Picking the Pac 10
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 6:00 AM PDT
Email
PrintIt is Pac 10 Media Day!
So this is a logical time to come out with my predicted finish for the upcoming Pac 10 football season. Remember, you heard it here first!
I am going to start by going out on a limb and picking USC as number one. Wow...who'd have thunk it? While the Trojans have holes to fill, they do so with well-prepared former high school All Americans. I believe they will beat Ohio State, an early major non-conference match-up, but I also believe the Trojans will lose one or two they shouldn't, preventing them from winning a national championship.
Two seasons ago, Washington pummeled a heavily-favored California team in a late-season home game. For the first time, as the Bears began a late season cave-in, coach Jeff Teford was losing touch with his team. In 2008, however, the Golden Bears went a long way toward resolving these issues, and in '09 I expect Cal to compete with USC for the league championship.
This would be a great opportunity to predict a down season at Oregon State. However, a problem with such a prediction: the Beavers still have two of the most dynamic performers in the conference on offense in the Rodgers brothers. Furthermore, coach Mike Riley has demonstrated time and again his ability to reload with under-the-radar talent and remain in the conference's upper echelon.
In my humble mind, the Oregon Ducks are 2009's Pac 10 mystery team. To begin with, coaching changes nearly always bring about a lingering "hangover". Furthermore, the Ducks have some major holes to fill after hits on both lines and the defensive backfield from graduation. Despite this, recent history tells us that we can pencil the Ducks in for 7-8 wins, depending on how quickly the team comes together.
Stanford is a program on the rise under Coach Jim Harbaugh. He has recruited well and has his athletes believing in his system. Most experts agree that they will finish in the upper division and go to a bowl. I agree.
ASU was the league's enigma in 2008, and simply weren't a very good team when all was said and done. The team had problems which even Coach Erickson couldn't solve, and now are starting all over at QB. Erickson is an excellent coach who can seemingly perform miracles, but I believe this team is at least year away from contending for a championship.
Most Pac 10 beat writers predict a ninth-place for Washington in 2009. While it's reasonable to assume an 0-12 team with a new coach, coming off a lackluster and hastily put-together recruiting class, isn't going to improve dramatically in year one, I am hedging my bet on the Huskies this season. I believe it is fair to place last year's disaster on the injury to Jake Locker and the lame-duck status of Coach Willingham; the team and the coach's fates were sealed when Locker when down in week four. It is fair to say with a healthy Locker, UW would have won 3-4 games in 2008, as the BYU, ASU, UCLA, and WSU games were all very winnable.
So, going in to 2009 I predict Washington will surprise and finish around .500, a major feat for Steve Sarkisian to achieve in his first season. Conditioning, attitude, experience, emotion, and coaching have all been elevated several notches. That said, I predict a 6-6 season for the Huskies and a trip to a lower-tier bowl game.
Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times went out on a limb also by picking the the Huskies to finish ninth. Even with his bumm knee he may just be a little more connected to the program than I am. I respect his opinion and Bob actually gets paid well for doing this type of stuff so it isn't like he is going to risk his reputation by picking the Huskies 7th or 8th. I love you Bob but grow some hair for crying out loud!
UCLA is breaking in a new QB and that position has caused a lot of woes for the Bruins the pat two years. I don't think that is going to change in 2009 and the Bruins will struggle to attain .500 despite the making of good defense.
Next up is Arizona. The Wildcats will be breaking in a new QB and have many holes to fill. I don't see coach Mike Stoops and company moving into the league's upper division this fall, not do I predict a bowl game for the Tucson faithful.
Last (and certainly least) are the Cougars of Washington State, having more problems entering 2009 than I can write in a single paragraph. I simply don't see the Cougs beating anyone this year. It is going to take some solid recruiting classes and a coaching change to clean this mess up.
2009 Pac Ten Predictions
- Southern California (11-1) Rose Bowl
- California (9-3) Holiday Bowl
- Oregon State (8-4) Sun Bowl
- Oregon (7-5) Las Vegas Bowl
- Stanford (7-5) Emerald Bowl
- Arizona State (6-6) Poinsettia Bowl
- Washington (6-6) At Large
- UCLA (4-8)
- Arizona (3-9)
- Washington State (0-12)
105 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Forgot to paste it in
It is in there now.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Johnb, agree with your top 2
and the bottom pick. I feel 3-9 is up for grabs. A lot of ifs for all those teams, the ones that finish in the upper half will be the ones that gel quicker, and get lucky at the right time. Of those 7 teams in the maybe, I concede Oreg, Oreg St, are probably stronger than the remainders, while AZ is lower. That leaves UCLA, Furd, ASU, and UW as the teams who will be fighting for that last bowl game. Locker is our key. I say 7-5 plus an added win with a Las Vegas bowl victory over AF. And no, I haven’t been drinking YET today. Go Dawgs
someone not a fan of Oregon..
absurd with the schedule the ducks have you have them with 5 loses.. USC Cal and OSU at home. But this wouldn’t be a husky blog without a little shot at the ducks.
A lot of new faces in the
trenches this year for the ducks combined with a tough schedule and an offense that usually results in them having to dip into their QB reserves could = 7-5.
