The Prediction - Washington 44 Baylor 37
by John Berkowitz on Dec 28, 2011 9:42 AM PST
Email
PrintThe Alamo Bowl should be one of the most entertaining match-ups of the college bowl season.
The contest features two high scoring offenses and and a couple of defenses which have given up an average of over 30 points per game.
The pregame talk going into this one has been all about Baylor and its Heisman Trophy winning quarterback Robert Griffin III. Griffin is one of the most exciting players in the country and Washington's defense is going to have a problem containing the dual threat QB.
Griffin led Baylor to a 9-3 record in 2011 which included late season big wins over arch rivals Texas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. The Bears finished the season strong with five straight wins and are currently ranked number 12 in the country.
Unranked Washington comes into the game with a 7-5 record which is respectable but they performed poorly against elite teams such as Stanford, Oregon, USC, and Nebraska. Despite uncompetitive losses to elite competition the Huskies are appearing in their second straight bowl game under third year coach Steve Sarkisian.
I expect a close contest because traditionally the Huskies are a strong post season team. Last season they upset heavily favored Nebraska in the Holiday Bowl. Washington is still rebuilding and the three weeks of rest before this game has allowed key components on both sides of the ball to get healthy which is a big plus for the Huskies.
What do we know going into this one?
Baylor is going to score a lot of points. Win or lose they have scored big against every team they have played this season and Washington will not be the exception.
RG3 is surrounded by a cast of outstanding supporting talent. RB Terrance Gannaway is a 240 lb wrecking ball who is more than capable of picking up some serious yardage against Washington. If the Huskies hope to win this contest they need to slow down the Baylor running attack and pick up some fumbles.
Wide receivers Kendall Wright, Terrance Williams and Tevin Reese are big time receivers. Wright is very dangerous and will test the Husky secondary early and often. I would imagine that Baylor coach Art Briles has seen plenty of film featuring Quinton Richardson...let your imagination take over from there.
Baylor like Washington has had troubles on defense this season. They are going to have a tough time stopping All Pac 12 running back Chris Polk who is more than capable of picking up a couple hundred yards on the ground against the Bears if Sark calls his number enough.
Huge Baylor NG Nicolas Jean-Baptiste will be one of the keys to stopping the Washington running game. He registered 36 tackles, 8.5 stops for loss, and four sacks in 2011. Like UW's Alameda Ta'amu his main job is taking up space and occupying double teams so the Bear linebackers can clean up.
The key to beating Baylor is committing to running the ball. Kansas State, Texas A&M and Oklahoma State averaged 268 yards on the ground against the Bears. That disrupted the rhythm of their offense and kept the Griffin led offense off the field enough to pick up the win.
Washington is more than capable of scoring enough points to beat Baylor. The Huskies averaged over 31 points per game this season and are featuring a healthy Keith Price for the first time in months. Even though he was hampered by knee and ankle injuries for most of the season Price still managed to throw a school-record 29 touchdown passes.
As Price goes so does Washington. When he had to sit out against Oregon State the Husky offense stalled almost the entire game. When inserted late in the fourth quarter despite lacking mobility because of injury he almost rallied his team to a comeback victory.
Price has a lot of great tools surrounding him in addition to 1000 yard rusher Chris Polk. The Bears don't match up well against big receivers. TE Austin Seferian-Jenkins is a player that the Bear defense is going to have a big problem with. Kasen Williams is another guy that is going to challenge them with his size and athletic ability.
Senior WR's Jermaine Kearse and Devin Aguilar are playing their final games as Huskies. I expect both of them to bring their A Plus games on Thursday night again and exploit a Baylor secondary that ranks 112th nationally, and has allowed a whopping 32 touchdown passes.
So who is going to win?
It is basically a home game for the Bears because Waco is only a little over three hours away from San Antonio. The Bears should put around 45,000 fans in the stands while Washington is expected to travel with approximately 10,000 which isn't bad since Seattle is over 2000 miles away.
Baylor is definitely the team in the spotlight and they are going to be under a lot of pressure. The Heisman hype stuff can be pretty distracting even though Griffin has a great head on his shoulders. The Bears have been the toast of the country over the last month and that will take its toll heading into this game.
I expect a barn burner of a game with an over and under in the neighborhood of 80 points. I think a healthy Keith Price is going to end up out-dueling RG3 in this game. I think the Husky defense will play well enough to give Washington the slight edge needed for victory.
Points will come quickly for both teams and the big key for Washington is to take and maintain the lead from the onset of the game. Washington needs to make Baylor chase them while they try to control the clock a bit on offense. Time of possession is going to be one of the keys to victory.
If Washington ends up chasing Baylor I don't like their chances. Sark isn't patient when his team falls behind and he tends to go for the quick strike to catch up rather than relying on Chris Polk to chip away at the opposition with 5-6 yards per carry.
Both teams have the ability to drive up and down the field all night. In the end the team who has the best turnover ration and is most productive in the red zone will come out being the winner.
