Grading the game
by John Berkowitz on Sep 5, 2010 8:28 AM PDT
Email
PrintQUARTERBACK: I thought we left "Deer in the Headlights Jake" behind the final two games of last season but it seems that wasn't the case. Jake didn't do himself any favors by not relaxing in the pocket and playing stiff the majority of the night. The coaching staff didn't do him any favors by continuing to call the draw rather than rolling him out to the right. Look for Jake to come out next Saturday and just kill Syracuse; he is a much better player at home than he is on the road. GRADE: C
RUNNING BACK: i thought Chris Polk did a good job last night. The problem was he only had 16 carries. UW started throwing early and ignored the running game in the first half. Jessie Callier showed some definite spark while running for his first Husky TD. Austin Sylvester was only so-so since as a blocking back; I noticed a few missed blocks by the FB that would have been picked up by Paul Homer last season. GRADE: B
RECEIVERS: Decent numbers by Kearse and Aguilar, but the receiving unit as a whole had far too many drops. Correct the drops and perhaps Jake doesn't look quite as mortal. Cody Bruns had a nice debut as a starter, catching three passes. GRADE: C
OFFENSIVE LINE: The Huskies picked up close to 400 yards in total offense last night, but if you can't pick up first downs in short yardage situations you aren't going to win close football games against quality opponents. Two failed fourth down conversions in the fourth quarter were game killers. GRADE: C
DEFENSIVE LINE: Ta'amu looked good when he wasn't gassed. Overall the interior of the line did a good job stopping the run when you consider how long they were on the field. The defensive ends didn't get it done and the BYU QB's had all the time they needed. Until UW puts together a pass rush they will struggle against quality opponents. GRADE: C
LINEBACKERS: Cort Dennison was all over the field making plays, Mason Foster and Victor Aiyewa both had solid games, but the lack of turnovers is something the defense must improve upon. What Washington truly lacks is a thumper in the mold of Donald Butler in the middle. Grade: B
DEFENSIVE BACKS: Williams and Fellner had solid games, but the corners played as if they were asleep. Richardson's pass interference penalty was a prime example of why he lost his starting job last season. Trufant seems out of sync at times. While the DB's only allowed one big play, it proved to be the game winner. However, chalk that one up to Nick Holt getting burned on a blitz call. Grade: C
SPECIAL TEAMS: Mahan and Folk get A's but give the rest of the unit a big fat F. Polk's ball handling miscues on kickoffs and Ducre's roughing the kicker penalty killed field position and kept BYU in the game when it looked like the Huskies might have the ability to put this one away earlier. Sark's decision not to go for three in the fourth quarter is questionable but we will cover that in the next section. When are we ever see this unit score more points than it gives up? GRADE: D
COACHING: First of all, not taking the points with 12:24 left in the fourth quarter when down by six is a real head scratcher. We have seen Sark do this before and we will see Sark do it again. You have to wonder how many games the gambler will lose by not playing the percentages correctly? On the road, in a hostile environment, with that many minutes remaining...you have to take the points.
Sark's play calling was off all night. He didn't establish the run early even though the opportunity was there in favor of throwing the ball. The first series was great but as soon as UW started making mistakes on special teams you could see the coaches start to panic, which was reflected by the overall play of the team and its QB.
Jake had a tough night, but you can put a lot of that on Sark's shoulders. You would figure that after two years he would figure out that Jake is best when he is rolling out to his right and has the green light to run. The up the middle draw stuff he called all night never allowed Jake to get a step ahead of the BYU defenders.
Probably the most discouraging thing that happened over the course of the evening. My wife Kate actually picked up on this...BYU simply was better coached and wanted the game more than Washington. This game reminded me quite a bit of the UCLA debacle last year, costing UW a bowl game.
It is a young staff that will only get better but you have to wonder how much better it would be if Sark wasn't calling the plays. I understand why he wants the control, but it simply isn't working.
GRADE: D for Sark and Grade C Plus for Holt
Officiating: You know you are going to get a little home cooking on the road, but when you play in Provo the calls can border on cheating. The ball was spotted offensively and defensively in BYU's favor all evening. UW stopped Nelson a full yard behind scrimmage on one crucial play, yet the zebra's gave him a first down. Quinton Richardson's PI penalty was unfortunate, but the ball was also uncatchable, meaning the penalty should not have been called. Kearse's tripping penalty which stopped a drive was an utter joke.
In a close game the officials can make a serious difference and they did last night in Provo. It is easy to blame the ref's but that does happen in this stadium.
Grade A for BYU and F for Washington.
287 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Zebras
I was sure we got a couple of stops that ended up being 1st downs for them. I was listening to the Honks after the game and they said Tamu had zero tackles. No assists…NADA. Mason Foster was an animal out there but he needs some help.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Coaching
1st time posting, long time reader though. Maybe the headache from banging my head on the wall last night made me sign up..
You hit the coaching dead on, John. The whole 4th qtr I was asking for an offensive coordinator. Sark can’t do both. Whether he is a good play caller or not, the offense needs someone focused 100% on analyzing and disecting the game and helping them succeed, and the rest of the team needs a head coach focused 100% on the bigger picture and keeping them motivated and their head focused in the game. It’s understandable that sark can’t do both. But he needs to admit it and take care of it.
I agree
The zebras didn’t help but a good team needs to overcome that. ST mistakes killed us. Lack of a pass rush killed us. Failure to contain on the Defensive edge killed us. Jake being off killed us. But the biggest problem with this team is probably its strength, the coaches.
Sark is a protege of Pete Carroll. A gambler who tries for homers with runners in scoring position. He is a very overpaid Offensive coordinator and an expensive OJT Head Coach. In the second quarter we needed the HC to calm the troops, but he was too busy planning his next series. I know why he does it, inexperience pure and simple and feels if he gets fired it will be because he called the plays and not someone else.
I was major bummed throughout and after the game because it was winnable. I totally bought into the pre season hype of an improved conditioned team and an improved JL. What we saw was a beatdown in the trenches and an overenthused JL slinging it past his receivers again and locking on to his primary target. The Coaching staff was plain outcoached by poor play selection. I thought they abandoned the running game too early.
The rest of my rants have already been posted by others so I will leave it at that. Maybe now that the Heisman is officially dead, maybe JL can relax and let the game come back to him again like the end of last season. He was too pumped for BYU.
Time to get ready for Cuse.
Totally agree with Jake rolling out more. I bet if you asked D-cordinators they’d all say that Jake rolling out scares them the most and for some reason Jake is more accurate when throwing on the run. Not sure why Sark & Co. can’t see this.
Especially off of play action
He is deadly when he fakes a hand off to Polk and rolls out to his right.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
If I could use two words to describe this game it would be these: Missed. Opportunity.
We held BYU to 23 points at home! Impressive! We put up 394 yds of offense (435 without that bad punt snap) IN PROVO! Nice work by the offense.
As I look back, our defense was actuallly pretty impressive, they came up with plenty of 3 and outs, and lots of red zone stops. The 2 biggest issues on defense were 1. lack of pass rush 2. lack of a defensive PLAYMAKER. We needed some big hits, turnovers to create some energy.
Special teams just destroyed us. Missed Opportunity, take away the unforced errors and we win that game by 10 points.
Not sure I’d agree with your assesment of our D. I thought several of BYU’s drives stalled because their recievers dropped catchable balls on at least 3 or 4 third down attempts not because our D maid a good play. Can’t believe how soft our CB’s looked. Very disappointing IMO.
Completely agree.
Still a missed opportunity though.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
On paper...
things were ok I suppose.
The lack of pass rush was disheartening, but expected. Part of it was that BYU was running 3 step drops all night.
Last year I remember thinking to myself “Why don’t they ever flash some Jake running plays?” I just wanted a couple called a game to show that it was there. Last night there were 11! That’s just ridiculous. Jake was passing the ball just fine and should have been allowed to do so.
If you’re going to run him, run some options or power sweep stuff to the outside where his speed is an asset. They were running him like he was Paul Homer last night.
As for the D – well, BYU stopped themselves as much as the defense did.
Husky Offense
Our third down conversion percentage needs improvement. I guess there is good with the bad, it’s just tough seeing it after a loss.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
I agree to an extent.
They were 4 for in the first half, which is very respectable. They are capable of maintaining that sort of rate all game long. They just simply need to execute it.
I believe that there are much better days ahead.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2010 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I liked the decision to go for the fourth down early in the fourth
A 40-yard FG is no gimme in the college game, they were on the road, and it was only 4th and 2. BYU just sniffed that play out and had every part of it covered supremely well.
And yeah, I agree with the assessment that BYU stopped themselves more than the Huskies did. There was no pressure on the QB, receivers were wide open and although the run defense was decent, if they let teams pass like that they are going to give up a lot more points.
I missed the first Chris Polk misplay on the kickoff but it looked to me on the second as if the ball took a wicked bounce and got past Polk in a manner that would have gotten past anyone. I don’t know that I can blame him for that one. I am the only person saying this though so I could be wrong.
I agree on the wicked bounce
May sound like whining but the dawns were a bit unlucky yesterday. Some bad calls by the refs, but also that one BYU punt that was headed straight for the end zone and then took a right turn and bounced out at the one. And that pooched kick off that bounced over the head of the lead man and then sideways away from Polk. Polk slipping on the prior kickoff wasn’t too fortunate either.
by Zack on Sep 5, 2010 11:00 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
They definitely got some...
…good bounces. I guess to a certain extent it was their day.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Neither is going for it on fourth down a gimme.
But I ask you: Which seems like the higher-percentage play? Going for a FG or going for the conversion when you consider that twice UW has failed to convert on 3rd and 2 and Folk had earlier nailed a 54-yarder that still had some sail to it when it crossed the crossbars?
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2010 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
The play calling on that last possession really annoyed me
We got into their territory and went run, run, 3rd down pass conv., run, run, qb draw, failed 4th down conv. Polk was good yesterday but the running game was hardly consistent and those plays just ate up clock and put us in high pressure 3rd and 4th downs.
by Zack on Sep 5, 2010 10:56 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
All of the mistakes are true
but there was almost a season’s worth of bad luck in that game. After Lopez’s hyper snap, he settled down. Starting with the ball outside their own 20 was a major victory; but that included some great bounces out of bounds on punts and difficult bounces on kick offs. Without any coaching, those will go away next week.
So now the coaches have to fix the real problems. But keep in mind, 435 yards without that bad snap, and dropped passes. Also, we were one touchdown from a completely different outlook on this game.
Sark calling plays? I don’t think that is going to change. That’s who he is. He speaks his way, recruits his way, coaches his way…. And we are pretty happy until we decide that after the 4th down failed, he should have kicked a FG (or run instead of passing). Not only do we have a young team, but we have a young HC and a new HC. We also have a smart HC and these things will resolve themselves. He has admitted that as an OC you plan to go for it on 4th, and the HC makes the call go or kick. Even when two people make that decision, there are still Monday morning QBs.
On JB’s prior story, the most positive remarks came from a duck and a Corn Husker. Going back a year, this was certainly better than the Oregon-Boise St game (if you are a duck). Yesterday, my enthusiasm certainly dropped in the second half, but I look forward to a happy weekend next week, where I can read the paper with great joy and relive the game. I feel like I’m starting to lecture, so I apologize, I’m done.
Agree, but good teams make their own luck.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Great Recruiters Too!
Just thought I’d add that.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Tough One To Watch
Ever read a review for a movie and all the critics rave about how great it is? Your friends see it and tell you it’s the best movie in years, but after you pony up $30 to see it in 3D with your wife, you shell out another $20 on popcorn and other crap, when the credits roll up on the screen you ask yourself, “That’s it???” That’s how I felt last night.
The offense was predictable, Kearse still drops easy balls are key moments, and Quinton, well, is still Quinton no matter how strong of a fall camp he had. The defense, outside of getting burned down the middle on the long TD with a poorly executed blitz, played decent, given how long they were on the field with all of BYU’s dinks and dunks. If our own crappy play calling could have given the tired D-Line longer breaks, maybe we couldn’t have stood up BYU’s offense a little better.
Have to disagree on the review of the refs. I’ve officiated high school football since 1989, and specifically, while the tripping call on Kearse was surprised me simply because I can’t remember ever seeing it called in a college game before, the rule is straight forward (Straight from the NCAA book: "Tripping is intentionally using the lower leg or foot to obstruct an opponent "). I’ve watched the play four times now and by book, the ref nailed it…though I’m still shocked he called it.