I actually am ambivalent about the Ducks
I just don’t see a lot of reasons why they will be better this season than they were last season.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions
And I’m quite sure the unrealistic duck blogs have Oregon going 12-0 or 11-1 and in the hunt for the championship. And I’m quite certain many other Oregon rival blogs will have the ducks finishing roughly around where we predict them to finish.
Anytime their is a coaching change their is going to be some CHANGE. You have change in personnel up front and in the defensive backfield. You might be able to score 30 points a game, but it doesn’t help if you average serving up 28 points a game. That is were the predicted 7-5 record comes into play.
Oregon has maxed out on potential. This has been and is your window of opportunity. Phil Knight can only buy you so much and when it’s all said and done, all it is is fluff. You wanted a rival Husky opinion, you got it at 7-5.
All I saw was purple
I'm okay with, for 13 consecutive games, we score 30 and they score 28.
Or did I mistake your point? ;)
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
The Duck Offense
The key of course is scoring more than the opporsition and UO has been very good at that. I don’t see it happening 13 times in 2009 though.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions
It's a dream right?
Nobody is going to vote Oregon into the BCS national championship. It’s not good for the television ratings. And if you don’t think it’s about the television ratings then you are not living in the real world. Utah doesn’t have a shot at a BCS championship, yet I am willing to bet that only about 35 BCS schools actually have enough rooting interest to get enough votes to get an invitation.
The computer system will kick you out Brotha! They throw in the computers so you don’t see what “actually” happens behind the closed curtain. It’s nothing more then smoke and mirrors. Enjoy the magic show fellas.
I’ll never believe the BCS system is ever on the up and up until they actually go to a full blown playoff system. And I don’t care if it is USC, Florida, LSU, Oklahoma, or Texas winning it all- it’s still a mythical championship. Head to head is the only way to crown a champion- the only way. And I can tell you, Oregon is not getting invited to the BCS/NCAA prime time showcase. The advertisers pay for the broadcasting rights and they want the best, most marketable two teams in this game and Oregon is not one of them. Sorry…
All I saw was purple
Until Dixon went down a couple of years ago
I thought UO was going to win it all until Dixon tore up his knee.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions
"Let's Play Tic Tac Toe"
Still think the computers would’ve found something to alter their strength of schedule. And see, that is the key to this whole thing. Strength of schedule??? How can anybody really determine a legit ranking system between 1 and 119 div. 1 college football teams?
That (strength of schedule) is the flaw in the system and they can spin it anyway they want, because they really never actually show you how it computes. Teams just shuffle weakly through the equation like Joshua trying to decipher launch codes to launch a WWIII nucleur holicaust (Wargames). And we believe them?
But we, the ignorant fans think “if it’s high tech then it must be accurate”. It’s a magic show and we are buying popcorn.
All I saw was purple
At its prime that Duck team was like UW '90 (only flipped of course, and not as deep)
When Dixon was healthy they could’ve beat anybody. That team was reminiscent of a shark attack… the gore was ugly (who likes to see the running board tredded uni’s win anything) but the sheer magnificence was incredible. Dixon was a veritable magician with his misdirection and every other member of that team played its role to perfection. I remember a lot of Ducks biting their finger nails down to the nub through three quarters at Husky Stadium however…
Our leather lungs together...
Then they lost all their games...
…I think they finally got it together for their bowl game. Too bad for oregon they missed their day in the sun.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
41.9 points per game in 2008
number are up from 2007.
give Masoli another year in the system = Pac10 title
If he's going to do it, it's going to have to be this year.
You’re away against everybody that matters next season, and USC is going to be a lot more experienced on defense and at QB.
Doesn’t matter, though. Oregon doesn’t have the defense to win the conference. Even with the offense the Ducks have, there’s always one or two games that come down to making stops instead of just scoring points.
It’s going to be interesting to see how Kelly actually does as the head guy. Being a good coordinator doesn’t gaurantee being a good head coach, as Duck fans are quick to point out to Husky fans. Kelly’s transition to date hasn’t been entirely seamless.
But I am glad to hear that he voted for Tebow (that was a great line, by the way).
Duh!!!!!!!!!!!!
someone not a fan of Oregon..
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Even I see the Ducks at 8-4 or 9-3 this year
as much as it pains me to say…
I also think that the Huskies can win 6 but more likely 4-5 would be my guess. UCLA, ASU, WSU, and Idaho are my locks. Arizona and Stanford are toss ups. It really depends on the mentality of the team with the early season schedule…
all good things come to an end ...
… if there was ever a season where the USC armor gets cracked (even if it is one season) this is the year. I have to believe there are a few upsets brewing when USC faces Oregon, Oregon State and Cal. Who knows, there might be another Stanford-type performance againsts the likes of the Cardinal, Bruins or Huskies. All that equals one more divisional loss than they are used to and a conference title for Cal in 2009.
"Greed is Good."
So is Rudy.
We were the ones who ended USC's reign the first time
with the destruction of Marijuanavich.
It’s time to do it again.
P.S – the total lack of serious investigation by the NCAA into USC’s alleged Bush violations makes me absolutely sick. They threw the book at us like we the Tony Soprano’s of College Football and USC gets a cakewalk? Whatever man.
I’m ready to put a boot to some SC sphincter. It may not be this year but redemption is coming baby and it’s gonna be sweet.
