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.

Here's what I think I think

2

Comments

  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,628 Founders Club
    AEB said:

    I'd be less concerned over the D. To me OL is our biggest shortfall from being #1.

    Agree fully. That's why my original post dedicated a huge paragraph to it. Far and away our biggest player concern is OL, followed by QB (Browning has issues and what is behind him is dreck), and then RB (unless McGrew and Ahmed save the day - it ain't Dotson), and THEN LB'ers. So yeah, pretty far down the list for me as a concern but it is the one place on D where I can see we could use some tweaking - this includes OLB being used as rush ends.
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,628 Founders Club

    Fuck off @Tequilla

    Thanks for reading! (queer winkie face)
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Swaye said:

    Fuck off @Tequilla

    Thanks for scrolling right past that TL,DR! (queer winkie face)
  • haiehaie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,416 Swaye's Wigwam
    I think we got fucking trucked and the PAC 12 is soft just like the west coast. Reminded me of the Stanley Cup final last year.
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    haie said:

    I think we got fucking trucked and the PAC 12 is soft just like the west coast. Reminded me of the Stanley Cup final last year.

    Bad analogy because the Western Conference is actually good in the Stanley Cup Final.
  • haiehaie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,416 Swaye's Wigwam

    haie said:

    I think we got fucking trucked and the PAC 12 is soft just like the west coast. Reminded me of the Stanley Cup final last year.

    Bad analogy because the Western Conference is actually good in the Stanley Cup Final.
    Not when the Sharks are in it. Hawks aren't a west coast team. Kings are the exception.
  • haiehaie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,416 Swaye's Wigwam
    lol @Tequilla thinks he knows something about the sport. Pick the Stars again this year please, it goes well with your current dooging.
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,982
    Current dooging?

    The vast majority of this board is way higher on the dooging schedule right now saying all is well, Nick Harris will be great, we're so close blah blah blah

    There are some fundamental parts of the program that MUST be VASTLY improved going forward and EVERYTHING that this program does going forward from yesterday needs to be focused on how we play at the nationally elite level ...

  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    edited January 2017
    Tequilla said:

    Current dooging?

    The vast majority of this board is way higher on the dooging schedule right now saying all is well, Nick Harris will be great, we're so close blah blah blah

    There are some fundamental parts of the program that MUST be VASTLY improved going forward and EVERYTHING that this program does going forward from yesterday needs to be focused on how we play at the nationally elite level ...

    But I was assured repeatedly by you that everything on the Husky offense was fine.
  • AEBAEB Member Posts: 2,985
    Swaye said:

    AEB said:

    I'd be less concerned over the D. To me OL is our biggest shortfall from being #1.

    Agree fully. That's why my original post dedicated a huge paragraph to it. Far and away our biggest player concern is OL, followed by QB (Browning has issues and what is behind him is dreck), and then RB (unless McGrew and Ahmed save the day - it ain't Dotson), and THEN LB'ers. So yeah, pretty far down the list for me as a concern but it is the one place on D where I can see we could use some tweaking - this includes OLB being used as rush ends.
    In the PAC you can get elite skill position talent. I think we've got an elite QB coming in. The RB position will remain solid with Ahmed and Pleasant may be good plus McGrew.

    OLB/DE will be elite in 2 years with the young talent developing. I'm solidly in @Tequilla camp re: OL... IF we want to compete with Bama. We're close to dominating the Pac12
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,982

    Tequilla said:

    Current dooging?

    The vast majority of this board is way higher on the dooging schedule right now saying all is well, Nick Harris will be great, we're so close blah blah blah

    There are some fundamental parts of the program that MUST be VASTLY improved going forward and EVERYTHING that this program does going forward from yesterday needs to be focused on how we play at the nationally elite level ...

    But I was assured repeatedly by you that everything on the Husky offense was fine.
    At the PAC level it was ...

    At the National Level we have shortcomings ...

    We had to scheme our ass off yesterday to be successful AND win the turnover battle (at least +2) and get 10+ points out of that ... we did some nice scheme things in stretches but didn't get turnovers while giving up turnovers leading to points.

    There was a path to victory yesterday ... perhaps a 20% chance ...

    Don't confuse being optimistic and glass half full for being unrealistic about our chances ... it was ALWAYS going to be difficult yesterday ... and it didn't matter who the OC was
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Tequilla said:

    Tequilla said:

    Current dooging?

    The vast majority of this board is way higher on the dooging schedule right now saying all is well, Nick Harris will be great, we're so close blah blah blah

    There are some fundamental parts of the program that MUST be VASTLY improved going forward and EVERYTHING that this program does going forward from yesterday needs to be focused on how we play at the nationally elite level ...

    But I was assured repeatedly by you that everything on the Husky offense was fine.
    At the PAC level it was ...

    At the National Level we have shortcomings ...

    We had to scheme our ass off yesterday to be successful AND win the turnover battle (at least +2) and get 10+ points out of that ... we did some nice scheme things in stretches but didn't get turnovers while giving up turnovers leading to points.

    There was a path to victory yesterday ... perhaps a 20% chance ...

    Don't confuse being optimistic and glass half full for being unrealistic about our chances ... it was ALWAYS going to be difficult yesterday ... and it didn't matter who the OC was
    This is a good post.

    What was really reinforced yesterday was how far away the Pac is from being competitive nationally.
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,982

    Tequilla said:

    Tequilla said:

    Current dooging?

    The vast majority of this board is way higher on the dooging schedule right now saying all is well, Nick Harris will be great, we're so close blah blah blah

    There are some fundamental parts of the program that MUST be VASTLY improved going forward and EVERYTHING that this program does going forward from yesterday needs to be focused on how we play at the nationally elite level ...

    But I was assured repeatedly by you that everything on the Husky offense was fine.
    At the PAC level it was ...

    At the National Level we have shortcomings ...

    We had to scheme our ass off yesterday to be successful AND win the turnover battle (at least +2) and get 10+ points out of that ... we did some nice scheme things in stretches but didn't get turnovers while giving up turnovers leading to points.

    There was a path to victory yesterday ... perhaps a 20% chance ...

    Don't confuse being optimistic and glass half full for being unrealistic about our chances ... it was ALWAYS going to be difficult yesterday ... and it didn't matter who the OC was
    This is a good post.

    What was really reinforced yesterday was how far away the Pac is from being competitive nationally.
    We're closer than not ...

    But the last few steps to get to that spot will be the hardest requiring decisions that may be very very difficult
  • AEBAEB Member Posts: 2,985
    Alabama is not "nationally". We compete with and could beat everyone else. That's how good Bama is on D.
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    AEB said:

    Alabama is not "nationally". We compete with and could beat everyone else. That's how good Bama is on D.

    Last I checked, the SEC has won a lot of national championships recently.
  • SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,628 Founders Club
    I sometimes wonder just what Browning would look like with an elite OL in front of him. If he consistently had time and a good pocket against top tier teams I wonder if he could light it up like he does against dreck. Probably a little drop off because coverage is better and thus you need more arm strength to thread it, but a top shelf OL would probably make noodle arm a Heisman winner.
  • dhdawgdhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
    DL looks awesome, so excited for that unit next year.

    victor and bierria will be beasts next year, and if some young guys like eifller or Williams can make an impact that could be one of the best front 7's in college football next year.

    with DB's their will be some dropoff, but I think we'll be fine especially if budda stays.

    I onder if ross stays. I don't think after the end to this year teams are gonna give him a 1st or 2nd round grade. he might leave regardless.

    If we can get stronger on the OL and browning can work out some of his problems, this team could be back at this spot next year.

Sign In or Register to comment.