I'm excited to see what the updated weights of the OL and DL will be. That'll be my first measure of development until we start hearing the reports from fall camp.
do they have the attitude and are they ready to rumble?
The areas of concern for me this year are the following:
The OL.
If we had a good OL coming back, I would think we were in pretty good shape.
If players develop like they did last year, we will have 7-8 All Pac-12 players (including HM). There just won't be many on the OL, which is the most important position.
I expect one of our RBs to get HM, one of our WRs, one of our TEs, two guys on DL, a LB and a couple DBs.
I get the OL commentary, but not really when you factor in the difference between Sankey and name your favorite 2014 RB as well as the QB issues.
If you eliminate runs from QBs and any fake punt attempts from the yardage, you get the following:
2013: 501 runs for 2,758 yards = 5.5 yards per carry 2014: 457 runs for 2,245 yards = 4.9 yards per carry
Yes, I get that a half yard per carry is relatively significant. But at the same time, if you tell me that on average we get 5 yards per running play with average at best line play and a QB that lacks the arm strength to make a defense worry about the down field throw, then I'm not exactly unhappy with the running game.
I would be very surprised if at the end of the year if we run the same analytics that the 2015 number will be south of 4.9 yards per carry.
I'm excited to see what the updated weights of the OL and DL will be. That'll be my first measure of development until we start hearing the reports from fall camp.
I get the OL commentary, but not really when you factor in the difference between Sankey and name your favorite 2014 RB as well as the QB issues.
If you eliminate runs from QBs and any fake punt attempts from the yardage, you get the following:
2013: 501 runs for 2,758 yards = 5.5 yards per carry 2014: 457 runs for 2,245 yards = 4.9 yards per carry
Yes, I get that a half yard per carry is relatively significant. But at the same time, if you tell me that on average we get 5 yards per running play with average at best line play and a QB that lacks the arm strength to make a defense worry about the down field throw, then I'm not exactly unhappy with the running game.
I would be very surprised if at the end of the year if we run the same analytics that the 2015 number will be south of 4.9 yards per carry.
Sankey made a big difference, but you also can't tell me the OL made any strides from 2013. They were the same, possibly even slightly worse. I don't know what there was to disagree with. It was a pretty factual (as much as player development can be) post.
It was a mixed bag. You're one the the posters that gets in a tiffy when anything but compliments are bestowed on Petersen. He's a proven talent developer and should be much better than Sark in that area. However, there were plenty of examples on last year's team where guys stayed the same or got worse, which I mentioned. Pretending otherwise is some major dooging.
Threads like this are great. They give you hope. But the first time Magna Carta or the Vanilla Hammer are throwing off their back foot to the assholes in the wrong uniforms I will be drinking myself into oblivion and cursing everything about this shit ass program. Is Crazy Larry dead yet?
FYFMFE
Voted up for using my Vanilla Hammer moniker for Lindy.
I get the OL commentary, but not really when you factor in the difference between Sankey and name your favorite 2014 RB as well as the QB issues.
If you eliminate runs from QBs and any fake punt attempts from the yardage, you get the following:
2013: 501 runs for 2,758 yards = 5.5 yards per carry 2014: 457 runs for 2,245 yards = 4.9 yards per carry
Yes, I get that a half yard per carry is relatively significant. But at the same time, if you tell me that on average we get 5 yards per running play with average at best line play and a QB that lacks the arm strength to make a defense worry about the down field throw, then I'm not exactly unhappy with the running game.
I would be very surprised if at the end of the year if we run the same analytics that the 2015 number will be south of 4.9 yards per carry.
Sankey made a big difference, but you also can't tell me the OL made any strides from 2013. They were the same, possibly even slightly worse. I don't know what there was to disagree with. It was a pretty factual (as much as player development can be) post.
It was a mixed bag. You're one the the posters that gets in a tiffy when anything but compliments are bestowed on Petersen. He's a proven talent developer and should be much better than Sark in that area. However, there were plenty of examples on last year's team where guys stayed the same or got worse, which I mentioned. Pretending otherwise is some major dooging.
Most guys, especially in technically skilled positions like the OL, take a step back before they step forward. The OL was worse, they also unexpectedly lost their leader Riva before the season started. Compound that with relearning how to move your body in the trenches and it's easy to see why the OL struggled.
No doubt 4 years of Cozz screaming into your face caused some deaf ears for the upperclassmen "anchoring" the line. If the line this season looks out of sync scheme wise by Pac-12 play, i'll join in your concern over its development.