Note to the Oregon schools…it was nice seeing you gain some respectability but fun time is over.
Purple Reign is coming back.
It was the Pac 10 that threw the book not the NCAA
Always keep in mind that it was the conference and our own President at the time who did it.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions
More than anything, the UW bent over and accepted the book.
And the USC thing is far from over, especially with the news today of their kicking game “consultant.”
When it’s all said and done, though, USC basketball will take a hit, but the football team won’t really. They might have to forfeit some games, but I doubt they lose TV money, scholarships, or bowl eligibility. They can thank the UW for that; there has been a bona fide lessening of penalties doled out to teams by the NCAA and member conferences after seeing the effects the 1993 probation had on the UW.
That was the mindset back then...
…it was also to actually “help” dig up dirt against yourself! Crazy but true. Now we’re back to your typical “fight the charges” strategy.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
6-6?
Even with a healthy Locker I think 6-6 is being optimistic. The pac 10 is top heavy with USC, Cal, Oregon, and OSU – and UW isn’t on the top.
A 6-6 season will mean that a solid running game will develop.
I’m thinking more like 4-8.
http://fourthdownand5.blogspot.com/ — a “playoff” blog
We have
3 very good (but young) TB’s in Polk, Shaw and Bronson. Our OL was bad last year, but did have some injuries and motivation issues. We have the best running QB in the nation and a more power run friendly offense installed. I think a solid running game is a lock if we can pass the ball.
Our WR corps is one of the most solid (top to bottom, not one bigtime star) in the Pac-10. If Locker can come around into a more accurate passer we could have a top 2-3 offense in the conference this year.
I like the underdog role, although 4-8 to me means we get 3 conference wins. I’ll take 3 conference wins this year, it means we beat at least two teams that we weren’t supposed to and three more than last year.
6-6?
It is totally being optimistic and I know that. However if you can win four why not six?
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Here's how it's going down
How it’s going down
Sep. 5 LSU – UW 28- LSU 24 (my upset of the year) **** 1-0
Sep. 12 Idaho – UW 31- Idaho 17 **** 2-0
Sep. 19 USC 12:30pm USC – 35- UW **** 2-1
Sep. 26 at Stanford 6:00pm UW 21- 17 **** 3-1
Oct. 3 at Notre Dame 12:30pm ND 31- UW 24 **** 3-2
Oct. 10 Arizona UW 35 – AZ 21 **** 4-2
Oct. 17 at Arizona State 7:00pm ASU 21 UW 13 **** 4-3 UW 28 **** 4-4
Oct. 24 Oregon ZERO 38
Nov. 7 at UCLA UW 27 – UCLA 14 **** 5-4
Nov. 14 at Oregon State OSU 28 – UW 21 **** 5-5
Nov. 28 Wash. St. UW 42- Coog 14 **** 6-5
Dec. 5 California Cal 38 – UW 14 **** 6-6
good call...
although I see it like this.
LSU 38 – UW 31 0-1
Idaho 14 – UW 48 1-1
USC 35 – UW 17 1-2
UW 28 – Furd 24 2-2
UW 31 – ND 28 3-2
UA 17 – UW 21 4-2
From here it gets tricky…if we end up at 4-2 it means we’ve gelled and people have stepped up (also mostly injury free). We could realistically win 3-4 of the final games if that is the scenario. If we end up at 1-5 or 2-4 we could lose out (except the Coogs of course).
ASU 17 – UW 14 4-3
UO 42 – UW 28 4-4
UW 21 – UCLA 14 5-4
OSU 35 – UW 38 6-4
UW 52 – WSU 7 7-4
UW 28 – CAL 42 7-5
It’s a stretch, but I’m tired of being a sadist. I think the best bet is 5-7 but 7-5 or 8-4 is not out of the question.
I reserve the right to change this after fall camp
I think you're both undervaluing Oregon and overvaluing yourselves.
Not to kick the hive here at all, I just think it’s pretty off to think Oregon will be only one game better than UW in 2009.
John, do you also have UW beating UO in Seattle?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
I have UO beating UW in Seattle.
I think it will be closer than in the past couple of years but I don’t see UW beating Oregon this season.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions
2007 was pretty close
That game was won decisively in the 4th, but it was tied at the end of 3. For 3 quarters the Ducks looked more or less as helpless as the Huskies on D. It was a much different story last year in Autzen. I was at the game and left just crushed at the lopsided line play on both sides of the ball. I hope some revenge is had in ’09. Welcome back to Husky Stadium, Quacks.
Our leather lungs together...
We both have
Oregon beating us at home…I personally don’t think it will be all that competitive. I called Oregon 42-28, I think our offense will improve, but we don’t have the defensive manpower to stop your offense.
Don't feel too good about yourself...
…I’ve got a feeling this is going to be a close game.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Hate to nitpick, John,
But I think you overestimated the importance of Jake’s absence in the losses that he was out for. With the exception of WSU, we really weren’t in those games for any multitude of reasons.
Conversely, Jake’s importance may be even greater this year with (despite) a better team and system around him. This is because we should actually be competitive in more games, giving him the opportunity to make the difference.
I don't know about that....
