Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

Huskies


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Husky Football Blog

Times reporter Bob Condotta keeps the news coming about the Montlake Dawgs.

E-mail Bob| RSS feeds Subscribe | Blog Home

June 30, 2008 10:06 PM

And then there were seven

Posted by Bob Condotta

The departure of running back J.R. Hasty further depletes Washington’s Class of 2005, which was generally considered to be the worst in the school’s history in decades and is living up to that, uh, hype.

There are now just seven players left from that class, though all seven could play key roles in the next two seasons.

The Class of 2005 was obviously put together in as much duress as any in recent UW history with the Huskies coming off a 1-10 season, the firing of Keith Gilbertson and the hiring of Tyrone Willingham. Gilbertson wasn’t able to secure many commitments and ultimately just one player who committed to him ended up signing.

Here’s the list with a comment:

DE Tyrone Davis --- High school player didn’t qualify academically.
QB Johnny DuRocher --- Technically counted as part of this class. Career ended early due to brain tumor.
CB Qwenton Freeman --- JC transfer didn’t qualify academically.
CB Chris Handy --- Nevada transfer via JC also didn’t qualify academically.
RB J.R. Hasty --- Highest-rated of the group but didn’t make impact expected and was dismissed from team a few weeks ago.
DE Darrion Jones --- Injuries have helped mute his impact so far but could be a starter this year.
OT Ben Ossai --- Entrenched as a starter at tackle.
PK Ryan Perkins --- Overcame brutal injury early in career to start last season but future is uncertain. Was the lone Gilbertson recruit of this year who ended up signing.
LB E.J.Savannah --- Has hit some bumps but has also been productive.
LB Chris Stevens --- Also an RB in high school but quickly switched to defense with Huskies.
DE Daniel Te’o-Nesheim --- Probably the most consistently productive member of this class.
TE Tim Williams --- Played sparingly for one season then transferred to Eastern Washington.
WR Marlon Wood --- JC transfer made some memorable plays in his two seasons before eligibility ran out.
OL Morgan Rosborough --- Hoping to earn time this season at guard.

Of the 14 players, four would have already been out of eligibility even if they had all made it in --- DuRocher, Freeman, Handy and Wood.

To recap the seven who are already gone: three never made it in --- Freeman, Handy and Davis; one transferred --- Williams; one was kicked off team --- Hasty; one had his career end early for medical reasons --- DuRocher; and one saw his eligibility expire --- Wood.

Stevens and Jones each played as true freshmen, but Jones has since redshirted, so Stevens is the only one who won’t have eligibility after this season, barring redshirting this season for some reason. That means UW could have just six members of this class in uniform in 2009, one reason the Huskies are young right now.


Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine

Submit a comment

*Required Field



Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Posted by DesertDawg

10:30 PM, Jun 30, 2008

Lets try and remember this post the next time there is talk that firing Ty will solve all of U Dub's problems...

BTW - Interesting blog entry on the Pac Ten and Wine...www.thecollegefootballguys.blogspot.com

Posted by Seattle Dave

10:40 PM, Jun 30, 2008

Excellent post Bob, it should become an annual tradition to do posts like this on each class. It really wouldn't take that much time and would be of great help to the casual fans to see how each class is doing.

The brutal truth is our fourth year class of guys, the group that should be the key leaders on the team, is essentially down to DTN, Ossai, Stevens and Savannah, with Jones still having a shot. I fear the handwriting is on the wall with Perkins' leg condition, and Rosborough has had three years to get in some kind of shape and apparently hasn't.

Posted by Formerly Guest

10:59 PM, Jun 30, 2008

I hope, for his sake, Perkins retires. Had a great year for us last year (I thought), but man...already guaranteed a knee replacement...Jeez.

Posted by It's All Ty's Fault

11:17 PM, Jun 30, 2008

It's Ty's fault Gilby won one game and was fired and that none of these guys qualified.

Posted by huskiesjv

4:43 AM, Jul 01, 2008

excuses excuses Typologists

Posted by onewoodwacker

6:31 AM, Jul 01, 2008

The 2005 class is indicative of coaching changes.
Granted - most "powerhouse" programs are not coming off a 1-10 season so this class is not what you would expect under normal conditions at the UW even if there was a coaching change.
Ty does deserve to NOT have that year counted against him - it was an exceptional year. He needs to keep the last couple of recruiting years going though.

Posted by Hockey Lips

7:31 AM, Jul 01, 2008

You think that class is bad, take a look a the classes Willingham recruited at Notre Dame in 2003 & 2004. Just as bad!

Posted by Marysville Mark

7:33 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Great post Bob, I know it would be a lot of work, but you could look back and follow it up with a list of the potential recruits that were lost. Gilby must have had a list of recruiting targets. These guys are likely filling leadership roles around the pac 10 and elsewhere. It might give some insight into how a program is built over time.
A second interesting aspect of this is that the young players are getting incredible experience. Sophmores and freshman getting real game time in the toughest schedules in the country. It's like playing four bowl games in the regular season.
I am enjoying every minute of it.
Marysville Mark

Posted by JuneauTom

7:51 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Sorry if I missed this elsewhere but, with the loss of Hasty and Murchison, does UW gain 2 more scholarships for the 2009 recruiting class? Thanks

Posted by Jordan

7:59 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Man, tough to argue with that post about how bare the cupboard was when Willingham came on board. If your team is going to be led primarily by juniors and seniors I think it is easy to see why our record has been what it has been. And if you combine this post with what some of last year's seniors did, WOW. Three examples of senior leadership that come to mind.

