The LSU at UW Prediction Thread
by John Berkowitz on Sep 2, 2009 9:28 AM PDT
Email
PrintWe have had some very nice people from LSU visit the site this week. One of them suggested we get a prediction thread rolling.
Why not?
I have my Pac 10 predictions coming out on Thursday this week but there is no reason that everyone else can't start chiming in about what they think will happen on Saturday night.
My feeling is that it will be closer than most people around the country think. I also am of the opinion that Washington needs to be at least plus two in the turnover category to have a chance of pulling the upset. In addition to the plus two they need to show that they can convert on those opportunities.
LSU suffered last season because of turnover ratio. I think if we can get pressure on their young QB good things can happen. I am not buying that the problem is solved in game one with a young QB with limited experience
LSU fans who are coming to Seattle to watch a game for the first time are in for a surprise. Husky Stadium is a fantastic venue to watch a game at. It gets very loud in the stadium because of the way it was constructed. The two upper decks reflect the sound back down onto the field. When it really gets rocking you simply can't hear your self think.
The SEC has some very loud stadiums. I have been to Knoxville and it is extremely loud. I have been to many stadiums across the country but I am pretty sure that I have never been to a venue as loud as Husky Stadium when the fans are participating.
Anyway this is your chance to make your predictions and debate them with the visiting fans from LSU!
Bill Schwartz on KIRO
Bill Schwartz who covered the Huskies on radio with Bob Rondeau for many years questioned yesterday if Jake Locker was buying into the new coaching staff. He made that observation after listening to interviews Jake has made with the media that seemed less than enthusiastic.
For those that didn't hear it, he said that based on his impressions of Jake's body language and tone of voice at the press conference it was his interpretation that Jake has doubts about Sark's offense working with the current players, and that possibly Jake is not buying into the new system. He gave the example of Jake being very measured in his responses.
Bob Condotta who knows the team better than anyone has a different theory. He feels that Jake is tired of answering the same questons over and over again. Kim Grinolds over at Dawgman thinks Jake is just doing what he was trained to do under Tyrone for the past three years. Both of these guys think Jake is 110% in by the way. I have heard and read a lot of these interviews and I haven't gotten a negative impression. I think Jake wants to get out on the field, start winning some games, and let the his play do the talking.
Ted Miller of ESPN thinks Jake and Sark are a perfect fit. everything he has heard has been positive.
I don't think anyone has anything to worry about when it comes to Jake Locker.
Condotta
Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times has an excellent interview with strength and conditioning coach Ivan Lewis. It is just a great read!
"I don't know why guys buy into one thing and not another when you are getting paid to go to school," says senior defensive end Daniel Te'o-Nesheim of Lewis' conditioning regimen. "But they bought into that."
Ted Miller
Teddy hasn't been too kind the the Huskies in his pre-season position ratings.
A couple of things surprised me such as rating the offensive line as high as seventh which I think is too generous and rating the linebackers ninth which I think is a crock. Quality depth is an issue but ninth when you have three potential all conference performers starting?
How about defensive end where the Huskies have talent three players deep at each position. Depth is not an issue here. How can you rate any unit 9th that includes Daniel Teo Nesheim?
WSU ahead of UW at both safety and cornerback? I find that hard to believe.
I hate to be critical of Ted because in the end he is usually pretty spot on with his pre-season observations. I think the key for most of us including the media is actually seeing how these guys perform in a couple of games. Without that I think it is impossible to guage whatever type of progress they have made since last fall.
Safety - 10th
Nate Williams is a solid strong safety and redshirt freshman Greg Walker has flashed ability at free, but the Huskies have a long way to go in the secondary.
Cornerback - 10th
Speaking of terrible against the pass... the Huskies allowed opponents to complete 67 percent of their passes and surrendered 24 TD passes with just seven interceptions in 2008. Quinton Richardson will man one side while the uncertain health of redshirt freshman Justin Glenn means true freshman Desmond Trufant or junior Vonzell McDowell will start on the other side.
Linebacker - 9th
The Huskies have a solid triumvirate. E.J. Savannah returns after missing all of 2008 due to a suspension. He'll play outside opposite Mason Foster with Donald Butler in the middle. Depth is an issue.
Defensive End - 9th
Daniel Te'o Nesheim was second-team All-Pac-10 in 2008 after posting eight of the defense's 16 sacks in 2008. Senior Darrion Jones returns at the other end and youngsters Kalani Aldrich and Everrette Thompson have potential.
Defensive Tackle - ?
(Ted hasn't rated the tackles yet but I think we all know where this is headed.)