The other thing I would say about the refs is that the whole thing about home-cooking is 99.4% myth and urban legend. I umpired Division 1 NCAA baseball for seven years, walking away only after my second child was born and wanting to be a dad more than I wanted to be an umpire. Trust me, unless we have a very serious situation along the lines of the NBA’s Tim Donaghy, refs couldn’t care less who wins or loses. It would take an official who’s had his gonads surgically removed to make calls in favor of a home team just because they’re the home team and it’s a tough atmosphere to officiate. While they may or may not be “good” officials is another matter (Jay Stricherz comes immediately to mind as a “not good” official), but home cooking? It’s an “eye of the beholder” thing.
by Purple Reign 91 on Sep 5, 2010 11:44 AM PDT reply actions
excellent analysis, johnb!
i agree 100 percent with the reasons for every grade, the Huskies aren’t awful skill or talent-wise which is why they deserve heat. this team must go to a bowl game or Sark and Co. didn’t do their job. Get it done! GO HUSKIES!
by 206 on Sep 5, 2010 12:01 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
I'm giving everyone a F for that game starting at the top
Jake you get an F for being a non factor in the second half…. period
O-line F, returning 4 against a new front 7 – REALLY
Deffense- F, 0 pressure all game even with blitzes and poor timing with penalties, the one blown coverage cost us the game
Special teams-F, no explaining needed here
Coaching – F- , The reason for the F- is three fold, preperation for this game, play calling and failure on what they’ve been preaching all camp long, finish in the 4th quarter when the game is on the line. Complete failure on the coaching staff for either not getting them ready to the point of being able to finish, or not knowing how too.
F’s all around boys, the only positive is that you get a week to fix ALL that is wrong
Last PAC-10 Rose Bowl winner not named USC....Washington
Hopefully
They come out pissed against Syracuse and run up the score.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
And then i read this
Huskies tailback Chris Polk said he thought it came down to a matter of will.
“I just think that they just wanted it more, honestly,” he said.
Or as UW tight end Chris Izbicki said: “They came out and outworked us. It’s too bad.”
ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!!
Last PAC-10 Rose Bowl winner not named USC....Washington
Here's hoping the players pay for it in practice.
Run ’em until they puke.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Run them until they puke?
That’s an approach I would strongly disagree with.
Instead, I say: Diagnose, correct, and run it until it’s run to perfection. Perfection, perfection, perfection.
I don’t think punishing anyone would solve the problem.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
And that's part of the reason why we've had soft teams for the last decade.
Either outwork the other team on Saturday or I’m going to work you until you quit Monday – Thursday.
Chris Polk:
bq. I just think that they just wanted it more, honestly,
bq. I think we just made our own stuff up. We didn’t do what we were coached to do, we just came out there and tried to do our own thing. When we were doing what we are coached to do they couldn’t stop us. Every play was working for us but we just made our own stuff up.
Chris Izbicki:
bq. They came out and outworked us
Completely unacceptable. We should never be out worked. We should never want it less. We should never stray from our assignments. As a coach, you either do it my way and life is great, or I’ll make your life hell. Enough of this pansy BS, this is football, play hard or go home.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Sorry
Formatting doesn’t like me lately.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
While the Huskies should never want it less than the other team, truth is, in every game there is, one team will collectively want to win more than the other, regardless of whether or not they do.
No, it’s a silly statement to say that’s why the Huskies have had soft teams for the last decade. First off, it’s assumptive and subjective to say that they were soft, secondly, it’s speculative to say that my approach is the same approach the Huskies have exercised collectively for the greater part of the decade.
Punish them all you l like, that won’t necessarily solve the problem.
Also, the Huskies played hard. They were beat by a team that played and executed better.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Don't know if anyone read this yet
Steve Kelley’s article
Except the last line should read:
And on opening night, at least, 2010 looked too much like20092008.
Last PAC-10 Rose Bowl winner not named USC....Washington
Is this where someone...
…needs to say, “take a deep breath”. We had a bad game and we lost. BYU playing at home in their opener was more emotionally charged than we were. They made plays and we made too many mistakes. We are a better team than this performance indicates. GO DAWGS!!
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
I love the positive attitude.
My problem is at home, yes, we are a better team than this performance. On the road, I’m not convinced that we are better than this.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Wish I could
But this was an expected victory, I counted this as a win, with all the factors we were set up to go into the Nebraska game 2-0 with that game being a showdown. Now… I’m looking at the schedule thinking the only sure victory we might have is Wazzu, all others are dependant on this team being able to adjust on game day which wasn’t done against BYU so why would i thnk otherwise until it’s proven. I would like to think we are the better team, I thought that throughout camp, but now… i’m left with what looked like another start to another year of misery. Until proven otherwise
Last PAC-10 Rose Bowl winner not named USC....Washington
Really feels like, "Here we go again", doesn't it.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
It DOES
And i’m such a Sark believer that it hurts, but this is ALL on his shoulders from my perspective, all the errors commited yesterday with play calling and conditioning (especially conditioning seeing as how he played there), there is no excuse to have this happen with this team. We had a “great camp” and this is what happened right out of the gate? It definately feels like another year of WTH only because of how that game played out, if it was a 45-42 loss I would have felt a little better about that only because I know our D is suspect, but the fact that our O wasn’t even in the red zone for the whole second half is beyond sickening. Life and football favor the prepared and right now this team didn’t look prepared which falls directly on Sark
Last PAC-10 Rose Bowl winner not named USC....Washington
I know exactly how you feel
Here’s the biggest problem from my point of view: If we are going to be a contender, we have to win games like yesterday’s, we can’t keep beating ourselves. In order to be successful, this coaching staff is going to have to get these guys to perform on the road. Right now, we might as well just forfeit road games, it’s pathetic.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
no, it is time for a sense of urgency...
Why?
… Jake Locker was the third best QB on the field
… BYU was more physical than us, by a lot
… We had no pass rush, again
… We generated no turnovers
… BYU is in a down cycle replacing a lot of key players from last year includong most of the D, QB and stud)
… BYU is probably the third or fourth weakest team we’ll see all year
… We still haven’t solved short yardage situations yet
… Playcalling was void of tempo, again
… We failed to score at all in the second half
The score isn’t the issue. The way we played timid and the lackluster emotion we showed in the second half are the most disappointing aspects of this game.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Sep 5, 2010 4:13 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Exactly.
It’s time to win, NOW, no excuses. If I wanted to watch a team lose, I’d be a Wazzu fan.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I want to handle these one at a time.
1. Not even close. Neither BYU QB had to win the game, they simply had to not lose it. Locker had to win it. He couldn’t be anything other than “exceptionally good” for the Dawgs to have a chance, on paper. He was merely “good.” He didn’t have near the time to throw that either BYU QB had, and, he had to be the too much of the rushing attack.
2. Agree. BYU has probably the third-best o-line the Dawgs will face this season. The inability of the Dawgs’ oline to get push was frustrating, though.
3. None. My brother made a point after this game – it doesn’t really look like the Dawgs know how to blitz too well. It seems like, far too often, they run to the man that’s trying to pick them up instead of making a move to beat him.
4. Disagree. Sort of. BYU is a mature program. They’ve recruited as well as they ever have. Yes, they lost a lot. But they’re replacing it with talent.
5. No way. Not even close. BYU is better than WSU, ASU, UCLA, Syracuse, and is on par with Arizona, Stanford, and Cal. At worst, this is a middle-of-the-Pac 10 team.
6. Agreed. Probably the most frustrating thing. I bet if you could get him to anwer honestly, Sarkisian would tell you this isn’t the offense he really wants to run. I don’t think he wants to sit in the shotgun and run the zone-read. The lack of effectiveness at tight end and fullback, the inability of the line to block, and the fact that the QB is one of the best runners on the team, is forcing him to play this way.
7. Sort of agree. I don’t like the zone read as the run game staple. I don’t like the fact that the Dawgs decided before the game to not attack the edges. I didn’t like the play calls on first and second down the last two drives (zone read, zone read, pass). But, the Dawgs started three drives inside their own five. Five inside their own 20. It’s tough to get much rolling when you’re constantly in the shadow of your own goal post. The play calling to open the third quarter was beautiful. Kearse has to make that catch.
8. Fact.
The score wasn’t the issue, you’re right. Holding BYU to 23 at home should be good enough to win.
I think going for it on 4th down early in the fourth was the right call at the time. BYU had rolled through the 4th quarter. There was no reason to think the Dawgs were going to shut them out the rest of the way. Jake didn’t sell the play action too well, and for that matter, play action on an end-around isn’t exactly what I would’ve liked to see. Either BYU had exactly the perfect defense called, or there was a blown assingment. The only guy that went the direction of the play was Polk. If he would’ve even screened the blitzing linebacker (much less made any contact with him), that’s an easy first down. I don’t know if that was his responsibility or not, but there it is. Good play by BYU. Oh, and Kearse was interferred with.
I disagree with John’s point that it was the DB’s that blew the coverage on the long TD pass. That was Dennison’s guy. The safety on that side had the receiver that Dennison was trying to pick up. Dennison turned the wrong way on the snap, and never saw the back out of the backfield.
Of any of the three units that you can pin this one on, it’s special teams. Take away the roughing the punter, the Dawgs get the ball back with tons of momentum and good field position. Aguilar needs to be more aggressive fielding punts. He let two balls bounce that he could’ve fielded. Polk had two bad plays – one was a slip, and on the other he misjudged a bounce. He probably won’t have either happend to him again this season.
Field position was the death knell of this game.
The playcalling wasn’t great, but I think the problem was strategic. The Dawgs are half-committed to making Locker a pro-style QB right now, and half running the spread-option. That’s a recipe for disaster. Play action out of the shotgun isn’t nearly as effective as play action under center. Maybe it was a single game plan. This wasn’t what the team has done most of camp.
It’s tough to get a read on how good BYU really is, but I think they’re better than I gave them credit coming into the game. They’ll win 10.
bravo
Agree with everything you said here.
The point about field position is a great one, and one that’s been overlooked by many. Throughout the game I was getting flashbacks to the UW/Oregon game in 2000, when we were consistently in bad field position but still came close to pulling out a win.
I know people are really disappointed in this loss. We all want to believe the hype about our offense and about Jake, and we all wanted the momentum of possibly going into the Nebraska game 2-0 with ESPN Gameday coming to town. Well, the reality is that Provo is a tough place to play with the heat and the elevation, and this is a mature program with a very good coaching staff. Rebuilding or not, this was never going to be an easy game.
Many of our mistakes were unforced rather than cases of being overmatched, and there were some instances of bad calls going against us and the ball bouncing in favor of BYU which helped keep us in bad field position all night. Those are things that are fixable and luck issues that we probably won’t face nearly as much the rest of the way.
My point being, for all that went wrong, we were just a few plays away from winning this game despite all the mistakes. If Jake puts a little more touch on that go route to Kearse and we turn starting off at our 1 yard line into a 99 yard TD, momentum would have been heavily in our favor and our team confidence a lot higher.
For all of our optimism, this team still has a lot of question marks, lack of quality/experienced depth and is still 7 seasons removed from a non-losing season. I know it sounds like excuses, and it’s true that the team and coaches need to make their own luck, but they are close to turning a corner. It sucks to have lost this game, but let’s keep some perspective and not lose our heads.
Thanks to the posters here for (mostly) keeping their emotions in check and not flying off the handle – it’s been a lot easier to read this board than the one over at Dawgman. Even on the premium board there, it’s been a flurry of embarrassingly juvenile, emotional and seriously over reaction dumb posts.
For all of our optimism, this team still has a lot of question marks, lack of quality/experienced depth and is still 7 seasons removed from a non-losing season.
Exactly. I think a lot of people (me included) confuse “better” with “good” in the offseason. Everything is “better” this year, but there are still a lot of things that have a long way to go to reach “good.” Some of it will happen this year. Some of it will take a couple more years and a couple more recruiting classes.
Yep
We are capable of winning 8+ games, but we are also capable of losing 8+ games. I want this program to have high expectations, but at the same time we should keep some realistic perspective and not over react. Yeah, we all wanted the team to get off to a good start, but it’s not a death knell for the season to lose at BYU, nor a defining indictment of this coaching staff.
Let’s kick the crap out of Syracuse like we are capable of and give Nebraska all they can handle the following week.
I'm upset like everyone else,
But you guys have to stop with the negativity and look at the game objectively. Not one bounce went the huskies way, and they made more mental errors then they likely will make in the rest of the season combined, they were admittedly outworked and they only lost by six points to a BYU in Polvo! And i know they lost a lot of their players, but BYU beat Oklahoma in the opener last year and smacked Oregon State in the Las Vegas bowl. The comparisons with the huskies two years ago are completely ridiculous, with the exception of the team getting outworked. It was just a very bad day. Its hard to imagine having less luck than they had yesterday, and sometimes its better to be lucky than good, just remember the Arizona game last year.
Good teams make their own luck.
I’m tired of hearing about how “the ball didn’t bounce our way all night”.
Loser’s cry about ref’s, bad luck, mental errors, and how the ball bounces. Winners find a way to win.
Win, or go to Wazzu.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
look, I'm as bullish on this team as anyone...
… but how we lost is what was so shocking. We played weak and soft. We made mental errors. We got average at best QB play. We got dominated on the lines. Our playcalling was choppy, like the kids had never run some of these plays before. Our special teams … oh lordy.
