Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

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

Woof

13

Comments

  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,931
    No doubt that we need a pure #1 on the outside ... we may have a couple on the current roster with Pettis and Lenius ...

    But yes, this is a critical area for future recruiting on the offensive side of the ball as Pete has established that he can get RBs, OL, slot WRs, and TEs on board. Defensive side of the ball seems solid other than some LB recruits that have left a few shaking their heads.
  • Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
  • Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.

    Here's what we know about the kid:
    He scores a ton of TDs
    He catches a ton of balls
    He plays in a legit league
    Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently

    He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
    This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,931
    If you look at the recent production of TCU's WRs over the last 5-10 years ... it's been fairly solid.

    UW would be doing quite well right now to match TCU's level.
  • greenbloodgreenblood Member Posts: 14,485

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.

    Here's what we know about the kid:
    He scores a ton of TDs
    He catches a ton of balls
    He plays in a legit league
    Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently

    He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
    This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.
    If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.

    It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.

    Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
    I don't know, Wisconsin maybe, but Iowa and BC isn't really receiver central.
  • Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.

    Here's what we know about the kid:
    He scores a ton of TDs
    He catches a ton of balls
    He plays in a legit league
    Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently

    He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
    This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.
    If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.

    It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.

    Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
    Except for the fact we're wasting scholarships.

    You make a good poont re: Wiscy and Iowa instead of SDSU... I mean, we are on a different level than the Ty years. It's just the same type of poont, only we're not recruiting guys ABSOLUTELY no one wants, we're recruiting guys that schools who have no access to decent WRs within their state boundaries want because they're desperate.

    Fair?
  • CokeGreaterThanPepsiCokeGreaterThanPepsi Member Posts: 7,646

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.

    Here's what we know about the kid:
    He scores a ton of TDs
    He catches a ton of balls
    He plays in a legit league
    Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently

    He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
    This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.
    If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.

    It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.

    Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
    agreed with that.
  • ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.

    Here's what we know about the kid:
    He scores a ton of TDs
    He catches a ton of balls
    He plays in a legit league
    Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently

    He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
    This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.
    If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.

    It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.

    Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
    Except for the fact we're wasting scholarships.

    You make a good poont re: Wiscy and Iowa instead of SDSU... I mean, we are on a different level than the Ty years. It's just the same type of poont, only we're not recruiting guys ABSOLUTELY no one wants, we're recruiting guys that schools who have no access to decent WRs within their state boundaries want because they're desperate.

    Fair?
    Around here we call that incremental progress.
  • Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.

    Here's what we know about the kid:
    He scores a ton of TDs
    He catches a ton of balls
    He plays in a legit league
    Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently

    He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
    This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.
    If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.

    It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.

    Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
    Except for the fact we're wasting scholarships.

    You make a good poont re: Wiscy and Iowa instead of SDSU... I mean, we are on a different level than the Ty years. It's just the same type of poont, only we're not recruiting guys ABSOLUTELY no one wants, we're recruiting guys that schools who have no access to decent WRs within their state boundaries want because they're desperate.

    Fair?
    Around here we call that incremental progress.
    So, what you're saying is—at this rate—2641 will be special?
  • ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    What specifically do you hate about this player, or Quinten Pounds for that matter? You seem to be on this kick of whining about how much we suck and how much our recruited players suck but you don't offer any reasons why you don't like their play. The fact is, we're UW. We've sucked for over a decade now. It's not like Petersen has his pick of 6'4'' 4 and 5-star wide receivers who just have to be asked to come here. We're gonna have to take some B-level players, so why does this kid specifically suck compared to other B-level slot receivers? You already tried the speed thing and got your ass handed to you by another poster, so try something else.

    Here's what we know about the kid:
    He scores a ton of TDs
    He catches a ton of balls
    He plays in a legit league
    Wisconsin, Iowa, and BC wanted him. He visited Oklahoma, TCU, and Ok State recently

    He's not amazing, but if you're gonna shit on him, at least back it up with something other than him not being as good as some of the elite receivers in teh west we can't get
    This was basically the standard poast during the Willingham years.
    If you replaced Wisconsin, Iowa and BC with Utah St, San Diego St, and Fresno St you'd have a poont.

    It's a fucking WR...aka the LEAST important position on offense.

    Until we have an offensive scheme, a QB, and an OL, it doesn't fucking matter.
    Except for the fact we're wasting scholarships.

    You make a good poont re: Wiscy and Iowa instead of SDSU... I mean, we are on a different level than the Ty years. It's just the same type of poont, only we're not recruiting guys ABSOLUTELY no one wants, we're recruiting guys that schools who have no access to decent WRs within their state boundaries want because they're desperate.

    Fair?
    Around here we call that incremental progress.
    So, what you're saying is—at this rate—2641 will be special?
    Naw, the big Seattle quake will wipe everyone out before that.
  • Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754

    Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?

    Great poont. I'm sure Andrew Kirkland agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!
  • TTJTTJ Member Posts: 4,799
    edited July 2015

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    Serious Q: how does your first impression of him compare to your first impression of Pettis?
  • Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754
    TTJ said:

    The guy might turn out to be good. Problem is he likely has no chance to be a #1 gamebreaker WR which is what we really need. Maybe we will get lucky and a few young WR's will be good. It just means we aren't doing so well with the higher rated guys.

    Considering this class and past few years, Pete's UW could be UW in the early Lambo era....good defense, excellent lines, short on WR talent and gamebreakers on offense. String = Jason Shelly?

    Yeah, the issue in my opinion is that you NEVER take B-receivers like this. McClatcher? Fine. That dude has serious quickness. You can see a way forward. Renfro looks really good—Michael Crabtree type kid.

    But Q-Pounds and all that crap? Why? You can move any idiot to WR and have a mediocre WR, you don't need to recruit them.
    Serious Q: how does your first impression of him compare to your first impression of Pettis?
    I loved Pettis right away. No joke.

    I thought he was fantastic. I had a similar reaction to Pettis and Steve Frank, "kid is an overlooked baller". Pettis just knows how to play football. Not outstanding physical characteristics, but jumped out on film.
  • CuntWaffleCuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,499

    Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?

    Great poont. I'm sure Andrew Kirkland agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!
    Andre Kirkland = Sark

    Big difference.
  • Dennis_DeYoungDennis_DeYoung Member Posts: 14,754

    Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?

    Great poont. I'm sure Andrew Kirkland agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!
    Andre Kirkland = Sark

    Big difference.
    Huge difference! Cannot be overstated! HUGE!
  • HeretoBeatmyChestHeretoBeatmyChest Member Posts: 4,295

    Or we could LIPO with recruits who haven't played one snap of their senior year in high school?

    Great poont. I'm sure Taylor Hindy agrees—gotta wait for that senior year!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.