I have to take the Huskies because I think that an overlooked underdog who has had three weeks to prepare (and get healthy) while their opponent (not used to the attention) has been distracted by the media holds a significant edge....Washington 44 Baylor 37.
101 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Kevin Smith
Just saw he is listed as doubtful. I was really hoping he would run one back tomorrow. Who fills in for him?
Callier more than likely, followed by Kasen Williams?
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 10:21 AM PST up reply actions
Callier Williams and Sankey
UW Dawg Pound - SBN Seattle
by John Berkowitz on Dec 28, 2011 10:23 AM PST up reply actions
I am not sure
Sankey may be behind Callier and Williams like John stated above. I’d like to see him get a second chance. Dude is a burner and has great vision.
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 10:37 AM PST up reply actions
I guess the pressure thing bothers me
Because the pressure has been on Baylor prior to this. They’ve had nationally-televised games. they’ve had RG3 come back and win the game in great fashion. It’s not like they haven’t done the pressure thing, and it’s more the case that they’ve done well under that pressure.
I’d put it this way: if you said that you’re going to be facing a top-15 team on the road with the Heisman winner at QB, there’s nothing there that makes me think that they’ll be bad because the media likes them more. Nor is there any indication that there will be a letdown; it’s not like Baylor gets a lot of bowl games.
Huskies have played nationally televised games too
“Pressure” and “letdown” are made up things that don’t actually have any effect on the outcome of a game, and are just perpetuated through confirmation bias.
agreed
and if that’s what you’re banking on to win a game, I suspect you’ll be disappointed.
Well, mostly agreed; I think nebraska didn’t want to play Washington at all and certainly didn’t take it seriously, at least not nearly as seriously as Washington did. Plus Nebraska got outcoached.
And that’s one factor that I think is underrated; I have no faith in Baylor coaching. At all. Sark is a better coach, and while Nick Holt is almost certain to do something fairly stupid as far as playcalling goes I suspect it won’t matter all that much given how good Baylor is. But Sark in general should be able to make better adjustments and make better calls. There should be more surprises and more gutsy calls from him too, I’d think.
This is a horrible argument
Well, mostly agreed; I think nebraska didn’t want to play Washington at all and certainly didn’t take it seriously, at least not nearly as seriously as Washington did. Plus Nebraska got outcoached
Can I use that everytime we lose a game, or is it only when a team get’s beat by an underdog. Please, Nebraska took it seriously and got beat up. Just like Baylor is going to take their beating seriously as well! Go Dawgs!
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
I highly doubt Nebraska wanted to be there.
So, I also doubt how hard they played.
I'm so positive, you'll need AZT later.
This is seriously the dumbest argument on the face of the planet
They are football players. They do what all football players do … Play the gopponent that’s in front of them.
Desire has nothing to do with anything. Coaching, talent and execution are the only factors that affect outcomes in a significant way and UW was equal or better in all three areas that day
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
I remember a certain Sun Bowl from back in the day
I personally know guys on that team who admitted they were hugely disappointed to be playing in that Bowl and not the Holiday Bowl, I believe. That UW team was not 20 points inferior to that Iowa team.
I'm so positive, you'll need AZT later.
Desire has a lot to do with success
if you don’t believe that, I’m not sure what sport you’re watching. Part of coaching is harnessing or instilling that desire, but it’s certainly there.
football players don’t just play the opponent that’s in front of them. They talk trash. They get beat down. They dominate or get dominated. These have psychological effects. These matter. Ignoring them ignores a huge chunk of sports psychology and motivation and somehow turns the 18-22 year old kids into automatons built only to play football. Do you really think that 18-22 year olds are somehow immune to emotion, or immune to 70k fans screaming?
Emotion only matters if it effects execution...
…but what emotion do you want? Joy? Anger? Calm? Resolve? Carefree? And, how do you measure it?
It’s a load of bunk. Part of coaching is eliciting concentration on execution however you can. However, Chip Kelly’s “nameless faceless opponent” is no better or worse than Pete Carroll’s “always compete” or Jeff Tedford’s “win one for the gipper” or Paul Wullf’s “pride in WSU”.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
Often, you measure it by results
Especially measured by results compared to other outcomes.
Just so we’re clear, gekko – your claim is that the emotions of the players have no bearing in the performance of the team and the coach has no ability to influence those emotions. Is that correct?
Teams come out flat. They get flattened.
Superior teams play lousy games. It happens routinely, including in the 2010 Holiday Bowl.
What emotion do I want? Desire and determination. Happy to be there, eager to fight and win. It has to be genuine, too. Heartfelt.
Football emotion, competitive emotion generally, is measured in concentration and quit. You focus on doing your best, and you keep fighting, and you keep fighting, and you keep fighting.
It's not which emotion. It's more how much emotion.
It’s the quality of the thing.
Name me one human competitor who doesn't go bonkers after a big win.
