Grading the Game
by John Berkowitz on Oct 30, 2010 8:34 PM PDT
Email
PrintI am off to Hawaii in the morning so I am trying to get everything cranked out for the weekend before I leave. I had the choice in August of spending two weeks in Hawaii or going to Eugene to watch the Huskies play. Just thinking that my wife is pretty darn smart by suggesting we go to Hawaii in November this year rather than December.
Quarterback
Jake simply didn't have time to do anything. The offensive line couldn't even begin to pick up the blitz and Washington only picked up seven first downs all night. When Jake did have time he just wasn't accurate and you could tell he was rattled early. I feel sorry for Jake as he descends to the second or third rounds of the NFL draft. His decision to come back to Washington has caused him to lose unrecoverable millions of dollars.
"They did some different things defensively that we did our best to prepare them for and they had a good plan. It's just I'm kind of with coach, I kind of don't know where to begin. I think we were we just weren't very sound everywhere. I know I made a few mistakes and things that really cost us in some big times in games, missed a few throws that would have possibly given us drives earlier in the game that could have changed the outcome of it. It's frustrating.''
Grade D
Running Back
The Huskies fell behind early and Chris Polk carried the ball for 17 yards on 13 carries. This was total domination in its purest form. Tough to blame Polk because there was very little there the entire night but when you average only one yard per carry you are lucky that you don't get an F.
Grade D
Receivers
These guys never had a chance to get open because Locker had only about two second to pass the ball after the snap. UW had an advantage deep over Stanford but was never able to get there which is the story of the game. Good news is I didn't see any drops. Bad news is these guys never had a chance to make a difference.
Grade C
Offensive Line
This was a historically poor performance. The two frosh on the right side were over matched from the start, You have to question why Sark didn't insert Christine and Habben to see if they could make a difference. I don't see any progress being made with Habben being on the sidelines.Maybe I missed it when they were rotating in...perhaps it didn't make a difference. Perhaps these are the growing pains you have to go through when you start frosh.
Grade F Triple Minus
Defensive line
Two frosh starting on this unit also and they were just eaten up all night. Ta'amu was overwhelmed early and was gassed pretty early. This unit won't improve until Elisara and Chrichton are back in the line up which probably won't happen till we play UCLA. We have seen some terrible defensive lines at Washington over the last eight years but this is probably the worst we have seen up to this point.
Grade F
Linebackers
These guys didn't have a chance because of the play of the defensive line. Mason Foster as usual had his good moments but it was impossible to clean up all night behind a defensive line that was being dominated.
Grade C
Secondary
19-26 isn't the whole story because the defensive line left these guys on an island the first four possessions of the evening. When a QB like Andrew Luck has that much time bad things are going to happen. If you don't get pressure a on a QB like Andrew Luck he is going to pick you apart.
Grade D
Special Teams
Stanford stifled the return game but Washington had decent coverage and didn't give up anything big the entire evening. The play of this unit may have been the only positive on the evening.
Grade B
Coaching
The team came out flat and that is entirely on the coaches. Washington was totally unprepared to play tonight and it brings up the honest question of whether the coaches have lost control of the team. The last two weeks have been vintage Ty Willingham.
"I'm not sure (if it was emotion or execution) to be honest with you. I'm going to have to try to assess it all. I thought we just didn't perform and they did. Obviously the line of scrimmage was a big factor. But we are going to assess everything and try to figure out why, how and what we can do to fix it.''
Coach Sark...your team is slow and predictable. Jim Harbaugh and his staff smoked you tonight. They made you look Willingham-esque. Your team wasn't ready to play and there is no excuse for that. We can talk talent gaps all night but your team didn't begin to fight until they were down by 28.
Coach Holt...that is eight terrible quarters in a row. I know that the defense didn't have much of a chance because of the inefficiency of the offense but your guys didn't start playing until they were down by 28 points. You make way too much money not to have your players mentally prepared to play.
Grade F
126 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"the last two weeks have been vintage ty"
Wow.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Oct 30, 2010 8:43 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
I thought this blog condemned comparing Sark to Ty
When did that change?
by GuerrillaDawg on Oct 30, 2010 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions
let it go Guerrilla lol
…the truth is hurting the pollyannas enough.
although they certainly were rude in trying to kill the messenger last week.
P.S. Fire Holt! Sark fire yourself as Offensive Coordinator!
by 206 on Oct 30, 2010 9:31 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
The urge to fire is the result of someone who wishes to assign blame
…as opposed to one who wants to see progress
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Gekko your statement is at best half correct...
and that’s only if blame(your word) equals accountability. Don’t try to put words in my mouth.
by 206 on Oct 31, 2010 2:06 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I didn't try to put words in your mouth...