1) Anthony Russo, a senior, gets the ball stripped late in the fourth quarter on a punt return against USC. With the rhythm the offense was in at that point, we have the ball on at least our 40 yard line and are driving to win the game against the then #1 team in the nation.

2) Louis Rankin fumbles the ball late in the fourth quarter at Oregon State with Washington driving to go ahead in the game. OSU recovers, drives, and scores.

3) And my personal favorite, Corey Williams, in the Apple Cup late in the fourth quarter (starting to see a theme?) catches the ball deep in WSU territory, starts running with it, and fumbles. WSU recovers and scores the go ahead touchdown.

Those are your seniors on the team. The veterans who are suppose to be reliable late in the game. Three of our "veterans" cost us a shot at the game. If you have seniors making those kind of mistakes with the game on the line, with the junior class being what Bob posted, and the most difficult schedule in the country you're not going to win very many football games. I think this is what he meant by the "more bullets in the gun" comment.


That being said, I still think Willingham needs to win 6 games this year. I give him a pass to this point. But we have to see the wins now.

Posted by Olyfan

8:19 AM, Jul 01, 2008

JuneauTom,

Murchison was a SR so he figured to be opening a spot on the 85 for a recruit anyway but Hasty was a RS-JR so he opened an extra spot. I count 14 SR's in athletic eligibility scanning the new roster (which is set by athletic eligibility for ill-conceived reasons) & Perkins is expected to hang it up after this season if not before then. With normal attrition I'd expect somewhere around 20 incoming recruits for 2009.

Posted by Fred

8:23 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Yeah. Obviously, TY should be kept on another season at least. So what if they don't win. We need to make sure that life is fair.

Posted by Clarendon

8:38 AM, Jul 01, 2008

How was Paul Wulff able to recruit around 25 athletes to PULLMAN with less time than Tyrone had to recruit 10 athletes to UW?

Enough of this free pass business.

Posted by UW Alum

8:42 AM, Jul 01, 2008

While I think that Ty needs to win this year, there are a few examples of coaches that had a horrid start at a school for five years before turning it around (Coach K at Duke and Frank Beamer at VaTech to name two). Patience does pay off sometimes, does anyone think that the talent level has not increased??? Ty has done a nice job recruiting (especially this incoming class). We go to a bowl this year, he deserves another year or two. I was also glancing at our roster for the 2009-10 season and we'd have something ridiculous like 20 returning starters. Bring on LSU, it'll set the tone for our return to glory.

Posted by Eddy

8:46 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Paul Wulff recruits "athletes" nobody else wants. Except for Mackay.

I rather save some scholies for when players want to come (ie last year) rathen than waste them marginal talent that Wulff will be saddled with for the next 4+ seasons.

Posted by 2003 dawg

8:46 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Hockey Lips,

You think that class is bad, take a look a the classes Willingham recruited at Notre Dame in 2003 & 2004. Just as bad!
Willinghams 2003 class at Notre Dame:

21 Players

12 4 star recruits
8 3 star recruits
1 2 star recruit

The four star recruits included the likes of Brady Quinn, Jeff Samardzija, and Tom Zibikowski. Amongst the three star recruits was John Carlson. Based on your ignorant post Ill assume that you dont know who John Carlson is so Ill explain. Hes the Tight End that the Seahawks traded up to take early in the second round ahead of USCs Fred Davis this year.

Thats not what I would call an empty cupboard, but thats just me.

Posted by Husky Fan In New York

9:08 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Hocky Lips, that just isn't accurate. TW's 2003 class had Victor Abiamiri, Trevor Laws, Brady Quinn, Ryan Harris, Jeff Smardzija, John Sullivan, John Carlson (by the Seahawks), and Tommy Zbikowski all I believe who were drafted. 8 NFL draft picks in one class is very, very good.

In fairness to TW, he took over a trainwreck and had less than 2 months to put together a class (over Christmas and New Year's too). Jonathan Stewart was the most notable recruit UW missed b/c of all the turmoil.

I am very thankful for Daniel Teo'Neshim, EJ Savannah, and Ben Ossai as well as Chris Stevens and Darrion Jones. Also hopeful that Ed Donatell will get the most out of Darrion Jones and Chris Stevens (especially Stevens) since Kent Baer never seemed to utilize Stevens speed and play-making ability.

Posted by Seattle Dave

9:24 AM, Jul 01, 2008

While I don't think comparing across sports is all that valid anyway, it is just false to say that Coach K had a horrid start at Duke in his first 5 years. He went 85-65 in his first 5 years at Duke with 3 winning seasons including his very first season there.

Frank Beamer is a little closer to the mark, but even he had winning seasons in year 3 (6-4-1) and year 4 (6-5) at VaTech. More to the point, Beamer is a unique coach who famously found a phase of the game that was undervalued by everyone else (special teams) and emphasized that undervalued phase to start beating people. That is not TW's m.o.