Offensive Line - 7th
Ben Ossai, Ryan Tolar and Cody Habben have combined for 66 starts, but it's not like that's been during a golden age of Husky football. There are depth concerns.
Tight End - 9th
Sophomore Kavario Middleton and Chris Izbicki were two of the Huskies' more heralded recruits over the past couple of seasons. Both have the ability to be strong contributors. JC transfer Dorson Boyce is a good blocker and will see plenty of action.
Wide Receiver - 8th
D'Andre Goodwin, Jermaine Kearse and Devin Aguilar combined for 100 receptions last year. The bad news is they scored only three touchdowns. Toss in freshman James Johnson, and this is one of the Huskies strongest positions. They may well be better than eighth, but they've got to prove themselves.
Running Back - 9th
This is a strange one. Three of the Huskies top four running backs from 2008 are gone for various reasons, and the fourth, Willie Griffin, appears to be No. 3 on the depth chart. So what's up? Chris Polk, a touted 2008 recruit who was injured last season, and Johri Fogerson, who played safety in 2008, have looked good during preseason practices.
Quarterback - 2nd
Point out the injury that ended his 2008 season after four games, or his lackluster completion percentage, but know that Jake Locker scares defensive coordinators. And early returns are he and Steve Sarkisian might make beautiful music together. Backup Ronnie Fouch has looked much better during the preseason.
Ted's Season Key for Washington
A team coming off an 0-12 season has a lot of critical areas, but the biggest one in 2009 is playing better in the secondary. The Huskies ranked 115th in the nation in pass efficiency defense last year, with opponents completing 67 percent of their throws, 24 of which went for touchdowns. The first priority -- because you can't magically create better speed -- is playing soundly and not blowing coverages.
71 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I hope LSU reads Ted Miller all day long
Everytime I read a Ted Miller ranking he seems to be all over the place. For instance as you say we have our top 2007 and 2008 tacklers on the field together along with a solid guy in Butler yet “depth” becomes the issue. In other rankings Miller proclaims that the WR have to prove themselves but I look and see his ranking of USC’s linebackers are based purely on conjecture. He assumes “It’s USC and these guys are replacing Matthews, Cushing and Maleluga so they MUST be good”
I’ve stopped putting any weight behind Millers projections since his framework for judging seems to shift around. I think he first ranks the team and then slots in individual talent according to what supports his final rankings. Thus UW and WSU are so poor because we rank so low in every position.
He doesn’t exude football to me.
The LSU -UW game will be close. Last year without Jake we got blown out by USC 56-0 and I’ve heard LSU fans mention that and the Oklahoma game as a testament to the impending blowout they are going to bring.
Well my answer to that is. USC fielded a Top 5 NFL Draft QB and NCAA Top 3 in Total Defense and Oklahoma fielded the Heisman winner. Both teams scored 55 or more points.
I look at LSU and I don’t see that talent. Lafell is a good WR nothing we haven’t seen at USC in spades. Scott and Williams are good backs but nothing we haven’t seen before.
LSU brings in a defense that should have played much better and now is under the leadership of Jon Chavis. Much like our defense has good players who are now under the leadership of Nick Holt.
The reason why a blowout seems unlikely without us having a high amount of turnovers is that our DL is comfortably 2 deep so our rotations should be good. Linebackers are tackling machines. We’ve got questions at DB.
In a nutshell our success against LSU is predicated on stuffing the run first and forcing Jefferson to beat us with his arm. I want to see the emergence of Darrion Jones so that teams have to game plan around two high energy DE. I want to see Meda and Elisara plugging the middle and slowing down Scott and Williams enough to let Butler, Savannah and Foster clean up. I want to see DTN and Jones pressure the QB and not leave our DB on an island.
I’m going to go with the upset here 31-27 in favor of my Dawgs. At home in front of a packed house we can play with superior talent teams (see UW -USC 2007) we just don’t have the depth and the talent to play poorly and still win.
I agree; I think it’ll be close. Possibly even a serious upset by the Huskies. Especially since LSU won’t know much about UW – and they’ll assume that it’ll be a cake walk with last season’s 0-12 record. It’s much easier to scout a successful team than it is a struggling team.
LSU will come in cocky, and it should take them most of the first half to recover from that. During that time, the Huskies can do a lot of damage. Add to that that the game will be in blaringly loud Husky Stadium, and they won’t know what hit them. It’ll be the second half that will probably determine the outcome of the game. Barring any injuries, of course.