Check out Chaz’s post below.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions
I think some people are forgetting that just two years ago with a healthy Jake Locker it was absolutely coaching and a lack of conditioning that lost us the games that we lost. We led or were tied at half in probably 3/4 of our games. I can’t think of any games that we weren’t in, and we faced more ranked teams than the 2008 season. So what changed from 2007 to 2008? Well, we lost a 1000 yd RB, 1000 yd QB, and our leading tackler. Add true freshmen and a coach that clearly knows he’s on his way out and you have what happened to our Dawgs. The team straight up just didn’t show up after Jake went down. Those of us that were at the Stanford game knew it the second Jake’s thumb got broke, I remember saying it to the guy that was sitting next to me “there goes the season.” Sad but true.
If we don’t win 6 games I will be shocked. And so should you
"The team...just didn't show up after Jake went down."
That was on my mind, too. But it doesn’t change the fact that it was still a team problem.
Don’t get me wrong—Jake was far and away the MVP both years. But the 2008 team became non-competitive for whatever reasons you want to list; so much so that I don’t think any QB could have saved them.
It will be a more talented, conditioned and coached team that hauls us back into contention. So while a healthy Jake Locker may not put up as many numbers, he’ll still be the difference in a lot more games simply because we’ll be competitive in a lot more games.
Agreed...
There was a team problem, but the Jake problem was equally important. The team with Jake took a BYU team that would’ve beat the (WSU) Cougs by 30 to the last second of the game. That team never showed up once after Jake was lost. As good as Jake is physically, he’s even more important for team morale. That’s a problem that will be remedied after a couple or three years of Sark’s recruiting, but until Jake’s gone, his health is the best barometer this team has for its confidence, much less its ability to win football games.
Our leather lungs together...
Exactly
Jake’s presence on the field as the general is what makes a huge difference for the rest of the team. That’s another reason why I’m excited for Montana, they say he’s a natural born leader and guys respect him. We don’t need Jake to be all-universe out there doing everything himself…just being on the field healthy is the most important thing
by ChazzReinhold on Jul 31, 2009 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions
The important thing is that the team gives him a chance to win.
I think that we all agree on the physical and psychologic impact of Jake Locker.
I just disagree with the concept of putting the team’s entire success on his shoulders. Any team in any sport that does this is bound for problems. It’s also why I think Jake will actually “win” more games in the future—because he won’t have to carry the whole damn team on every single play.
Nobody wanted to see Jake have everything on his shoulders. But when half the offense didn’t know their mother****ing assignments because Ty didn’t beat it into their heads and the fact that Lappano/Ty MADE it rest on Jake offensively then what’s a guy to do!
Everything about the team culture will change. Remember what happened the first time Nicky Holt caught a dude playing with an ipod during a team meeting? Dude got his ass handed to him. Our new coaches will not put up with that s**t, these guys are on scholarship to play football and they WILL be focused or they will be out.
by ChazzReinhold on Jul 31, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Last I had heard...
everyone was qualified with the exception of Tivao (won’t make it in) and the OL recruit, who’s status is still up in the air. I’m not sure that it’s a done deal with the other JC guys but it looks promising. This is the thing about JC guys at the UW, it’s so darn difficult to get them into school!
by doubledeucedawg on Jul 30, 2009 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions
LSU Ticket Sales
Sales are brisk for the opener. If they’re already talking about view obstructed seats that must be a good sign.
by doubledeucedawg on Jul 30, 2009 9:00 PM PDT reply actions
ASU
Are any of you forgetting Arizona State lost two QBs in the offseson? Carpenter graduated and Elway’s kid quit. In this league QB play is BIG!
We have ASU in the desert on Oct. 17th. That means the weather won’t favor the Sundevils and who knows maybe we get in a groove and ASU finds themselves still trying to find a new QB.
Sorry duck fans, I’ve got Udub beating Oregon this year. Oregon is not all that! It’s not like they are USC. They are the ducks, they come from a state that is inferior to Washington. I’ll tremble in the wake of USC, Oklahoma, Texas, and Florida. But I don’t fear a dam duck.
New personnel on D line, new personnel in the secondary, new coach- too many questionmarks that don’t equate to success. “NOW IF YOU WANNA CROWN EM … THEN CROWN EM … BUT we let’em off the hook” [Best quote ever- Dennis Green].
All I saw was purple
Don't Fear the duck
If you remember correctly how did Oregon beat us last year at Autzen? At the half they were ahead 14-10 (I think). Can’t remember the halftime score for sure, but I know it was a close game at the half.
In the 2nd half how did Oregon score? They were all broken plays MAN! If we play better 2nd half defense, I think the outcome would’ve been drastically altered. All I am saying is that Oregon didn’t pound us into the ground- they scored on cheap crap. That stuff can be fixed.
Oregon is NOT all that. If you ask me I think losing to Oregon has become more of a mental block then anything else. Don’t forget the Nick Holt factor. That guy won’t allow us to lose focus or take downs off. With the Holtster, we are going to be in it to win it! Don’t fear the duck…
Go Dawgs! WOOF!!!
All I saw was purple
I don't fear the ducks...
Who’s afraid of Eugene hippies anyway? Really though, I think it’s gonna be a pretty poor game for us. I hold out hope that they keep up the run happy spread style they go with. Our LB’s and DL are our strength on D, but they can light us up through the air (albeit with an unproven WR corps).
