The Monday Morning Wash
by John Berkowitz on Nov 9, 2009 7:38 AM PST
64 comments
It wasn't a pretty game and Husky fans weren't very happy that the team went down to another loss in a game they could have won 24-23. The result brought up the usual questions about the coaching staff which have been reverberating ever since the Notre Dame loss. The major one is perhaps Steve Sarkisian should stick to managing the overall team and the game rather than having the extra burden of calling plays and running the offense next season.
The point has some validity because the head coach has a lot on his plate on game day and only so much time to get everything done. One of the things that didn't get done Saturday was a review of a questionable UCLA TD. First of all the Pac 10 officials should have automatically reviewed the play. Since they did not Washington should have called time out and requested the review. UCLA hurried to the line and kicked the PAT rendering any review moot.
Another point that has a lot of validity is this team even though it is 3-6 is much better than last years squad. We all complain that they should be 6-3 but in reality it is this coaching staff that has helped put the team in the position to be close enough in those games to come away with the win.
The 2009 squad is made up of the pretty much the same players that went 0-12 last season and were in the position to win at the end of only the BYU and WSU games in 2008. The 2009 edition is killing us because they have had a chance to win in the fourth quarter against every team but Oregon this season. That is progress and the only way things are going to turn those close losses into wins is having better talent and experience on the field.
A disturbing trend that I have picked up on inthe second half of the season has been a serious lack of depth and a lack of gas in the second half of games. This team is tired in the third quarter. an example of that was blowing a 9 point lead to UCLA in the second half. We can all the blame the coaches but a big part of the quotient is that this team is wearing down in the last quarter of the season.
I think the future of Husky football is bright and is in good hands. This is a major rebuilding project and the only thing that turns it around once and for all is a big influx of fresh talent. Sark intends to bring in a class of around thirty next season which would replace one third of the current roster. That is the type of class you can anchor your program with in coming seasons.
If you are a Husky fan that wait is excruciating. We all hoped that at the very least this team would become bowl eligible this season. With three games left that goal is still on the table but improbable because up next is the Oregon State Beavers on the road. Lose the next one and the team is just playing for respectability against WSU and California.
My advice is to not get too down on this team and its coaching staff. The wins are going to come and this staff is going to turn it around. Rebuilding a football program isn't an overnight process. Being competitive in almost every game is a huge step in that direction. None of us should be into moral victories and honestly this team should be 6-3 right now. The players, coaches, and fans know that. Lets see what happens over the next three weeks. There is lots of football still to be played.
Around the Pac Ten
Arizona 47 Washington State 7
The victory, combined with Oregon's loss at Stanford, moves the Wildcats (6-2, 4-1 Pac-10) within a half-game of the first-place Ducks. Arizona and Oregon are the only teams in the conference with just one loss.
Oregon State 31 California 14
Sean Canfield threw for 342 yards and two touchdowns and ran for a score Saturday night in Oregon State's 31-14 victory over California.
USC 14 Arizona State 9
Will Harris returned an interception 55 yards for a touchdown -- one of four turnovers forced by the Trojans -- and No. 12 USC held on for a shaky 14-9 victory over Arizona State.
Stanford 51 Oregon 42
Gerhart ran for a school-record 223 yards and three scores, Andrew Luck threw for two touchdowns and Stanford held on to beat Oregon (No. 8 BCS, No. 7 AP) 51-42 Saturday to become bowl eligible for the first time in eight years. The loss drops Oregon into a tie for first place with Arizona in the Pac 10.
Pac Ten Power Ratings
1. Arizona...Mike Stoops has the Wildcats in a position to contend for the Rose Bowl. Up next is Cal on the road.
2. Oregon...The Ducks face ASU at home this coming weekend. The ASU defense will challenge the Duck offense.
3. Southern Cal...The Trojans are struggling on offense and next week they get a Stanford team at home that is very capable of beating them.
4. Oregon State...Riley teams get better as the season goes on. This team is no exception. Up next is Washington at home.
