The Monday Morning Wash
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 7:00 AM PDT
Email
PrintBig brother comes to town this weekend in the form of the USC Trojans. I have watched USC two weeks in a row and I think they have the stuff national champions are made of. Saturdays win over tOSU was just a classic.
As far as UW is concerned I think they were holding back schemes on both sides of the ball on Saturday. Idaho was better than most thought. Nathan Enderle has a decent arm and good footwork. When you give him four seconds to throw underneath he is going to do something positive with it.
Next weeks game will be closer than most people think. UW always gets up to play the Trojans so motivation won't be much a of a factor. The coaches are also going to unleash everything they have because it is the conference opener. USC just may be a little beat up after playing tOSU. That was a very physical game so UW might just be getting them at a better than usual time. Matt Barkley and Taylor Mays are listed as probable after getting dinged up.
Thanks!
Kate and I want to thank T-Dawg, Ordawg, Sundodger, T90Dawg, Kim Grinolds, Scott Eklund, and all the other great people who hosted us this weekend at their tailgate parties. We had a fantastic time!
Pac 10 Round Up
USC 18 OSU 15
This game was an instant classic from start to finish. The younger Trojans got a baptism in the fire of Columbus and came out with a win after being dominated by the tOSU defense most of the night. That last drive to finish out the game was pure and vintage USC. How many times have we seen them do that during the reign of Pete Carroll?
Wake Forest 24 Stanford 17
Tough to travel 3000 miles and win a football game. Stanford's depth and one dimensionalism was exposed in this one. SJSU is next.
Oregon 38 Purdue 36
This was a wire to wire track meet that was decided by a missed PAT and a too close to call two point conversion. Nice rebound game by the Ducks but the schedule begins to really heat up.
Hawaii 38 WSU 20
This one isn't as close as the score appears since Hawaii was up 35-0 at one point in the first half. Coug fans will console themselves with a win in the second half. Coug realists realize that Wulff is not the guy.
Arizona 34 Northern Arizona 17
Not enough points by the Wildcat offense and too many points given up to a Big Sky team. This game was closer than you think. Iowa will expose the Cats next week.
Oregon State 23 UNLV 21
Experts thought this one would be closer than most thought and it was. UNLV beat the spread and OSU is lucky to come out with a last second win.
California 59 Eastern Washington 7
The Bears dominated all day as expected. No surprises here except they didn't go over 60 points.
UCLA 19 Tennessee 15
This is a big win for Rick Neuheisel and the Pac on the road. Nothing to write home about. Tennessee was sloppy and UCLA cashed in on FG's. Not a real pretty game. Kevin Prince is out for at least four weeks with a broken jaw and the rapid decline of the Bruins due to QB depth arrives earlier this season.
Pac Ten Power Ratings
USC has a good shot to run the table this year but they arrive at Husky Stadium a little beat up and that is good news for Washington. How good is it? Well perhaps UW is still in the game through the fourth quarter with the help of Jake Locker. After two weeks I am pretty sure it is a free for all after USC and Cal...that being said those two teams may not come out of the conference schedule unscathed. WSU is the only team in the conference that really doesn't have a chance this season. Getting better week to week is the key to finishing strong in the conference in 2009.
1. Southern Cal...You win in Columbus early and you just might go all the way. Next up is UW.
2. California...The Bears need to play somebody good. Next up is Minnesota and they aren't very good.
3. Oregon State...2-0 start for the Beav's and we all know they get better every week. Next up is Cincinnatti at home. We will find out how real OSU is when they face the Bearcats.
4. Arizona...2-0 but I am not buying in. Stop Grigsby and you stop Arizona. Iowa is up next and UA has to be a less one dimensional to beat them.
5. Washington...Did UW hold back schemes against Idaho? We find out when USC comes to town.
6. UCLA...The Bruins are 2-0 and it is always nice to win in Knoxville but the QB fromerly lnown as Prince is out for four or more weeks which means the Bruins are in early trouble because of limited QB depth.
7. Stanford...The holes are exposed. Lets see how they do against scrappy SJSU which has a history of upsetting the Tree. Stanford can't afford many more injuries.
8. ASU...LA-Monroe is up next after an early bye week.
9. Oregon...A little redemption at home against an average Purdue team. The Oregon defense isn't up to snuff this season. Purdue's defense is similar to a sieve.
10. Washington State...Next loss is SMU. I think it is very doubtful that Wulff makes it twelve games.
Pac Ten Offensive Player of the Week
TB Jacquizz Ridgers OSU...166 yards and a touchdown on 26 carries. He also had 65 receiving yards on 10 receptions.
