Grading the Game
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 7:42 AM PST
Email
PrintIn my preview I said that this one didn't look good on paper. What I didn't predict was how terrible Washington was going to play. I didn't anticipate that. Perhaps the series of close losses have finally taken its toll and this team no longer has a lot of fight left in it. Washington isn't as bad as they looked yesterday but as a team they seem to have peaked midway through the fourth quarter of the Notre Dame game and have been regressing ever since. Perhaps the series of close losses have finally taken its toll and this team no longer has a lot of fight or heart left in it.
Quarterback
The first quarter was just a disaster in which poor offensive execution took the Huskies out of the game early. Locker threw an interception on the games second drive to set up Oregon State's first touchdown. OSU applied a lot of pressure early but Jake made it worse by taking the sacks rather than throwing the ball away. It is almost the end of year four and the game hasn't really slowed down yet for Jake. He couldn't adjust to the OSU pressure by getting the ball off quicker. Truth is he wasn't getting a lot of help from the play selection or his offensive line either.
Jake was sacked four times, and rarely had time to throw, completing just 14 of 23 passes for 153 yards. He had just 62 yards passing through three quarters before the two scoring drives in the fourth quarter and finished with three touchdown passes. The deep pass was there for the taking all day but Locker didn't have time enough to set up for his receivers to get down field.
Grade D
Running Backs
I wonder what Chris Polk would do behind a good offensive line? He had 19 carries for 116 yards against one of the nations best rush defenses. Polk continues to break tackles and run strong every play. He also showed some speed getting around the corner at times today. Polk has 900 yards for the season and it looks like he will be the first 1000 yard back at Washington since Louis Rankin. When Sark was hired we all thought the fullback would be utilized more but Paul Homer has been MIA this season. What is really puzzling since they are having trouble in the red zone is why they aren't utilizing him as a blocker?
Grade A minus
Wide Receivers
When Locker had time these guys were open but overall there were too many key drops early that could have pulled Washington out of the hole they were digging. Jermaine Kearse had a another solid game and continues to improve. Devin Aguilar was shook up on a hit but returned to the game. James Johnson is still going through some growing pains. D'Andre Goodwin played a little more than usual and we had a Cody Bruns sighting.
Grade C
Offensive Line
These guys set the tone for the game from the very first snap and it was not a very good tone. The first quarter was just attrocious. Jake didn't have time to throw and Chris Polk had nowhere to run. It wasn't Jake's best game but the offensive line really never gave him a chance.
Washington already has four highly rated HS OL on tap for next year but they won't be able to help immediately. This game sealed the fact that Washington needs to bring in two JC OL who are capable of starting in 2010
Grade D minus
Defensive Line
We actually saw pressure on the QB for one of the first times this season. Washington picked up three sacks. However the offense put the entire defensive unit in a bad position the entire game. I thought they actually were playing pretty well until the two minute TD drive by OSU to end the first half.
The wheels seemed to come off after that and the game was no longer in doubt after a long James Rodgers return on the opening kickoff of the second half. The Beavers picked up 178 yards on the ground with most of it coming on long plays by Jacquizz Rodgers. Take away the big plays caused by missed tackles and it was a much better effort than last week against UCLA.
Fans need to realize that Oregon State was able to rotate ten defensive linemen into the game all evening. Washington is a long way away from being able to do that. The lack of depth is a big reason these guys are worn down by halftime.
Grade C
Linebacker
Butler, Mason, and Dennison played OK but there were somemissed tackles here and there that led to big plays. A healthy EJ makes this unit a lot better which is no knock on Dennison who plays his heart out. Linebacker needs to be a priority in the 2010 recruiting class.
Grade C Plus
Secondary
Sean Canfield was 21-29 for 185 yards and for TD's. Washington pressured him better than most QB's they have played this season but he kept making plays. You have to give credit to Canfield for making plays. Desmond Trufant was picked on for the second straight week. You would think with more pressure these guys would have done better but they didn't. The Huskies failed to break up passes or even get close to making interceptions.
Grade C minus
Special Teams
Will Mahan's seven yard punt in the first quarter helped keep Washington in the self inflicted hole the offense had put them in. James Rodgers 90 plus yard kickoff return to start the second half put the game out of doubt for the Beavers. Washington doesn't have much of a return game and tried to compensate by inserting Donald Butler as a lead blocker. Butler would clean a Beavers clock on the first block but it seemed like he was the only one blocking out there on Saturday. The returners for the most part are tentaitve but that just may have a lot to do with the lack of downfield blocking.