Why? Emotional release, that’s why. All that desire and determination, all that focus and fight, they’re like a steam engine, driving the competitive pistons up and down. The moment of victory is an explosion of joy. Ultimately, sport is almost entirely about emotion.
Sure
You can also use words like ‘grit’ and descriptions like ‘all he does is win’.
If you really believe that Nebraska was excited to play Washington for the third time after beating the crap out of them earlier that year AND when they almost won the Big-12 championship, feel free. Just keep in mind that there are a lot of people that will disagree with you.
If you really believe that Nebraska was excited to play Washington for the third time after beating the crap out of them earlier that year AND when they almost won the Big-12 championship,….
The third time? Really? You think a matchup a year later had anything to do with that game?
You can argue that Nebraska had bigger plans that season, and didn’t want to be there, and I’ll agree. But at least remain in the now. You aren’t helping your position by projecting like that.
It was what was said at the time
That they weren’t all that happy to be having them a third time in 12 months. It’s not really projecting; it was what was stated in the press. I can find articles to back me up if you really want.
And yes, I think it had something to do with the outcome. Given that the first game was on the road and the Huskies looked about as inept as you could possibly be, given that they barely missed out on the championship and given that they weren’t thrilled about the matchup, yes, I think playing them again a year later was frustrating to them. It certainly didn’t make them particularly motivated to play.
Answer this then
Why was it that only Nebraska’s offense wasn’t motivated? Because their defense didn’t have a terrible game. Neither did their special teams. Is having your quarterback too injured to run effectively when he’s not a good passer the same as being not motivated? Kinda funny how if Taylor Martinez was 100% they probably would have had a normal amount of “motivation”
Their defense played okay
Not great. And Polk owned them. Basically Washington played conservatively with Polk, Polk Polk as the gameplan and taking it out of Locker’s hands as much a s humanly possible (didn’t throw a pass in the first half, for instance). Their D did okay, but they certainly weren’t the dominanting force they were in the first game.
That was the biggest key to Washington’s win. Taylor Martinez’ public grousing also hurt, but it wasn’t like Martinez was the sole reason they dominated the first time. Their D was a bigger part, and they simply didn’t play as well; they didn’t get as many TOs, didn’t get as many short fields and in general weren’t flying around.
I dunno, thecassino; I saw a Nebraska team significantly less fast and less powerful in the game. On every phase.
Fact check: Locker attempted multiple passes the first half.
And now, for my very elaborate and college-educated plan!'
Also, we didn't play them a year later in the bowl. It was a few months.
And it wasn’t the third time. It was the second.
And now, for my very elaborate and college-educated plan!'
The disposition you duck fans have for Jake is slanted and bordering on obsessive
… And I find it pretty funny that you criticize him for all of the same faults your QB currently exhibits. Do you really think Jake isn’t as productive as DT if he has Oregon’s o-line and their run game to set up play action? A look at his excellent play in the pros so far should set your perception straight.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
His excellent play in the pros?
Not sure what games you’re watching, but he’s done okay in the pros. He’s still really inaccurate and still has a crazy great arm. Which means he gets 50 yard bombs but finishes with 19/39 or some such and still overthrows screen passes. And since I know people will be pedantic about it: first game with more than one pass 9/19, second 13/29, third 11/16 but that was against the Colts! 51% completion rating so far with 4 TDs. It’s good that he hasn’t been picked off yet, but that’s not ‘excellent’ – not when you can compare him to players like Dalton or Newton.
Also, not sure where you’re getting this ‘you duck fans’ thing. Did Locker throw the ball a lot in the first game against Nebraska? Did he throw it as much in the second game by comparison? This isn’t me having anything against Locker – it’s me seeing that Sark saw Locker wasn’t going to get it done against a NFL-caliber secondary and instead went to Polk. That’s what they did in the last few games last season, IIRC – they relied on Polk. At the time we thought it was because Locker was banged up, but they did the same thing against Nebraska when Locker should have been mostly healed up. It was a good coaching move. It was the right call. That’s not on Locker being bad; it’s on Sark being smart.
I do have a thing for people not realizing how good Price is compared to Locker and how limiting Locker was to this offense. A scrambling QB that is often hurt and can’t hit the basic routes easily and isn’t great at reading is a detriment to a pro-style offense. While you can make excuses for Locker all you like, the fact is that Price is simply better for this system by leaps and bounds. And I don’t think he gets the credit that he deserves for it.
Also, I don’t see how my criticism of Locker has any bearing on my actual opinion of DT. Did I say ‘unlike DT, who is awesome’ anywhere? That’s a non-argument. I can be unhappy with DT’s overthrows just as much as I could be unhappy with Locker’s inaccuracy too. For the record I think DT is a good but not great fit for the Oregon O – he makes good reads most of the time, is good at reading coverage and can occasionally make plays with his feet. He isn’t accurate and occasionally makes some of the dumbest decisions I’ve ever seen (20 yard sack for an INT? YES Please!). He’s very inconsistent and seems to need to get into a rhythm before good things happen, but at the same time he can be a very good passer. He doesn’t have massive arm strength. Happy?