Pac Ten Defensive Player of the Week
USC Defense...Held Ohio State to 15 points at home!
Husky Offensive Player of the Week
QB Jake Locker was 17 for 25 for 253 yards and three touchdowns.
Husky Defensive Player of the Week
LB Mason Foster had a long interception return to lead a unit that had mixed results this week.
105 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
GO DAWGS
I love Wulff, may he and Sterks stay at WSU a long time. I was impressed by what Akey’s done at Idaho, i think they could take WSU, might Akey return to WSU in 2 years?
We spent game day on the field, a neighbor got us sideline passes as a gift, so it was different for us. Wouldn’t want to make a habit of it, view is limited, but to answer the Dman neggies, we STOOD and yelled all day. The field is definitely louder, plus it was great to see and hear the student section. The players were very enthusiastic, esp when Mason intcpted the ball, and Kearse, Goodwin had their long pass completions and not forgetting johri"s TD. Often we would have to look at big screen to see what happened during play, but still all in all, a very fun time.
johnB, I agree with you, the Dawgs held a few things back. It seemed to me they played a lot of kids against Idaho to check out who was going to step up. Ikehara at guard, Aldrich, Pulu and Crichton, not much Taamu this game. With the injury to Matthews along with D Jones, the game time will only help the youngsters although for the most part they were neutralized.
I hope we play better in pass defense, but think the Trojans won’t cover the 22 points, hope Barkley and Mays are out, but will have to wait and see. Each coaches probables are different.
One criticism was Sark not pulling Locker at 9 minute point, game was over and all Jake did was hand off to Shaw, something Fouch could have easily done. Also, Akey had already pulled his starting QB Enderle by then. I will give Sark a pass for this one as a rookie HC. The Sark extended family was there to congratulate him after the game for his first (of many ) victories.
Thanks for the Report prrbrr....
…I’ve wondered how that would be watching from the sidelines. On Locker I think Sark may just want to get him as many reps as possible. This is a new offense and Fouch got a ton of playing time last year, I was thinking the same thing though. I was disappointed in that last Idaho drive where they scored a late TD, I know it was our 2s and 3s, but still. No doubt Idaho knew the subs were in too! I hope Darrion Jones is back for $C and ditto for Mathews, did he play against Idaho?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Anytime John
Maybe you’ll find a reason to get to Tempe. It was good to see you and Kate. A lot of L’s under the bridge since we finally met in Hawai’i when we thought Ty was gone.
It sure seems like Holt held the D back for most of the game. They did run some stunts and different coverages. Foster’s pick comes to mind.
Tom (T dawg) hosts a great tailgate.
Jack
Purdue should have won...
too many mistakes, could be due to the new staff. But they did cover, and I did break even on my bets thanks to them. Bolden will be a star before his PU career is over.
- UCLA is in trouble. Prince is young but promising and I don’t see a whole lot of options behind him.
- I think we could beat SC (albeit 1 out of 7/8 times). Carrol teams tend to get big win hangover. Not so much overlooking, but when you beat tOSU at home, it’s tough to get up for (formerly) hapless UW on the road.
- Here’s hoping Furd comes out of SJSU a little banged up. Our run D looks passable, and our LB corps looks good and should be able to contain Gerhart/Luck.
- Oregon can’t put together a complete team. Last week it was the offense, this week the defense. They’ll need to pick up the pace real quick if they hope to get to 5 wins in the conference.
Sorry I couldn’t manage to meet up with you and Kent. It’s (insert random “important” family obligation here) season. Hopefully if you’re in town again this year we’ll get together.
Absolutely
Well, I think USC is definitely coming to town at the right time after the right result against OSU. I think had OSU laid down it would have given them too much confidence or had OSU beaten them it would have fired up USC too much. Banged up or not USC will come to play, Pete Carroll always puts a good lineup out there, injuries or not. I am excited, conference play always brings the best out of those who work hard.
GO DAWGS!
by ReturnOfTheDawgs on Sep 14, 2009 7:57 AM PDT reply actions
Anybody check Miller's power rankings?
He’s got the Dawgs at 9th. One of you Millerpologists please explain this to me
Miller
All that matters is the wins and losses. Beating Idaho isn’t going to blow anyone’s socks off. Way too many yards given up for Ted to jump on the bandwagon.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 8:07 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
And Oregon beating Purdue IS blowing his socks off?
by ChazzReinhold on Sep 14, 2009 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions
At least Condotta has UO 9th
Who cares about Oregon?
