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.
Options

Mad Son's Ramblings: Even if we're doomed it is too early to tell

Hardcore_HuskyHardcore_Husky Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 302
Name Dropper 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
Swaye's Wigwam
edited October 2014 in Hardcore Husky Board
imageMad Son's Ramblings: Even if we're doomed it is too early to tell

Washington's recent woes on offense have Husky fans rightfully asking questions about the coaching staff. Mad Son addresses those worries in this week's Ramblings.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Options
    TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary
    Seems like a good article for the Tug Tavern.
  • Options
    DerekJohnsonDerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 60,569
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Founders Club

    Seems like a good article for the Tug Tavern.

    If you would allow me about 25 seconds, articles always post to the Tug Tavern and I have to manually switch them to the main bored.
  • Options
    TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary

    Seems like a good article for the Tug Tavern.

    If you would allow me about 25 seconds, articles always post to the Tug Tavern and I have to manually switch them to the main bored.
    Fuck the Devs.
  • Options
    AlexisAlexis Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 3,022
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    Would this team be looked at as better if the offense was throwing up huge numbers and we had a typical Sarkesque defense. Guys on the radio were saying that the team was wasting an awesome defense today. I guess I don't totally disagree, though this defense is really only awesome compared to the Sark/ty kind of defense. It has improved though since the beginning of the year. And if Peterman, as an offensive coach, can get the defense to improve, no reason to think that he can with the offense also.
    I'm beginning to think the defense is teachable because Sark ignored it for 5 years, so they don't have to unlearn a bunch of crap, unlike the offense. It has 5 years of Sark gumming up the works.
  • Options
    CanardCanard Member Posts: 504
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    You are just two to three years away from being two or three years away. And young. Let's never forget the perpetual youth.
  • Options
    SpoonieLuvSpoonieLuv Member Posts: 5,438
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
    edited October 2014
  • Options
    RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,123
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    I don't think anyone would say the talent is good on offense, but of course the talent looks bad on the worst offense in the PAC 12. The talent looked terrible on defense in 2011. A year later, many of the same guys were remarkably better.
  • Options
    digitsdigits Member Posts: 1,420
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes First Comment 5 Up Votes
    Dardanus said:

    Biggest issue on offense is the line. They are soft and terrible (except for Riva, who can't stay healthy). They have been terrible in years past, and they are still terrible. At this point, no amount of coaching will help them.

    The whole, "# of OL career starts= winning" did not apply to this unit. Shouldn't be all that surprising for the reasons you listed. Considering the progress we've seen with the secondary, I think some new blood will do the OL some good.

  • Options
    sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    5 Awesomes Photogenic First Anniversary Name Dropper
    When Sark was hired, I didn't need any time to wait and see. I (and many others) knew we were doomed.
  • Options
    TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary

    The article is spot on and Petersen will get time to work things out. A couple points on offense.

    1) In regards to the offense, this is the third straight year of mediocre or worse offenses from Petersen's teams. 6 points against Wilcox and Sark last year with a returning QB off an 11 win team, a beast RB who is getting NFL buzz in Ajayi, Matt Miller was a junior who had 1900 yards over the previous two years, Kellen Moore's brother was a steady contributor, Amsterdam the WR on Hard Knocks was also on the team and would have made the Falcons if not for injury. They weren't without talent. UW was certainly not a great defense last year. We saw the same boring offense last year that we are seeing now.

    2) Hiring Jonathon Smith as OC. He was the QB coach of the mediocre offenses the past two seasons at Boise State. It was a really bad hire on paper that was mostly glossed over because we were so excited about 92-12 and Petersen. Petersen obviously sees something in Smith, but he didn't have anywhere close to the ideal resume for the job. We always talk about assistants not mattering. I agree about position coaches, but coordinators do matter. I would feel a lot better about everything with a proven OC or at least a position coach from an actual explosive offense.

    The QB and talent issues are certainly valid. That said, there are some negative trends playing out that should at least be acknowledged. We don't play a good defense the rest of the way. Improvement should be expected, and if not, maybe there should be same changes with the staff and possibly the scheme.

    Disagree.
  • Options
    TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Anniversary

    image

    Great

    Referral Denied

    You don't have permission to access "http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTY4MDMyODQwM15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwNTY5Mzk5._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg" on this server.
    Reference #24.3c6ccc17.1414709995.32c1081c

    as always
  • Options
    HFNYHFNY Member Posts: 4,532
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
    Standard Supporter
    I totally agree with you except for #1. Washington's D did very well against teams that had less talent and other than the drubbing by Oregon, in Husky Stadium we gave up just 13 to Arizona, 0 to Idaho State, 17 to Cal, only 7 to Colorado, and 17 to WSU.

    As for total scoring, BSU was 19th in 2013, 54th in 2012, 5th in 2011, 2nd in 2010, tied for 1st in 2009, and #12 in 2008. If anything, 2012 was the exception and not the norm right?

    The article is spot on and Petersen will get time to work things out. A couple points on offense.

    1) In regards to the offense, this is the third straight year of mediocre or worse offenses from Petersen's teams. 6 points against Wilcox and Sark last year with a returning QB off an 11 win team, a beast RB who is getting NFL buzz in Ajayi, Matt Miller was a junior who had 1900 yards over the previous two years, Kellen Moore's brother was a steady contributor, Amsterdam the WR on Hard Knocks was also on the team and would have made the Falcons if not for injury. They weren't without talent. UW was certainly not a great defense last year. We saw the same boring offense last year that we are seeing now.

    2) Hiring Jonathon Smith as OC. He was the QB coach of the mediocre offenses the past two seasons at Boise State. It was a really bad hire on paper that was mostly glossed over because we were so excited about 92-12 and Petersen. Petersen obviously sees something in Smith, but he didn't have anywhere close to the ideal resume for the job. We always talk about assistants not mattering. I agree about position coaches, but coordinators do matter. I would feel a lot better about everything with a proven OC or at least a position coach from an actual explosive offense.

    The QB and talent issues are certainly valid. That said, there are some negative trends playing out that should at least be acknowledged. We don't play a good defense the rest of the way. Improvement should be expected, and if not, maybe there should be same changes with the staff and possibly the scheme.

  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    The article is spot on and Petersen will get time to work things out. A couple points on offense.

    1) In regards to the offense, this is the third straight year of mediocre or worse offenses from Petersen's teams. 6 points against Wilcox and Sark last year with a returning QB off an 11 win team, a beast RB who is getting NFL buzz in Ajayi, Matt Miller was a junior who had 1900 yards over the previous two years, Kellen Moore's brother was a steady contributor, Amsterdam the WR on Hard Knocks was also on the team and would have made the Falcons if not for injury. They weren't without talent. UW was certainly not a great defense last year. We saw the same boring offense last year that we are seeing now.

    2) Hiring Jonathon Smith as OC. He was the QB coach of the mediocre offenses the past two seasons at Boise State. It was a really bad hire on paper that was mostly glossed over because we were so excited about 92-12 and Petersen. Petersen obviously sees something in Smith, but he didn't have anywhere close to the ideal resume for the job. We always talk about assistants not mattering. I agree about position coaches, but coordinators do matter. I would feel a lot better about everything with a proven OC or at least a position coach from an actual explosive offense.

    The QB and talent issues are certainly valid. That said, there are some negative trends playing out that should at least be acknowledged. We don't play a good defense the rest of the way. Improvement should be expected, and if not, maybe there should be same changes with the staff and possibly the scheme.

    It sounds great but Boise's offense wasn't subpar last year. You're better than cherrypicking one game to prove a poont. Struggling in one game = / = subpar offense all season. And Wilcox's defenses tended to do very well at home against teams that don't run read option.
  • Options
    TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,816
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes 5 Fuck Offs
    RoadDawg's focus here is questionable IMO

    It's clear he doesn't like Smith and is using revisionist history to go back and say that "we glossed over" and "should have know" that we'd expect that while completely discrediting that we have substandard QB play. When QB play is brought up, it circles back to the coaching. Then on top of that, pointing out that Petersen's last 2 years (the years AFTER Kellen Moore) are indications that Petersen is losing it - even though as DNC and HFNY are pointing out there's a lot of cherry picking going on.