Hugh Millen has shown that it is very very very rare for a coach to ever succeed if he doesn't do so in his first three years at a school. Given the absolute disaster TW walked into here, it is not unreasonable to give him four years rather than three but if we don't start seeing success this year, we probably never will.

Posted by sequimdawgbob

9:33 AM, Jul 01, 2008

"8:38 AM, Jul 01, 2008

"How was Paul Wulff able to recruit around 25 athletes to PULLMAN with less time than Tyrone had to recruit 10 athletes to UW? "

Stop and think, Wulff does not have the same standards to deal with that Tyrone has. How many of that "around 25" would be eligible at UW? Of those eligible, how many would help the UW or any Pac 10 team do anything other than fill up a uniform?

Too many questions?

Posted by 2003 dawg

9:47 AM, Jul 01, 2008

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/huskies/359075_ubok15.html

interesting article detailing the severity of perkins injury...

Posted by jh

10:35 AM, Jul 01, 2008


..."Washington's Class of 2005, which was generally considered to be the worst in the school's history in decades"...

...coincidently...willingham's Notre Dame Class of 2005 is also down to seven players and is also considered the worst ND recruiting class in the last 50 years...

Posted by 2003 dawg

10:43 AM, Jul 01, 2008

JH,

TW was fired on November 30th of 2004.

But I guess ND's 2005 recruiting class is reflective of TW.

You've out done yourself again with your infinite wisdom.

Posted by jh

10:45 AM, Jul 01, 2008


..."TW's 2003 class had Victor Abiamiri, Trevor Laws, Brady Quinn, Ryan Harris, Jeff Smardzija, John Sullivan, John Carlson (by the Seahawks), and Tommy Zbikowski all I believe who were drafted. 8 NFL draft picks in one class is very, very good."...

...Abiamiri signed with Maryland...but because of a recruiting violation ended up at ND...every other player you mention was an ND "legacy" that is...a player that wanted to go to ND lifelong no matter who is coach... every school -especially ND - has these "legacys"...just look to Jake Locker as an example...

Posted by jh

10:48 AM, Jul 01, 2008


...you can't have it both ways...either willingham did a crap recruiting job that year at ND...or he did a crap recruiting job that year at UW...take your pick...or...considering his recruiting history while at stanford, ND and UW...both...

Posted by Samurai I Am Awry

11:00 AM, Jul 01, 2008

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/huskies/359075_ubok15.html

interesting article detailing the severity of perkins injury...

nugget of wisdom from my freshman HS football coach - "if you cant get a first down in 4 attempts you do not deserve to punt."

Posted by Have it both ways?

11:04 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Ty's class '05 @ ND had great talent, that can't be spun. They signed there under him so he gets the credit. His UW '05 class, not so much.

"Legacy" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. In any case Locker did not grow up a Husky fan (or a legacy to anywhere but WWU).

Posted by jh

11:08 AM, Jul 01, 2008


...willingham may get "credit" for "signing" legacys...but he didn't recruit them...just like Locker...

Posted by Have it both ways?

11:13 AM, Jul 01, 2008

correction, post above meant to type "Ty's class '03 @ ND" that was the class under discussion

Posted by Gabe

11:13 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Parsing TW's recruiting record and comparisons with other coaches is farily pointless with two months to go before the '08 kickoff at Autzen. The ONLY thing that counts will be his performance this year. Everything else will be totally irrelevant to his future. 4 or more losses he's gone; 6-6 he's a lock to stay; 5-7, who knows? If he does leave, it will be interesing to see if Donatell is a leading candidate for the head position. No doubt depends on whether he works some kind of magic with the defense . First order of business: turn out the lights at Autzen. Troy Must Be Destroyed (ducks demolished)

Posted by jh

11:19 AM, Jul 01, 2008


...the problem for the UW "future", gabe, is that I feel that willingham sees the handwriting on the wall for this season and has quit recruiting. Much like WSU last year...and once again like stanford and ND...he's leaving the cupboard bare for his successor...

Posted by Gabe

11:22 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Sorry: My last post was obviously defective. 4 or fewer WINS and TW loses his overly generous paycheck. 6 or more wins and he gets renewed. In between, anyone's guess. Someday I'll get this right on the first try. Nevertheless, Troy Must Be Destroyed (ducks demolished)

Posted by Gabe

11:47 AM, Jul 01, 2008

I know next to nothing about recruiting. But it's hard to accept jh's contention that TW is purposefully sabotaging the program. Is there a more positive explanation for where we stand right now on recruiting? Stanford is never a great comparison because the cupboard is usually bare due to higher academic requirements. It's been a long time since the glory years of Plunkett and Elway. TW had terrific recruiting results last year. So how can we ssume he's purposefully dragging down the program in the wake of that successs? The theory is just too paranoid to be plausible. Troy Must Be Destroyed (ducks destroyed)

Posted by huskyHusky

11:52 AM, Jul 01, 2008

There has been a serious talent gap at Washington for the past 4 years.

When Anthony Russo is you go-to-receiver...no offense to Russo, you're going to loose close games. It wasn't until Luis Rankin's 5th year that he gained over 1,000 and still could't restrain his dancing tendacies. Last year our starting DE, Gunieheim, was under-sized and easily thrown around by Boise St. What about our QBs!! Locker is a great runner but is still learning how to pass in his 3rd year with the program. Before him, Stanback, a great athlete but didn't really understand the position and also had issues with accuracy. Our last good(not great) QB was Pickett and that was nearly 6 years ago!!