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 12:35 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Hmmmm
Well at least Miller’s got the gut to nationally announce that he is “this close to putting the Trojans on upset alert.” Ballsey….
by ReturnOfTheDawgs on Sep 14, 2009 8:21 AM PDT reply actions
by the way...this is also from Ted's blog...
“The Ducks were outgained 453-350 but probably won’t apologize after all they’ve been through over the past 10 days.” What exactly does “all they’ve been through” mean??? It seems like the country (or just Ted Miller) has found a soft spot in their hearts for Oregon. Poor kids……..
by ReturnOfTheDawgs on Sep 14, 2009 8:29 AM PDT reply actions
Probably Just...
…the Blount thing and the horrible game they played on the road at Boise.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
The Yucks
Does this mean they’re out of the NC race!?…;O)
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
ASU's Schedule
What a frikken joke! I hope we NEVER lower ourselves to that level!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
OK I stand corrected...
…they do play Georgia but why play two cupcakes?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Well...
I heard some scuttle butt on Saturday that Eastern and Portland State are possibilities for the future.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 12:21 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I don't think we'll do that...
…the DAWGS pride themselves on NOT playing teams like Portland State and Eastern Washington.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
That better not happen
There are just 4 teams that have never played a 1AA team and the UW is one of them. And it’s something Im proud of.
http://www.spartyandfriends.com/
by thecassino on Sep 14, 2009 10:26 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Couldn't agree more
There are plenty of teams like Idaho, San Jose State, San Diego State, UNLV, Fresno State, and those are all west coast schools, I think Utah State might even be a FBS school?
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Between schools like Idaho, San Jose State, San Diego State, Utah State and New Mexico State (not to mention teams in other parts of the country like the MAC & Conference USA) I see no reason we’d need to stoop to scheduling a Division 1-AA team to get an easy win on the schedule.
I forgot about the New Mexico schools
There are plenty of FBS powderpuffs to play.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Can anyone send a link ...
that shows the Huskies non-conference schedule in coming years. I haven’t been able to locate one. thanks for the help.
"Never retreat, never surrender" - Mark Grant
by wishfulthinking on Sep 14, 2009 8:52 AM PDT reply actions
Here's one...
http://www.gohuskies.com/sports/m-footbl/wash-m-footbl-futurescheds.html
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
thanks!
"Never retreat, never surrender" - Mark Grant
by wishfulthinking on Sep 14, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions
You're welcome, John.
It was good to meet you. You and Kate are welcome at the Woofmobile any games that you can make. Also good to meet you, too, T9O.
The best thing, of course, was the win. Finally. I used to think that beating Oregon State and Cal was part of my birthright. I had no idea how bad things could actually get, and that beating Idaho was a cause for minor celebration.
I sure hope Idaho’s QB is as good as the Dawgs’ made him look. And I hope that Holt comes up with a better defense than a linebacker on a tight end in man coverage running down the middle of the field. Idaho probably threw for a 100 yards on that simple little play.
The Dawgs need to be able to run the ball against USC. The Trojans handled a mobile QB well against OSU. Jake is a much better passer than Pryor, but he’s still going to need some help in keeping USC’s defense honest.
Pryor
I thought he looked lost out there. I only watched a little of the game though. I wish I would have gotten more looks of the $C QB.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
I think Pryor is a great athlete.
But he’s not a good QB when he faces a team with the speed USC has.
Pryor makes plays in the passing game based on his running ability, either with run/pass option plays, or simply with the threat of him running. Kind of like Locker as a freshman. Once USC eliminated the threat of him running and made him one-dimensional, Ohio State was done. Their offense became non-existant, with nothing other than the hope of a big play.
The Dawgs need some semblance of balance to even have a chance.
Barkley was solid, and in the context of the situation, almost spectacular. He grew up on that last drive. It might be the springboard that slows the game down for him from here on out. After the game, when he was being interviewed, you could tell that the adrenaline and nerves of the situation caught up to him.
He’s got a strong arm, and he’s accurate. The team really seems to like him. The only thing that nobody knows about him is how he plays with pain (I’m sure he’s tough enough, but it might be the only glimmer of hope the conference has for the next three seasons). The Dawgs need to hit him, and get him thinking about that shoulder.
You bet...the Woofmobile is just awesome!
I really suspect we were holding quite a bit back after looking at the replay. We played a lot of kids and kept it pretty vanilla.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 12:15 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
vanilla
If we were playing “vanilla” on Saturday, then it was because they didn’t feel confident expanding the defensive playbook with all the new kids they were rotating in.
I don’t believe for a second that there were holding stuff back in anticipation of USC. First of all, did we play vanilla against LSU? Secondly, does anyone think that Pete Carroll doesn’t have a pretty good idea of what Nick Holt’s defenses are all about?