LSU 20, UW 21
Cassie
Raw Charge, an SBN Tampa Bay Lightning Blog. And calling shotgun in the clown car.
by Cassie McClellan on Sep 2, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
LSU fan here
Please don’t confuse the arrogance that many LSU fans exude with overconfidence on behalf of the team. Our team will come in ready to play — Les Miles always prepares his teams to play. During his time here we are a combined 8-0 in bowl games plus first games of the season. Every one of those games have been blowouts, with the exception of when we played ASU in 2005, and that was the year of Hurricane Katrina (and ASU was solid).
I’m not here to talk trash — I think that is lame. I respect UW’s history, and wish you guys the best after game one, but honestly if you think we won’t be prepared you are deluding yourself. Les Miles might make the occasional batshit in-game decision, but he is VERY good at preparing a team to play.
My prediction: a much improved Husky team keeps it closer than most people think for a while, but LSU pulls away at the end, winning 38-24.
Gregatron is not responsible for any of the crap he just wrote.
St. Louis vegetarian blog
Crazidawg says...
LSU 27
Washington 24
First half looks good for Huskies where they are within striking distance. In the 2nd half LSU is able to control the clock, wear us down, and manage to escape with a big victory. But LSU comes away with the victory offering the Washington Husky program a lot of respect by letting folks know that Husky Stadium has the appeal of an SEC venue due to the shear size, magintude, and volume of the electrfying stadium. All of which results in another loss. Yet Sark, Holt, and the team come away feeling very confident in themselves and in this young team. We expect to win, but doesn’t happen this weekend vs. the Bayou Tigers.
All I saw was purple
This is pretty much what I'm expecting.
UW keeps things close in the first half, catching LSU flat-footed a bit, but in the end talent wins out.
LSU wins 28-20
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
big surprise
Washington has always performed better as underdog. We need to change it to TOP DAWG.
Remember the tombstones in Miami the huge victory in Nebraska. The bowl win over Florida.
Especially the SUN BOWL vs. Texas who looked upon pac-10 football as somewhat less than manly. In their final desperation Texas took to passing – four straight sacks by the Dawgs by four different players to end the game.
But a note for NEBRASKA when the Huskies left the field the whole crowd, a sea of red, stood and cheered the Huskies as they left the field. That was CLASS.
Nebraska fans are generally considered the classiest in college
http://www.spartyandfriends.com/
by thecassino on Sep 2, 2009 11:01 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
agreed.
nebraska was one of the best tailgates i’ve ever been to. and i didn’t spend much time with UW fans.
Prediction
38-35 UW…This is what I am hoping for at least. I predict with my heart.
I Love the Purple Tinted Glasses
I will make my prediction in the morning. I think it will be closer than most people think for a number of reasons.
I am excited but...
The last time we won was 2007, and LSU has some awesome talent AND depth. Luckily we get them at the beginning of the year. And our starters are pretty solid. Both teams have a lot to prove, and we can keep up with them like we did against Ohio St two years ago. LSU might be jet lagged, but they will get over it in the second half. Their QB got it done in the second half of last year, and he should be fairly good by the second half.
I don’t believe in our secondary yet, and the wildcat is to hard to block. We fall down week one, but win at Idaho and upset week 3. With the great recruits coming in town, some will see a chance to play early and realize we are in fact better than last year. 40-24 LSU
Actually...
our qb (Jordan Jefferson) was pretty bad in the second half last year. That isn’t to say he won’t improve this year though (he was a true freshman).
Gregatron is not responsible for any of the crap he just wrote.
St. Louis vegetarian blog
Ted Miller
Usually I find Ted Miller very insightful however I think in the case of the Huskies, he is letting last season taint his objectivity. Certainly the team needs to prove it is better than last year, however I find that if we were to use his rankings, WSU should finish 9th and the Huskies a distant 10th in the conference. I know of no one this side of Jim Moore who has predicted that, so either the sum is greater than the parts, or Miller has nothing else to go on except last year’s record with a coach who couldn’t and a QB who didn’t. The coach is gone and the QB is back better than ever. I hope the Huskies use his predictions as bulletin board fodder!
Taint
I think Ted thinks that the play of Locker will push UW past WSU in the standings. That is a huge factor because WSU is terrible right now at the QB position which makes the entire offense look worse than it is. On the other hand Locker elevates his unit.
You have to give Ted some credit because he has been correct in all his predictions since he arrived in Seattle to work for the PI. We are all hoping he is wrong this year and he has thrown a few disclaimers out there.
I don’t think anyone knows how well Washington will play until they hit the field for a game. We have a bunch of questions that will start to be answered on Saturday night.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 2, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Not a Ted Miller fan...