Kinda funny when compared to the BruinsNation theory
That Sarkisian only won because Locker was so awesome.
Have they? I seem to recall the Dawgs blowing off all their marquee games...
When the spotlight shines bright, these Dawgs have routinely rolled on to their backs and whimpered for mercy. One can always hope that just makes them overdue for a solid effort, finally, but on the evidence, this is not a confident bunch. And for good reason.
There are some key exceptions, of course. Keith Price always gives his all, bless his heart. War Daddy always shows up, veteran stud that he is. Kasen Williams and ASJ are generally the biggest, nastiest guys in their immediate vicinity. Cort Dennison will always take a direct path to the ball, and wrap the guy up.
But the guys in the trenches? The outside linebackers? The entire secondary? The receiving corps? Frankly, there’s a roster full of guys who don’t seem to know what they’re supposed to be doing half the time, who are frequently out of position, and even when the play comes right to them, they routinely fail to make it.
This is a team that has yet to earn its swagger. The kind of hang tough, team swagger that says `We can whip these over-rated bums, and the refs, and the crowd, and every other damm thing that comes along. We can understand our assignments, stick to our assignments, execute our assignments, fight to the final whistle, and play football like we actually know what we’re doing. So that, win or lose, you know you played the Washington Huskies, and it HURT’.
But instead, I see a season-long disconnection between the coaches and most of the players, between the scheme and the execution. There’s a near-total lack of accountability. When you screw the pooch, when you hump the bunny, well, they just pat you on the butt and send you right back out there to do it again.
If forced to pick one word to describe this team, chances are most observers would choose `undisciplined’. Or perhaps `young’, if they wanted to be charitable about it. Well, school’s out, kids. Grow the eff up already. Seize your last chance to listen to your coaches and play some honest to Dawg Husky football. First play, last play, and every play in-between.
i'd go with young
and the leaders on the team are quiet leaders, ie senio, alameda, ET and cort.
15 extra practices are huge for our frosh and soph olb’s.
underclassmen want to send off the seniors and realize the bowl game is the first game of the next season.
back up 3-tech’s and backup de will be critical to our success.
You'll have to clarify which cliches, there are too many to choose from.
I'm so positive, you'll need AZT later.
Letdown is very real
It’s part of why we won in SD last year. It’s why P12 teams lose to half rate WAC schools…it’s tough to get motivated when you don’t want to be somewhere.
That said, it doesn’t get much bigger for Baylor, they won’t have a letdown.
by B Money on Dec 28, 2011 6:51 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
It isn't though
Because when the “letdown” concern is brought up 1 of 2 things happens:
a) The team worried about a letdown wins, and wasn’t a victim of a letdown.
b) The team worried about a letdown loses, and was a victim of a letdown.
Even in the first scenario you’re perpetuating the myth of a letdown effect by saying that the team was able to somehow, against all odds, overcome the magical letdown effect.\
Example from this year: a lot of people said that North Carolina wasn’t motivated or focused against Mizzou, and got blown out because they didn’t really want to be there.
Another way to look at it was that UNC’s coaches had both feet at the door, including their head coach who is heading to OSU to become DC. While they were looking around and interviewing for their next jobs, Gary Pinkel and staff were putting together a gameplan that was far superior to what UNC put together and picked them apart, while getting a couple lucky turnovers to pile on.
Which seems more likely?
There’s almost always a logical (ie: real) reason for a supposed “letdown” and a surprising amount of the time it’s coaching.
I never said it's the only reason
But it plays a part.
When USC best us unmerciful this year, why was that? Are they way better than us? No, we’ve beat them 2 years in a row. Did Kiffy cakes out coach Sark? Not likely, but it could play a part. Just like the hammering SU put on us before an emotional loss to the Ducks could have deflated the team and played a part.
Letdown gets overblown often…but completely dismissing it is just as lame. It’s never an excuse for a loss (NU fans…) but it certainly is a real thing. It flat out happens too often to be totally dismissed as coincidence.
by B Money on Dec 28, 2011 8:50 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
And we weren't?
That answer is a bit to “Foutsy” for me to take seriously.
by B Money on Dec 28, 2011 10:53 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
You've been out-reasoned at every turn.
Time to look up “confirmation bias.”
Teams (for foreign blogs): Seahawks, Mariners, Huskies and Broncos. Yes, I recognize the contradiction; I was born in Denver.
by THolt on Dec 29, 2011 1:42 AM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
Each side of every debate has confirmation bias
It’s in the nature of debate to slant evidence in your direction. Since I never claimed to be a neutral third party, it’s my job when arguing to use confirmation bias.