I see where you are coming from.
But even during the game it looked pretty vanilla, I can’t tell you why they played that way, just that they did. I do think a small part of it was not showing USC everything they have, and keeping it simple for some of the younger players. But that was the most vanilla defense I’ve seen in a while.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Vanilla
Fellas don’t you get it? We played a vanilla defense to make sure we don’t lose anybody to an injury w/ USC coming up. The very last thing we need is to get a defensive kid hurt and has to sit out the USC game. That’s the reason we played vanilla.
Can you imagine if we lost one of our LBs for the USC game because he got hurt vs. freakin’ Idaho? The vanilla base defense was installed to have every defender geared and strapped up for SC.
All I saw was purple
But don't you think it's interesting...
…that from my perspective anyway, the offense really appeared to click. The defense didn’t, but having said that they did stop the run well. The exception there was when the subs came in and they started to run the ball effectively. Just an observation which may not mean much. Some one said earlier Holt may have wanted to just keep everything in front of him and make Idaho drive all the way down field and score. It worked, the game was salted away and then Idaho made a late score. I’m tellin ya guys, if the number one defense is in on that last drive, Idaho doesn’t score a TD!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
No, actually I don't get it.
What does our defensive scheme have to do with avoiding injuries? Don’t our players still have to hit people, tackle people, block people? I don’t see any correlation between defensive play calling and injuries. Blitzing doesn’t increase a players chance of getting hurt, neither does stunting, or faking blitzes, or disguising coverages. Where do you get this stuff??
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
It's very simple
In base defense each member of the defense has an assignment. Linemen don’t stunt and noboby blitzes.
What happens when you stunt or blitz Lear? Better yet what could happen? Let’s suppose you are called to knife (stunt). In a situation where you are knifing in, it is possible that your body could be contorted due to the blocking leverage. Being contorted in football is NEVER good- theirs always a very good chance that serious injury can occur.
What happens if you are assigned to blitz the B gap and you don’t know it, but their is a pulling guard about to enter the gap you are assigned to blitz. Both players are hitting the gap at full throttle, but they don’t see each other. Now the blitzing linebacker is not prepared to take on someone he can’t see. Most often when you are called to blitz, you are in a stand-up pedal to the medal mode. Not seeing oncoming traffic could get legs and feet twisted- thus injury could result.
Base defense translates to assignment defense. Not so much attacking involved. Anytime you attack, you are more inclined to see more injuries. Think about it. Let’s say you are in heavy traffic heading home with multiple lanes, on coming traffic, cars and trucks everywhere. We’ve all been in this situation before where traffic is a nightmare and an accident is just around the corner. Question: how do you avoid accidents in those driving conditions? It’s quite obvious you don’t floor it for petes sake. You go with the flow of the traffic.
Base defense and an attacking defense is cut from the same concept. In base you have an assignment and you anchor down. The only way you are going to get injured when you are anchoring down is if someone rolls over your back leg.
And to answer your question Lear- yes our players still have to hit people, tackle people, and block people. That stuff is not going to get anyone hurt. Injuries occur when your body gets contorted or when leges get bent backward, or twisted. I think it’s obvious you’ve never played football. That’s okay, I’m here to help :)
All I saw was purple
"That stuff is not going to get anyone hurt."
Try telling that to Jake Locker.
I call BS, this is football, scheme has extremely little effect on injury. Instead of arguing like usual, let’s put it to a vote. How many people think playing a vanilla defensive scheme will protect our players from injury?
The current tally 1 agrees, 2 disagree.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Stick to track Lear
Because it is obvious you’ve never played football.
And you’re giving me Jake Locker??? Dude, where the hell are you from? You just gave me argumentative material to back my argument even more fella.
When Jake is comfy and cousy in the pocket, their is very little chance the guy can sustain injury. But when he is wheeling and dealing as does blitzing and stunting, he is more suspect to the chance of injury. Locker’s been hurt twice in his young Husky career- RIGHT? Both times he was pushing the envelope. If the cat stays in the pocket like a “normal” QB does, then chances are he wouldn’t have sustained those injuries.
Lear how about you line up with the Husky scout team sometime. I’d like to see you play base defense as one of our LBs. In base- if you get a run read you put your anchor foot in the gap and make your reads. Then I want to see coach Holt send you on a blitz through the B gap, just so you know exactly how distorted your body can get. Bodies flying everywhere. In base you close your gap, read, and fill.
Note to kirkd: I heard we stunted 12%- that’s nothing to brag about nor nothing to write home about.
