|
Articles
|
When will UW be better than the
Oregon schools? After reading my article, "Holding Sark's feet to the fire, Part II," a Husky fan wrote me an e-mail wondering when Washington football would get better than the Oregon schools. (Note that the referenced article presents two benchmarks for measuring progress). He writes that it's been 6 years since UW has gone bowling and had a winning season. It's been 8 years, he says, since UW has bettered both Oregon schools. He says my timetable, presented in the article above, means that it will be 3 or 4 years before the Huskies will go to a bowl and that only the Lord knows how long it will take to better both Oregon schools. Table. Washington's record compared with that of the Oregon schools over the last 10 years. The Huskies last beat both Oregon and Oregon State in 2003, when Keith Gilbertson coached the Dawgs.
The following is my response to his e-mail. I am unhappy, too. Unfortunately, there is no fast track for getting to a bowl, other than an infusion of talented players, say a couple of potential first-round NFL draft picks, one each on the offensive and defensive lines to speed matters along. And the list goes on. Players of that ilk aren’t going to commit to UW until the team has shown more progress than it has this year. However, Steve Sarkisian is off to a good start, and finishing 4-8 would meet or better most people’s expectations for this season. Right now, beating UCLA at Pasadena would be huge, not having beaten the Bruins there since 1995. Although some of the this season's statistics have improved significantly, I’m disappointed that the defensive numbers – a 6% improvement -- aren’t better than they are. And the defensive stats look to worsen considering upcoming games against Cal and Oregon State. Defensive stats measure the heartbeat of the team and are a prognosis for its future health. However, it’s critical to support the current coaching staff as much as possible. Supportive fans can make a big difference at ball games, with crowd noise, etc. Another coaching turnover, along with its attendant mediocre recruiting class, would be a blow to the rebuilding effort. We have two transition classes on the team right now, the 2005 (rated 55th) and 2009 (rated 66th) classes, and can’t afford another one to go with the 2009 class. As for the Oregon schools: Oregon is running a gimmicky, high-precision offense that needs an extremely talented quarterback to orchestrate the show. Maestros like Dennis Dixon and Jeremiah Masoli don’t grow on trees. Oregon fell apart after Dixon got hurt a couple of years ago, losing three straight games after starting 8-1. Oregon State has the Roger brothers, a dynamic duo and an improbable pair to have on one team. When they were both lost to injury at the end of last season, the Beavers, without the main thrust of their offense, barely eked out 3-0 victory over Pittsburgh in the Sun Bowl. The vibrant milieu of the Don James era seems forever gone thanks to parity in college football and the facility-building wars that have taken place in the northwest. Yet, Husky fans can pin their hopes on parity as being a gravitational force in slowing their northwest rivals’ impetus. However, dominating both UO and OSU on a yearly basis is unlikely because of the parity angle we're pinning our hopes on. Once UW reaches parity with one or both of them in any given year, it will have its lean years as well. Certainly emotion, determination and focus can make a big difference in future games, especially at Husky Stadium as we’ve witnessed this year. Maintaining continuity in coaching will be a driving force to improving. For example, staying with Mike Stoops, who has been on the proverbial hot seat the last few years, was critical to Arizona’s record (5-2) this year. The ‘Cats beat Oregon State at Corvallis this season, along with UCLA and Stanford at home, these three teams being more or less in the middle of the conference along with Arizona. And, of course, there was the immaculate deflection. Three teams rule the conference, with five in the middle and two at the bottom. Over the next two years, I expect UW to reach the middle of the pack, assuming Jake Locker stays another year. His presence will help recruiting, among more obvious reasons for his staying. In summing this up, if I could answer your question in mathematical terms, I would say that bettering the Oregon schools (bos) in the future is a function of the following: bos = f (p, sb, stb, i, hfa, arr, cc, x) where p measures the parity factor; sb relates to the Mike Stoops benchmark; stb represents our statistical benchmark; i stands for intangibles, such as focus and determination; hfa relates to home-field advantage, as measured in decibels of noise, say; arr relates to the average recruiting ranking over the past five years; cc stands for coaching continuity; and x equates to other variables. Devising a mathematical equation as well as coming up with other variables (x) for the function bos (measured in days to reach the goal) is left to the reader. ;-) I’m not preaching the virtues of being patient; it’s just that we fans don’t have another choice, other than complaining and throwing a hissy fit – which, unfortunately, won’t help the overall state of the program. It's certainly necessary to hold Sark's feet to the fire, but the heat of the fire must be kept at a reasonable temperature lest we wade through another unnecessary litany of head coaches. Richard Linde can be reached at malamute@4malamute.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