I'm excited to see what the updated weights of the OL and DL will be. That'll be my first measure of development until we start hearing the reports from fall camp
The areas of concern for me this year are the following:
The OL.
If we had a good OL coming back, I would think we were in pretty good shape.
If players develop like they did last year, we will have 7-8 All Pac-12 players (including HM). There just won't be many on the OL, which is the most important position.
I expect one of our RBs to get HM, one of our WRs, one of our TEs, two guys on DL, a LB and a couple DBs.
Highly doubt a Husky gets at HM at RB this year without some miraculous improvement. Deep group this year.
Paul Perkins, Devontae Booker, Royce Freeman, Nick Wilson will for sure get conference honors if they stay healthy. All were nearly 1,500 yard backs in 2014. Lasco at Cal was a 1,000 yard rusher last year. And that's before SCs top back, a 2nd back at whoregon, McCaffrey at Stanford is a big talent. Same for Demario Richard or Ballage.
I get the OL commentary, but not really when you factor in the difference between Sankey and name your favorite 2014 RB as well as the QB issues.
If you eliminate runs from QBs and any fake punt attempts from the yardage, you get the following:
2013: 501 runs for 2,758 yards = 5.5 yards per carry 2014: 457 runs for 2,245 yards = 4.9 yards per carry
Yes, I get that a half yard per carry is relatively significant. But at the same time, if you tell me that on average we get 5 yards per running play with average at best line play and a QB that lacks the arm strength to make a defense worry about the down field throw, then I'm not exactly unhappy with the running game.
I would be very surprised if at the end of the year if we run the same analytics that the 2015 number will be south of 4.9 yards per carry.
Sankey made a big difference, but you also can't tell me the OL made any strides from 2013. They were the same, possibly even slightly worse. I don't know what there was to disagree with. It was a pretty factual (as much as player development can be) post.
It was a mixed bag. You're one the the posters that gets in a tiffy when anything but compliments are bestowed on Petersen. He's a proven talent developer and should be much better than Sark in that area. However, there were plenty of examples on last year's team where guys stayed the same or got worse, which I mentioned. Pretending otherwise is some major dooging.
Most guys, especially in technically skilled positions like the OL, take a step back before they step forward. The OL was worse, they also unexpectedly lost their leader Riva before the season started. Compound that with relearning how to move your body in the trenches and it's easy to see why the OL struggled.
No doubt 4 years of Cozz screaming into your face caused some deaf ears for the upperclassmen "anchoring" the line. If the line this season looks out of sync scheme wise by Pac-12 play, i'll join in your concern over its development.
That's an important point to consider: how the change in OL play affected the OL. We transitioned from a zone blocking scheme to a man blocking scheme. Different ways to handle pass blocking and run blocking. Also different ways to pick up players on stunts and blitzes. For a number of players, this was their first time doing a man blocking scheme, so it's not surprising to see some of these veterans struggle. Then again, you have someone like Micha Hatchie who is suddenly a lot better, especially with how he got into the second level at the end of the year.
Then again, the OL looked like shit in the spring, so maybe we're screwed. Who knows.
I get the OL commentary, but not really when you factor in the difference between Sankey and name your favorite 2014 RB as well as the QB issues.
If you eliminate runs from QBs and any fake punt attempts from the yardage, you get the following:
2013: 501 runs for 2,758 yards = 5.5 yards per carry 2014: 457 runs for 2,245 yards = 4.9 yards per carry
Yes, I get that a half yard per carry is relatively significant. But at the same time, if you tell me that on average we get 5 yards per running play with average at best line play and a QB that lacks the arm strength to make a defense worry about the down field throw, then I'm not exactly unhappy with the running game.
I would be very surprised if at the end of the year if we run the same analytics that the 2015 number will be south of 4.9 yards per carry.
Sankey made a big difference, but you also can't tell me the OL made any strides from 2013. They were the same, possibly even slightly worse. I don't know what there was to disagree with. It was a pretty factual (as much as player development can be) post.
It was a mixed bag. You're one the the posters that gets in a tiffy when anything but compliments are bestowed on Petersen. He's a proven talent developer and should be much better than Sark in that area. However, there were plenty of examples on last year's team where guys stayed the same or got worse, which I mentioned. Pretending otherwise is some major dooging.
Downvoted for caring whether you are disagreed with or not.