Either the lights come on next week and we show up a different club or we face the prospect of opening up the season facing a 1-4 record and bowl eligibility all but gone. I believe in the former, but I now have to at least acknowledge the possibility of the latter. That wasn’t on my radar before.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Sep 5, 2010 5:15 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
MEN V. BOYS
Referring to excellent UW-BYU game thread by Posted by Bob Condotta I learned we played 13 true freshman. When this team gets developed you will rarely find a freshman playing. Young very young getting their first taste of the jitters. Two years down the line watch out.
Other comments I picked up during the game BYU 34 players married with children. An astounding 51 players on church missions. You add 85 active scholarship players and it totals 116 plus on the active/inactive roster.
Talk about stockpiling players they make everyone else look like chumps. Average age not given but some players in their 30s. A redshirt year and two year mission they come in as 21 year old freshman the same age all other university’s are graduating their players.
NCAA needs to look at this adults playing boys. Maybe as an independent they will join other football factories that pay their players and no age limit.
That game thread was a god send to understand what was going on. You must have had a good spotter to track all those numbers. Job well done. Congratulations.
Im sure there is a point in there...
… But I’m hoping that the whole “they had older players” issue wasn’t one. Good ’ol Tripper debunked that myth.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Sep 5, 2010 5:06 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Great Quote that sums up how I feel about Husky Football today:
“Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and &#^% the prom queen.”
Winners find a way to win. No more excuse, it’s time to win games. End of Story.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Right on...
It’s been “just 2 more years” since 2004.
2004 to 2008
The worst stretch historically in Husky Football history. I haven’t heard anyone call for two more years until now. Most of us say “win now” and that’s why this is so disappointing. It’s probably asking the rabid fan too much to get over it after one day but these kids and this team don’t have that luxury.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Then you better go back and read this forum since 2004/2005.
Maybe next year, two at the most: It’s a rebuilding year, we’re going to have a great recruiting class, give the new coach and staff a chance, when these kids aren’t freshmen we will do fine, these all all new offensive schemes, the plays have to be simple and basic so they can be run to perfection, oh, the quarterback is hurt…………………………..
What is the answer Norm?
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 6, 2010 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Fresh from Bob Condotta's blog
This article says we are favored by 11.5 points in next weeks game, to which the first comment i saw reads :
“Boy Syracuse must be the WSU of the Big East”
Last PAC-10 Rose Bowl winner not named USC....Washington
Grass
Don’t ya think we need a grass practice field? We do so much prep all on turf and then have to play the game on grass.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
No leader on the field
Tim Tebow willed his team to victory after victory. So have all the other great QBs of any generation. You can sense it when they played. They demanded great things from their teammates. I don’t see any of that stuff from Jake Locker. When his teammates come out and say stuff like they did pertaining to stuff like we just made stuff up, they out worked us, and they wanted it more, tells me that no one on the field is demanding the very best from other members of the team.
I’m sorry to inform you but Jake’s pro stock is going to fall hard. I don’t sense any quality leadership skills in him. Their simply isn’t any magic. When he looks over at players, I don’t see him looking confident- that stuff is contageous and I don’t see it from Jake. This team needs a leader more then a QB.
Agree John, the playcalling was lethargic. I think it’s time to give the job to coach Nuss. When he was calling the offense a few years ago for Fresno State, the Bulldogs were rolling. Sark abandoned the running game. If he would’ve estabished the running game we could’ve gotten conrtol of the game and managed the clock, thus allowing our defense good blows. Then again, maybe Sark was worried about avoiding injuries to our RBs. After all it was a non league game and a long season. Bottom line is the offense never got in rythmn (sp?)
I’ve vented a lot of frustration last night. I think we all did. What kills me is Jake is the most talented college QB I’ve ever seen. But I find myself questioning his leadership qualities. I remember Joe Montana. You could just look at the guy and see thru his eyes that he was going to get the job done. Sure wish I could see it in Jake…
All I saw was purple
ok i've never called you out Crazi
But I guess there’s a first time for everything. You are talking out your a$$ there. Willing your team to win is mythological BS! Comparing our program to UF is a strawman.
I know for a fact that after the cb in the ‘07 AC went on a flyer that caused the coog winning TD that that cb was told in no uncertain terms that what he did cost the team a win and that he would never do that again or would answer to him (Jake). That was Baer’s job but Jake took the responsibility and it was sorted out in the locker room for the team to see.
It’s hard to soar with eagles when you fly with turkeys sometimes.
by PandG on Sep 5, 2010 6:53 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Then apparently you've never played
Ask any member of the Niners back when Joe was playing. Everyone will tell you that he had someting special. Come next April scouts are going to look back over Jake’s college career and wonder if he has the leadership skills in order to lead an NFL team. My gut tells me his stock is going to spin out of control down. I like Jake Locker, but I am beginning to wonder if this kid will ever be a winner.
And no, I wasn’t comparing UF to our program. Those were your wordsl. I merely compared Jake to Tim and I can do that from both a QB stand point and a leadership stand point. We see Tebow coming off the field and getting in the defensive players huddle, demanding more of them. I honestly can’t believe Polk and Izbiki said what they said. My God! We haven’t won a road game since 2007. If you don’t want to be the first Husky team to win a road game- then welcome to the losers club. That’s what we’ve been and that’s what we are. And Polk and Izbiki are both losers for having the balls to say that. One question for the Husky regulars: “How bad do you want it”.
Bottom line if I were Sark: I’d bench both Polk and Izibiki for their comments. You don’t want it bad enough. Go sit the bench. At least the 4th stringer would put forth effort. We are losers until this team figures out how to get it done.
All I saw was purple
Keep digging.
“I like Jake Locker, but I am beginning to wonder if this kid will ever be a winner.”
Umm, he won a state championship at Ferndale, he was a winner before he came to the UW. If I were to list the reasons why we lost this game, Jake’s performance would be at the bottom of the list.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
High school ... you're giving me high school?
I don’t give a dam about high school. High school is like pee wee football, everybody get’s to play. If I were Jake I’d be pissed as hell at Polk and Izbiki for saying what they said. Are you kidding Polk? Didn’t want it bad enough? The great QBs demanded more from their teammates and if Jake doesn’t respond to Polk or Izbiki’s comments then surely his leadership qualities have to be questioned.
All I saw was purple
It's the supporting cast.
Football is a team game, Jake can’t win the game all by himself.
Did Jake take over and win the game like a Heisman Candidate, no. Did Jake cost us the game, no. Jake did an adequate/average job. If you want to blame the loss on somebody, try Polk and special teams, they screwed the pooch.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Sark "abandoned" the run game.
Ignorant statement. Many of the plays were spread option plays, where Locker has the choice to give the ball to the RB or keep it.
The running game was not abandoned.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2010 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Polk had only 16 carries
And last year he showed us he can carry the load upward to 25 to 28. I call that abandoning the running game. Locker shouldn’t be the running game fella. Ty tried and it only led to serious injury. Polk is the running game at this point and he needs more the 16 carries to be effective. Locker shouldn’t be running designed running plays. Polk is the stud ball carrier- use him. Locker should be focused on getting the ball downfield to our playmakers. And if nothing is open, jet out of there and pick up what you can. Did you notice none of that spread option crap went for anything? Locker running the ball should be a bonus to the offense.
All I saw was purple
I don't know Crazi...
…was it me or was our offensive line just not getting any push up front?
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
But the offensive line played well enough for us to churn out almost 400 yards
A 400 yard night doesn’t happen if nobody blocks. I am sick of that excuse. You cannot get 400 yards with nobody blocking. It came down to execution. We had a lot of 3rd down and 3s, 4s, 5s and we didn’t convert. If I recal Locker was sacked only once.
All I saw was purple
In this, I agree.
The execution needed to be better. That’s why I had very little problem with the playcalling. A lot of the plays were there. The execution on the other hand, was not.
The only one that I did not really agree with was the one where they went for it on 4th and 2 early in the fourth quarter.
That said, the O-line did play relatively well, but they did not generate a consistent push.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2010 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
The play calling was awful
Their was no consistency to it. The offense clicked on a few drives, then on the next possession we’d go 3 and out. Come back out and move the ball, next possession another 3 and out.
This is where we disagree. It seems to me that Sark is trying too hard to get the big play. To get the big play you have to call a game with consistency. Most everthing Sark called looked like he was trying to make plays for Locker. Polk is a weapon in the backfield and I didn’t see Sark using him very much. The play calling centered around Locker and Kearse for most of the game and when you don’t get others involved in the offense, a defense can feel it and concentrate on stopping those key players. Polk more or less was a non factor in the game. Sure he totaled 88 yards, but that didn’t hurt BYU in scoring.
All I saw was purple
I now know based on this post that your strengths aren't in analysis.
You are factually wrong on most accounts.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions
And if you thought the play calling was good you are wrong on that account
I have a brother on the East Coast who is not a Husky fan. He watched the game and he said that was some of the worst play calling he has seen in a college game. Not because we don’t have talent, but because nothing we did was to our benefit.
All I saw was purple
exactly!
Of all the problems I saw in this dirty diaper in Provo….And there were too many to list and many others have already done a better job pointing them out than I would…The biggest,most important problem is the ugly fact that the play caller is only accountable to himself! Even if nobody wants to hear this or believe it…it’s still true. Blame aplenty to go around! but, the one who needs to do something radical is Sark. He is either the head coach or the play caller. If he is going to call deep balls on third and 2 ?from his own 16 yard line? when we really need a sustained drive…I think the Head coach needs to kick his ass or kick him to the curb! Just imagine if Nuss, or anyone else was to make that ridiculous low percentage gamble-accountable to his boss? That is the problem! He isn’t accountable to his head coach! This has me really concerned for this year..while others will point out Jakes lack of saavy and feel for the game etc. The biggest player in this potential nightmare is the Coach! I hope Coach Sark gets this in the big picture! This is time to change things up! Locker needs to roll out and buy time on every play…his massive advantage over others..this will open draws to Polk and make defenses fill their diapers…which is better than us all throwing up our purple Kool-aid!
wrong
Play-calling is a strength of Sark’s.
As for the long pass on 3rd and 2 – I guess this must be news to you, but on the vast majority of passing plays, there are multiple routes where the QB can throw the ball, and it’s his decision on which receiver to throw to. There were short routes on that play, but Jake felt they were covered, which is why he threw long. That’s not a fault of Sark – that’s a credit to how BYU defended that play and it’s a reflection on how Jake read the defense and what routes he was focused on.
Last Two Games...
…of last season the guy looked like a genius calling plays. Now all of a sudden he needs to stop calling plays.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Play Execution...
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 7, 2010 7:04 AM PDT up reply actions
The OL wasn’t getting consistent push up front for our run game. If you only took a shallow look at the numbers from the box score, you’d think we had great success running the ball. Well, not exactly – as Condotta detailed in his blog, the big run numbers were mostly built off 4 big carries. The rest of our runs were averaging less than 3 yards per carry. Sure, you can keep running the ball hoping you get one of those few big runs, but the majority of the time our run game wasn’t getting a whole lot.
The OL did a little better on pass pro, but keep in mind Jake’s athleticism helped him avoid some sacks, and he was also throwing the ball quickly most of the time – it’s not like he was consistently sitting back in the pocket for 5+ seconds so he could dissect the defense.
Do you know what a spread OPTION is???
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 5, 2010 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I know what a spread option is
It’s a play designed for either Polk or Locker. On most occasions Locker keeps the ball and it goes for little or nothing yard wise. That play is easy to diagnose by the defense. Everytime Jake sets up in shotgun formation. The first thing the defense reacts to is the possible spread option. As the play unfolds, the defense puts a guy squared in the hole Polk wants, and if Locker keeps the ball, the defense already has a defender in the path of Locker- it’s such an ugly play and goes for nothing.
I’d actually love to see Sark transform this play into a pass. Their is no question defenses are keying spread option when they see the shotgun formation. I say continue the fake to Polk, the LBs will react to it, then Locker steps back and finds Izbiki behind the run-keying LBs. Nobody would be there. This play is a flat liner and I can’t see why we continue to use it.
All I saw was purple
agree about the read option play
We just don’t execute this play very well. Jake doesn’t do a good job of selling the fake to the RB, and we rarely block the play well enough to get much of anything. We need to either practice this play more, add some wrinkles to it or scrap it, because it seems like this play rarely produces a good result.
I don't think this is a true option play much of the time.
Last year, it was very clear in its execution that the runner was predetermined (Sarkisian said last season that it was more the “look” than the actual option). It appeared the same Saturday as well.
that could be
I wonder if it’s a lack of confidence in Locker being able to make the read or lack of practice time. Obviously if you provide an option on the play it gives Locker the ability to make a decision in the moment to best exploit what he sees in front of him, but maybe they don’t practice that play enough for Sark to be confident that Jake can read things well enough.
If it were me, if he doesn’t want to give Jake the option on that play, scrap it altogether.
Then if you know what a spread option is, then you cannot say that the running game was abandoned.
