Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays.
Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays.
You're a great poster, but sometimes you don't see the forest for the trees.
Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays.
Gaskin surely can take 25 carries? My main point was just what were they thinking having Browning throw 32 passes.
Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays.
Tequilla, it's the same thing every fucking week regardless of who plays RB. Browning throws 30 plus passes every week. If Washington played, They would have split the 21 carries that were called in the game.
Smith should be fired but won't because his boss loves him. Who needs to pressure the head coach? Well that would be Woodward but he obviously feels no heat from his boss who is the dyke version of Rachel Dolezel. Dawg fans are fucked.
Smith will be gone, but I still don't care. There is no way he is allowed back after two years of having the worst offense in the Pac 12. I doubt a coordinator has ever survived that, at any school.
I highly doubt Petersen fires anyone, especially since Woody will give him, at the very least, five years (regardless of his job performance)... especially since Woody has the AD job for as long as he wants it... especially since we now have a pres. who has no prior experience being a U pres., let alone firing and hiring an AD... especially since the BOR are appointed by the governor... and on, and on, and on.
The culture of the state of Washington is the problem. The state legislature, along with the governor, are buffoons, and these are the ones appointing the BOR, and on down the hill the shit flows. Case in point: UW's new pres. Year in, year out, rated as one of the best public universities in the world, and they hire the interim pres., who started off as an associate professor in '86. I'd argue that such a highly acclaimed university deserves better. Apparently, she is the only pres. of major university that was appointed from within. Speaks volumes.
I know the narrative is that Coleman and Cooper suck. And they do. They aren't very good RB's. That said, both had some success last season. Both were better than Washington for parts of the season. It's FS to pretend like giving them 5 or 6 carries is going to really hurt the offense.
Other than Oregon State's QB who is also a true freshman, Browning is probably the worst QB in the conference. Yeah, he's a true freshman and he shouldn't be playing, and he will get better, but right now, he sucks.
While 19 of 30 for 199 and a TD doesn't seem like much, it's on par with what we did in the running game.
Generally speaking, I lean towards wanting to run the ball more than throw it.
I wasn't enthused with the play calling during the game, but didn't hate it either. Just thought we had a lot of lengthy fields to go and that isn't going to turn out good for our offense too often as we're going to run into a hold, sack, etc. Given Oregon's defense has had more struggles against the pass than the run, it didn't shock me that we tried to exploit them more in the passing game. With Browning completing a high percentage of his passes during the season, it's not a terrible approach.
The one reason I would advocate more plays to Gaskin is that particularly without Washington playing he's by far our most explosive player. That being said, about 100 of his 150 yards came on 2 carries ... so it's not like we were running for a consistent 4-6 yards per play.
Two days after the fact when looking at what our numbers did look like, 6 yards per play both running/passing, it's hard for me to be overly critical of what we did offensively. That's by far our best offensive game in conference this year and only the Utah St game was better (excluding Sac St).
And no, I don't think that if you change Browning's numbers to 16 of 25 for 175 and up Gaskin's numbers to 23 for 180 that that changes the outcome of the game.
There are plenty of things to get really critical of Smith on ... the one that I'd point to in this game was that we didn't take quite enough shots down the field to test the Oregon secondary (and I think that this is the biggest general criticism that I have of him right now). But I'd sign up for 6 yards per play by the offense the rest of the year right now.
While 19 of 30 for 199 and a TD doesn't seem like much, it's on par with what we did in the running game.
Generally speaking, I lean towards wanting to run the ball more than throw it.
I wasn't enthused with the play calling during the game, but didn't hate it either. Just thought we had a lot of lengthy fields to go and that isn't going to turn out good for our offense too often as we're going to run into a hold, sack, etc. Given Oregon's defense has had more struggles against the pass than the run, it didn't shock me that we tried to exploit them more in the passing game. With Browning completing a high percentage of his passes during the season, it's not a terrible approach.
