Petersen's Presser
Comments
-
DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.RaceBannon said:
Do you have a point?FremontTroll said:
Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?RaceBannon said:Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs
That's a great defense.
We don't have one. We have a scheme
Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team
College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.
Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.
2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.
It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense. -
What’s a DNC?!!FremontTroll said:
DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.RaceBannon said:
Do you have a point?FremontTroll said:
Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?RaceBannon said:Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs
That's a great defense.
We don't have one. We have a scheme
Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team
College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.
Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.
2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.
It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense. -
Race a tequila fluffer?? I call bullshit.. haha. You may have a read a sentence or two of his novella's. You made tequila's year though! Your validation will have him beaming through Christmas. His co-workers will notice his strut in the office with his chin held high!RaceBannon said: -
This type of reasoning and facts is not welcomed at HH. It's too logical!!!FremontTroll said:
DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.RaceBannon said:
Do you have a point?FremontTroll said:
Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?RaceBannon said:Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs
That's a great defense.
We don't have one. We have a scheme
Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team
College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.
Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.
2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.
It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense. -
Is yards per game the proper “stat for losers” to compare these defenses? How do total yards, scoring, and 3rd down conversions compare?FremontTroll said:
DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.RaceBannon said:
Do you have a point?FremontTroll said:
Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?RaceBannon said:Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs
That's a great defense.
We don't have one. We have a scheme
Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team
College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.
Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.
2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.
It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.
The 2018 defense seems to bend more and is on the field more than the two prior years squads, but this may be because the offense isn’t. With the offense scoring as many Husky TDs for themselves as for the opponent last game, it may be cerebral to keep the defense on the field.
I agree the defense is not the problem, but Pete’s neutering seems to have affected the defense too.
-
Stats remain for losers. Hasn't changed
-
Pete agrees with you.RaceBannon said:Stats remain for losers. Hasn't changed
-
It’s a venereal disease that can’t be cured with a VD shot.salemcoog said:
What’s a DNC?!!FremontTroll said:
DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.RaceBannon said:
Do you have a point?FremontTroll said:
Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?RaceBannon said:Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs
That's a great defense.
We don't have one. We have a scheme
Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team
College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.
Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.
2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.
It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense. -
I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games. -
If the defense were taking risks resulting in more negative plays but also more big plays allowed you'd probably be complaining that with THIS offense we can't afford to give up big plays and we need to minimize downside.whuggy said:I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.
The bottom line is 10 points scored is not enough. -
whuggy said:
I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.
Yikes!! It’s sad that a lowly sodbuster has to spell this out. But Myles Gaskin is, has and will be the MVP of this Squad. Without him on the field, you’re fucked. Your D gave up 6 pts. You held the other “hot squad” in the Conference to 7 pts. They’ve had one bad game at Oregon. Probably the last one they will have all year. -
While it seems like we have been 'bend but don't break', the lack of turnovers is just awful luck, we should be forcing way morewhuggy said:I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.
shoutout @AIRWOLF
-
Yes, yards per play is the most predictive simple statistic. Total yard or points are not great because games are not of equal length and neither are fields.Homebrew_Dawg said:
Is yards per game the proper “stat for losers” to compare these defenses? How do total yards, scoring, and 3rd down conversions compare?FremontTroll said:
DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.RaceBannon said:
Do you have a point?FremontTroll said:
Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?RaceBannon said:Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs
That's a great defense.
We don't have one. We have a scheme
Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team
College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.
Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.
2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.
It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.
The 2018 defense seems to bend more and is on the field more than the two prior years squads, but this may be because the offense isn’t. With the offense scoring as many Husky TDs for themselves as for the opponent last game, it may be cerebral to keep the defense on the field.
I agree the defense is not the problem, but Pete’s neutering seems to have affected the defense too.
But 2018 we are allowing 16.8 points per game. 2017 also 16.8. 2016 18.8. -
Anybody calling out the defense as the problem is an idiot. FULL STOP
Could it be better? Sure. Everything could always be better. It would be great to create more turnovers when there is the opportunity, to create more pressure, and to get home rushing the QB when there is pressure. But this is a very good defense, even while rotating multiple walk-ons in the front seven.
The #1 problem is the offense. Specifically its inability to convert scoring chances into points. Followed by a relative lack of big plays.
The #2 problem is special teams.
The defense falls in behind those. -
While Bill Connelly terms it turnover "luck" and there is an element of randomness, I am persuaded that it isn't ALL random. Playmakers thrive on confidence and the defense doesn't have enough of either.Neighbor2972 said:
While it seems like we have been 'bend but don't break', the lack of turnovers is just awful luck, we should be forcing way morewhuggy said:I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.
shoutout @AIRWOLF
-
Pete is not the GUY.
The guy replaces his QB when his QB wilts, time and again, under pressure. The guy gives his backup more reps in meaningless non-conference games so the backup can handle a close game late in the second half. The guy doesn’t let his petulant QB hold the program hostage and develops a contingency plan in case his starting QB isn’t getting it done.
The guy replaces his LB coach who has proven he can’t recruit championship level players or handle special teams with a coach who can.
The guy doesn’t keep telling everyone, including his team how “hard” it is to win. The guy sleeps in his office, figuring how to make it hard for other teams to win, then executes.