I love his blog but I’ll never forget the bunch of BS pro – Neuheisel articles he wrote when all that crap went down. It was truely pathetic. And I couldn’t disagree more with most of his “position rankings”. UW LB’s #9…huh….really Ted? Whatever – pretty much discredits the whole thing in my opinion.
Miller sympathized with Neuheisel, it’s true. Reasonable people can disagree on their interpretations of Neuheisel and how the UW should’ve handled his issues.
Just to give Miller’s take the benefit of the doubt, can you say that you’ve spent as much time evaluating and observing the entire Pac-10 as Miller has? It’s highly doubtful you have, so how can you be sure that his ranking of the UW LB’s relative to the rest of the conference is so far off?
Logical Fallacy
Ted Miller is a writer. I’m unaware of his coaching or evaluation credentials so if I’m missing something here please inform me. To say that Miller has spent more time evaluating is a fallacy. It doesn’t matter how much time he spends if his evaluations are incorrect. It’s an Appeal to Authority fallacy. We’ll eventually find out if he’s correct but I can see easily see the logical foundation behind our expectations for a better than avg linebacking core.
2007 top tackler = Savannah
2008 top tackler = Foster
That’s a lot of production on the field at the same time. I have a hard time believing that there are 8 teams in superior situation with regard to their LB corps.
Yes, Ted is a writer – who has spent the last 15+ years covering football, and before that playing football up through H.S. Ted has watched a lot of football, more than most of us on this board.
And my point with regard to his evaluation of the LB’s in the conference is this – we all know the UW’s situation quite well. But how many of us also follow ALL of the other programs in the conference and can speak with any kind of authority on those teams as well? Ted can – he’s been to every school in the last year and watched practices and seen players in action. He reads up on every team in the conference every day, whereas most of us only read up on the Huskies.
You say his evaluations are incorrect – can you point out something that shows where he’s been proven to be way off base? It happens to every analyst, whether it be a writer like Ted or former players or coaches you see on TV. The question is how often are they incorrect?
And as I pointed out elsewhere, judging a LB’s ability solely by their tackle totals is poor evaluation. There are a lot of factors that go into those tackle counts, many of which are out of the control of the player in question.
As I mentioned elsewhere, go look at the list of top tacklers in the conference for the last several years. How many of those guys also prove themselves to be top-level players, i.e. All-Americans, successful NFL players, etc.? Being a top tackler is not necessarily indicative that you are one of the best players at your position in the conference.
Now, don’t get me wrong – I do think Ted has the UW LB’s rated too low for the conference, but I also acknowledge that LB is a position of great strength across the conference, so just because the UW has a good group of LB’s doesn’t mean the rest of the conference doesn’t also have a good group of LB’s.
Lastly, Savannah and Foster were top tacklers on two of the most awful defenses the conference has seen in recent memory. How good could they really have been?
Sorry Kirkd, you aren't seeing the whole picture.
Let me put it this way. according to Ted Miller, our offensive line is the second highest rated unit on the team, only behind the QB’s. So either the Pac10 has HORRIBLE offensive lines, and AWESOME linebackers, or just maybe, Ted’s rankings need to be rethought.
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
So what makes you think the Pac-10 doesn’t have a lot of very bad offensive lines (at least 3 worse than ours) and a lot of very good LB’s?
Have you been following Ted’s blog and read about all the difficulties UCLA, Arizona State & WSU have had with their lines? They are baaaaaaad.
I’m not saying I fully agree with Ted’s rankings – I doubt our LB group is worse than 7th in the league, and I think he’s placing more importance on what happened last year than he should – but he’s got a much more objective and informed view of the entire conference than pretty much any one of us. And I think he’d be the first to admit that he’s more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to teams that have done well of late, i.e. he’s more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to USC’s young LB’s than he is to the UW’s young RB’s or WR’s, but it’s a defensible position.
We can all talk all we want about how much better we think our team is than they showed on the field last year, but until they prove it on the field this year, it’s just talk. Will Ted be eating some crow at the end of the season from some of his predictions? Undoubtedly. But show me someone out there that gets all their pre-season football predictions right.
Lb's
I think we are in the top 3-4 based on starters.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 2, 2009 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Neuheisel
There were a lot of people who sympathized with Neuheisel and still really don’t hold anything against him in the UW community. I don’t really have a problem with him even though i witnessed the death by 100,000 paper cuts.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 2, 2009 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t think Neuheisel would’ve lasted at the UW even if he hadn’t been involved in the March Madness pool – things were going downhill, and fans were less willing to accept Neuheisel’s style of play when we weren’t winning a lot.
