Shaq at Running Back, and Winning Ugly

Hardcore_Husky

Shaq at Running Back, and Winning Ugly

Instead of complaining about Shaq not playing defense, CokeGreaterThanPepsi urges everyone to appreciate getting to watch a truly special player play football.

Read the full story here

Tequilla

For those that need a reminder every once in a while, there's only one stat that matters at the end of the game ... SCOREBOARD BABY!!!

H_D

Why do you hate moral victories?

Alexis

Shaq looks like Eric Dickerson when he runs, only with a better mullet

AtomicPiss

Alexis said:

Shaq looks like Eric Dickerson when he runs, only with a better mullet

that's a great comparison

RoadDawg55

I am fully on the Shaq at RB bandwagon, but keep in mind that it was Colorado. These next two weeks will be interesting. It's impressive because he has only been a full time RB for two weeks, but Colorado is terrible and has the worst rush defense in the Pac 12. I was looking at their past games, and they haven't held a RB under 100 yards in conference play. Everyone has torn them up.

Meek

agree with you, except instead of looking at Shaq's overall yardage gained on the ground against Colorado I was noticing the big difference between all our other RBs and that moment when Shaq's vision and first step picks a gap and you see him surge forward with power. Against Colorado most of those go through for huge yardage, but with Shaq I see him being a positive yardage gainer and that's one of the things that frustrates me the most so far with our stable of backs - we never get those 3-4 yard gains on 1st or 2nd down. This is what I hope becomes a bit more of a trend for the O.

Gladstone

Great read, really starting to look forward to these articles.

WilburHooksHands

Meek said:

agree with you, except instead of looking at Shaq's overall yardage gained on the ground against Colorado I was noticing the big difference between all our other RBs and that moment when Shaq's vision and first step picks a gap and you see him surge forward with power. Against Colorado most of those go through for huge yardage, but with Shaq I see him being a positive yardage gainer and that's one of the things that frustrates me the most so far with our stable of backs - we never get those 3-4 yard gains on 1st or 2nd down. This is what I hope becomes a bit more of a trend for the O.

From what I've seen Cooper actually hits the hole harder, but Shaqs power mitigates that. I would not want to tackle him.

GrundleStiltzkin

WilburHooksHands said:

Meek said:

agree with you, except instead of looking at Shaq's overall yardage gained on the ground against Colorado I was noticing the big difference between all our other RBs and that moment when Shaq's vision and first step picks a gap and you see him surge forward with power. Against Colorado most of those go through for huge yardage, but with Shaq I see him being a positive yardage gainer and that's one of the things that frustrates me the most so far with our stable of backs - we never get those 3-4 yard gains on 1st or 2nd down. This is what I hope becomes a bit more of a trend for the O.

From what I've seen Cooper actually hits the hole harder, but Shaqs power mitigates that. I would not want to tackle him.

Harder and more decisively. I think that's just a matter of reps for Shaq.

dnc

I like the article, and noticed a lot of the same things you did regarding the big pass plays almost all coming after Shaq established his dominance and we ran play action of some sort with him. Shaq is going to really help open the field up for Miles I believe.

My only real issue is with the prediction. I don't know if UW will beat UCLA but we're going to keep it a lot closer than 25-11 and score more than 11 poonts. Not sure I'd feel that way with without Shaq at RB, but given the focus of the article I was surprised to see such a gloomy expectation from our offense.

CokeGreaterThanPepsi

dnc said:

I like the article, and noticed a lot of the same things you did regarding the big pass plays almost all coming after Shaq established his dominance and we ran play action of some sort with him. Shaq is going to really help open the field up for Miles I believe.

My only real issue is with the prediction. I don't know if UW will beat UCLA but we're going to keep it a lot closer than 25 and score more than 11 poonts. Not sure I'd feel that with without Shaq at RB, but given the focus of the article I was surprised to see such a gloomy expectation from our offense.

I like to set my expectations really low every week. If you noticed I predicted UW to lose 77-4 to Cal before the game. It's what I like to do (IWILTD), so don't take my predictions seriously. Once we have a good team I will start making serious predictions!

dnc

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

dnc said:

I like the article, and noticed a lot of the same things you did regarding the big pass plays almost all coming after Shaq established his dominance and we ran play action of some sort with him. Shaq is going to really help open the field up for Miles I believe.

My only real issue is with the prediction. I don't know if UW will beat UCLA but we're going to keep it a lot closer than 25 and score more than 11 poonts. Not sure I'd feel that with without Shaq at RB, but given the focus of the article I was surprised to see such a gloomy expectation from our offense.

I like to set my expectations really low every week. If you noticed I predicted UW to lose 77-4 to Cal before the game. It's what I like to do (IWILTD), so don't take my predictions seriously. Once we have a good team I will start making serious predictions!

In that case, I love your prediction. Keep up the good work.

doogsinparadise

Who the fuck scores 11 points?

pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=24&pts_lose=11
pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=25&pts_lose=11

whatshouldicareabout

doogsinparadise said:

Who the fuck scores 11 points?

pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=24&pts_lose=11
pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=25&pts_lose=11

We'll make history on 11/8.

By winning 11 to 8.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=11&pts_lose=8

AtomicPiss

doogsinparadise said:

Who the fuck scores 11 points?

pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=24&pts_lose=11
pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=25&pts_lose=11

The Huskies beat #2 Michigan 20-11 in 1984

BHAMSTER

maybe CGTP can be the 2nd coming of ariz123 ! Go Dawgs.

AtomicPiss

DerekJohnson said:

doogsinparadise said:

Who the fuck scores 11 points?

pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=24&pts_lose=11
pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=25&pts_lose=11

The Huskies beat #2 Michigan 20-11 in 1984

and to illustrate how much things have changed since then, I was upset that our defense allowed a 2-point conversion with no time left.

LoneStarDawg

DerekJohnson said:

DerekJohnson said:

doogsinparadise said:

Who the fuck scores 11 points?

pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=24&pts_lose=11
pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=25&pts_lose=11

The Huskies beat #2 Michigan 20-11 in 1984

and to illustrate how much things have changed since then, I was upset that our defense allowed a 2-point conversion with no time left.

and you were probably pretty content with our offense scoring 20

#BackInMyDay