Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


250 Up VotesSecond Anniversary250 Awesomes100 Comments100 Up Votes100 AwesomesName Dropper25 Up VotesFirst Anniversary25 AwesomesPhotogenic10 Comments5 Awesomes5 Up VotesFirst Comment

Show your support for what this community means to you:

Choose a Donation Amount
Username (required for credit)

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Take a look around and join the community. Have a topic? Join us and start a thread.



Last Active
  • Re: W O O F

    Got a live one. Pete just tweeted.
  • Re: DDY & Coker

    If building a college football program from 15 years of shit to a NC was akin to creating a character on dungeons and dragons or drafting afantasy football team, yes, firing half your coaching staff to get slightly better recruiting results while maintaining wverything else would make sense.

    Unfortunately, it's not. Starting next year with a brand new OC, QB coach, LB coach, Special Teams coach, DB coach, TE coach, DL coach and 2nd year OL and WR coach (who have thus far not proven themselves as position coaches) could help us "do better" in's more likely a recipe for taking a conference contender and turning them into a 3-6 team.

    The simple solution of "just fire everyone and hire guys that are great coaches and great recruiters" is an overly simplistic way of looking at this. Why doesn't every team do that?

    Smith should be gone regardless, and I think he will be.
    Malloe should be gone if they strike out on Taimani and Togai.
    Other than that, you're risking too much in player development and program stability. You end up where UCLA is now.
    We have one of the absolute best leaders in CFB, UW can get truly elite with better coaches and recruiters. That is all I’m saying. And not everyone can get those types of coaches because they either don’t want to work with a shit head coach, or they want to get paid more. UW can offer pay and a great HC.

    I just want to support our elite head coach, that has developed an elite culture, that has an elite defensive scheme and DC. That’s it.

    I am sorry for that.
    The problem is that there are very few coaches that are great at both developing talent and recruiting. We have exactly one of those on staff: Jimmy Lake. Swapping Gregory for an Adrian Klemm clone isn't a recipe for success in the near or long term. Pete will always defer to guys who can develop talent, and I'm ok with that after a decade plus of players developing in spite of the coaches, so long as we have a few ace recruiters sprinkled in.

    Babuskha and Malloe (if he doesn't get 2 of Togiai, Tremblay, and Taimani) should be goners. Assuming Lake leaves, Alexander or Heyward are fine, but nowhere near Lake. JD Williams would be a home run. The 10th coach must to be an elite defensive recruiter, specifically focused on the front 7. Anything below that is unacceptable to me.
  • Re: DDY & Coker

    Just curious, why the love for Heyward? I thought he was above average, but recruiting and development was hit and miss in his last go around.

    Williams is a superstar recruiter, but I realize his talent development is a bit of a question mark.
  • Re: DDY & Coker

    Double shitpoast (thanks @dnc for breaking it up)

    Ideal situation for me is as follows:
    Hamdan (co-OC/QBs) for Babuskha
    - Lubick calls the plays and Hamdan recruits

    JD Williams (secondary) for Lake
    - Contingent on Lake actually leaving

    Choate (DLs) for Malloe
    - Not gonna happen, but I also don't think there is an elite DL coach on the west coast, so maybe someone in TX or Tosh (not likely)

    Gregory to full time ST coach

    Sirmon to LBs

    Biggest downside would be too many white guys on staff.
  • Re: Vegas terror attack

    If 250 round magazines didn't exist and only five round magazines were accessable to the public like how they are sold in "hunting AR's" today then this shooting still happens, but is much slower and much less lethal.

    You could say they would make their own (they wouldn't) or they would get them from outside the US (not likely).

    People have ALWAYS gone crazy and guns have always existed. Look at the mass shooting numbers during the Brady Bill era and compare them to the period after them. When crazy has way more fucking rounds without having to stop to reload or even aim to wipe out hordes of people that's a common sense foul.

    Why can't you walk into Wal-Mart and buy a hand grenade? You know the fucking answer, but there is a pause when people talk about taking away 250 round barrel magazines. That's fucking retarded. News flash, an AR with 250 rounds is much more deadly than a hand grenade, yet hand grenades are way too dangerous to sell to the general public.

    I own more guns than 90% of America, but I'm not stupid. This has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.
    Send over one a them 'thar 250 round magamazines will ya Shmarty pants?

    250 round belts yes, magazines no.

    This was Nevada where machine gun ownership is legal. But that means he passed an extensive FBI background check. IIRC there have only been 2 murders committed with legally owned machine guns. There's about 250,000 of them in the country.
    So you're saying that stringent backround checks and regulation of firearms saves lives?