UW Dawg Pound: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Along The Olentangy for Ohio State Fans!

Grading the game

Quarterback

I thought Jake Locker took over the offensve portion of the game. He was accurate all day but was more impressive to me was the way he made decisions and used the entire field. He looked like a true field general yesterday. I think Idaho's defense was more challenging than we thought it was. They never folded the entire game and gave Jake a good run for the money. Despite that he engineered 42 points without turnovers which isn't too shabby in any game.

Grade A

Running Backs

I thought the Huskies would run the ball more and begin to involve the fullbacks. They didn't run as much as I thought and instead of using the FB's it seems that Johri Fogerson has taken that role of the back who catches the ball out of the backfield. I thought both Polk and Fogerson were solid the entire game. Curtis Shaw got some time int he fourth quarter. These guys moved the chains but I didn't see the long runs I expected which would have tacke don same yardage.

Grade B

Wide Receivers

Locker used to entire field yesterday which allowed all of receivers to lend a hand in this one. I can't remember seeing a drop even though there had to be at least one. What impressed me was the way that all the kids went up for the ball. There were some close ones out there that least years team would have allowed to be intercepted or broken up. Our guys were out there fighting and making athletic plays.

Grade A

Offensive Line

The holes needed to create big playe weren't there this week. When you put up 42 points it is still a good performance but the run blocking was less effective than the previous week which is odd. This group is what it is and we will get a much better idea of where they are when they face an expremely tough defensive front next week

Grade B

Defensive Line

The pass rush wasn't there this week and that gives me some concern. I thought Idaho did a great job of taking away Washington's front four in passing situations. They still shut down the run but i expected Endele to be on his back most of the game. Washington might have gone vanilla stunt wise in this one with USC coming to town this week. Give guy's like Idaho's Lupati credit because I thought he was an excellent player who will go on to play Sunday's. We did have three sacks but the consistent pressure on the QB was out there. Even though we have improved play in the interior DTN didn't break out.

Grade C

Linebackers

The linebackers looked better than average to me for a second week. That being said they haven't played as well as I thought they would yet. Once again it could have been because of the schemes they used on Saturday. Uw controlled the Idaho game all day and they D didn't really give up any big plays.

Grade B

Secondary

Idaho picked up way too many yards through the air. I can't put it all on the secondary because Enderle often had as many as four seconds to throw. It is still a work in progress back there as the coaches continue to experiment to find the right combinations. Trufant and Glenn had significant playing time this week. The defensive backfield is a work in progress and they need more help from the guys up front.

Grade C

Special Teams

Erik Folk was solid with his PAT's but didn't get any FG attempts which is good. The coverage units didn't give up any big plays but they aren't pinning anyone back. The kickoff's are way too shallow in my humble opinion. Mahan was solid and is a great addition. The KO returns haven't yielded much this season. Fogerson is a very capable punt returner. He just makes plays whenever the ball is in his hands.

Grade B

Coaching

The enthusiasm on the sidelines was fun to witness in person. This staff works harder than the players which is just fun to watch. These guys leqd by example and I really like it. From a scheme and play calling perspective they didn't impress me as much as they did last week. Once again with USC coming in next week I am sure that they are saving some stuff on both sides of the ball. They did make some gutzy calls along the way but I don't think they open up the complete bag until next week. I would give the offense an A but the defense is scaring me right now. Lets hope it was the vanilla schemes because if it isn't USC is going to have a field day.

Grade B Plus

0 recs  |  Comment 84 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

More good news:

We’re now officially the lone D1A program in the state.

http://www.spartyandfriends.com/

by thecassino on Sep 13, 2009 9:26 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

I like it!

On the running backs, I think Fogerson needs to run the ball a bit too. If he comes in and becomes what amounts to a third down receiver it won’t be long before defenses start recognizing that. Doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll be able to stop it but it makes sense to keep them guessing.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Fogie

He’s become a great H back and a great talent either in the backfield or blending in well with the receiving unit. Moving him to offense, I’ll admit I didn’t see the point other then RB depth issues. But this kid is lighting it up on offense- what a nice surprise he’s become.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah maybe...

…we can also get the ball to him on a reverse or two.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

James Johnson

The kid just continues to impress and now “The Flea” has become a force again.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

WSwho?

I’m lovin’ it!!!!!!!! Especially since some bonehead coug tried to give me some grief when we came back from Peru into Seattle. I didn’t say a word to the clown but he just kept coming over! I told him as we left that we were going to “kick their butts”. I felt like saying “So you’re degree from WSU allowed you to work at Denny’s?” I decided to be nice and not go there but I should have this guy was a jerk.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

My biggest concern now...