…simply made a point. Your definition of accountability has not been established. Everyone else’s goals are progress over last year and a bowl game. Since neither goal has been eliminated, your reaction is nothing more than a mindless rant that is premature. It certainly isn’t at the point where the final assessment is conducted and accountability is meted out.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
pollyannas?
There’s been plenty of criticism of Sark and his staff on this blog. The fact that many of us don’t agree with one of your particular beefs – that Sark retains play-calling duties – doesn’t mean we’re a bunch of purple-glasses wearing optimists with huge blind spots.
There’s things that Sark appears to be doing quite well:
- Recruiting
- Creative offensive schemes
- Cultivating a much more open and positive public face for the program
There’s things that we’re not so sure about:
- Player development, especially in certain areas (offensive line, defensive backs, defensive line)
- Sark’s play-calling (I think the issue is much more about execution than play-calling)
- Sark’s ability to motivate his players
There’s things we know that need improvement:
- Zone coverage – we suck at it
- Tackling
- Playing assignment-sound football
- Sark’s time management has had many notable gaffes
I’m still a long ways from saying Sark shouldn’t be the coach. Coaching turnover comes at a pretty high cost to a program, so you have to be damn sure that the alternative – keeping the existing staff – is worse. That was clear to many of us by Ty’s 3rd year. Despite the disappointment of yesterday, I’m a long ways from feeling that pessimistic about Sark, but the rest of the season will tell us a lot.
kirkd, why you are responding?
i most definitely not referring to you. Beyond that your response does not contradict anything
i’ve said here. we agree far more than we disagree. and at least you have a basis for your opinions instead of ’don’t question the home team’ or ‘everything is Ty’s fault’ …
but i’m not going to sit by and let the mindless hordes demand allegiance to something that isn’t working! anyone that can’t see our defense is pathetic and our play-calling questionable at best is not being rational. I have zero time for irrational nonsense!
btw, i’m a Sark supporter from before he agreed to take the job. But there’s plenty of USC fans that wanted him gone because of his ‘pass-happy’ play-calling, this is nothing new.
by 206 on Oct 31, 2010 2:22 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
johnb, sorry about triple post. my phone does that sometimes.
by 206 on Oct 31, 2010 2:28 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
NP..happens to me too.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 31, 2010 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions
kirkd, why you are responding?
i most definitely not referring to you. Beyond that your response does not contradict anything
i’ve said here. we agree far more than we disagree. and at least you have a basis for your opinions instead of ’don’t question the home team’ or ‘everything is Ty’s fault’ …
but i’m not going to sit by and let the mindless hordes demand allegiance to something that isn’t working! anyone that can’t see our defense is pathetic and our play-calling questionable at best is not being rational. I have zero time for irrational nonsense!
btw, i’m a Sark supporter from before he agreed to take the job. But there’s plenty of USC fans that wanted him gone because of his ‘pass-happy’ play-calling, this is nothing new.
by 206 on Oct 31, 2010 2:23 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
kirkd, why you are responding?
i most definitely not referring to you. Beyond that your response does not contradict anything
i’ve said here. we agree far more than we disagree. and at least you have a basis for your opinions instead of ’don’t question the home team’ or ‘everything is Ty’s fault’ …
but i’m not going to sit by and let the mindless hordes demand allegiance to something that isn’t working! anyone that can’t see our defense is pathetic and our play-calling questionable at best is not being rational. I have zero time for irrational nonsense!
btw, i’m a Sark supporter from before he agreed to take the job. But there’s plenty of USC fans that wanted him gone because of his ‘pass-happy’ play-calling, this is nothing new.
by 206 on Oct 31, 2010 2:23 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
kirkd, why you are responding?
i most definitely not referring to you. Beyond that your response does not contradict anything
i’ve said here. we agree far more than we disagree. and at least you have a basis for your opinions instead of ’don’t question the home team’ or ‘everything is Ty’s fault’ …
but i’m not going to sit by and let the mindless hordes demand allegiance to something that isn’t working! anyone that can’t see our defense is pathetic and our play-calling questionable at best is not being rational. I have zero time for irrational nonsense!
btw, i’m a Sark supporter from before he agreed to take the job. But there’s plenty of USC fans that wanted him gone because of his ‘pass-happy’ play-calling, this is nothing new.
by 206 on Oct 31, 2010 2:24 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Losing to Stanford is not the sin. Losing the way we did is. Was there games like this last year? I know we had games with lopsided scores; however, I felt like we were competitive and in most games, just got beat by better teams. There have been three games this year that were very Ty like, in which our uncompetitiveness was inexcusable and unexplainable; Nebraska, Arizona, and Stanford. Actually there have been four games. The BYU game was very Ty like in which we just do not come out and play the way we are supposed to and we lose to a much inferior team. Even the ASU game borders on a Ty game. How does WSU play to within 14 points of these guys on the road and we get crushed by 41 at home? There is going to have to be a lot of soul searching by every member of this team, players and coaches alike, and they are going to have to decide what kind of team they want to be for the rest of the year; a hard playing competitive team that plays with heart and effort or a team that just folds its tents like so many of Ty’s teams.
