Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
I'm not worried about Haener beating out Eason
Comments
-
Can somebody please explain to me what's so overly complicated about Petersen's offense? It's one of things that's repeated so often that I'm wondering if it's just accepted dogma to the point where nobody's bothered to put real thought into it. I've only heard one credible source claim that the offense is complicated, and that was, I think, McGary after one of the inexplicable losses. And even that might have merely been in reference to that game's plan and not the overall picture.
To me, it looks like they run the same route concepts that every team runs. They run RPO. They run inside/outside zone and power. Mostly 12 personnel, sometimes 10. This is not groundbreaking. People complain about shifts and motion, but that really only fractionally complicates things while conveying a LOT of useful information to the offense.
I think the offense is actually quite brilliant in one way, which is favoring versatile athletes and changing plays at the LOS to take advantage of mismatched personnel groupings. The tight ends/H-backs are a big part of this. Guys like Chico in 2016 also (is he a back or a receiver?).
What I see as far as failings from the offense are far more fundamental. Plays are blown up usually when a guy just goes completely unblocked while one of the OL is blocking nobody. Or when receivers get zero separation, which is always. Almost every single team in football can execute a simple screen pass to the running back, but it's an instant cringe nearly every single time the Huskies have tried it under Petersen unless the running back makes a miraculous play. A screen pass is a screen pass, so it's not "The Offense" that makes, for some reason, the Huskies incapable of executing one. There's something else to it.
I see a formation/play that nobody would be surprised at all to see Oregon or Stanford or Arizona run, but it gets blown up because one of the OL is standing there looking for work, blocking nobody, while a DT and LB chase Browning around like a headless chicken. Is it offensive complexity that causes that?
I see a 3rd and long, Huskies put four out into the pattern on a basic concept that every team in the country has in their playbook. Blocking is fine, throw is fine, but defense is two-deep(ish), man-under, and no receiver has six inches of separation.
I saw a quarterback relying way too much on pre-snap read, leaving that read if it were taken away, and then not throwing the ball until AFTER he would see somebody break open, which is way too late 81% of the tim. Was this poor quarterback play or offensive philosophy?
So what is it? What is it specifically that makes Chris Petersen's Offense so much more complicated than everybody else's? A few examples would be great. Why is a crossing route concept from Washington rocket surgery but the exact same crossing route concept just basic air raid when the Cougs run it?
I have eyes, so I agree that the offense is fundamentally broken--it wasn't just Jake Browning, who was physically limited but not nearly as bad of a player as he's been given credit for here--but "it's too complicated" just seems too shallow. I think it's more likely a collection of very specific things that are breaking it, and they don't seem to be able to find and/or fix them. -
We're questioning Eason's IQ and accuracy in fall camp because he hasn't been named the starter? He hasn't been named the starter because Pete wants Eason to work for it. This is Pete's game for new QBs. I'm not worried at all that Eason won't be named the starter. We've learned very little since the open practices besides some random fan tweets. Far too little to make judgements on Eason's abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if he has some growing pains early but let's not dismiss him and crave for Huard quite yet.dnc said:This thing might stretch past the EWU game but ultimately Eason is going to start.
I am worried that Eason isn't nearly as good as most of us want to believe he is.
Obviously I think he's better than Brownsocks and the walking turnover, but if he was the stud that his recruiting hype suggests he would have put Haener away in the spring or at worst the first week of summer.
The reality is Eason is most likely exactly what we saw at Georgia - a big, strong armed QB with serious accuracy issues. And probably not the highest football IQ.
He'll make opponents defend the whole field and probably have a handful of NTD, BB throws. But he's not the QB savior we've been waiting for.
ISHIT. -
@pisssnow let’s be honest. We had enough talent and the schedule to make the playoffs in 2017 and 2018. To put up less that 14 against against cal and stdu. I don’t think we should completely rule it outYellowSnow said:
2016 made # @FirePete into a lunatic, fringe movement. The 2nd Pac title and massive level up in 'crooting confirmed this. In spite of the FS offense, the risk of firing Pete is far too great. The odds of upgrading from him - he's a top 3- 4 corch in the country - at this stage of the game are minuscule. I'm happy to reassess after 2021.FirePete said:
So how much is pete’s buyout after next year. Also I hear urban is tanned rested and readyYellowSnow said:
It's fucking maddening @RoadDawg55 . Pete gets A- to A+ grades on being a CEO, player development, Defense, leveling up in recruiting, etc. But the offense is D - and not championship caliber. We're gonna find out in a hurry how much of this is Pete's system and how much was Browning. Tick, tick, tick...RoadDawg55 said:
If we are bad on offense this year, Bush has to go. I would put more blame on Pete, but changes will have to be made. No more, “We are so close, assignment errors, etc.” It has to be blown up if it’s bad.YellowSnow said:
My hope for the future in spite of Pete's FS potato head offense, is that, at least, most of the guys in the QB room moving forward- i.e., Eason, Sirmon, Morris, etc - don't have quite the same physical limitations as Browning.RoadDawg55 said:He’s not going to be great and our offense is FS. I wish we didn’t have to wait for Huard to get great QB play, but that’s what seems likely. If Huard isn’t great, we are fucked and it will get ugly.
