I clicked expecting an AOG post since he posted last in the thread. Of course it turned out to be Tequilla long (didn;t read in entirety).
Agreed. The UW should have offered deBoer $15 million crowd has LESS than ZERO facts to support their RIDICULOUS claim.
Further, they have offered ABSOLUTELY ZERO PROOF that deBOER would have done ANY better at UW (in 2024) than Fisch has. In fact, you could point to him losing 2 games in the first half of 'Bama schedule (with their roster) is NO BETTTER (likely MUCH WORSE) than Fisch has done at UW with UW's depleted roster.
Year two with Fisch will be better as he has pointed to year two from day one. This is my biggest criticism.
It is what it is.
Despite an old fucker (or two) sitting around in shitty depends opining for the long gone great days of 2023 their pipe dream was NEVER A POSSIBILITY. NEVER.EVER.EVER,
Disagree that it is a three year job. In today's environment, year two or GTFO. PERIOD.
I just root against Seattle. As much as I love UW, the whole NW is full of crazy psychopaths who don’t deserve happiness.
I don’t care about the NFL except to the extent that Russ the human cheese ball Wilson flails and fails. Yes, petty; I’m not above it.
plus, it would be nice to see Fields develop. for no particularly reason other than he’s not Russ.
The results of the last 2 games over the prior 3 weeks has led to a proverbial wet fart in church to be let out all over Husky Nation.
I see a lot of opinions back and forth ranging from the conclusion that Fisch isn't the guy to constant criticism over play-calling to the thread here that longs for Kalen DeBoer.
Let's be very clear about DeBoer …
The timing of when DeBoer left was absolutely disastrous as it pertained to the 2024 UW roster (and beyond). With the move AFTER the closing of the initial transfer portal period, there was absolutely zero opportunity for UW to properly replace the type of attrition that comes with this type of coaching turnover. The choice to hire Fisch was absolutely the best option that was realistically available at the time (can't wait to hear the additional names that made sense). His work at Arizona allowed him to build a recruiting class that he was able to largely bring with him to UW to replace a chunk of the class that followed DeBoer. He had mixed results bringing in the talent that was at Arizona in large part due to threats and commitments made by large Arizona boosters (you can debate how much UW boosters could or should have stepped up better).
Those that look at this UW roster and think that this was some 8+ win team was fooling themselves. By my count, UW has 14 OL on the roster this year. Of those 14, 8 of them are either RS Freshman or true Freshman that are/should be redshirting. It's a little better on the DL but there's a definite lack of difference making talent there. Big picture, that's not a recipe for success.
So let's talking about play calling for a second … where does a below average OL really show up the most? Short yardage and red zone situations where the field is condensed and the ability to win at the LOS is at its most important. Then add into it that in total the roster has 5 TEs on the roster and that includes 1 that was hurt in the 1st game of the season and hasn't played since, 1 that hasn't played all year due to injury, and a 3rd that hasn't played as a true freshman and is redshirting. Again … that's not great. I can go on … but when you're criticizing the production and the play calling, it's probably a good idea to re-read the above a few times … 14 OL and 8 of them are RS or true freshman and of the 5 TEs only 2 of them are effectively healthy and able to play. Good luck with that …
I'll go into this more in a different thread but as it currently stands 2/3 of the roster next year will be sophomores or younger next year. That's going to translate to a lot of youth and uneven play. It's also going to give plenty of opportunity for the players to define which of them are part of the solution and which of them likely won't make it at this level. That's not a bad thing.
But then again, there are a number of people that want to go put a loose fitting band aid on the problem and dramatically hit the transfer portal this offseason … what does that look like? Where would you target? Are there implications to the development of the young players on your roster that makes up 2/3 of it at present?
Lastly, let's say that UW is 6-2 instead of 4-4 … does that change the future at all? Sure, it makes you feel better today and you could definitely argue that the Wazzu and Rutgers game could (or should) have been easily won. In my opinion, that doesn't change what 2025 looks like. It doesn't change that 2026 is most likely the year where UW makes its way back into the CFP discussion.
This was always going to be a 2-3 year rebuild given the circumstances around the coaching change and the limitations on how this roster was built. No matter what happens over the next 4 games and the 6+ weeks until the early signing period of the 2025 class … that isn't changing. The reality is that what happens with the end of the recruiting season and what we do in the transfer portal is more important than anything that happens over the next 4 games.
This reminds me of some Gilby era posts
@GrundleStiltzkin is right. Never trust the Dutch.
We should start a long thread about how worried we are to lose Fisch to Florida.
Hopefully I'll get a phone call from the beat writer at the Gainesville Sun.