---------------------------------------------
--- dubsup1234 wrote:


Mariota, DAT, Addison, Lyerla, etc. are not relied on to do all the heavy lifting. Plus they are all supremely talented, so they are much different from the recruits UW got after going 0-12. You have older guys like Barner, who are able to get the job done each year. Freshman and sophomores are fine if they are not relied on. We don't have the depth so we have to rely on them, which leads to inconsistency. If we traded coaches last year, the outcome of the season would not have changed a great deal last year for either of us. However good a coach you are, you are restricted by your talent. Otherwise, recruiting would not matter (which it does).

---------------------------------------------

I thought for sure that KrisVashon was the Doogiest Doog that ever Doog'd, but you're right there in contention for King Doog.

Actually, you've covered every bullet point in the Doog handbook so well that I'm wondering if you might actually be a Duck trying to make Husky fans look stupid. It's just really hard to believe anyone could actually be this much of a Doog.

---------------------------------------------
--- JDDucky wrote:

What? Mariota was our starting QB! Not required to do the heavy lifting?. DAT was a RB, slot, wide out and punt and kick returner. Not required to do the heavy lifting? Again, if Chip, Saban, Meyers, Shaw, heck, even Peterson were coaching they could squeeze out 10 wins from USUC without much effort. PLEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSEEEEEEE keep Sark. Sign him to a lifetime contract! Eventually you guys will figure out that good coaching produces good results.

---------------------------------------------

I'm saying they have help. However good they are themselves none of them have to carry the team by themselves. If we had your team Sark would do just as well as Chip. Your team has amazing talent and DEPTH. We don't have that. If Chip were our coch he would not do better than Sark. This is a players sport, coaches are necessary, but they don't have the impact you think they do.

The problem USC and UW both have is depth and that is the key to college football. Oregon has depth so that makes Chip's job easier than Kiffin's and Sark's.

Chip is a great coach, but NO coach can win without depth and talent.

I wouldn't want to face reality either, if I was this ignorant. Sadly life doesn't work that way. If I were you I would listen to facts, which is all that I've presented.

---------------------------------------------
--- RedmondWaDuck wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- dubsup1234 wrote:


Mariota, DAT, Addison, Lyerla, etc. are not relied on to do all the heavy lifting. Plus they are all supremely talented, so they are much different from the recruits UW got after going 0-12. You have older guys like Barner, who are able to get the job done each year. Freshman and sophomores are fine if they are not relied on. We don't have the depth so we have to rely on them, which leads to inconsistency. If we traded coaches last year, the outcome of the season would not have changed a great deal last year for either of us. However good a coach you are, you are restricted by your talent. Otherwise, recruiting would not matter (which it does).

---------------------------------------------

I thought for sure that KrisVashon was the Doogiest Doog that ever Doog'd, but you're right there in contention for King Doog.

Actually, you've covered every bullet point in the Doog handbook so well that I'm wondering if you might actually be a Duck trying to make Husky fans look stupid. It's just really hard to believe anyone could actually be this much of a Doog.

---------------------------------------------

THEN QUIT BRAGGING ABOUT YOUR LAST THREE RECRUITING CLASSES UNDER SARK! If it's about talent and depth. And it's not even you dub. It's the your Doog friends that keep telling us how great your class is, how you continue to out recruit us, and then get body slammed by 3-5 tds per game! This has been going on for 9 YEARS!! You can't have it both ways. Either it's cruddy coaching with decent talent, or great coaching with cruddy talent. 7-6, 7-6,7-6... you've gone through the cycle. Your freshmen 4 years ago were seniors last year with the SAME coach. Read Murdocks post on the earlier page. He hit's all the main points. NO MORE EXCUSES.

---------------------------------------------
--- JDDucky wrote:

THEN QUIT BRAGGING ABOUT YOUR LAST THREE RECRUITING CLASSES UNDER SARK! If it's about talent and depth. And it's not even you dub. It's the your Doog friends that keep telling us how great your class is, how you continue to out recruit us, and then get body slammed by 3-5 tds per game! This has been going on for 9 YEARS!! You can't have it both ways. Either it's cruddy coaching with decent talent, or great coaching with cruddy talent. 7-6, 7-6,7-6... you've gone through the cycle. Your freshmen 4 years ago were seniors last year with the SAME coach. Read Murdocks post on the earlier page. He hit's all the main points. NO MORE EXCUSES.