…is the defense. Idaho did have some pretty good receivers and a tall experienced QB but we have got to be able to stop that. We have to find ways to pressure the QB and make plays on the ball in the secondary. If I’m not mistaken these issues have been problems for us the past few years. Somehow I think we’re going to get better with Holt in charge of the defense.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 9:41 AM PDT reply actions  

I thought Idaho looked VERY good!

Idaho’s QB looked impressive. He had great footwork, great QB mechanics, and a very active arm- I would not be surprised to see this guy playing pro ball. I have a hunch that Idaho might have a decent year in the WAC this season. Very solid starting units for a mid major that could move up in the WAC standings.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah I think you're right Crazi...

…as crazy as it seems Idaho may have a pretty solid team.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't care what anyone says though...

…Idaho does NOT get the teams full attention. I’m just glad we played well enough to get the win. If anything the D might have had a let down.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think you're right on

vs. BIG BAD LSU our defense looked pretty good, that is for a few lapses in coverage. But other then that very solid defensive play.

vs. Idaho we played more of a bend but don’t break defense.

Now that I think of it, maybe the defensive strategy was by design. Consider this: If we played Idaho balls to the walls on defense as we did vs. LSU and someone got injured- that would be devastating. Maybe coach Sark and coach Holt are playing “safe” on defense in order to have all our guys healthy for USC coming up. Now I am not sure I am buying into this theory, but it woud make sense.

The last thing we want is a major injury to a starter in the Idaho game. Was coach Holt calling “safe” stuff and staying in base defense vs. Idaho in order to offset the chance of injuries? Do you buy it? I’m not sold on it, but it’s possible.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

To me it's more of a mental...

…let down. The defense appeared to just not be too motivated to play Idaho. Kind of strange though that the offense looked pretty damn good!

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

See below dawgfan...

It is possible we played vanilla so that Carroll doesn’t know what he is getting next saturday.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Defensively we didn't offer USC anything

I have a hunch we looked vanilla vs. Idaho so that we don’t give USC anything when they look at film.

They saw a Husky defense have issues with getting pressure on the QB, they saw a secondary stuggle again, and they saw our LBs bucket stepping out of their stances.

The nice thing about how the defense played vs. Idaho is that it won’t offer USC a good look at our defense. USC has one game film on our defense and that is vs. LSU, who by the way plays in a spread offense- so truthfully USC doesn’t have a clue about our defense vs. the pro style. Way to play vanilla defense coach Holt- you ROCK! WOOF!!!

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Idaho's QB...

looks to be from the same mold as John Friesz.

"Anytime, Anyplace"
"Life is hard, it's harder if you're stupid." - John Wayne

by Husky nav on Sep 13, 2009 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agree

Nathan Emberlie looked like he’s blossomed as a good pocket passing QB. He made a few mistakes, and a few were off the target. But that kid had tremendous footwork and great QB mechanics.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

Offensive Line

They’ve been a pleasant surprise. They played well against LSU and had another strong game against the Potato Heads.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 9:42 AM PDT reply actions  

The Sun must have Given you Heat Stroke JB

NO WAY does the the secondary and defensive line get a C. We got torched yeaterday. No push by the defeseive line, the secondary was playing vanilla fudge. Blitzing was marginal, it seem like IDAHO knew when the Blitzes were coming all day. The linebackers and secondary were taking steps backwards when the ball was hiked in comparsion to LSU game. Defensive coaching staff, the defensive line and secondary get a GRADE: D- . It would been have of F, but the Offense had a great output and we won the game. We looked strong moving the ball. I was happy hell on the out come. The defense has to go into the USC game thinking take no prisoners. BEAT USC !!!
woof… woof… woof… GO DAWGS

by bigdawgdaddy999 on Sep 13, 2009 10:08 AM PDT reply actions  

It was hotter than hell

I think you are grading a little tough. The one thing we saw was the lack of stunts and blitzes. I thinkt hey are saving it for conference play. We will regrade against USC next week and I think you will look at ti differently one way or another.

by John Berkowitz on Sep 13, 2009 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

It was hot there yesterday !!!

I agree with you about the stunt and blitzes. When there was a blitz, the pressure came from the corners. Your probably right about exposing anything on defense until the USC game.
On the offensive line, they did good. The zone blocking happens when we run the ball. That is so the running backs can cut back and there are holes to run to. Remember, IDAHO did alot of blitzing.

by bigdawgdaddy999 on Sep 13, 2009 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think it was a lot of soft zone and a lot of throws to receivers covered by linebackers.

I was encouraged to see few missed tackles in the secondary, but our zone was pretty weak over the middle. A lot of pass completions to guys being covered by LB’s – especially in areas covered by EJ.

The pass rush was surprisingly weak. This shouldn’t be a surprise given the relative youth of our D-Line. This fact mixed with a lack of physical prowess in our secondary is a toxic mix against strong passing teams. ND is the best passing team left on our schedule with Cal showing some good potential. USC is dangerous based on their talent alone, but we are lucky that they still have a raw QB who makes mistakes (if he’s under pressure).