The one reason I would advocate more plays to Gaskin is that particularly without Washington playing he's by far our most explosive player. That being said, about 100 of his 150 yards came on 2 carries ... so it's not like we were running for a consistent 4-6 yards per play.
Two days after the fact when looking at what our numbers did look like, 6 yards per play both running/passing, it's hard for me to be overly critical of what we did offensively. That's by far our best offensive game in conference this year and only the Utah St game was better (excluding Sac St).
And no, I don't think that if you change Browning's numbers to 16 of 25 for 175 and up Gaskin's numbers to 23 for 180 that that changes the outcome of the game.
There are plenty of things to get really critical of Smith on ... the one that I'd point to in this game was that we didn't take quite enough shots down the field to test the Oregon secondary (and I think that this is the biggest general criticism that I have of him right now). But I'd sign up for 6 yards per play by the offense the rest of the year right now.
The worst thing is you actually think you are being analytical and smart by posting this. I don't give a shit what Browning's numbers were. He fucking sucked. And that's been the case in quite a few games. Oregon's secondary is really, really bad. Averaging 6.6 per attempt is bad. Cyler Miles averaged 7.29 last year.
Maybe we should have thrown a lot more last year considering Miles averaged more per attempt than the running game got? Enough with your pseudo intelligent, analytical bullshit. Are you watching these fucking games?
I don't think Browning sucks ... he's a freshman. He's going to make some mistakes and make some decent plays. He's averaging 7.4 yards per attempt on the year and outside of Stanford and Utah, the most difficult defenses he will see on the year he's already played. If you think Browning and Miles are comparable at all, you're insane.
Yes, Oregon's secondary sucks. My biggest criticism in the game was that we didn't take more shots down the field.
The biggest problem with the offense from an execution standpoint is that they are not able to consistently execute 8, 10, 12 play drives. This is where the youth comes into play. Somewhere a mistake gets made whether it is a penalty, sack, trying to cut outside into a loss instead of taking it up the field and taking what is there. Where we find ourselves in drive killers is when we get behind the chains.
I do think that we may have a few more play makers than we're showing and I don't think that the offense is maximizing it's potential through scheme.
The part that I'm really struggling after the last couple days of reading this board is that everybody is surprised by the offensive performance. Yes Oregon sucks, but by our standards, we had a fairly good offensive game. We're not going to score 40+ points without a lot of help on defense or special teams. We didn't get a turnover or special teams play that gave us a short field(s) to work with. Probably our ceiling with that set of variables right now is about 27-30 points.
For those saying that I'm just being analytical here for the sake of being analytical, or for those saying that I'm being doogish, or not seeing things here, what is it that you're seeing that I'm not seeing? I just don't think that by going heavier on the run was going to necessarily find us another TD because I don't think the OL is good enough to carve out enough holes to get us consistent runs down the field. Everything will break right a few times during the game and Gaskin will get some big gainers. But when I see the offense at its most consistent this year, it's mixing in the run with the short to intermediate passing game behind the LBs.
Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays.
You're a great poster, but sometimes you don't see the forest for the trees.
I don't think Browning sucks ... he's a freshman. He's going to make some mistakes and make some decent plays. He's averaging 7.4 yards per attempt on the year and outside of Stanford and Utah, the most difficult defenses he will see on the year he's already played. If you think Browning and Miles are comparable at all, you're insane.
Yes, Oregon's secondary sucks. My biggest criticism in the game was that we didn't take more shots down the field.
The biggest problem with the offense from an execution standpoint is that they are not able to consistently execute 8, 10, 12 play drives. This is where the youth comes into play. Somewhere a mistake gets made whether it is a penalty, sack, trying to cut outside into a loss instead of taking it up the field and taking what is there. Where we find ourselves in drive killers is when we get behind the chains.
I do think that we may have a few more play makers than we're showing and I don't think that the offense is maximizing it's potential through scheme.
The part that I'm really struggling after the last couple days of reading this board is that everybody is surprised by the offensive performance. Yes Oregon sucks, but by our standards, we had a fairly good offensive game. We're not going to score 40+ points without a lot of help on defense or special teams. We didn't get a turnover or special teams play that gave us a short field(s) to work with. Probably our ceiling with that set of variables right now is about 27-30 points.