Wsu got crushed - don't be fooled by the garbage time TDs they scored
…also, if you want to play that game, you have to look at how WSU did against ASU and USC.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
True
WSU did score 21 in the fourth quarter. I was just using them as an example of a team that did not give in. It just concerns me to see this team come out so flat. There is no question that Stanford is the far better team; however, I did not see much competing, especially, on the offensive side, on UW’s part.
Does Jake
ever vary the snap count. The Stanford D was on the run when the ball was snapped…all night long….Jake could have moved down the field 5 yards at a time until the Tree stopped jumping the snap.
Agreed
Ty took a top half PAC 10 team all the way down to 0 and 12. It is going to take some time to dig out. That man should be banned from football forever.
Ty
is part of the reason for the last two games…not the entire reason I meant to say. Too many of the upper classmen on this have had enthusiasm for the game coached out of them. Until Jake and the rest are gone we will see more of the same.
I'd like to believe that
I don’t know how much that’s affecting things, and I don’t know how much we should expect the new staff to be able to turn these guys around. I hope that the Ty hangover is part of the problem, and I hope that the hangover doesn’t infect Sark’s recruits too much.
It’s time for some real leaders to emerge on this team.
I hate to say this and it is not really that fair, but I think left over Ty players are used to losing and, to a certain extent, accept losing.
I think that's true
I don’t want to make any sweeping generalizations about the players, but I suspect that too many of the Ty players are conditioned to losing and expect it. I’m sure there are exceptions, but not enough.
The thing I worry about are the newcomers coming to expect and accept losing. I know this staff is preaching otherwise, and hopefully that message is getting through, but they collectively have to step up and realize that winning requires effort, execution and belief. At some point they need to break through mentally and start expecting to win. The first step is competing for the full 60 minutes, and even if they lose, making sure the opponent respects the effort they put forth and feels the effects of that effort.
Wow!!!!
So we go from too many freshmen playing, to poor Ty recruiting, to an inept AD, to upper classmen being conditioned to losing….and throw in lousy coaching, play calling and depending too much on Locker.
I think the answer is there……..
By all means ...
… supply us with the answer. Please feel free to write a long post detailing said answer. I’m interested.
don't feed the troll
Norm knows better than any of us, and he only comes by to tell us what idiots we are for not seeing things the same way he does. It would be beneath him to actually explain himself and engage in any kind of useful debate.
So, engage Norm at your own risk.
I think he is just Norm…just another Husky fan sick of losing and excuses.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Nov 1, 2010 11:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Perhaps the most profane web site in sports.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Nov 4, 2010 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions
OL
Our OL was absolutely owned, and it didn’t really change when Christine and Habben were put in the game (and that happened pretty early – surprised you missed that John). The complete lack of a pocket may have rattled Jake, but he was waaaaaay off-target most of the night – just some awful, head-shaking throws. Even Polk was affected – I saw a couple of plays where he ignored a big hole and instead ran right up the backs of his stuffed linemen.
Defense was clueless again, biting consistently on fakes, playing awful zone “coverage”, not getting near enough pressure on Luck, not lining up in time and still moving around when Stanford was snapping the ball.
Nebraska was bad, BYU was disappointing, but this was the worst loss of the Sark era IMO. The team just looked flat and clueless.
I shudder to think how bad next week is going to be.
Beating Oregon
doesn’t mean anything anymore.
Because everyone realizes it’s impossible
by GuerrillaDawg on Oct 30, 2010 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions
I assure you it would still mean a lot
Even though it seems impossible.
That's funny.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Oct 31, 2010 7:15 PM PDT up reply actions
It was one of those tough one's
I was distracted the entire night by my wife repeatedly telling me how bad we are and offering up the question of why we are wasting our Saturday nights when we could be out having fun.
She makes a good point…but she wasn’t born into this like me.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 30, 2010 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Worse part is that the team seems to be getting worse as the year goes on. Sark needs to try to put a stop to the decline or there will be no momentum and player or fan confidence going into next year, his third. Third years are usually the make and break point for new coaches, and I really do not want to go through this “fire the coach” crap again or have to sit through the beginnings of another coaching regime.
decline
You could say the same thing happened last year too, until the last two games. It’s possible that the last 3 games of this year could lead to a similar resuscitation of the season. We’ll see – need to beat the beatable teams and keep the Oregon game from being a complete disaster.
Beat the beatable teams
That is what this program needs to start doing before it can challenge for conference championships and beyond. We have to start beating the ASU, UCLA, WSU, etc of the world on a consistent basis before worrying about the Oregons and Nebraskas of the world.