Our offense is going to have to continue to convert 50% of third downs and rack up 450+ yds of offense every week to keep us in all ball games. The good news is that we probably have the best air attack in the pac 10 right now.

Damn, my eyeball tastes good.

by Gekko Mojo on Sep 13, 2009 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Very true

My thinking is that Holt kept it pretty basic, leaving the fancy stuff in the tank for USC and conference play. No need to show any looks that might give our future opponents something to watch on film and gameplan for.

http://www.spartyandfriends.com/

by thecassino on Sep 13, 2009 12:46 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

I thought we looked okay on defense

But we’ve got to come strapped and ready to get it on next saturday. Our secondary is going to become the opposing offense’s target if we don’t get stuff cleaned up back there. I think part of what we saw on saturday was the same stuff we saw vs. LSU, but I thought Idaho’s QB looked very good too.

Idaho’s QB had too much time in the pocket and was able to wait on routes too much. This kills our secondary. To help the secondary we’ve got to put more pressure on the QB so that he can’t get comfortable in his passing game. Our secondary is a work in progress, but the kids are going to eventually figure it all out.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed...

…the pressure was almost non existent. I remember watching some of those plays and thinking “I could make those throws the guy just sits back there forever!”

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Comment about WSU !!!

I was saying Fire Pall Wullf. No way. He needs at least 4 years to implement his system. WSU needs to take baby steps. Remember it takes at least 5 years to develop a program to win some games. Paul Wullf needs to get the same respect TW got at the UW to coach 4 years. Paul Wullf and Cougar fans deserve each other. Oh yah…Cougar Fans , the Cougars Couged It !!!

P.S. LMFAO

by bigdawgdaddy999 on Sep 13, 2009 10:21 AM PDT reply actions  

Wulff is my hero!!!

I love the guy, and hope WSU keeps him around FOREVER!!

"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"

by Lear Pilot on Sep 13, 2009 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Is Wullf on the hot seat yet?

Anywhere else the guy would be very much on the hot seat. How did WSU find themselves down 31-0 to Hawaii before the half?

History tells us that WSU gives coaches at least 4 years, but considering where WSU is right now, are they going to be willing to wait? I’ve heard that WSU might have to wait because they can’t afford to fire him this early in his contract.

I was completely floored when I brother phoned me and told me WSU was down 31-0 before halftime. Way to coug it! WOOF!!!

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Actually it was 35-0 before the half...

…I don’t know if he’s on the hot seat, he apparently was saying a lot of guys were injured but it’s definitely getting warm. I think the temptation is to go after a guy like Akey.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Akey Breaky has it going on!

I don’t want to sound like a broken record, but I think that was the best Idaho team to visit Husky Stadium in a very long while. I’m not saying Idaho will win the WAC nor beat Boise State, but in the upper tier of the WAC is definitely something to ponder.

I was really impressed w/ the Vandies. That Rob Akey is a very good teacher. You could tell because we played a very sound Vandy team the other day.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 7:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

They had....

…some tall athletic receivers. That one kid was local and he’s 6’6". Those guys are pretty hard to defend.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Can they afford...

…to keep him? But remember, he did win the Apple Cup last year! That alone will buy you another year in the Palousy!

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

O line

I think the O line is not very good but on the other hand is playing well above their ability. From my vantage point in the endzone it looks like they are doing alot of misdirection and counters. I dont think in a situation, where it is our o line running a simple play that the D knows is coming, that we are going to win many of those battles.

by mynameisdavid on Sep 13, 2009 10:24 AM PDT reply actions  

I think this is not a well constructed argument.

I’ve said previously that the negativism around the o-line in the preseason was overstated. Decades of college football have shown that experience is more important than “talent” when it comes to predicting o-line success. Collective career starts is the single best predictor of o-line success in college football and I think our o-line is top 3 in the pac 10 in that regard. We should continue to be ok even if our talent/depth is considered subpar. Obviously, an injury to an upperclassmen changes that statistic dramatically, but what we have now should be projected to be pretty decent.

Damn, my eyeball tastes good.

by Gekko Mojo on Sep 13, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm going to take the middle ground.

Meaning, I don’t think they are great, but I don’t think they are bad either. I think you both have good points, and the line falls somewhere in the middle. Just an average offensive line. Having Jake makes an average line, a good line. Fouch would probably spend a lot of time on his backside behind this line. Definitely lots of room for improvement, I don’t think we will be able to force it down the throat of anybody this year, but they will do enough to put up good offensive numbers.

"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"

by Lear Pilot on Sep 13, 2009 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

They held up really well against LSU

I didn’t see anything that they really couldn’t do in that game. I was really surprised to be honest with you, the biggest problem in that game was the two turnovers. Because of that I expected them to dominate against Idaho. I don’t know if they dominated, keep in mind I’m still talking about the offensive line here but they got the job done. It wasn’t like they couldn’t run the ball or pass protect.

The glaring issues, to me, in the Idaho game, were the defensive ones.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm agreeing with Gekko

We churned out 361 total offensive yards vs. a SEC defense. Even folks in the SEC are hard pressed to put up those type of numbers up on LSU. How many times did Jake get sacked? Maybe one, partially due to him accidently sliding into the defender. How many times was he hurried? Jake had a pretty good pocket to operate out of- I only saw him run when we needed a first down (twice), never was he running for his life.

The same could be said in the Idaho game too. The point is, Jake is getting plenty of time in the pocket. He’s not dodging anybody, he’s definitely not running for his life anymore, and we are making a lot of completions. All of which has a direct correlation to how the offensive line protects the passer.

Meanwhile, although we haven’t been rediculously churning out a lot of rushing yards, we are moving the ball on the ground as well as we have looked in the last 3 years. Is that saying something? Probably not, but at least we are gaining positive yardage. And I’ll take Polk gaining 65 yards a game if Locker and company can make offensive plays through the air on any day.

My point is- we are doing the job up front offensively. These guys are working together and it will pay dividends in the win column this season. No it’s not a dominating offensive line, but other then USC’s, who else has that much explosion up front offensively in league? My thoughts of the O line leading up to week 3?

I think we’re pretty good and can get a lot better. How do folks on the O line get rewarded for All Pac 10 status? The voters look at the win column and it’s by word of mouth. No stats to compare an O lineman from another- go out and do your job and if you do it enough, folks will notice. This Dawg fan is noticing! WOOF!!!

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 7:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Huh?...

…we put up 478 yards, though I didn’t include sacks or lost yardage plays.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Okay I am brain farting...

How many total yards to we muster vs. LSU- I know the total was pretty big.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Defensive Blues

The defense looked really bad. Unless they find a way to play faster and make plays, we will get torched next week. We were playing at the same speed as Idaho all day on defense. I was expecting some big plays or even third down stops but they did not come. I hope we were playing down to the competition or next week will not be fun.

by Fighting Husky on Sep 13, 2009 12:31 PM PDT reply actions  

Here’s the thing – people were giving our defense too much credit last week against LSU. Yes, we ‘held’ them to 321 yards while gaining 478 yards ourselves. So we outplayed them for the most part, right? Not so fast…

We dominated the TOP battle, nearly 37 minutes to 23 minutes, but part of that was due to LSU busting some big plays that didn’t require a lot of time. We ran 83 (!) plays, LSU ran 48 plays. We gained 478 yards, which sounds impressive, but then again we had 83 plays to get that yardage, and averaged 5.76 yards per play. That’s pretty good against what is supposed to be a very talented defense. We allowed 321 yards, which sounds good on the surface until you realize that they got that in only 48 plays, or 6.69 yards per play.

Given the above info, is it really so surprising that Idaho gained 412 yards on 63 plays (6.54 average) or that we gained 374 yards on 58 plays (6.45 average)?

Our defense is a work in progress. Not enough pass rush, soft zone coverage, secondary that needs a lot of improvement, etc.

by kirkd on Sep 13, 2009 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Those two turnovers really hurt us.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nice stats!

I think you are right on. The offense is doing a good job, but there is definitely room for improvement. The defense, on the other hand, is looking a little scary. Hopefully they step up and show some improvement this week, or it could be a very long game.

"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"

by Lear Pilot on Sep 14, 2009 5:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

A work in progress...

After the first two games it is pretty clear that this is going to take an influx of talent. The good news is, Sark seems to be able to bring that talent to Montlake. It seems that John’s pre-season thoughts were accurate. The interior lines are ok, but have a ways to go and the DBs are inadequate. But this is a pretty decent start, they played a good team tough and they won the game they were supposed to win. Something we didn’t see much of in past few years. But it is a work in progress – still looking at 4 or 5 wins depending on how worked up they can get for Stanford, Notre Dame, Arizona and Oregon. I look forward to the continued improvement each week!

"Never retreat, never surrender" - Mark Grant

by wishfulthinking on Sep 13, 2009 1:11 PM PDT reply actions  

RBs

Have there been any big running plays out of the backfield, other than Locker?

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:27 PM PDT reply actions  

Sure, there was the 33 yard run by Polk against LSU.

by kirkd on Sep 13, 2009 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well Good hopefully...