I didn't say that the OL made strides in 2014 YoY. What I did say is that when you account for the fact that Sankey was Sankey and a massive difference between Price and Miles, that while the YoY difference was a little more than a half yard per carry, that if you tell me that I have an OL that gets me roughly 5 yards per carry on average that it's going to be hard for me to complain too much about things. That's a recipe for success for this team IF we can consistently get 5 yards per carry on average out of the RBs.
I have no problem calling Petersen out for any number of things when it is warranted. But I'm also not going to go crazy at this point and act like a complete know it all armchair QB at ANYTHING that he does that is wrong. Mistakes are going to be made by everybody ... even the very best. Shit happens. You cite that Petersen is a significant upgrade in developing talent compared to Seven (agree 100% with that) and that there are examples where players didn't improve or regressed (which is a true statement in any program).
However, since you have asked, I'll give a quick run down of some of my bigger criticisms of Petersen over the last 18 months (in no particular order):
"Skinny" Eason's recruitment: Petersen recruited like he was in the WAC and waited to offer him until it was too late ... on the plus side he seems to have learned a lot from this and we are finding that he's getting in on kids earlier and earlier. On the other side of things, it's also fair to question whether Eason was dead set on leaving the State of Washington as well as questioning how much the recruitment and presence of Jake Browning had on Eason. It's far from a black/white situation to me.
Jonathan Smith as OC: Understand Petersen focusing on hiring coaches that have coached under him, etc. to aide him in the transition. Smith had a very lukewarm first year as any instance where you could see signs of him making good to great calls as an OC were often followed by some highly questionable ones. The jury is most assuredly still out on him. At this point, I'm keeping an open mind on this because I think even the best of OC's would have been very challenged being a good play caller with Miley Cyrus playing QB.
Pease as a WR coach: There's plenty of red flags on Pease in his background that make you come to the conclusion that he's very likely a massive jackass. The fact that he's the position coach in the one position where you can very much question recruiting historically under Petersen I don't think is coincidental. I'm probably more questionable about Pease going forward than I am with Smith because I could at least see signs with Smith where he'd make solid play calls and very often when he'd call some trick plays, notably with our best QB last year in Marvin Hall, those plays seems to work at least 81% of the time.
Fake Punt Call vs Stanford: Petersen's welcome to the PAC moment as he learned that he wasn't able to get away with some of the same shit he got away with in the WAC coaching against complete dumbfucks most of the time. On the other hand, I'm sure he was also looking at the ineptitude of Miley Cyrus and was thinking that he had to create something to get the winning score. I get the thought process ... just don't agree with the decision.
Fumble against Arizona: Most have criticized @TheChart for the piss poor play calling that led to the fumble. Given the time left on the clock from what I remember being in the stadium I don't recall the clock allowing the ability to run the clock out with simple knees. However, I do think that it's within reason to criticize the coaching of Miles in such situations as the preceding series of downs saw Miles snap the ball with anywhere from 3 to 7 seconds left on the play clock. Had more effective coaching of Miles occurred and those snaps bled just a handful of seconds off the clock, the ability to take a knee instead of running the ball would have resulted and the win sealed. Often it's the inability to execute the smallest of details (which happened in that game in spades) that decide the outcome of a close game. And while I'm not surprised that this fact was lost on many of Seven's mental midgets, it was very disappointing to see that Petersen hadn't been able to completely coach that out of them.
By and large we're so used to players not developing much during the off season around here. That's why I hold that under Petersen we might be pleasantly surprised in several areas this fall. Not enough to win 11 games, but enough to have a decent season, like the 1999 UW Holiday Bowl team.
But that 1999 team was loaded with tuff Lambo recruits. This year's team is loaded with soft Sark recruits.
In conclusion, that is where the similarities end.
Comments
The OL.
If we had a good OL coming back, I would think we were in pretty good shape.
If players develop like they did last year, we will have 7-8 All Pac-12 players (including HM). There just won't be many on the OL, which is the most important position.
I expect one of our RBs to get HM, one of our WRs, one of our TEs, two guys on DL, a LB and a couple DBs.
If you eliminate runs from QBs and any fake punt attempts from the yardage, you get the following:
2013: 501 runs for 2,758 yards = 5.5 yards per carry
2014: 457 runs for 2,245 yards = 4.9 yards per carry
Yes, I get that a half yard per carry is relatively significant. But at the same time, if you tell me that on average we get 5 yards per running play with average at best line play and a QB that lacks the arm strength to make a defense worry about the down field throw, then I'm not exactly unhappy with the running game.
I would be very surprised if at the end of the year if we run the same analytics that the 2015 number will be south of 4.9 yards per carry.