To say that the running game was abandoned is an ignorant statement.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I want it scrapped entirely
We saw it when Ty tried to institutionalize it. Sark brought it back w/ his pro style offense. I just don’t like it. We are a pro style team and the philosophy of the pro style is run, pass, and play action. The problem with the spread option is that it is not condusive to our offensive philosophy. Translation: it sticks out like a sore thumb. Everytime Locker is in shotgun the defense knows to key the spread option. And what happens? The defense collapses it entirely for no gain. If we do that on 1st down we are looking at 2nd down and 10 and if we don’t get something decent on 2nd down we are looking at 3rd and long. Scrap the play!
All I saw was purple
Because...
The play caller isn’t accountable to his head coach!
Give me a break.
That’s some pretty loose logic, at absolutely best.
Back that one up. Provide some logic there.
Keep digging.
25-28 carries??? Would you like to try again?
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Try 18.8 carries per game in 2009
Don’t you just hate research.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
That was his average Lear- Duh?
I’m quite confident that if Polk’s carry average was 18.8 then surely he showed us last season he can carry up to 25 to 28 carries a game. If I recall he had a couple games were he darn near carried the ball 30 times. If I’m wrong I will retract that statement. Yet if I am right then he has showed us that he can carry the load. I’m done for the night. Keep in mind champions run the ball and control the clock and tempo, i.e. Alabama, Florida, and LSU the last few national champions.
All I saw was purple
His highest total in 2009 was 25 carries.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Thanks
You just proved my point that Polk can carry the load. On a good day Polk needs 20 to 22 carries per game. We can’t become a one demensional offense. When Polk only touches the ball 16 times, the defense will lean to stopping Locker. And the way BYU aligned with their LBs outside, it appears that BYU was geared to stop Locker. To counter that, go with Polk up the middle with more consistency. At some point the stud RB will break one, which in turn will pull the BYU LBs back inside more. When that happens Locker could in return have the outside available.
All of this could’ve been a halftime adjustment. It was a no brainer that BYU intended to stop Locker outside. To open the 2nd half we should’ve gone to Polk time and again so that we could then open up options for Jake- didn’t happen.
My guess is that a lot of guys on this blog didn’t actualy watch the game, due to it being on an obscure channel. Point of emphasis: if you didn’t watch the game then you don’t know what you are talking about. This game was winnable and BYU gave us every opportunity to win it. BYU played just as sloppy as Washington, the difference? They converted when it counted. We didn’t. We score one TD in the 2nd half and we win this game. But the play calling didn’t allow us to get into position to score. We had too many 3 and outs due to bad 1st down calls. Then to try to make it managible we’d try to get half the distance back on 2nd down. Half the time those 2nd down plays were ineffective and we looked at a lot of 3rd and longs for most of the 2nd half. With the guys we have in this offense, we shouldn’t be having these problems.
All I saw was purple
There is a huge difference between 20 and 28 carries per game.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
No there's not
When your running back is getting 20+ carries tells me that the running game is effective and the offensive coordinators job becomes easy. It means that you are getting first downs and moving the ball and you have the lead on most occasions. Passing the ball and limiting your stud running back to only 15 carries tells me that you have no faith in your running game, you are behind, and you are either panicking or playing catchup.
20+ carries by one RB means you have control of the game and you are riding your stud RB to a victory. 15 or 16 carries is not enough to control the game. Look back at the game Lear- did you sense we had control of the game? Hell no, we looked like we were panicking on offense. Their was no consistency in anything we did offensively and you know that.
All I saw was purple
Keep digging.
Polk will be far more effective if he only gets 20 carries a game. His body (shoulder) can’t take the abuse of 25+ carries every game. It’s one thing to run for 25 carries once or twice a year, 12 times in one year and he’ll be injured before you know it.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Then we've got problems
Polk is in his 3rd season in the program. If he can’t get 20 carries a game then we have to find someone who can help him acheive that. Our offense is all about mixing up the run and pass w/ play action and if we aren’t running the ball enough then no one is going to bite on anything.
That brings me to another topic. What happened to play action? We have to run to set up the pass w/ play action. If I remember correctly most of our stuff was 80 game stuff. Using 70% 80 game stuff is too one demensional. I did like the opening bootwaggle play and it was a great play to start the game. After that I wasn’t impressed with the play calling and our offense was ineffective for most of the game.
All I saw was purple
Yes. And it's an astronomical difference.
It isn’t just the 40% (!!) increase in the number of carries, it’s the increased exposure to contact, the extra energy exerted, etc. With the exception of very, very few backs in the nation, college (and pro, for that matter) runners can’t handle that many carries a game, week after week. It gets to the point that it’s counterproductive. The chance of fumbling increases not only as touches increase, but as fatigue and the small pains add up. Focus wanes. And on and on.
Directly from Coach Sark
“I’d like to see Chris get 20 carries a game, that’s obviously the goal going into it every time. He’s got some big-play potential, which he showed in the fourth quarter popping the run down their sideline. Ideally, 20 carries is what we’re looking for.’’
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Thanks Lear for doing my homework
Like I said, Polk needs to carry the rock 20 to 22 times per outing. Have you noticed the further he goes the stronger runner he is? In that part of his game he reminds me of All Day Peterson.
All I saw was purple
Have you thought about running for public office??
Make up your mind already, you start off saying 25-28 carries, I call you out, then you go done to 20-22 carries per game.
That’s been my point all along, 20 carries a game is perfect. 25-28 is too many. I know it’s tough, but you can do it, just say, “Lear, you’re right, 20 carries a game is just right.”
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I couldn’t agree with you more. Special players make things happen when its clutch time. I was waiting last night for Locker to have that special drive but it never happened. I think Jake Locker is a fine football player, but I have never seen a player get so much hype for never really doing anything. What big game has he won? Sure he beat up on WSU and the Golden Bears in the last 2 games last year, but really? The PTP’ers find a way to make plays. Locker up to this point has been unable to make those plays.
I am not blaming Locker for the loss last night. There were many blunders in the 4 quarters of action, but for all the hype Locker got this off season for how talented he is, he needed to carry the team like he is the #1 pick in the draft and find a way. This may upset some Huskie fans, but Locker has been purely hype his 4 years as the starter at UW.
P.S And dont say the big win was against USC game last year. The Trojans were playing with a 2nd string quarterback who is not even on the team anymore because he is so bad.
Regardless of who the quarterback was, USC was still a very good team last year.
In that game, you give credit where credit is due.
And if I may suggest something, a player doesn’t win games by himself; games won and lost are a reflection of an entire team, much more so than an individual player, so stating a question in the context of what big games that a player has won is misleading.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Quarterbacks make a big difference.
Carl,
I cant agree with games are won and lost are a reflection of a entire team. Take out any decent quarterback and automatically your team is going to get worse. Example. Last years National Championship game. Colt McCoy goes down on the first drive. Do you think Texas was as good with the backup playing? They sure won’t. Texas wins that game if McCoy doesn’t get dinged up. Texas had 10 great players on the field, but without the 11th player being the starting quarterback the offense was bad.
If Barkley plays last year the USC offense instantly becomes better and who knows maybe the Dawgs still pull it out, however the chances of them winning go down big time with Barkley under center.
Take out any decent player at any position and your team is going to get worse.
Your statements are totally useless. Sure, QB’s the most important position on the field, and sure, Texas has a much better shot with their star QB. That does not lead logically to “games won and lost are a reflection of an entire team.” The QB can’t do it all by himself.
QB is like being a pitcher in MLB
If you have a Cliff Lee you can win 1-0. Dominant QBs can win you ballgames. I keep referring back to Ryan Leaf and how WSU made it to the Rose Bowl that year. WSU didn’t have great players. They had good players. But they had a stud QB under center. He was dominant with the ball in his glove sort a speak…
All I saw was purple
the opposing QB is irrelevant in this discussion...
… because the main point was that Jake can’t make a winning play and, yet, in the USC game, he did that a few times on that last drive.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Until I see Jake win one on his arm- he's suspect
Indeed Jake made a few plays down the stretch of last season’s USC game, but we won that game with Folk’s foot. I think it’s much easier to make plays in space rather then to make plays when the game is on the line where the field becomes much smaller. Has Jake ever won a game with the game on the line? Sure he got us in position to send Folk out for the winner.
Great QBs make plays when the game is on the line and I haven’t really seen much of that from Locker yet. He’s great when he’s between the 20s, but really struggles when the game is on the line and he needs more then a FG to win.
Could it be that our team played tight due to all the hype surrounding this team and the season? Could the Heisman talk have been added pressure on Jake, where he played stiff for much of the game? Maybe bowing out of the Heisman race early will do him a world of good. Maybe the pressure cooker of hype was released with that awful showing. Maybe now our offense can play pressure-free and make plays. Mabye the pressure of keeping Locker in the Heisman race will allow Sark a chance to make better and wiser play calling decisions. This team is ripe to take it to the next level, but last saturday’s performance was a major step backward.
All I saw was purple
jeebus, really?
…but we won that game with Folk’s foot
And how exactly did we get into position for Folk to win the game? Oh, that’s right – some great throws by Jake.
C’mon crazi…
Read the entir post next time
I will stand by what I said, because I’ve yet to see Locker win late in the game with his arm.
Great QBs make plays when the game is on the line and I haven’t really seen much of that from Locker yet. He’s great when he’s between the 20s, but really struggles when the game is on the line and he needs more then a FG to win.
Until I see him put it all together, I have to question his decision making process and his poise in the pocket. Locker has no excuses these days. He has tremendous talent surrounding him.
All I saw was purple
You miss the point
Jake didn’t have to finish that drive vs. USC, because the smart play was to kick the FG.
I would agree that Jake hasn’t done enough in terms of game winning drives to justify the Heisman hype, and he still has work to do. But let’s not pretend that he hasn’t done well in the clutch in the past.
I get it
But I am still hesitant that he has total command of the offensive team. I don’t think a lot of guys believe in each other. When you struggle, sometimes it’s a mental issue. I think we are still dealing with that stuff.
All I saw was purple
flexibility of adaptability is the true measure of intelligence
That being said I’m not saying our coaches are stupid but the function of a coach is to put their team in a position to win. With that in mind they failed again. Either they felt we were better conditioned to play physically with anyone, ala U$C, or they are not objective in their assesment thereof. Clearly it is not the former at this point. So why not play to our strength, play action with Jake rolling out vs zone read. You can accomplish the same ends with the former in this case.
We knew their OL was a strength so to expect our DL to neutralize their OL was a false assumption. That is not a hindsight thought, that is a halftime adjustment that did not happen. So I don’t feel Holt is at fault. We lost the TOP battle which put our D at risk of being worn down. Mendenhall said this is what happened from his perspective and that they kept Jake contained between the tackles. On the latter point our playcalling facilitated that.
The third phase, STs is hampered by coach N having the responsibility of rebuilding a known weakness and dealing with inserting 10+ frosh on STs.
Sorry for the rant but bob’s blog was toxic and I am finally decompressing in SLC to do my first post-game post. I am having a hard time going to ND and the pit that is Provo to have my purple heart ripped out by poor game preparation.
by PandG on Sep 5, 2010 6:36 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Double sorry for doing Crazi length post following Crazi. No offense Crazi, it’s just a double whammy ya know.
by PandG on Sep 5, 2010 6:38 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Nothing wrong with long post's.
It’s when EVERY post becomes a novel that we have a problem.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Coaching Staff
I think this staff is a blessing and a curse. They are young and refreshing. They work their tales off and our great recruiters. But they have aways to go when it comes to play calling, in game adjustments and overall gameday preparation.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Sark needs to turn it over to Nuss
Somebody should be whispering in Sark’s ear to take the FG with 12 minutes left in the 4th. Getting another FG would’ve put points on the board and we would’ve been another FG away from a tie game. Let’s look back. Say Sark takes that shot at a FG and Folk hits a successful one. Down by 3 at that point. WOW! Instead of going for it on 4th and 3 late in the game we could’ve sent Folk back in, who then could’ve hit another one to tie that game up.
Sark’s plate is full. He’s doing a marvelous job everywhere except play calling. At some point you have to trust your coordinators.
All I saw was purple
Turn it over to Nussmeier?
Please, expound on Nussmeier’s proclivity as a play caller, since you assert it will automatically be an improvement.
I’m wondering if Sark is haveing a hard time with play calling because, for the first time in his career, he doesn’t have a big talent advantage.
I don't think so
If you remember correctly, USC fans were on the fence with Sark’s play calling too.
All I saw was purple
USC fans whined about their O once Bush was gone and they stopped hammering everyone by 50. Only beating teams by 30 was totally unacceptable..
Some of that may be true
But the evidence we’ve seen supports my argument too. Last season Sark gambled away opportunities to put points on the board [see ND game]. On saturday we saw more of it. When you are on the road you have to put points on the board anyway you can. Folk is a helluva kicker and has become very effective inside the 35. Why we continue to reach into the bag of tricks is killing us. Get the 3 points put up coach. Getting 3 points and inching closer to BYU could potentially get the momentum back. But when you go for it and come away empty, it’s a psychological drainer.