For those saying that I'm just being analytical here for the sake of being analytical, or for those saying that I'm being doogish, or not seeing things here, what is it that you're seeing that I'm not seeing? I just don't think that by going heavier on the run was going to necessarily find us another TD because I don't think the OL is good enough to carve out enough holes to get us consistent runs down the field. Everything will break right a few times during the game and Gaskin will get some big gainers. But when I see the offense at its most consistent this year, it's mixing in the run with the short to intermediate passing game behind the LBs.
Good job at missing the point before going off on some tl,dr nonsense.
You aren't going to agree with me because I'm way too measured for your taste and I'm not going to agree with you because you run into I5 traffic at rush hour for my taste.
But yes, I watch the games. I see a team trying to achieve balance. I see an offense that isn't particularly well coordinated with a play caller that at times is overmatched and doesn't think far enough ahead with a plan. I'm also one of the first people to say that Smith and the offense doesn't have a specific identity ... which is also a popular topic around here now. This is a team that could stand to try to take a few more shots to take advantage of teams trying to jump the running and short passing game ... whether they work or not is inconsequential at this point ... that there's a threat needs to be established.
I also said before the season that the defense was going to be significantly better than many thought ... that also has played out.
I believe I also said before the season that winning was going to be tied to controlling the field, playing to the strengths of the team, and being opportunistic. I'll defer to @CokeGreaterThanPepsi for numbers that he came up that we talked about last week, but not only is UW last in the conference in plays run, but significantly so. It's very clear at least to me that the coaching staff has decided that our best path to winning is to shorten the game and play to the defense.
The fact of the matter is that we didn't get any turnovers this week and no short fields. Given the limitations on this offense (numerous), that's going to be an uphill battle to get significant points on the board.
And since I know this was only a few weeks ago, but my position on Smith is well established and known. He has shown no reason to be retained next year. Pease should be on the same bus out of town. At the same time, I'm not going to bash the guy because he's the popular punching bag. He's down the list this week when it comes to reasons that UW lost.
And had Browning been able to finish out the game, I do think that we had a legitimate chance to get the score to win. Unfortunate that he wasn't able to do so.
You aren't going to agree with me because I'm way too measured for your taste and I'm not going to agree with you because you run into I5 traffic at rush hour for my taste.
But yes, I watch the games. I see a team trying to achieve balance. I see an offense that isn't particularly well coordinated with a play caller that at times is overmatched and doesn't think far enough ahead with a plan. I'm also one of the first people to say that Smith and the offense doesn't have a specific identity ... which is also a popular topic around here now. This is a team that could stand to try to take a few more shots to take advantage of teams trying to jump the running and short passing game ... whether they work or not is inconsequential at this point ... that there's a threat needs to be established.
I also said before the season that the defense was going to be significantly better than many thought ... that also has played out.
I believe I also said before the season that winning was going to be tied to controlling the field, playing to the strengths of the team, and being opportunistic. I'll defer to @CokeGreaterThanPepsi for numbers that he came up that we talked about last week, but not only is UW last in the conference in plays run, but significantly so. It's very clear at least to me that the coaching staff has decided that our best path to winning is to shorten the game and play to the defense.
The fact of the matter is that we didn't get any turnovers this week and no short fields. Given the limitations on this offense (numerous), that's going to be an uphill battle to get significant points on the board.
And since I know this was only a few weeks ago, but my position on Smith is well established and known. He has shown no reason to be retained next year. Pease should be on the same bus out of town. At the same time, I'm not going to bash the guy because he's the popular punching bag. He's down the list this week when it comes to reasons that UW lost.
And had Browning been able to finish out the game, I do think that we had a legitimate chance to get the score to win. Unfortunate that he wasn't able to do so.
Then why the fuck aren't they calling more run plays?
You aren't going to agree with me because I'm way too measured for your taste and I'm not going to agree with you because you run into I5 traffic at rush hour for my taste.
