UW practices according to a buddy

  • Thread starter Thread starter [Deleted User]
  • Start date Start date
I think Wilcox went to USC for these reasons...

1) Because Sark's expertise is extremely limited, Wilcox basically has full reign over the defense

2) He had already worked for Petersen, so he may have viewed it as somewhat of a step back

3) Going to USC he's still working with Heyward & Sirmon. At UW he would have had new assistants.

4) Going from UW DC to USC DC is not a lateral move and gets him that much closer to being a HC

5) Broadens his base as a potential future HC. Him & Sirmon have recruiting roots in the south, Oregon, WA and a few years at USC will earn them some recognition in that area.

He doesn't need to prove himself as a DC, as he's already highly thought of. Sark's coming mediocrity at USC won't harm Wilcox's reputation if his defenses perform well.
 
I think Wilcox went to USC for these reasons...

1) Because Sark's expertise is extremely limited, Wilcox basically has full reign over the defense

2) He had already worked for Petersen, so he may have viewed it as somewhat of a step back

3) Going to USC he's still working with Heyward & Sirmon. At UW he would have had new assistants.

4) Going from UW DC to USC DC is not a lateral move and gets him that much closer to being a HC

5) Broadens his base as a potential future HC. Him & Sirmon have recruiting roots in the south, Oregon, WA and a few years at USC will earn them some recognition in that area.

He doesn't need to prove himself as a DC, as he's already highly thought of. Sark's coming mediocrity at USC won't harm Wilcox's reputation if his defenses perform well.
Click to expand...

Sark's poor coaching, attention to details, poor special teams and sometimes erratic play calling could hurt Wilcox though.

I can see Wilcox bailing on Sark though after 2015 when it's pretty obvious Sark could be in trouble. I think Sark will be on the hot seat going into 2016 and as an assistant you don't want to be on a coaching staff where head coach is facing death watch.
 
I think Wilcox went to USC for these reasons...

1) Because Sark's expertise is extremely limited, Wilcox basically has full reign over the defense

2) He had already worked for Petersen, so he may have viewed it as somewhat of a step back

3) Going to USC he's still working with Heyward & Sirmon. At UW he would have had new assistants.

4) Going from UW DC to USC DC is not a lateral move and gets him that much closer to being a HC

5) Broadens his base as a potential future HC. Him & Sirmon have recruiting roots in the south, Oregon, WA and a few years at USC will earn them some recognition in that area.

He doesn't need to prove himself as a DC, as he's already highly thought of. Sark's coming mediocrity at USC won't harm Wilcox's reputation if his defenses perform well.
Click to expand...

Excellent use of 5 reasons, although I think if Petersen went after him, Wilcox would still be here. He may not have wanted to step on his buddy Coach K's toes either by staying at UW and relegating K to DL coach.
 
I think Wilcox went to USC for these reasons...

1) Because Sark's expertise is extremely limited, Wilcox basically has full reign over the defense

2) He had already worked for Petersen, so he may have viewed it as somewhat of a step back

3) Going to USC he's still working with Heyward & Sirmon. At UW he would have had new assistants.

4) Going from UW DC to USC DC is not a lateral move and gets him that much closer to being a HC

5) Broadens his base as a potential future HC. Him & Sirmon have recruiting roots in the south, Oregon, WA and a few years at USC will earn them some recognition in that area.

He doesn't need to prove himself as a DC, as he's already highly thought of. Sark's coming mediocrity at USC won't harm Wilcox's reputation if his defenses perform well.
Click to expand...

Completely disagree.

If he didn't need to prove himself as a DC, he would have a better gig than working for Sark by now.
 
He's proven himself as a DC but he hasn't had a championship type of defense yet. If he develops one at USC then he probably will get some HC offers.
Click to expand...

So he's proven himself to be a good DC, not a great DC... but he doesn't need to prove himself unless he proves himself at USC then will get HC offers.

Got it.
 
He's proven himself as a DC but he hasn't had a championship type of defense yet. If he develops one at USC then he probably will get some HC offers.
Click to expand...

So he's proven himself to be a good DC, not a great DC... but he doesn't need to prove himself unless he proves himself at USC then will get HC offers.

Got it.
Click to expand...

My head hurts
 
I think Wilcox went to USC for these reasons...

1) Because Sark's expertise is extremely limited, Wilcox basically has full reign over the defense

2) He had already worked for Petersen, so he may have viewed it as somewhat of a step back

3) Going to USC he's still working with Heyward & Sirmon. At UW he would have had new assistants.

4) Going from UW DC to USC DC is not a lateral move and gets him that much closer to being a HC

5) Broadens his base as a potential future HC. Him & Sirmon have recruiting roots in the south, Oregon, WA and a few years at USC will earn them some recognition in that area.