All I saw was purple
Sounds like you’ve come full circle and now are supporting my original point. Sark seems to be calling plays and making decisions like he has a decided talent advantage. He needs to realize that that is not the case at UW (at least not right now) and make sure that he factors that into his thinking.
Either way...
He just has a problem with managing his play calling. Their was no consistency in the play calling. And it kept Locker out of rythmn for most of the game. Is it that Sark is use to having a talent advantage? That could be true. Yet even after Norm Chow left USC and Sark took over- USC still had more talent across the board then anybody else. Their could be a lot of truth in what you are saying, but on the other hand, Sark could be a young coach that wants to go for the juggular so often it bites him in the buttocks too often.
This is Sark’s program and his football team. At this level their are so many administrative duties. The last thing I want to do is label coach as a bad play caller. Coach Nuss is a level headed coach. He knows how to coach QBs and he knows how to coordinate an offense. I think Sark needs a guy that can sustain momentum. Sark seems to be going for the juggular on every play. When you call an offense like that. you are bound to find yourself in a lot of 3rd down and longs, which lead to a lot of 3 and outs. Coordinating an offense means you have to sustain momentum. Find weaknesses in the defensive armor and keep hammering on it to loosen the armor- one reason why many O coordinators choose to sit up in the booth to see the weakness in armor. Then right when you have the armor lose just enough. You strike with a big play. To Sark every play is a big play and that’s how I see him play calling. 3rd and managable is all that you ask for in play calling. Keeping things managable will allow Locker to make those plays. But to continue to look at 3rd and longs is a tall order to fill.
Nuss can call an offense, he had a Fresno State offense rolling under Pat Hill. Nuss is the O coordinator, but if we limit his activity in the offense, this guy is going to be gone. Of any assistant coach on our sideline, Nuss will be the first coordinator poached and will be the first Sark assistant to become a BCS head coach. This guy is good at what he does. I bark for Sark! But I cringe everytime he elects to “go for it”.
All I saw was purple
Here's the truth about it all..
This team could win 7,8,9,10 games this year, how you ask? Inuries to key players that we play that week, lucky bounces/calls, miracle plays, teams coached by Slick Rick. Believing that our coaching staff now realizes what they have to work with and can gameplan with that group along with preparing them, it’s possible, not likely but possible. All I know is i’m extremely tired of seeing the tail feathers stomp teams out knowing we still aren’t there and it’s another year of “how much are we going to lose to them by this year”. I’m just sick of it, and the fact that Polk said “they just wanted it more” is really sickening. If you think that then pack your S*!^ and get the F&^% out of here because at this point there shouldn’t be any team that wants a victory more than you. And Izbicki saying they outworked us, WTF is that, these kids aren’t playing with passion and it showed on the field and in the post game comments.
Last PAC-10 Rose Bowl winner not named USC....Washington
Agreed
And that is why I find myself questioning the “on field” leadership of this team. We haven’t smelled a road victory since 2007. This team should be so focused on getting that done. Again if I were Sark- Polk and Izibiki wouldn’t see the field in the first half of the Syracuse game. Husky fans have been loyal as hell for this decade of losing. We expect our team to play to win.
All I saw was purple
Not The Greatest Place...
…to open the season either. I know historically we should go in there and for the most part kick BYU’s ass, but even James lost down there in 1985 (got smoked by the way). BYU has a lot of momentum gained over the last few years under Mendenhall. We are just beginning our accent. We still have some challenges to overcome to get to where we want to be.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
I don't think anybody is upset about the venue
We all expected a hostile environment. BYU fans can get pretty noisy. I think what we are ticked off the most about was the fact that this team was not prepared to win. Sure they were prepared to play, but their is no evidence that tells me that this team was prepared to win. Sark’s ill-advised gambling play calling was notoriously bad. Polk’s 2 muffs inside the 10 on kickoffs bad, and our LBs were aggressive, but we were too spread out and out of alignment. We expected to see our team turn the page and look and play like a winner. The reality? We are no better then our 5 win team last year at this point. Actually I don’t think were even that good. At least that team played to win every game.
All I saw was purple
I think there should be a law
every time someone says “you gotta play the percentages!” about 4th Down conversions, they need to actually quote percentages. What are “the percentages”, exactly? By only saying that part, you’re trying to cover gut instinct with the illusion of actual research behind you.
On the road, in a hostile environment, with that many minutes remaining…you have to take the points.
Now that’s perfectly respectable reasoning, but the flip side (and why I supported Sark’s decision) was that I thought there was no chance in hell our defense could stand up anymore to BYU. They did (shockingly), and forced the first 3 and out since BYU’s first drive, but watching the game in Sark’s shoes and making an assessment of our D as almost gassed and A) likely to give up another FG, completely negating what we just did or B) give up enough yardage to keep the Husky offense hopelessly pinned against our own end zone, seems rational or at least not the maniacal risktakings of a chronic gambler.
With 12 minutes left in the game you’re guaranteed to get the ball back again, and had the Defense or Special Teams shown any real signs of spark at that point (ST being return yardage) I would have kicked the FG and been content to start playing a 3 point game. But with the team we had seen up to that point, versus being on the road in a hostile environment…. and if it’s a toss up, I prefer the certainty of controlling your own destiny.
But hey, people will disagree.
couldn't have said it better
You explained perfectly why I wasn’t that upset about Sark deciding to go for it.
The defense had already started stiffening up at the end of the 3rd quarter, why would it have been difficult to believe that it wouldn't have continued in the 4th?.
Percentages: I’ll humor you. The exact percentages: Eric Folk last year, had a FG percentage of 85.7% (18 of 21 attempts); in FG’s up to 39 yards, he made 93.3% of his FG’s (14 of 15), and in FG’s over 39 yards, he was 63% (4 of 6).
Just earlier in the game, in the same direction, Folk made a 54-yarder with a considerable amount of sail left as the ball crossed easily over the crossbar. At the 27-yard line on 4th and two, Folk would have had to kick a FG of roughly 45 yards.
Last year, the Huskies converted 56.5% (9 of 16) of their 4th downs.
Last night, the Huskies had already failed on all three 3rd and short situations, that is, 2 yards or less, and had, up to that point, failed to convert a single 3rd down in the second half on their own, so I ask fairly what would lead Sarkisian (or anyone, for that matter) to believe that the Huskies would convert on 4th and 2?
So, with all of the information that I have provided, which do you think was the higher percentage play?
I’d like to make it clear that I had no real problem with the play-calling at all last night. That was the only decision that I disagreed with.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 12:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Which 3rd quarter drive suggested the defense was "stiffening up"
the one where busted coverage in the defense immediately gave up a 48 yard TD pass to BYU, or the one where BYU went 44 yards starting from their own 20 and ended up pinning the Washington offense back at their own 14? These aren’t green shoots that suggest to me the defense or return team was starting to turn it around.
Thank you for looking up some numbers. I’m less interested in talking about the likelyhood of Folk making the field goal, so lets consider that play’s success relatively assured. As far as the 4th down decision,
A) a sample size of 3 is useless and making decisions based on that is self-defeating because
B) short yardage situations clearly (and naturally) favor the offense. It is not unreasonable to expect an offense to gain several yards when asked. There’s nothing mystical or arcane about short yardage and 3rd downs. (*) Speaking of 3rd downs…
C) in the second half, two short yardage situations failed, one otherwise successful 3rd and long failed because of a personal foul penalty was enforced against Washington (that was the “tripping” penalty, I think), and on the 4th quarter drive Sarkisian decided to go for it, Locker gained 12 on 3rd and 14. If Sark thought that was two-down territory (which he obviously did) then making up 6/7ths of the necessary yardage on 3rd qualifies as a success. What do 2 successes and 2 failures tell us to expect in the future? Once again, virtually nothing, because the sample size is too small. What do we defer to?
(*) The fact that Sarkisian had tape of BYU and had been watching his offensive line all year in training camp. If he sees both and concludes that certain short yardage calls should work, I am 100% fine with deferring to him until the team conclusively demonstrates in live-fire situations that they aren’t physically capable. That point is several games into the season, that point is not now.
Let’s approach this from another angle- we consider the two failed 4th down conversions. Clearly the Huskies are no good on 4th down, right? But actually look at the two plays. The first one, BYU correctly diagnoses the playcall and prevents Locker from hitting either of his two high percentage plays (run for the 1st, complete the short pass) and makes him try the long bomb. The second one, Locker passes to an open Devin Aguilar but the nose tackle puts his hands up in time and swats down the pass. What do we conclude from 0-2? Are the Huskies just innately bad at 4th downs, or were they torpedoed by bad luck and poor timing?
The Huskies were losing. At some point if you want to win the offense will have to make plays, and you can’t do that by running and hiding from every short yardage and 3rd down situation.
correction
that’s 2-3 on 3rd downs in the second half, not 2-2 since the Huskies didn’t make the 3rd and 14 after the penalty was enforced. Still, that emphasizes how at small sample sizes percentages have virtually no predictive value.
to belabor this
if you thought that going for it on 4th down was wrong based on a subejctive assessment of the team’s strength, that’s fine. I disagree. But “the percentages” aren’t in your favor just because a team went 0-3 or 1-4 in some situation. (And as we saw at the NFL level in the infamous Colts/Patriots Belichick 4th down game, once we start reaching reasonable sample size the “percentages” actually start to support the “go for it” crowd).
Why are you only singling out the size of the sample in the game when
Success or lack thereof in the flow of a game can be used to determine a predictive value? Also, why nitpick when the samples that I’ve pointed out were directly correlational?
And in any case, I’ve already provided more than just the sample size of the specific situations in the game; I’ve provided an entire season’s worth of percentages from last year, and it is highly relevant as most of the same players involved in those situations are involved this year.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions
BYU's last drive of the third quarter.
Of course the sample size was small, because the Huskies only had 3 short yard situation. But if that’s does that sound like any indication of success? As you so rightfully said, that short-yardage situations favor the offense, and yet, the Huskies converted none of them, what does that tell you about the chances of converting on 4th and 2?
If Sarkisian made calls based on what he saw in fall camp rather than based on what’s been happening in the game, then I’d be seriously concerned about his decision-making process.
And what was the point of your post? It does not refute the point of contention that I had been refuting: Namely, that going for it on 4th and 2 when the higher-percentage call would have been to try the FG. Trying the FG is not running and hiding every short yardage and 3rd down situation. That’s an incorrect assessment.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions
So which is it - did they run to little or too much?
Many of the runs that got stuffed were zone reads that Jake decided to hand off to Polk even though there was nothing but a wall for him to run into. In addition, BYU did a good job of staying in good position to keep Jake from rolling out, as evidenced by one of his runs where he had to cut inside the Left Tackle on a 3rd down and ended up getting knocked out of bounds a few yards shy.
My take is that the coaches thought that our O-line would be able to create space for Jake/C Polk to get through the line, but that just wasn’t happening for whatever reason. That is why they passed with more frequency in the second half.
I am hoping our O-line/D-line play can be attributed to being gassed at high altitude and playing against big older well-coached kids. If so, our offense and defense will be remarkably better next week and beyond.
I am not cashing in my chips for this season as many seem to be doing. Most of the errors we made were self-inflicted, many by young players try to be aggressive but not doing it with their head. Hopefully those errors will be corrected this week and we’ll see a much different team in the next few weeks.
It was a tough week, now lets remember that it was 1 game and move on to the next. Go DAWGS!!!
P.S. I love how everyone loves when a coach goes for it on 4th down if he makes it, but is a terrible play caller when they don’t. Too many people wearing Wazzu colored glasses around here. If you want a conservative play caller, I think TW is still available.
I was against going for it before it even happened.
Success of the play would not necessarily be reflective of a good, in-game decision-making process. I firmly believe that you go with the higher-percentage play unless circumstances dictate otherwise.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 12:58 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't disagree necessarily
I just thinks it’s funny that people want an aggressive play-caller, yet tear them apart on blogs when it doesn’t work. Kicking a field goal would have been a sound decision as well, but I don’t have too much problem with going for it with 9 minutes left, if you’re not sure you’ll be able to make it back to that end of the field before the end of the game.
Our numbers on offense were good, and a few drops or over throws less and they would have looked even better, especially considering the terrible field position the special teams left them with.
I don’t think we can take much from this game other than the fact that our young players are going to have to step it up a bit and figure out how to block out the fact that they are playing in front of 70,000 instead of 2000 fans. I’m sure the teaching points will be many this week and we will see a lot less self-inflicted mistakes next week.
by Carne Guisada on Sep 6, 2010 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't care for aggressive play-calling one bit.
I want smart play-calling.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I've never liked aggressive play calling
It sends a message to the defense that the head coach doesn’t believe they can do their job. Kick the FG w/ 12 minutes left on the clock. My god anything can happen with that little amount of momentum with that much time left on the clock. But to come up empty drains you mentally. What is the use of having a great kicker if we aren’t going to use him? Folk is an exceptionally gifted kicker.
