Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Husky Jacks open thread [2020]
Comments
-
dnc said:
I’m truly gutted and feel sick to my stomach reading this.insinceredawg said:sonics1993 said:
He was never going to win the job. Going into the offseason, I couldn't find one person within the husky program who thought he was going to win the job. He's just not a good QB no matter how much husky twitter tries to hype him up.bananasnblondes said:Per insider dawgman poster, starting qb has been announced and Sirmon probably shouldn't be alone tonight
No bullying you son of a bitch!
-
Remind me his predictions the rest of the time. He's biased toward Cal and Stanford so it's not much different than reading fucking Jhop's predictions1to392831weretaken said:
Wilner wasn't so stupid last year. Was friggin' Nostradamus.haie said:
Jon Wilner is so stupid he actually said, "Yeah UW without their secondary doesn't really have many play makers."CallMeBigErn said:
lol dude. Do you know what defense we run? Do you know how we recruit secondary to our defense versus every other group?
'without their elite unit that singlehandedly wins them conference championships their defense isn't really that elite' No shit?
Doomed.jif -
He has been pretty spot on for us for years if i recall. 2017 he predicted we would lose to Stanford and blow it which we did in the emphasis truck racer bowl. Year after that he said we would win the north and we did. He had Oregon in the north last year.
But still. -
i know you have a brand to uphold as the fob hemorrhoid of these forums but you shouldnt belittle mental health. hopefully he gets the help he needs.FireCohen said:
careful he might threaten to hurt himself againBaldwinIV said:
holy fuck that's the stupidest thing i've ever readinsinceredawg said:sonics1993 said:
He was never going to win the job. Going into the offseason, I couldn't find one person within the husky program who thought he was going to win the job. He's just not a good QB no matter how much husky twitter tries to hype him up.bananasnblondes said:Per insider dawgman poster, starting qb has been announced and Sirmon probably shouldn't be alone tonight
-
k well we'll see if Cal wins the north. He fluffs them and stanford like no other. I think picking Cal to beat UW and Oregon and/or win the North is an absolute shit bay area take. But that's just me.AtomicDawg said:He has been pretty spot on for us for years if i recall. 2017 he predicted we would lose to Stanford and blow it which we did in the emphasis truck racer bowl. Year after that he said we would win the north and we did. He had Oregon in the north last year.
But still. -
I think Wilner's been doing this long enough to understand a few truisms like "a team without a proven quarterback typically struggles" and "losing most of your offensive line is a bad thing." These things aren't true every time, but you'll catch more than you drop if you just go with the generalities. Last year, he said Washington would struggle with new quarterback and new offensive line. He said the bay area schools would both beat Washington, and he said Oregon would beat Washington and win the conference. That doesn't sound like Bay area homerism, it sounds like fucking insight, because all of that happened. Including traditional Bay area power Oregon winning the conference.haie said:
k well we'll see if Cal wins the north. He fluffs them and stanford like no other. I think picking Cal to beat UW and Oregon and/or win the North is an absolute shit bay area take. But that's just me.AtomicDawg said:He has been pretty spot on for us for years if i recall. 2017 he predicted we would lose to Stanford and blow it which we did in the emphasis truck racer bowl. Year after that he said we would win the north and we did. He had Oregon in the north last year.
But still. -
Whoop de fucking dooo.1to392831weretaken said:
I think Wilner's been doing this long enough to understand a few truisms like "a team without a proven quarterback typically struggles" and "losing most of your offensive line is a bad thing." These things aren't true every time, but you'll catch more than you drop if you just go with the generalities. Last year, he said Washington would struggle with new quarterback and new offensive line. He said the bay area schools would both beat Washington, and he said Oregon would beat Washington and win the conference. That doesn't sound like Bay area homerism, it sounds like fucking insight, because all of that happened. Including traditional Bay area power Oregon winning the conference.haie said:
k well we'll see if Cal wins the north. He fluffs them and stanford like no other. I think picking Cal to beat UW and Oregon and/or win the North is an absolute shit bay area take. But that's just me.AtomicDawg said:He has been pretty spot on for us for years if i recall. 2017 he predicted we would lose to Stanford and blow it which we did in the emphasis truck racer bowl. Year after that he said we would win the north and we did. He had Oregon in the north last year.
But still.
One year.
We have metrics losers screaming at me still for me calling Oregon to destroy Utah in the CCG. It's one year.
He's a bay area homer. UW lost to Cal and Stanford because they shit their pants while fielding superior talent.