Grade F
Coaching
Steve Sarkisian isn't impressing anyone with his offensive play calling. Washington needed to strike long against the Oregon State defense early to stretch the field to take some pressure off Locker and they didn't do it. The long pass was there for the taking all day but Washington never went after till the game was no longer in doubt. To be fair the lack of protection provided by the offensive line was a big factor. If you can't block you can't get much of anything to work.
Penalties continue to be a problem for this team. Washington was penalized nine time for 76 yards. The majority of them were of the stupid unprepared variety such as offsides and delay of game. The team simply did not look ready to play today.
"Well that was an ugly football game. There wasn't a phase where we performed to our capabilities. And that's what's disappointing from a coaching standpoint. You want to acheive or play as close to your level of capability as possible and today, for whatever reason --- that's what we have to figure out --- we just didn't do that. We didn't perform at a level that we're capable of.''
"I have to look at everything we're doing, because the last thing I want is for this to ever happen again," Sarkisian said. "The opponent didn't even really have to play, and they were going to beat us today. We just kind of handed it to them."
Washington is going backwards right now. I could have sworn I saw Ty Willingham on the sidelines. He wasn't on the sidelines but he is in the heart of too many players on this team. The Huskies came out flat and there is no excuse for that when you are playing to keep alive for a bowl game.
Oregon State really didn't impress me that much. They are a good team but far from the best that Washington has played this season. Washington acted like they didn't want to be there and with two more game left that is a real bad sign.
On the positive side I thought Nick Holt mixed things up well this week. It was nice to see some pressure and a pass rush. Sometimes it backfired but it was better than sitting back waiting to be picked apart by Sean Canfield.
Grade D
56 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
OL Failure
The OL is just terrible….John I think you are being overly harsh on Locker. I am not sure the game is too fast for him, but rather his OL gives him no chance to think. Yeah, I would like to see him tuck it and run more, but he has also made some pretty awesome plays this year when he kept his head up and looked down field.
Harsh on Jake
I disagree…I think things are still happening too quickly out there for him to make the proper adjustments that help win football games. Sometimes he just kind of locks up because of indeciveness. Another thing to focus on his how he locks on to his first target. That is where the ball is going 95% of the time. When the game slows down for a QB they make the 3-4 reads before throwing the ball. He isn’t there yet.
The great one’s have the ability to take a look at the field and see the whole picture as it develops. Jake isn’t doing that. I think he is a marvelous athlete with great skills but he needs more time to become the QB we all know he can be.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:20 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed John!
The reason Jake is having difficulty with the speed of the game is because his team is slower then the oppostion. Washington as a whole looked awfully slow out there. And when you play a fast defense like OSUs the game can’t slow down fast enough for you. We’re not getting guys blocked, the receivers are covered for the most part, and gaps are getting squeezed. That is what Jake sees because his own team is slower then the opposition right now.
We won’t get any better until we get faster at every position. SPEED KILLS and we don’t have it.
All I saw was purple
Crazi
You made me laugh a little on that one. His team is slower than the opposition. The offensive line just does not have the talent to compete week in and week out at this level. You are right….speed kills.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions
We don't have team speed!
We’ve got decent individual speed at certain positions, but if you look at our overall team speed we are a very slow footed team.
Our O line is still slow even after shedding all that weight in the offseason. The only guy I see using a quick first step on offense is Chris Polk- man that guy hits the hole with authority, that is a quick first step.
But the O line is slow out of the stance, slow with applying the leverage foot, and can’t get their heads up quick enough to spot that they are dealing with an unbalanced line or a blitzing LB that wasn’t spied prior to the snap. We’re slow (as a team) across the board!
All I saw was purple
the game can't SLOW down FAST enough
its a great line, and sadly, too true
Speed of the game is still missing, Locker Leaving?
Oregon State played fast, we looked like we had an inch and half of mud on our cleats. We looked and played slow for a BCS level program. Evidence: Look at the kickoff returns from both teams. Oregon State is quick to catch the kickoff, quick upfield, and quick to get 20+ yards on every return.
We took our time fielding the kick, slowly progressed upfield and ran into a brick wall. That was just on kickoff teams fellas.
I think the 0-12 thing still stings in the minds of the players. It’s easy to lose hope when not much goes right. And I agree John, I think the way we lost to ND really bothered the players and it’s become somewhat a mental block and we’ve regressed ever since. Right now I think this team’s mindset has switched back to 2008.
Our coaches have to keep hammering away until we’ve got something. Stay the course- that is the only way to improve the mindset of the program.
I’m beginning to think that it may be in Jake’s best interest to pursue a pro career if he is drafted high. Not to mention, but I think it may be in Washington’s best interest if he indeed departed early for the pros. This team can’t think for itself- they lean on Jake too much to pull them thru. Hell even I do as a fan!