It was a mixed bag. You're one the the posters that gets in a tiffy when anything but compliments are bestowed on Petersen. He's a proven talent developer and should be much better than Sark in that area. However, there were plenty of examples on last year's team where guys stayed the same or got worse, which I mentioned. Pretending otherwise is some major dooging.
No doubt 4 years of Cozz screaming into your face caused some deaf ears for the upperclassmen "anchoring" the line. If the line this season looks out of sync scheme wise by Pac-12 play, i'll join in your concern over its development.
Paul Perkins, Devontae Booker, Royce Freeman, Nick Wilson will for sure get conference honors if they stay healthy. All were nearly 1,500 yard backs in 2014. Lasco at Cal was a 1,000 yard rusher last year. And that's before SCs top back, a 2nd back at whoregon, McCaffrey at Stanford is a big talent. Same for Demario Richard or Ballage.
I don't see DWarsh jumping half that list to HM.
Freeman is fantastic and as a RB Tyner is just a guy. My $0.02 anyways.
Then again, the OL looked like shit in the spring, so maybe we're screwed. Who knows.
You're two thirds of the way to a lemon party...keep up the great poasting!
I didn't say that the OL made strides in 2014 YoY. What I did say is that when you account for the fact that Sankey was Sankey and a massive difference between Price and Miles, that while the YoY difference was a little more than a half yard per carry, that if you tell me that I have an OL that gets me roughly 5 yards per carry on average that it's going to be hard for me to complain too much about things. That's a recipe for success for this team IF we can consistently get 5 yards per carry on average out of the RBs.
I have no problem calling Petersen out for any number of things when it is warranted. But I'm also not going to go crazy at this point and act like a complete know it all armchair QB at ANYTHING that he does that is wrong. Mistakes are going to be made by everybody ... even the very best. Shit happens. You cite that Petersen is a significant upgrade in developing talent compared to Seven (agree 100% with that) and that there are examples where players didn't improve or regressed (which is a true statement in any program).
However, since you have asked, I'll give a quick run down of some of my bigger criticisms of Petersen over the last 18 months (in no particular order):
"Skinny" Eason's recruitment: Petersen recruited like he was in the WAC and waited to offer him until it was too late ... on the plus side he seems to have learned a lot from this and we are finding that he's getting in on kids earlier and earlier. On the other side of things, it's also fair to question whether Eason was dead set on leaving the State of Washington as well as questioning how much the recruitment and presence of Jake Browning had on Eason. It's far from a black/white situation to me.
Jonathan Smith as OC: Understand Petersen focusing on hiring coaches that have coached under him, etc. to aide him in the transition. Smith had a very lukewarm first year as any instance where you could see signs of him making good to great calls as an OC were often followed by some highly questionable ones. The jury is most assuredly still out on him. At this point, I'm keeping an open mind on this because I think even the best of OC's would have been very challenged being a good play caller with Miley Cyrus playing QB.
Pease as a WR coach: There's plenty of red flags on Pease in his background that make you come to the conclusion that he's very likely a massive jackass. The fact that he's the position coach in the one position where you can very much question recruiting historically under Petersen I don't think is coincidental. I'm probably more questionable about Pease going forward than I am with Smith because I could at least see signs with Smith where he'd make solid play calls and very often when he'd call some trick plays, notably with our best QB last year in Marvin Hall, those plays seems to work at least 81% of the time.
Fake Punt Call vs Stanford: Petersen's welcome to the PAC moment as he learned that he wasn't able to get away with some of the same shit he got away with in the WAC coaching against complete dumbfucks most of the time. On the other hand, I'm sure he was also looking at the ineptitude of Miley Cyrus and was thinking that he had to create something to get the winning score. I get the thought process ... just don't agree with the decision.
Fumble against Arizona: Most have criticized @TheChart for the piss poor play calling that led to the fumble. Given the time left on the clock from what I remember being in the stadium I don't recall the clock allowing the ability to run the clock out with simple knees. However, I do think that it's within reason to criticize the coaching of Miles in such situations as the preceding series of downs saw Miles snap the ball with anywhere from 3 to 7 seconds left on the play clock. Had more effective coaching of Miles occurred and those snaps bled just a handful of seconds off the clock, the ability to take a knee instead of running the ball would have resulted and the win sealed. Often it's the inability to execute the smallest of details (which happened in that game in spades) that decide the outcome of a close game. And while I'm not surprised that this fact was lost on many of Seven's mental midgets, it was very disappointing to see that Petersen hadn't been able to completely coach that out of them.
In conclusion, that is where the similarities end.