5. Stanford...The Cards are bowl eligible! Up next is a tough game with USC.
6. California...This is a hurting football team that hasn't performed that well. Up next is Arizona at home.
7. Arizona State...The defense is intimidating but the offense is very challenged. ASU might now win another game this season but they are going to make them all close and interesting.
8. UCLA...The Bruins break a five game losing streak and this week extend to 2-0 on the road at WSU.
9. Washington...Missed opportunities are killing this team. Up next is Oregon State and they look pretty scary.
10. Washington State...Coug's can't wait till the Apple Cup.
Pac 10 Offensive Player of the Week
Stanford's Toby Gerhart who led the Cardinal in an upset against Oregon.
Pac 10 Defensive Player of the Week
UCLA's Rahim Moore intercepts Jake Locker in the final minutes of the game to seal a victory against the Huskies.
UW Offensive Player of the Week
Chris Polk rushed for a career high 134 yards against UCLA.
UW Defensive Player of the Week
Donald Butler knocked UCLA QB Kevin Prince out of the game with a jarring hit in the first half and played tough all day.
Quote of the Week
"There are three games right there that could go either way that really kind of makes your season, and we just didn't get those games," Holt said. "And here we are 3-6 and battling for the last three games of the year to have a good season. So I think we are still learning. There's a lot of transition still."
0 recs |
64 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Just Baffled....
Not really much more that can be said about this game, everyone see’s the problems and there doesn’t seem to be anyway to fix them during the game. Here is praying that lessons are learned for next year.
If we rush 4 all game against OSU
and play that ULTRA-SOFT zone behind it – the Beavers will put up 50+ on us. Let’s hope our staff has the guts to blitz the crap out of Canfield and let the chips fall where they may. = wishfull thinking : (
The Husky D and Beaver O should be an interesting match-up. As an OSU guy, I’ve been happy to watch the week to week progression the O-Line and WRs have made. It’s been a huge, huge relief. Canfield has time to throw and is actually using good judgment. Plus, it’s nice to see the big man move in the pocket like he has.
After the Cal feast, I would say our D is what UW should really worry about. If that defense continues on its path, they will be looking to go after Locker very early. Either way, should be a good game. Hope it doesn’t rain. Anyone here going?
Canfield is going to have all day in the pocket and will carve us up, and when he’s not doing that Jaquizz will be darting from behind the big holes that are open for him and gashing us up and down the field.
I’d love to think differently, and you never know in college football how kids will come out and play from week to week, but this should be an easy win for the Beavers.
Man, after growing up on Husky football under Don James, I never imagined that the tables would be turned this way…
Man, after growing up onHuskyBeaver footballundergetting pounded by Don James, I never imagined that the tables would be turned this way…
What Rose Bowls and National Championship does OSU have...
What Rose Bowls and National Championship OSU have, when that happens the tables have turned.
by bigdawgdaddy999 on Nov 12, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
Couldn't disagree more.
First I’d like to thank you for bringing some really good stuff to the blog, and you did it without the usual first “we rule, you suck” type of comment. It’s a pleasure to chat with classy fans from other schools.
But, you are wrong, I’m not worried about OSU’s defense anywhere near as much as I’m concerned about your offense. You might have a very good defense, but with Jake and Chris Polk, and our WR’s, we will score 20 points, give or take. The real challenge on Saturday is going to be keeping OSU from scoring 50 points. You guys have a solid running game, and a solid passing game. A balanced offense is always the toughest to stop. I predict a very big day for the Rogers brothers.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
with all my rants complete in the last thread, I can now reason again.
Yep this is mostly the same personnel as last year when we got killed every game. The new staff has done so much with so little, but I think thats why we all are ranting and raving. The new staff set the expectation bar high, and now we are moaning about our inability to finish a game. The frustration at the Rose Bowl was very draining to me personally.
Its time to get ready for Ore St, and get their respect. We have lost 5 in a row to the Beavs, and Riley appears to have his team in their usual November readiness state. Canfield is drooling at going up against our pass defense. Our 4 man rush with 3 non existent pass rushers isn’t going to hack it this weekend. Holt will need to get really creative and change looks and blitz packages. If he decides to play it straight up, it will be a 30 point plus loss. Trying to prevent the big play by keeping them in front of you hasn’t worked at all with this D, plus they give up the big play anyway, so why continue to be a knucklehead and use something that hasn’t worked all season.