The offense has been good one year out of 5 for Pete here. Oregon State sucks, but Jonathon Smith has a good offense there and I just saw he had multiple skill guys on the preseason All PAC 12 teams. Pete has made good adjustments to every problem but his offense. I’m getting tired of it. -
It isn't, it's a false narrative just like the OKG/racial bullshit.1to392831weretaken said:Can somebody please explain to me what's so overly complicated about Petersen's offense? It's one of things that's repeated so often that I'm wondering if it's just accepted dogma to the point where nobody's bothered to put real thought into it. I've only heard one credible source claim that the offense is complicated, and that was, I think, McGary after one of the inexplicable losses. And even that might have merely been in reference to that game's plan and not the overall picture.
-
If you dumbfucks ever fired Pete I hope Oregon would be there to swoop his racist ass up in a heartbeat
-
In that event he'd be all yours? if you? wanted himntxduck said:If you dumbfucks ever fired Pete I hope Oregon would be there to swoop his racist ass up in a heartbeat
-
Statue of tits Cohen at autzen porkinglot?ntxduck said:If you dumbfucks ever fired Pete I hope Oregon would be there to swoop his racist ass up in a heartbeat
-
The idea of Pete's complicated offense comes from Pete himself and from the inability of players with less than 48 starts to be able to excute it halfway decently
15 hours a week for practice
I formation sweep right, I formation sweep left, throw the Skinny post
Profit -
It's not just the deep ball, screen passes have time to actually work instead of getting blown up. Even Haener should be able to stretch the field horizontally better than old Cobra.
-
I'm always honest with you WAC. Why would I have reason to lie?FirePete said:
@pisssnow let’s be honest. We had enough talent and the schedule to make the playoffs in 2017 and 2018. To put up less that 14 against against cal and stdu. I don’t think we should completely rule it outYellowSnow said:
2016 made # @FirePete into a lunatic, fringe movement. The 2nd Pac title and massive level up in 'crooting confirmed this. In spite of the FS offense, the risk of firing Pete is far too great. The odds of upgrading from him - he's a top 3- 4 corch in the country - at this stage of the game are minuscule. I'm happy to reassess after 2021.FirePete said:
So how much is pete’s buyout after next year. Also I hear urban is tanned rested and readyYellowSnow said:
It's fucking maddening @RoadDawg55 . Pete gets A- to A+ grades on being a CEO, player development, Defense, leveling up in recruiting, etc. But the offense is D - and not championship caliber. We're gonna find out in a hurry how much of this is Pete's system and how much was Browning. Tick, tick, tick...RoadDawg55 said:
If we are bad on offense this year, Bush has to go. I would put more blame on Pete, but changes will have to be made. No more, “We are so close, assignment errors, etc.” It has to be blown up if it’s bad.YellowSnow said:
My hope for the future in spite of Pete's FS potato head offense, is that, at least, most of the guys in the QB room moving forward- i.e., Eason, Sirmon, Morris, etc - don't have quite the same physical limitations as Browning.RoadDawg55 said:He’s not going to be great and our offense is FS. I wish we didn’t have to wait for Huard to get great QB play, but that’s what seems likely. If Huard isn’t great, we are fucked and it will get ugly.
The offense has been good one year out of 5 for Pete here. Oregon State sucks, but Jonathon Smith has a good offense there and I just saw he had multiple skill guys on the preseason All PAC 12 teams. Pete has made good adjustments to every problem but his offense. I’m getting tired of it.
We did have enough talent in theory. That still doesn't mean a team is going to the CFP every year. Pete's offense to date is garbage. And we're still stacking Pac titles like cord wood and being lights out on the recruiting trail. We're stuck with Pete through year 8. Strap on a pair of balls and suffer through it like a man. -
If its not complicated then its stupid
ITS HARD to fail in the red zone so miserably yet we do
Lets take our fastest guy and hand him the ball 7 yards deep running FUCKING SIDEWAYS
Lets throw the 40 yard out for a 1 yard gain or a pick fucking six. At least we don't throw it to the fullback. Go Gilby!