I would actually pick an upset over SC before Oregon. They have nothing but untested QB’s and we get them the week after they get tOSU. If they’re still hungover from winning big, we might be able to go OSU or Stanford on them. I’m not gonna hold my breath though.
Although they've shown remarkable depth...
@ QB. By the eight week of the season I doubt the Huskies see a healthy Masoli or Roeper. Now that Chips Ahoy is running the show unchecked I can only imagine how many QB’s Oregon will run through. Oregon starts fast and blows up, getting them in the eighth week is a big Husky advantage, and if Sark is as smart as I think he is, this game has a Big, FAT, CIRCLE! around it. As much as that guy loves coaching the Huskies, he’s gotta know you have to hate the Ducks.
Our leather lungs together...
I saw plenty of Oregon QB's in the 2008 opener
None of them had a problem with UW which is a testament to the system they have put together.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 31, 2009 8:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah I think it's critical that you...
….knock the snot out of their QB every chance you get!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
The point though was that they don’t have a QB with any sort or amount of Pac 10 experience nor success. And Dennis Erickson does not frighten me anymore. He is in the twighlight of his career and the program reflects that. Erickson’s best coaching days are behind him. And they still don’t have a QB.
All I saw was purple
but we have a mediocre defense...
and they have a very good one. I’m excited to see our offense (hopefully hitting it’s midseason stride) go up against their killer D.
I might also add
that Billy Joe didn’t have any experience or success when he took over. He ended up all right. It’s tough to gauge on QB’s, some have it and some dont. I don’t recall a whole lot of them who take off in their after having been average for a year or two before.
Hobert?
That was a loaded team- Billy Crystal could suit up at QB and look good under center for the Dawgs that year. Hobert was a very cool customer. He didn’t overthink the room and didn’t screw up the offense. He got the ball where it needed to be and why? Because he had diesel cat O line protecting him forever.
All I saw was purple
I also remember we lost...
…a starting offensive lineman before that season. Of course with that defense, who couldn’t rack up monster stats.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Pac 10 QB's
Experience at QB seems to be one of the prerequisites for doing well in this conference.
ASU, Arizona, USC, Stanford, UCLA, are all breaking in new QB’s. You might as well throw WSU in there too since most of their QB’s were injured last year.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions
ASU is good...
Yet they’ve sort of been living a sheltered life with Carpenter playing QB for like 7 years down there! It took Oregon what about 5 or 6 games to finally find the right QB to run their system last season? On paper ASU wins this game as does most teams we face this year. But if we are going to predict our season in July- how about looking at some of the possiblities? Oct. 17th in Tempe should be great weather for us (mid 80s). New QB? I’m not saying I’m just saying. In our league their is something truly special about the play of QB and a 5th year starting QB is almost golden!
All I saw was purple
Zona too...
Tuitama could be the next Doug Flutie. He’s undersized but he’s got a solid arm and he always seemed to find an open guy, whether deep or underneath. Mike Stoops would probably be the perfect coach for a school with low expectations, but I’m not convinced he can carry a team like Harbaugh or Tedford. I think UW can take both of the desert schools this year.
Our leather lungs together...
Tuitama is gone
I think that is a major reason that Arizona will regress this season.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 31, 2009 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions
I didn't make myself clear
I think most people are underselling Tuitama’s importance to AZ’s success. His departure will have a greater impact than many seem to think.
Our leather lungs together...
And this point is the main reason why I think we beat 5 of the 6 teams you listed. Teams with new QB’s are gonna struggle mightily, especially teams that were only decent while they had their 13 year starters like ASU or Arizona. We know UCLA either can’t keep their guys healthy or their guy throws more pick sixes than td’s. Stanford got a good kid in Luck but that will still be a work in progress. And Wazzu…oh crap. We’ll have to wait and see if Wulffie gets desperate and peels some drunk dude off a sticky frathouse floor to come QB for them like he did last year. Methinks it will probably happen again, lmao
by ChazzReinhold on Jul 31, 2009 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions
On Paper
On paper the only teams we beat this year are Idaho and WSU. So I guess we are favorites to win the Palouse championship. By the way I don’t have UW beating ASU figured into my predictions even though it is a winnable game.
I just happen to think there are four additional victories floating around out there.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 30, 2009 11:01 PM PDT reply actions
Agreed
and all I am saying is that ASU could be one of them. I think all of our games are winnable except for USC and Notre Dame. USC is USC with Carroll and we’ve never beaten the Domers so there you go.
But I still think we could catch LSU napping a little to open the season. 10 of the 12 games are winnable, the trick is figuring out the right ones.
All I saw was purple
ND over LSU
Crazi you’re Crazy…We will definitely have a better shot at ND than LSU. Dont let their “tradition” fool you. They are still coached by Charlie Weis…
I hope we take’m both but our best shot is ND in my opinion.
I think ND is very winnable
Sark and Holt have never lost to ND.
I think if ND was in the Pac 10 they would finish 5th or 6th in 2009.
by John Berkowitz on Jul 31, 2009 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions
Why not Notre Dame?