UCLA
That’s the critical game left on the schedule. While I want to see effort and some level of competitiveness against Oregon, I don’t expect a win.
The game against UCLA however is a winnable game, and for me will really define this season – win that game and the bowl hopes stay alive, and provide motivation for the final 2 games. UCLA is bad this year. There’s no good reason to lose to them, especially at home. That said, they’re not going to be a cakewalk – this team can’t take ANY team for granted. But losing to UCLA will be a bad sign, and I’m afraid it could lead to losing out, which would be a huge blow to Sark’s status and the confidence that the team has in this staff. Short of a complete team mutiny, Sark will get a 3rd year, but going 3-9 would put him on a hot seat.
UCLA looms as a very important game for this staff and this year’s team. There is still hope that the goal of a bowl game can be reached.
This was the worst loss in the Gekko era....
… You could see it in the players. The game was over with 6 mins to go in the first quarter
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Similar to Oklahoma
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 30, 2010 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Worst loss in the Lear Pilot era.
Actually, according to KJR this is the first time the Huskies have been shut out at home in my lifetime (1976 was the last time).
I can hear it already, “Willingham never got shut out at home, but Sark did.”
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
No doubt
I think all the changes and shifting around have finally caught up. It would be good to have the same lineup for more than one game.
Okay, violating my 24 hour policy of commenting while I am still mad. (long)
ST grades, johnb should be an F. Not sure if they showed it on TV but twice had only 10 guys on field. 1st was on kickoff return team, Fellner missing for at least 20 secs, then barely gets on field before kickoff. Noticed he was no longer there after that on all the subsequent kickoff return teams. Also, on punt kick team, same deal, 10 on field, cost a TO, not that we needed it later. Dennison missing. Really, at this point in season, and the Head Coach cannot insure we have the basic 11 guys on the field. Were the missing guys being talked to by coaches or what. COACHING
!st drive of game, 3rd and 1 and you get a false start. This could have easily been avoided because it was caused by Stanford jumping offside, a Kreutz or Frank Garcia would have hiked the ball causing an offside, instead, nothing but then Freshmen linemen flinched causing the false start. I also thought it an extremely bad idea to play the 2 frosh next to each other. Move tolar to RG, put Porter in at LG. They were replaced on the 4th offensive series, surprised we didn’t act earlier.
The DEs continue to overpursue, and fail to contain the edge. Didn’t matter in 2nd half as Stanford just kept running it up the between the tackles. DBs and Holt’s zone are not working. Way too soft in coverage. Early on Desmond was at least 8 yds off his guy when he caught the ball. At this point, maybe we need to go man and just suck up the big plays becuase they are happening anyway after beiing NICKed to death by a thousand paper cuts.
And once again, to approach a touchy taboo subject, Sark as game day offensive caller. While he may feel comfortable, he said in this post game interview, they need to reassess everything they do top to bottom. Start here, would a detached Head Coach have noticed earlier that he didn’t have enough guys on field for STs TWICE?. Also, as a detached HC, you can assess better how the game plan is going. Let’s see, no points in second half (OT against OSU not counted) in last 4 games. I think Sark has become extremely predictable in play calling and other teams scouting have picked up on this.
On 3rd and short, why do we give up 5 yards off the bat by lining up Locker in gun or use the wildcat to Polk deep? In fairness, there was 1 time where Locker did lineup under center for a conversion (barely) on a sneak. Conversely, on 3rd and long (19 to be exact after a Polk deep loss caused by a bad Jake zone read), why do we lineup Locker under center knowing he has to drop at least 3 steps to get ready to throw instead of being in gun to better read the defenses.
Lastly, Sark the play caller needs to throw to the TE or FB out of the backfield if nothing else to give the defenses something to think about, even if they drop it. Right now there is no threat at all using the TE or FB, so defenses dont have to (and don’t) need to concern themselves. Just concentrate on Kearse, Locker, Polk andr Callier and just destroy the predictable play.
BTW, I stayed as always to the end, and for one poster, there were more empty seats seats in the season ticket section than TYEE sections at the start of the game. But most of the empty seats were among, as expected, the public fan areas in west end zone. By games end, the entire stadium was pretty much gone equally, maybe 5000 total of us left. Crowd noise was never a factor after the usual 3rd down conversions and the long TD play by Luck. Our own D once again took the crowd out of it.
Thanks for letting me vent like most of us are doing. Has Sark moved a cot into the Graves building yet? Maybe two, one for Nic as well?
I don’t know about that…two years ago you could have said the same thing about USC.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 30, 2010 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Got them next year up here
We will be another year better, and who knows about them. The current streak will not go on forever. At some point, we will no longer be a young team, especially on defense.