I would rather give up even bigger plays and go down trying rather than making Canfield the next Heisman all american QB we have faced this year.
It times to teach these youngster how to play a biltzing defense...
It times to teach these youngster how to play a biltzing defense. We are nine games into the season, not the first three. Let the kids run wild. Might see a difference. Saying we are too young is hogwash. There are players there that can do it.
Langsdorf and Riley would LOVE this.
If you watch some OSU tape from this year, they LOVE setting up the screen to Quizz and short routes to James to make overzealous D’s pay—and it works a lot of the time. On top of that, both Rodgers brothers thrive in a loaded box where they can dodge guys and make ’em pay. Kinda like this.
We are who we are at this point.
.. still a step too late in getting pressure on the QB and still too mistake prone on offense. This is anot a nega-dawg comment, it is just an honest assessment as to where we are at in the turnaround cycle. Assuming its a little too much to ask to win three in a row, what do you look for in the last few weeks of the season? I’ll be watching and hoping for the following:
1. Growth of confidence in the young players in the secondary – let’s let Fellner, Long, Trufant and Q-Rich take some more risks (and more lumps) as a way of exposing them to more experiences.
2. Growth of defensive ends – let’s send more pressure from the LBs in order to create more 1:1 opportunities for the young DEs (and to see if they can turn a few of those into some confidence building sacks)
3. Development of the O-Line – I’ve commented on how disappointing Ossai has been this year. Its a shame because he seems like a great teammate. Still, it is time to give the guys who are going to be on the line next year a few game reps.
4. Jake’s decision making and footwoork – if this is the last season of Jake 2.0, then I’m really hoping to see concerted effort to improve his progressions and to eliminate “happy feet” and “jump passing”. If he wants to cut loose and do more improvising, which is a hall mark of all the great ones, I’ll enjoy that ride.
5. Gameday coaching – the last three games mark the end of the honeymoon for Coach Sark. No more clumsy play calling, poor clock management or missed challenges. I love what he is doing on Sun-Fri, but having a coaching advantage on gameday is important. I hope to see growth and maturation.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
I’ve commented on how disappointing Ossai has been this year. Its a shame because he seems like a great teammate
Well, I’m not so sure about the “great teammate” part given that it sounds like he quit on the team during the UCLA game.
this was addressed at the press conference
ossai had a stomach condition that limited his play on saturday.
by PandG on Nov 9, 2009 10:19 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Not sure I buy "stomach condition"
Softy said he talked quickly with Cozzetto after the game and Dan didn’t want to talk about Ossai only saying “Schaefer is my tackle”. Seems if Ben was sick then he would have just said that – who knows.
Cozzetto is a gruff, not very talkative guy. I wouldn’t necessarily take that quote as meaning that there was something more going on than what Sark said in his press conference.
I’m not saying there may not be more going on here than just a stomach condition with Ossai – the fact that Schaefer got a lot of reps with the 1’s yesterday suggests there’s real competition going on – but I think the speculation that Ossai had quit on the team was misinformed.
Jake's footwork
Jake’s footwork will not, check that, can not get better until the offensive line starts blocking for him. I would like to see a lot less of that “jump” pass, but his footwork is 99% caused by the o-line.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Totally agree Lear
The offensive line is not holding up long enough and it throws everything off kilter, including QB footwork, timing routes, and QB reads.
All I saw was purple
From what I've noticed
I’ve tried to stay upbeat about this young team and have issued out many reasons as to why we are not winning on a consistent level. All that crazi B.S. is out the freakin’ window!
Point Blank- we don’t have anybody that can stretch the field on offense, we don’t possess play makers on offense. Now that may be an overstatement, but consider how miserable we play in the redzone is enough evidence to throw that out there.