Don't get me started -
Pete's not going to get fired no matter how the team performs this year. Or probably even next year.YellowSnow said:
I'm always honest with you WAC. Why would I have reason to lie?FirePete said:
@pisssnow let’s be honest. We had enough talent and the schedule to make the playoffs in 2017 and 2018. To put up less that 14 against against cal and stdu. I don’t think we should completely rule it outYellowSnow said:
2016 made # @FirePete into a lunatic, fringe movement. The 2nd Pac title and massive level up in 'crooting confirmed this. In spite of the FS offense, the risk of firing Pete is far too great. The odds of upgrading from him - he's a top 3- 4 corch in the country - at this stage of the game are minuscule. I'm happy to reassess after 2021.FirePete said:
So how much is pete’s buyout after next year. Also I hear urban is tanned rested and readyYellowSnow said:
It's fucking maddening @RoadDawg55 . Pete gets A- to A+ grades on being a CEO, player development, Defense, leveling up in recruiting, etc. But the offense is D - and not championship caliber. We're gonna find out in a hurry how much of this is Pete's system and how much was Browning. Tick, tick, tick...RoadDawg55 said:
If we are bad on offense this year, Bush has to go. I would put more blame on Pete, but changes will have to be made. No more, “We are so close, assignment errors, etc.” It has to be blown up if it’s bad.YellowSnow said:
My hope for the future in spite of Pete's FS potato head offense, is that, at least, most of the guys in the QB room moving forward- i.e., Eason, Sirmon, Morris, etc - don't have quite the same physical limitations as Browning.RoadDawg55 said:He’s not going to be great and our offense is FS. I wish we didn’t have to wait for Huard to get great QB play, but that’s what seems likely. If Huard isn’t great, we are fucked and it will get ugly.
The offense has been good one year out of 5 for Pete here. Oregon State sucks, but Jonathon Smith has a good offense there and I just saw he had multiple skill guys on the preseason All PAC 12 teams. Pete has made good adjustments to every problem but his offense. I’m getting tired of it.
We did have enough talent in theory. That still doesn't mean a team is going to the CFP every year. Pete's offense to date is garbage. And we're still stacking Pac titles like cord wood and being lights out on the recruiting trail. We're stuck with Pete through year 8. Strap on a pair of balls and suffer through it like a man. -
Pete isn't getting fired period
And that's fine
Its jut nice to rip him to shreds -
The weed be letting me knowRaceBannon said:Pete isn't getting fired period
And that's fine
Its jut nice to rip him to shreds
-
By the way, James was offensively challenged until 1989 when he brought in Gilby for the O line and Pinkel to OC. Then Pinkel got the Toledo job and Gilby and his one back, although James made him use two, Palouse Puke attack. Shout out to @Tailgater
Then we lit it up while having the best defense in school history
Lets not take 14 years to figure it out again -
Let’s say if urban was in play. Would you consider firing Pete and getting urban?
-
I think Petersen lasts longer at this pointFirePete said:Let’s say if urban was in play. Would you consider firing Pete and getting urban?
I think Urban is the better coach -
P.S. @Swaye I think Billy has my watch.RaceBannon said:Pete isn't getting fired period
And that's fine
Its jut nice to rip him to shreds
-
-
We? had our shot at Urbs.
-
Komo?GrundleStiltzkin said:We? had our shot at Urbs.
-
-
Pete could win 8 games a year and never get fired. Luckily, he’s better than that. I agree with Yella that we would be insanely FS to fire him. We aren’t finding a better coach. It’s never going to happen. I just want to maximize what we have and win, same as everybody else here.
-
Urban would be unhireable by UW at this point.
Dabo unhireable for different reasons.
Saban not worth even this sentence.
The lead pipe lock upgrades are off the table. -
I've convinced myself that Jake Browning was actually one of the worst starting QBs in PAC history.
The alternatives are inconceivable. -
Have a little faith baby.RoadDawg55 said:Pete could win 8 games a year and never get fired. Luckily, he’s better than that. I agree with Yella that we would be insanely FS to fire him. We aren’t finding a better coach. It’s never going to happen. I just want to maximize what we have and win, same as everybody else here.
-
How in hell did this otherwise great thread devolve into a Pete firing thread? Shame.gif
Credit to mushbrain firepete for the successful hijack. I guess I underestimated you lol -
Why don't fans dig how beautiful it is out here?YellowSnow said:
Have a little faith baby.RoadDawg55 said:Pete could win 8 games a year and never get fired. Luckily, he’s better than that. I agree with Yella that we would be insanely FS to fire him. We aren’t finding a better coach. It’s never going to happen. I just want to maximize what we have and win, same as everybody else here.
-
Urban would win quick but get headaches behind his eye and sanctions/team arrests quicker.RaceBannon said:
I think Petersen lasts longer at this pointFirePete said:Let’s say if urban was in play. Would you consider firing Pete and getting urban?
I think Urban is the better coach -
This thread is a thing of beauty