Playing base cannot prevent injuries, but if you stick with base rather then taking the bull by the horns, then you might have a better chance of staying healthy. That is all I am saying fellas. Do we really want to play balls to the walls vs. freakin’ Idaho when we’ve got all world USC at our doorstep this upcoming weekend? Think about it. I’m sure staying fresh and keeping kids out of the training office this past weekend had crossed both Sark and Holt’s minds.
We’re cool Lear … but stick to track (I’m kidding of course).
All I saw was purple
Note to kirkd: I heard we stunted 12%- that’s nothing to brag about nor nothing to write home about.
That figure came from someone charting only the first half. Chart the whole game and I think the percentages are closer to 20%.
Playing base cannot prevent injuries, but if you stick with base rather then taking the bull by the horns, then you might have a better chance of staying healthy. That is all I am saying fellas.
Nope. Still not buying it. You cite Locker sticking in the pocket all cozy as having little chance of injury – yeah, right. Until a LB blitzing from the blindside takes him out hard, or a DE shoves an OT into the side of Locker’s knee, or a DT gets close enough to him that Jake’s hand hits his helmet on his follow-through.
There’s simply waaaaay too many variables at play in any one point in the game to think that a base defense is more “safe” from an injury perspective than going with more exotic blitzes and stunts.
This is jock straps ... not astro physics!
C’mon kirkd are you kidding? When you blitz you are not in a position to defend yourself. You are going 100 miles per hour, running upright- thru tiny space, where you have 305 lbs. O linemen that you are trying to squeeze thru. Not to mention but you have big ugly D tackles not even on a whim looking out for your best interest. There is a lot of serious beef in there and you are trying to go thru it all w/ blazing speed. As a defender you position your body all the time to either dish out the blow or take the blow. But when you are in an all-out blitz, your body is exposed to serious contact.
Why is it so difficult for you and Lear to comprehend this? All I am saying again fellas is that when you play base defense (defensive front) you have assignments. You anchor your gap, read blocking leverage, and either fill or pursue. Not a helluva lot can go wrong in regards to being exposed to injury. But if the defense increases the phyicality, i.e. blitz or stunt of the game, you have a higher chance of being exposed to injury.
Take for instance the Ohio State/USC game. I’m going to go out on a limb and say Pete Carroll thru everything but the kitchen sink at Terrell Prior and the Buckeye offense. Have you seen their injury report? Meanwhile we played a conservative base defense for the majority of the game and our injury report is all good. We are fresh for the clash with USC- not so much for USC however.
Why did Holt go mostly with a base defense vs. Idaho? hmmm … logic tells me:
1) To ensure we have everybody injury-free for the USC game.
2) To increase depth w/ playing time offered to the No.2s
3) Don’t give Carroll anymore looks then he needs. Currently w/ playing mainly base defense, Carroll can only spy the LSU game.
This isn’t rocket science fellas. It’s all about strategy. Again, do we really want to go balls to the walls vs. Idaho? Or do we want to use that game for the reasons stated above? Again the objective of the Idaho game was to get a WIN. What do we prove by kicking their butts 33-0? Just grab the win and stay fresh and healthy. Not rocket science fellas…
All I saw was purple
Ah, you’re right – when the D-linemen with 1-gap responsibility are shooting to get into the backfield in a base dfense, they aren’t being contorted by the O-linemen trying to block them. When the LB’s in a base scheme read a running play and shoot their gaps, they are taking it nice and slow in comparison to a called blitz.
You’re right crazi – it ain’t rocket science. Why you keep on with this line of logic is beyond me, because it’s all a bunch of BS.
Why were there more injuries in the USC-Ohio State game? First off, luck has a big part in when injuries happen or don’t happen. Secondly, USC was playing a faster, bigger, more physical team in Ohio State than the UW was in Idaho, meaning the collisions weren’t as violent in general.
Of your 3 points, only #2 makes any sense.
Don’t give Carroll any more looks than necessary? Right, because Pete has no idea what Holt likes to do on defense after working with him for so many years.
Shootin' the gaps
kirkd- when a LB shoots a gap he is in more of a controlled running position in regards to kinesiology. His aiming point is not deep in the pocket, where he rakes down on a quarterback. He knows going in, that the impact is going to occur on the L.O.S. But when you blitz, many times a blitzing LB doesn’t really know where the contact is going to be reached. It could be an immediate impact or it could be that he gives chase. BIG pyschologial difference.
And I knew you were going to throw “playing a faster, bigger, more physical team in Ohio State” at me. But that is the beautty of it kirkd. Guys get up for those big games, those games are showcase games for the players and coaches. Idaho isn’t! You want to bring it every time in those big games. But you play more of a conservative style defense vs. mid majors for all the reason I provided you earlier.
