I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.
Yes, Saturday was poor, but our pass rush has been good to great since Kwatkowski got here.
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.
Yes, Saturday was poor, but our pass rush has been good to great since Kwatkowski got here.
Polynesian DL weren't the problem.
Coaching was the problem.
There are a lot of good poly players. My point is more like there appeared to be for a long time that a player was recruited just because he was a big polynesian dude... what that appears to be is a bias based upon race. The other word for that is racism. I'm just calling it as it really is. The bored here is supposed to be for free speech. Probably saying we need more big fucking black guys is racist sounding. But what does it look like they are doing in the SEC SEC SEC SEC?
Yes, the pass rush has improved. That was my original point above which was buried. I asked what you assholes were complaining about since it had improved!
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.
Yes, Saturday was poor, but our pass rush has been good to great since Kwatkowski got here.
Polynesian DL weren't the problem.
Coaching was the problem.
There are a lot of good poly players. My point is more like there appeared to be for a long time that a player was recruited just because he was a big polynesian dude... what that appears to be is a bias based upon race. The other word for that is racism. I'm just calling it as it really is. The bored here is supposed to be for free speech. Probably saying we need more big fucking black guys is racist sounding. But what does it look like they are doing in the SEC SEC SEC SEC?
Yes, the pass rush has improved. That was my original point above which was buried. I asked what you assholes were complaining about since it had improved!
Hi there.
We had a pass rush last year. And the year before.
Serious question: Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.
Serious question: Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.
True, but that doesn't answer the question as to why UW went with only three on Saturday for most of the first half, which yielded zero pressure on the QB, while subjecting both DT's to double teams by Utah's 5 man front. Fighting a double-team on every play is going to tire out even the toughest DLs, which it did.
UW has thrived with good pressure from a 4 man front against everyone, until Utah, who has a big, pretty good OL. Something theoretical was going on, but I don't get it. If the DBs cover well, then Twilliams can run pretty well, so where's the spy? Psalm? Let's be serious. No pass rush can make a mediocre QB look great, and that's what happened a lot saturday. And even the best DBs can't cover everyone for 7 or 8 seconds. So, WTF was going on and why weren't the typical 4 rushing on every down like we've done all season? If we do that at Cal, we fucking lose. Webb is way, way better than Twilliams, even though he's a dumbshit, too.
Serious question: Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.
Of course it is the preference. I was addressing the extreme reluctance that this coaching staff has displayed towards any form of blitzing. There is a lot of room between almost never bringing even five guys and sending 6+ every other play, like ASU does.
Serious question: Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.
Of course it is the preference. I was addressing the extreme reluctance that this coaching staff has displayed towards any form of blitzing. There is a lot of room between almost never bringing even five guys and sending 6+ every other play, like ASU does.
I was screaming for blitzes in the 4 qtr, because our pressure had not been good all game, and Utah was fucking marching down the field with Twilliams having all day in the pocket. When they finally brought pressure, Utah folded like a cheap table. Why did they wait so long? The bottom line for me is that, at some point, you have to get pressure on the QB if he's burning you with completions, chunking yardage on you, feeling safe in the pocket, and, most important, gaining confidence.
Serious question: Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.
Of course it is the preference. I was addressing the extreme reluctance that this coaching staff has displayed towards any form of blitzing. There is a lot of room between almost never bringing even five guys and sending 6+ every other play, like ASU does.
I was screaming for blitzes in the 4 qtr, because our pressure had not been good all game, and Utah was fucking marching down the field with Twilliams having all day in the pocket. When they finally brought pressure, Utah folded like a cheap table. Why did they wait so long? The bottom line for me is that, at some point, you have to get pressure on the QB if he's burning you with completions, chunking yardage on you, feeling safe in the pocket, and, most important, gaining confidence.
Yeah. I don't want them to go blitz crazy, but when you can roll out Jones, King and Gardenhire to play WRs man-to-man and can put Budda as a single high center-fielder, you would to feel pretty good about sending some pressures from time to time.
The weird thing is I have heard Petersen say that you need to blitz sometimes, even if you don't need to, just to remain somewhat unpredictable. Yet they blitz under 10% of the time...
Serious question: Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.
Of course it is the preference. I was addressing the extreme reluctance that this coaching staff has displayed towards any form of blitzing. There is a lot of room between almost never bringing even five guys and sending 6+ every other play, like ASU does.
I was screaming for blitzes in the 4 qtr, because our pressure had not been good all game, and Utah was fucking marching down the field with Twilliams having all day in the pocket. When they finally brought pressure, Utah folded like a cheap table. Why did they wait so long? The bottom line for me is that, at some point, you have to get pressure on the QB if he's burning you with completions, chunking yardage on you, feeling safe in the pocket, and, most important, gaining confidence.
Yeah. I don't want them to go blitz crazy, but when you can roll out Jones, King and Gardenhire to play WRs man-to-man and can put Budda as a single high center-fielder, you would to feel pretty good about sending some pressures from time to time.
The weird thing is I have heard Petersen say that you need to blitz sometimes, even if you don't need to, just to remain somewhat unpredictable. Yet they blitz under 10% of the time...
Bingo! Zactly! Just to keep Twilliams off balance. Plus! The blitzes they finally tried, worked like a charm, damn near causing a turnover. Yet, not even once in the first half. Who does that? Why?
Serious question: Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.
True, but that doesn't answer the question as to why UW went with only three on Saturday for most of the first half, which yielded zero pressure on the QB, while subjecting both DT's to double teams by Utah's 5 man front. Fighting a double-team on every play is going to tire out even the toughest DLs, which it did.
UW has thrived with good pressure from a 4 man front against everyone, until Utah, who has a big, pretty good OL. Something theoretical was going on, but I don't get it. If the DBs cover well, then Twilliams can run pretty well, so where's the spy? Psalm? Let's be serious. No pass rush can make a mediocre QB look great, and that's what happened a lot saturday. And even the best DBs can't cover everyone for 7 or 8 seconds. So, WTF was going on and why weren't the typical 4 rushing on every down like we've done all season? If we do that at Cal, we fucking lose. Webb is way, way better than Twilliams, even though he's a dumbshit, too.
14-31 is bad. They didn't do horrible, but Troy would have completely cracked with more pressure.
Comments
Polynesian DL weren't the problem.
Coaching was the problem.
Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
Yes, the pass rush has improved. That was my original point above which was buried. I asked what you assholes were complaining about since it had improved!
We had a pass rush last year. And the year before.
Hth.
UW has thrived with good pressure from a 4 man front against everyone, until Utah, who has a big, pretty good OL. Something theoretical was going on, but I don't get it. If the DBs cover well, then Twilliams can run pretty well, so where's the spy? Psalm? Let's be serious. No pass rush can make a mediocre QB look great, and that's what happened a lot saturday. And even the best DBs can't cover everyone for 7 or 8 seconds. So, WTF was going on and why weren't the typical 4 rushing on every down like we've done all season? If we do that at Cal, we fucking lose. Webb is way, way better than Twilliams, even though he's a dumbshit, too.
I absolutely do not get rushing only 3 DLs. Not at all. Against any Pac 12 team. Ever.
The weird thing is I have heard Petersen say that you need to blitz sometimes, even if you don't need to, just to remain somewhat unpredictable. Yet they blitz under 10% of the time...