Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

greenyellow wrote:

i completely agree with everything you just said.

"Sarkisian's been on his own as a head coach for two full, mostly successful seasons now at Washington"

Mostly successful?

karlhungis wrote:"Sarkisian's been on his own as a head coach for two full, mostly successful seasons now at Washington"

Mostly successful?

1 winning season out of two I guess counts as being "mostly successful" to a lot of people.

greenyellow wrote:

karlhungis wrote:"Sarkisian's been on his own as a head coach for two full, mostly successful seasons now at Washington"

Mostly successful?

1 winning season out of two I guess counts as being "mostly successful" to a lot of people.

And the winning season was still mediocre in itself.

greenyellow wrote:

karlhungis wrote:"Sarkisian's been on his own as a head coach for two full, mostly successful seasons now at Washington"

Mostly successful?

1 winning season out of two I guess counts as being "mostly successful" to a lot of people.

Technically not even a winning regular season.

greenyellow wrote:

karlhungis wrote:"Sarkisian's been on his own as a head coach for two full, mostly successful seasons now at Washington"

Mostly successful?

1 winning season out of two I guess counts as being "mostly successful" to a lot of people.

It does in Seattle. Even Corvallis has higher standards than that.....

UW might win some games now that they got rid of Locker.

Destroyer77 wrote:UW might win some games now that they got rid of Locker.

Let's hope not.

Destroyer77 wrote:UW might win some games now that they got rid of Locker.

I love how you say "got rid of Locker" like they traded him or something

UOducksTK1 wrote:

greenyellow wrote:

karlhungis wrote:"Sarkisian's been on his own as a head coach for two full, mostly successful seasons now at Washington"

Mostly successful?

1 winning season out of two I guess counts as being "mostly successful" to a lot of people.

Technically not even a winning regular season.

To be fair, they were improvements over the seasons in front of them. You could even say big improvements. But it is easy to go from 0-2 wins to 5-7 wins. Climbing above that is the hard part.

wlduck wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:

greenyellow wrote:

karlhungis wrote:"Sarkisian's been on his own as a head coach for two full, mostly successful seasons now at Washington"

Mostly successful?

1 winning season out of two I guess counts as being "mostly successful" to a lot of people.

Technically not even a winning regular season.

To be fair, they were improvements over the seasons in front of them. You could even say big improvements. But it is easy to go from 0-2 wins to 5-7 wins. Climbing above that is the hard part.

Agreed, I think most of us looking at UW objectively would agree that Sarkisian's teams are superior to his predecessors. I too think UW will actually be better off sans Jake Locker.

I am pretty neutral on UW. I didn't know they were Oregon's rival until I applied to law school here, even, and I have always followed college football pretty closely. I think he has done a good job as coach. I think he has not done a great job, but he did well for the players he had. I don't see them getting to a 10-11 win season any time soon. They have good players at certain positions, but they aren't deep. They aren't good across the board, either.