Sarkisian On UCLA

What??? Say that again??

Seriously Wolf, WTF..... This quote made no sense until I read the original that started with a "Nah". "Nah" being the word he references when he says "I think this is the best way to start this." In other words....NO he's not interested.

Was that Bill Cosby asking that question in another episode of "Sark says the darndest things"?

Wtf? Can somebody translate that for me? And by somebody, I don't mean "lispy" Scott.

That's journalistic malpractice. I know you think it's your job to make everyone look as bad as possible, but you cut the part of his response that directly answered the question you raised. Is your life so miserable that you must break the rules of standard journalistic procedure -- not to mention common decency -- to drag everyone into your cesspool of personal suffering? Honest question.

You can't even quote people properly. You are so terrible at your job putz. There is not a single aspect of being a writer or journalist that you show any knack for. You are pitiful.

I gotta say, even with the "Nah," I'm not sure I completely understand what the heck Sark was saying. Did that answer really make sense to anyone else, apart from saying that he won't comment on speculation? He didn't really say that he wasn't in the mix, just that it was speculation at this point.

Which was pretty much what he said prior to the UCLA game when he admitted he was taking the Washington job.

As long as he brings Holt.

Not sure what that meant, but the simple fact is the Washington job is better than the UCLA job. Leaving the Huskies to come to the Bruins would be a step down for Sark.

Well, even if there can be only one Lane F'ing Kiffin, it probably doesn't suck to be the head coach of any of the other Pac-12 football teams. Do your best, save your money, set for life. Fight On Sark!

Here's the entire context of the UCLA piece from the article in the Seattle Times. Understand that this was an interview done with Sark and that the UCLA question was addressed halfway through the interview. Scott leaves out the "Nah"--

Also, Sarkisian was asked about a couple of columns in Los Angeles papers that have mentioned him in connection with the UCLA job --- worth noting there has been no reports that he's an actual candidate for the job in terms of UCLA having interest in him.

The question ended asking "is there any interest there?" This was his response: "Nah. I think this is the best way to start this, because hopefully we can continue to be successful here and those rumors and different things come about and I can start now and say I can't talk about 'what if's' and 'speculations' and so I'm not that concerned about it.''

Hey Pete, thanks, now its crystal clear. lol It's amazing what these coaches and writers can do to the english language.

Pete, I'm tellin' ya. I clicked on that link AND I watched the video so I actually heard the words come out of his mouth and I STILL don't complete understand what he was saying.

Imagine if they'd asked Coach O.

Coach O, great guy, NO HC.

Ex-Cop,

I didn't watch the video until reading your post. My point originally was that Wolf left out the "Nah" at the beginning, which I thought was important. But after watching the video, it looks like Sark jumped the question and didn't give a clear answer. This leaves me to believe that he has had back-channel discussions with UCLA. He gets paid $2 million per and UCLA might offer him as much as $4 million.

There is a reason why UCLA fired Neuheisal so soon before the Pac 12 Championship game and Bowl game--they want to hire a new coach immediately and not leave potential recruits in limbo with National Signing Day less than a month after bowls are finished. If they want to hire somebody who is currently a head coach, they are going to need to pay a larger premium because that coach would have to abandon his team before their bowl game. I don't see Sark as being one to abandon Washington before the bowl game but what if UCLA does indeed offer to double his pay? His success in Washington is limited and although I would hate to see him in powder blue, I think he realizes that his reputation is positive in LA, he'd be able to recruit better, and he is from LA. I'm not saying that it will happen, but funny things can happen when enough money is thrown at you.

One other point here though--Washington could easily counter with a pay increase to keep him. Granted, it would be tough to justify doubling his pay given that they haven't improved much from last year to this year and they probably would want to see another year--next year is his 4th--before giving him a large pay increase and contract extension.

Sucksian is a joke. UCLA doesn't want that hack, nice play by his agent. In SUCK you would be getting a fatter dark haired Skippy ... big deal.
And drop the SC ties with SUCK , he didn't do anything for SC but use them and piss away national titles. Just like his ass boy Kiffen.