UW vs. Boise State Officially Friday Sept. 4th
Comments
-
I didn't even realize I stepped on 5 reasons ... WTF was I thinking?
-
B+, needs more exclamation points and a random shot at Smith.devildawg said:It will be a woodshed moment for Pete! Boise has the better team,playing the home opener vs Pete will be a big deal in that town.
I see UW limping home from a ass kicking setting the tone for a dismal year... -
It's smart. Actually "you" almost lost to a real Big Sky team twice this decade. At home. With more money.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:The fact we're playing at an ex-Little Sky program is borderline pathetic (I graduated, it's we're). Oh, did Safeway Stadium add more capacity? Is it 34,000 now? LOL
Also, it's never too early to troll their boreds. Watch the master Bill.
($75,000) -
When did Kim Guzzler hack your account?Tequilla said:Let's be honest, barring a massive miracle at the QB position, the 2015 Husky Football season is going to be a season in transition where our interest is going to be in watching the team development over the course of the season leading into the special 2016 and 2017 seasons.
I'm sure that somehow they'll find a way to get bowl eligible, but anything greater than 8-4 next year would be a MASSIVE surprise. And in fairness, 8-4 may be a stretch when you consider the following:
1) Still tremendous uncertainty at the QB position and the desire to make sure that Browning redshirts if at all possible
2) Replacement of large chunks of an average OL ... which while the newbies may be young, hungry, and ready to rumble, they'll probably have a few growing pains during the year. In the long run, this will be a better group but that might be in 2016.
3) Given the issues of 1 and 2 above, even if we were flush with skill position players, we could have offensive challenges. The reality is that we're not flush with much on offense at this point that makes you think of skill position players being anything more than average PAC caliber unless we get a strong breakout season from a true frosh or two - but what's more likely from anybody in that group that plays immediately is being a contributor that positions them into being strong contributors in 2016 forward.
4) Replacement of essentially the entire defensive front ... while I think we have some good pieces there to build upon, they are still young in some areas there and really nobody in that group has been asked to play 60+ snaps in a game before and have the consistency tied into that.
5) Potential best player on defense is Feeney if he can find consistency, but the rest of the LB position will be relatively new and mistakes will happen as this unit grows.
The only positional group that I feel relatively decent about is the secondary. Everything else is a massive question mark flush with ceilings of probably average conference play next year.
I haven't looked at what Boise returns, but that will be a tough game. So will Utah State. Going 1-1 in those games is probably the likely result. 4-5 in conference is probably about right as well. Home games against Cal and the Cougs are probably wins as is the game at Oregon State. Should expect to get at least a split of Arizona and Utah since the games are at home. 5-4 in conference next year is probably the best case scenario because I don't see wins @ SC, @ ASU, or @ Stanford and Oregon's got to completely shit the bed at the QB position worse than us for us to win that game at home next year. -
fivehundredmileDAWG said:
Like the 12's say "I'm in"Tequilla said:
Pretty much this ...fivehundredmileDAWG said:Actually I'm fine with Friday ...
ANY Friday in 2015....
Cause ... For 2015 ...
TSIO most likely
There will be some interesting things to look at and watch as the players develop in Year 2 under the Petersen system. It would be nice to see at least one win that comes from left field (Oregon???) where after the game you look at things and shake your head.
But honestly, when you look at the roster, and what is likely to be contributing this year, and then compare to PAC averages, it's hard not to see that Petersen's more or less 2015 was going to be a treading water year as soon as he took the job.
I'm just realistic about it. Win big in 2015 or GTFO. -
He didn't ...TierbsHsotBoobs said:
When did Kim Guzzler hack your account?Tequilla said:Let's be honest, barring a massive miracle at the QB position, the 2015 Husky Football season is going to be a season in transition where our interest is going to be in watching the team development over the course of the season leading into the special 2016 and 2017 seasons.
I'm sure that somehow they'll find a way to get bowl eligible, but anything greater than 8-4 next year would be a MASSIVE surprise. And in fairness, 8-4 may be a stretch when you consider the following:
1) Still tremendous uncertainty at the QB position and the desire to make sure that Browning redshirts if at all possible
2) Replacement of large chunks of an average OL ... which while the newbies may be young, hungry, and ready to rumble, they'll probably have a few growing pains during the year. In the long run, this will be a better group but that might be in 2016.