All I saw was purple
Wow! Calm down crazies:)
Wow,
How does Sark go from “best play caller ever” to “he sucks and should hand it over right away, immediately, now”? You guys are ridiculous. Just calm down, take a breath and think rationally for a moment- The last 2 games of the season (WSU and Cal) were called by the same guy and you were stoked out of your minds by the results. One game into the new season at a difficult place to play against a good team that game planned and executed well and you have lost your minds. Although it didn’t work out, the coaches were trying to take what BYU gave them- their backers were positioned on the outside to contain locker so UW was trying to attack the middle. Didn’t work but come on, have Sark give up play calling immediately? Really? If he calls an awesome game next week you all should be self- banned from ever write on this blog again out of sheer hypocrisy. Anyone calling for Sark to hand over play calling right now is just silly.
Berkowitz- Bootlegging Jake every play is brilliant. Accept its not and wouldn’t have worked as well as you think. In fact it didn’t when they failed executing it twice on key plays. I hate seeing the Huskies lose too but come on man- your assessment was as emotional and bad as the play calling last night. I read a crappy article on this blog a few weeks ago but I wasn’t calling for you to never blog again. Usually i really like the blog and give it the benefit of the doubt. You got better after laying an egg- so will Sark.
by feverdawg on Sep 5, 2010 11:17 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Almost Famous
Yep, love that movie.
“Your looks are becoming a problem!”
I agree that people need to calm down.
The negativity is palpable.
I will never ask for Sarkisian to give up playcalling. I have said already that I had no problem with his playcalling at all. The only decision that I disagreed with was his decision to go for it on 4th down early in the 4th quarter.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Sep 6, 2010 1:00 AM PDT up reply actions
We expected our team to play to win [que Polk and Izbiki's comments now]
Their was no consistency to the play calling. Sark came out with the bootwaggle (roll out) to start the game (very first play of the game). Did we see it again? Polk only touched the ball 16 times- he’s the second best weapon on O. He has to get more touches on the ball.
Yes the last 2 games of the 09 season the offense clicked. Those 2 games gave all Husky fans a lot of hope that this team could potentially put something together for the 2010 season. The BYU game was winnable, hell BYU gave us every opportunity to win that game. Yet we have a 5th year senior QB with Heisman credentials, a sure handed first rounder in next Aprils NFL draft. Yet what bothers me is that a rotation of BYU QBs (one a true freshmen) played better in key situations. Its pretty easy to come to the conclusion that the Hiesman is effectively over. You don’t win Heismans when a true freshman upstages you. Locker looked like the 3rd best QB on the field.
Indeed the last 2 games of 2009 looked promising. Yet from this game (everybody involved), we didn’t get better during the offseason, in fact I think we got worse. We should be pissed and I’m quite certain Sark is pissed. This game was winnable and we let it slip away.
All I saw was purple
I don't think too many of us thought really highly of his playcalling last season
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Agreed Gekko
I think we all expected the Huskies to turn the page this season. The long snap blunder was a reminder of the nightmarish decade we’ve had to endure. And given the thought that we haven’t won a road game since 2007, we all thought this game was going to be the game where we slay that dragon.
Guys, we won’t be a bowl team until we can find away to win on the road. A BYU win would’ve accomplished a lot last Saturday. It would’ve provided us with tremendous early season mementum. Secondly a win next saturday vs. Syracuse would’ve set up a showdown with Nebraska coming to town. Did we just lose to BYU? I think we lost more then that. Theirs a very good chance the ESPN College Gameday Show won’t be embarking on Montlake for the Nebraska game. The game will still be primetime, but I think we lost out on the ESPN hype. Not to mention but the BYU loss could effect recruiting as well. How great it would’ve been to beat BYU and get a commit from Hundly today. Looking at our schedule, where do you think that first road victory will come now? We lost more last saturday then just the game…
All I saw was purple
Agreed.
There are a few glaring examples of bad calls, but the numerous really good calls (and well-designed plays) are quicly forgotten….
One bad call can spoil a possession and if you do that enough times it kills momentum- which I think was on display on saturday.
All I saw was purple
I've been trying to keep it shorter fellas
But I’ve been on a emotional roller coaster and it kills me that we could’ve easily won this game. I think we were prepared to play, but I don’t think we were prepared to win (does that make sense?).
All I saw was purple
I'm not sure what to think really
I wasn’t able to watch the game on TV and I only heard bits and pieces of the game on the radio, so I can’t say I have a lot of knowledge of what went right/wrong yesterday. But I’ve seen people here and at other sites say Sark is a horrible play caller, Locker is all hype and no results, and with our mental state we’ll be lucky to beat WSU. I think that’s overeacting, just 48 hours ago many of us thought we could win 8 or 9 games this season. I think that was optimistic, but a 6 or 7 win season is not out of the picture yet.
The D played about how I expected them to, mostly holding their own but giving up that one big play. Penalties are something we need to cut down on, that’s something that can definitely be fixed over time. I’m more concerned about the Offense and Special Teams, sounded like they were a little off yesterday. Kick and punt returns on both sides of the ball should be major issues to work on at practice this week. The Offense, I don’t know what to do about that. Seems like there were a lot of factors involved in the stagnant offense the second half, play calling, bad execution, missed opportunities, dropped passes, etc. Hopefully it was just a one game screw up and they can start clicking again like last year against Cal.
by seahawksfan2863 on Sep 5, 2010 11:37 PM PDT reply actions
While the special teams were pretty awful,
I thought the playcalling is what did us in. Sark reminds me of a college version of Andy Reid.
Can you spot the bust?
8/31/10 - We're going to trade every starter besides Aaron Curry and Julius Jones for 4th-6th round picks
Today is Sept. 6th John
Today is the day Hundley is slated to commit. Is he still commiting today? If so, are you going to be on top of this story? If so, I’ll be dialed in all day waiting the news.
But personally I don’t think it’s going to be good news for Husky fans. The loss to BYU really put a lot of doubt in my head that this kids is coming. But I guess we’ll see…
All I saw was purple
problem solved for the unwitty
1- Roughing the kicker. HUGE BLUNDER.
2-Playing 13 true freshman. A necessity but shows HUGE lack of depth.
QUICK FIX? Take two aspirin and check back in two years.
Keep in mind that Sark recruited towards special teamers
When you do that it provides you with depth. If you recruit special teamers that keeps your 1s and 2s off speacial teams.
I think the spcail teams will be okay. They are young and made some bad decisions in the game- yet bad decsions is what freshmen do on occasion. But they can play and that is key to building great special teams units. I have a feeling our special teams will make better decisions from this point forward.
The trick is to work out the bugs so that you don’t have to use 1s and 2s for special teams.
All I saw was purple
Did you watch the Florida or Ole Miss game?
We made some Freshman mistakes, but at least we can mostly blame it on having to play 13 freshman. Florida and Ole Miss looked just as bad and they were playing a walkover team, and Ole Miss found a way to lose! We were playing a good team in their building. We made some first game mistakes and BYU didn’t happen to make as many of them or we still could have won.
by Carne Guisada on Sep 6, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Concerning the last 2 posts
Hundley made up his mind last week, before the games were played. Also, as bad as the dawgs may have looked to you, UCLA was worse.
Yes, we played 13 frosh out of necessity, but they will be more experienced next week and I think your headache will be gone next Saturnay night.
Hundley to UCLA. (Brandon Huffman)
Slightly off-topic, I know.
(off subject) Pittser
I am done venting frustration about the loss to BYU. A game that was winnable. Moving forward we still don’t have a QB in this upcoming class. Is Adam Pittser plan B? Well as of now he hasn’t been offered by UDub. Some have marvled over his potential, I see plan B with him and I don’t necessarily believe in using scholarships on too many plan B guys. That = settling and Sark mentioned when he arrived that he wasn’t going to settle. I think we should load up on walk-on QBs who will compete their butts off just to be on the team. Meanwhile that competition they bring will make Price and Montana that much more confident in what they do. The real battle at QB is between Montana and Price and every walk on knows it. But that doesn’t necessarily mean they will keep the job. Out play them and one or two of those guys could get a scholarship and don’t rule out winning the job outright.
In the mean time their are some very good in-state QB kids coming up. I say take the walk-on kids now to fuel competition at this position and go hard after the future in-state kids. We need competition at the QB position. Can anybody remember the last time we had competition at the position?
All I saw was purple
Pittser is not a plan B
Kid can play.
by Brian Floyd on Sep 6, 2010 11:40 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Have you seen who has offered him?
In many programs across the nation, Jeff Tuel would be considered a plan B. That’s not intended to be a zinger. It’s intended to be reality.
All I saw was purple
And I'm telling you that you're wrong
If you want to judge by his offers, that’s fine. When he shows up at Elite 11 and outperforms every quarterback there except for one — the consensus top quarterback in 2011 — then maybe it’s time to reevaluate what you think about him.
Elite 11 is not live
I want to see what the kid does when he is staring down a defense. If Sark uses a scholarship on Pittser then apparently Sark sees something great in him. But as of now Sark hasn’t offered and that is where we are at. If Sark sees plan B with him, do we waste the scholarship on him? Or do we use that scholarship on plan A guys at other positions, load up on walk-on QBs to fuel competition and go hard after the in-state QBs coming up.
Now I see what your intension is. You want us to go after the Pittser kid so WSU can get their paws on the upcoming in-state QBs. If the in-state up and comers see a lot of scholarship QBs on the Washington roster, their is a good chance that WSU could get them. Say no to Pittser :)
All I saw was purple
i agree that elite 11 isn't a huge deal
just kids doing drills in their shorts without any defense. i would like to see what he can do on the field with his arm, not just in the wing-t offense. but at the same time, i think he’s probably better than any other qb we can recruit this year, so we need to offer him. we only have price & montana next year
If Sark offers I'm on board
I’ve liked every player he has recruited. I just find it weird that we don’t have a QB in this class this late in the season. I think Hundley could’ve been a pretty good QB in Sark’s offense and with only Montana and Price on scholarship next season at QB. Their was a chance to player early. QBs get injured all the time, QB who can’t seperate from one another on the practice field could potentially both become the guys [see Riley and Heaps]. With offensive fire power Sark is recruiting who wouldn’t want to be in the mix?
All I saw was purple
Tuiasosopo=Plan B?
Some programs felt that way. They saw him as a safety. He wasn’t the ideal height for a QB either.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
But he was an in-state product
And a remarkable athlete. It was a no brainer to offer him for that reason.
All I saw was purple
Agreed
Just making an observation from the perspective of a lot of top programs at the time. The thing is though he was not the prototypical pro style QB. I have to wonder if he ever would have been. He was a great QB in that option hybrid that Gilby and Neu put together.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
I guess I'm not done :)
Thought I was, but apparently I am still grieving the loss. Just thought of something BYU did. Is it a coincidence that BYU brought back the legendary QBs who played for LaVell Edwards on this day? Why this day? hmmm…
Everybody knew that Mendenhall was starting two new QBs and for the most part the team was in somewhat of a rebuilding phase since they lost a lot of starters last season. BYU brought back all the great BYU QBs and made this all about BYU. Doing so would motivate a young BYU team in playing hard. Izbiki was correct. BYU played harder then us and why? Because BYU had all the lengends in attendance along with their legendary coach LaVell Edwards. Their kids didn’t want to lose this game with all those guys in attendance. I’m not convinced BYU is better then us. But on this day their kids wanted him more then we did and I think bringing back those players was enough motivation. It was a tough loss and at this point all we can do is fix some of the stuff that went haywire and rechannel our focus.
All I saw was purple
I don't think QBs who played when their current starters were in diapers had anything to do with it.
You are missing the point
The idea wasn’t to bring back a bunch of has-been all americans and hall of famers. The idea was to create a nastalgic frenzy to increase hype and school pride. You are correct that the players wouldn’t remember Jim McMahn or Steve Young or Ty Detmer, but the overwhelming seasson ticket holders remember well. The idea was to motivate the BYU team in not wanting to lose this game due to the importance of who was in attendance.
You have to credit BYU with their tradtiion of putting out a lot of good college QBs. They have a slew of well-publicized QB names and a lot of them played in the NFL who won Superbowls, MVPs, and have reached the hall of fame. I have tremendous respect for the BYU football program. Never been a big fan, but during LaVell Edwards regime they played in some big games. I think the reunion served a purpose.
All I saw was purple
Pittser
We started off the season great with a 34-8 win (on Aug. 27) against Oregon
I’m beginning to really like this kid!
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Until Sark offers their is really nothing to like
I’m not impressed with the schools that have offered Pittser. That’s not a selling point to me. Now if Sark offers him, then surely my opinion could change. As of right now I have been impressed with Sark’s eye for talent. And since we have not offered tells me that Pittser is a plan B guy and his offers say the same as of now. Upstaging other high profile players at the same position in a controlled scrimmage doesn’t say a lot. As a lowly freshman in high school way back when I beat a the best upperclassmen basketball player in our school in a game of one on one. Does that say I am the better basketball player? Answer: hell no and this Elite 11 camp thing is nothing more then a controlled scrimmage. He may have shined, but their is a reason none of the top programs have offered him.