We can continue postion by position and see similar gaps in talent. I think the drop off in talent is a direct result of the turmoil the program experienced after the Neuheisel regime. That ensuing chaos affected talent evaluation, coaching up players and possible recruits. Talent suffered. Players regardless of talent will make mistakes but eventually well talented teams will overcome mistakes that may determine the outcome of a game. I agree with a previous poster, last season we didn't have enough talent (or developed talent) to overcome cucial mistakes to beat USC, tOSU, UO, and ASU. We only had enough talent to keep up with them until the 4th quarter.

Posted by Luke

11:53 AM, Jul 01, 2008

Bob, what's going on with Jason Wells and his knee? I keep hearing about our good young safeties, forgetting that we had a solid safety in Wells.

Posted by JimBobJoe

11:57 AM, Jul 01, 2008

So we didn't have enough talent to beat USC but Stanford did?

Posted by Stop making excuses

12:04 PM, Jul 01, 2008

I don't think anyone is saying we had the talent to beat USC, Oregon, etc.

What we did have the talent to beat was Arizona, WSU, and Hawaii.

Posted by uw dude

12:11 PM, Jul 01, 2008

what do you know, jh is on the blog again... get a life dude.

in other news, Pac-10 teams as fine wines. cant say i disagree with most of these comparisons.

http://www.thecollegefootballguys.blogspot.com/

Posted by huh?

12:15 PM, Jul 01, 2008

i like your logic jimbobjoe. i guess appalachian state had more talent than florida since app st. beat michigan and florida did not. if i was to gamble on florida vs. app st. i think, just maybe, yeah, i'm pretty sure, i'd bet on florida to win

Posted by Designtime

12:15 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Gabe,
You think he gets extended with 6 wins? Just kill me now (even though I think we will win only 5).

If he gets to finish his contract with 6 wins it will be the final admission that mediocrity is the new standard at UW.

Posted by ArtV

12:21 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Arguing with the Ty-haters is pointless. They have virtually no College Football IQ and think things like the head coach calls the plays on offense, that another coaching change benefits the UW program right now, that JR Hasty would have been awesome under a different coach.

I wish that an 8-4 season would shut them up, but we all know it wont.

Posted by Formerly Guest

12:30 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Designtime,

To be honest, medicrity would be better than what we had in 2005 and 2007.

Many program have to pass through mediocrity to get to excellence, or even competence.

Posted by wtf?

12:33 PM, Jul 01, 2008

i think i read some where that ty was responsible for oil prices skyrocketing

Posted by Formerly Guest

12:36 PM, Jul 01, 2008

UW dude,

Nice link. Very accurate I am afraid.

Posted by huskHusky

12:39 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Having talent doens't guarantee you will every game, if that was the case all the SEC schools would be undefeated every....something has to give. Those with more will find a way to win and take bigger risks. Who was our last 1000 yrd rusher before Ranking? and how long ago was that? Laughable.

Believe it or not, Arizon is more talented than us in a lot of ways. Stoops has had 3 really good classes and it will finally come together for them. They had a more experienced QB, better secondary, better LBs, better WRs and better DL .Tuitama, Cason, Jennings, Grisby, Lopez..etc

Oh btw, for the post regarding Stanford, UW recruited a lot of their players too, just because they play for Stanford doesn't mean they're not D-1 type players. We recruited Chike Amajoyi (played as true frosh for them against us this year), Kellen Kiilsagaard, Matthew Masifilo a 4star DT from Hawaii, Delano Howell (yup Dan's little brother, a 4star RB) and David Decastro from our back yard.

Posted by jh's rear-end

12:53 PM, Jul 01, 2008

can someone please get his head out of my personal area? no one has come to the rescue and ended my misery yet...

Posted by uwlb

12:55 PM, Jul 01, 2008

IT'S SIMPLE..Easier said than done, but if UW can start back winning this year, all this type of media (i.e. scholarship rescinds, kicked off team, etc) will all be erased and everyone will LOVE Ty. Now, tell me I'm wrong with this simple universal thought? But, on the other hand UW would be faced with signing TY to an extension if UW does well..O OH......

LETS GO DAWGS!

Posted by Formerly Guest

1:00 PM, Jul 01, 2008

HuskyHusky,

I think most people agree with your theory.

It is near impossible to consistently win when facing a significant talent-differential.

Things that can neutralize that differential-
1) Injuries (helped Stanford beat USC)
2) Bad weather (helps us at home a lot)
3) Rivalry games (has bene helping OSU trump more talented UO teams of late)
4) A Really good team quitting at the first sign of adversity (helped everyone, including us and Stanford, beat Cal during the 2nd half of the season last year)
5) Quirky systems. People have posted on this board how the advent of the Wing-T at the high school level has really helped marignal programs outcompete more athletic ones. In college football, the innovative development of the spread has allowed less talented teams like Utah a few years ago to confuse and embarrass more talented teams. The wishbone in the 70s and 80s helped many SWC teams stay competitive with better opponents.
6) Outlandishly amazing coaching. Which usually utilizes some of #5 to help. My sense is that OSU has had some of this the last 5 years. They just seem to do more with less than anyone else in our conference, over the last 5 years.

