Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
The UW Doog Pod Season 2 Episode 1 We're Back!
Comments
-
Much improved sound quality since I last listened @UW_Doog_Bot. It's been a while for me so I don't know when it actually improved. Thanks all the same.
-
Would be an enhanced listening experience and shave about 10 minutes of time off the pod with just 50% less F-bombs IMO.
Appreciate the effort! God Bless! -
This recording was actually a fucking mess. I spent a ton of time in post cleaning it up but I can still here a ton of stuff I could have worked on and cleaned up. Especially if we bothered doing stuff like multi track recording...89ute said:Much improved sound quality since I last listened @UW_Doog_Bot. It's been a while for me so I don't know when it actually improved. Thanks all the same.
So I actually appreciate the sound quality feedback. -
DawgWagonDan said:
Would be an enhanced listening experience and shave about 10 minutes of time off the pod with just 50% less F-bombs IMO.
Appreciate the effort! GET YOUR MIND RIGHT! God Bless! -
Maybe @RuffaloSoldier can guest star at some point.
-
What?
-
Why is there a clicker that says 'F*** Off' that is not very classy
-
@UW_Doog_Bot
You weren't wrong. You said by the time you got this edited Elijah Jackson would have been committed and announced.
Plus Covington and Esteen. -
Wow that was tough listen. Fudgepack don’t try so hard to be funny. I personally enjoy the alienrape chamber it add some character to the pod.
-
Grundle sounds like Gladstone. Well, at least that’s what I think from the combined minute they let him talk.CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
Haven’t listened yet but surprised no one said GRUNDLE STOp. Also surprised he didn’t communicate through GIFs.dirtysouwfdawg said:Is was cool you guys let grundle speak so much!
Side note, it took about 6 weeks for my new phone autocorrect to pick up GRUNDLE STOp -
We are just lucky that grundle podz here at all.dirtysouwfdawg said:
Grundle sounds like Gladstone. Well, at least that’s what I think from the combined minute they let him talk.CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
Haven’t listened yet but surprised no one said GRUNDLE STOp. Also surprised he didn’t communicate through GIFs.dirtysouwfdawg said:Is was cool you guys let grundle speak so much!
Side note, it took about 6 weeks for my new phone autocorrect to pick up GRUNDLE STOp -
-
Alright fudgie. So dinner last night was great. The kids cheered and really appreciated it!backthepack said:Ungrateful fuck. I gave you and your little shit heads a s/o and you can’t even thank me? Diaff
They did what me to tell you thank you and said something about dropping too many f bombs but then in the same sentence my 5 yr old said “this faggot needs to die in a fucking fire.” No clue where this was learned from.
Pretty bummed I had to explain alien rape chamber to 4 kids between the ages of 5 and 10 but I’m sure they’ll get over it.
#themoreyouknow -
Yvbe.dirtysouwfdawg said:
Alright fudgie. So dinner last night was great. The kids cheered and really appreciated it!backthepack said:Ungrateful fuck. I gave you and your little shit heads a s/o and you can’t even thank me? Diaff
They did what me to tell you thank you and said something about dropping too many f bombs but then in the same sentence my 5 yr old said “this faggot needs to die in a fucking fire.” No clue where this was learned from.
Pretty bummed I had to explain alien rape chamber to 4 kids between the ages of 5 and 10 but I’m sure they’ll get over it.
#themoreyouknow -
Your 5 yr old sounds like a douchecanoedirtysouwfdawg said:
Alright fudgie. So dinner last night was great. The kids cheered and really appreciated it!backthepack said:Ungrateful fuck. I gave you and your little shit heads a s/o and you can’t even thank me? Diaff
They did what me to tell you thank you and said something about dropping too many f bombs but then in the same sentence my 5 yr old said “this faggot needs to die in a fucking fire.” No clue where this was learned from.
Pretty bummed I had to explain alien rape chamber to 4 kids between the ages of 5 and 10 but I’m sure they’ll get over it.
#themoreyouknow
-
I have two of them actually (5 yr olds, not douchecanoes). Sometimes I wonder if they are sharing a brain. They are cool as fuck though. I just wish they’d get a job.backthepack said:
Your 5 yr old sounds like a douchecanoedirtysouwfdawg said:
Alright fudgie. So dinner last night was great. The kids cheered and really appreciated it!backthepack said:Ungrateful fuck. I gave you and your little shit heads a s/o and you can’t even thank me? Diaff
They did what me to tell you thank you and said something about dropping too many f bombs but then in the same sentence my 5 yr old said “this faggot needs to die in a fucking fire.” No clue where this was learned from.
Pretty bummed I had to explain alien rape chamber to 4 kids between the ages of 5 and 10 but I’m sure they’ll get over it.
#themoreyouknow -
Myth: The Huskies couldn't run (to maximum effect) in 2018 because defenses didn't respect Browning's arm and put 8 in the box.
Reality: Nobody was putting 8 in the box. And on the rare occasion when it would happen, it was because the Huskies' personnel would dictate it. It's like saying Stanford couldn't run the ball because defenses were putting 8 in the box. Yeah, no shit they were, Stanford had seven tight ends on the field!
