Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

UW Players at NFL Combine

2

Comments

  • chuck
    chuck Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 11,808 Swaye's Wigwam
    Partially agree with both TTJ and Roaddawg. I think RD is underrating Shelton and TTJ is underrating Kikaha.

    Completely agree on Shaq. He's a good football player but no first round talent. He's not good enough at any one position. He doesn't have the measurables to be a safetym the toughness to be a great linebacker, nor is he quick enough to be a running back.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dnc
    dnc Member Posts: 56,855
    TTJ said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    Many will disagree, but I think the 1st rounders outside of Peters are overrated. Shelton is good, and even though his effort improved, he didn't bring it every game. Sometimes he was incredible (early season, Arizona, WSU). Sometimes he was meh (Oregon, UCLA). Almost every sack was against Hawaii and Eastern.

    Shaq is a ball hawk, but has average instincts and misses a lot of tackles. Mason Foster was a great LB. Shaq was not. That said, he was a very good RB and that was arguably his best position.

    Peters is a future Pro Bowler but he clashed with the coaching staff. That was too bad, but Petersen had to draw the line.

    Kikaha was a stud and IMO the MVP of the defense. We saw how the defense performed without him in the UCLA game. I agree with Chuck that he is an intriguing 2nd-4th round pick.

    I think Petersen should have won a few more games, but the transition wasn't smooth. We can make excuses, but 8-6 with that schedule sucks no matter who is coaching. On one hand, QB play was terrible and the rest of the offense wasn't much better. OTOH, the offense was the worst in the Pac 12 and the coaches deserve blame and criticism for that.

    Agree re Shaq and Peters. But IMO, you're overvaluing Kikaha. And way, way undervaluing Shelton, who is the best player to come through UW in 20 years.
    THIS

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SteveInShelton
    SteveInShelton Member Posts: 1,611
    Damone said it a while back - Washington's defense had some great individuals but it wasn't a very good team defense. You are only as good as your weakest link on defense, and UW had a lot of weak links.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DerekJohnson
    DerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 69,765 Founders Club
    SteveInShelton said:

    Damone said it a while back - Washington's defense had some great individuals but it wasn't a very good team defense. You are only as good as your weakest link on defense, and UW had a lot of weak links.

    The Seahawks were a case study of that in the Super Bowl when Lane went down and Simon was in the game.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RoadDawg55
    RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,391 Standard Supporter
    SteveInShelton said:

    Damone said it a while back - Washington's defense had some great individuals but it wasn't a very good team defense. You are only as good as your weakest link on defense, and UW had a lot of weak links.

    I agree with that, but the defense played well enough to win 10+. Stanford, ASU, and Arizona (turnovers) were all lost by the offense.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CokeGreaterThanPepsi
    CokeGreaterThanPepsi Member Posts: 7,646
    RoadDawg55 said:

    SteveInShelton said:

    Damone said it a while back - Washington's defense had some great individuals but it wasn't a very good team defense. You are only as good as your weakest link on defense, and UW had a lot of weak links.

    I agree with that, but the defense played well enough to win 10+. Stanford, ASU, and Arizona (turnovers) were all lost by the offense.
    Good poont. It is weird to think about how close UW was in those three games (although the ASU game was weird with that weather). Just frustrating to think of how close UW was to getting those wins (although, the offense was so dreadful in the Furd and ASU games that it is hard to say we were "close").
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • haie
    haie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,429 Founders Club
    CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    SteveInShelton said:

    Damone said it a while back - Washington's defense had some great individuals but it wasn't a very good team defense. You are only as good as your weakest link on defense, and UW had a lot of weak links.

    I agree with that, but the defense played well enough to win 10+. Stanford, ASU, and Arizona (turnovers) were all lost by the offense.
    Good poont. It is weird to think about how close UW was in those three games (although the ASU game was weird with that weather). Just frustrating to think of how close UW was to getting those wins (although, the offense was so dreadful in the Furd and ASU games that it is hard to say we were "close").
    I really thought we should have beaten ASU in addition to Arizona. When you are gashing the (poop) out of them like Shaq was, you should be getting 7's en route to wearing their defense down, who is blitzing almost every play. Graham was losing it on the sideline, I think he knew what was coming too if they couldn't get some momentum-swinging play with Strong. The defense should have picked off Kelly at the end there and then marched down the field and finished it.

    Stanford is another game where I wonder what could have been if we'd taken some shots with Ross and ran Shaq at rb more. I know they needed his defensive td but just an abysmal effort by the offense. And we were at home. They were winning on the line, but it shouldn't have come down to risk giving them the ball back at the 50.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Dennis_DeYoung
    Dennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754
    On the defense, we had 4 All-Americans and 4 kids who were WSU level players. Then some young kids.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • creepycoug
    creepycoug Member Posts: 24,281
    bananasnblondes said:

    UW had 3 amazing athletes on defense (4 if you include Peters). The drop off between those players and the rest of the team was huge.

    ...

    Aside from that you had a bunch of guys like ... Evan Hudson ... who were upperclassmen with years of starting experience , but were never actually very good.

    Truer words have not been written here in more than 1/2 hour. Kid has about the slowest first step I've seen on a Pac-level defensive line.

    Compare/contrast with Danny Shelton who, compared to Hudson, was short and fat. Just another illustration that you can't work your way to speed and quickness. It's there or it's not, with or without hunks of fat hanging off your ass and with or without hard work.

    I know for a fact that Hudson was a weight room legend and, as a former walk on, did everything the coaches told him to do and did it twice for good measure.

    Great HS athlete. Marginal D1. Period. Might have been better off working on his curve ball or off-speed pitch to go with the fast ball.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter