Lavon Coleman 2 carries Myles Gaskin 6 carries against mighty Griz

NeGgaPlEaSe

Discuss

Baseman

3 to 1. One and three. Gaskin to the Coleman.

RoadDawg55

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

chuck

Pretty sure they've had enough scrimmage carries this year. Should be ready for the conference schedule which is when the ol will remember how to block.

I haven't watched a down of uw football yet this season though so I know even less than usual.

NeGgaPlEaSe

RoadDawg55 said:

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

Like USC, Alabama? I guess watching Brownsocks run and Trey Adams catch is much more entertaining

bananasnblondes

As I said last week when this same shit came up, Gaskin and Coleman don't need extra practice against Montana. It won't matter worth a fuck against pac 12 teams if they get 5 carries or 25 against Montana

TommySQC

bananasnblondes said:

As I said last week when this same shit came up, Gaskin and Coleman don't need extra practice against Montana. It won't matter worth a fuck against pac 12 teams if they get 5 carries or 25 against Montana

Actually it would matter is they got 25 and were dinged .

Rest em up for conference

haie

It was exactly like last week's game. Get people reps. See who's going to play in conference this year.

bananasnblondes

TommySQC said:

bananasnblondes said:

As I said last week when this same shit came up, Gaskin and Coleman don't need extra practice against Montana. It won't matter worth a fuck against pac 12 teams if they get 5 carries or 25 against Montana

Actually it would matter is they got 25 and were dinged .

Rest em up for conference

I was going to add that. Pete don't give a fuck about padding his players' stats

TommySQC

bananasnblondes said:

TommySQC said:

bananasnblondes said:

As I said last week when this same shit came up, Gaskin and Coleman don't need extra practice against Montana. It won't matter worth a fuck against pac 12 teams if they get 5 carries or 25 against Montana

Actually it would matter is they got 25 and were dinged .

Rest em up for conference

I was going to add that. Pete don't give a fuck about padding his players' stats

I knew what you meant

uzi

RoadDawg55 said:

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

Because, as anybody that understands sports will tell you... you are good at what you practice.

If we can't run on Montana or Rutgers, how the fuck are we going to run on Oregon, Stanford, or any other Pac-12 team?

And it isn't just about Gaskin or Coleman, it is also about our OL doing run blocking against somebody other than our scout team or our own D.

UWhuskytskeet

uzi said:

RoadDawg55 said:

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

Because, as anybody that understands sports will tell you... you are good at what you practice.

If we can't run on Montana or Rutgers, how the fuck are we going to run on Oregon, Stanford, or any other Pac-12 team?

And it isn't just about Gaskin or Coleman, it is also about our OL doing run blocking against somebody other than our scout team or our own D.

They were even shittier at running the ball in the first three games of last year. LIPO

uzi

UWhuskytskeet said:

uzi said:

RoadDawg55 said:

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

Because, as anybody that understands sports will tell you... you are good at what you practice.

If we can't run on Montana or Rutgers, how the fuck are we going to run on Oregon, Stanford, or any other Pac-12 team?

And it isn't just about Gaskin or Coleman, it is also about our OL doing run blocking against somebody other than our scout team or our own D.

They were even shittier at running the ball in the first three games of last year. LIPO

And look how that worked for us when it came time to play good defenses (USC, Bama).

bananasnblondes

uzi said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

uzi said:

RoadDawg55 said:

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

Because, as anybody that understands sports will tell you... you are good at what you practice.

If we can't run on Montana or Rutgers, how the fuck are we going to run on Oregon, Stanford, or any other Pac-12 team?

And it isn't just about Gaskin or Coleman, it is also about our OL doing run blocking against somebody other than our scout team or our own D.

They were even shittier at running the ball in the first three games of last year. LIPO

And look how that worked for us when it came time to play good defenses (USC, Bama).

So you're saying that if we had let Gaskin and Coleman run wild against Portland State, we would have run all over Bama and USC?

uzi

bananasnblondes said:

uzi said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

uzi said:

RoadDawg55 said:

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

Because, as anybody that understands sports will tell you... you are good at what you practice.

If we can't run on Montana or Rutgers, how the fuck are we going to run on Oregon, Stanford, or any other Pac-12 team?

And it isn't just about Gaskin or Coleman, it is also about our OL doing run blocking against somebody other than our scout team or our own D.

They were even shittier at running the ball in the first three games of last year. LIPO

And look how that worked for us when it came time to play good defenses (USC, Bama).

So you're saying that if we had let Gaskin and Coleman run wild against Portland State, we would have run all over Bama and USC?

I'm saying if we prioritized the run in all games, we'd be better at the run in big games.

I don't see other good teams trying to save their RBs from getting dinged up, it is a pussy excuse.

Pete himself has said we need to prioritize the run more... you think you know better than him?

Something is wrong with our run game, and it needs to be fixed, or we will be back to 3rd place in the Pac12 North.

NeGgaPlEaSe

Wow there's a lot of hidden sucking SmithFS off in this thread. Absolutely no excuse for not running when it's a glaring weakness. And for all those worried about dinging up the running backs, fuck off. Because having your QB (white) leading the team in rushing (among starters) makes more sense.

TTJ

NeGgaPlEaSe said:

Wow there's a lot of hidden sucking SmithFS off in this thread. Absolutely no excuse for not running when it's a glaring weakness. And for all those worried about dinging up the running backs, fuck off. Because having your QB (white) leading the team in rushing (among starters) makes more sense.

I agree with this so much, I'm gonna quote it a second time.

NeGgaPlEaSe said:

Wow there's a lot of hidden sucking SmithFS off in this thread. Absolutely no excuse for not running when it's a glaring weakness. And for all those worried about dinging up the running backs, fuck off. Because having your QB (white) leading the team in rushing (among starters) makes more sense.

There.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Scrimmages are serious business.

RoadDawg55

uzi said:

bananasnblondes said:

uzi said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

uzi said:

RoadDawg55 said:

It's Montana. Why give them a lot of carries?

If this was a game against a real team, I would maybe think otherwise. It's not though.

Because, as anybody that understands sports will tell you... you are good at what you practice.

If we can't run on Montana or Rutgers, how the fuck are we going to run on Oregon, Stanford, or any other Pac-12 team?

And it isn't just about Gaskin or Coleman, it is also about our OL doing run blocking against somebody other than our scout team or our own D.

They were even shittier at running the ball in the first three games of last year. LIPO

And look how that worked for us when it came time to play good defenses (USC, Bama).

So you're saying that if we had let Gaskin and Coleman run wild against Portland State, we would have run all over Bama and USC?

I'm saying if we prioritized the run in all games, we'd be better at the run in big games.

I don't see other good teams trying to save their RBs from getting dinged up, it is a pussy excuse.

Pete himself has said we need to prioritize the run more... you think you know better than him?

Something is wrong with our run game, and it needs to be fixed, or we will be back to 3rd place in the Pac12 North.

We ran the ball well in every game but one. We didn't run well against Alabama because they were dominant up front. Nobody could run on them.

We ran fairly well against USC, especially in the first half. We abandoned it way too early.

RoadDawg55

NeGgaPlEaSe said:

Wow there's a lot of hidden sucking SmithFS off in this thread. Absolutely no excuse for not running when it's a glaring weakness. And for all those worried about dinging up the running backs, fuck off. Because having your QB (white) leading the team in rushing (among starters) makes more sense.

I wanted Smith fired early in 2014. He sucks and our offense is shit.

I just don't care about scrimmages against Montana.

bananasnblondes

I'm gonna break this down Revenge of the Nerds style. College football is not your faggy dungeons and dragons RPG that you play in your mom's basement. You do not level up your player"s stats and abilities by using them repeatedly against early weak opponents.