He doesn't need to prove himself as a DC, as he's already highly thought of. Sark's coming mediocrity at USC won't harm Wilcox's reputation if his defenses perform well.
Click to expand...
Perhaps Petermen didn't want him anyway
 
He's proven himself as a DC but he hasn't had a championship type of defense yet. If he develops one at USC then he probably will get some HC offers.
Click to expand...

So he's proven himself to be a good DC, not a great DC... but he doesn't need to prove himself unless he proves himself at USC then will get HC offers.

Got it.
Click to expand...

Boobs, he just needs more time is all. Wait til he gets his own guys, nobody knows the damage that Holt did.

Damn when did this place turn into Doogman where we make excuses for coaches?

 
If Wilcox is smart he's gone after this coming season and two season tops ... only part of attaching the ride to Sark's wagon is that Sark's now at USC. That's solid gold from a resume standpoint.
 
I remember beating Indiana (around 2002 or 2003) something like 38-13 and going onto Dawgman to vent about how that wasn't Husky Football and why do we suck so bad.
Click to expand...

Conversely I remember in 2011 being like "This is going to be a long year" after the Eastern game and being told "a win is a win" by several doogs.

"Three years ago you would have killed for a win and now you are complaining? Damn you are negative!".

While like you said back then being disappointed in wins was normal because the expectations were so much higher. I remember leaving Husky Stadium in 1995 after barely beating Army and walking out feeling like we had lost.
Click to expand...

There was the famous "Can't you just be happy with 5-1?" When I pointed out that UW went through the easy part of the schedule in unimpressive fashion and the reckoning would soon come. They went 2-5 after that.

How a team wins or losses in very important. I remember after watching the Colorado game in 1990 thinking, UW has a very good team and could very well be one of the best in the nation. It was a well played game by two good teams. I think Colorado won the MNC that year (even though they got a 5th down vs. Missouri). Then there are games where they play like shit, but are lucky to beat an inferior team, and you know they aren't very good and it will catch up with them. Like a bad golfer who who maybe skips one across the water, or hits a tree and gets a bounce that puts him near the hole...maybe he gets a par or a birdy on the first couple of holes, but everyone knows he will still shoot a 110, becuase he isn't very good. (see the Arizona foot bounce pick 6 for reference)
Click to expand...

Looks like I have all the screenshots I need.
 
No complaints here - which makes this bored difficult, nothing to bitch about

Even jamming some Springsteen on Tues
Click to expand...

This board will be more intense I think. The more winning you do the more it hurts when you lose, the more joy you gain when there is a big win.

Dawgman back in the late 1990's and early 2000's was very much like that. There was several people punching their fists on the key board after the Miami loss in 2001 and they allowed it. That was the mindset back then that blowout losses like that were fucking unacceptable as they should be.

So I think even in wins you'll see posters more critical of individuals as we are looking big picture. Like if UW defeats Hawaii for an example 34-24(same score as Illinois) there will be some major angst in here while last year nobody cared because we knew the season was over the minute Sark was allowed to have a year five.
Click to expand...

I remember beating Indiana (around 2002 or 2003) something like 38-13 and going onto Dawgman to vent about how that wasn't Husky Football and why do we suck so bad.
Click to expand...

Conversely I remember in 2011 being like "This is going to be a long year" after the Eastern game and being told "a win is a win" by several doogs.

"Three years ago you would have killed for a win and now you are complaining? Damn you are negative!".

While like you said back then being disappointed in wins was normal because the expectations were so much higher. I remember leaving Husky Stadium in 1995 after barely beating Army and walking out feeling like we had lost.
Click to expand...

Huh?
 
Last edited:
I'm glad I never participated in this thread.
Click to expand...

Same.

Also, this thread reminds me that Cockus was responsible for 81% of the posts on HH back when he was still alive (RIP Ts and Ps). I imagine if he didn't leave he'd be approaching 100,000 posts by now.
 
I'm glad I never participated in this thread.
Click to expand...

Same.

Also, this thread reminds me that Cockus was responsible for 81% of the posts on HH back when he was still alive (RIP Ts and Ps). I imagine if he didn't leave he'd be approaching 100,000 Avogadro's number of posts by now.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited:
Fuck, More_Cockus must have worn out the keys in his mom's basement typing this much. Can you TL:DR an entire thread?
 
...I can see WilcoxMarques bailing on Sark though after 2015 when it's pretty obvious Sark could be in trouble. I think Sark will be on the hot seat going into 2016 and as an assistant you don't want to be on a coaching staff where head coach is facing death watch...
Click to expand...

Crisperization complete.
 
This thread, TL;DR except for first and last posts.

emlsx.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top