When Hershal Walker was with Dallas, trading the guy was unthinkable! But Jimmy Johnson traded him to Minnasota and the dynasty of the 90s Cowboys was born. Now that is in no way the same, but the mental concept is the same. Dallas looked for Walker to carry the Cowboy’s pathetic offense the same way the Washington offense is carried by Locker. Now we wouldn’t get any players out of Locker leaving early as Dallas did with Walker, but in the end- this young team would be forced to think for itself, instead of leaning on one savior.
Remember this- their is no I in team. A football team consists of 22 players (not including special teams). The 11 member offensive unit is out there by themselves and the 11 member defensive unit is out there by themselves. If Locker were to leave early, and I’m not saying that he will, but if he does- the team won’t have Locker’s presence any longer, they will have coach Sark’s. In a way, maybe Locker has become a distraction to the football team. Is the team rallying around Locker and hoping Jake can do it by himself? Or are they looking to coach Sark to call the right plays and set them up for a victory?
Either way, the team we see on the field these days resembles the 2008 team more so then the team that took it to LSU, USC, and Notre Dame. When we played those guys we looked like we belonged. This team late in the season? Can you say regressing back to 08?
Something needs to shake this team up!
All I saw was purple
Locker Leaving?
There are a couple of pretty good schools of thought on Jake leaving a year early. Obviously there is a the attraction of the money and getting out of a losing situation. The type round the clock tutoring you can get in the NFL is important but the game experience you get in college is even more important. Jake may get drafted high if he goes in but his destination will likely be the bench. Mike Holmgren who knows a thing or two about QB’s thinks Jake should stay in college another year.
The other school of thought is maybe like when Lambright was fired and Brock Huard graduated early it is time for Jake to do the same thing. Maybe another atmosphere helps him develop better. Maybe Sarkisian would be better off developing his own QB to start a year earlier?
My gut feeling is that Jake and the program would be better served if he stayed another year. He needs anothe ryear to develop and Washington could use an extra year to develop Fouch, Price, and Montana.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions
Arm Strength- HUGE difference
Tui couldn’t make the NFL throws. He made all the college throws though and was golden. The passing game between the NFL and college ball is night and day. Tui didn’t have it.
All I saw was purple
Oh man – you can’t be serious about this team being better next year with Jake gone can you?
The Herschel Walker example is a terrible one – the reason the Cowboys got better isn’t because they got rid of Walker, it’s because the return for trading Walker was so much better than Walker himself. If the Huskies could “trade” Jake Locker for 2 high level OL and 2 high level DL and a stud CB, then you might actually improve the team. But this is college, so it’s a moot point.
Jake is still a work in progress. He played in a run-oriented system in H.S., then joined a Husky team that ran a spread-option offense. He had no true QB coach. Sarkisian and Nussmeier are having to completely re-educate Locker on how to be a true pro-style QB.
I will grant you that Jake’s decision-making is often poor, and he may not ever turn into the most cerebral QB out there. But his physical gifts are off the charts, and he has shown a lot of improvement this year under Sark. Give him another entire off-season of coaching with these guys along with expected improvements all around him on offense, and Jake should live up to that 1st round speculation next year if he chooses to return.
The reality of this team is that while there is some talent here, it’s limited, and depth is almost non-existent. As the season has progressed and injuries have piled up, we’ve seen that lack of quality depth exposed and this team has worn down.
Missing the point as usual kirkd
Again for clarification purposes for those that just skimmed my earlier post above. After I brought up the Dallas thing I mentioned quite clearly the following…
“Now this is in no way the same, but the mental concept is the same.”
I’m not talking about the team getting better without Jake. I was referring to all the Locker-to-the-pros thing might have become a distraction over the course of the season. And the thought that maybe the “team” is looking more and more to Jake to make a play for the win. Without Jake’s presense out on the field, this young team would be forced to look to only one guy for leadership- Coach Sark. But what do I know? I’m as clueless as the next fan- right?
All I saw was purple
No, I read that part, and as is often the case with your theories, it doesn’t make much sense. Dallas wasn’t struggling because they were waiting for Walker to make a play – they were struggling because they didn’t have enough good players. Trading Walker gave them so much more in return that they were able to rebuild the team and become better despite trading away one of the best RB’s in the game.
This team isn’t “distracted” by Jake’s NFL situation – they just aren’t good enough and deep enough to succeed in a very deep, very talented Pac-10 this year.
