Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Apparently, we run too much now

2»

Comments

  • chuckchuck Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 11,315 Swaye's Wigwam

    Dipshits we ran for 250 passed for 250 (approximately) buttfucking tards comin out woodwork

    Franny, get your gun!
    Fecal your not funny and no nothing of football. You're kind of in an awkward position here. Thats the prerequisite for the dawgman big board. Head on back Sally
    Your dawgman hypocrisy is both hilarious and embarrassing. Why don't you get back to ranting, you're no good at being the bored humor police. anything
    FTFY
    Downvoted. How can you deny PLSS's greatness at being the board stooge?
  • chuck said:

    Dipshits we ran for 250 passed for 250 (approximately) buttfucking tards comin out woodwork

    Franny, get your gun!
    Fecal your not funny and no nothing of football. You're kind of in an awkward position here. Thats the prerequisite for the dawgman big board. Head on back Sally
    Your dawgman hypocrisy is both hilarious and embarrassing. Why don't you get back to ranting, you're no good at being the bored humor police. anything
    FTFY
    Downvoted. How can you deny PLSS's greatness at being the board stooge?
    That hurts
  • IrishDawg22IrishDawg22 Member Posts: 2,754
    The numbers just do not agree with the general thought that Sark did not run the ball. His problem was the fact that he had no idea of how to manage a game. There were several occasions when he went to the run to early (AC 11') and stuck with it in key situations (ND 09'). And I think he was more concerned about being "clever" with his play calling rather than going with the flow of the game. But here are the numbers:

    Seven:

    09' = P - 458 R - 390 49.6% RUN PLAYS
    10' = P - 376 R - 481 56.1%
    11' = P - 406 R - 452 52.7%
    12' = P - 438 R - 466 51.5%
    13' = P - 413 R - 610 59.6%

    5 YR AVG = 53.9

    Coach P:

    09' = P - 458 R - 508 52.6%
    10' = P - 424 R - 485 53.5%
    11' = P - 477 R - 492 50.7%
    12' = P - 394 R - 478 54.8%
    13' = P - 466 R - 563 54.7%
    14' = P - 72 R - 163 69.4% ****

    5 YR AVG = 53.26

    Technically the Reddit (that is your source) dude is right, but the numbers a skewed this year because of the Lindy start on the islands. I am sure if you asked Coach P he would like to get the running plays down to his 5 yr average. We are not going to be very successful in conference play if we are running the ball over 65% of the time. If people want to get to that number we would have to commit to going to the Stanford (power) or Oregon (zone/read) systems. Coach P has had great success with his balanced attack and I am sure that is his goal at the UW.
  • ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    chuck said:

    Dipshits we ran for 250 passed for 250 (approximately) buttfucking tards comin out woodwork

    Franny, get your gun!
    Fecal your not funny and no nothing of football. You're kind of in an awkward position here. Thats the prerequisite for the dawgman big board. Head on back Sally
    Your dawgman hypocrisy is both hilarious and embarrassing. Why don't you get back to ranting, you're no good at being the bored humor police. anything
    FTFY
    Downvoted. How can you deny PLSS's greatness at being the board stooge?
    His shtick was funny the first 23 times.

    Now, not so much.
Sign In or Register to comment.