Oh so you can see who Oregon will have on the field 6 years from now?
Thanks for thevgripping insight, Marty McFly. LOL
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
I certainly don’t see us being competitive with them in the near future… I don’t know who’ll be on the UO roster 5-6 years from now, but they’ll probably be a lot of 4-5 star seniors (drawn by their facilities, their 2-straight Rose Bowls, and probable Natl title this year), and Kelly has shown the ability to coach ‘em up for games, and I doubt he’s leaving anytime soon.
-Marty
LOL.
We are due for a major upset. Those guys don’t respect us at all.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
But what about their sanctions and loss of scholarships and post-season ban?
(Or did you not see THAT part of the future when you did your prognostication?)
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Oct 31, 2010 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Thank you, John...
for telling it like it is. Now maybe this blog can stop being the island of pollyannas and we can talk real football again.
btw, the PurplePollyanna should man up, retract his last commentary and issue an apology for the delusional smack talk…i won’t hold my breath.
by 206 on Oct 30, 2010 9:25 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
When they aren’t performing I am not going to sugar coat it.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 30, 2010 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions
I blame the entire loss on
the fact that, at no point between an hour prior to the game and the end, was there a “GO! HUSKIES!” chant.
Obviously since we didn’t tell them to go, they didn’t go.
The crowd
tried to help the D early BUT!!!!
I did something tonight I’ve never done before in 20+ years of being a season ticket holder…left in the 3rd quarter
NEVER LEAVE EARLY
Were you also one of those asses that booed the Huskies?
by chrees on Oct 30, 2010 11:00 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I didn't boo
But I did yell at the field that I thought they looked worse than the Cougars as the game ended.
Can't Blame You
I can’t blame you for leaving early, and I am glad you do not boo the kids. At Seahawks games, I boo loudly if they are making bad mental mistakes or just playing lousy; however, they are professionals that are getting paid millions of dollars, and I am spending a lot of money to see them perform. Husky players are just kids, amateurs, not getting paid a cent. I have never booed at a Husky game, football or basketball. I go to Husky games for the love the the game and program.
Same here T90Dawg
That was the first game I have EVER left before the 4th quarter even began. Normally I’m the guy making everybody wait until the very end.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
Recruiting
Rivals Pac-10 rankings:
2009: Stanford #3, UW #9
2008: UW #5, Stanford #8
2007: UW #4, Stanford #9
2006: UW #6, Stanford #10
Sorry, but I can’t buy the argument that we got blown out because Stanford is way more talented than we are, that we don’t have the players to compete with top teams like that.
Stanford gets excellence from their players, and we haven’t. But it’s not like they’re USC-like loaded.
I wish we had Jim Harbaugh.
Rivals ratings are over rated
What is obvious is that Harbaugh has done a great job getting his type of guys to play his type of game. He has also had some time time to put it together.
I do not know if Sark is the answer, but I do know he has not had enough time to get it to work. When you put that OL against two true frosh, you get pushed around. When you put that DL against two true frosh and a hodgepodge, you get killed.
The most worrisome part to me is the lack of consistency. When you start a different OL every week, you are asking for it.
I love Harbaugh too
But regarding the recruiting rankings, a few things to keep in mind:
- Harbaugh is in his 4th season, and I’d be willing to bet there’s been a lot less attrition in his classes due to being there longer than has happened with the UW classes and the transition from Ty to Sark;
- It should be noted that Harbaugh was 4-8 and 5-7 in his first two seasons, so Sark may yet equal or better him in record by the end of the year;
- The Scout.com rankings are a little different, and given their greater emphasis on the West Coast, might be a little more relevant; as well, simply looking at where each team finished in the Pac-10 is only a part of the story – look also at the average rating of the players in their classes:
2010: Stanford 5th, avg star ranking: 3.14; UW 3rd, avg star ranking: 3.13 (UW signed 30 guys to Stanford’s 22, hence the higher ranking despite a lower average star ranking)
2009: Stanford 3rd, avg star ranking: 3.41; UW 10th, avg star ranking: 2.58
2008: Stanford 8th, avg star ranking: 3.06; UW 3rd, avg star ranking: 3.19
2007: Stanford 8th, avg star ranking: 2.79; UW 4th, avg star ranking: 2.81
2006: Stanford 7th, avg star ranking: 2.58; UW 6th, avg star ranking: 2.77
Looking at those numbers, I don’t see much (if any) supposed edge in talent for the Huskies.
I did not mean that UW
had a talent edge over Stanford, but that Stanford did not have some inherent talent edge over UW, especially in the 2006-2007 upperclassman years. Sure, our frosh against their upperclassmen would be a bad match-up, but why do we have to start our frosh when they’ve been able to start their seniors just fine? It’s not like Ty’s players were all one-star walk-ons. They were still 3-star players, just like Stanford has. But my how they’ve grown. I know Ty was a horrible coach, but I can’t believe he chose the only 3-star players incapable of growth.