Enlighten me as to how stating USC is better, while ignoring every other variable is not confirmation bias? Football players are not machines. They, as humans are imperfect and do not approach every game the same way with the same fire and passion. It’s not an excuse (like I said), because it’s their job to overcome, but it is real and does factor in when one team clearly lacks a reason to dig for what might be that extra umph to get them over the edge.
by B Money on Dec 29, 2011 8:22 AM PST via Android app up reply actions
As an example
This week is my firms big annual contract and I get to lead the crew. It’s kind of a big deal, so while I should approach every project with the same vigor, I just can’t. The other small jobs just don’t matter as much to me and don’t provide the same motivation to push myself pst what is expected of me.
It’s real in life and football. It’s overblown and used as a crutch far too often when teams lose, but it’s human nature to prioritize. I don’t see how anyone could not understand this.
by B Money on Dec 29, 2011 8:37 AM PST via Android app up reply actions
So tell me, thecassino
How to explain Eastern Washington? Were they that good in general? Their record doesn’t indicate that. Was Washington that bad? Their record doesn’t indicate that, either. Is it solely that the defense just didn’t know what was going on and that Price was new?
Another example: USC vs ASU and USC vs. Oregon. Do you think that USC had the same amount of motivation for one or the other? Do you think Oregon had the same motivation to beat USC that they did, say, Stanford?
The notion that it’s overblown as an explanation is reasonable. The notion that it doesn’t exist is basically completely false and is easily shown by the ridiculous amount of players who can speak to being more up, more motivated, etc for specific games – and not just in football, but in all sports. Coaching absolutely helps that motivation (or can hurt it), but at that point you’re just talking about a specific source for the letdown, not that it doesn’t exist.
Answers:
EWU: Price was injured, and they curtailed the playbook as a result (Sark admitted as much). UW secondary couldn’t stop anybody all year, why would they have stopped EWU?
USC vs ASU: Matt Barkley had his worst game of the year, and USC had a couple fumbles which ASU was able to capitalize on. Nothing out of the ordinary for a typical upset that happens all the time in BCS conferences.
USC vs Oregon: So wait, now we’re surprised when US goddamn C beats somebody? Really? They’re the #5 team in the country.
Find a real example of motivation or letdown that isn’t easily dismissed by REAL things that happened and I’ll accept it.
Uh
Why wouldn’t they have stopped EWU: because other D2 teams did? EWU declared this their bowl game and their chance to prove something; do you think that had nothing to do with their performance, especially compared to the rest of their schedule? Alternately: do you believe that Washington’s D was worse than South Dakota, Montana, Portland State and Montana State’s? Because those teams all held EWU to fewer points than Washington did.
ASU: so that’s a non-answer; why did Barkley have his worst game of the year? It wasn’t the ASU D; they were not particularly good all year by your margin. Unless…ASU’s D played extra better than they had prior to that game because it was a big game…huh. See, your reason says why they lost, but not why the things happened in the game like they did. Saying ‘because Barkley played badly’ and then saying that it’s not because of a letdown or because the other team made a lot of plays that they usually didn’t.
USC vs. Oregon: yes, it was surprising that USC came into Oregon and beat them by 3 points, especially given their performance against common great teams (Stanford). It was also surprising how slow Oregon was early on. But hey, I’m sure that has everything to do with coaching, players making plays for some unknown reason and good matchups and nothing to do with the fact that athletes are human and some days they play well, some days they play poorly.
Re: USC/ASU
Statistics have shown that interceptions have more to do with the quarterback throwing them than the defense they’re playing against (see: Tom Brady), and fumbles are mostly a random occurrence with a 50/50 chance of being recovered by the defense. So what I said about turnovers being the reason and not ASU being “amped” or whatever is perfectly valid. Barkley had a bad game, which happens to any player at some point throughout a season, and ASU caught a little luck. There is no boogeyman.
On USC/Stanford/Oregon: they’re 3 of the top 6 teams in the country. Any one could beat any of the other two on any given day, I don’t really see how one beating another is any evidence for motivation playing a role.
And Eastern, you’re attempting to do two things that show you’re out of your depth: make a direct comparison between different teams based on one statistic, and comparing a game played with an entire offseason to prepare with a games played on one weeks rest. It’s extremely faulty logic at best.
Whatever the reason, we had no business letting EWU make a game of it.
That was embarrass at the time, and even more so as the season went along and Eastern was shown to be what they are. Ugh…
I'm so positive, you'll need AZT later.
Agree with Cassino
Letdowns are an excuse that fans and coaches Mae when they can’t explain a lack of execution or the breakdown of execution as a result of the superior performance of a foe where one was unexpected.
The emotional aspect of football is so overblown that it has become an absurdity. Whether a player executes because of his “fiery leadership” or his “steely ice-blooded demeanor” does not matter … All that matters is his execution! If he fails to, it is because the man ahead of him was better…or better prepared…or he made a mistake.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
Just because those phrases are largely hokum and silly.
It doesn’t mean that motivation doesn’t come in to play at all. They aren’t the same thing.
I'm so positive, you'll need AZT later.
I'm agreeing with Steen...