…he can bust off some more of those. We need some big plays from the RBs.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Polk looks pretty good. He runs hard, he seems to be hitting the hole with authority and for the most part has shown good field vision. He’s not quite as fast as Curtis Shaw, but he’s fast. I was thinking yesterday about the fact that Polk has a shot at being the #2 all-time rusher at the UW if he stays healthy and progresses as expected. I’d say he has a shot at #1 all-time except that I think Sark will rotated his RB’s enough to make it hard for Polk to get enough carries to pass Nip.

by kirkd on Sep 13, 2009 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Trojans favored by 22...

…GET SOME Huskies!!!!!!! Beat the Trojans!!

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:40 PM PDT reply actions  

As coach Sark says...

Is that all?

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Chinks in the Armor...

…I think there are some and we need to exploit them.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

So far...

I think we are getting the most that can be expected. For the program to return to even close to what we remember, and for some of us that memory is getting dimmer, there are certain things that had to happen.
1. The coaching had to change. Obviously the easiest to do, but nothing was going to happen until that happened. So far at least, we seem to have hit a home run on that piece.
2. The attitude of the players needed to change. That too is happening, thanks to the efforts from part one.
The first two were the easiest to establish.
3. The talent level had to improve. Some of that has happened because TW recruited some very nice skill players his last class. We should also give him some credit for Locker. However, it will be some time before the level can be radically improved. We need a fair amount of patience here. No matter how well they are coached, no matter how hard they work, no matter how much enthusiasm they show, they are still the same guys, and they cannot be All Pac Ten overnight. It will take a few solid years to put the talent level to where it needs to be.
4. Then they need to learn how to win. That will take some winning, and some losing close ones.
5. Lastly, they need to learn to expect to win. USC won last night because they expected too, and so were not the least flustered when it mattered. The DJ Dawgs were much the same. Ohio State on the other hand, at the end when they still were in it, self destructed. For all his talent, Pryor hasnt learned how to win.
Actually, we are fortunate, especially on offense. Jake is the rare player who makes the rest better.
Isnt it awesome to have positive expectations, and excitement again?? I might even buy a few tickets for the first time in about ten years.

by OlyDawgFan on Sep 13, 2009 2:54 PM PDT reply actions  

Yeah you should...

…there is nothing like being there. That LSU game was aWesome! We didn’t win but we played hard and were in the game until the end. I still say if you take away those two turnovers we win.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sark is doing all this right now

Yes I agree we’ve got to be a little patient as Husky fans. I’ve shown a lot of patients with our secodary issues and I think our kids are going to figure it all out sooner rather then later. You don’t see me jumping up and down mad as hell with our secondary. I think we’re okay back there, we just got to learn, pick it up, and go with what we know.

But a HUGE key to helping out an inexperienced secondary is the push of the defensive front. If we can get decent pressure on the opposing QB, then he is going to become flustered, inpatient, over-think stuff, and at times- just get rid of it! All this stuff can only help our young secondary and we’ve got to continue to get that done up front. Meanwhile the youngsters in the secondary have got to pick up the pace a little in learning how to defend in coverage.

I thought for the most part in the LSU game we did a great job in the secondary. We got caught a few times in 3rd down and short, where we were geared to stop the LSU run. Miles caught us in a run stopping alignment a few times in those situations and burned us. But as a defensive coach, who has young talent or inexperienced talent, sometimes you’ve got to gamble.

We’re getting there fellas … it only gets better from here on out.

Go Dawgs! WOOF!!!

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'am patient crazidawg.

I was just giving my relections of the game. Sark and Holt are doing a hell of a job.

by bigdawgdaddy999 on Sep 13, 2009 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Has anyone...

…really analyzed the game and determined if we were just playing vanilla defensively? We could be saving the twists and dogs for $C?

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whether we were playing ‘vanilla’ against Idaho or not, does anyone believe we were playing ‘vanilla’ against LSU? Or to the bigger point, does anyone think that Carroll doesn’t have an excellent idea about the type of defense Holt likes to run?

Let’s not go searching to hard to excuse a mediocre (at best) defense – that’s what it is. We are showing the ability to be pretty good against the run, but pass defense is still a big weakness.

by kirkd on Sep 13, 2009 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why Vanilla?

Not so much so that Carroll can’t see what we are doing, but to keep defensive players healthy. We didn’t blitz Idaho much and without looking back at the game, I’m willing to bet we played a lot of base defense.

Why base defense vs. Idaho? We’ve got USC coming up. Playing more base defense would significantly keep the injury total down. In fact I think we came away from the Idaho game injury-free. vs. Idaho? Win the game and avoid injuries. Plus Carroll only has one game film to look at involving our defense.

Now the secondary is iffy, but it can be helped if we can get some pressure on the opposing QB. We did that very well vs. LSU.