And I really don’t think there’s anything to your theory about the team looking to Jake to make a play, I think you’re just reaching. On the one hand, of course they look to Jake – he’s the QB. On the other hand, Polk is making plenty of plays on his own; Kearse is stepping up big-time lately to make plays, much like Johnson was earlier in the season.
The issue with Jake and this team isn’t that his situation is a distraction, or that they are waiting for him to make a play – it’s that there’s not enough talent around Jake, especially the O-line, D-line and secondary, and Jake himself is not yet a polished product. That’s it – no need to go inventing some off the wall psycho mumbo-jumbo explanations.
But that was the beautty of it kirkd
Do you remember that trade? Before it went down, everybody thought Jimmy Johnson was flat out stupid for trading his best player away. Back then the thought of trading down was nonsense at best. Look how that decision has changed how pro teams draft- they all trade down now and it all spawned from that one trade.
The beautty of that move was that nobody saw it coming. Now I believe both Sark and Locker would both benefit w/ Jake coming back for a senior year. But you have to have a back up plan if the deal goes down- right? You have to have an eye for the future. Is Sark a man of vision? This move whether it goes down or not is a huge decision for both Locker and coach Sark.
I think if Locker were to leave early for the pros it would be a HUGE tool in recruiting. Why? Because lets look at the last five years of Husky football. How many 1st round draft picks have they had coming out? Hell with that, how many Huskies were drafted in the top 7 rounds? You could probably count them on one finger bud. If Jake comes out early think of the number of college QBs Sark would then have put in the NFL. Carson Palmer, Matt Linehart, John David Bootie, Mark Sanchez, and now potentially Jake Locker. This would be a huge recruiting tool MAN! Make no mistake, every recruit that is a 3 star recruit and above has dreams of playing pro ball in the league. They are committing to the best programs that can get them there. Is their a correlation between the lack of NFL draftees coming out of Washington and our win/losss records over the last five years? I think so.
Make no mistake, Sark already has a back up plan if Jake submits his name to the NFL draft. I think Sark is in a win/win situation on this. Fouch showed some good things last season as a freshman QB on a team that quit around him. I’ve heard he has better accuracy then Jake, and I might be alone on this but I think Fouch has pro style mechanics and footwork down better then Locker too. We’ll be okay, no need to push the panic button if Locker leaves.
All I saw was purple
John, read your own post
What’s it about? Is it about Jake Locker and his future pro career or is it about the Washington Huskies?
I think this talk about Locker’s career possibilities is a huge distraction to the rebuilding of the program to some extent. Is it all about one guy? Or is it about the team?
Don’t get me wrong- I love Jake Locker and want to see him in Husky Purple for another season. But if this Locker-to-the-pros thing is TOO big and has become a huge distraction for the coaching staff and team, then surely it would be in the team’s best interest if he did leave early.
I’ve been an apologist for keeping Locker healthy. But at the end of the day the guy is a Husky and we are trying to win a football game and go to a bowl. No primo donnas here- because if we are too worried about keeping Jake healthy then what is the message to the rest of the team? This team has become more about Jake Locker then anything else, it surrounds the entire program and the residue is leaking into the lockerroom.
I see it as a fan and the team has regressed to the point that all their hopes are on Locker’s shoulders. That’s not the making of a good football team.
All I saw was purple
You make a good point...
I am just not 100% sure about it yet.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
I see where you are coming from
but losing Locker would be a mammoth loss for this program. The only way we are going to sniff a bowl game next year is with Jake at the helm. If Jake goes pro, we could easily be 4-8 again next year, Sark loses most of the momentum he has in recruiting, and two year later we are looking for another head coach. I know that is the worst case scenario, but it would be a likely scenario with Ronnie at QB behind this offensive line. I don’t know if Washington and Sark can survive another losing season.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Think about it this way . . .
How well do you think Ronnie or Keith or Nick will hold up behind this o-line?? Don’t discount Jake’s capabilities, the only reason he “appears” to be doing so poorly is the complete and utter failure of the o-line. Look how well he was doing early in the season when the line was giving him time, especially compared to how he is doing now when he is INSTANTLY being hit by defensive linemen. Always blaming the QB is normally a sign you lack understanding, this team wouldn’t have any wins if it weren’t for Jake.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I'm not so sure Lear
Fouch was a redshirt freshman last season. Walking into the atmosphere in 2008 is not the ideal situation to find yourself taking over as the starting QB. I saw some good stuff from Fouch. I saw a good arm, I saw him make some quality throws at times. Hypothetically if he were to take over in 2010- I think you’d see a more confident kid in Fouch, knowing he has a decent supporting cast surrounding him. The O line? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves too fast. Most of the O linemen we are starting were thrown to the wolves (thrown into action too fast). Many of our O linemen are coming back next season (is that a good thing or bad thing?). Also keep in mind that this coaching staff only had one full offseason to reform this O line. Look how we controlled LSU to open the season up front- LSU was blocked most of the time. Now we don’t have much depth up front and losing Christine evidently killed our blocking efforts. After he was lost for the season with a broken leg- the O line flat lined and it’s been like that ever since. Two years under Sark and Coz will make a huge difference- now we won’t be looking at Roses next season, but I do see a lofty bowl picture next season, even with Fouch if Locer were to leave.
