Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Husky Jacks open thread [2019]
Comments
-
There are tons of 4 star WR’s. It’s definitely over saturated in the rankings.FremontTroll said:
Yeah I doubt there is any data to back that up. Seems like people have that take for whatever position their team inexplicably sucks at.RoadDawg55 said:I don’t have anything to back it up, but 4 star WR’s seem to be busts more than any other position. A lot of these guys put up big numbers in pass happy offenses in high school but actually suck. See Spiker as example #1.
Also how do we know our 4* receivers are busts if they never get to play? -
Chin was a 4 star on ESPN.RoadDawg55 said:
There are tons of 4 star WR’s. It’s definitely over saturated in the rankings.FremontTroll said:
Yeah I doubt there is any data to back that up. Seems like people have that take for whatever position their team inexplicably sucks at.RoadDawg55 said:I don’t have anything to back it up, but 4 star WR’s seem to be busts more than any other position. A lot of these guys put up big numbers in pass happy offenses in high school but actually suck. See Spiker as example #1.
Also how do we know our 4* receivers are busts if they never get to play? -
This is a very strong point. Every time I have checked it has easily been the most represented position in the 4 blue chip rankings.RoadDawg55 said:
There are tons of 4 star WR’s. It’s definitely over saturated in the rankings.FremontTroll said:
Yeah I doubt there is any data to back that up. Seems like people have that take for whatever position their team inexplicably sucks at.RoadDawg55 said:I don’t have anything to back it up, but 4 star WR’s seem to be busts more than any other position. A lot of these guys put up big numbers in pass happy offenses in high school but actually suck. See Spiker as example #1.
Also how do we know our 4* receivers are busts if they never get to play? -
I don't think this is true. RB is far easier to make an early impact in college and the NFL.Houhusky said:
WR is supposed to be the easiest position to recruit and the easiest to transition from HS early and yet all the WRs suck and never get better.DoogCourics said:
On Eason having a bad game:Domicillo said:
On how many drops:
The fact that Pete is outright saying the best WR were on the field has me freaking out. It's literally the only position on the team that none of the young guys ever rotate in and get a chance. Even on OL where you want it to be older guys, Kirkland showed he was the best and took over. Defensive side of the ball is only about rotating guys and getting young talent in. That's why people are frustrated today about the defense, the young guys played like young guys. But at least they played.
It used to be the rule that receivers took three years in the NFL before they really emerged. That isn't so consistent anymore but it's still not unusual for the transition to take awhile at either level.
I'm not saying it's the hardest position but I've never heard/seen anyone suggest it's the easiest. -
I wondered on Saturday as I saw Joe Ngata return a punt and nothing else at Clemson if he would be starting herednc said:
I don't think this is true. RB is far easier to make an early impact in college and the NFL.Houhusky said:
WR is supposed to be the easiest position to recruit and the easiest to transition from HS early and yet all the WRs suck and never get better.DoogCourics said:
On Eason having a bad game:Domicillo said:
On how many drops:
The fact that Pete is outright saying the best WR were on the field has me freaking out. It's literally the only position on the team that none of the young guys ever rotate in and get a chance. Even on OL where you want it to be older guys, Kirkland showed he was the best and took over. Defensive side of the ball is only about rotating guys and getting young talent in. That's why people are frustrated today about the defense, the young guys played like young guys. But at least they played.
It used to be the rule that receivers took three years in the NFL before they really emerged. That isn't so consistent anymore but it's still not unusual for the transition to take awhile at either level.
I'm not saying it's the hardest position but I've never heard/seen anyone suggest it's the easiest.
Or would he be sitting with the rest of the kids because he's not ready
-
Apropos of nothing, the WR position and play is my least favorite in football aside from kickers, who really don't count anyway.
-
Clemson at least has a reason for him not playing. Those WR’s ahead of him are good, future early round picks. At least the two main guys.RaceBannon said:
I wondered on Saturday as I saw Joe Ngata return a punt and nothing else at Clemson if he would be starting herednc said:
I don't think this is true. RB is far easier to make an early impact in college and the NFL.Houhusky said:
WR is supposed to be the easiest position to recruit and the easiest to transition from HS early and yet all the WRs suck and never get better.DoogCourics said:
On Eason having a bad game:Domicillo said:
On how many drops:
The fact that Pete is outright saying the best WR were on the field has me freaking out. It's literally the only position on the team that none of the young guys ever rotate in and get a chance. Even on OL where you want it to be older guys, Kirkland showed he was the best and took over. Defensive side of the ball is only about rotating guys and getting young talent in. That's why people are frustrated today about the defense, the young guys played like young guys. But at least they played.
It used to be the rule that receivers took three years in the NFL before they really emerged. That isn't so consistent anymore but it's still not unusual for the transition to take awhile at either level.
I'm not saying it's the hardest position but I've never heard/seen anyone suggest it's the easiest.
Or would he be sitting with the rest of the kids because he's not ready
I still doubt Ngata would do much more than rotate in for a few plays if he came to UW. Later in the season he would get more time. -
-
-
Has Petersen ever actually manned up and said that anything, play calling, time management, depth chart, was actually HIS fault and not a team fuck up or added some qualifier such as this?GrundleStiltzkin said:
I know nobody here likes Pete Carroll, but he admits when he is wrong, and will take the blame for others even when it wasn't his fault.
Why the fuck can't Petersen admit that he fucked up the clock management and say that he will be better going forward? Fucking hell of an example to set for the kids I'm sure he would expect to own up to their mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybx26gqq224
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6GWRSwNAH0