Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options
After UCLA: Inside the Mind of CokeGreaterThanPepsi
Hardcore_Husky
Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 302
After UCLA: Inside the Mind of CokeGreaterThanPepsi
As a demoralized Husky Nation continues to reel after the UCLA game, CokeGreaterThanPepsi offers an inner glimpse into his sanctum sanctorum.
Comments
Good piece
Then I wonder which current coaches in the big conferences would have let either players go, Strong would have done it. None of the SEC guys would have.
I wonder if those Peters and String were Petersen's recruits. I can see it being a little easier to let them go when those guys weren't your recruits. I guess we'll see what the future of Petersen's OKGs has in store when similar events occur.
But the way I prefer to look at the situation is that it's foolish for me to criticize someone over every single little detail along the way. That's the definition of being a micro-manager ... is it not? Instead, would I not be better suited to view someone from the standpoint of having them prove to me whether they can or cannot do the job? And in the pursuit of proving whether they can or cannot do the job, is it not prudent to make sure that that individual has every relevant resource available to them to be able to do the job that they are being asked to do? And in this observation, isn't it the job to identify when the person isn't the answer that then, and only then, that I evaluate making a change and finding a different option?
At this point, we don't know whether Petersen can or cannot do the job. We like his resume. He's shown prior success at previous jobs. We don't know for sure whether he can do this job. But he's got a lot of positives working in his favor. He's got an incomplete product to work with. He's got a solid initial recruiting class in the transition class. His second class would appear to be shaping up nicely. He's doing some nice work in laying the foundation for future classes. He's looking like he is changing the culture in a manner that shares similar attributes with prior cultures that have proven to be successful at this school (and that of many other very successful schools).
This isn't a long winded way of trying to say that he deserves his 3 or 4 years to prove whether he's the right guy or not. If he's not the right guy, we'll know it because it will stick out like a sore thumb. But there's nothing there right now that really suggests that he isn't. Anything that we can identify as "problems" are things that don't have a definitive root cause to explain as of yet.
@Tequilla, I'm going to respond to your post as well. I think we are all in agreement that unless something drastic happens, it will take 3, if not 4 years to get a definitive answer. It really sucks, but that's the harsh reality. The lines are going to be very young next year and will need at least one season, if not two before being good. That's not even factoring in QB. Without good, experienced lines, it's extremely tough to win. That's where Sark really fucked over the program.
We lost Price that is a huge loss and I will agree to that one. Still there isn't a playbook more adapted to Miley or Lindquist strengths?
At running back sorry but during the off season people were dismissing that. Washington was a stud in the making. RB is a generic position, etc...
ASJ is a lazy fuck and was barely used by Sark his senior season.
The rest of the team was coming back. We have no receiver? Pretty sure a year ago some said String, Ross, Kasen, and Mickens could be one of the best WR group in the country. And I would have agreed to that.
What happened since is a result of their actions but also a result of Peterman's choices. Its Pete who chose to go with his system regardless of the talent he had. Didnt care about smoothing the transition.
So enjoy playing Campbell and true freshmen. Lets hope in 2 years we will look back and see it was the foundation needed. But dont tell me we had no talent.
I don't know WTF happened with this guy....maybe it was Harsin the whole time. Were we all wrong on here?
There's no doubt that we lost a lot after last season ...
We THOUGHT that there were suitable players waiting in the wings to take over for them.
It's easy to perform a backup over limited opportunity ... much harder to perform when the lights are shining on you and you have to perform on a consistent basis.
We knew Sankey was a huge loss. We expected that between Coleman and Washington one of them would step up as the "next man up" just like Sankey did when Polk left. Neither of them has stepped up to embrace the opportunity and instead the RBs that we have are proving that more than anything else that they are JAG with the possible exception of Cooper who I'm not sure is trusted in a full workload week in and week out.
While ASJ wasn't a huge factor in the passing game last year, his run blocking ability was a concern in replacing. Perkins being in and out of the lineup has hurt from a receiving standpoint. We still have not replaced the blocking that ASJ provided.
The WRs is an area where I think that there's some revision to the revision happening. A lot were concerned about Kasen coming back from injury and said that him coming back healthy was a key. I don't think anybody thought that Kasen would be what he has been this year - but a non elite Kasen was a concern. Mickens hasn't shown any real growth in his game other than being a scat WR. Campbell is JAG. Hall is a Mickens JAG. Ross is the big question mark as many wonder why we can't get him the ball more whereas others openly wonder if Ross does enough things well to help him get the ball. Just because he's fast doesn't mean you can just give him the ball in various spots and just say "here you go." A lot of people IMO are discounting the idea that Ross may not be a very good WR (see Hester, Devin).
Then there's the QB position where Miles has underwhelmed considerably versus what was expected. The loss of Spring Practice hurt for sure. The argument about tailoring an offense around what Miles does well I just shake my head at. The offense is super vanilla. That tells me that there's not a lot of trust in Miles to do much of anything well. They've tried to find ways to help Miles be successful and they show up from time to time. But there's nothing about playing the QB position that Miles does at a PAC average level on a consistent basis. And the sad thing is that he's the best QB on the roster. Not sure how you can really change the offense in a manner that really highlights more of Miles' strengths other than quite possibly asking him to run the ball more - which is an opportunity for disaster waiting IMO. And even if you could find an offense that Miles could run, it's such a different offense from what is trying to be installed that you run the risk of having to reteach an entire new offense in the offseason. Is it worth the extra 1-2 wins in the short term that would result from compromising your identity and what it is that you are trying to do long-term in the program? It's a tough question.
The bottom line is that normally some things happen better than you think while others underperform. Normally in the end they wash for the most part. Every once in a while everything goes better than expected and sometimes they all go worse than expected. This year, everything that we looked at before the season on offense has gone worse than expected. Few players have shown any growth year to year. Few have stepped up during the season (returning players). It just kind of is what it is and tells you that going forward the guys that were inherited on the roster on the offensive side of the ball aren't going to be strong parts of the solution on offense.