Posted by huskyHusky

1:28 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Guest,

Well said. You defiantely articulated that better than I could.

Big time college football is and will always be about talent. Plus or minus its usually the same 25-30 schoos who battle each other for the best 500-750 players across the country every year. This shark like frenzy for the top players has caused alot of programs in recent memory to get in trouble by the NCAA for how they court and sign them. I would love to have USC's, tOSU's, and LSU's second or third stringers at any position. As for the lower and middle of the pack schools like UW (for right now), things like program stability (which includes coaching), injuries, eligibility, wheather and systems all matter and help to bridge the talent gap especially in close games.

Posted by Jordan

1:36 PM, Jul 01, 2008

JH,

Most of Notre Dame's players for the last 15 years have been legacy recruits. Not sure I see your point. Not that anyone ever does.

Posted by Reality Check

1:46 PM, Jul 01, 2008

All of the pro-Ty versus anti-Ty stuff does get old. But, since it's the dominant topic of this thread, here goes...

Ultimately it comes down to wins. Period. All of this crap about injuries, weather (are you serious!?), enough bullets, schedule, etc. are just excuses. Losers make excuses, winners win. It's just that simple. I see Riley winning 8, 9, 10 games with his players. From where I sit, I'm not convinced he's got vastly more talent man for man. Boise State won 13 games and won the Fiesta Bowl a couple years back. And again, I don't see them having 4 and 5-star recruits across the board. The debate can go on and on about recruiting, players, etc. but the one fact that can't be debated is the win-loss record. And his W-L record stinks.

But whatever the case, it gets old all of the analysis of why he's good or why he's bad. The guy has won 11 games in 36 tries. The rest is just noise. If he can't win 7 games this year, he SHOULD NOT get an extension. 'nuff said. Good luck, Ty. Maybe keeping your job will be incentive enough to put it together this year. In the words of a local football coach wannabe, "A fifth year has to be earned." Well, if that's true for a player then it's sure as hell true for the coach!

Posted by Formerly Guest

2:01 PM, Jul 01, 2008

RC,

Yes, I was serious about weather. Remember the apple cup in 1993? "Snow bowl?" WSU beat a more talented UW team. Remember the "Fred Small Game" when Marcus Allen set the NCAA rushing record in a season? UW beat a more talented USC team.

I am not saying we need to give TW more of a chance because it hasn't rained enough the last 3 seasons for him to win more than 11 games.

Everyone agrees that OSU does more with less than most programs, and unless our staff does the same this year, they will be unemployed by the end of it.

Posted by Gabe

2:07 PM, Jul 01, 2008

I find it hard to argue with Reality Check's argument about what should occur in a perfect world. I do agree performance this year is all that counts in the decision. But my take is that TW's a lock to work out his contract with a 6-6 record. That will be viewed as substantial positive movement in pulling the program out of the ditch. I think the powers that be will not want to risk disruption of the program after a 6-6 record and will be inclined to let him show what he can do with the team when these great new recruits are sophomores and Locker has matured. I think there are better coaches out there, including some high school coaches, who would achieve more for a lot less, but I can't see him getting the boot with a 6-6 showing. Depending on the season, we may never know if this is right or wrong. Certainly if the team goes 4-8, there will be no question. Troy Must Be Destroyed (ducks demolished)

Posted by Seattle Dave

2:52 PM, Jul 01, 2008

I hate to harp on such a tiny detail, but as long as we are here, note that the 6-6 record that people keep talking about (in some cases, as a borderline between "definitely keep Ty" and "definitely fire Ty") is virtually impossible.

There are 7 bowls contracted to the Pac-10 for 2008, thus, starting this year, it is almost impossible to construct a scenario where a bowl-eligible Pac-10 team does not go bowling. If by some fluke the Pac-10 were to end up with one or more "extra" bowl-eligible teams, those would almost certainly go as at-large bids to some other bowls, given that there will be 68 bowl bids for the 120 FBS teams this fall.

Accordingly, UW will either end up 7-6 or 6-7 overall if we win 6 reg season games, and I believe either of those outcomes would put a sharp point on the appropriate decision for Emmert and co.

Posted by Designtime

3:07 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Art,

Your post amuses me a little. As an aside, some head coaches do call their own plays.

The one thing that Fox news better than anyone is label people that they disagree with. Lately everyone who thinks Ty is doing a terrible job is labeled a "Ty Hater". I don't hat Ty. I just don't want him coaching the UW football team.

For someone claiming other people have low football IQ's your reasoning seems awfully poor.

There are endless stats to show Ty is doing an awful job, and more stats on top of that to show he is unlikely to ever be sucessful at this school. Surely you have heard people talk about them.

Posted by Designtime

3:21 PM, Jul 01, 2008

If Ty is 6-6 next year he should be fired. Let's take programs with nothing going on that have been turned around quicker than Ty could get a traditional power back to 500.

Ron Zook took a terrible team to the Rose Bowl.

Jeff Tedford took one of the worst BCS schools in the country and won almost right away.