Our offense is a dunk and diver, but for some reason we are not coming up with big plays offensively and it kiills us when we need to score. I’m with all you on the defensive side of the ball- we are not playing well there either. But the defense is in total contrast with the way the offense is playing. Offensively we can move the chains but we lack big play making ability. On defense we can’t stop anybody but we can make a big defensive play, i.e. fumble recovery or pic.
Either way you slice it, it’s not working. How to solve or remedy the problems? Bring in talent. I’m not here to knock our kids, but the stuff Sark and Holt are implementing or want to implement requires a certain degree of skill. We don’t have a lot in that department right now. It’s going to be a waiting game. It’s coming … we just have to manage the best we can now and in the meantime, keep getting better where we can, and keep trying to figure out how to close out close games. That’s it…
All I saw was purple
I’ve got to disagree here crazi – Jermaine Kearse isn’t a burner, but the kid makes acrobatic catches and has great ball skills. More often than not, he’s going to out maneuver his defender to make the catch. I think the bigger issue on stretching the field is that Jake isn’t the greatest at throwing the long ball – he has a tendency to overthrow those plays so the WR has no chance at making a play.
But if you watched the two jump catches Kearse made against UCLA, those are plays he’s made before and is showing he’s quite good at.
Don’t get me wrong – I’d love a speed merchant that can outrun anyone on a go route, but I think we’ve got playmakers at WR and RB.
Funny thing
I keep here about Jake’s tendency to overthrow the ball and how he needs to “underthrow” the ball so that the reciever can make a play on it. Yet, underthrowing the ball created the interception on the final drive, oops. There is a time to throw a jump ball, and there is a time to overthrow it to make sure only the WR has a shot at it, either way, underthrowing the ball creates turnovers.
I think we have playmakers on offense, we just need an offensive line that will hold up long enough for those playmakers to do their thing.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Depends on the long pass. On a one-on-one situation, you want to err on the side of underthrowing the ball, because the receiver has the advantage over the defender on making a play on the ball in the air. It’s obviously better to hit the receiver in stride, but in those cases if you’re going to err, err on the side of underthrowing it.
When there’s safety help deep, you need to be more concerned about placing the ball where only the receiver can make a play on it, because a safety will likely have the best shot at getting to an underthrown ball – that’s the difference.
In the case of Jake’s last pass vs. UCLA, he needed to put the ball on Kearse’s outside shoulder. On multiple go routes down the middle of the field where it’s been our receiver vs. one defender, Jake has usually overthrown the ball, giving the receiver no chance to make a play.
I partially agree
I agree that Jake’s pass needed to be on Kearse’s outside shoulder, and that placement of each pass depends on the current play and the coverage. But I don’t agree with the concept of underthrow a pass to give a receiver a fighting chance, those types of passes will lead to interception. Every time Ronnie threw it long last year my heart stopped as the defender went up to make a play on the ball, funny thing, he threw a lot of interceptions.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Well, obviously it depends on the specific play. Generally speaking, a receiver has an advantage over a defender running with him on a go route to make a play on the ball, because the defender is reacting to what the receiver is doing. More often than not, the receiver has a head start on the defender on spotting the ball and getting himself in position to make the catch. It’s far more common to see a receiver catch an underthrown ball than a defender intercepting one.
If you overthrow the ball, nobody catches it. Minor fail for the offense, unless the defender interferes with the receiver on the play, in which case you might get a PI call (if the ball was deemed “catchable”, in which case it’s a moderate win for the offense.
If you underthrow it, either nobody catches it (minor fail for the offense), the receiver catches it (major win for the offense) or the defender catches it (major fail for the offense), or the defender interferes with the receiver (moderate win for the offense).
And when I saw “underthrow”, I don’t mean lobbing it up so much that other defenders have time to close on the play and get involved – I mean slightly underthrowing it where it’s still just the receiver and the original defender involved. Also, I didn’t advocate purposely underthrowing the ball, just erring on the side of underthrowing vs. overthrowing.
Also consider that Kearse has shown a great knack for making plays on balls in the air, and Aguilar has the basketball background that he too should be pretty good in those situations. So part of it is also knowing your personnel.
