Why is winning important?

junior4949 said:
Wasn't the same being said about Sarkisian before he jetted off for USC? Sark inherited a Washington team that hadn't won a game the previous year and still finished with five wins which was his only losing record while being there. Petersen inherited an eight win team. The culture was already changed before he got there. He's 3-3 to start this year. When you consider the rest of their schedule, there's only one gimme game. It's a flip of the coin whether they're bowl eligible this year. Sark went bowling every year he was there except his first year which again was the result of inheriting a team that didn't win a game the year before.

I'm not saying he's going to be a bust. However, history is not on his side. This is one of the biggest reasons I never wanted him considered as Nebraska's next coach.
Click to expand...
I don't know Junior I think you are trying real hard to make a point. If you don't think he is going to get it done that is fine. Sarkisian record at Washington was basically 7-6 every year he was there. Peterson was 8-5 his first year. Peterson was USC's first choice for that job and he turned them down. Peterson is a strict disciplinarian that has weeded out a few guys there, and is changing the culture from very loose to a much tighter style of play and coaching.

He may not get it done, but I would give him at least 4 full years before I decide that.

 
My only point in any of this is the fact that the guys before him that left the cozy comfort of Boise State failed as head coaches elsewhere. Like you said, Petersen has only been there a year and a half. He inherited an eight win team. He duplicated it his first year. It's going to be extremely difficult to reach enough wins with who they have left on the schedule to go bowling. If he only wins five games this season, there will be a lot of grumbling. He deserves time. He deserves the same five years CU afforded to Hawkins.

 
Because if you're not first, you're last. Waking up and pissing excellence is all that matters. Be the biggest, harriest, american winning machine that you can be!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's a lot more complex than just "Kids want to play where they can win"

Yes that is a factor, but it is one of many and those factors vary a great deal from kid to kid.

How do non-power teams manage to win? Good coaching, luck, the right kids at the right time, the answers vary about as much as the reasons a kid chooses one school over another.

 
junior4949 said:
Wasn't the same being said about Sarkisian before he jetted off for USC? Sark inherited a Washington team that hadn't won a game the previous year and still finished with five wins which was his only losing record while being there. Petersen inherited an eight win team. The culture was already changed before he got there. He's 3-3 to start this year. When you consider the rest of their schedule, there's only one gimme game. It's a flip of the coin whether they're bowl eligible this year. Sark went bowling every year he was there except his first year which again was the result of inheriting a team that didn't win a game the year before.

I'm not saying he's going to be a bust. However, history is not on his side. This is one of the biggest reasons I never wanted him considered as Nebraska's next coach.
Click to expand...
Petersen inherited an absolute dumpster fire at QB when he took over UW once Keith Price graduated. Cyler Miles makes Tommy Armstrong look like the second coming of Aaron Rodgers. This Browning kid that they have now is going to be pretty good and they're letting him roll as a true FR. He threw for 91 TDs his senior year. I didn't believe it when I heard it but...

http://www.gohuskies.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=209874589

 
Back
Top