Randy Edsall took a team that wasn't even D-1 a few years ago and took them to bowl games.

Bronco Mendenhall took a washed up MWC team. Now some people are talking about them crashing the BCS.

Brian Kelly has taken Cinncinati to bowl games. Before him, alot of people didn't even know they had a footaball team.

Rebuilding doesn't take 5 years. History says so. I challenge anyone to show me 5 coaches in college football history (who wasn't a first time head cocah) who took that long?

Posted by Gabe

3:24 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Seattle Dave, that was a truly elegant point. Let me be the first to stick out my neck and say if TW finishes the regular season 6-6 and takes them to a bowl, but loses, he is a lock for another year to complete his contract. I don't think he'll be fired because of a bowl loss; more likely rewarded for getting there at all. However, if he ends up 7-6, then watch out for a contract renewal and a raise (whatever else, please God, don't give the guy more public money; 1.5 million is obsene as it is) Troy Must Be Destroyed (ducks demolished)

Posted by Husky19

4:03 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Seattle Dave wrote: "Hugh Millen has shown that it is very very very rare for a coach to ever succeed if he doesn't do so in his first three years at a school."

Oh well I guess we should not play any games this year. All done since Hugh Millen said so........ By the way, what NFL or D-1 team is Hugh coaching at???? Oh yeah, that is what I thought.

Ty wins 9-10 games this year.

Posted by optimism is good

4:03 PM, Jul 01, 2008

design time - you have a low football IQ, just kidding. you show a lot of examples of other schools rebuilding faster the UW but i'm not sure they were in the same situation. i think hedges, ricky and gilby did a whammy on this program that will only now be surpassed this season. i think UW will finish either 8-5 or 9-4 as the pac-10 won't be as strong as it was last year. in the shoulda, coulda, woulda category imagine if last year's team got ucla the day they played notre dame, osu the day they played cincinnatti, oregon the day they played arizona, etc. they would have been bowl bound. i think this season UW is a much better team and will get a few breaks that will bring them out on top, ie an interception that is caught and not dropped, or a 3rd down pass that is not called an illegal forward pass for crossing the line of scrimmage, or a TD pass that is caught and not kicked up to the opposing team's db. the glass is half full my friends and the wins are on their way - GO DAWGS

Posted by Seattle Dave

4:03 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Gabe, just for fun, let's game that scenario out a little further.

With the Pac-10's bowl tie ins being what they are, a 6-6 Husky team in '08 almost certainly plays in the Emerald Bowl vs. the #5, #6 or #7 ACC team; the Hawaii Bowl against a WAC team (almost certainly UH); or the Poinsettia Bowl against the MWC runner up (or if that turns out to be BYU, perhaps an at-large non-BCS team in a bowl swap to avoid the rematch problem).

In your scenario we lose that bowl game. If this is a second straight losing season that concludes with a loss @ Hawaii, that's a disaster for Ty and I see no way he survives. Ditto for the Poinsettia Bowl if against any other less prestigious non-BCS program than BYU.

The only way I could see Ty surviving a loss at the end of the year that leaves us sitting sub-.500 again is if we were to lose to a historically good ACC team that has itself underachieved but really has more talent than us and should be expected to win (Miami or FSU come to mind as possibilities here.)

Posted by Designtime

4:17 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Optimsm,

I certainly agree it is hard to compare circumstances and doing that is completely subjective. That said, I think those programs would be harder to recruit to. Imagine trying to recruit to Cal coming off a 2-9 season, hadn't won anything in years, with poor facilities and an administration that is almost hostile to football. That takes something.

All that being said, I am glad that there are optimisitc fans left, and I am more glad that you aren't trying to convince me to be positive with bogus reasoning.

Posted by Seattle Dave

4:33 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Geez h19. You tend to feel free to give your opinions about Husky football. I know poor old Hugh is not a big time high school assistant like you are, but he does have an Orange Bowl ring and ten years in the league so I think he is as entitled as the rest of us to comment.

I'll say this, if Ty wins 9+ this year I will be leading the parade for his extension.

Posted by optimism is good

4:42 PM, Jul 01, 2008

I'm not sure if it's my purple glasses that are clouding my vision but I really do see a lot wins this season
oregon - new qb, new rb
byu - gonna be just like when boise st. came in last year
okla - if that fumble for ohio st. is called correctly i think that game is MUCH closer. i see a tight one with oklahoma as well
stanford - it's stanford
arizona - they won't be able to stop the run which should keep the ball away from tuitama
osu - replacing d
notre dame - it's notre dame
usc - last two have been real close
asu - last two were lost in the 2nd half, more weapons/depth this season
ucla - too many injuries
wsu - replacing too much
cal - will have quit
bowl bound
ALL WINNABLE GAMES - GO DAWGS

Posted by Eastside Joe

5:14 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Have you pro-Ty guys actually watched the games over the last three seasons?

The 2007 Hawaii game was essentially the same as the 2005 game against Air Force.

A team that doesn't know how to win and a coach that doesn't know how to teach them.

