Who thinks this is the last straw for Sark? (I do not)
- Thread starter BigDawg90
- Start date
MikeDamone
Active poster
I don't care if its the last straw for sark, buts that's it for me. Not renewing next year. 26 years as a tyee is over. In tired. I did my part. The UW didn't do theirs. . I'm sad because I love college football, but I can't do it anymore. The huskies haven't been the same since crawley choked to death on a ham sandwich anyway. Later guys. I know... Awesome... Better seats for some other sucker.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Sark "rebuilt the program" in 2009. He's been treading water in the land of mediocrity ever since. How many more 7-6 seasons do you need to see?
Will he be fired? I really doubt it. He has about an eight year pass because of 0 and 12!!! Should he be? Well, if they get the right coach to replace him, I'd have no problem with it. I'll put it that way. That's a big if though. I don't have a lot of faith that these jokers can find the right coach.
No, I have no doubt that Woodward wants to win a Rose Bowl. But he made the foolish move to hire a coach with no prior head coaching experience, and we're all seeing the results and paying the price.
Not only did Sark not have any head coaching experience but he had almost zero experience outside of USC and Pete Carroll.
While I like the idea of getting someone with head coaching experience, look at UW's last 2 coaches who fit that criteria: Gilby and Ty. Of course, UW hiring those guys was just flat out dumb because any normal person, i.e. anyone not named Todd Turner, Babs or Mark Emmert, would realize they had crap for coaching records. Getting a head coach from a smaller conference school is great but make sure he's shown something or steal away someone from another big time school like Arkansas did with Rob Riggle's twin brother.
If you're going the coordinator route, make sure the guy has experience at more than one school under more than one coach. The Pete Carroll way worked great at USC but it's not a sure fit at every other school and it helps for a coach to be able to draw on depth of experience based on learning from multiple coaches.
While I like the idea of getting someone with head coaching experience, look at UW's last 2 coaches who fit that criteria: Gilby and Ty. Of course, UW hiring those guys was just flat out dumb because any normal person, i.e. anyone not named Todd Turner, Babs or Mark Emmert, would realize they had crap for coaching records. Getting a head coach from a smaller conference school is great but make sure he's shown something or steal away someone from another big time school like Arkansas did with Rob Riggle's twin brother.
If you're going the coordinator route, make sure the guy has experience at more than one school under more than one coach. The Pete Carroll way worked great at USC but it's not a sure fit at every other school and it helps for a coach to be able to draw on depth of experience based on learning from multiple coaches.
purplehaze
New Fish
It also helps if he is not a young guy, who feels obliged to hire a staff even younger than himself, so that they feel they have to respect him. We ended up with one of the most inexperienced coaching staffs around.
digits
Active poster
And the man who hired him had no AD experience, so there ya go! Sark is a talker. I've never in my life seen a HC love to hear himself talk so much, especially to the media. Most HCs avoid the media like the plague, not Sark. What I'm getting @ is he used his gift of gab to land this plum job. He sold Woodward a bill of goods in his interview(s), blew him away, and here we are. Sark was in no way, shape, or form qualified to be the HC of UW... and @ $2+ mill a year? No fucking way.
Let's put this into perspective. UW, one of the wealthiest, most successful universities on the West Coast, hired an AD, with no prior athletic dept. experience, to oversee not only rebuilding the football program, but renovating Husky Stadium to the tune of $250 mill. Consequently, Woodward hires a HC, who is as equally unqualified as he is @ his own AD job, to help rebuild a winless football program. Sounds like a recipe for success to me!
MelloDawg
New Fish
At one point, and I'm not sure this is still the case, Woodward was the only AD in the Pac-10/12 who had no prior collegiate athletic administration experience prior to his appointment. That said, I still think he "gets it" and understands the relevance of the football program (Hedges went with the balanced approach, Turner was a dumbass and Emmert was a fraud).
Sark has been trending the absolute wrong way for over a year and living off the Holiday Bowl win over Nebraska in 2010. The worst thing for this program, next season, would be to win 8 games. It would be the first time in over a decade, but not nearly what will have been expected going into the year. 7-5 has to get him fired, otherwise we are Cal, but Grinolds/Fetters/Ecklund will find every reason to prop him up and explain why 7 wins is the new 12 wins.
Sark has been trending the absolute wrong way for over a year and living off the Holiday Bowl win over Nebraska in 2010. The worst thing for this program, next season, would be to win 8 games. It would be the first time in over a decade, but not nearly what will have been expected going into the year. 7-5 has to get him fired, otherwise we are Cal, but Grinolds/Fetters/Ecklund will find every reason to prop him up and explain why 7 wins is the new 12 wins.
pointless bump
Doog_de_Jour
New Fish
Sark just needs more tim.
@DeLarry Hardy har har
UWhuskytskeet
New Fish
Disagree. I think 8 wins is enough for USC to poach Sark. Thinking we'll go after Petersen at Boise State if that happens.
Yeah but year 5 for Petersen will be disappointing to duck fans
Thanks Taft!