What player surprised you the most (positive and negative)?
Comments
-
This is way fucking better than I could have said it. It seems we are trending up everywhere (recruiting, development, defense, energy, fight, special teams) but the offense is so fucking miserably bad, that it somehow negates everything else being better. I mean, this offense isn't just bad, it is fucking awful.Gladstone said:It's so goddamned maddening. For playcalling I could run a mysql script that randomly selected plays from an old NCAA Xbox game and I bet we generate more yards on offense. But as discussed, as we hate on Smith, just the same it stands to reason we hate on Petersen for hiring and sticking with this dumpster fire.
It's a glaring elephant in the room, which is a shame because you can see actual progress blossoming everywhere else in the program. As it relates to in-state recruiting the relationship with local HS coaches has improved drastically over Sark. The S&C is obviously working. The defense has generally been good, with lots of player development at all three levels. Special teams immediately improved. The effort level seems high. All the off the field bullshit doogs love is also very strong.
The whole 'offensive guru' dumpster fire reminds me of Charlie Weis. -
He is not the one who disappointed me the most, you guys already mentioned them, but Travis Feeney as a DE didn't do it for me. I thought it was a waste of his talent and I prefer him as a LB who can swarm to the ball and every now and then blitz the passer. The second half felt more like this, I didn't pay attention if he was lining up the same.
-
ThisRoadDawg55 said:Browning looked pretty good. He threw some nice balls, moved around in the pocket, barked orders, wasn't nervous, etc. He looked like he belonged, but objectively speaking, he played like shit. 20-34 for 150 and a pick is a terrible game.
We've harped on the offensive coaching enough, but our talent isn't that bad. It's really not. And even if it is bad, I still expect to have a good enough coach to coax something out of them. It's fucking pathetic. The defense and special teams set them up multiple times with outstanding field position and they twiddled their dicks and kicked FG's. I think they got one first down on either of those drives.
It's really depressing that Petersen and his staff had a long time to reflect on last year's dreckfest of an offense and improve it. All off season to make necessary tweaks and changes. And we come out and play arguably the worst offensive game of the Petersen era. We all know how bad some of those games were last year too. This was as bad or worse than ASU and Stanford last year. There were some good things going on, but it's hard to feel good about anything with this embarrassing of a showing. -
I agree, OTOH I said similar but opposite things about Kikaha (why is he playing pass coverage? We need him rushing the QB every snap! etc) after the Eastern game last year and he went on to a monster season. The buck position still doesn't make a ton of sense to me but it worked really well last year once Kikaha got his feet under him. It's possible the same happens for Feeney. OTOH Kikaha was better pre-buck than Feeney, so maybe not. EWIWBI?The_Undertaker said:He is not the one who disappointed me the most, you guys already mentioned them, but Travis Feeney as a DE didn't do it for me. I thought it was a waste of his talent and I prefer him as a LB who can swarm to the ball and every now and then blitz the passer. The second half felt more like this, I didn't pay attention if he was lining up the same.
-
Disappointed Petersen is still the coach today
-
You are right, I forgot I felt the same with Kikaha last year. Wait and see I guess.dnc said:
I agree, OTOH I said similar but opposite things about Kikaha (why is he playing pass coverage? We need him rushing the QB every snap! etc) after the Eastern game last year and he went on to a monster season. The buck position still doesn't make a ton of sense to me but it worked really well last year once Kikaha got his feet under him. It's possible the same happens for Feeney. OTOH Kikaha was better pre-buck than Feeney, so maybe not. EWIWBI?The_Undertaker said:He is not the one who disappointed me the most, you guys already mentioned them, but Travis Feeney as a DE didn't do it for me. I thought it was a waste of his talent and I prefer him as a LB who can swarm to the ball and every now and then blitz the passer. The second half felt more like this, I didn't pay attention if he was lining up the same.
-
I always knew we'd hate Peterman but didn't think it would be so soon.RaceBannon said:Disappointed Petersen is still the coach today
-
I would say UWs offensive talent surpasses Colorado, Oregon State, and Wazzu. Maybe Utah, but they have Booker. So it's below average, but not befitting of the worst offense in the league.RoadDawg55 said:Browning looked pretty good. He threw some nice balls, moved around in the pocket, barked orders, wasn't nervous, etc. He looked like he belonged, but objectively speaking, he played like shit. 20-34 for 150 and a pick is a terrible game.