Having heard this eighty times this offseason, hearing it again at the beginning of the pod bugged me enough that I had to start watching the Cal game just to prove how wrong this is. Let's break down the first Husky drive play by play to see:
1st and 10
Huskies come out in the rare 21 personnel, with both receivers also in tight. Cal puts 7 in the box, presses with the corners, and brings the safeties up because the formation is begging for this. Even still, there is a man advantage at the point of attack here, and if everybody does their job, this is a 7 yard gain minimum. Instead, the entire three fifths of the line completely fucks up. Call is lead right with zone blocking up front. Kirkland chips the NT and climbs to the WIL. The 5-tech across from McGary gets the better of him and drives him a yard into the backfield, but this could have been overcome had Harris not been immediately abused by the NT. Either Kirkland needed a better chip or Harris just needed to be better here, but the NT in the backfield destroyed the play. Sample erases the OLB head-up on him, Otton gets more than enough of the MIK linebacker, and Kirkland does some nice work downfield on the WIL. Harris' missed block, McGary giving ground, and (eventually would have made a difference) Hilbers flopping and releasing the right OLB doomed the play. Otherwise, it was there to be made.
2nd and 11
11 personnel, spread, with an extra tight end in the slot. Cal plays base 3-4, cover-1. If you count the boundary side OLB, this is actually pretty well stacked up against the run. I'm not sure they would do anything different, though, against a strong-armed QB out of this formation. Both corners and the SS are playing soft coverage, and the FS is at least 15 yards deep. Cal is begging UW to throw underneath with this. UW obliges, with a quick flare to Ahmed to the twins side. The whole line cut blocks, Otton completely erases the safety, Jones gets abused by the corner. The play is designed for Ahmed to beat unblocked 235 pound Weaver to the sideline. Ahmed should beat Weaver to the sideline... Ahmed has to wait for the pass to get there, which allows Weaver to get there at pretty much the same time, and he and the unblocked corner make the TFL while Ty Jones watches and feels bad. This play needed better blocking on the outside and either a faster release/throw or for the left tackle to leave the end unblocked and climb down to the linebacker in order to succeed. It didn't. Loss of three.
3rd and 14
10 personnel, 3x1. Cal puts 6 in the box, all on the LOS to disguise the blitz, cover-1 with soft cushion across the board. As they should. At the snap, they drop a LB and bring 5. UW channels their inner Cuog and runs a shallow crossing route, with the single receiver left running a shallow drag and the inside slot to the trips side running the angle cross that Hugh Millen recently beat into the ground in his Ohio State review on YouTube. Perfect route by Fuller, beats the safety, perfect throw by Browning, first down. What's interesting about this defensive call is not necessarily that Cal disrespects the deep ball but rather how they disrespected the receiving group. To play single-high man-under on 3rd and 14 is pretty much a big FU to UW's passing threat, but not necessarily a call that makes it any tougher on the running game.
1st and 10
Here's your example of 8 in the box. Why? 12 personnel, with an extra running back in the slot, so 8 on 8. Putting a deep safety over Otton/Fuller is actually paying more respect to the deep threat than I probably would in this situation. Watching this play unfold is almost funny it's so bad. Ahmed motions from strong to weak side, reverses at the snap, and takes a fly sweep back to the strong side. This motion is stupid, as not only does it fool nobody, but it gives the play away the second he's past the quarterback without the ball being snapped. You can see both linebackers start leaning hard toward the eventual play side before the ball is being snapped: everybody on the defense knows where this is going. Nobody at all buys the inside zone action away from the play, and the line predictably fail at trying to block four with three. Great effort by Ahmed to turn a two yard loss into a three yard gain. I see no way that having a strong-armed quarterback changes how the defense plays this. Interestingly, faking the fly sweep and running the zone read to the left, it was blocked for a huge gain. McGrew would have the free safety to beat for a house call.
2nd and 7
11 personnel, unbalanced left to the field side. #2 receiver ineligible. Cal puts 7 in the box, linebackers pretty deep, single-high safety. The RPO zone read to the right is well blocked, with McGary getting the better of the OLB. McGrew would have met the boundary side corner about four yards downfield, with nothing beyond that. 2v2 to the trips side was the better bet, though. Decent blocking, decent RAC by Baccellia, first down.
1st and 10
21 personnel again. 8 in the box to counter. Of this whole exercise, this is the best example of Cal stacking against the run, but it's probably what they would do against this formation even if Skinny were QB. Dropping a second safety here would be suicide against a running play. The compromise is soft coverage by the corners and the FS playing deep. Proof is in the pudding: Lead left to the weak side, zone blocking up front, and there's all kinds of room for Ahmed. Tackle is made by a huge effort play from the backside end and some, admittedly, not very physical running from Ahmed. Still, 5 yard gain.
