Expectations
by Lear Pilot on Jul 12, 2009 6:28 PM PDT
19 comments
Just read a great piece on Bob Condotta' blog, so I thought I'd pass it along, it's worth the time to read.
The short version is he compared how a new head coach did in their first season compared to how the previous coach had done in their last season. All of this is from 1978 and forward, when the Pac10 expanded to 10 teams. Needless to say, I found it very interesting to see how many coaches did better, how many did worse, and who the coaches that made the biggest difference were. Here's the top five turnarounds since 1978 per Bob:
Tedford 2002, plus 5.5
Kapp 1982, plus-5
Elway 1984, plus-4
Willingham, 1995, plus-3.5
Erickson, 2007, plus-3
It was interesting to here that Kapp and Elway were fired within five years, and there's nothing I can say about Willingham that you don't already know. So 3 of the top 5 weren't all they were cracked up to be.
So, how does all of this apply to us? We know that the best turnarounds were an increase of 5.5 wins and 3 wins. If you simply add that to last year, that would put us between 3 and 6 wins this coming year. That is only if Sark puts himself at the very top of the list. I consider myself a realistic and informed fan, that being said, I know full well that we highly underachieved last year and I believe it's very possible for Sark to put himself near the top of that list. Shoot, I'd even put money on it. But it is sobering to see the overall stats of what happens when you get a new coach. Here's some simple numbers I calculated from Bob's info:
23 out of 49 coaches did better than the previous coach = 47%
6 out of 49 coaches had the same record as the previous coach = 12%
20 out of 49 coaches did worse than the previous coach = 41%
So, what should we take out of all of this? In my opinion, successfully turning a program around doesn't usually show up in the first year. Look at Erickson and Tedford, they have the biggest turnarounds in the last 30 years and they only improved by 3 - 5.5 wins. Most successful turnarounds are a process that take multiple seasons, not one off season. As for the Huskies, the deck is highle stacked in Sark's favor for a big turnaround, but if we only win 4 - 5 games, it will go down as one of the biggest first year improvements in the last 30 years of Pac10 football. Hopefully this helps us fans build realistic expectations for this coming season, if we do better than our expectations, GREAT!!!
Be patient, don't expect for Sark to conquer the world in his first year, we can save world domination for years 2 and 3!!! Then the whole world can BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON!
0 recs |
19 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Realistically speaking...
We will go undefeated…kidding. 4-6 wins is what I need, not want, need. Anything less than 4 will have me VERY upset. There are 4 wins on our schedule and we will be ready for them when they arise.
by bigdave967 on Jul 13, 2009 7:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I couldn't agree more
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
by Lear Pilot on Jul 13, 2009 8:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Funny thing is...
…we were optimistic last season about going to a bowl game (6 wins minimum), of course everything imploded from Locker going down to Willingham’s fired negative shadow hexing the team. I think if we get some breaks and stay healthy we are going to surprise people. If not I’d have to concur with bigdave and say between 4 and 6 wins. I think the real test will be staying positive and fired up and playing hard THROUGHOUT the entire season no matter what our record is. Mentally we have to be on top in every game we play.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
by dawgfan22 on Jul 13, 2009 8:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Husky Fans...
…have got to step up and make Husky Stadium difficult to play football in again. I know it’s been tough to do lately, especially last season, but we have to help make Husky Stadium an explosive environment again. It’s time and the time is NOW!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
by dawgfan22 on Jul 13, 2009 8:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The deck is stacked in Sark's favor
You are right, going into last year most of us thought with a healthy Locker a 6-6 record would have been a possibility. I think Sark has the tools to work with, just not the depth to deal with many injuries. Filling Husky Stadium and making a lot of noise will definitely help, against LSU and USC we are going to need any extra help we can get.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
by Lear Pilot on Jul 13, 2009 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
July 27th
buying two tickets to USC…dont care what they cost. Flying out and going with my old man…ill do my part.
by bigdave967 on Jul 13, 2009 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fast Start
I think that’s critical too, or could be, from a psychological standpoint. Even if that’s not the case the mental toughness has got to be there.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
by dawgfan22 on Jul 13, 2009 10:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Somewhat fast start
I think we really need to Idaho (duh) and Stanford. If we go 2-2, mentally we will be on track for good things, going 1-3 could lead us down a bad road.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
by Lear Pilot on Jul 13, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
need to beat Idaho
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
by Lear Pilot on Jul 13, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree
from a mentality stand point Stanford is the pivotal game…prob the most important on the schedule. That game will make or break this season in my opinion.
by bigdave967 on Jul 13, 2009 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even if we get into...
…a position where we don’t want to be we need to be mentally tough enough to keep playing hard and grow from it.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
by dawgfan22 on Jul 13, 2009 7:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
From what I've heard you say around here Lear,
I think your argument is that we need to keep expectations high, not temper them.
It sound to me like you fall in the 4-5-6 win category. That’s a HUGE turnaround, and given your statement that the deck is tremendously stacked in Sarkisian’s favor, should be expected.
I agree with you.
No offense to anyone, but the people that I think that have the unrealistic expectations are those that are going to be pleased with the progress that even three wins shows. That’s not progress. Or if it is, it’s the sort of progress that Todd Turner or Willingham would try to shove down our throats.
by Sundodger on Jul 15, 2009 10:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah if you use the logic...
…that last years team WAS a 0-12 team then 3-9 would be progress. I think most of us would agree though that if certain factors would have been different we could have been a 5 or 6 win team last season. The problem now that I see is how much of a mental adjustment do these guys have to make? They did go 0-12 last season, so where are they mentally? My guess is with Sark and Co. coming in and shaking things up this is going to be a very different team mentally and physically.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
by dawgfan22 on Jul 15, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on the definition of "high"
Yep, I’m leaning toward 4-6 wins this year, and I think that is a fair expectation. As long as we remeber there are going to be bumps along the road, and we aren’t going from last to first in Sark’s first year.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
by Lear Pilot on Jul 16, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
High expectations are a bowl game.
6 wins gets there.
Given the fact that the winnable games on the schedule other than Idaho and WSU are on the road, and the fact that LSU, USC, Cal, Oregon (gulp), and probably Notre Dame and Oregon State just flat have more talent, 6 wins is high. Not unreasonable, but high. The upper end of reasonable, I’d say.
Maybe you’re seeing a lot of people expecting or predicting more than that this year. I haven’t, to be honest with you. I see far more people that are in the 3-4 win range, and that what’s I’m talking about – those expectations are just too low.
by Sundodger on Jul 16, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Erickson at Oregon State?
When Dennis Erickson took over at Oregon State, didn’t he win like 11 games that year? Or was that his second year? If it was his first year then I think he’d be close to the top of the list.
All I saw was purple
by crazidawg on Jul 15, 2009 4:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
2nd year. He went 7-5 in his first year there (OSU’s first winning season since 1960).
by kirkd on Jul 15, 2009 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was near the top of the list
- to be exact, with an increase of 3 wins over the previous year. Kirkd hit it the nail on the head, it’s the second year that Erickson had the big improvement. Be patient and give Sark time, the big turnarounds are pretty rare in year 1, and much more likely in year 2, that is unless your name is Urban.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
by Lear Pilot on Jul 17, 2009 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure why it did that
Suppose to say: #5 to be exact.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
by Lear Pilot on Jul 17, 2009 9:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