I look back at the LSU game and for the most part our young secondary played pretty dam good! For starters the secondary stepped up and provided run support when LSU’s running game spilled outward. Secondly LSU’s passing game hurt us only twice. Both times it was 3rd and short and Miles caught us in a run stopping defensive alignment and the corners were in man coverage. Other then those two situations I thought our young secondary did a decent job.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 14, 2009 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

You’re going to have to explain to us why you think playing base defense would reduce our chances of injury, because I sure can’t see any reason why that would be true.

by kirkd on Sep 14, 2009 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

I heard...

…that the tackling was better in the secondary. This was an obvious problem against LSU. I think all of this will improve but if a guy is out there playing safety he has to be a good tackler. One of the keys of any good staff is “Is the team getting better”.

On another note: Prince broke his jaw against Tennessee. He’ll be out like 4 weeks.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Slow down boys

It seems like the fans are moving faster than a Sark practice. A lot of experts thought preseason that this was a 2 win team, we can’t become a top 10 team overnight. It takes 3 games to see how the teams are doing, especially when so many teams load up on cupcakes. It will be interesting to see how LSU and Idaho continue to play. If Purdue isn’t any good, then the Ducks are in trouble.

Watching $C, it looks likes we should concentrate on the run and make the young QB beat us. Unfortunately, that was how we approached Idaho. We had 2 position changes in the def backfield and we still don’t know what Batts can do. We continue to get better each week, and we improve during the game. This is foreign territory for our players. Remember, a year ago the offense got a delay of game penalty coming out of a time out.

We will have a game plan to compete with $C, but execution will be the determining factor. The smart money will be on $C, but we will compete, and that will give us a chance.

by dawgdude on Sep 13, 2009 5:36 PM PDT reply actions  

I think we might match up well vs. USC. From what I saw a not-so-polished Ohio State QB made some good throws vs. that USC secondary. I saw plenty of room back there and Locker with his slew of receivers could have a very big day.

Sark knows what Carroll likes to do with his defensive front- so theirs a good chance that Chris Polk and Johri Fogerson could find some ground.

The key on offense is the offensive line. If we can give Locker plenty of time in the pocket [see LSU game], we should move the chains pretty well. The trick will be sticking it in the endzone.

On defense, coach Holt knows nothing about the new USC coordinator. But what USC is doing this year, looks a lot like what USC ran with Sark calling the offense. Either way, I think we can get to the young gun slinger USC QB. Coach Holt knows the personnel very well on the offensive line. So he knows how to defeat it. If we know how to defeat the USC offensive line and get penetration on it, then we might be able to rattle the youngster QB. All of which will make our inexperienced secondary look and play better.

LBs have got to fill the gap, make stops, and handle the underneath routes. I know our secondary is really suspect right now. But I do see the defensive line play as the key to winning on defense vs. USC. Get Barkley rattled and a tad off balance and our secondary will look a whole lot better.

I’m not predicting anything this week so don’t ask.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 13, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Don't forget about the crowd...

…we need to make Husky Stadium ROCK!! I’ve got fantastic new seats on the south upper deck and no one got mad at me. I thought the stadium vs LSU was pretty loud. I’m not saying it was up to par of Nebraska 92 or ? but it was WAY better than recent history!

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

No turnovers!!!!!!!!!

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 13, 2009 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

We may be able to throw against USC.

… but that is not our primary concern. Shutting down their offense is the issue. We’ll have to load the box to neutralize that out-of-this-world rushing attack. This will put our DBs out there with one safety to support them. Barkely may be a frosh, but he can still succeed in that kind of open space, especially when his receivers have significant size/speed advantages. We are going to have to match them score for score and hope for a few breaks. Unfortunately, USC doesn’t make many mistakes. But, who knows, maybe we’ll catch them napping on us. However, with both Holt and Sarkisian on the other side, I have a feeling those boys are going to have plenty of motivation.

Either way, it’ll be fun. If we can hang with them and punch them in the mouth a few times, I’ll be proud.

Damn, my eyeball tastes good.

by Gekko Mojo on Sep 13, 2009 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

How are we going to get pressure on Barkley?

We couldn’t even get pressure on Idaho’s QB. As much as I’d love to see a win this week, I just don’t see us being able to go toe to toe with USC yet.

"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"

by Lear Pilot on Sep 14, 2009 5:13 AM PDT up reply actions  

They don't wear red capes...

…we need to realize that and find a way to get it done. If I was the coach I might use the LSU game as motivation.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 14, 2009 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

technically, they do

trojans and all, you know.

"Never retreat, never surrender" - Mark Grant

by wishfulthinking on Sep 14, 2009 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Lear...

We didn’t blitz Idaho. We played base defense almost the entire game. The idea surrounding the Idaho game was to win and stay injury-free. Mission accomplished!

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Sep 14, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

We blitzed Idaho. We probably only blitzed 20% of the time, but we blitzed them. We just didn’t get much pressure when we blitzed…

by kirkd on Sep 14, 2009 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thoughts on Idaho and USC...