If you are such a brainiac, then why don’t you provide a clearer picture as to why we went vanilla. Both you and Lear must have it out for me. You argue, but you don’t provide a thorough explanation. I did. Am I wrong? I could be, but if you look at the three reasons I provided, from Sark and Holt’s perspective- you may come to a conclusion that playing more of a conservative approach could lesson the possibilities of sustaining injuries leading up to the BIG GAME, which you want to throw everything out in order to win the showcase game.
All I saw was purple
If you are such a brainiac, then why don’t you provide a clearer picture as to why we went vanilla. Both you and Lear must have it out for me. You argue, but you don’t provide a thorough explanation.
I have provided it, many times. To reiterate:
To the extent that we were playing “vanilla”, it was because Holt was rotating in a lot of backups, and he didn’t have enough confidence in their knowledge of the defense to run the more complex schemes.
And I knew you were going to throw "playing a faster, bigger, more physical team in Ohio State" at me. But that is the beautty of it kirkd. Guys get up for those big games, those games are showcase games for the players and coaches. Idaho isn’t! You want to bring it every time in those big games. But you play more of a conservative style defense vs. mid majors for all the reason I provided you earlier.
Funny, all I’ve ever heard up to this point is how to avoid injuries in football, you need to play fast and loose and not conservative, that when you’re not going 100% is when you’re more likely to get injured.
It’s simple physics crazi – bigger & faster players = more energy in the collisions, and thus more potential for injury as a result.
There are so many factors that go into injuries that it’s “crazi” to think that scheme has anything more than the smallest of impacts. A LB shooting a gap when reading a running play knows where the impact is going to be more than a LB blitzing? Somewhat true. But that LB shooting the gap could get blindsided too. He could also have an OL or DL collapse sideways into his knee right as he’s going through the line and have his knee ligaments shredded. He could lower his head too much on contact and get a neck stinger, a concussion or worse.
There are two explanations for why the UW could’ve gone vanilla against Idaho – keeping it simple for the backups and not trying to show too much to the next opponent. The second explanation doesn’t make much sense in this case because it’s USC – it doesn’t really matter what the UW shows because Pete knows Holt so well.
That leaves the keeping it simple for the backups explanation.
Seriously crazi, I’ve been playing, watching and reading about football for decades, and I’ve never seen anyone try to argue that scheme makes any difference in injuries.
Fast and Loose- Correct
But you don’t have to compound fast and loose with unneccessary schemes when you are facing an overmatched opponent- which I still firmly believe Sark and Holt didn’t want out of the Idaho week.
It’s easy- get the win and minimize any damage that could have a direct impact leading up to the USC week. And I agree with you that we used Idaho to broaden our depth by playing the No.2s.
We may both be correct that Holt didn’t want to offer Carroll much to look at. Keep in mind Carroll is a defensive guy. Now I know he’s been around football long enough to know a thing or two about offensive football. But as head coach you usually turn that stuff over to the O coordinator, especially if you are a defensive guru. Does Carroll know enough about the offense to know what to do if Holt does this or does that? We’ll have to wait and see. I betting he doesn’t and it’s all going to be on the new USC O coordinator and his offensive line coach to figure out how to disrupte a Holt-lead Husky charge. If Holt can work some magic and get us a consistent pass rush it will assist our ability in coverage. If we can’t then it may be a long day for our youthful secondary.
Let’s stop the maddness. We both love what we are seeing on the field- why rehash the freakin’ Idaho game of all games.
Go Dawgs! WOOF!!!
All I saw was purple
C’mon crazi – you don’t actually believe this do you? First off, we did blitz against Idaho, and we did run stunts. Secondly, I’m still having a hard time believing this theory that stunts and blitzes put a player in positions of more harm than our base defense. Bodies get contorted, legs get rolled on & twisted in football period, regardless of the defensive scheme.
The much better explanation for the vanilla defense vs. Idaho is that’s all that Holt was comfortable using with all of the backups he was rolling into the game.
Good to know I'm not the only one.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I think you're wrong here
Smart teams play vanilla all the time especially prior to conference play. Now we didn’t play vanilla against LSU..we stacked the box and blitzed the corners and got burned when Walker couldn’t make the tackle and the linebackers failed to be there for support.
I don’t think it’s just about schemes. Pete may know Holt but he doesnt’ know how Holt is going to react and respond to his offense and vice versa.
Yeah that's why you game plan...