Harbaugh did go 5-7 is second season, but I think they were in almost every game.
They won’t get it turned around next week, and we’ll have our backsides handed to us three weeks in a row. I’m finally starting to actually wonder if our current staff has what it takes, which is a sad thought to think
development of Ty's players
I didn’t see much in the way of development of players under Ty, so the fact that the upperclassmen Sark inherited from Ty aren’t doing much isn’t really that surprising to me. Sure, I wish this staff were good enough at player development and motivation to get through to guys like Tolar and Habben and Richardson (to name a few), but I’m less concerned about how well they develop those guys and much more concerned about how they develop guys like Jamora, Potoa’e, Porter, Kohler, etc.
I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in the ratings going in…way too many changes at Washington over the last four years while Staford has had four straight years of Harbaugh…it makes a difference and this current Husky team look a lot like Harbaughs second team at Stanford.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 31, 2010 7:03 AM PDT up reply actions
I just can't believe
we’re 41-points-at-home-worse than Stanford, strictly on a talent basis.
I’m not looking forward to your prediction for next Saturday. I don’t think I’ll even be able to watch that game.
There is a talent gap but this loss had nothing to do with talent.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 31, 2010 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions
That loss was about tired, beat up and deflated kids allowing themselves to get beat
…not talent.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Kids just did not come out to play
It is hard to explain, especially considering wins have been so hard to find for this program. You would think the kids would be pumped up and ready to go whenever a chance presented itself. I think the players still do not believe that they can beat good PAC 10 teams, and that they are just going through the motions to “get the game over with”. Football is such an emotional sport, if a team does not truly believe that they can win or in what they are doing, they will not win or perform, period.
It's such a shame that Te'o couldn't have stayed for one more season.
He was the only reason we had any pass rush last year.
It all goes back to coaching
Recruiting doesn’t mean squat if you don’t coach up from the HS game to college. Sark, it’s Holt or you and Holt, time to man up, all be it hard, and make the choice.
For my entire life, our emerald city was set in the finest gold ring, upon a royal purple standard of excellence. The best will stumble, but the elite will always rise again.
Not sure I follow
Are you suggesting that Holt, Sark or both need to go? We all knew this rebuild might be rough. UW football has been bad since the 2004, and it’s not going to get better overnight. Sark’s recruiting well, he’s beaten teams this year and last that the Huskies have no right beating, and he’s basically trying to scheme around the talent deficiencies on the team. Now I think that this should not have been the 41 – 0 beatdown that it was, but it was apparent from the outset that we were overmatched physically. Regardless of what happens in Oregon next weekend, this team is still poised to become bowl eligible. I know that many of us came into this season with high hopes, myself included, and Sark fanned the flames in fall camp, but there’s no reason to jump ship yet. We have 4 games to get 3 wins.
Way too early for that
Wait till the end of the season to start thinking about making a call like that. Firing coaches is a losing proposition.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Oct 31, 2010 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Just to be clear
I wasn’t suggesting that people be fired. Quite the opposite. I was asking S_o_Smith if he was intimating that Sark / Holt / both be fired.
Holt should be fired.
It’s one thing to change the head coach, it’s another to fire assistant coaches. Sark needs to send a message to his players that anything short of excellence will not be tolerated. In two years Holt has given me absolutely no reason to believe that there is even hope for the future of the defense.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
Defense is not very good, but
We all new this defense would struggle this year, and we knew the defense would really struggle against Stanford. With that said, in two of our loses, ASU and BYU, the defense played well enough for us to win. Even in this game, sure the defense got ran over; however, I think they competed better than the offense did. For me, the offense is far more disappointing than the defense has been. The offense is not as young, and the offense was supposed to be the strength of the team. For this year’s team, the defense was just supposed to slow teams down. It was the offense that was supposed to win games. Even in games in which we scored a lot, the offense still made to many mistakes and did not perform at a high level and put teams away. The Oregon State game is a good example. Up 21-0, we all new our defense would not keep OSU down all game. The offense, for the most part, took the rest of the game off, and it almost cost us. Do not get me wrong, I am not 100% sold on Holt, not even close; however, a majority of this year’s misery falls squarely on the shoulders of the offense.
I know what you mean . . .
The difference for me is that I see a glimmer of hope from the offense and I don’t see any hope from the defense. The offense has shown that it is capable of putting up big numbers, they just need to figure out how to do it on a weekly basis. The defense, on the other hand, has looked pretty dang poor in almost every game. BYU and ASU, well turns out BYU sucks and ASU can be a real up and down team. In each of those games the defense still wasn’t able to play zone coverage or get any pressure on the QB. As you said, the defense played well enough to keep us in the game, but I think it was more of the other team’s inability to move the ball than our defenses ability to stop them.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
Actually, at the college level
the two go hand in hand. You must be able to recruit kids that fit what you want to do. Once you get them, you must be able to coach them as well.