2nd and 5
Same unbalanced trips formation as 2nd and 7, only to the other side. Cal defends it exactly as they did the last time. This time, they run power away from the trips side, with McGary pulling. It's 4v4, and this play should have picked up the first down in spite of pretty meh blocking to the play side. Hilbers and Watty both give ground, forcing the pulling McGary up the hole. Ahmed isn't patient, doesn't read his blocks, and tries taking it wide, right into a mass of humanity and gets pulled down by a single fistful of shoulder jersey a la Covey. Would have at least gained yards--a lot of yards if McGary gets a good piece of the LB--had he followed McGary up the hole. Instead lost three.
3rd and 8
11 personnel, 2x2. Cal has 6 in the box, which is light against the run here, but the right call on 3rd and 8. It's a nickel, cover-2, press man on the outside. Aside from the boundary side safety paying zero respect to the receiver on that side running deep, Cal is being awfully respectful of Browning here. The throw is a back-shoulder to Ty Jones on the field side, the throw is perfect, Jones can't hold on after review.
4th and 8
11 personnel, tight end left, two receivers right. Fuller motions to make trips right. It should be pointed out that, in Chris Petersen's overly complicated shift-and-motion offense, this is the first real motion (if you don't count Ahmed's fly sweep bullshit above) of the series, and there has yet to be a shift. Cal has 7 in the box, all on the line like 3rd and 14 above, so definitely heavy against the run. At the snap, though, the trips side OLB immediately turns and runs with the inside receiver, though, so Cal is disguising cover-2 man-under here. The do bring an extra rusher, the Huskies pick it up nicely. Nobody open, Browning scrambles for the first down. -
I'm tired of doing this, so I'm quitting, but I think the point stands. My fuzzy recollection is that Cal played the Huskies the most aggressively of any defense they faced (even Ohio State played a hell of a lot of nickel and cover-2), and yet they weren't doing anything that was crazily stacked against the run. Eight in the box was only ever in response to two tight ends or a tight end and a fullback. The conventional wisdom that defenses stacked the box to stop the run due to a lack of faith in Browning's arm is ignorant. For starters, you don't need to stack the box to stop the run, as the Huskies' base nickel proves. But mostly, Browning's arm--and a healthy lack of respect for the receiving corps--hurt the intermediate passing game more than anything, as safeties were cheating up and teams like Cal were playing a lot more man coverage on obvious passing downs than they otherwise might. Plays in the running game were there to be made all year, and sometimes they were made! Other times they were blown up usually due to missed blocks, bad reads by the backs, or FS play calls. Browning's arm and a lack of physicality from the receivers (and, in my opinion, poor scheming to get receivers open) definitely hurt the passing game, but it was a team effort--all the way to the booth and sideline--when the running game failed. I don't expect that last part to change too much next year: it'll improve if the blocking/execution improves.
-
Sidenote: I had successfully drank the memory--and therefore pain--of that Cal game away, and fuck me for looking at it again. I had totally forgotten that the Huskies scored a TD on their opening drive, which makes the offensive performance that followed even that more unbelievably shitty.
-
Tl,dr the offense sucks
-
So they didn't put 8 in the box but the safeties cheated up and defenses could stay in man at cb.
Different nit, same problem. -
Hey, a lot of people keep a flask in their desk at work. I keep Hardcore Husky.RaceBannon said:Tl,dr the offense sucks
No, different problem, as people think changing the quarterback will magically open up running lanes this coming season.UW_Doog_Bot said:So they didn't put 8 in the box but the safeties cheated up and defenses could stay in man at cb.
Different nit, same problem. -
Alright, I went back and read it. Good chit. I will say that I mentioned this on the pood that I believed that it wasn't just deep throws but horizontal throws as well that would help the run game. All those screen passes we hated when Smith was OC all of a sudden aren't so bad when you have a QB that can get it out quickly...and when you have WR's that aren't charmin soft blockers.
ex.
"Ahmed should beat Weaver to the sideline... Ahmed has to wait for the pass to get there, which allows Weaver to get there at pretty much the same time, and he and the unblocked corner make the TFL while Ty Jones watches and feels bad." -
We are definitely on the same page now. All I'm trying to say is that defenses weren't stacking the box, so QB change will have little if any effect on the running game, but better blocking and scheming upfront would. Higher velocity/quicker release (both throwing motion and recognition and green light) will help the short and intermediate passing game for the exact reasons you point out above.UW_Doog_Bot said:Alright, I went back and read it. Good chit. I will say that I mentioned this on the pood that I believed that it wasn't just deep throws but horizontal throws as well that would help the run game. All those screen passes we hated when Smith was OC all of a sudden aren't so bad when you have a QB that can get it out quickly...and when you have WR's that aren't charmin soft blockers.
ex.
"Ahmed should beat Weaver to the sideline... Ahmed has to wait for the pass to get there, which allows Weaver to get there at pretty much the same time, and he and the unblocked corner make the TFL while Ty Jones watches and feels bad."
Everybody recognized that a lid was being put on the offense, I just disagree on what the improvement will look like when that lid is taken off.
-
Get a fucking yeti you cheap ass hoes
-
Everyone else is still going to sound like shit.Pitchfork51 said:Get a fucking yeti you cheap ass hoes