---------------------------------------------

The reason we "brag" is, because we realize every recruiting class is closing the gap between the two teams and we are improving our depth chart. Recruiting is the primary key to success, not coaching. Even if it hasn't translated to the field yet, we hope it will, like it has for many of the top recruiting programs in the country. It takes time to get rid of the 0-12 Ty era stain of our program and most of us understand that. We feel we're close to building depth to be able to continually compete for championships. You need to understand that most fans feel the need to talk trash about little things and you need to stop taking it seriously. It is not life and death. It is just football.

Even your hero Chip would not have won many games with the lack of depth and talent Sark has had to deal with after being hired after 0-12. Chip has been incredibly fortunate unlike Sark. Remember that when you bash Sark.

This is turning just dumb. Anyways, enjoy your new young talent tomorrow. I'm sure you and your Doogies will let us know that on Scout you will have the 12th ranked class while us "Ucks" have the 15th ranked class and this is a sign that you will overtake us in your new digs next year. And so on and so on. When all is said and done, it's about the Ws. Enjoy your "Off-Season National Championship." Best recruiting class, best new stadium, best academics, best "putting players into the NFL" etc...

---------------------------------------------
--- JDDucky wrote:

This is turning just dumb. Anyways, enjoy your new young talent tomorrow. I'm sure you and your Doogies will let us know that on Scout you will have the 12th ranked class while us "Ucks" have the 15th ranked class and this is a sign that you will overtake us in your new digs next year. And so on and so on. When all is said and done, it's about the Ws. Enjoy your "Off-Season National Championship." Best recruiting class, best new stadium, best academics, best "putting players into the NFL" etc...

---------------------------------------------

You mad? Hahahahaha.

I am not making any excuses for next year. I expect to compete well, if not win due to the depth and talent we hopefully will have. We finally have the depth and talent to compete with you next year after rebuilding, so we will see what happens, but with the way we are recruiting, we are on the right track either way and slowly gaining the depth we need. What we don't know is whether your new coach is a good coach or not. If he is Bellotti-like you may go back to mediocrity, which I'm sure you don't want.

UW beat Stanford and competed to the wire with USC, two teams that either beat you or had a chance to. To me, this shows how close UW is to consistently competing with the elite in our conference and it is just going to take until we stop being inconsistent, which will happen when we mature and grow older and get more depth, which is happening now.

Not making excuses? You can sum up every one of your posts in one word, IF. If we weren't young, If we had more depth, If we made some field goals. IF, IF, IF! If I had a million dollars, I'd be a millionaire.

Maybe IF you had made a field goal against the best team in the PAC, in Stanford, you might have won your first Natty, instead of being jealous of ours.

Surprisingly we beat that same Stanford team that physically knocked you around. Haha. I wonder why? UW is getting better and sadly all you can do is live in fear.
---------------------------------------------
--- caughtdropped wrote:

Not making excuses? You can sum up every one of your posts in one word, IF. If we weren't young, If we had more depth, If we made some field goals. IF, IF, IF! If I had a million dollars, I'd be a millionaire.

---------------------------------------------

Living vicariously through another team must be great. We beat you > you beat the team that beat us. I bet you were secretly hoping KSU would win, huh?

I don't concern myself with Oregon. Your program has 2 major bowl victories in 90+ years. You are not on UWs level historically. 7 Rose Bowls and 2 Natty's are things you can't match.

UW is getting better after the embarrassing stretch under Ty and we are slowly getting back to competing for titles. Beating Stanford was the first step. You are next. Sadly it won't matter after your program fades back to mediocrity after you realize Helfrich is nothing more than a Bellotti clone. Which means he is perpetually mediocre. You kept Bellotti, a 7-6 coach for almost 15 years. Will you do the same for Helfrich?

---------------------------------------------
--- caughtdropped wrote:

Living vicariously through another team must be great. We beat you > you beat the team that beat us. I bet you were secretly hoping KSU would win, huh?

---------------------------------------------

Better luck against Washington State next season. Maybe you'll be able to unseat them as kings of the Apple Cup.

Too funny.

dubsup1234 wrote: I don't concern myself with Oregon. Your program has 2 major bowl victories in 90+ years. You are not on UWs level historically. 7 Rose Bowls and 2 Natty's are things you can't match.

UW is getting better after the embarrassing stretch under Ty and we are slowly getting back to competing for titles. Beating Stanford was the first step. You are next. Sadly it won't matter after your program fades back to mediocrity after you realize Helfrich is nothing more than a Bellotti clone. Which means he is perpetually mediocre. You kept Bellotti, a 7-6 coach for almost 15 years. Will you do the same for Helfrich?

---------------------------------------------
--- caughtdropped wrote:

Living vicariously through another team must be great. We beat you > you beat the team that beat us. I bet you were secretly hoping KSU would win, huh?