All I saw was purple
Jake?
We’ve heard over and over that Jake is the best quarterback in the conference, maybe the country. I agree that he has the most talent in the conference, but that certainly doesn’t mean he’s the best quarterback. At least half of the PAC 10 quarterbacks we’ve played this year, if not more, have outperformed Jake. Football history is full of quarterbacks with great talent who couldn’t get the job done. I for one will take a less talented quarterback who wins over a greatly talented quarterback who looses.
It will not be a disaster for the program if Jake goes to the NFL early. Has he or the program shown any really improvement over the course of this season? What evidence is there that he or the team will be any better next year. Sark and company have a proven history of developing and making untainted freshman quarterbacks into winners, Heisman candidates, and NFL first round draft picks.
I am tired of waiting for Jake to “get it” and live up to his hype. I would love to see Locker come back and become the player we’ve been told all these years that he is destined to be; however, this is Jake’s fourth year in the program. Though not really his fault, I am not at all convinced that it will happen for Locker here at UW, and that it may very will be best for all parties involved if Jake moves on. He may very well become an all-pro in the NFL; however, let’s be honest here and take off the purple glasses. What evidence is there that he will become an All-American, All-Pac Ten, or even a plus 500 winning quarterback here at UW? In the long run, it’s about the program and what’s best for it. We used to hang our hat on dominating football games, going too and winning Rose Bowls, and challenging consistently for national championships; not on how “great” our quarterback is.
As long as Ty’s tainted players are still on the scene, we will never truly be able put that nightmare truly behind us. That’s not a reflection on Jake. He’s been a great Husky and a warrior for the program. In any other era of Husky football, he would have been a conquering hero; however, reality is what reality is. We as a program need to move on and put this crap behind us. I am truly looking forward to Sark developing that next great Husky quarterback along with the winning, titles, and program acclaim that is going to bring.
Well at least somebody else sees the possible distraction that I've been noticing
I’m done talking about Jake Locker, the Quarterback, the legend, the savior, and the golden boy. I could honestly careless what his pro career looks like. As of now he is a Husky and should be treated like any other on this team. No more worrying about keeping Jake healthy. Eventually we are going to have to play and learn to win without Jake anyway. If we are so worried about keeping Jake healthy what is the message being sent to the rest of the team?
This program should be more about Coach Sark and Holt. It’s their program and every Husky should be looking at them to push this program up and beyond. Jake is only one guy. His first two seasons as a Dawg were dreadful and he was poorly coached. He’s had one good season under a coaching staff that understands the intracacies of the pro style offense- a crash course. I’m not saying that Jake is a loser and can’t grasp it. I’m saying I am tired of looking only to Jake to make a play. It takes 11 guys on offense to move the chains. If one guy is late or slow then the entire play gets derailed.
This team is about the Washington Huskies and not just about No.10.
All I saw was purple
Play Calling
From the first offensive play by the dawgs everybody in the stands and on T.V. could tell the OSU game plan was to bring pressure. My question therefore is why isn’t Sark calling for more quick slants and quick hitters to the tight ends? How about something really original like a screen pass to the fullback? I think remember seeing one in a football history class somewhere. Did Nick Woods get knocked on his backside or what? James Johnson has to be the worst kick returner in the nation.(slow)
Sark scripts his frst 15 plays...
I guess he didn’t script very well.
Next years kick returner is somebody who is currently in high school
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
Johnson returning kicks
He might not be doing very well, but he is still a big, noticeable improvement over our previous kick returners this season.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
What happened to Jordan Polk?
I saw him deep in coverage for kickoff return last season and he showed signs of brillance back there. Fields the ball rather quickly and heads up field for positive yards quickly. He’s got some jitterbug in his step and looks to have great skills for a kickoff returner. What happened?
All I saw was purple
Screens
We still don’t run good screens. Keep in mind that screen plays develop rather slowly. To a point that Sark maybe weiry of calling such a play. With taking so much time for the screen to develop, what are the chances that our O line screws it up? Not to mention but Jake’s screen accuracy has been lousy at best.