Fuck Pete for proving that dumb shit right. -
BaldwinIV said:
i know you have a brand to uphold as the fob hemorrhoid of these forums but you shouldnt belittle mental health. hopefully he gets the help he needs.FireCohen said:
careful he might threaten to hurt himself againBaldwinIV said:
holy fuck that's the stupidest thing i've ever readinsinceredawg said:sonics1993 said:
He was never going to win the job. Going into the offseason, I couldn't find one person within the husky program who thought he was going to win the job. He's just not a good QB no matter how much husky twitter tries to hype him up.bananasnblondes said:Per insider dawgman poster, starting qb has been announced and Sirmon probably shouldn't be alone tonight
-
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.haie said:
Whoop de fucking dooo.1to392831weretaken said:
I think Wilner's been doing this long enough to understand a few truisms like "a team without a proven quarterback typically struggles" and "losing most of your offensive line is a bad thing." These things aren't true every time, but you'll catch more than you drop if you just go with the generalities. Last year, he said Washington would struggle with new quarterback and new offensive line. He said the bay area schools would both beat Washington, and he said Oregon would beat Washington and win the conference. That doesn't sound like Bay area homerism, it sounds like fucking insight, because all of that happened. Including traditional Bay area power Oregon winning the conference.haie said:
k well we'll see if Cal wins the north. He fluffs them and stanford like no other. I think picking Cal to beat UW and Oregon and/or win the North is an absolute shit bay area take. But that's just me.AtomicDawg said:He has been pretty spot on for us for years if i recall. 2017 he predicted we would lose to Stanford and blow it which we did in the emphasis truck racer bowl. Year after that he said we would win the north and we did. He had Oregon in the north last year.
But still.
One year.
We have metrics losers screaming at me still for me calling Oregon to destroy Utah in the CCG. It's one year.
He's a bay area homer. UW lost to Cal and Stanford because they shit their pants while fielding superior talent.
Fuck Pete for proving that dumb shit right. -
This actually doesn't hold any water. Can you remind me who the DC was last year? JL could have started Ulo last year if he wanted to (or he could have told his buddy to do it). Both Bynum and Puka began to get PT as the year wore on (before Puka was injured). That's not uncommon.DoogCourics said:DoogWhisperer said:
If you don’t think that CP, one of the best coaches in college football, didn’t do this, I don’t know what to tell you. All coaches do this.DoogCourics said:
Jimmy mentioned in an interview yesterday that he is an equal opportunity employer. And what he means by that is that he needs someone to step up and take the job. And just because he is named the starter, it doesn’t mean he’s going to stay that way. He’s had starters on the defense that get pulled after game 3 (Kyler Gordon for Trent McDuffie last year, Cam Williams for Brandon McKinney).GrundleStiltzkin said:
“Our coaches grade every practice and every scrimmage. Every game that we’ve had internally. We really lean off those. I tell the guys all the time, the film is going to tell us. Who knows the plays? Who can regurgitate the play in the huddle? Who can execute it? Who can see the coverage? Who can make a play when a blitzer is in your face? Who can get us into a good play? Who can lead the team? And all those add up day after day after day, and by the end of this week hopefully we are going to know who that is going to be. But it’s never final either. At any position it’s never final. This is a constant battle, it’s a constant competition. And everyone knows that on this team, that you can never sit back and relax because I’m the starter. No no no no, now is the time for you to perform.”
I know there is a lot of hand wringing about multiple QBs playing and sharing reps. But honestly for me, I like that Jimmy is bringing his philosophy from the defense over to the full team. You don’t start because you’re a veteran (Opera Singer). You don’t get to relax and be lazy because you’re the incumbent (Browning). You’re going to earn the job, and once you do, you’re going to perform or you’re going to lose it.
And if none of these QBs can do it, then you pick the best of the shits and you run the fucking ball and play amazing defense and The Chosen One takes over next year. ISHIT.
And that is with me being one of the biggest CP apologists in the site. I would say yes to this for the first half of his tenure, thus Browning and Pettis playing early, etc.
But last year for example: Nacua, Bynum, Ulofoshio. Guys who weren’t getting any run and then as soon as they do they are clearly the best player when compared to their veteran starters playing over them.
The only spot that wasn’t doing that was the DBs. Lake threw the freshman out there all the time.
And multiple times this offseason Lake has made comments about how the offense must be more simple and easier like the defense has been. Also that there is no reason young guys shouldn’t be able to grasp the playbook and play immediately, like the defense has done. And last but not least, that the best players will play no matter their experience or age.
Maybe it’s just confirmation bias because I’m looking for it (wanting a change from watching Baccelia and Manu), but to me these were veiled shots at the way Petersen ran his offense and personnel.
Let's look at the top recruits in Puka's class (and let's be honest, Puka is not in their class).
1. Nolan Smith: Never started but started to play more and more throughout the year.
2. Kayon Thibodeaux: Only started when they lost a senior starter. Really came on throughout the year and became a stud.
3. Derek Stingley: Best CB in the nation from Day 1
4. Jadon Haselwood: Never started. Played more as the year wore on
5. Antonio Alfano: Never started. Bust
6. Trey Sanders: Missed the year with injury. Still not starting.
7. Evan Neal: Started all games. Stud
8. Zacch Pickens: Didn't start but did play more throughout the year.
9. Bru McCoy: Didn't play
10. Darnell Wright: Started but mostly at a position that's not going to be his long-term future.
Look, I'm not saying that our WRs last year were great, but unless they are absolute studs (Stingley, they're likely not going to start Day 1). People here wanted to play SPiker and Ausborn and those dudes haven't done shit and probably suck.