We haven’t been exactly making big plays on offense though. And I agree in part with Lear, our offense is not holding up long enough. But you can’t blame everything on the O line. When Locker takes his 3 step drops the line only has to block for a couple of seconds and the ball is gone.
I’m not talking about what we have kirkd, I’m talking about what we don’t have. Have you noticed we aren’t getting many YACs? The only guy that has decent big play ability that I’ve seen thus far is Chris Polk- he’s the only guy that has put together some big plays that should’ve been halted early on and weren’t.
Either we’re not getting folks in open space enough or we don’t know what the hell to do once we catch the ball.
All I saw was purple
I think we’ve had a number of big plays on offense. You’re right that we haven’t had much YAC, but I put a lot of that on Locker. How many times have you seen him hit a receiver in stride in space?
As I said, I’d love a burner at WR that also has good hands, but those guys are rare. In the meantime, I’m totally comfortable with Kearse, Aguilar and Johnson at WR. Those guys are good enough to win the conference with. As much as we all like Jake, there are a lot of areas where he can improve, and many of those are areas that would lead to more big plays on offense – like hitting a receiver in stride on a crossing route in space or on a go route when he’s got a step on the defender.
Polk is a playmaker – his game against UCLA should be enough evidence of that. No, he’s not the fastest guy on the field, but he’s fast enough. Put him behind a good OL and he’d have a few long TD runs to his resume. Almost all of his long runs this season have been mostly based on his ability rather than gaping holes that the OL created.
The 2009 squad is made up of the pretty much the same players that went 0-12 last season and were in the position to win at the end of only the BYU and WSU games in 2008.
OK, I have to call you out on this one John – there’s a major difference between this year’s team and the one that played 8.5 of last year’s games: Jake Locker. Jake is a huge difference maker between those two teams.
I agree on that.
I would hate to see this team without Jake.
I also think there is more to it than that. Chris Polk is a heckuva running back and we have some pretty good receivers. I guess it is a more mature team at all the skill positions.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 9, 2009 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
As a Beav outsider looking in I’ve been impressed with Polk. He’s a great back and will continue to be for a while. Locker is of course Locker (meaning good). Locker’s a junior, correct?
Locker is a RS-Junior. Judging by his last few games, he really ought to return for his final year for some more seasoning before jumping to the NFL.
Polk is a RS-Freshmen, which is good news for Husky fans, maybe not so good news for the rest of the conference…
What does the “quarterback in waiting” position look like? Is it Fouch or are there younger guys that could see time?
Locker definitely needs seasoning as a passer before he steps up to the NFL. Hopefully he’s smart about it and let’s Sarkisian and Co. mold him into a better prospect.
Polk’s a stud.
Fouch, Price, or Montana
If Jake stays another year we are in good shape. Most think that Price will pass Fouch up for the starting job if Jake leaves early. Montana could have a say but he doesn’t arrive till fall.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 9, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
Yep
We’re solid at the QB position for years to come. Actually we a real solid at all the O skill positions with good depth and talent. Our weakness on offense is our OL which lacks overall talent and depth. Sark will have his work cut out for him getting this position back up to standards in the next few years.
I like Fouch
He’s got a season under his belt, really knows the supporting cast. And if we could get a little more consistent in the redzone, I think Fouch could gell with the offensive guys coming back.
All I saw was purple
Questionable. Ronnie Fouch is the #2 guy at the moment. We all saw him last year, but that probably wasn’t a fair trial given how the team had mailed in the season and given his youth. He’s supposedly progressed quite a bit under Sark & Nussmeier. That said, he’s obviously not gifted in the same ways Jake is.
We signed a guy named Keith Price this year out of the SoCal area who many are very excited about. He’s pretty mobile, has a decent arm and performed very well last year in a tough league and is considered a natural leader. There’s a lot of speculation that he might jump past Fouch on the depth charts.
Coming in next year is Nick Montana, who’s obviously gotten a lot of hype based on his name and the great team he plays for. He may well turn out to be a great QB, but I’d expect he’ll need a few years of seasoning, which he should get with Fouch & Prince ahead of him.
The team will take a pretty big hit if Jake leaves, but long-term I expect the QB position to be one of strength given the development credentials of Sark & Nussmeier.