There might be something to this 2012 nonsense.
by B Money on Dec 29, 2011 9:44 AM PST via Android app up reply actions
Letdowns are overused
But it doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. It doesn’t mean that teams can be beaten by far inferior teams simply because they did not play as well as they could, often because they just didn’t take it seriously.
I guess for me this is hard to understand not getting, but I played football in HS. We did practice harder and get more motivated to beat certain teams. We didn’t care as much about other teams that were a joke. Now, you can call that a failure in coaching or a failure to motivate, but the fact is that it’s hard to get motivated to beat a D2 school when you’re D1. It’s hard to get motivated to beat a 1-11 team when you’re 12-0. It’s certainly harder to give it that extra effort.
We all have this notion that a player who is generally better than an opponent out to therefore win every contest with said opponent...
… And when they don’t, we can’t rationalize that said opponent was better for that one play, that one game or that one series.
We don’t apply this rationale to other sports (oddly) and we fail to recognize that the line between a UW athlete and an EWU athlete is more fine than you might think.
The other thing I find galling is that we all presume we can discern state of mind and somehow measure / judge “want to”. What bullocks! Maybe a coach will tip us off to it with some of his comments to the media. Outside of that, how can you tell? It’s pure insanity.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
We do apply it to other sports
It’s news when the heat lose to the bucks, or when Manchester United loses to Wigan. It doesn’t apply as much to baseball because the player with the most influence on the game changes daily. Although it is still news if Felix gets out-pitched by behrens guy just called up from minor league ball.
Motivation is boy something that can be quantified. It is only relative to your levels of it in other situations. You can often tell how that relates based on body language, and sometimes actual language.
by B Money on Dec 29, 2011 10:31 AM PST via Android app up reply actions
Just because you can't quantify something
doesn’t mean that something doesn’t exist. And we can witness emotional response; we can see when people make stupid mistakes that did out of anger. You can see when teams start getting tired and making mental errors. You can see the fire when teams are really up and running around and hitting. These are things, as humans, we are absolutely wired to see – the body language, the facial expressions, the internal feeling we ourselves get when we see these things. Just because we haven’t quantified units of anger or developed a system that reads body language and tells you exactly how many anger units that person has doesn’t mean it’s non-existent.
We absolutely apply this to other sports. The NCAA basketball tournament is rife with this comparison. We use it in basketball to exclaim when someone is hot or cold. We use it in baseball to see performances of pitchers and hitters as good or bad streaks.
The empirical result is ‘they were better’, but that isn’t an answer any more than ‘they won because they scored more points’ is an answer to why one team won.
I think it comes down to this
lose the pressure and letdown and Heisman talk. Washington, yes Washington, is the better team. Baylor is a very very very bad team with the BEST quarterback in the nation, screw that, BEST player in the nation. Beyond him they have burners at receiver, and a bruiser as a running back. The rest of the team is horrendous. If we play up to our potential, we will beat Baylor. I have a lot of faith in Keith, it all rides on him. If we are at least even in turnovers and Keith plays a solid game, Baylor will lose.
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 10:35 AM PST up reply actions
So other than the great players they're a bad team?
This is a pretty silly argument. Yes, other than the Heisman winner and best player in the nation, along with really good receivers and a good running back they’re not a very good team. Well…how is that all that different than Washington? Aside from the skill players on offense Washington is pretty much devoid of playmakers. Yet somehow Washington’s skill players are better than Baylors? Please.
Big difference
I never said really good receivers. I never said good running back. They have a big bruising rb and fast receivers. Talent and being fast and big are two different things. I think Kearse, Aguillar, Williams, and the rest of Udub’s receivers are way more talented. Chris Polk is way more talented. Our horrible defense looks like a diamond compared to Baylor’s. Stop listening to ESPN and national media, watch Baylor play in some games, then tell me how Baylor is talented. They are a bunch of horrible players surrounded by the best in the nation.
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 11:49 AM PST up reply actions
I've watched them play in several games
they’re quite good. And RG3 is phenomenal in making them good, which really is all that matters. It doesn’t matter if Kearse is going to be more NFL-worthy than the otther Baylor receivers because he’s not got RG3 throwing to him this game.
I do agree that Baylor’s defense is horrible, but their position players are at least as good as Washington’s save Polk. And honestly, if your only advantage is a good running back compared to a Heisman winning QB, that’s not a big advantage.
Price...
KP has been lights out against “horrible defenses” all year plus he’s as healthy as he’s been all year. There’s no excuse for UW not to match Baylors production on offense.
Oh, absolutely
I don’t see a reason why Price wouldn’t light it up, other than receivers sucking horribly and inexplicably.
You guys are too caught up in the hype
Don’t get caught up in that. Baylor will lose tomorrow!
