Seattle Times "Victory & Ruins" package

Today, The Seattle Times began a multi-part series examining the "disturbing" backstory of the University of Washington's 2000 Rose Bowl season. Pretty good read.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004147443_rboverview27m0.html

Good luck, UCLA.

 

Washington made the Rose bowl in 2000, not 2003.

 

Fixed. Brain fart

 

In a stunning development, a successful college football team is populated by gentlemen of less-than-stellar character, carrying on in the fine tradition of Oklahoma in the '80s, Nebraska in the '90s, Miami for the last 20-odd years, etc., etc., etc.

Jerramy Stevens must be a charmer. He sure has received a helluva lot of second chances.

 

Good read, but I have to imagine that a lot of this was known sooner than later, no? Seven years later is a long time for this stuff to trickle out. Is it just coming out now because Neuheisel got hired by UCLA?

 

Is it me or did it end rather abruptly?

 

I got that, too. Could have used more context. It was pretty 'just the facts, ma'am.

 

The sixty-six wins quote was gold. They could have spun the story around that. But it just ended there and...the analogy I'm going to draw is based in food. It's like going to a restaurant thinking you're going to eat a great meal and instead you leave empty, still hungry.

 

Well, it is a multi-part series.

 

I understand it is a multi-part series. And there's more to come. I just didn't like how the first installment ended.

 

Why are they bringing this up now? All the story on Stevens is going to do is bring up bad memories for the woman he raped and the other people he has treated horribly.

 

Why now?

Because some UW fans are looking longingly at the Neuheisel era, forgetting that winning that way is part of what got them into the mess they're in now.