But yes, I watch the games. I see a team trying to achieve balance. I see an offense that isn't particularly well coordinated with a play caller that at times is overmatched and doesn't think far enough ahead with a plan. I'm also one of the first people to say that Smith and the offense doesn't have a specific identity ... which is also a popular topic around here now. This is a team that could stand to try to take a few more shots to take advantage of teams trying to jump the running and short passing game ... whether they work or not is inconsequential at this point ... that there's a threat needs to be established.
I also said before the season that the defense was going to be significantly better than many thought ... that also has played out.
I believe I also said before the season that winning was going to be tied to controlling the field, playing to the strengths of the team, and being opportunistic. I'll defer to @CokeGreaterThanPepsi for numbers that he came up that we talked about last week, but not only is UW last in the conference in plays run, but significantly so. It's very clear at least to me that the coaching staff has decided that our best path to winning is to shorten the game and play to the defense.
The fact of the matter is that we didn't get any turnovers this week and no short fields. Given the limitations on this offense (numerous), that's going to be an uphill battle to get significant points on the board.
And since I know this was only a few weeks ago, but my position on Smith is well established and known. He has shown no reason to be retained next year. Pease should be on the same bus out of town. At the same time, I'm not going to bash the guy because he's the popular punching bag. He's down the list this week when it comes to reasons that UW lost.
And had Browning been able to finish out the game, I do think that we had a legitimate chance to get the score to win. Unfortunate that he wasn't able to do so.
Fuck what you think could have happened. The offense dug themselves a hole in the first half with shitty play calls, gutless decisions and browning not being all that great passing the ball.
Fuck this hypothetical "if he had been in the game in the last drive" bull shit. Who gives a shit even if it happened. (which I highly fucking doubt because I have eyes) It doesn't excuse the fucking shittiness of the first 3 quarters of play where UW found themselves completely inept against one of the worst defenses in the nation in probably the biggest home game of the season.
Run the god damn ball especially with a true fresh. and pedestrian, non-burner wideouts. Establish the run. Control the fucking clock. The line is good enough to get them 4 YPC. That's all you need to set up 3rd and short. It doesn't need to be more complex than that.
Run the god damn ball especially with a true fresh. and pedestrian, non-burner wideouts. Establish the run. Control the fucking clock. The line is good enough to get them 4 YPC. That's all you need to set up 3rd and short. It doesn't need to be more complex than that.
Not cute enough to make coaches look brilliant. Need 3 men in motion and sideways passing to move the needle.
Comments
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays.
The culture of the state of Washington is the problem. The state legislature, along with the governor, are buffoons, and these are the ones appointing the BOR, and on down the hill the shit flows. Case in point: UW's new pres. Year in, year out, rated as one of the best public universities in the world, and they hire the interim pres., who started off as an associate professor in '86. I'd argue that such a highly acclaimed university deserves better. Apparently, she is the only pres. of major university that was appointed from within. Speaks volumes.
Other than Oregon State's QB who is also a true freshman, Browning is probably the worst QB in the conference. Yeah, he's a true freshman and he shouldn't be playing, and he will get better, but right now, he sucks.
Generally speaking, I lean towards wanting to run the ball more than throw it.
I wasn't enthused with the play calling during the game, but didn't hate it either. Just thought we had a lot of lengthy fields to go and that isn't going to turn out good for our offense too often as we're going to run into a hold, sack, etc. Given Oregon's defense has had more struggles against the pass than the run, it didn't shock me that we tried to exploit them more in the passing game. With Browning completing a high percentage of his passes during the season, it's not a terrible approach.
The one reason I would advocate more plays to Gaskin is that particularly without Washington playing he's by far our most explosive player. That being said, about 100 of his 150 yards came on 2 carries ... so it's not like we were running for a consistent 4-6 yards per play.
Two days after the fact when looking at what our numbers did look like, 6 yards per play both running/passing, it's hard for me to be overly critical of what we did offensively. That's by far our best offensive game in conference this year and only the Utah St game was better (excluding Sac St).