    I don't know if you were at the Boise game in 2013, but I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that Boise had no shot of winning that game. I actually thought that considering the circumstances Boise played really well on offense. At no point the entire night were they able to gain any kind of separation in the passing game. On top of that, Southwick was a good, but not great, Boise QB and definitely not a PAC caliber QB game in and game out against a tanned, rested, and focused PAC defense playing at home. Between that game, and looking at a similar situation in Vegas where Boise clearly lacked the athletes on the field yet somehow won the game, convinced me that Petersen was in fact a far better coach than I had historically given him credit for (well before the hire).

    You're fitting your narrative into a perspective that you are trying to lead on. What you're not considering at all is how AFTER Kellen Moore games like the 2013 game in Seattle magnified to Petersen how difficult it would be to continue winning at such a high level at Boise. No matter how well he coaches up his players, there's a certain reality that the overall depth and quality of the program will not hold up against a higher end Big 5 conference team. Even with Petersen gone this year, Boise played very well for about 3 quarters in Atlanta this year against Ole Miss before they started to wear down, made some mistakes, and Ole Miss pulled away. In fact, it's a very similar story to what happened in Seattle last year.

    There's a reason that Petersen continually is dropping hints to the media talking about how Miles is doing a lot of what they are asking of him but also noting that one of his biggest areas of improvement will come in the area of recognition and playing with anticipation. We've seen 3 QBs play this year and at this point 0 of the 3 show the ability to really do either. That's a MASSIVE problem. With Miles specifically, while you can play the position without a gun for an arm if you can play with anticipation and recognition, it's almost impossible to play at a high level without those traits and an arm. If you have the arm, it can help minimize weaknesses with anticipation and recognition - much like a 100 mph fastball can help offset some problems with location. We talk often about finding ways to get Ross the ball, but a lot of getting him the ball is tied to weaknesses in the QB position as the routes that Ross will run well are the drags and quick slants that you need to throw the WR open vs. waiting for the WR to come open.

    There is talent on this offense - but there's also a lot of guys being asked to do things that quite honestly they aren't really prepared to do. Mickens is being asked to be a #1 WR when really he's suited to be a #3 slot WR. One common trait of a great team (regardless of sport) is that players are slotted appropriately and asked to do what they are capable of and not what they aren't capable of. In that regard, we have massive problems on offense.

    Things will get better, but it's going to take a little bit of time. We will need a offseason to reassess what strengths and weaknesses we have on offense and find something that will highlight and minimize. All the while, we need to also keep a mindset on what the ultimate vision that we have and finding the players that fit that vision. There will obviously be tweaks in the interim, but the worst thing that we could do is completely switch up our offense to fit the current players and allow the current players (and their existing limitations) shape the future direction and identity of the offense.

    In the interim, I'm perfectly content to see incremental progress, the team playing the right way, and learning how to develop the tools necessary to win when the going gets tough instead of just winning the games when we are front running the entire time. We didn't close the game against ASU. But we were down 10-0 with seemingly no expectation of doing anything that would lead us not only back into the game but to win. Instead we find a play out of Timu and then a drive that ideally would have finished in a TD but got us back to level. That doesn't happen last year. The next step in the growth of this program would be the defense coming out and following up the game tying drive by getting a stop and turning it back over to the offense. And the final growth is the offense following up that drive with a game winning drive. This program will grow from this adversity. We'll find ourselves some players and some pretenders.
  • Options
    RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,123
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    edited October 2014
    Christ Tequilla. There are so many parts of your post that are flat out false, especially in regards to last year's game. I don't like Smith because the offense sucks and he was unqualified for the job. A QB coach from the MWC became the OC at a school that aspires to be a top PAC 12 program. I don't know how that can be argued.

    Maybe it was a stretch to call Boise's 2013 offense mediocre, but it scored 6 points against the only good opponent they played all year. The offense had at least 3 NFL skill players too (Ajayi, Miller, Amsterdam) and a pretty good QB. I can't comment on their OL, but I don't remember it being too bad. The 2013 UW offense had a great year statistically. Was it actually a great offense? No, because it didn't perform well enough against the good teams it played. I don't think Boise's offense beating up the dreckfest MWC is a cause for celebration.

    When the offense does better and we win, I will praise coaches. Until then, I will continue to bitch. I think we are in good hands, but this year's offense is concerning. The shit about adversity being good for the program is wishful thinking. I can throw 20 examples of how that is bullshit. How about Michigan and Florida for two. They have had adversity the past couple of years. It doesn't look like that has helped them.
Sign In or Register to comment.