Let’s see if Sark offers before we go nuts over him. I’m betting we don’t. I think it makes sense to use that scholarship on a plan A guy at another position. We have 2 QBs on scholarship now that can lead us to bowl games in the future. In the meantime load up on walk-on QBs and get in on the up and comer in-state QB kids coming up soon.
All I saw was purple
USC QBs
USC will have 5 scholarship QBs next year 2 verballed this year- only 75 scholarships – why don’t we go after one of them also USC may withdraw offer from one with the limited scholarships
by lorenzothedog on Sep 6, 2010 4:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I'd be shocked if Kiffin pulled an offer before signging day
I would however not be surprised if he forces one out after signing in hopes that they don’t land at a competing school.
I used to let my little brother win at basketball to make him feel better about himself too.
Almost every player at the elite 11 was committed to a big time program with coaches who have spent their entire professional careers looking for, finding, and developing quarterbacks- do you think he might be as good as all of them were saying?
Or
You might be right and we should not offer any QBs till nick montana graduates and stock up a bunch of non-offered walk-ons. If the walk on QB can beat Montana in a one on one game of basketball we’ll know he’s a poser and should not be not offered to play at UW. That sentence made as much sense as your last post. I love the passion you have but I think you need to rethink your philosophy.
please, for the love of all that is holy, limit Crazi's posts to one paragraph...
… or at least use bullet points and lay of verbose, poorly spelled sentences. My thumb can’t handle the scrolling on my phone.
Oh, and BYU is still third or fourth worst team we’ll see all year … UCLA might be worse while WSU and SYR clearly are. ASU has a top 3 pac 10 D and a legit talent at QB this year. That trumps a rebuilding BYU. Ariz has a wicked offense while Cal, Stan and Or St are much better balanced/deep. USC, Neb and ORE are in a different class.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Sep 6, 2010 4:40 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd
What would work better, limiting post’s per day or just limiting words per day??
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
I'll assume this is directed toward me.
Oh, and BYU is still third or fourth worst team we’ll see all year … UCLA might be worse while WSU and SYR clearly are. ASU has a top 3 pac 10 D and a legit talent at QB this year. That trumps a rebuilding BYU. Ariz has a wicked offense while Cal, Stan and Or St are much better balanced/deep.
Thanks for the fantastic justification. ASU’s QB is Awesome!!!!!!
boise st - there is some playcalling
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Sep 6, 2010 5:45 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
I've been watching and I've noticed one thing
Boise State plays faster the us- way faster. Now they don’t have anymore speed then we do but when you win, you believe, and when you believe you play faster. I’m not talking about individual speed, I’m talking about the speed of the game and they play fast as do all teams who are vying for national championships. We’ve got a ways to go to get to that level.
All I saw was purple
My goodness ...
… all respect to Urban, B Kelly, Saban, Ferentz, and Riley – but is there a finer coach in the game outside of Chris Petersen? Unreal what he gets out of that team.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
HEISMAN WATCH
Team tries to give game away “running into the kicker” seven points the other way. Missed extra point missed field goal . Wow, sound familiar.
Judicious use of TOs they get ball back with two minutes to go. Score in 52 seconds. Four and out for VT.
Figure it out yet: KELLEN MOORE
BSU 33 VT 30 both D1 both top ten.
The SENIOR difference.
I didn't buy the top 3 preseason hype
But I’m believing it now. That BSU team is built like a national contender. And where do they get thier kids? Either these recruiting data bases are off the chart horrible or develop kids like crazy, or maybe they’re from another planet. One thing is for sure- BSU kids know they can play and compete with anybody. We’re not even close to that platform yet.
All I saw was purple
Kinda Blows Up...
…all the recruiting hype to a certain degree doesn’t it? I mean they may not put guys into the NFL but if you want to win NCAA football games? How many 4 and 5 star guys do they sign?
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
How do you figure?
If you are referring to the sideline late hit call- it was legit by definition of the rule. Now it appeared the Hokie brushed him, but the NCAA has put an emphasis on that stuff near the sideline because too many kids were getting clobbered out of bounds. Even though I disagreed with the call it was the right call.
All I saw was purple
Two steps before he was hit the runner’s small toe hit the out of bounds line. He then kept running in bounds and was hit. How was the defender suppose to know his foot brushed the sideline? He was hitting him about the same time the whistle was blown. = obvious no call IMO.
I agree with you that the ref could’ve easily kept the flag in his pocket. All I’m saying is that last year the NCAA made those out of bounds-sideline hits a point of emphasis to clean up. I think the reason the ref threw the flag was because the whistle deadened the play, but the play continued.
I agree it was a bad call, but by definition of the rule and the point of emphasis, the ref had to make the call. If that flag doesn’t happen on the winning drive is anybody really talking about it? There was a call made on a BSU defender earlier, who was called for roughing the passer and it looked harmless. The call was a bad call, but nobody is bringing up that penalty.
All I saw was purple
A Tale of Two QBs
BSU and VT, great game. You could say that both UW and BSU were down at the end of the game and needed a TD to win. Kellen got his, Jake didn’t. Lear says you make your own luck, but its not always that simple. BSU saved 20 yards when the ref picked up the flag for the illegal block and got another 15 on the out of bounds hit, even though the WR was out by about 2 inches and kept running, a couple of yards in bounds. I didn’t know he was out until the replay.
So Kellen is a hero and Jake a loser? What about the third QB, is the VT guy a loser? He might have lost the game, but he played a great game and brought his team back from 17-0. The season is young and I think all 3 will do fine.
And one more QB, the Illinois kid, Pittser is an inch taller than Kellen Moore. If you like him Sark, go get him.
I’m still trying to figure out how BSU is really that good. I mean where do they find these kids? That team is built for championships. They are playing at varsity speed and Washington is playing at J.V. speed. Looking back to the BYU game and comparing it to the BSU/Va Tech game, the speed of the game was night and day. But the confusing part of it is that player for player, I’d bet Washington has faster players then Boise.
All I saw was purple
True thoughts
I was wondering the same thing. I bet they get a lot of off the radar athletes from smaller less known schools in off the beaten path states like Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota etc.
I heard over 60% of their athletes are from California. Makes me wonder if they’ve outgrown WSU. In other words is Boise State getting kids that Washington State use to get? One can only wonder. Plus BSU doesn’t have Pac 10 type academic standards in order to get in. It’s becoming a football factory very quickly.
All I saw was purple
Tyrod Taylor as a sophomore did tonight what I hope Jake as a senior does the rest of the season...
… He did it all tonight including:
- showed an accurate arm, hit the deep ball
- made adjustments at the line of scrimmage
- bought time behind the line with his feet
- kept eyes downfield
- kept BSU on their toes with called QB runs
He is an impressive young QB.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
i think moore may have locked up the heisman
he just needs a strong showing against osu and then his normal video game numbers against the wac and i think he wins it. this team is going to the national championship game
For once I agree with Brian Floyd
All it would take is for Boise to drop one game and it’s all over. No Heismans and no BCS invite. We just completed week 1. Nothing is ever won in week 1. I might be a delusional Husky fan, but even I know that :)
All I saw was purple
ok, it's prematre to say that he's already won it
but i think right now he’s favorite and boise state is very likely to make the national championship game. va tech was by far the most difficult test on their schedule
Yeah the refs lost this game for you
………..I mean thats what you take away from reading the synopsis.
Huh?
Apparently you got your green goggles on reading through this.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
John overstated things with regard to the refs. They made some bad calls that benefited BYU, but I’ve seen a lot worse (cough Oklahoma at Oregon, 2006 cough).
That said, when you look back at a close game like this one, the bad calls stick out more:
- BYU getting an amazingly generous spot on a 3rd down play; instead of being about 1 yard short (which is where the ball ended up), they were given a spot that wasn’t even deemed necessary to measure with the chains for a 1st down to keep a drive going that should have been over;
- The refs calling tripping on Kearse on what would have been a big 3rd down conversion for the UW when all he did was cut block a guy;
- A DPI call on Richardson that probably should have been waved off as an uncatchable ball;
- Multiple instances of BYU holding on the few occasions that our DL were getting some penetration into the backfield
Are the calls why we lost the game? No, they were only a small part. But the calls, like the ball, most often bounced BYU’s way, and in a close game you pay more attention to it.
Quite a list...to be overstated
Quite a list and despite that we had our shot to win twice in the fourth quarter.
You are right though…I have seen worse.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 7, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions
The DPI call on Richardson was debatable, and holding calls are notorious for being inconsistently called. It’s only the first two calls I listed that really bothered me, and who knows what calls or non-calls the BYU fans felt went against them?
I didn't see the calls, so I won't say anything about them
This is some good background information on holding and why officials do and do not make some calls.
well...
…on the two occasions I’m thinking of, both times the UW player had their back to the camera so I couldn’t tell for sure where the BYU lineman’s hands were. While it certainly looked from the live action camera angle that our DT was getting hooked and/or grabbed after he’d started to get past the block towards the QB, I don’t know for sure.
And many times it's hard to tell for sure on TV
Like I said, I didn’t see the specific plays because I was listening and just kinda had it on in the background, so I really can’t say whether are not the officials were terrible. The officials series from Corn Nation was just interesting to me.
Wait...
….because I was listening and just kinda had it on in the background,…
You’re the ace Husky reporter in these here parts.
I don’t like hearing that you aren’t taking your job seriously.
Haha, I was responsible for in-game updates
So I was half paying attention to like 4 games at once. When I heard yelling, I’d pull up the screen.
duckyou - either an illiterate or an idiot ...
… Because just about every thread in this post is critical if not hyper-critical of some aspect of how the Huskies played on the field.
In fact, when was the last time the duck fan actually exhibited an ability to self critique? Certainly not during the offseason
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Sep 8, 2010 6:48 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Hopefully...They come out pissed against Syracuse and run up the score.
While doing opponent research… I stumbled on this site to see what is what with Washington Football… and I can tell you, 2 years ago, you could have ‘run up the score’ against us… but I doubt that will happen this year… Greg Robinson is gone and Doug Marrone has changed this team dramatically in his short time at the helm…
We will play smarter, and tougher than the team you remember from 2 years ago… We may lose, across the continent, to a Pac10?, Pac 12? team… but I doubt they will self destruct like the Robinson teams that were overmatched against Akron, let alone the likes of Washington….
…. and point #2… Blaming the Refs? Really? I would expect that had you lost by 3 or something…. but, outside of soccer…. scoring in the 2nd Half is kind of important…
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 1:57 PM PDT reply actions
officiating
None of the calls that went against Washington directly impacted a score, so I agree that we shouldn’t place too much blame on the refs. The calls were more in the vein of allowing BYU to continue a drive that should have been over and preventing Washington from continuing a drive. By themselves, not a major impact, but they did help impact the flow of the game.
For me, the officiating was a small part of many things that went wrong for Washington against BYU, and certainly not among the first things I’d focus on. More like, “…oh, and there were a few calls that went against us that didn’t help our cause any” kind of thing.
Regarding Syracuse, I’d be surprised if we won 42-12 like the last game. It’s not out of the realm of possibility given the offensive weapons this team has, but I’d guess the game will probably be closer than most Husky fans will feel comfortable with for most of the game. But who knows, maybe this team really has embraced the expect to win mentality and will come out pi$$ed off and fired up and play an exceptional game.
I think I’d actually like Syracuse’s chances of an upset better had Washington beaten BYU – in that scenario it would have been possible that the Huskies could have overlooked the Orange while thinking about the following week against Nebraska. Now, I think it’s likely that they’ll get Washington’s full attention.
Interesting response..
Kirk… I enjoyed your response… But am not sure how you can balance saying of a possible blowout… “It’s not out of the realm of possibility given the offensive weapons this team has”… … after I read a UW article that characterizes your Heisman QB as “Deer-in-the-Headlights Jake”…. and grading out your whole offense with ’C’s for grades….
SU has a stout defense, was #13 against the rush last year, and returns 9 starters… with the Linebacking corps being the studs…
Surely, we are still building back up to our former prominence… and I am not brashly calling for an SU win… but if your team prepares for the same kind of SU team you guys played 2 years ago… You may very well be sitting at 0-2 and facing Nebraska…
And I agree, that it would have far better for SU for UW to beat BYU… gotta expect that UW will not be overlooking us in front of the first home crowd of the year… We see this game as a good measuring stick of how much progress has been made under Coach Marrone… because believe me… We of the Orange Nation remember the 42-12 game all too well….
And please… tell Jake to wait one more game off before he starts his Heisman run….
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions
regarding the offense
They didn’t play their best at Provo. But the grades you saw are as much a product of what our expectations are for them as they were an objective assessment of their performance. Objectively, they did a fair job – 433 yards on 69 plays (I’m not counting the -39 yard botched punt against our offense) for a 6.3 yard per play average, but tempered by only scoring 17 points. Part of that can be attributed to field position – our offense had long fields virtually the entire game, so we had to sustain drives longer in order to score.