Let me start off by saying that I dont care what our record has been over the past 16 games, when you play a team you think to be inferior, you will not give it your all. You can give me the 0-15 remark all day and night until your blue in the face but we did not take them seriously…not anywhere near the intensity of LSU. That being said, we looked pedistrian on Defense.

Againist Idaho we ran a lot of D-Line pass stunts. They were poorly executed and looked slow. The D-linemen were not helping each other. Typically when you run a stunt, lets say End first Tackle around, the end should help the tackle by ripping in front of the tackle to shield him blocking the interior D-linemen. Most schools will teach you to grab the O-linemen and pull him with you so that he can not come off and get set on his pass protection. This is how you help each other…I say NONE of that. Guys were ripping with no authority and linemen were not confused or out of position when re-engaging. It was almost pathetic to watch. On top of the fact that we looked mediocre up front lets not completely discount Idaho’s O-Line which boasts 4 Seniors and a legitimate first day pick at Guard. They were a seasoned bunch. Secondary is, well, hard to stomach at times. I think since we dont have the type of athletes in the Def Back field Holt is playing everything in front. He would rather give up the 5 yard pass play and keep the ball in front of his guys then allow the back breaking deep pass. Even LSU had to throw the short stuff and make guys (or a guy) miss which is what they want (minus the missed tackle!). With the personnel they have right now they are going to be a bend but dont break Defense. I think we need to accept this and hope it works because we dont have the guys yet…time gentlemen, we will get there. Linebackers looked good, nothing to crazy. Just a solid performance. Missed INT in the first half are the kind of plays we NEED from them going forward though. Againist Idaho we can sit back and say, “oh well not a big deal, still won by 20” but those are the momentum killing, creating plays that we HAVE To have going forward.

Offensively we looked good. Locker is getting hit way to much but his pocket pressense is awesome. He stays in there and makes the throw despite getting hit. Recievers are making plays and getting open for the most part. Johnson is truly a star in the making. Kearse, Goodwin, Aguliar, J. Polk, and Fogerson are all solid WR’s who give us a lot of options. Middleton still needs to hit the weight room. Looks like he still has a little bit of baby fat and he needs to be a work out warrior. He can catch but his blocking is still suspect. O-Line is playing better than expected but not yet a top half of the PAC 10 O-line. Locker gets hit to much in pass protection. Run blocking they look good but I am not seeing them getting to the second level at a good rate. They are making good 1st level blocks and creating holes but the are lacking the 2nd and 3rd level blocks that help RB’s take it to the house. Speaking of RB’s I would disagree with posters who think that they are hitting the hole hard. They are young and still tenative for the most part. C. Polk is getting through the line but not making the 2nd-3rd level guys miss. He really needs to work on a "Go-To’ move. Once he gets there you notice a hesitation that is allowing them to get 3-5 yards a carry but not the big time plays that you need. We still havent had a run over 20 yards (correct me if I’m wrong, there may have been one in the first half againist LSU..losing my mind). We need a solid running game with big plays againist better teams. So far the offense has been the strong point this year but its still young.

USC…they are again another great team. We have the advantage of our coaches knowing them personally. They know how each one of those guys operates. That is a huge advantage. Also Taylor Mays may not play and if he does he will be working with a bum knee…never good for a Safety. Our D-Linemen HAVE to get pressure on the young QB and let them know they are there. I read a book called Boys will be Boys about the Cowboys rise to fame during the 80’s and 90’s. They had a philosophy that no matter what they would always touch the quarterback. Obviously they would hit him when they had the chance, but even when he had thrown the ball they would go up and touch/tap him just to let them know that they were there. Over the course of a game that can mentally wear on a QB. We need Barkley to know that if he takes one more second in the pocket, he’s going down.

Either way it feels good to get the monkey off our back but we still have a lot of football to play!

by bigdave967 on Sep 14, 2009 6:30 AM PDT reply actions  

Good post!...lot's of info!

I remember at least one pass that Idaho should have converted into a TD and there could have been two. Not many teams are going to miss those in the future, we have to start covering better. I wonder how much nickel we played if any? I’d like to see what Batts can do back there but I don’t watch the game closely enough from the stands to see all the details.

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 14, 2009 7:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Some comments...
Speaking of RB’s I would disagree with posters who think that they are hitting the hole hard. They are young and still tenative for the most part. C. Polk is getting through the line but not making the 2nd-3rd level guys miss. He really needs to work on a "Go-To’ move. Once he gets there you notice a hesitation that is allowing them to get 3-5 yards a carry but not the big time plays that you need. We still havent had a run over 20 yards (correct me if I’m wrong, there may have been one in the first half againist LSU..losing my mind). We need a solid running game with big plays againist better teams. So far the offense has been the strong point this year but its still young.