3) Given the issues of 1 and 2 above, even if we were flush with skill position players, we could have offensive challenges. The reality is that we're not flush with much on offense at this point that makes you think of skill position players being anything more than average PAC caliber unless we get a strong breakout season from a true frosh or two - but what's more likely from anybody in that group that plays immediately is being a contributor that positions them into being strong contributors in 2016 forward.
4) Replacement of essentially the entire defensive front ... while I think we have some good pieces there to build upon, they are still young in some areas there and really nobody in that group has been asked to play 60+ snaps in a game before and have the consistency tied into that.
5) Potential best player on defense is Feeney if he can find consistency, but the rest of the LB position will be relatively new and mistakes will happen as this unit grows.
The only positional group that I feel relatively decent about is the secondary. Everything else is a massive question mark flush with ceilings of probably average conference play next year.
I haven't looked at what Boise returns, but that will be a tough game. So will Utah State. Going 1-1 in those games is probably the likely result. 4-5 in conference is probably about right as well. Home games against Cal and the Cougs are probably wins as is the game at Oregon State. Should expect to get at least a split of Arizona and Utah since the games are at home. 5-4 in conference next year is probably the best case scenario because I don't see wins @ SC, @ ASU, or @ Stanford and Oregon's got to completely shit the bed at the QB position worse than us for us to win that game at home next year.
Maybe I'm being overly conservative at this point and will become more optimistic after the Spring, and maybe it's my lack of optimism as long as Miley Cyrus is the QB (and at this point there's no strong reason to suggest he will or won't be), but I just see an average team for the UW in 2015. I don't think that they'll be bad ... I just don't think that they'll be particularly good. -
The stalker troll followed me all the way over here...wtf troll?FremontTroll said:
B+, needs more exclamation points and a random shot at Smith.devildawg said:It will be a woodshed moment for Pete! Boise has the better team,playing the home opener vs Pete will be a big deal in that town.
I see UW limping home from a ass kicking setting the tone for a dismal year...FremontTroll said:
B+, needs more exclamation points and a random shot at Smith.devildawg said:It will be a woodshed moment for Pete! Boise has the better team,playing the home opener vs Pete will be a big deal in that town.
I see UW limping home from a ass kicking setting the tone for a dismal year...
He dickwad troll! You follwing me over here?
So your ready to fully endorse little Smitty? I'd gladly pay you if the Dawgs can pull out the win on the smurf turf if you'd like to put your money where your mouth is?
The great thing about this board is I won't get the boot for calling you a fucktard....
-
I just assumed this was a gimmick account since you are such a clown and loyal KG supporter on dm.c.devildawg said:
The stalker troll followed me all the way over here...wtf troll?FremontTroll said:
B+, needs more exclamation points and a random shot at Smith.devildawg said:It will be a woodshed moment for Pete! Boise has the better team,playing the home opener vs Pete will be a big deal in that town.
I see UW limping home from a ass kicking setting the tone for a dismal year...FremontTroll said:
B+, needs more exclamation points and a random shot at Smith.devildawg said:It will be a woodshed moment for Pete! Boise has the better team,playing the home opener vs Pete will be a big deal in that town.
I see UW limping home from a ass kicking setting the tone for a dismal year...
He dickwad troll! You follwing me over here?
So your ready to fully endorse little Smitty? I'd gladly pay you if the Dawgs can pull out the win on the smurf turf if you'd like to put your money where your mouth is?
The great thing about this board is I won't get the boot for calling you a fucktard....
If not then welcome, and LEAVE. -
Yeah. EmbarrassingApostleofGrief said:
It's smart. Actually "you" almost lost to a real Big Sky team twice this decade. At home. With more money.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:The fact we're playing at an ex-Little Sky program is borderline pathetic (I graduated, it's we're). Oh, did Safeway Stadium add more capacity? Is it 34,000 now? LOL
Also, it's never too early to troll their boreds. Watch the master Bill. ($75,000)