It is not realistic to expect a coach to take kids that played high school football last year, and beat kids that played high level college football for the last two years. I personally do not see how it is realistic to expect a new coach to take left overs from a previous regime that could not win anything at all, and suddenly be competitive against well established, well coached programs like Stanford.
As far as I am concerned, the jury is still very much out on Sark and Co. I am not ready to throw them under the bus, if for no other reason than it would set the program back at least two more years.
Stanford Power O/ Power Lead
Hey guys, first time long time here. I enjoy the blog very much and everyone who brings good conversation about college football.
Just curious if anyone remembers the announcers yesterday on Versus talking about Stanford continuing to run the Power O and the Power lead out of various sets. I know the old saying if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it but damn….. I’ve never seen a college team continuously do the same two running plays over and over again with gaping holes. I think it’s #71 Andrew Phillips the right guard who pulled on those plays and would manhandle anyone in purple that stood in his way. One would think Nicky Holt would send Nate Williams on some stunts to clog up the middle? Something, anything to mix it up.
When Holt was at USC I remember so much shifting, stunting, and gap control that it was very difficult to run on them. Is he not doing that now because of a lack of talent and depth?!?!
Just really confused and stunned. Here’s hoping we can pull a Stanford circa 07 on the Ducks next week!
Good Grading, John
When Sark says that the team had good practice and was prepared for the game, I wonder what planet he has been on.
"2nd or 3rd round for Jake"
The second or third round for Jake might actually help him if a team that isn’t desperate for a quarterback drafts him as a project and he gets time to develop, otherwise hello baseball.
Aloha John
An awful game, but I had to agree with your write up and most commenters. The Stanford recruiting classes comparisons are interesting. I guess Izbicki and Middelton graded out better than the Stanford lineman. But a few years later, those linemen on each side of the ball are overwhelming are guys.
I continue to think that this team mainly needs time to grow up. Its worked for Stanford, and I like the new guys coming in. As the players get better, the coaches will look better.
The wind is blowing hard in Maui right now, but its still Maui….enjoy.
Starting over
I think it’s time to realize the rebuiding process is going to take longer then anyone expected. I think it’s about time the coaches, the players, folks running the websites, and Fox Sports NW discontinue the preseason hype. It adds too much pressure for such a young team.
I think this coaching staff is going to have to start from scratch after the bowl-less season comes to a halt. I think it’s time to evaluate each player and decide if they have the god damn guts to compete (even when the chips are down). If they don’t have the guts, then get rid of them. I watched the Oregon/USC game last night and the main reaseon why the ducks are good is because they aren’t afraid to play fast. They have great self esteem as individuals and as a team. Besides Brandon Baer, nobody really stands out as a world-beater. They believe and they play fast. We don’t believe and we play slow.
I love Jake Locker as does every other Husky fan. But psychologically we rely too much on No.10 to lead us to victory. If Jake has a bad day, it’s simple we lose. I think the best thing that can happen to this team is for Jake Locker to graduate (for the reason stated above). We have to learn to trust each other, we have to learn to not rely on one or two players to pull us out. We have to do it! Our team has a psychological dissadvantage. We rely on one player instead of 11 players. Jake is a phenomenal athlete, arguably the best to ever step foot on campus. But the team thinks the team will only go as far as Jake’s legs will take them. We have to change the mindset of the players. No more relying on No.10 to make a play. In fact, I think it would be a great motivator for the team to start Keith Price for the Oregon game. No, I am not conceding the victory. I’m sending a message to the team that it’s time to quit looking at No.10 to get the win.
Kick off every player that quit in the Stanford game right now. It is cancerous to the program so don’t wait.
All I saw was purple
That will help the future recruiting, kicking out a ton of players...
Future players love to know they too will be treated with such respect.
I’m not so sure that Oregon doesn’t have quite a few “world-beaters” talent wise… however, you do make a great point about the way everyone relies on Jake, and he is such a focus point. It would be nice to see how good he could be if he was allowed to just be another guy instead of the absolute definitive key to the offense and team.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Oct 31, 2010 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions
The news just gets worse
ABC has announced they are going to televise the UW @ Oregon game. Great, now we can be humiliated on national TV.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
Good thing it's only regionally
I’m not sure I can stomach another debacle nor make a good post [see above]. I’d be more likely to watch the game if Price were inserted as the starter at QB.
All I saw was purple
I'm seriously considering waging on the dawgs to cover this week..
…because we know they aren’t THAT bad and UO has zero respect for us. That and 30 pts is huge
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Stanford beat us by 41 . . .