I don’t doubt that the Catholics will likely be improved, but the Huskies will be much more so. You don’t get the reputation of most overpaid coach in college football (by far) by beating teams you’re expected to cruise over. This team has eyes on big things, so you know that Navy, Stanford, UCLA and of course USC are going to draw most of the Bowl Conference Series’ proudest satellite’s attention. Also, Sark and Ho (if Sarkisian gets an abbreviation, Nick Holt should too, right?) have made a habit out of stomping the Irish like it’s a Civil War-era New York City riot. Nobody knows how to let Charlie Weis embarrass himself like Pete Carrol’s former lieutenants. If this game weren’t in South Bend, I’d pencil in the Huskies for a win.
Our leather lungs together...
Sorry Fellas, ND is off my board
We’ve never beaten the Domers and if & when we ever do, I think that opportunity will come at our home field. You’ve got to look at it with perspective.
- LSU is on the road to a place they’ve never been to in their entire lives- they are sheltered in the South, everything will be different up here including the food.
- This is the season opener. I have a hunch the Mad Hatter (Les Miles) won’t have his offense running on all cylinders yet. LSU will attempt to speed up the clock with a lot of ground attack, sort of try to over power us by running the ball. And why? Because Les Miles thinks he can.
- And if the Bayou Tiger offense isn’t very productive (1st game of the season) and Sark has our’s jumping out of the chute like an angry bull, things could get a little “iffy” for the Mad Hatter. The key will be what the key has been for the last few seasons. Have a decent gameplan, make adjustments as the game progresses, and in order of balancing the playing field (LSU’s depth) we’ve got to be in top notch football shape. Our regulars are going to have to go longer vs. LSU’s depth. It can be done, it just takes proper work ethic, believing in the system, and the proper football conditioning program.
But we are NOT beating the Domers…
All I saw was purple
Jake Locker/Expectations
I agree with you guys that having Jake Locker back will totally make this a different team then what we saw last year. Having him on the field completely changes everything for the opposing defense.
That being said, I still am not getting my hopes up for a bowl game. As a few of you have stated about Oregon, anytime you have a new coach and a new system their will be growing pains, I expect 5-7.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
I understand where...
…you’re coming from Lear. It makes sense. I’m just hoping that we get some breaks and momentum going and maybe we can surprise some people.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Here's my picks for Dawg wins
Idaho
fUCLA
Arizona
ASU
Stanford
WSU
I think we’ll have 6 wins and make a bowl game
Stanford is going to be a better team than you.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
Even if that is true...
it doesn’t remove the possibility of a Husky win.
Your uniforms are ugly.
"Anytime, Anyplace"
"Life is hard, it's harder if you're stupid." - John Wayne
Of course, anything's possible.
I just think the notion that a first-year coach taking over a team that went winless the previous year winning six games, taking said team to a bowl game, and also beating two or even three teams that are going to be not just better, but good teams, is a little silly. I’ll call wins over Idaho and the Arizona schools and the Apple Cup givens. Four legit wins will be good for Sark’s first year.
I will eat crow if you guys beat Stanford. I definitely think UCLA is possible though not likely, but Stanford will be a real good team this year. Harbaugh will finally get respect for the work he’s done with the Stanford program.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
I don't think we had 0-12 talent last year
We did have an 0-12 coach.
If you can find a way to win four you can usually find a way to win six.
If WSU and Idaho are the only two teams we beat this year I will be very surprised.
To my Duck friend….I think you are forgetting Jeff Tedford and Cal.
Things happen.
by John Berkowitz on Aug 2, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
Do you think you will beat both Arizonas?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
College Football
On any Saturday. Did you guys think BSU would defeat you guys at home last season? What was your call on that one?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
If you're going to be uncongenial when I ask an honest question, I suppose I shouldn't post here anymore.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
I think it was a decent response...
as that was a somewhat loaded question. Nobody here (besides maybe Crazi) realistically thinks that we’re gonna shock the world and go 8-4 with a big bowl win. However, this was not a bad team last year, not good, but certainly not 0-12 caliber.
We can realistically beat both AZ schools, Stanford, UCLA, WSU and Idaho (UA, ASU and UCLA are about a toss up and Furd is a big ?). I personally think Stanford will be much of the same this year, I don’t think they’ll compete until 2010/2011, that said, they’re good now but still beatable. If we catch some breaks and get some beat up teams or some good teams sleeping on us (LSU and ND) we can get to 6 or 7 wins.
We have Jake Locker, all of our top recievers back, 4 very good young TB’s, a top 3 in the Pac-10 LB corps , a potential 1st team all Pac-10 DE, and a new offense that will play to our strengths. We may have had the worst season in CFB since the BCS came about, but we have a lot to look forward to. Like df22 said, “on any Saturday”.
We like a decent discussion, but don’t take your ball and go home when we don’t have a dignified response to a dig like that. It’s hard to call it game by game considering that we haven’t even started fall camp yet.
I wasn't making a dig at all,
And I’ve encountered hostility before from you guys here while begging a sincere question.
I agree that you didn’t have 0-12 caliber talent. To tell you the truth, that’s what WSU had. And they still don’t have any better.
I think your guys’ “should win” games are Idaho and WSU.
I think your “hope to win” games are the Arizona schools, because both schools are at low points in their program (whether it be horrible coaching at Arizona or lull in talent at ASU.)
