We won't know until we play Oregon, UCLA, and the serious Arizona schools. Those teams have the offense we couldn't stop the last five years.
We have to make the tap ins against Cal, Colorado, Utah and WSU. The season hinges on the top four games. We will know if we are better
If UW can win the tap ins and one or two of the UO, UCLA, and Arizona teams, I think that would be an extraordinary coaching job by Petersen and would bode well for the future. He has a lot of work to do. Based on the the first 5 games, I don't think WSU is a tap in.
This 10 win stuff is garbage. I would be extremely happy with the play of the defense so far, and the offensive struggles can be explained by Petersen implementing a brand new system. The two major flaws so far just need time to correct.
Cyler needs to get more game experience before he can step up in big games. Mariota played like crap his freshman year against Stanford as well. The only way Cyler is going to improve is to be given time for Peterson to unteach what Sark taught him, and then get him doing things the right way.
Your running backs are below average, lets face the facts. Not going to fix that this year, but give Peterson a year to recruit some talent at that position.
However, I really like his focus on the lines with regard to recruiting so far. Petersen at least looks competent, which I couldn't say with your last two hires. Peterson might not work out, but I would have a lot more hope. Also, the wait till next year line might of some credence given your current coaches track record. Until he proves me wrong, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. However, instead of wins and losses this year, I would focus more on the actual football product being displayed. Is it better? or is it not? That is really all that is important in year one. I'm still LIPO on the product though until we get a few more games into the Pac 12 schedule.
We won't know until we play Oregon, UCLA, and the serious Arizona schools. Those teams have the offense we couldn't stop the last five years.
We have to make the tap ins against Cal, Colorado, Utah and WSU. The season hinges on the top four games. We will know if we are better
If UW can win the tap ins and one or two of the UO, UCLA, and Arizona teams, I think that would be an extraordinary coaching job by Petersen and would bode well for the future. He has a lot of work to do. Based on the the first 5 games, I don't think WSU is a tap in.
I finally watched the Cal and Wazzu games yesterday. Even with Coleman and Washington we should run right the fuck through them. Halladay starts a game throwing a pick 6, Cal getting down by 2 scores to Colorado at home, on top of both teams having shit defenses. Those fucktards make us look like the most efficient team in the pac.
At some point you have to beat the teams ahead of you like Stanford and Oregon. We've been good enough t o beat 7-12 fairly consistently for a few yrs. Time to get over the hump.
For me personally, the difference is I actually have faith in Petersen. Sark was always a keep your fingers crossed and pray he pulls something out of his ass situation.
Some here remind me a lot of the doogs in 2011 when UW was 5-1 with a loss to Nebraska. The writing was on the wall, but some wanted to just be happy with 5-1 and claim that Nebraska was unbeatable no matter what so it was OK. But there was a pattern, the HHB's saw it and were mocked for pointing it out. UW beat the weakest pac-12 teams and was rolled by the upper tier teams.
Same thing is happening now, except some here are clinging to nothing but hope in the face of very telling statistics.
And stop with the 10 win bullshit. That proves nothing with the shitty preseason and a 13 game schedule. HHs measure success or failure in conference. We can't change the rules for Petersen.
It's sort of like golf...
First, if it's like golf, let me keep score and we'll win 14.
But we barely beat Hawaii and we barely beat Eastern at home.
You may say we should have started out better, and that may or may not be valid.
But to say the game we watched Saturday was an improvement over those two games isn't changing the rules, it is simply a fact.
Some here remind me a lot of the doogs in 2011 when UW was 5-1 with a loss to Nebraska. The writing was on the wall, but some wanted to just be happy with 5-1 and claim that Nebraska was unbeatable no matter what so it was OK. But there was a pattern, the HHB's saw it and were mocked for pointing it out. UW beat the weakest pac-12 teams and was rolled by the upper tier teams.
Same thing is happening now, except some here are clinging to nothing but hope in the face of very telling statistics.
And stop with the 10 win bullshit. That proves nothing with the shitty preseason and a 13 game schedule. HHs measure success or failure in conference. We can't change the rules for Petersen.
It's sort of like golf...
First, if it's like golf, let me keep score and we'll win 14.
But we barely beat Hawaii and we barely beat Eastern at home.
You may say we should have started out better, and that may or may not be valid.
But to say the game we watched Saturday was an improvement over those two games isn't changing the rules, it is simply a fact.
huh?
Sounds like you're saying progress can't be measured by the scoreboard - for the 15th year..
Most of us think Sark was a lousy recruiter, not because he couldn't get good talent, but because his classes showed no balance and he got a stiffy for "skill" positions at a detriment to what really matters.
And most of us thought Sark didn't teach fundamentals or at least his teams were not fundamentally sound - and that includes mentally tough.
Now Peterman takes over that group and suddenly by game 5 our lines should be great and we should be putting up 30 on the #1 defense in the country.
It's like wiping before you poop, it doesn't make sense.