The guy doesn’t fuck the fan base that buy the tickets and make the donations to pay his salary, highest in the PAC-12, by allowing the above to continue.
Chris Petersen is NOT the GUY. -
The problem is that there isn’t another QB on the roster capable of taking over from Jake ... that’s a different issue
I’m pretty sure Pete would move on from Jake if he had an option -
This is so dumbBaseman said:Pete is not the GUY.
The guy replaces his QB when his QB wilts, time and again, under pressure. The guy gives his backup more reps in meaningless non-conference games so the backup can handle a close game late in the second half. The guy doesn’t let his petulant QB hold the program hostage and develops a contingency plan in case his starting QB isn’t getting it done.
The guy replaces his LB coach who has proven he can’t recruit championship level players or handle special teams with a coach who can.
The guy doesn’t keep telling everyone, including his team how “hard” it is to win. The guy sleeps in his office, figuring how to make it hard for other teams to win, then executes.
The guy doesn’t fuck the fan base that buy the tickets and make the donations to pay his salary, highest in the PAC-12, by allowing the above to continue.
Chris Petersen is NOT the GUY. -
From pre season overwhelming favorite to 6 and 3 playing out the string with no fire or care
Great job by everyone. Look at our stats!!!!!! -
I hear Browning has thrown for a lot of career yards
-
No one is saying anything close to this.RaceBannon said:From pre season overwhelming favorite to 6 and 3 playing out the string with no fire or care
Great job by everyone. Look at our stats!!!!!!
NYBE -
It's what I am hearingHillsboroDuck said:
No one is saying anything close to this.RaceBannon said:From pre season overwhelming favorite to 6 and 3 playing out the string with no fire or care
Great job by everyone. Look at our stats!!!!!!
NYBE
But if we just get rid of Smith errr Hamden we'll be fine -
I agree the fix is a lot more complicated than replacing Hamden.RaceBannon said:
It's what I am hearingHillsboroDuck said:
No one is saying anything close to this.RaceBannon said:From pre season overwhelming favorite to 6 and 3 playing out the string with no fire or care
Great job by everyone. Look at our stats!!!!!!
NYBE
But if we just get rid of Smith errr Hamden we'll be fine
I don't agree the fix involves the defensive side more than some minor tweaking.
The offense is bad and the special teams are terrible. That's where the blame lies. The only reason we have the six wins is the defense. -
This team has too much Trump in it. "I'm doing my job, you do yours!" "I got mine, fuck everyone else." It needs more Obama. The strong helping the weak.
-
Please confine your aggressive stupidity and lame ass trolling to politics.RaceBannon said:From pre season overwhelming favorite to 6 and 3 playing out the string with no fire or care
Great job by everyone. Look at our stats!!!!!! -
Don't forget TD's too.BearsWiin said:I hear Browning has thrown for a lot of career yards
-
If Pete needs help with pep talks here should start here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1N5mQZ6WWc -
Go fuck yourselfAIRWOLF said:
Please confine your aggressive stupidity and lame ass trolling to politics.RaceBannon said:From pre season overwhelming favorite to 6 and 3 playing out the string with no fire or care
Great job by everyone. Look at our stats!!!!!! -
The Pete and Jake relationship is a disaster. Jake thinks he is the shit and Petersen feeds his ego with his retarded coach speak. Throw in whatever the fuck is happening with Hamdan and it is just a complete disaster. Shit that should not be happening in year 5. Gaskin has masked a lot of the bullshit all year and it became very telling since he has been hurt.
Going into this year anyone with a half brain knew this team was overrated by the fluff and puff the national media was putting out about them. They should still be a top 15 team with the talent (despite the injuries) and they have maybe showed a glimpse of that in 1 or 2 games this year. You should NOT be losing to this fucking Cal team in year 5... absolutely embarrassing.
Somehow this team could still win the Pac 12 and go to a Rose Bowl, although the likelihood we beat both Stanford and WSU at this point is not good with how dog shit we have looked over the last couple of weeks. We would get slaughtered in the Rose Bowl right now too.
This isn't a fire Pete post, but he needs to get this shit figured out FAST.
-
Please confine your aggressive stupidity and lame ass trolling to politics.CuntWaffle said:The Pete and Jake relationship is a disaster. Jake thinks he is the shit and Petersen feeds his ego with his retarded coach speak. Throw in whatever the fuck is happening with Hamdan and it is just a complete disaster. Shit that should not be happening in year 5. Gaskin has masked a lot of the bullshit all year and it became very telling since he has been hurt.
Going into this year anyone with a half brain knew this team was overrated by the fluff and puff the national media was putting out about them. They should still be a top 15 team with the talent (despite the injuries) and they have maybe showed a glimpse of that in 1 or 2 games this year. You should NOT be losing to this fucking Cal team in year 5... absolutely embarrassing.
Somehow this team could still win the Pac 12 and go to a Rose Bowl, although the likelihood we beat both Stanford and WSU at this point is not good with how dog shit we have looked over the last couple of weeks. We would get slaughtered in the Rose Bowl right now too.
This isn't a fire Pete post, but he needs to get this shit figured out FAST.