I think the games that you will not win are possibly Stanford and UCLA. Stanford is going to be good, man. I’m worried about Stanford sweeping in and taking out the Ducks. It’s gonna be a trap game all around the Pac. UCLA overrated, and everyone knows it. Slick Rick is gonna turn in a mediocre maiden season in all likelihood, but no less, they have a lot of talent. I think they have enough of a talent advantage over you to negate any out-coaching done by Sark and co.
Notre Dame would be a great game to win, not just for you guys, but for the Pac. I really think I’ll be pulling for you in that one, but right now I’d put my money on ND. LSU would get my bet too.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
You are basing this all on what?
“hope to win” games? All of our games fall under hope to win. I’m going to spell it out for you. Every game on our schedule is winnable except USC, you and I don’t have any clue as to how the season will unfold- maybe Stanford has a few key injuries, maybe the team comes down with something the week of the game, maybe some of the players get kicked off the team for undisclosed reasons.
Now if we are talking about “on paper” then please say it. Because when you don’t say on paper then it comes across as a dig, especially coming from a duck.
You’re giving us Idaho and Washington State? If that is all you’re giving us then I think you are wasting your time over here. Your gift of Idaho and Washington State would be accurate with a 5th year under Ty Willingham. We have Steve Sarkisian and Nick Holt now and we don’t know where the program will be come december. But I can tell you this we’re going to win more then 5 games this year. Hell I think we have what it takes to win 6+ games this year and one of those wins is vs. Oregon.
I think I speak for all of us, we don’t mind a good discussion about college football. But please leave the duck digs at home. Giving us Idaho and Washington State???
And getting back to what dawgfan22 asked- Did you guys think BSU would defeat you guys at home last season?
All I saw was purple
Homering
We love hearing from the other side but don’t “homer” us with your opinions. If you spin it with your “best case scenario” for your team and our “worst case”, you won’t find any support here.
You guys better buck up because BSU is gonna be a tough opener. Those fans are going to be liquored up and LOUD!!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
I happen to know about BSU...
…my ex and her family has season tickets. That atmosphere is going to be nuts!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Arizona, yes. That's a team the Dawgs should beat.
ASU falls into that nebulous grouping with Stanford and UCLA as tossups. It’s possible that Oregon State could slide down to join them, or that the UW could climb up and do the same. They all fall in the category of “winnable.”
I don’t expect you to agree, because, somewhat rightfully, you’re going to use 0-12 as your baseline for this season. I’d argue that we assume Willingham was gone prior to last season but Locker still gets hurt, the 2008 Husky team wins a minimum of 3 games, and quite possibly four (WSU, UCLA, ASU, BYU, Stanford were all very winnable).
The 2008 version of the Dawgs were the least motivated and least prepared team I’ve ever seen. Everything associated with the program reflected Willingham’s lack of interest in competing and winning. The man was paranoid, and confused, and completely over his head last season. Worst of all, he stopped caring. Sarkisian doesn’t have to be a genius to be able to get more out of the talent at hand than Willingham ever did. It’s not going to take a complete roster overhaul to get to 6 wins.
Believe it or not, I'm not basing my critiques of you guys on 2008.
2008 was the perfect storm of terrible coaching, injured savior, and mediocre talent on a dejected team huddled together for 12 games. There’s a reason why records don’t roll over to the next season.
The thing is, you guys seem to be under the belief that Chip Kelly as a first-year head coach – with tons and tons of young talent as well as experienced talent rolling over from last year – will be only one win or so better than the Sarkisian administration – which is a new face in the program, of course a first-year head coach, and will admittedly not have very much talent to work with (save for the presence of an ungodly Senior QB.) I just don’t see why you give a very, very strong benefit of the doubt to yourselves but find Oregon a whole two games or so under the expected record. A 7-win season for Oregon would be a massive disappointment. Yikes, even 8 wins would be disappointing too.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
Why are you comparing Oregon and Washington?
I certainly wasn’t.
There are some Husky fans predicting a Duck demise, just like there are some Ducks that are already proclaiming Kelly to be the second coming.
Oregon is set for at least this season and probably next regardless of how good a coach Kelly is. The schedule is favorable this year if the Ducks can take care of business against BSU and Utah. I’d guess the Ducks finish 10-3, because everybody comes to Autzen. At worst, it’s the Sun Bowl, and you’d probably be one of the best teams to ever play in El Paso if that’s the case.
That being said, things have been a little odd in Eugene this offseason. There might not be any real fire, but there sure is a lot of smoke…..And I’m not just talking about players leaving. Kelly was a great offensive coordinator. His duties as a head coach are drastically different, and he won’t get to work to his strengths as much. (Yes, the same applies to Sarkisian)
As for the UW, the first 6 wins are the easy ones, not that I’m predicting 6. You’re really only talking about the middle portion of the conference. It’s the successive three or four that are REALLY hard to come by. Sark has an easier job making a 6 game improvement than Kelly does in making a 2 game improvement. Much easier.
You mentioned Stanford earlier. I really don’t get the hype around them. Yes, Gerhart is good, and yes, Harbaugh has recruited well. For Stanford. Fact is, you’d be disappointed if the Ducks signed any of the past few Cardinal classes. They won five games last season. Two were against the Washington schools. One was against Oregon State, before the phone rang for the Beavers’ annual midseason wake-up call. One was against San Jose State. One was against Arizona. They’re starting a new QB. They’ll be good – for Stanford. It’s all relative. They are still getting credit for a win against USC from three seasons ago. Because they don’t have any other wins worth bleating about.