This got me thinking that maybe we should get some reps to Bronson and that other tailback? Fogerson is apparently the number two back and I think it’s great what he’s doing as a third down back/WR but why not give him some reps running the ball?

Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!

by dawgfan22 on Sep 14, 2009 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions  

I definitely agree with that.

We needed to get more back ups in againist Idaho. Not only was the game pretty much in hand once Shaw came in at around the 7 minute mark but they deserve the time. We needed to put them away and have back ups in starting the 4th quarter. Bronson, Batts, Drew Schafer, Boyce are all guys that should have seen the field. Either way the real season starts this week.

by bigdave967 on Sep 14, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

I thought I heard Batts was ill for the game. Bronson looked good last spring, but he is still eligible to red shirt.

by dawgdude on Sep 14, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good point about Bronson.

Didnt hear Batts was ill. That would make sense.

by bigdave967 on Sep 14, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Conference Games

There were a lot of drops by Idaho that if they made them, it could have been a lot closer. Thats what makes them Idaho though. From here on out teams wont make that many small mistakes.

Also, Idaho tie the noose around their own necks with all those penalties. We can rely on those mistakes going forward.

by bigdave967 on Sep 14, 2009 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, compared to last year Polk was hitting the hole a lot harder.

by kirkd on Sep 14, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

True

but do you really want to compare this year to last…

by bigdave967 on Sep 14, 2009 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sure I do – we want to see improvement right? Polk looks a lot better this year, which is a good sign to me that this staff is doing some things right.

by kirkd on Sep 14, 2009 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Improvement

O’ Dea High School would have looked like an improvement if they took the field. We were 0-12 and horrible. Anything above JV High School football would have been an upgrade. The whole team, not necessarily just Polk, are vastly improved but I still see things that are holding us back from taking the next step. Only time will fix the problems that we had. Playing in games and getting that experience. Trust me when I say that Polk not playing last year was a HUGE blessing in disguise and we are going to be a very upset fan base in 2 years when Middleton, Kearse, Bruns, Ta’ Amu, Everette Thompson leave us because they didnt red-shirt.

by bigdave967 on Sep 15, 2009 6:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Trust me when I say that Polk not playing last year was a HUGE blessing in disguise and we are going to be a very upset fan base in 2 years when Middleton, Kearse, Bruns, Ta’ Amu, Everette Thompson leave us because they didnt red-shirt.

I agree. But we better get used to it – Sark clearly has brought with him the philosophy from USC, which is if a guy can contribute as a true frosh, he plays. The old days of redshirting your entire freshman class are gone…

by kirkd on Sep 15, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

And I agree if they are physically superior to the guy you already have

…and when Sark got here the upperclass cupboard was bare at a lot of positions. We need young guys to play but those guys last year were wasted. None of them made a difference on our record for the better.

I am not a huge fan of true freshmen playing but not againist it if the guy is a beast. Typically skill position guys on offense can do this before linemen and I think you will notice that if you look at USC and who plays as a true freshmen. Typically, RB’s, WR’s and now one QB. Positions that require skill as opposed to technique you can let a guy play on ability alone and get production. Linemen are a different breed IMO.

by bigdave967 on Sep 15, 2009 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

True, but it’ll be interesting to see how much different (if at all) things are in 3 years. Quality depth will presumably be better, but so will the recruits.

I wish we’d been able to redshirt Tokolahi, Pulu and Crichton…

by kirkd on Sep 15, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the UW Dawg Pound an unofficial site for Washington Husky fans.
Start posting about the Huskies »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
My Pac 10 picks and why
Small
Out of Town Game Watch Thread...
Rainer_small
RECRUITING SPACE LEFT
Small
FSN Northwest: Will they show the BYU game?
New_picture_small
Gekko's Three-Putt
Scnw_logo_small
New Confrence Alignment Dynasty for 360
Learjet31a_1_jpg_small
The 2010 Husky Football Season as seen from 45,000'
Rainbow_small
Narrative of Husky Stadium remodel
Small
BYU Road Trip
Rainbow_small
Interesting comment from Locker on ESPN.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Virginia Tech quarterback Tyrod Taylor celebrates with the crowd in the final moments of the fourth quarter of an NCAA football game against Tennessee Sunday, Dec. 13, 2009 in Atlanta.  (AP Photo/John Bazemore)

Week 1 College Football Buffet: Previewing Every Game So You Know Which To Consume

Photo +19 updates

QB Jeremiah Masoli Elgible To Play Immediately After Winning Appeal

North Carolina football coach Butch Davis responds to questions during NCAA media day in Chapel Hill, N.C., Thursday, Aug. 12, 2010. (AP Photo/Gerry Broome) +8 updates

UNC Announces It Will Be Without 12 Players In Opener As Investigation Continues

More from SBNation.com >


Managers

1959_huskies_small John Berkowitz

Dubs_small thecassino