Per insider dawgman poster, starting qb has been announced and Sirmon probably shouldn't be alone tonight
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.
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.
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.
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.
Whoop de fucking dooo.
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.
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.
Yeah well Cal would give their left nut for our players and success. So wilner can go fuck himself because Stanford is fucking dead and Cal is mediocre and wilcock is gone to a school offering more support the second his agent calls.
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.
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.
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.
Whoop de fucking dooo.
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.
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.
Yeah well Cal would give their left nut for our players and success. So wilner can go fuck himself because Stanford is fucking dead and Cal is mediocre and wilcock is gone to a school offering more support the second his agent calls.
None of this has anything to do with how accurate he has been the past 3 years.
That being said he is due to miss one of these times. Maybe this is the year.
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).
“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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Nobody wants to play freshmen just because. They should have to earn it. I doubt many would argue with that. It was ridiculous that Bynum didn’t see the field and get a real chance until half way thru the year. Puka could have and should have played a role earlier.
Regardless of our opinions on whether Puka and Bynum playing earlier, the offense was over complicated and bad under Pete. And it was frustrating to watch Baccallia and Fuller against Cal. Fuller dropped like 4 balls and Baccallia not getting his foot in was arguably the worst play of the year.
The frustrating part for me was that Baccallia and Fuller didn’t have any consequences for their poor play.
There have been many freshman WR’s that have started or played well. We saw what Puka did before he got hurt. It has nothing to do with your list, he was our best big play threat from day one.
Dunno if this is already posted somewhere else... Some rando on reddit claims to have @Sources saying Thomson won the starting job and Morris as backup.
Dunno if this is already posted somewhere else... Some rando on reddit claims to have @Sources saying Thomson won the starting job and Morris as backup.
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.
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.
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.
Whoop de fucking dooo.
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.
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.
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.
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.
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.
Whoop de fucking dooo.
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.
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.
Most good teams do this
They also sometimes beat teams with as much or more talent instead of shitting the bed every single time in that situation. And those programs sure as hell don’t end up in the vegas bowl.
Dunno if this is already posted somewhere else... Some rando on reddit claims to have @Sources saying Thomson won the starting job and Morris as backup.
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.
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.
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.
Whoop de fucking dooo.
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.
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.
Most good teams do this
They also sometimes beat teams with as much or more talent instead of shitting the bed every single time in that situation. And those programs sure as hell don’t end up in the vegas bowl.
The only time they play teams with more talent is in NY6 games where they play teams that are much more talented.
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.
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.
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.
Whoop de fucking dooo.
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.
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.
Most good teams do this
They also sometimes beat teams with as much or more talent instead of shitting the bed every single time in that situation. And those programs sure as hell don’t end up in the vegas bowl.
The only time they play teams with more talent is in NY6 games where they play teams that are much more talented.
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.
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.
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.
Whoop de fucking dooo.
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.
It’s almost like uw has a track record of shitting the bed vs teams with inferior talent every year since 2016. Almost.
Most good teams do this
They also sometimes beat teams with as much or more talent instead of shitting the bed every single time in that situation. And those programs sure as hell don’t end up in the vegas bowl.
The only time they play teams with more talent is in NY6 games where they play teams that are much more talented.
This isn't unique to UW. Fucking doogs
USC and UCLA usually has more talent than UW and ducks sometimes, but still
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).
“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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Nobody wants to play freshmen just because. They should have to earn it. I doubt many would argue with that. It was ridiculous that Bynum didn’t see the field and get a real chance until half way thru the year. Puka could have and should have played a role earlier.
Regardless of our opinions on whether Puka and Bynum playing earlier, the offense was over complicated and bad under Pete. And it was frustrating to watch Baccallia and Fuller against Cal. Fuller dropped like 4 balls and Baccallia not getting his foot in was arguably the worst play of the year.
The frustrating part for me was that Baccallia and Fuller didn’t have any consequences for their poor play.
There have been many freshman WR’s that have started or played well. We saw what Puka did before he got hurt. It has nothing to do with your list, he was our best big play threat from day one.
Puka was brought on like most good freshman were. He was our most targetted receiver by midway to the year for Pete's sake ( ).
Why would this change with Jimmy? He did the same thing with Ulo.
First thing I noticed. Hugh Breed Love Millen would be going bananas with that "rounded" cut. Jesus. I realize Ty isn't Jerry Jeudy but my god that's a soft route (and softer coverage by KT).
And Morris' ball was late and soft, as well.
I thought I was nervous for this Election. This offense, mannn...
Comments
That being said he is due to miss one of these times. Maybe this is the year.
Regardless of our opinions on whether Puka and Bynum playing earlier, the offense was over complicated and bad under Pete. And it was frustrating to watch Baccallia and Fuller against Cal. Fuller dropped like 4 balls and Baccallia not getting his foot in was arguably the worst play of the year.
The frustrating part for me was that Baccallia and Fuller didn’t have any consequences for their poor play.
There have been many freshman WR’s that have started or played well. We saw what Puka did before he got hurt. It has nothing to do with your list, he was our best big play threat from day one.
Dunno if this is already posted somewhere else... Some rando on reddit claims to have @Sources saying Thomson won the starting job and Morris as backup.
EWIWBI
This isn't unique to UW. Fucking doogs
Why would this change with Jimmy? He did the same thing with Ulo.
And Morris' ball was late and soft, as well.
I thought I was nervous for this Election. This offense, mannn...