Yes, I do think we have better skill talent this year with the growth of Polk, Kearse, Aguilar and the addition of Johnson. Now if we could start using Middleton in a more effective manner (where are the seam routes down the middle to clear out LB’s?) we’d have potential Rose Bowl quality skill talent.
My point though is that the improvement isn’t as big as it might appear by saying “0-12” – I think we all know that last year’s team wasn’t really 0-12 in terms of talent – probably more like 3-9 or 4-8.
Virtually No Playmakers
Nobody is stretching the field. No one is making big plays. That stuff is killing us in the redzone. We dink and dive it all the way down the field, but everytime we look to punch our ticket in for pay dirt- we can’t make the stinkin’ play.
I think this team is lacking some maturity. Nobody is stepping up to be the go to guy, no one is making that big play in order to put us in position to score.
All I saw was purple
5-4 or 4-5 is probably more realistic
I think it is inaccurate to say we SHOULD be 6-3. Yes we COULD be 6-3 with EVERYTHING going our way. But the only game we absolutely should have won is Notre Dame…that game was stolen from the Dawgs. ASU and UCLA were both extremely close games in which we just didn’t execute in the clutch….the product of a young, inexperienced team with young, inexperienced coaches.
And if you say we should have won against ND, ASU and UCLA, then objectively speaking you must admit that we should have lost against Arizona, a game in which we were outplayed but which turned on a freaky, lucky, questionable play at the end.
Of course I am not happy or satisfied with 3-6, and I would be ecstatic with 6-3, but I could live with 5-4 or 4-5.
Records
Got to agree with you, we “could” be 6-3, and we “could” just as easily be 1-8. The USC and Arizona games could have easily gone the other way.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Reality?
If we blame the youth on this team for some of our issues – and I agree it is an issue – what is it going to be like next year when we add around 30 new players to our roster?
It will think on that one
I haven’t decided who to blame next season…lol.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 9, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
The churn of playing true freshmen is a bad cycle to be in. We have to hope that Sark is a long-term guy and that he can eventually build up enough talent to where he doesn’t feel compelled to play so many true freshmen in the future.
Yep
How many years in a row can we talk about being a young team? We’ve been a “young” team ever since Willingham was hired, continually waiting for freshmen to be seniors, yet they never get developed into good players. It’s about time we started developing the players on the roster, instead of looking for the next set of freshmen to replace them.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Harder to do when other schools can reload with JCs
We can’t get too may JC’s enrolled academically, so immediate help is not there. Oregon, Oregon State, Arizona, Arizona State, and Washington State are easier to get in academically. Not only can they reload with JCs, but can recruit prepsters that are borderline academic material. We can’t and we continue to have to play true freshmen.
So we’ve got to out recruit the opposition and bring in a truck load of A+ guys to rebuild our depth in the program. A lot easier to rebuild when getting in is easier.
All I saw was purple
I agree, but you missed my main point
Not being able to get JC’s does hurt when you get a new staff, or when you unexpectedly have a lack of depth at a given position.
My main point is that eventually you have to develop the current freshmen so that they are still starting as juniors and seniors. How many times have we seen player xxxxx xxxxx start as a freshmen and as a sophomore, doesn’t develop or improve and as a junior/senior gets passed up by a freshmen. Then the whole cycle starts over. Eventually we need to develop the current talent, I’m hopefull that Sark and Co. can and will suceed at developing talent, we know they can develop QB’s, only time will tell with every other position.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Freshman
I know this staff wants to develop their own guys. So it’s almost like starting over to a certain degree. Fellner-true freshman, Pulu-true freshman, Creighton-true freshman, Trufant-true freshman. My hope is that since the decision has been made to play these guys instead of redshirting them is that the dividends will come next year and these guys will end up being studs over the course of their careers. I guess this is the other part of bringing in a new coaching staff. They are going to have lean towards building towards the future. I think we need to be patient which is hard after going through the Ty era. Some of those kids coming in next year can help us defensively and in a couple of years this is going to be a very good defense.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
That IS the key Lear!