And no, I don't think that if you change Browning's numbers to 16 of 25 for 175 and up Gaskin's numbers to 23 for 180 that that changes the outcome of the game.
There are plenty of things to get really critical of Smith on ... the one that I'd point to in this game was that we didn't take quite enough shots down the field to test the Oregon secondary (and I think that this is the biggest general criticism that I have of him right now). But I'd sign up for 6 yards per play by the offense the rest of the year right now.
Maybe we should have thrown a lot more last year considering Miles averaged more per attempt than the running game got? Enough with your pseudo intelligent, analytical bullshit. Are you watching these fucking games?
Yes, Oregon's secondary sucks. My biggest criticism in the game was that we didn't take more shots down the field.
The biggest problem with the offense from an execution standpoint is that they are not able to consistently execute 8, 10, 12 play drives. This is where the youth comes into play. Somewhere a mistake gets made whether it is a penalty, sack, trying to cut outside into a loss instead of taking it up the field and taking what is there. Where we find ourselves in drive killers is when we get behind the chains.
I do think that we may have a few more play makers than we're showing and I don't think that the offense is maximizing it's potential through scheme.
The part that I'm really struggling after the last couple days of reading this board is that everybody is surprised by the offensive performance. Yes Oregon sucks, but by our standards, we had a fairly good offensive game. We're not going to score 40+ points without a lot of help on defense or special teams. We didn't get a turnover or special teams play that gave us a short field(s) to work with. Probably our ceiling with that set of variables right now is about 27-30 points.
For those saying that I'm just being analytical here for the sake of being analytical, or for those saying that I'm being doogish, or not seeing things here, what is it that you're seeing that I'm not seeing? I just don't think that by going heavier on the run was going to necessarily find us another TD because I don't think the OL is good enough to carve out enough holes to get us consistent runs down the field. Everything will break right a few times during the game and Gaskin will get some big gainers. But when I see the offense at its most consistent this year, it's mixing in the run with the short to intermediate passing game behind the LBs.
There may be a few 3 and outs mixed in, but we are already getting those without the benefit of the big gainers..
But yes, I watch the games. I see a team trying to achieve balance. I see an offense that isn't particularly well coordinated with a play caller that at times is overmatched and doesn't think far enough ahead with a plan. I'm also one of the first people to say that Smith and the offense doesn't have a specific identity ... which is also a popular topic around here now. This is a team that could stand to try to take a few more shots to take advantage of teams trying to jump the running and short passing game ... whether they work or not is inconsequential at this point ... that there's a threat needs to be established.
I also said before the season that the defense was going to be significantly better than many thought ... that also has played out.
I believe I also said before the season that winning was going to be tied to controlling the field, playing to the strengths of the team, and being opportunistic. I'll defer to @CokeGreaterThanPepsi for numbers that he came up that we talked about last week, but not only is UW last in the conference in plays run, but significantly so. It's very clear at least to me that the coaching staff has decided that our best path to winning is to shorten the game and play to the defense.
The fact of the matter is that we didn't get any turnovers this week and no short fields. Given the limitations on this offense (numerous), that's going to be an uphill battle to get significant points on the board.
And since I know this was only a few weeks ago, but my position on Smith is well established and known. He has shown no reason to be retained next year. Pease should be on the same bus out of town. At the same time, I'm not going to bash the guy because he's the popular punching bag. He's down the list this week when it comes to reasons that UW lost.
And had Browning been able to finish out the game, I do think that we had a legitimate chance to get the score to win. Unfortunate that he wasn't able to do so.
Fuck this hypothetical "if he had been in the game in the last drive" bull shit. Who gives a shit even if it happened. (which I highly fucking doubt because I have eyes) It doesn't excuse the fucking shittiness of the first 3 quarters of play where UW found themselves completely inept against one of the worst defenses in the nation in probably the biggest home game of the season.
HTH
Granted, he would have needed to have seats in Sec. 108 Row 12 to catch it.