But firing him when we did was stupid. He should’ve been kept through the 2003 season and then let go, so that we could’ve done a proper coaching search instead of having to go with Gilby. That was a huge mistake, much worse than anything Neuheisel himself did to the program.
And I think people forget just how good of a motivator he was and the fantastic job he did with the 2000 team. It’s funny how people that don’t like Neuheisel try to put much of the credit for that 2000 team on Lambo. Sure, he deserves some of the credit for laying that foundation, but it was Neuheisel and his staff that got the most out of those guys.
I had grown tired of Neuheisel’s act – the lies, the softening of the program culture, the glibness that seemed more and more phony the more you were exposed to it. The pool was an idiotic thing for him to do, and I don’t believe for a second his story about getting approval from the UW compliance department first. But I don’t hold much ill will against him in the long run. No, the people that deserve contempt for the state of UW football as inherited by Sark are William Gerberding, Barbara Hedges, Todd Turner and Tyrone Willingham. Mark Emmert is on probation in my book – if the Sark hire works out and Woodward turns out to be a good AD, Emmert’s decision to hire Ty and then give him a 4th year will be easier to pardon.
Agree with 99% of what you said
Neuheisel wouldn’t of lasted much longer at the UW, and Hedges couldn’t do anything right. The way I see it, she should get most of the credit for how far the football team has fallen.
Rick was a great motivator on gameday, too bad he didn’t care about the offseason workouts and conditioning. I must admit, I have a far different memory of the 2000 season then most Husky fans. Most fans forget how we couldn’t win a game until the last two minutes. We couldn’t put anybody away early, couldn’t pull away from anybody, shoot, we couldn’t find a way to have the lead before the second half of the fourth quarter. I tend to remember it as the most overrated the Huskies have ever been. Don’t let that take away from what they accomplished, they won, and winning is all that matters, and Tuiasosopo was a total stud!
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
Most fans forget how we couldn’t win a game until the last two minutes. We couldn’t put anybody away early, couldn’t pull away from anybody, shoot, we couldn’t find a way to have the lead before the second half of the fourth quarter. I tend to remember it as the most overrated the Huskies have ever been. Don’t let that take away from what they accomplished, they won, and winning is all that matters, and Tuiasosopo was a total stud!
Well, there’s multiple ways to look at it. On the one hand, you could say they were over rated relative to their 11-1 record; another way to look at it is that Neuheisel got everything he could out of that group – remember, the team had gone 6-6 and then 7-5 in the two seasons prior to 2000.
I think the 2000 team was the best scenario for Neuheisel; he was a good motivator and gameday strategist, and he was a player’s coach that was a breath of fresh air for the team after the old-school Lambo. But enough of Lambo’s toughness and work ethic remained to combine with Neuheisel’s strengths and produce the magic of 2000.
I’d guess that Neuheisel has learned some lessons from his time at the UW, and I’d guess that he’s not pushing the grey areas of the recruiting rule books as much any more. And I think he was starting to learn that he needed to be a little tougher on his players. But I also have my doubts that he’s got what it takes to build a program into a consistent winner. That said, give him credit – he’s got a great staff at UCLA, and his recruiting has been excellent there so far.
But I don’t think he’s in the upper half of the conference’s coaches…
I agree with Lear...
If we had QB who wasn’t mobil in 2000 like Tui – say Cody Picket then that 2000 team would have been 6-6 at best. I give Nue credit for finding a way to best use Tui’s talents but that team was all on Tui’s back and he carried them to win after win.
Remember it was...
…Tui who went to Nue with the idea of adding the option attack to the offense. I’ll give credit to Nue for being bright enough to run with it.
by doubledeucedawg on Sep 2, 2009 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions
He had the memo, yes. But he didn’t mention anything of the sort when first asked about it. It wasn’t until a few days later that he came out with that memo to try to exonerate himself, which to me reeks of someone who got busted and then scrambles around frantically looking for some way to get out of it. I highly doubt Neuheisel had carefully considered that memo before joining that pool – he probably had some vague memory of an e-mail talking about basketball pools, searched his e-mail folder, found that particular one and had an “a-HA!” moment.
Ted is dead ---- wrong.
But he is doing the Huskies a big favor by lowering the expectations around the country. It will be a lot easier for the players to concentrate on playing football instead of trying to live up to hype, if everyone believes they are hopeless.
Personally I think the Huskies will win by two touchdowns. Now you know why I am not a gambler.