Eventually we need to develop the current talent, I’m hopeful that Sark and Co. can and will succeed at developing talent, we know they can develop QB’s, only time will tell with every other position.
Somehow I’ve got a lot of confidence that this staff will get these guys better each year moving forward. Hugh Millen even commented how in the first year with a new offense these kids aren’t quite on the same page yet. He said next year they will be.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
I knew where you were going...
… I just felt like being a smart ass and being argumentative.
I agree with the ugly cycle of freshmen- if you continue to cycle thru freshmen you’ll never develope the upper classmen. To a point that they lose interest and don’t work hard in the offseason or quit all together. Ty was notorious for cycling thru and the upper classmen were lost.
All I saw was purple
Sark is going to play true freshmen that can crack the 2-deeps. The days of wholesale redshirting of freshmen classes is gone.
That said, I’m sure Sark would prefer not to play quite so many true freshmen, especially linemen. In an ideal world, I think the only true frosh that would’ve played out of this class would’ve been Johnson & Trufant. Guys like Crichton, Tokolahi, Pulu, Fellner, Wallace & Bronson would’ve been better served by playing on the scout teams and building up their bodies under Ivan Lewis and trading a year as a true frosh for a year as a 5th year senior.
Lack of quality depth is the culprit. Unlike Ty, it appears that Sark’s first class will be more productive, and so far his 2nd class appears superior to Ty’s as well, so there is hope that enough depth will build in the next couple of years that by Sark’s 4th class or so we should see the playing of true freshmen decline quite a bit.
I also still think a bowl game is not out of the realm of possibility.
With basically the season on the line, maybe Sark and Holt can conjure up another monumental effort (ala USC) and maybe catch OSU a little flat. Then after an almost certain win against the Cougs, I believe we get a bye week to prepare for a Cal team that may not have that much to play for…
Fisnish with three wins?
I really don’t see why not. We would have to play a lot better than we have to beat OSU and Cal.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 9, 2009 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
It’s obviously possible, but also highly unlikely. We just aren’t a good matchup for Oregon State, not unless our D-line and secondary get a whole lot better next week.
We should beat WSU handily – no excuses not to, unless Jake doesn’t play for some reason (and even then we should win).
Beating Cal is possible given that it’s a home game and it’s in December and Cal probably won’t have a whole lot to play for at that point. Chances are we still lose that game, but it’s a much more plausible win than against OSU.
True – but I think UCLA matches up with OSU better then we do. The OSU passing game against our D is a HUGE mismatch unless something changes drasticaly.
Yep
We just seem to be getting a step slower ever week in the secondary.
by John Berkowitz on Nov 9, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions
Don't blame the secondary
I’m not sold that the “secondary” isn’t improving, I thought it was the linebackers that were getting killed in the passing game. Their ability to play a zone defense was horrible, they’d just stand in a spot, not adjust to the recievers, and react once a ball was thrown. There were way to many passes across the middle of our defense that the LB’s should have been in position to stop.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
comparing to last year to this year
i believe we are quicker, in better position and the cb’s are not 9 yards off the los.
as the season wears on we are getting slower.
i feel we are thinking in absolute terms many ways.
we are competing now, just not finishing. we couldn’t even spell the word last year.
last year in absolute terms we were the worst. i can handle and understand the product i’m watching now, although i am disappointed in the result. i could not watch or support another 2008.
it may not happen this year but at some point we will be in a position for a break that will go our way.
Wins
The Huskies can beat oregon state. If you think about it, the huskies only pac ten wins have come against 2 of the top 3 teams in the conferenence. Maybe we should be more worried about WSU than Oregon State or Cal.
Sure did feel good . . .
seeing the scoring updates of Oregon losing. Here’s hoping Arizona beats them and wins the conference.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
That was SWEET!
It was funny reading the duck board, a lot of those guys seemed to be apathetic about the loss…go figure?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
JCs
I agree you should recruit great athletes no matter where they are but all things being equal I’ll take the high school athlete. Four or five years in your system gives you a much greater chance of developing an athlete into your system. GO DAWGS!!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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.