The play I think is awful is the shotgun draw to Polk- that thing backfires for a loss every stinkin’ time! That is the main reason I mentioned we needed to scrap our spread. That play is dissaster waiting to happen. In fact I think that shotgun draw to Polk was the very fist play we called for our offense vs. Oregon State and we got dropped for -2 yards on it. Scrap it!
All I saw was purple
Husky Defensive Coordinator
Sorry to say, but I think that Nick Holt stinks. If he coached as well as he glowers and makes “tough” faces on the sidelines the Huskies would never lose! Please Sark, dump this guy…….
Holt stinks?
I disagree on that one completely. None of us like the results so far but the defense is getting better every week. You need to really factor in the lack of depth, experience, talent, and speed. Depth is problably the biggest thing right now. We don’t have it and other better teams do.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 11:57 AM PST up reply actions
The jury is still out on Holt
I agree, so far Holt hasn’t done anything worthy of the paycheck he is cashing. He has run a very “safe”, very bland defense all season. Yesterday was the first sign of any imagination, or aggresion on the part of Holt. This is not the defense we were sold when we hired Holt. Next season is put up or shut up time for Nick Holt.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Actually, I saw a lot out of Holt vs. OSU that encouraged me. The defense played pretty well to start the game, but the offense couldn’t do jack squat and kept putting them in bad positions. Fatigue wore in and they broke down, but I liked what I was seeing early – some creativity with the standing rushers on passing downs to confuse OSU’s line, a lot more blitzing than usual, and pretty good play early on by the line.
I think we all need to recognize that this staff is playing with a deck that’s less than half full. I don’t think Holt has played conservatively because he wants to, but because he feels he has to in order to give the team the best chance of winning. It’s telling that the last 3 years under 3 different defensive coordinators we’ve seen very similar approaches, which tells me that the personnel just isn’t there to play more aggressively.
I still have some quibbles with things the defensive staff has done – I don’t think Crichton or Pulu should’ve been starting ahead of Darrion Jones for example, and I wish they hadn’t burned Pulu and Tokolahi’s redshirts – but overall, I think we need to see how this defense evolves over the next two seasons as they get more of their players in the program and the current kids get more time under this staff.
I saw that too
There was a lot ot like out of the defense in the first quarter. We finally saw some imagination and some creativity. If Holt keeps that up, I’ll retract every negative thing I’ve said about him. I still wonder why it has taken soooooo long to try anything other than a 4-3 zone defense.
I do think the jury is still out on Holt. He could turn out to be a great defensive cooordinator, or he could turn out to be just another Pete Carroll disciple that flops when he leaves USC.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I’m withholding judgment on Holt until he gets more of his players in here – I don’t think this season is a particularly fair test. I do want to see clear improvement in the numbers next year on top of what we’ve seen this year. Yardage allowed is only down slightly, but turnovers generated are up sharply and points allowed have dropped under Holt.
I do wonder whether Holt & Carroll work best as defensive guys when they work together. Evidence from this season and from the two years Holt was at Idaho suggest USC has had their best defenses when Holt was around.
C'mon Lear!
Do you actually buy that load of crap you just posted? We don’t have the defensive talent as other Pac 10 programs nor the depth. Holt can’t run the stuff you want to see because at the end of the day, we don’t have the players to run that stuff. If he does it’s a big risk for a big play. YOU CAN’T GAMBLE AWAY FIELD POSITION, when you have a lousy at best football team. You want us to BLITZ ALL NIGHT. That is Hollywood my friend [see Remember the Titans]. If we continue to show blitz eventually it will sting us because we don’t have the best defensive talent in the land to continue to be that aggressive. Teams that have great defensive talent can keep calling aggressive stuff and get away with it, because they have enough talent to compensate for it. We don’t, so playing more of a bend but don’t break defense is the only way to go.
All I saw was purple
Holt virtually has no secondary to work with
I think he’s done a remarkable job. We’ve made more big plays on defense then our offense has all dam season. Look at all the LB INTs, fumble recoveries, and some lofty goal line stands our defense has accomplished. But it is spotty play, I’ll give you that drjazz78. Also you have to consider that our offense has put us in bad situations all dam season too. Too many 3 and outs, being rushed back into action due to an offensive turnover, and the field position our defense is continually put in. You’re not seeing the big picture if you think Nick Holt is not THEE guy.
Furthermore, we don’t have nearly the depth as other Pac 10 programs. If we have one injury at any one particular position it would be the equivelent as Oregon State bringing in the 4th stringer. Our No.2s aren’t really No.2s. If our No.2s were on USC, Oregon, Oregon State, Arizona, or Stanford’s rosters, they’d be lobbying for the No.3 spots at best. Our bench falls off the map when we get a guy hurt. Look at our O line play after Christine went down with a broken leg. The O line play flat lined it big time.