What do you feel has been odd this offseason?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
What I mean is that the transition has not been seamless.
With the hand-picked selection, you’d think it would be.
You have a former coach (Gray, I believe) badmouthing Kelly to Portland high school coaches at a recent camp. Admittedly, the guy was just fired. But in a fraternity as close-knit as that of college coaching, you don’t burn bridges.
Kelly’s popularity certainly isn’t universal. Maybe it’s because he’s following a legend who was very open and transparent, maybe it’s an east coast/west coast thing, but Kelly is rubbing some people the wrong way. This is what I’m hearing from Oregon fans, not my opnion. It’s likely much ado about nothing, and winning cures all. What was with taking a shot at UW’s spring game, by the way? That came across as very petty, regardless of the audience.
Then there’s the 8 (9?) transfers out of the program. Not guys dismissed for rules violations, or academics, but simply choosing to leave. That’s a lot, especially given that the new head guy has been with the team for a few years now….Maybe it’s all just coincidence.
I have Oregon
At 9-3. I think you guys lose to SC, Cal and either OSU, BSU or ASU. 8-4 is not out of the realm of possibility, but neither is 10-2. I think you will be at least 2 games ahead of us.
You gotta understand that we need something to grasp at. This is a proud team and anything less than 4-5 this year would be a dissappointment.
And FYI, Locker is a RS Jr. This year.
by B Money on Aug 3, 2009 1:08 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Redshirt Junior?
You’re right, my bad. I spaced that one.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
“and will admittedly not have very much talent to work with”
Who admitted that? Sark, or you? I love how you talk about your “young talent” and “experienced talent rolling over” and then go on to say Locker is the only talented guy on our team.
Why don’t you understand that you are on a Husky blog with die-hard Dawg fans who have high expectations for their team? You have high expectations for your Ducks, yet you are telling us we can’t expect 6 wins now that we got rid of our crappy coach.
Without Ty we would’ve beaten Stanford, UCLA, ASU, BYU and WSU last year.
I honestly think we can win 6 games for this year. Stanford is no juggernaut. They’re good, but very beatable. UCLA will probably be worse imo. Some people think Arizona will be good but they have no experience at QB. ASU, same story at QB. Idaho, yeah. WSU, most definitely.
I know you think you’re bringing “reality” to this blog, when really you’re just annoying.
by ChazzReinhold on Aug 3, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
when really you’re just annoying.
I apologize. I won’t come over anymore if I’m being an annoyance. The reason I come over here is to get your guys’ perspective on some things and to sometimes set records straight on what Oregon is and what Oregon isn’t, in the Husky fan’s mind.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
That's fine
if you’re setting us straight on Oregon. But you’re trying to set us straight on UW, we always expect excellence, not Ty nor 200 straight losing seasons will sway us otherwise. We know that we have talent, and that Sark is on top of bringing in alot more. If he’s half the coach he comes off as, we’re in pretty damned good shape.
It’s easy to rag on an 0-12 team, but we know better. I like it when nobody gives us credit, it means we can be the 07’ Stanfords or the 08’ OSU’s. We will knock off at least 2-3 teams we’re not supposed to beat, and 1 of them we’ll be more than 15 point dogs (I’m looking at you LSU, USC and ND). If we don’t, I’ll eat crow for another season. But I’ll be damned if someone is going to come in here and tell me we can’t go 7-5 this year. It’s a longshot, but many others have come up big before us and we can certainly do the same.
and just a side note...
I personally don’t think you’re trying to stir up trouble, but it’s hard to interperate “tone” in a text comment, and quite a few of your comments have come off as smug.
I'm sorry, though I assure you I have not intended to come across as smug.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
I look forward to the days of being a national power again..
but for now, I just want to be better than BYU. I have hated that team for 27 years or so.
"Never retreat, never surrender" - Mark Grant
by wishfulthinking on Jul 31, 2009 8:48 PM PDT reply actions
goshdangit i HATE byu
but i’m extremely biased because i’m a Husky and on a smaller scale Ute fan. Both my teams hate BYU, hahaha
by ChazzReinhold on Jul 31, 2009 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I can understand optimism
but really? six wins? 0 and 12 to 6 and 6? I’ll give you Idaho ( if you lose to UI though, any time I see a UW fan its now “Bow down to Idaho”), and the Apple cup is impossible to predict, but really, LSU? you are seriously predicting that you will beat a team that went 7-5 last year and is not very far away from a national championship? that’s more than purple colored glasses, that’s pure arrogance.
Certainly, Sarkisian is more animated than stiff willy, but is he a better head coach? He might have had success under carroll, but that doesn’t always translate to head coaching abilities (carroll:sark::price:doba). How about you get a few games under his belt before hailing him as the almighty.
Its going to take a lot more than a flashy head coach to fix your problems, not to mention that you are basically staking your season on the ability of locker to play. what happens if locker goes down again?
by WilfredVonCougar on Aug 6, 2009 9:11 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on UW Dawg Pound
Related FanShots on UW Dawg Pound
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