We've harped on the offensive coaching enough, but our talent isn't that bad. It's really not. And even if it is bad, I still expect to have a good enough coach to coax something out of them. It's fucking pathetic. The defense and special teams set them up multiple times with outstanding field position and they twiddled their dicks and kicked FG's. I think they got one first down on either of those drives.
It's really depressing that Petersen and his staff had a long time to reflect on last year's dreckfest of an offense and improve it. All off season to make necessary tweaks and changes. And we come out and play arguably the worst offensive game of the Petersen era. We all know how bad some of those games were last year too. This was as bad or worse than ASU and Stanford last year. There were some good things going on, but it's hard to feel good about anything with this embarrassing of a showing.
I thought it was odd they never opened up vertically to make BSU pay for stacking the box. Boise actually didn't pressure a ton, they just took away the run completely. My guess is Peterson thought his defense could win him a FG and field position battle...and he was almost correct. He just ran out of time. -
Stanford says hello.BallSacked said:
I would say UWs offensive talent surpasses Colorado, Oregon State, and Wazzu. Maybe Utah, but they have Booker. So it's below average, but not befitting of the worst offense in the league.RoadDawg55 said:Browning looked pretty good. He threw some nice balls, moved around in the pocket, barked orders, wasn't nervous, etc. He looked like he belonged, but objectively speaking, he played like shit. 20-34 for 150 and a pick is a terrible game.
We've harped on the offensive coaching enough, but our talent isn't that bad. It's really not. And even if it is bad, I still expect to have a good enough coach to coax something out of them. It's fucking pathetic. The defense and special teams set them up multiple times with outstanding field position and they twiddled their dicks and kicked FG's. I think they got one first down on either of those drives.
It's really depressing that Petersen and his staff had a long time to reflect on last year's dreckfest of an offense and improve it. All off season to make necessary tweaks and changes. And we come out and play arguably the worst offensive game of the Petersen era. We all know how bad some of those games were last year too. This was as bad or worse than ASU and Stanford last year. There were some good things going on, but it's hard to feel good about anything with this embarrassing of a showing.
I thought it was odd they never opened up vertically to make BSU pay for stacking the box. Boise actually didn't pressure a ton, they just took away the run completely. My guess is Peterson thought his defense could win him a FG and field position battle...and he was almost correct. He just ran out of time. -
the maddening thing about the game is that Boise didn't stack the box against us. They had two high safeties almost exclusively. We were up against a 7 or even 6 man box probably 90% of the time and we could not run the ball. It was a carbon copy of the Stanford game from last year.BallSacked said:
I would say UWs offensive talent surpasses Colorado, Oregon State, and Wazzu. Maybe Utah, but they have Booker. So it's below average, but not befitting of the worst offense in the league.RoadDawg55 said:Browning looked pretty good. He threw some nice balls, moved around in the pocket, barked orders, wasn't nervous, etc. He looked like he belonged, but objectively speaking, he played like shit. 20-34 for 150 and a pick is a terrible game.
We've harped on the offensive coaching enough, but our talent isn't that bad. It's really not. And even if it is bad, I still expect to have a good enough coach to coax something out of them. It's fucking pathetic. The defense and special teams set them up multiple times with outstanding field position and they twiddled their dicks and kicked FG's. I think they got one first down on either of those drives.
It's really depressing that Petersen and his staff had a long time to reflect on last year's dreckfest of an offense and improve it. All off season to make necessary tweaks and changes. And we come out and play arguably the worst offensive game of the Petersen era. We all know how bad some of those games were last year too. This was as bad or worse than ASU and Stanford last year. There were some good things going on, but it's hard to feel good about anything with this embarrassing of a showing.
I thought it was odd they never opened up vertically to make BSU pay for stacking the box. Boise actually didn't pressure a ton, they just took away the run completely. My guess is Peterson thought his defense could win him a FG and field position battle...and he was almost correct. He just ran out of time.