I think the LB position ranking is a bit low, but I get that the conference is pretty loaded with good LB’s. And let’s stop to remember – while Savannah, Foster and Butler have all looked good at times, have any of them had a season you’d consider All Pac-10? I think they’re all capable of that, but thus far they’ve all been a little below that level IMO, to say nothing of All-America level of play.
On the OL ranking, again, it’s important to note context – the Pac-10 is filled with a lot of really questionable lines this year. As bad as things may look to us with our OL, it may be worse down at UCLA especially with their injury situation. ASU has had two really bad years in a row with their OL. Oregon State lost a lot of guys and have a true frosh and a walk-on starting. WSU is just bad all around. Oregon and Arizona lost some very good OL to the draft.
So while we’re all concerned with our OL (and with reason), don’t forget that a lot of Pac-10 teams are concerned with their OL, and it’s one reason I think the UW has a fair shot at finishing higher than 9th in the conference this year.
As for a game prediction, my heart really wants to think we can pull off a stunning upset in a rocking Husky Stadium, with turnovers converted to scores by our D and Jake Locker working his magic.
But the realistic side of me figures it will probably be something closer to 45-24 LSU, with the Huskies keeping it somewhat close in the 1st half before seeing LSU pull away in the 3rd Qtr.
Yes
I believe Foster was 2nd in tackles last year and Savanah lead the league the year before = pretty good.
I think you’re over valuing that stat – if you go back over the years and look at the yearly leaders in tackles in the P10, do all of those guys stand out as top LB’s?
I’m not saying they didn’t have good seasons, but there’s more to being a good LB than accruing a high number of tackles, as there are a lot of variables in that stat out of the control of the individual player. I think Savannah and Foster have had seasons worthy of Honorable Mention All Pac-10, but they probably haven’t been among the 6 best LB’s in the conference in a season up until now.
Well...
you pretty much just said it yourself Kirk:
“but they probably haven’t been among the 6 best LB’s in the conference in a season up until NOW.”
If we NOW have two of the 6 best LB’s in the conference and the other one – Butler is a senior and no slouch – then how on earth can we have second worst set of LB’s in the conference? Do the eight teams above us each have all three LB’s in the top 6? This makes no sense.
I trust Sark's...
…evaluation much more. He continues to say the front seven on defense is a strength. He hasn’t been asked to grade in comparison to other Pac-10 teams but I would imagine the LBs would be up in the top 3 of the conference.
by doubledeucedawg on Sep 2, 2009 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that our LB’s are NOW among the 6 best groups in the conference (though they may be) – I meant that up to this point they might not have been, and at this point, we don’t know how much (if any) they’ve improved until we see it on the field.
Anyway, waaaaay too much discussion about something that really doesn’t matter that much. As I posted originally, I was surprised that Miller had our group rated at #9 and think that’s too low, but I also acknowledge that this is likely a position of strength for much of the conference and Ted has much more perspective on this than I do, given that he follows the entire conference and my focus is almost entirely on the Dawgs.
As I previously posted....
I already… …have my popcorn etc.!…My TV is warming up, my Huskies jersey is back from the cleaners and my cheering voice is in tune!
LETS GO DAWGS!! Yeah Baby!…Dawgs by 10….34-24
by Dawgs71 on Aug 26, 2009 3:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been watching highlights of winning UW games, I have all my purple gear ready and my wife is going to wear her purple lingerie ;-) Huskies by 3, 27-24
Go dogs!
lucky you!
I hope it all works in your favor
What happened with all the doom and gloom?
Okay just what the hell is going on? Every Dawg fan on this board has predicted 4 wins or less for the season. Old dog and myself (crazi) are the only legit guys that have come out and said 6+ victories this season.
I predict we drop this game, while most of you fellas are predicting the upset special over one of our most challenging opponents on the docket. Where’s your heads? I think what is happening is everyone is drinking more and more of the purple kool aid as the season nears.
I ask that everyone try to remain consistent. I understand that their is only 3 more days until kickoff, but let’s not lose our heads. This is LSU we’re talking about fellas. How does anyone with a clear conscience link LSU with Oregon and Cal? Good grief- may I suggest putting down the kool aid glass for awhile so that you might be able to see this logically? LSU, Florida, and USC have dominated the game for the last 6+ years, but you have the bayou tigers as good as the ducks and bears. Hmmm?
The reality check is going to bite you where the sun doesn’t shine. We’re going to be better this season but not vs. a top flight LSU club to open the season.
All I saw was purple
I'm not into...