All I saw was purple
new QB
One thing people are overlooking if Jake stays we go into year three with little or no QB experience. Not good.
Let’s face it next year is not going to be any better than this year. The excitement is gone and it will probably take MONTANA to bring it back.
Maybe it will start falling into place year three but more likely year four and five to get back to the position we held under Don James when we owned the Nothwest and were Rose Bowl contenders.
We don’t have a single five star committed so coaching and enthusiam are a necessity.
I agree...
I would much rather have Jake stick around anothe ryear to develop som expereince behind him.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 15, 2009 11:57 AM PST up reply actions
Sad, but true
I tend to agree with you. As great as Jake could be, next year’s winning and loosing is not likely to be any better, regardless of who’s the quarterback. In the long run, the program, and that what this is all about, may very will be better serve by starting over with someone new next year. A quarterback who will than be in year too in that all important make or break third year of Sark’s tenure.
It has too be said
I tend to agree with you. As great as Jake could be, next year’s winning and loosing is not likely to be any better, regardless of who’s the quarterback. In the long run, the program, and that what this is all about, may very will be better serve by starting over with someone new next year. A quarterback who will than be in year too in that all important make or break third year of Sark’s tenure.
I disagree – I think this team should show definite improvement next year. Here’s who we lose next year:
Ben Ossai – Not a major loss. He’s already getting pushed by Drew Schaefer.
Daniel Te’o-Nesheim – Significant loss – really good DE.
Donald Butler – Significant loss – finally lived up to his physical potential this year.
E.J. Savannah – Has missed a lot of time with injury and was rusty when he played. Not a major loss in terms of performance.
That’s basically it. The offense should be better, as virtually everyone is back. With another year under Ivan Lewis and Dan Cozzetto, the OL should improve. They’ve shifted guys around, and I think this staff has a pretty good feel for what they have now. I don’t think the OL will be world-beaters next year, but another year together and another off-season learning the new zone-blocking system should result in improvement. Chris Polk is a stud, the best RB we’ve had in a long, long time, and our WR group is quite good, especially with Kearse continuing to blossom.
The defense takes some big hits with DTN and Butler gone, but the expected growth and improvement elsewhere on the defense as well as improved depth should help balance out those losses.
If Jake returns, I think next year’s team should be expected to win 6+ and go bowling.
Agreed
There is a lot of potential for next year. If Jake returns, a bowl bid is very likely.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
or if Jake doesn't return
I might be in the minority but I saw good stuff from Fouch last season as a redshirt freshmen QB, thrown into action and playing on a team that quit around him.
All I saw was purple
Ronnie has potential
He could be a very solid QB, BUT . . . . he doesn’t have Jake’s mobility, therefore he will be lucky to be alive, let alone playing, by week 3 next year.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
We're only losing one significant guy
Donald Butler. Ossai has been getting beaten over there badly! We’ll have an experienced D line coming back so losing DTN is not significant if you ask me. E.J. hasn’t been 100% since the USC game so we’re not losing much there too.
That brings me to another topic. If Corey Dennison could learn to wrap up, he’d be a dam fine LB! And I think he will be the frontunner to take Bultler’s Mike position at LB. Wrap up sonny. That is the only part of his game that is lacking right now- easy fix.
All I saw was purple
Defense Getting Better????
Sorry, I guess you were watching a different game than I was. The Huskies defense is frankly terrible, and their schemes don’t work. But that’s ok, Holt can look like a tough guy and glower for the TV cameras. Looking tough doesn’t get the job done.
There’s just no depth or quality talent, outside the freshman and a couple of seniors, on the defensive side of the ball. No matter the coordinator, the defense was destined to be horrible this year. Like Sark, we need to give Holt two to three years to recruit and a realistic chance to get the job done. Like head coaches, we can’t change coordinators every year.
I think you're living in La-La Land fella
With the inexperienced talent and lack of depth issues we have, who could be impressive running this defense? You are being too delusional about all this. This is Holt’s first season as our D.C., he knew from day 1 that this job was going to be a major challenge to get it back to where it should be. Rome wasn’t built in a day and the Washington defense won’t be built in one offseason. Get it?
All I saw was purple
Holt
Oh boy, can we look forward to another rotten season with no-talent players? The recruit class is not promising but with our “Mean-Faced Defensive Wizard” he can at least look tough! I think Willingham would love this guy!
Have you seen who we are bringin in?