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 11:52 AM PST up reply actions
Either way
it doesn’t matter what I think or claim to know about Baylor. When game time comes I throw out being a reasonable analyst and straight up become a Dawg! Maybe I’m starting to slowly put on the purple and gold goggles and see things all things Husky! Maybe it’s that I’m an ignorant Husky fan that when it’s game time, I get a little crazy! I’m not sure what the hell is going on, all I know is I’m starting to yell “Go Huskies!” at random passerby, probably clueless as to what I’m yelling! I’m starting to argue with other Husky fans and with myself! I want to go out there and tackle people in the streets and argue penalties with people wearing black and white atire! Let’s go Dawgs! It’s game time and I’m excited, can’t hardly wait! Let’s go Huskies!
Basically what I’m saying is, you can’t argue anything I say right now cause I’m drunk on Husky football!
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 12:35 PM PST up reply actions
Hey, nothing wrong with being a homer, as long as you are nice about it.
even better if you have the grit to not be despondent if we are disappointed.
by HuskyInExile on Dec 28, 2011 10:35 PM PST up reply actions
That's crazy talk. They are not a bad team
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
by Gekko Mojo on Dec 28, 2011 11:32 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
No, they are a horrible team
I’ve been watching Baylor since I was a kid. I watch tons of Bear games. Yes, Baylor gets a lot of play on ESPN. They are the toast of the town currently. Washington isn’t but I’ve watched both teams play every game. Washington is head and shoulders a better team. The only thing different besides this team and other Baylor teams in the past is RG3 is older, smarter, and wiser. They’ve had better receivers since RG3 has been there, like David Gettis. They’ve had better running backs like Jay Finley. This Baylor team, including the defense is horrendous. Their defense makes ours look like LSU. And by far Washington has better skill players, it’s not even close. Are you guys kidding me?
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
happy for your enthusiasm
doubt any of the players buying in to that angle.
we will play our style of ball and take care of our business and see what happens when the final whistle blows.
psychologically the team will prepare themselves by knowing what they need to do to win, not convince themselves that they are playing an inferior opponent and this game is a gimme.
I know
I’m just getting a little amped! Sorry everyone!
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
too true. They are NOT giants, and my guess maybe a little overrated, but
they have some pretty good talent in the right positions to fit their scheme, and we oughta admit that RG3 is a darn good QB.
- Sure hope we can rattle him, though it’s not obvious to me how to do it.
If we had a brilliant secondary we might confuse him w/ coverage, but we don’t (yet), and he seems to be able to either scramble for a few yards or be smart enough to dump it if there isn’t an open receiver.
Hope he gets a shot in the NFL; they’re very much focused on ‘type’ players
by HuskyInExile on Dec 28, 2011 10:39 PM PST up reply actions
44,997 fans!
I maybe a Texan, but I’m a Dawg! And I’m bringing two other Dawgs with me! Let’s go Huskies! See y’all in San Antone! Woof!
I hope for the same result
I think it all rides on Keith Price’s arm. If he is on, we will roll Baylor. I think we may even win by multiple scores, although my confidence isn’t sky high in that. I think we need to use Keith to open up the running game later in the second half. If we have a lead in the third qtr, I say we pound CP1 down Baylor’s throats, pick up our trophy along the way, and head to Seattle Alamo Bowl champs! Woof! Bow down to Washington!
Yeah, KP will need to be sharp when he does throw, but if we're gonna win many of those
throws will be from play action after Polk has shredded them a few times . . .
Shove it down their throat a few times, open up a little w/ play action or even a trick play, shove it down their throat some more . . .
AND
win the turnover & field position battle.
Have FUN!
by HuskyInExile on Dec 28, 2011 10:42 PM PST up reply actions
I like your pick, jb. Mine 45-42 UW
if Sark commits to the run and doesn’t revert to his DNA. OTOH, besides Polk and Folk, our advantage is with our WR and TEs catching the ball against their smaller corners. Balance will be the key. We will need to win STs more than ever and have a plus 2 on TOs. The crowd could become a factor, GO DAWGS. I will be watching from HecEd.
baylor plays a zone defense
this works really well to see how the lb’s react to play action. if they shade back, give polk the rock. if they key the run, devin reads seams as well as anyone. he could have a really big game.
with sark i think the pass will set up the run and once the ol gets in a rhythm the run will roll.
on d, 15 extra practices are huge for player development and hopefully hud and josh got the concept of contain. funnel it back to the middle which is our strength. if that occurs josh could wreck havoc on the backfield. with that being said i miss jamora in the bowl game.
biggest call imo is who to replace k. smith? i would take kasen or sankey over callier in that both are more electric. would be gutsy to show confidence in sankey to get the husker monkey off his back but would be hard to argue against kasen as he is on the rise.
I think we should pass to setup the run as well
I think Keith kinda got lost in the “hype” after the Stanford let down. Not being talked about too much. If he comes out and throws all over Baylor, back those safeties up, CP1 will have a huge second half. It’s very possible as Baylor’s defense is soo bad it’s not even comparable to ours.