2008 Huskies win 4-5 games tops.

Posted by Gabe

5:36 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Seattle Dave, your argument is certainly well constructed, but I still think it's unlikely TW will get the death penalty for going 6-6 and taking the team to a bowl and losing. All of this is totally speculative, of course, since we don't know what the precise circumstances will be or what lurks in the hearts and minds of el presidente and the yet-to-be-identified AD. Odds are we won't see this scenario unfold in any event. Let's hope for starters that the Huskies crush the Ducks and things get off to an astonishingly good start. That's what we all want. Troy Must Be Destroyed (ducks demolished)

Posted by Husky19

5:49 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Seattle Dave,

Its not so much about Hugh's comment as it is about you and other people thinking it is the "truth" about what will happen.

The point I am trying to make in my response is; just because UW is against the odds of success doesn't mean anything. Flip a coin 3 times, it comes out heads all 3 times. What's the odds that it comes out heads on the the 4th flip? 50/50.

See I look at each season independant of each other. Usc was not always the juggernaut that they are today, look at the 80's and 90's. They were not consistently winning 9,10,11 games each year. Don James had losing seasons, Weis won his first 2 years and look at what happened last year. Shouldn't he have won last year? Rhetorical JH, don't answer.

I think we need to look at the current situation irregardless of the past. Look at the 2008 season and only the 2008 season. Look at the players, the coaches, the schedule, other team's losses/gains etc... Of course if no changes are made, you can expect the same thing over and over. But there were some very (hopefully) productive changes, 3 new coaches and better talent the last 2 years.

UW does have play makers in most positions, and experience in key positions. I predict a 9-10 win season. If this happens, instead of lobbying for Ty's 5th year, I would lobby for a Donatell extension and raise. He will be the x-factor in the turn around.

So again, I respect Hugh, I respect his experience and NFL tenure. I just think it is useless to pull out crap like statistical data in such a volatile field WITHOUT anything backing it up.

How about this, head coaches with hair win more than bald head coaches. Hmmm is it because the losing causes coaches to pull their hair out more often?? (Obviously a joke but you get my point).

Did he runs any type of statistical analysis, regression analysis, what is the correlation, R-Squared etc... How do we know his data is statistically accurate. What were his assumptions?

Posted by Designtime

6:35 PM, Jul 01, 2008

You're kidding right? Without ANYTHING to back it up?

Hugh looked at all the coaches in college football. This is nothing like flipping a coin 3 times.

Vegas must love you!

Posted by Cowboy Justice

6:57 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Hugh had many many numbers to back up his assertion. Probably too many numbers for your head to comprehend.

Coaches that have been mediocre for 13 seasons don't suddenly become successful. We deserve much better than Ty Willingham at UW.

And for those who compare TW to Frank Beamer, pleeeeeeeease!

Frank Beamer had a winning season in year 3. Tyrone crapped all over himself in year 3.

Posted by onewoodwacker

7:12 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Why does it seem to be the fashion opinion is that the Pac-10 will be weaker this year? Did I not see that the Pre-season #2 team is USC and that ASU, Oregon and Cal are all ranked? As Iv'e said before -I personally think ASU will win it all (the Pac-10) this year with the best Offense in the nation and a serviceable Defense and wull be in a BCS bowl. I also believe that Stanford (we had BETTER keep our eye on Jim Harbaugh, he is turning that program around and will win by his 3rd year if not this year) will be much improved as well as Arizona. So - I just don't see the Pac-10 being easier.

Posted by Jordan

7:17 PM, Jul 01, 2008

Eastside Joe,

I was at the Air Force game. It was nothing like the Hawaii game. First of all, that UW team was TERRIBLE. One of the worst teams I've seen. Stanback missed so many throws he looked like it was Peewee league football out there. The Hawaii game was lost because our defensive line got ZERO pressure on the quarterback in the second half. The Air Force game was lost because our offense looked and played like an average high school team. And Hawaii was a far better team then Air Force. Hawaii went to the BCS for god sake.


To the other debate,

I think it will be very easy for Emmert to fire Ty if he goes 6-6 in the regular season and loses in a bowl game. I think to say with certainty Ty should and will be back he needs to at least go 6-6 in the regular season and win the bowl game or go 7-5 in the regular season and lose the bowl game. Anything less than that and too many people will say with a losing record not enough progress is being made.

Posted by jh

7:59 PM, Jul 01, 2008


...considering his "buyout" history...what makes you think willingham wants a 5th year?...is this the reason for zero commitments?...is this the reason for playing golf in SEC land during a prime NW recruitment period?...

Posted by Mutt

8:02 PM, Jul 01, 2008

After Don James, they've all been young right now, say it the way it is....this program leaves alot to be desired in any starch of the imagination, wishful thinking just does get it done !

Posted by Ziasudra

8:02 PM, Jul 01, 2008

I'm a Hokie, so I love Frank Beamer - but I have one question - when he had a winning season in his 3rd year, who was hw playing? Richmond? East Carolina?
I'm too lazy to look it, but I doubt seriously it was rated as the toughest schedule in the U S of A.. . .

Posted by NorCalDawgFan

9:53 PM, Jul 01, 2008

This blog needs Malibu and Chris Miller reminding us how we are going to win on August 30. Too many other people living in the past.