Holt is running this defense with Ty’s kids- not his. Let’s not jump to any conclusions until Holt has his own kids on the team. Then we can be a little more apprehensive. I personally think we’ve got one of the finest college D coordinators in the land.
The scowl on the face? What, do you want to see him with a big cheesey smile? Holt is playing the part dude, defensive guys need to be big, nasty, tenacious, in-your-face, and play with a reckless abandon. What you see on Holt’s face is a constant reminder as to what is expected from a BCS level defense. This isn’t kindergarden nor a knitting class. This is major college football brother and it’s time we start playing the way Holt looks on the freakin’ sideline.
All I saw was purple
He's right Crazi
Holt’s scheme for the first 9 games were pathetic. Running the same play over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over is a great recipe for getting beat.
That being said, I saw some signs of life in our schemes against the beavers, hopefully Holt is learning that super conservative schemes are easy to defeat.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Have You Seen Who We Are Bringin' In?
Well, if Holt is playing a part, he’s no John Barrymore! Acting like you are tough and in-your-face might be fine for a photo op but that doesn’t win games. If he recruits like he coaches the Huskies are in BIG trouble.
The mark of a great coach is getting more out of what he has to work with than expected; Sorry Holt, you fail that grade!!!
So here we are with two to go
I think Nick Holt is much better than we give credit for. The OSU game gave perfect evidence of why the defense has been bend not break this year. For that matter, last years coaches used the same basic idea for the same reasons. Before you can run a bunch of blitz packages to pressure the QB, you need corners that can cover one on one. What may have been the key play in the game Saturday, 3 and 10 nearly half time, if we hold we get the ball and at least a chance to go in feelin good. We blitz, They hit an open guy in front of true freshman Trufant for nineteen yards, a first down, and follow it uo by finishing the drive. We have neither the talent, nor the experience to run anything too sophisticated.
I also think we are too hard on Locker. If he played for any team in the conference other than one in Washington, he would light up the league, and show marked improvement while he did it. It is impossible to learn to read thru progressions when often he cannot even get to the first option before he starts to run for his life. I think the reason it looks like he has not gotten any better has everything with time, and confidence in his guys to protect him. John commented that the way to beat OSU is to throw deep. The other side of that is, they setup their defense and dare you to do that, knowing there is no way Locker will have time to throw very deep with any accuracy.
Special teams is another matter. This is where your depth, and hungry young guys show their stuff. Unfortunately, ours are doing just that. If you think this team has any talent, just look here.
Lastly, a quick comment on the play calling. While I do not always agree with his calls, Sark is very limited in what he can do. It makes very little difference what play is called, if the kids do not block, catch etc., it will not work. It will be interesting to see where he goes from here.
I think we are looking at several years of slow climbing. Look at Stoops in AZ. It took him quite awhile to dig out of terribleness (great word, huh?) Much as we would like to think different, this program is every bit as bad as that one was, maybe worse.
We cannot live in the past. Much as we like to remember Don James, those days are gone. Remember, he lost to Alabama down there his first year 52-0. It took three years to get to the Rose Bowl. Sark and Co. should get at least that. It will be awhile.
If we are going to complement Stoops
Remember, AZ did not go 0-12 and we did beat AZ this year. Sure, there was luck involved, but we were in a position to win. Speaking of luck, we’ve had 3 cases of bad luck besides the good luck with AZ.
Let the kids have their bye week to heal, and hopefully we get a feel good game with the Cougs. Then we’ll see how we do with Cal.
Next Year's QB(s)
I hope Sark applies the week to week competition philosophy to the QBs as well next year…. at least next Spring. I like Jake and I think it would be for the best if he returns. But, as some of you guys know, I also like Keith. Ronnie? I have nothing against Ronnie, either. I think last year must have been hell for him, and Sark has made some very favorable comments about him this year. I just hope Sark would be bold enough to experiment and play whomever has the hot hand, and not just assume that Jake is The Guy because he’s been The Guy. I am skeptical that the loss of Jake to the NFL would be the total catastrophe that some of you guys envision. I also think we are going to have to play some of these incoming big guys like Kohler, et al, to get the OL literally up to speed.
Mush you Huskies!!! Go Dawgs!!!
Expect to Win!!!
I have no doubts Locker will easily win a QB competition next year if he returns. But even if he does return, there will be an important competition between Price & Fouch for who gets the 2nd team reps. Once next season starts, whoever is the 3rd string QB is going to find their practice reps almost non-existent. If Jake returns, that means either Price or Fouch is going to have very little to do during practices, and whoever wins that battle for 2nd strings becomes the likely successor to Jake.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