…planning to do some things that your opponent doesn’t expect. There’s probably more of that going on offensively but still, you have to keep your opponent guessing.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
I’m still not buying the idea that we played vanilla as some kind of strategy to keep info from USC. I’d be shocked if Holt didn’t use everything in his defensive playbook he felt his kids could handle vs. LSU. And I have no doubt that Carroll, Seto, Norton & co. at USC know Holt’s defensive tendencies and strategies quite well. There was little competitive advantage to be gained against by holding back on defensive schemes vs. Idaho – they saw quite a bit already vs. LSU, and they know Holt very well.
If we were playing vanilla against Idaho, it’s because of all the backups Holt was rotating in the game.
UW has a better offense that tOSU
… but our defense is not even close. We have no choice but to drop a safety into the box, try to take away their run game and force Barkely to beat us. He has yet to demonstrate that he can consistently get balls to his WRs, but he definitely can play. We’ll have to live with the results and try to get this game into a shootout. If they are able to run effectively against us, we’ll be dead.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Gekko if we come with that defense we played LSU, then I think we might have something. We played dam fine defense vs. LSU and if we come with that, Carroll is going to be impressed.
We’ve got a LOT better offense then Ohio State and I think we can put a LOT more points on the board then Ohio State. Prior is not a polished QB and he found folks open in that USC secondary. Imagine what Locker can do with all our receivers. The key will be protection.
Some are already calling USC national championship contenders. They beat up on San Jose State and Ohio State- WHOOPIE! USC didn’t impress me in Ohio. The only thing I saw that looked good was their running game- if we can find away to slow down the running game, we’ll be just fine.
All I saw was purple
What the hell do we have to lose!
This is a huge game with everything to gain and really nothing to lose! Gamble, twist, dog, blitz! Take some chances and get to the young freshman QB!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
The positive spin is USC’s weakness – their rookie QB – is going against our weakness – our pass defense.
If our defense continues to play the run well and we can force some 3rd and long situations, and we are close enough (or ahead) to keep the crowd very loud and involved, we have a chance to force Barkley to make some mistakes.
That said, Barkley is very poised for a true frosh, and he was playing against a better defense at Ohio State than he’ll face against us. And while we’ve played the run well so far, USC will have the best O-line and best running attack we’ll see all year (Cal might quibble with that, but I think USC is better).
Our offense, most specifically Jake, gives us a chance to score 20+ points against an athletic, very talented Trojan defense. The question is whether we can generate enough turnovers to keep USC from scoring 30+ points…
You sound like Sark
I was just reading through his press conference, one of the biggest things he said we need to improve is turnovers. Our defense has created one turnover in each game, he wants to get that up to three per game. The best way to beat USC is create turnovers and protect the ball when we have it.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Interestingly enough...
…that’s what Coach Sark was saying, that the biggest issue for the defense, was to produce more turnovers.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Recruiting
Seems like a lull in action right now. Anybody know if we have a bunch of recruits taking official visits this coming Saturday?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
No
but I think Sean Parker should make it up asap and see where he can start next year
by ChazzReinhold on Sep 14, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Non Conference Teams for Next Year
BYU, Syracuse and Nebraska
by bigdawgdaddy999 on Sep 14, 2009 10:22 AM PDT reply actions
I'm looking forward to facing Nebraska again
I was reading their board because they’re looking at Deontae Cooper and one of their fans made some off color “why is he looking at a team like Washington when he can come here and play for championships”
LOL. Nebraska hasn’t been good in years. They seem to be playing well so far this year but I’m liking our chances with a senior Locker and another year of depth and training.
Any word on Cooper?
He’s one of the only guys from the LSU trip I haven’t heard anything about
by ChazzReinhold on Sep 14, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions
2011 Non Conference Teams
BYU, Hawaii, Nebraska. If I remember right from a few years back. “The Ohio State Buckeyes” was on the schedule. So it looks like we will be playing Hawaii instead. ugh
by bigdawgdaddy999 on Sep 14, 2009 10:32 AM PDT reply actions
There are incentives for playing Hawaii
The hula girls are hot
LOL
Illinois
They are trying to put together a home and away with the Illini. Word is it will be announced soon. I am all for games within driving distance of Chicago.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 12:18 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Chicago trip would be a good one
mix it in with a little late season baseball and maybe a Sunday game at Soldier.
"Never retreat, never surrender" - Mark Grant
by wishfulthinking on Sep 14, 2009 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Depth Chart
Looks like Darrion Jones is back as well as Deshon Mathews. Nate Williams is listed as a costarter with Victor Aieywa.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
like I said
UW played a lot of young kids all day on Saturday and kept a lot of things underwrap. It was a great experience building game and they treated it as such from the get go.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 12:08 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Congrats on breaking the streak guys!!