Posted by Seattle Dave

9:55 PM, Jul 01, 2008

ziasudra, as a matter of fact your Hokies did play ECU that year as they often do, and also Akron and Temple. It wasn't the toughest sched in America that's for sure, but it was a legit regional schedule: they also played Florida State, UVa, W.Va., Clemson and NC State.

h19, of course you're right about the coin flip but believe me when I tell you this was not a cherry picked sample HM looked at. I can't recall the exact numbers -- maybe if you go back far enough in the archives at dawgman.com or kjram.com you could find them, but he looked at ALL coaches in the history of major college football.

On the 9 or 10 wins, I agree that this team will be significantly better with the new playmakers and Donatell. But from where I sit this year's schedule actually looks tougher than the corresponding first 12 games last year in which we went 4-8. Oklahoma needs no introduction and don't kid yourself, ND will not suck that bad twice in a row. Other than DTN and Elisara I see vast gaping holes on the D line and as we all know, if you lose the battle for the line of scrimmage in college football (or any football really) it's all over, they can just run on you for first downs, control the clock and keep your playmakers off the field.

Oh and DJ did not have "losing seasons,"at least at UW, he had A losing season (and only one game below .500 at that) immediately followed by a 16 year run of winning seasons that included 7 (of what are now called) BCS bowls. Winners lose a few now and then, sure, but over the long haul winners win, or else they get driven out of the game.

Posted by Jordan

7:32 AM, Jul 02, 2008

Seattle Dave,

You brought up Hugh Millen point that coaches who do not succeed in the first 3 years rarely do. Hugh was saying well Don James won the Rose Bowl in his third season.


I have 2 things to say to that first that was a far different time in college football. Many teams in the Pac-10 like Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford could be easily beaten. Football was not seen as a priority like it is today. And that has to do with the money the schools can now bring in. I don't know numbers but I would guess that most if not all of the teams in the Pac-10 have a football program that can pay for the entire athletic dept (except WSU). So every team in the Pac-10 wants to field a winning team.

Secondly, the comparison to Don James is not fair. I am not putting James down. I love him and think he is by far the best coach we have ever had at UW in any sport. And he is a better coach than Ty. However, James record in his first 3 seasons was 6-5 in 1975 with a team that had 7 players drafted in the NFL. James went 5-6 in 1976 his second season and had 3 players drafted in the NFL. And in 1977 he went 8-4, beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl and had two players drafted in the NFL. In 1977 he lost four games but is credited with only losing two and going 10-2 because UCLA and Miss. St. forfeited the game because they used an ineligible player. He also had Warren Moon on that team who was not drafted by the NFL out of College.

I love Don James but the fact is he began his coaching career in a different era with more talent. Just read Bob's post and look at who we have had drafted the last few years. This is Ty's second year with a talented quarterback, the excuses are over, he needs win. But Hugh Millen's comparison and yours is not a fair one.

Posted by Seattle Dave

9:14 AM, Jul 02, 2008

Jordan, I wasn't talking about Hugh's remark that DJ won the Rose Bowl in year 3. I agree that would be an unfair standard due to different times and circumstances.

I was talking about another time when Hugh looked at the careers of ALL (yes literally all) major cfb coaches and found that a very small % ever achieved a winning season at a school if it didn't happen by year 3. Unfortunately I don't recall the exact numbers but it was on the order of 1%.

Ultimately we agree about Ty: the excuses are over, he needs to win now. If he does, I'll be his biggest fan I promise you.

Posted by Husky19

12:42 PM, Jul 02, 2008

Designtime and Cowboy:

You're kidding right? Without ANYTHING to back it up?

Ok, so he took all football coaches. What assumptions were made? Did he factor in each time the NCAA made rule changes i.e. 85 scholarship limitation?

You see taking raw data and taking an average or sorting it by wins and losses does nothing. It is at best a high level basic analysis.

Design Vegas loves people like you that THINK you know more than you do.

On the surface Hugh's data may be correct but if you dig under that I bet you will find strong correlations to different assumptions. All I am saying is that it is not as black and white as you 3 (incl Seatte Dave) may think.

With that said, I agree with Seattle Dave, Ty needs to win or he's out. But I also said I thought UW would win 9-10 games this year due to the new coaching changes. If you want something you never had, you gotta do something you've never done. Ty got rid of Baer.

Posted by rickdawg

1:11 PM, Jul 02, 2008

TW: scattering players like a wet dog scatters water. Right now, the goal is to keep as many decent prospects as we can so that the new coach will have something to work with. TW can take a couple of those gold jersey boys (the pencil necks with the good grades who can't tackle) along with him to his next job at William and Mary. That's assuming he ever gets a head job again. Apologies to ND. Thou art forgiven. He's really that bad.

Posted by BiGDawg1959

9:27 PM, Jul 02, 2008

Tyrone Davis was a COMPLETE JOKE!

Recent entries

Jul 1, 08 - 10:14 PM
Huskies in state all-star game

Jul 1, 08 - 10:06 PM
Shelton Sampson update

Jun 30, 08 - 10:06 PM
And then there were seven

Jun 30, 08 - 05:03 PM
Everybody else in?

Jun 29, 08 - 11:07 PM
Locker returns to Bellingham lineup, keys win

Advertising

Marketplace

Advertising

Advertising

Categories
Calendar

July

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Browse the archives

July 2008

June 2008

May 2008

April 2008

March 2008

February 2008

Advertising

Buy a link here