…making predictions but I’m surprised too crazi. I expect this Husky team to improve more and more as the year goes along. That being said this is the first game of the season and I think it’s a stretch to predict a Husky win…although seeing the outcome through my purple tinted glasses gives the DAWGS a monstrous upset!
by doubledeucedawg on Sep 2, 2009 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions
With all due respect to UC and Oregon
and they are due respect, LSU is a cut above each program.
Gregatron is not responsible for any of the crap he just wrote.
St. Louis vegetarian blog
Easier to predict 4-5 wins for a season
then predict on a week to week basis. I dont know if that makes sense but when put on the spot before a game I cant predict a loss…i know it doesnt make sense but oh well
OKAY...
….if you insist on a more left lobe prediction instead of my earlier right lobe (purple right lobe) prediction then I must say it will probably be LSU 34 UW 17. But that’s no fun to say 2 days before kickoff. Let me live in the moment B4 reality kicks back in. I just hope to get throught the first 3 games of the season without major injuries. The real test of this teams growth will be from game 4 on….
Team Speed will win the day
Our Huskies will make us proud by playing with more intensity and better fundamentals than we’ve seen in a long time. Expect flashes of brilliance that will portend future greatness. But accept that we’re just starting the journey back with a new system, and will not play error-free.
LSU is a solid national power, and has a lot to prove in coming out to visit the Pac-10. They are also getting plenty fired up just reading stuff like that on this blog. They will make some mistakes, will give us some opportunities, and may even get rattled early on. But they will win going away with superior experience, depth, and overall speed. -12 points.
That’s my oddsmaker’s analysis. But I hope I’m wrong, and we pull the upset of the week. Either way, we’ll wear our Purple with pride.
completely agree and understand
Sark and Holt are going to do great things at Washington, but that day is far from near. We’ll be improved in all phases of the game, but like I said it’s too early to begin thinking about the what ifs. We are talking about a generational sized upset here fellas. How many of you chimed in with the win over Nebraska in 91? That was a generational sized upset. We are too young, don’t have the depth nor team speed of an LSU. We have a new coaching staff bringing in a new system. One spring camp and one fall camp is not going to turn us into Goliath Killers virtually overnight. This is going to be a process and coming up short vs. LSU is one step towards learning to be a powerhouse once again.
All I saw was purple
How many of you chimed in with the win over Nebraska in 91? That was a generational sized upset.
Wait – what? Are you saying the UW win over Nebraska in 1991 was a “generational sized upset”?
Okay Let me Clarify...
Heavens no it wasn’t a “generational-sized” upset, but it was a game to remember and it happened a generation ago. It was one for a generation. Furthermore this game vs. LSU (if we win) would be just as big- if not bigger. Now I realize that win at Nebraska gave us a chance to play for a national championship, but considering where this team has been lately, personally I think it would be as big if not bigger- especially for those fans who were too young to remember the Nebraska Barn Storming Game.
I stand corrected- the Nebraska game was NOT a generational-sized upset. It was however one for a generation. This LSU game (if we win) would be that big for this generation. Hope that clears up some misconceptions.
All I saw was purple
Let me help you out a bit Crazi
I totally understand what you are saying, even if you said it in an extremely confusing way. The win over Nebraska was an “epic” win, not because we went to Lincoln and won, but because we laid an egg in the first half, and decide to get our butt’s in gear the second half, which created an unbelievable come from behind win.
Saturday’s game, if a victory, would be an “epic” win, an “epic” upset, an "epic’ surprise (nationally), and would forever be remember in Husky lore.
LEGENDS ARE MADE ON THE SHORES OF LAKE WASHINGTON – Why not make a few THIS Saturday???
"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"
OK, that makes a lot more sense. Beating Nebraska that year legitimized the 1991 team as a bona fide National Championship contender, and as such was a big, big win for the program. That proved to those players and to the nation that a National Championship was possible.
Beating LSU would be a major upset and a huge, huge statement about the start of the Sark era. With all the marquee recruits in the house on Saturday, it would likely lead to some commits on the spot, and it would reinforce in the strongest way possible with the team that what this staff is teaching is on the money, and it would get the whole country buzzing about the Huskies again in a positive way.
I’m not counting on it, but I can’t imagine a better way to start the Sark era than to pull off an upset against LSU in our house.
LSU 38-20, Dawgs go 5-7 on the season
I’ve stated a lot of reasons why I think we’ll have a chance to win and will hang in this game but my emotionless prediction is that the game gets away late. If we are going to win this game we need to have a lead or tie at the end of the 3rd quarter or it is probably over. It takes more than one summer to truly fix poor conditioning and instill a winning attitude.