But given the expectations and pre-season assessment of the talent on hand, it was a bit of a disappointment. We expected a little more consistent push up front; while our running game had superficially good numbers (167 yards on 30 carries, again removing the -39 yard botched punt), a lot of that was gained on 4 big plays; we couldn’t consistently count on churning out 4-5 yard gains to keep the chains moving. Locker was decent, but not great – he had happy feet too often in the pocket, missed a few throws he needed to make (most notably the overthrow to Kearse that should have resulted in a 99 yard TD) and he panicked on the two 4th down plays, not displaying enough patience on either one. Kearse had a decent game, but had at least 2 critical drops.
This is an offense that averaged 375.5 yards and 26.1 points per game last year, and with just about everyone back in the 2-deeps on that side of the ball, the expectations are that the offense should be even better this year in their 2nd year in Sark’s offense. Even though the offense didn’t quite live up to the hype in Provo (hence the “C” grades), the potential is still there for this offense to put up big numbers.
Regarding the expectations...
I assume you guys had the same high expectations for last week… and it didn’t pan out… Which we know is common with early season games, as we saw from some of the games last weekend…
I am looking for SU to be competitive with UW for the whole game, give ‘em a good game… and continue the slow, steady climb back from the depths of the abyss that we were in during the Robinson Era… but I don’t expect a 42-12 shellacking like we took a couple years ago… Could it happen? Sure. But I don’t expect it…
Looking forward to the game… I’ll be hanging with My Boys, in Orange, and cheering like mad for a big upset…. GO ORANGE!! (PS… I’d feel more comfortable if we were playing a Basketball game against you guys….)
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree
I am looking for SU to be competitive with UW for the whole game, give ‘em a good game
I think this is most likely. But as I said earlier, it’s not totally loony to think that Washington could blow out the Orange if they play up to their expectations. Unlikely, but not impossible by any means. Get the offense rolling in high gear early, get a turnover or two, build up a big early lead forcing the Orange to become more one-dimensional, and it could happen.
I also acknowledge that the Orange could upset the Huskies. Our guys need to get over the BYU game, play with focus and confidence. If they don’t, they could be looking at a confidence-sapping 0-2 start to the season…
Washington could blow out the Orange if they play up to their expectations
There is that word again… Expectations are dreams, wishes, and hopes…
And I don’t really get why you guys are so expectant of a ‘blow-out’… as it has been mentioned numerous times…. after the BYU game…you should be happy with a win… any way it comes… I mean, I am sure the expectation a week ago was about beating up on BYU….
Going into games with reasonable expectations, rather than pipe dreams… might be a better way to go… If WE get ahead early, I could see your team falling apart under the pressure of 0-2, Home Loss, Heisman-Dashed… losing to a team you expected to ‘Blow out’….. and instead, YOU getting blown out…
You never know… That’s why they play the game…
Interesting debate… that will be settled Saturday, and one of us will be crying!
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 7:31 PM PDT up reply actions
who said we expected a blowout?
All I’ve said is that it’s possible, but not likely. I’m predicting a fairly close game, with Washington ending up winning by around 10 after scoring late. I can see a scenario where the Huskies get a big win, but I think it’s a lot more likely the game stays close for 3 quarters before the Huskies slowly pull away.
And I acknowledged that the Huskies could lose. I really doubt they’d get blown out though. I know you’re a Syracuse fan and all, but I think the best you guys can hope for (barring a catastrophic injury or two) is a close win.
Competitive Game
But could be a big win for the DAWGS…of course I was at the Nevada game in 2003?…we lost and that was like the first loss to a “cream puff” in decades at Husky Stadium. If the emotion of the DAWGhouse starts to rock, you guys are in trouble!
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
I Can't Wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For kick-off! Husky Stadium! Boating to the game! Tailgating! and of course Husky Football! What on earth could be better! GO DAWGS!!
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Let the game begin!
Over confidence is a dangerous thing.. Glad you guys have it and not us!
And I don’t know about your little Nevada game… but make no mistake… We are not a “Cream-puff” team…
I just wiki-ed your team… and your recent record shows NO REASON to have such lofty dreams… except in your own ‘expectations’… (There’s that word again…) I really hope the Coachs and the Team is as needlessly over-confident as the Fans are… if so, we will win, possibly big….
Outside of the ‘Rick Neuheisel’ years…. you guys don’t have a ton of reasons to be so dismissive of any team… I think you are counting too much on that 42-12 win from a couple years ago… It’s not like you are a National Powerhouse in the last 15-20 years…
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions
you fail in the interwebs
It’s not like you are a National Powerhouse in the last 15-20 years…
Huh. Not a “National Powerhouse” in the last 15-20 years. Let’s see what the Huskies have done in that time frame:
1991: 12-0, National Champs
1992: 9-3, #11
1996: 9-3, #15
1997: 8-4, #18
2000: 11-1, #3
2001: 8-4, #19
What he didn't tell you is . . .
we actually have two teams. We send the JV team to the road games and the varsity team plays the home games.
On a more serious note, the Huskies play like two different teams, they suck on the road and can be pretty good at home. Don’t forget Syracuse has to travel across the entire country and play in a pretty hostile environment. I don’t expect a blowout, but it is a possibility playing at Husky Stadium.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Send the JV's!!!
Really… Seriously… Save the Varsity for your Pac 10?, Pac 12? schedule… We are cool with that… I mean, you want to be good hosts, don’t you?
And I agree that the travel will be another factor we will have to overcome, along with a hostile environment…. But unless things go seriously askew… we should be able to give you a good game, and hopefully make you sweat for awhile…
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Home Opener
I expect the crowd to be a factor. If the D gets rolling the crowd is going to be really disruptive to your offense.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
If the D gets rolling..
Your own blog gave your D a ‘C’ for a grade against BYU… so we will see about your ‘rolling D’… and ‘The Crowd’ has yet to win a game in any sporting event that I have ever seen…
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Why Do You...
…keep referring to that one game? On the road in a very hostile opener at BYU? The expectations for this Husky team are off the chart. That’s why people are pissed plus, yes we did suck. All I can say is we’ll just have to talk about it after the game. That’s why we play it right? But keep in mind that it’s our opener at home. You’re going to be in our house and yes these road games can get out of hand.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
By the way...
…you guys pounded Akron right? That ought to raise your confidence level.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Yep... We did...
Shut em down… and took a knee on the 1 late in the game, to show some Class… Something you’d ever see that in the Pac 10? 12?… Your best team (USC) had to cheat to win… Stay Classy Pac 10? 12?!!!!
Jesus… you keep talking and talking about “Expectations”… How is that working out for you so far?
I would recommend that you take the word ‘Expectations’ out of your vocabulary, it’s doing you more harm than good…
And I keep referring to that ‘one game’… cause that’s all you’ve or we’ve played… Christ you guys talk like you were 11-1 last year and rolled in a Bowl Game… No wonder you trash your own team on Monday cause they don’t live up to your delusional ‘Expectations’ on Saturday… We have been to a Bowl Game more recently than you guys have…
And I will let you know Sunday whether Akron is better or worse than you and your Undefeated Juggernaut (by Expectations) of a Team… At least Akron doesn’t have Delusions of Grandeur like you fools…
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions
At least Akron doesn’t have Delusions of Grandeur like you fools…
The fools I was referring to was that ‘dawgfan22’ who seems unable to carry on a reality based conversation without foaming at the mouth about his lofty ‘expectations’… Exactly the kind of fan that the Coach’s and Team probably hate because he expects way too much… and crys like a girl when it doesn’t work out his way…Christ! How Ridiculous….
Apparently, I missed out on the back-to-back-to-back Undefeated Seasons that you guys have been enjoying in the Northwest recently…
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions
But we did...
…blast you guys 42-14 now didn’t we smack talker! LOL! So there’s your recent history lesson between our two teams. Nuff said!
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Now who's talkin'...
…out their ass. Akron? Are you serious? LOL! Yeah hang your hat on that big win. You’re whole post is BS! Like I said talk to you after the game stud.
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
speaking of classy
Where in the hell do you get off painting this conference as not “classy”? Because USC didn’t properly monitor one guy? Yep, this is an out of control conference like the SEC or Big 12 alright…
And it’s ripe hearing you talk about class, considering how quickly you’ve revealed yourself to lack any yourself.
Oh, and your research you claim to have done is rather lacking. We’ve played 3 times and Washington has won twice.
Please!... Spare me...
USC has been the flagship program for an middling conference for years now… and Reggie and OJ Mayo were their 2 biggest recruits… and now we know how they got ’em…
I re-read my posts and don’t see where I compared anyone to the SEC, or Big 12… so your point… is kind of pointless… And aren’t you guys bringing in ‘out of control’ Big 12 programs to join your conference?…. Sweet!….
Please let me know what the cut-off number is for illegal recruiting… One is okay?… How about two?… Is three too many?… Let me know what the rule is out West…
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 8, 2010 6:48 AM PDT up reply actions
a "middling" conference?
You mean like the Big East?
Your point was pointless from the start. You get your panties in a bunch because fans here have high expectations for our team and start trying to make some bizarre connection between your team taking a knee on their last play against Akron and the Pac-10 supposedly lacking “class” because the NCAA decided to drop the hammer on the Trojan football program because Reggie Bush was getting paid by agents and USC didn’t pay enough attention.
Newsflash for you – major violations happen in every big conference, including yours. Am I supposed to be impressed because your team took a knee on their last play? I grew up watching Don James football at Washington – I saw the Huskies do that on a regular basis, so don’t try and lecture us on “class”, especially when it carries the irony of such a classless tool as yourself delivering the message.
Good Job Kirk!
I would have hated to be on the receiving end of that! Well said and so true…
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
Sorry, you get the varsity squad.
Did you read my post? We play the varsity team at home, this is a home game. I bet your team makes us sweat just as bad as they did two years ago.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Hey DawnFag22.... How was last weekend for you?
Get used to it…. there’s more to come…
Now… I know your are desperate… If you read what I wrote… I acknowledged that win… but that was 2 long years ago… That SU team is gone… and this one is much better… as you will see… Mr. “Expectations”… with your ’Heisman, Deer-in-the-Lights Quarterback…
And don’t call me stud… save that for your little dawggie pals….
Gotta say, you are the only moronic, immature fan that I have met on this site… The rest of the fans seem to be thoughtful, reasonable, and reasoned… Whereas you make indefensible claims, about your dream-like ‘expectations’… and cry like a bitch when someone challenges it… Get a Pair….
I will savor my Akron win… and you can savor your ‘expectation’ win at BYU… Oh! Wait!… You LOST that game right?… I am going to look over this site tomorrow and see what kind of gibberish you wrote before your Saturday loss… I’m sure it was as sensible as the crap you have written tonight…
To you… I hope we send you crying home at 0-2…
To the rest of the UW Nation… Good Luck, and lets have a exciting, injury-free game!
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 7, 2010 9:27 PM PDT reply actions
and to be clear here
There was absolutely nothing posted by dawgfan22 that remotely justifies the hostility you’ve been posting here. If there’s anyone here that needs to “grow a pair”, it’s you since you seem to so bent out of shape at the suggestion that the Huskies have a chance to win big this weekend.
Grow thicker skin and learn to control your emotions, or don’t bother coming back here.
Hey Kirk
Have you noticed that the two Syracuse posters we have had this year are complete jerks?
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 8, 2010 8:20 AM PDT up reply actions
The bottom line pal...
…is that you won’t have the guts to come around here after the game. GO DAWGS!!
Washington Husky Football-"Hear the bark, feel the bite!"
That will be the tell tale sign
He knows where to find us, I wonder if he’s got the balls to come back next Monday. I’m betting he won’t.
Either way, I can’t wait to get to Husky Stadium on Saturday, GO DAWGS!!!
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Oh... I will be back...
To remind you guys after your team doesn’t blow out SU… and in fact, could easily lose… because while I have a rational understanding of my team, and all you guys have is your unrealistic ‘expectations’ that your team is some kind of Powerhouse, despite all the evidence to the contrary…
Awww… all the UW fans got their widdle feelings hurt because everybody doesn’t see the same thing they see… how sad… I guess, after last weekend… you are feeling a little unsure about your team, and ready to lash out at anyone who does not parrot your delusional thinking…
I’ll see you next week… either to concede to defeat, and congratulate you… or to laugh like a M-Fer if you don’t get your expected ‘Blowout’ win… Time will tell…
Syracuse University Orange
The only private University to win both Football & Basketball Championships (Football-1959/Basketball-2003)
by Gotch Carr Superstar on Sep 8, 2010 6:42 AM PDT reply actions
Dude, WAKE UP
Nobody EXPECTS a blow out. We expect a win, and if the team comes out and plays well, a blow out is possible. See last years games against Cal and WSU. For the record, Cal is better than Syracuse.
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Gotch Carr Superstar
Even though you are kind of a turd I have enjoyed your visit to our blog this week.
It is always good to get fans of the opposing team to visit during the week.
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Sep 8, 2010 8:22 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on UW Dawg Pound
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