Most of us think Sark was a lousy recruiter, not because he couldn't get good talent, but because his classes showed no balance and he got a stiffy for "skill" positions at a detriment to what really matters.
And most of us thought Sark didn't teach fundamentals or at least his teams were not fundamentally sound - and that includes mentally tough.
Now Peterman takes over that group and suddenly by game 5 our lines should be great and we should be putting up 30 on the #1 defense in the country.
It's like wiping before you poop, it doesn't make sense.
I didn't say anything to the affect that UW should beat Stanford by 30. Go back through the threads over the past 9 months. See what this boards expectations were for this year. PLSS suggested this could be an 8 or 9 win team and was boo'd off the board.
I'm just amused that so many of the things that we relentlessly mocked doogs for saying are now being repeated by HHBs.
Some here remind me a lot of the doogs in 2011 when UW was 5-1 with a loss to Nebraska. The writing was on the wall, but some wanted to just be happy with 5-1 and claim that Nebraska was unbeatable no matter what so it was OK. But there was a pattern, the HHB's saw it and were mocked for pointing it out. UW beat the weakest pac-12 teams and was rolled by the upper tier teams.
Same thing is happening now, except some here are clinging to nothing but hope in the face of very telling statistics.
And stop with the 10 win bullshit. That proves nothing with the shitty preseason and a 13 game schedule. HHs measure success or failure in conference. We can't change the rules for Petersen.
It's sort of like golf...
First, if it's like golf, let me keep score and we'll win 14.
But we barely beat Hawaii and we barely beat Eastern at home.
You may say we should have started out better, and that may or may not be valid.
But to say the game we watched Saturday was an improvement over those two games isn't changing the rules, it is simply a fact.
huh?
Sounds like you're saying progress can't be measured by the scoreboard - for the 15th year..
And it sounds like you're saying Eastern Eagles = Stanford Cardinals.
Some here remind me a lot of the doogs in 2011 when UW was 5-1 with a loss to Nebraska. The writing was on the wall, but some wanted to just be happy with 5-1 and claim that Nebraska was unbeatable no matter what so it was OK. But there was a pattern, the HHB's saw it and were mocked for pointing it out. UW beat the weakest pac-12 teams and was rolled by the upper tier teams.
Same thing is happening now, except some here are clinging to nothing but hope in the face of very telling statistics.
And stop with the 10 win bullshit. That proves nothing with the shitty preseason and a 13 game schedule. HHs measure success or failure in conference. We can't change the rules for Petersen.
It's sort of like golf...
First, if it's like golf, let me keep score and we'll win 14.
But we barely beat Hawaii and we barely beat Eastern at home.
You may say we should have started out better, and that may or may not be valid.
But to say the game we watched Saturday was an improvement over those two games isn't changing the rules, it is simply a fact.
huh?
Sounds like you're saying progress can't be measured by the scoreboard - for the 15th year..
And it sounds like you're saying Eastern Eagles = Stanford Cardinals.
Comments
Cyler needs to get more game experience before he can step up in big games. Mariota played like crap his freshman year against Stanford as well. The only way Cyler is going to improve is to be given time for Peterson to unteach what Sark taught him, and then get him doing things the right way.
Your running backs are below average, lets face the facts. Not going to fix that this year, but give Peterson a year to recruit some talent at that position.
However, I really like his focus on the lines with regard to recruiting so far. Petersen at least looks competent, which I couldn't say with your last two hires. Peterson might not work out, but I would have a lot more hope. Also, the wait till next year line might of some credence given your current coaches track record. Until he proves me wrong, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. However, instead of wins and losses this year, I would focus more on the actual football product being displayed. Is it better? or is it not? That is really all that is important in year one. I'm still LIPO on the product though until we get a few more games into the Pac 12 schedule.
Hogan has his limitations as a QB (loopy delivery, not as funky as Miles') but he's a winner with a 19-4 record as a starter.
But we barely beat Hawaii and we barely beat Eastern at home.
You may say we should have started out better, and that may or may not be valid.
But to say the game we watched Saturday was an improvement over those two games isn't changing the rules, it is simply a fact.
Sounds like you're saying progress can't be measured by the scoreboard - for the 15th year..
Most of us think Sark was a lousy recruiter, not because he couldn't get good talent, but because his classes showed no balance and he got a stiffy for "skill" positions at a detriment to what really matters.
And most of us thought Sark didn't teach fundamentals or at least his teams were not fundamentally sound - and that includes mentally tough.
Now Peterman takes over that group and suddenly by game 5 our lines should be great and we should be putting up 30 on the #1 defense in the country.
It's like wiping before you poop, it doesn't make sense.
I'm just amused that so many of the things that we relentlessly mocked doogs for saying are now being repeated by HHBs.
Peterson said the offensive playbook is too big, lending to poor execution. Will be dialed back
Peterson said coaching needs to be looked at in depth...IE Jonathan Smith
UW scored 6 points against Stanford in a loss,
Sounds about right.