Something To Ponder About The Defense

RoadDawg55

There's been a lot of talk about Wilcox's defense taking the next step. However, with the offense going to no huddle, I'm not sure if comparing the numbers will tell the whole story. For example, Oregon's defense gave up more yards per game than UW's last year, but they were surely a better defensive team. The reason they gave up more yards is because they had more plays run against them which is a result of Oregon being a no huddle team.

I think if Wilcox can keep the points per game and yardage in the same ballpark, it would be a huge sign of progress. I think the real key will be the defense's efficiency. 3rd down percentage, TO's (Should have more this year), Red Zone defense, etc. The other key will to have no true stinkers such as giving up 52 points in a bad game. If we can limit the opposition to somewhere in the 30's in our worst game, that would be another sign of progress.

TierbsHsotBoobs

RoadDawg55 said:

There's been a lot of talk about Wilcox's defense taking the next step. However, with the offense going to no huddle, I'm not sure if comparing the numbers will tell the whole story. For example, Oregon's defense gave up more yards per game than UW's last year, but they were surely a better defensive team. The reason they gave up more yards is because they had more plays run against them which is a result of Oregon being a no huddle team.

I think if Wilcox can keep the points per game and yardage in the same ballpark, it would be a huge sign of progress. I think the real key will be the defense's efficiency. 3rd down percentage, TO's (Should have more this year), Red Zone defense, etc. The other key will to have no true stinkers such as giving up 52 points in a bad game. If we can limit the opposition to somewhere in the 30's in our worst game, that would be another sign of progress.

Pass the bong or get the fuck out.

[Deleted User]

Agree but you're kind of stating the obvious. It's like archaic stats in baseball that people used to use, but are now being replaced by advanced stats. Yards per play and defensive efficiency will always be the most important stats in judging a defense.

[Deleted User]

I think our defense will be worse stats wise due to the fact we won't be facing as many shitty QB's as we did last year. UW really was fortunate in just how many shitty QB's they faced.

Not to mention Trufant was a stud and a true shut down corner. He really hid our lack of pass rush.

Plus this is UW so if one side has a slight progression then the other side must have a slight regression while special teams remains fucking shitty as usual.

[Deleted User]

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

[Deleted User]

CollegeDoog said:

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

I don't think Wilcox is as great as some on here do. I think he's a solid DC but we had some bombs last year defensively.

Ultimately this all falls on Sark as it should. I'm very neutral on Wilcox and am waiting to see if he is a great DC or a bad one. Unlike Sark where I know he's a bad head coach.

RoadDawg55

CollegeDoog said:

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

I didn't say we won't. We probably will have at least one or two, but not having those games would be a huge step. I don't think Stanford will hang 40 on us. They are not explosive enough. ASU and UCLA are likely candidates along with Oregon.

[Deleted User]

RoadDawg55 said:

CollegeDoog said:

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

I didn't say we won't. We probably will have at least one or two, but not having those games would be a huge step. I don't think Stanford will hang 40 on us. They are not explosive enough. ASU and UCLA are likely candidates along with Oregon.

It would be a good step. As long as Sark is the coach though, I don't see that happening. Once his teams get down on the road they become even softer. It's usually in the early third quarter when they just quit all together. I hope you're right though, but Sark's teams haven't been mentally tough enough to persevere on the road.

RoadDawg55

He_Needs_More_Time said:

CollegeDoog said:

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

I don't think Wilcox is as great as some on here do. I think he's a solid DC but we had some bombs last year defensively.

Ultimately this all falls on Sark as it should. I'm very neutral on Wilcox and am waiting to see if he is a great DC or a bad one. Unlike Sark where I know he's a bad head coach.

We don't need to re hash this one. I don't think he has been great yet either, but he has been good. Yes, we had some bombs, but jump of 70 in the total defense was a great first step. I don't mean to excuse the poor play, but to expect a great defense last year would be unrealistic. 2 freshmen LB's and a Sophomore who was fucking terrible as a freshman (Timu), and a below average DL.

The optimist in me likes that Wilcox and the defensive coaches at least showed they can develop players, save for DL. Timu was greatly improved, Shaq and Feeney got better as they year went on, Trufant was a totally different player, and Glenn and Parker moderately improved. If I felt more confident in our DL, I would feel pretty good about our D this year.

[Deleted User]

RoadDawg55 said:

He_Needs_More_Time said:

CollegeDoog said:

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

I don't think Wilcox is as great as some on here do. I think he's a solid DC but we had some bombs last year defensively.

Ultimately this all falls on Sark as it should. I'm very neutral on Wilcox and am waiting to see if he is a great DC or a bad one. Unlike Sark where I know he's a bad head coach.

We don't need to re hash this one. I don't think he has been great yet either, but he has been good. Yes, we had some bombs, but jump of 70 in the total defense was a great first step. I don't mean to excuse the poor play, but to expect a great defense last year would be unrealistic. 2 freshmen LB's and a Sophomore who was fucking terrible as a freshman (Timu), and a below average DL.

The optimist in me likes that Wilcox and the defensive coaches at least showed they can develop players, save for DL. Timu was greatly improved, Shaq and Feeney got better as they year went on, Trufant was a totally different player, and Glenn and Parker moderately improved. If I felt more confident in our DL, I would feel pretty good about our D this year.

Look I liked what I saw from Wilcox and think he is a decent to good DC. I'm just taking the wait and see approach with him.

I like that Wilcox appears to coach up his players on the sideline instead of just strolling around pissed off all the time like Holt.

However, I don't think he's an elite DC which is fine bc he's good enough to win a Rose Bowl as a DC if you have a good head coach. I'm just not one of those who thinks he can be a future head coach.

If UW cracks the top 15 this year in defense I'll gladly jump on the Wilcox bandwagon. The vast improvement in LB's and DB's was a great start.

TierbsHsotBoobs

CollegeDoog said:

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

Why do you hate Oregon and Oregon State?

chrisvashon

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

CollegeDoog said:

Also you're far too optimistic about our blowout losses. We will give up 40-50 points in several games this year. Strong candidates are at Stanford, at ASU, and at UCLA.

Why do you hate Oregon and Oregon State?

Seriously. And Helfrich doesn't need to take his foot off the gas in order to preserve the post game embrace.

RaceBannon

Husky football is the boy inside the dyke or something like that. Just when you think one thing is fixed something else fucks up