UWDoogpound Giving Kim a run for his money...
- Thread starter HeretoBeatmyChest
- Start date
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
Not to mention the parallax
Tequilla
Active poster
What amazes me is how so many of the idiots that have watched Sark for 5 years and those in the national media haven't figured out the myth that is SC.
Does SC have talent? Absolutely. But they've also had talent the last 2 years under Kiffie and I'm not convinced that Kiffie is that much better/worse off than Sark. I'm still trying to figure out why Saban wanted anything to do with Kiffie ... but that's a whole different topic.
SC's biggest problem through their "probation" hasn't been that they've lacked talent ... it's that they've lacked depth.
The biggest thing that a "big school" can do is that they can line up 1-85 on their roster and just constantly rotate players in/out of the game because often the drop off from the starters to backups isn't THAT noticeable. Take that to how a mediocre .500 team looks (say the 2009 Huskies) where you might have some solid front line players but there was a massive drop once injuries or fatigue hit.
SC hasn't had that depth the last few years and they certainly aren't going to have much more this year. On top of that, if you look at the class that Sark signed in his first class, he basically picked the low hanging fruit that he was establishing as the UW class and convinced them to go to SC so that he could get early momentum and that all important free pub.
And as for UCLA, last I checked they abused SC last season 35-14 and beat them the year before that 38-28. Sark hasn't beat Mora yet either. So until Sark/SC can figure out how to beat UCLA, the kings of LA at the moment is UCLA.
Does SC have talent? Absolutely. But they've also had talent the last 2 years under Kiffie and I'm not convinced that Kiffie is that much better/worse off than Sark. I'm still trying to figure out why Saban wanted anything to do with Kiffie ... but that's a whole different topic.
SC's biggest problem through their "probation" hasn't been that they've lacked talent ... it's that they've lacked depth.
The biggest thing that a "big school" can do is that they can line up 1-85 on their roster and just constantly rotate players in/out of the game because often the drop off from the starters to backups isn't THAT noticeable. Take that to how a mediocre .500 team looks (say the 2009 Huskies) where you might have some solid front line players but there was a massive drop once injuries or fatigue hit.
SC hasn't had that depth the last few years and they certainly aren't going to have much more this year. On top of that, if you look at the class that Sark signed in his first class, he basically picked the low hanging fruit that he was establishing as the UW class and convinced them to go to SC so that he could get early momentum and that all important free pub.
And as for UCLA, last I checked they abused SC last season 35-14 and beat them the year before that 38-28. Sark hasn't beat Mora yet either. So until Sark/SC can figure out how to beat UCLA, the kings of LA at the moment is UCLA.
CuntWaffle
New Fish
I think I had a drunk convo with someone who posts at the doogpound, it went along the lines lke this.
Doog: "I like the Petersen hire but was excited to see what Sark was going to do next"
Me: "Same as always, 5-4 in conference, probably gets 9 wins due to the shitty OOC schedule, and plays in a pointless bowel game".
Doog: "You can't tell me he didn't improve every season though"
Me: "He didn't though, 7-6 = 7-6 = 7-6. 5-4 = 5-4 =5-4 =5-4"
Doog: "It doesn't matter, he isn't our coach anymore, we just need to win... and beat Oregon this year! Pete better get that done"
Me: "Sark got royally butt fucked by Oregon every year, how come those standards only apply now?"
Doog: "Yea but still"
Doog: "I like the Petersen hire but was excited to see what Sark was going to do next"
Me: "Same as always, 5-4 in conference, probably gets 9 wins due to the shitty OOC schedule, and plays in a pointless bowel game".
Doog: "You can't tell me he didn't improve every season though"
Me: "He didn't though, 7-6 = 7-6 = 7-6. 5-4 = 5-4 =5-4 =5-4"
Doog: "It doesn't matter, he isn't our coach anymore, we just need to win... and beat Oregon this year! Pete better get that done"
Me: "Sark got royally butt fucked by Oregon every year, how come those standards only apply now?"
Doog: "Yea but still"
Last edited:
Dardanus
New Fish
Good question. Are you measuring size in terms of diameter or length? Or both? And if using diameter, would you just compare the final diameter, or the starting size as well? I assume the amount of taper varies significantly by model, so some plugs may start out relatively small, but end up being quite large.
allpurpleallgold
New Fish
He went 9-4 last year.
AtomicDawg
Active poster
That was the Don James Standard. I don't see why everyone was so frustrated with sark.
HeretoBeatmyChest
New Fish
Boobs_Or_Harv
New Fish
My first comment was deleted got a stern message. They are tired of the Sark argument and if I do it again I'll be gone. Very Doogman like.