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 11:57 AM PST up reply actions
i was sideline for the standford game
we got our asses kicked.
stanford played their most physical game of the year against us.
in the 4th i saw cort tap himself out of play. never seen that.
the team lost confidence after that game, brutal beatdown.
physical dominance versus psychological hype imo.
yes if we are within a td at half i like our chances to win. the pressure will be on them to respond and polk only gets stronger.
the mo of sark is once we are two scores down he switches to a predominant passing gameplan, even if it in the first half.
in his mind he needs to be within a score at half to keep the course.
I agree
Sark alwasy gets me angry when playing from behind. That’s one of the only times his inexperience shows.
by datboyeddiep on Dec 28, 2011 12:39 PM PST up reply actions
yep he's still learning his own confidence in his team
when we lose we get beat down ie ’furd, whoregon, huskers and SUC.
the beavs was just a not mentally prepared to play with a backup qb. another sign of youth.
next year will be predominately his players, will be interesting to see how the personality develops.
Baylor's O is too good
It’s better than ours by oh let’s say 2 touchdowns. The defenses are about even in terms of futility.
Baylor 52 Dawgs 38
by Mariner_Drunkard on Dec 28, 2011 11:59 AM PST reply actions
Baylor - used to underdog role
I think what is interesting is Baylor has always been the underdog. It will be interesting to see how they play when they are the favorite and the spotlight is on them.
I think our offense will do fine this game and with the emergense of ASJ, KW, and KP a little more mobile, I think our offense could play very well (if we don’t turn the ball over). I still think for us to win we need to win special teams and get some red zone stops or turn overs. We are also going to have to be the more physical team. For some reason this team has played soft in big games.
I am excited….GO DAWGS!
the pressure is on baylor to perform
this takes the spotlight of us and just get on with our business, prepare, prepare, prepare.
i like this role.
we played physical in the holiday bowl and in lincoln this year.
the wheels fell off in palo alto. for awhile them team didn’t believe in their own physicality until the AC when it all came together.
i don’t see them going backwards at this point.
This statement is the key, and most likely the problem.
If Washington ends up chasing Baylor I don’t like their chances. Sark isn’t patient when his team falls behind and he tends to go for the quick strike to catch up rather than relying on Chris Polk to chip away at the opposition with 5-6 yards per carry.
As a play caller, the biggest issue that I have with Sarkisian is that he lacks patience. When he’s down, it seems like he wants to make up ground in big chunks as opposed to sticking with his game plan. He calls a great game with the lead, but it doesn’t seem like he does nearly as well when he’s behind, even if by a little bit.
The Dawgs have to get out in front early. That’s the way Sarkisian is going to feel comfortable sticking to the running game if it’s not grabbing huge bites of yards right away.
This is absolutely spot on . . .
For all the talk leading up to the season, and early in the year about a tough running-oriented O, the switch to a passing dominated game plan consistently comes out too quick. My primary complaint on the Offensive side of the ball is that Sark doesn’t have the trust/patience to let the running attack develop over the course of the game. Frankly, the running game should be more effective later in the game as the opponent’s D gets worn down.
Here is my concession about motivation
While it doesn’t cause games to be won or lost, it will cause a loss to turn into a blowout. Yes, teams that are getting beat soundly will often pack it in (coaches too).
The “motivation” being a positive in a big game wears off after the first few plays of the game have passed and the players level out. About the same amount of time it would take for a surge of adrenaline to wear off. Weird huh?
And your proof for this is where exactly?
This is just as much a subjective and referential analysis as any other. The only thing different is that you’re actually claiming some kind of result based on data – data that I suspect doesn’t exist. I’m sure that for every example you come up with I can come up with a counter to it that proves you’re wrong.
Either you allow subjectivity to influence things or you don’t.
At this point you're just arguing anything that I say
Now you’re arguing when I’m agreeing with you. And your reading comprehension is terrible to boot.
I know the author is a UW fan and all
But two points in this prediction are laughable:
1) the idea that Baylor will only score 37 points.
If a 6-6 Big Sky team can rack up 470 passing yards in Husky Stadium, how is Robert Griffin going to stay under 600 total yards? He could go out there drunk and win this game. Seeing as he won’t, expect a Baylor score on all but 1 or 2 possessions. If UW wins this it will be because they score 50+ and get some turnovers, which could happen with some luck and a great performance.
2) UW winning
Baylor is a good team that has been playing great football. UW is a mediocre team that has been playing mediocre football. Aside from a win in Seattle against an awful WSU team, UW’s defense has been perforated in every game against somewhat decent opponents this season.
Oh yeah, the game is in Texas.
Baylor wins big, 59-24
Welcome to the Sound Pound...
This
Berkowitz himself gave all the reasons the Bears will pound washington senseless. A greater homer pick I’ve never seen. I don’t believe Baylor will exceed 50 points however as I’m pretty sure the huskies will be able to move the ball on Baylor’s scrubs.
If ya can't get your Dick Enright, get your Dick Harter!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on UW Dawg Pound
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