---------------------------------------------

I feel sorry for the kid. Last time I checked when you lose your last 2 games of the season including one to a doormat conference rival team, that usually means your team performance is trending down, period! In the business world that's what gets people fired. It's very simple. Sark is not a good coach but we appreciate you standing behind him. It only makes our job easier.

dubsup1234 wrote: I don't concern myself with Oregon. Your program has 2 major bowl victories in 90+ years. You are not on UWs level historically. 7 Rose Bowls and 2 Natty's are things you can't match.

UW is getting better after the embarrassing stretch under Ty and we are slowly getting back to competing for titles. Beating Stanford was the first step. You are next. Sadly it won't matter after your program fades back to mediocrity after you realize Helfrich is nothing more than a Bellotti clone. Which means he is perpetually mediocre. You kept Bellotti, a 7-6 coach for almost 15 years. Will you do the same for Helfrich?

---------------------------------------------
--- caughtdropped wrote:

Living vicariously through another team must be great. We beat you > you beat the team that beat us. I bet you were secretly hoping KSU would win, huh?

---------------------------------------------

For someone who doesn't concern their self with Oregon - you sure have alot to say on our board. 

All of your other posts are classic Sarkpologist bullet points.

Signing Day isn't exactly turning out as the Doogers thought it would.

If I could only listen to Softy right now...

You know dubsup1234, I'm actually enjoying this thread and your constant repeating of your "We beat Stanford (and rushed the field)" mantra, but on two nearly successive posts your wrote these two phrases:

"The reason we "brag" is, because we realize every recruiting class is closing the gap between the two teams and we are improving our depth chart."

"I don't concern myself with Oregon."

So which is it? Either you're pinning the success of every recruiting class on "closing the gap" with Oregon, or you're not concerned with Oregon.

You can't have it both ways

Which is it?

.5 Natty's and a big thank you to Almighty God that you didn't have to actually PLAY Miami is reality. Learn the difference and you will be a much more stable individual.

---------------------------------------------
--- dubsup1234 wrote:

....

My question is why do Duck fans want to see Sark go soooooo much? Is it fear? Is it knowing that Sark has a chance to bring UW back to national prominence? What is it that makes Duck fans continually pray to see Sark go?

.....
---------------------------------------------

Are you serious?

Duck fans want Sark to stay. We know he sucks and would love for him to continue......forever.

Please oh please, show me any Duck fan who's desperate to see Sark leave UW.

Poor, poor Sarkingham. But Mommy, the cupboard was bare. We absolutely love Sarkingham. He can't coach a lick, he loves to recruit shiny things, and he's, well, getting fatter as each year ROLLS by. More and more "cuddly" is what I am trying to project here.

Please, please sign this guy to a looooooooong term deal.

Go Ducks!

---------------------------------------------
--- dubsup1234 wrote:


---------------------------------------------
--- JDDucky wrote:

THEN QUIT BRAGGING ABOUT YOUR LAST THREE RECRUITING CLASSES UNDER SARK! If it's about talent and depth. And it's not even you dub. It's the your Doog friends that keep telling us how great your class is, how you continue to out recruit us, and then get body slammed by 3-5 tds per game! This has been going on for 9 YEARS!! You can't have it both ways. Either it's cruddy coaching with decent talent, or great coaching with cruddy talent. 7-6, 7-6,7-6... you've gone through the cycle. Your freshmen 4 years ago were seniors last year with the SAME coach. Read Murdocks post on the earlier page. He hit's all the main points. NO MORE EXCUSES.

---------------------------------------------

The reason we "brag" is, because we realize every recruiting class is closing the gap between the two teams and we are improving our depth chart. Recruiting is the primary key to success, not coaching. Even if it hasn't translated to the field yet, we hope it will, like it has for many of the top recruiting programs in the country. It takes time to get rid of the 0-12 Ty era stain of our program and most of us understand that. We feel we're close to building depth to be able to continually compete for championships. You need to understand that most fans feel the need to talk trash about little things and you need to stop taking it seriously. It is not life and death. It is just football.

Even your hero Chip would not have won many games with the lack of depth and talent Sark has had to deal with after being hired after 0-12. Chip has been incredibly fortunate unlike Sark. Remember that when you bash Sark.

---------------------------------------------

Just keep telling yourself that dumbass...

---------------------------------------------
--- GGG19 wrote:

With Wilcox-Sirmon-Tosh-Heyward's recruiting prowess bringing in good classes now and the future, it shouldn't be an issue.

---------------------------------------------