You think Oregon isn’t going to beat us by more?? Sorry, but I’d put money on Oregon in a heartbeat, there is NO way we stop a mobile QB, let alone LMJ.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
think about what has to happen to sustain a 30 point margin of victory ...
… including our #1’s going against their twos and threes. And, with Jake out, the spread is going to go up to 33 or so. that’s a lot of points that get covered with a few garbage time plays.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
I'd take Oregon every time
Given what Oregon’s offense has done to everybody this season, I just can’t see us keeping it within 40 points, especially with Jake out.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
Does any team in this state play competitive football anymore?
UW 0-41, WSU. 0-42, Seahawks 3-33. My God. What a horrible weekend. Maybe I’ll start watching the Volleyball team, they are a lot easier to watch.
by Big Husky on Oct 31, 2010 4:45 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Basketball
If it wasn’t for the 160 mile round trip I’d give up Husky football and start with Husky basketball.
A lot easier on the eyes??
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
volleyball
they got swept this weekend in LA, but they are easier to watch.
next week's opponent is #1
in the BCS and here:
Your first PAC 10 Power Poll: Week 9: http://wp.me/pVda6-6s
Go Ducks!!!!
Look
They’ve been ranked #1 for three weeks and they act like they are the best program ever. For as good as the Ducks are and have been over the last few years, giving them their props, they do not even belong in the same book when compared to the historical program success of the University of Washington. Damn, Duck fans get on my nerves.
Gonna be a long week.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
very true.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
Oregon is good but I don’t think they have all the pieces in place to win a BCS title. I think their are some tough Pac 10 games left to think about before thinking about going to the BCS title game.
I’ve seen better Pac 10 teams other then this version of Oregon. They’re good, but not great in my opinion. I think they first need to win roses before thinking of winning BCS titles. What makes Oregon so good is that they play fast. Yes it’s speed, but when you play fast you have great self confidence and great self esteem. They believe and are playing championship-level football in October.
Oregon is going to kick our collective butts this saturday and I’m not sure I will watch the game. Do we have a chance to win with No.10 as our starting QB? I don’t think it’s going to matter. I mentioned we rely too heavily on Jake to pull us up in order to win. I’m tired of the team relying on Jake. I say we insert Keith Price in at QB and send a message that the entire team has to bring it in order to have a chance to win. Plus it would offer Price tremendous game experience. Plus it would ensure that Jake is healthy for the remaining “winnable” games. To me it makes sense to go with Price.
All I saw was purple
it makes no sense
Sit Jake for the Oregon game and watch as Sark completely loses the team. If people think some of the upperclassmen are already checking out on Sark, it’s nothing compared to what would happen if Sark sat out Jake.
There are reasons for playing Price instead (as noted above), but the downside is so much worse that it’s not really worth even discussing.
Should be interesting, now that we know Jake is sitting.
At least is appears to be due to injury. Unfortunately for Price, getting his first start in Eugene is going to be a very, very tough task.
That being said, if I’m Sark I’d be telling Price, “You can’t lose, everybody is expecting us to lose by 70, just imagine how legendary it would be if you knocked off the #1 ranked Oregon team in Eugene!”
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
as I noted below
I hope the injury is legit and Jake the team are buying it. From info I’ve read elsewhere, I tend to think it is legit, so I’m not so worried about Sark losing the team by sitting Jake. If it had just been “Jake is sore, we have no shot against Oregon, let’s get him healthy for the final 3 games” I think that could have been disaster for team morale. But if Jake is legitimately sporting a broken rib and the medical staff is holding him out, that gives Sark a lot more latitude to sit him with out locker room repercussions.
Whoever “they” are, you’re talking to or listening to the wrong Duck fans. Seriously, why pay any attention to the random 19-year-old blog poster who thinks wings on uniforms look cool and whose complete frame of college football reference is the past five years? There can be no question – Oregon football has a long, long way to go before its historical achievements approach that of the Huskies. Yes, the Ducks are making strides, but… No modern Rose Bowl win. No national title. Still well behind in the head-to-head wins and losses. Some of us get it.
In Chip I trust. In Nick, not so much.
Nice to see a reasonable Duck fan here
Yeah, every program has those annoying kids posting out of mom’s basement. For some reason I notice the ones from Oregon more.
Can I steal your tagline?
Just one small change:
In Sark I trust. In Nick, not so much.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
WOW, a sane Duck fan
Have to admit there are a ton of illogical Husky fans out there as well. Unfortunately, all we have to live off right now is past glory, and that just sucks.
Is there a reason you say
“Seen the wsu flag again this morning…” rather than saw it?
by spencer peaty on Oct 31, 2010 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Is that the PAC 10 Power Poll guy?
I find his Oregon ranting funny, but it’s difficult to understand.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on UW Dawg Pound
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