I think we’ll win 5 games on the season with one of them being a minor upset, three being by 14 points or more and the other two very close. We should beat Idaho, WSU, Arizona, and UCLA and then the 5th I see as either OSU, ASU, or Stanford. No bowl game this year but lots of hope for 2010.
Husky Stadium Renovation in 2010?
“We are going to dig, no matter what,” Woodward says. “Failure is not an option as far as getting Husky Stadium renovated.”
Scott Woodward quoted in the Seattle Times.
by doubledeucedawg on Sep 2, 2009 10:20 PM PDT reply actions
With all the bragging this week about noise in Husky Stadium,
Can you imagine the dB level with the horseshoe pulled in, and all seats built down to field’s edge?
Wow!
Lou Holtz
He is nutz….Notre Dame National Champions….ok! What a joke. I respect him but ESPN needs to find another person to take over. That bias slant is ridiculous. He thinks that they will go undefeated…they play USC. Sorry its off topic…either way.
UW!!!!!!!! Lets go!!!!!!!
Notre Dame
Holtz makes a very good point. Every game on Notre Dame’s schedule is winnable except probaby USC. The only problem is that Lou isn’t doing the coaching.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 3, 2009 6:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Mark my words
Notre Dame will struggle with Michigan State, Pitt, and Stanford, all after they lose to USC. They were 3-8 and now they are some how going undefeated?? Delusional thinking by Mr Holtz, a man i do respect though. They havent won a national title in over 20 years. They are the same as we are…a traditional program that is down because of Ty Willingham.
As a side note, if you couldnt tell, I hate Notre Dame.
Holt gets game ball!
Coach Holt settles down his secondary in the 2nd qtr, berates his LB’s to stay committed and plugged AND to trust the safeties! Chavis will not have an answer for the all out Sark assault and the Huskies pull away in the 4th after subduing both LSU-lines- Locker runs it in for the final points. UW 30 – LSU 17.
"As for being a Raiders fan, I wouldn't wish that fucking shit on anybody." [the venerable OTS at Roll Bama Roll}
I don't see a blow out
Whenever Jake Locker lines up healthy Washington has a chance. We have played some very tough teams while he was healthy and taken it down to the wire. I just don’t see a blowout happening in the opener.
by John Berkowitz on Sep 3, 2009 7:09 AM PDT up reply actions
One key is...
…to protect Locker in the pocket and give him enough time to make some plays. I hope we have some quick three step drop passing plays. I think we have the speed on the field to get open quickly.
Defensively we have to be able to pressure the QB and slow down their running game.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
You may not....
see a blow out. OK. I do. I’ve been reading this stuff for months and just based on what little I know as a fan I say blow out victory for the Tigers. Just too much for UW to overcome in the opener.
The guy wanted preditions so I gave mine. That is all.
LSU Jonno is spot on.
by Totally Spoil on Sep 3, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions
I've got 35-17 LSU.
The crowd noise will be a non-factor guys. But don’t misunderstand that comment, it isn’t a knock on UW. LSU plays in Jordan-Hare, The Swamp, and Neyland Stadium regularly. Those 3 stadiums all rank in the top 10 to 20 loudest stadiums nationally. Let’s pretend that Huskey Stadium is every bit as loud as those (and I am assuming it will be), that means it is business as usual. LSU is used to playing in big games with loud fans.
Since the team is flying up today, I seriously doubt a 2 hour jet lag will have any bearing on the game two days from now. Besides, if you can’t get hyped up for a football game that you are playing in, well you must be dead.
UW definitely has the advantage in the mystery department. LSU won’t really know what to prepare for. LSU will be able to mix it up some and countery the mystery aspect with the talented Russell Shepard thrown into the lineup this year, but ultimately UW has the advantage in the mystery department. The thing is though, I never buy an argument that has its basis in “we’ve got new coaches, the other team won’t know what to prepare for”. OK, but the counter point is, your players have never executed the new gameplan on the field before either. We’ll see how it turns out I guess.
Jefferson (our QB) has, so far, been a better caretaker of the football in his short career than Jarrett Lee last year. Combining that with the fact that LSU DOESN’T FUMBLE, should mean that we have a positive TO margin this year. That turn around should start this week. I think everyone on this blog would agree that UW must win the TO battle to win this game, and as of right now, I think that is an uphill battle for you guys.
I can’t wait for the game! Good luck to you guys, and let’s all hope we have an injury free game!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on UW Dawg Pound
Related FanShots on UW Dawg Pound
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