I don’t know if yalls game will be on TV here or not next week, but if it is I’ll be watching.
Good luck against SC!
Thanks
We are on TV every week. If you have direct tv you should be able to catch every game.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 12:38 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Jinxed it?
No sooner than I said the Tree throws a fast one.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 15, 2009 4:24 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
This week is an ABC game so it is regional.
I have direct TV but I can’t get other regions Fox Sports channels. Am I missing something?
You need ESPN Gameplan and the Sports package
Game plan lets you get every game that ABC/ESPN has scheduled…so you get all the regional games. The sports package lets you get every single Fox sports station plus a bunch of other stuff such as Versus.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 15, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I have Comcast's Sports package
Does that include the ABC regional broadcasts? I know I have all the FSN channels and Versus…but ABC and ESPN regional broadcasts…I dont know.
You too, on win over Vandy...
Get ready for the schedule to toughen up in the next couple of weeks!
"Never retreat, never surrender" - Mark Grant
by wishfulthinking on Sep 14, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Batts is history
Shocked to just read on BCs blog that Batts is no longer on the team. No Details. Wow!
hopefully david did something worthy...
I heard this and worried that Sark might have a Willingham-esqe doghouse. At least he’s handling things. Could be a big loss next year.
by B Money on Sep 14, 2009 12:49 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Big difference – Batts was dismissed rather than left in limbo with little communication on what’s going on. Ty rarely had the balls to actually dismiss a guy – he’d just leave him sitting in limbo.
Given the problems in our secondary, I would have to assume that Sark wasn’t looking for a reason to let Batts go – whatever he did, it must’ve been big.
wow
I didn’t see him play on Saturday now that I think of it…interesting.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 14, 2009 12:50 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Not the best news
But the silver lining is that it opens a scholarship up for next year.
http://www.spartyandfriends.com/
by thecassino on Sep 14, 2009 1:02 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Husky Stadium
LSU was a good starting point but we need Husky Stadium to ROCK this Saturday!!! GO DAWGS!!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Unreal
Apparently $C fans don’t think this will be a contest. We need to prove them wrong!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Still that's 65000 fans...
…in the house! Hopefully that will be closer to 70000 by game time.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
No TV for the Stanford game...
At least I don’t have to watch an FSN telecast until November (going to the ASU game, yay) then.
From Bob Condotta: “a deal could have been brokered to have the game televised regionally by FSN-Northwest, but only if Stanford agreed to move the start time. Stanford apparently didn’t want to do that, keeping it at 6 p.m., which means no local FSN-NW telecast.”
What is up with that?...
…but then again it is Stanford.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
You lost me...
…but I think I understand what you meant. Stanford apparently had their tickets already printed for 6PM. To me that’s kind of bogus I mean a lot of these games get picked up late by TV.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Any chance Versus or someone else could pick up the game?
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Gosh I don't think so...
…versus already has picked up a game. I don’t know what time slot though.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Idaho Game
OK so I decided to actually replay the game and see what we did defensively. The first half had 33 plays in which Idaho had the ball on offense. Of those 33 plays the Huskies brought extra pressure on 4 plays. You do the math. I did and it amounts to 12% of the time. Other interesting observations is that Crichton played a lot in that first half. BC’s blog stated that the coaches are now going to give Everette Thompson some looks. He was injured and they apparently were considering a redshirt for him. They appear to be rethinking that. Stay tuned DAWGfans!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Buckeyes better
Ohio State outplayed USC much the same as the Huskies outplayed LSU. A poor coaching decision at the end the first half allowed USC to end the half with a gift field goal. Ohio State quarterback underthrew wide open receivers four or five times as he was always throwing off balance. No Barkley no win!!!
That's what I saw...
…a wide eyed young QB (OSU) who was in over his head. I only watched part of the game though.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
No doubt OSU outplayed USC...
It will be the turnover magin again for the dawgs. If we are +2 in turnovers and score TD’s in the Red Zone…we will win
by bigdawgdaddy999 on Sep 15, 2009 11:44 AM PDT reply actions
Stanford
Gosh I guess I could drive all the way over to Seattle to watch the game? That is if Woodward can arrange some kind of feed from Tree Stadium.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Supposedly Woodward is still working on it
I am hearing that Scott Woodward is still trying to work out some type of solution to the Stanford situation. I am not sure exactly what that means. We will find out what he can come up with by Monday. Maybe they can get permission for a delay telecast.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 16, 2009 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
