How can Mr. Run The Damn Ball have a team come out so flat two weeks in a row?
Comments
-
I guess what I didn't make clear is IMO they're not flat. They're flawed. And frankly I think that is more damning than believing they are coming out flat.DerekJohnson said:
If Pete was still the coach, we'd be sitting here right now blaming the lack of fight on Pete's constipated personality. But Lake's forte is supposed to be swagger and fire.NoWarningJustDawg said:Coaches have to have a ton of belief in themselves and their system. IMO sometimes it is easier for us to see that changes need to be made than for the coaches to see/admit it..
If you insist on a bend don't break wait for mistakes defense against a power running and efficient passing team that rarely makes mistakes, you have to take them out of their game. An explosive UW offense (sorry Baze) would put pressure on the Tree to pass and score/risk more. NOT running into the teeth of the defense in stubborn fashion when all five OL are new or in new positions.
Add in the high amount of losses on the DL to draft/injury, and suddenly the problems at LB become glaring. Basically this is a very talented, flawed team with a few major holes that will keep them from being elite. Unfortunately stubborn coaches appears to be one of them. Eh, but I'm probably wrong; what do I know.
TL;dr - UW vs Tree is The Definition Of Insanity, basically...
So, no, I do not think "just play harder guys!" is the answer, and I rarely thought that about Petersen either. But we can agree to disagree, no biggie.
-
I'm not saying that's the only issue. But they are flat, flat, flat.NoWarningJustDawg said:
I guess what I didn't make clear is IMO they're not flat. They're flawed. And frankly I think that is more damning than believing they are coming out flat.DerekJohnson said:
If Pete was still the coach, we'd be sitting here right now blaming the lack of fight on Pete's constipated personality. But Lake's forte is supposed to be swagger and fire.NoWarningJustDawg said:Coaches have to have a ton of belief in themselves and their system. IMO sometimes it is easier for us to see that changes need to be made than for the coaches to see/admit it..
If you insist on a bend don't break wait for mistakes defense against a power running and efficient passing team that rarely makes mistakes, you have to take them out of their game. An explosive UW offense (sorry Baze) would put pressure on the Tree to pass and score/risk more. NOT running into the teeth of the defense in stubborn fashion when all five OL are new or in new positions.
Add in the high amount of losses on the DL to draft/injury, and suddenly the problems at LB become glaring. Basically this is a very talented, flawed team with a few major holes that will keep them from being elite. Unfortunately stubborn coaches appears to be one of them. Eh, but I'm probably wrong; what do I know.
TL;dr - UW vs Tree is The Definition Of Insanity, basically...
So, no, I do not think "just play harder guys!" is the answer, and I rarely thought that about Petersen either. But we can agree to disagree, no biggie. -
Stanford runs downhill, and plays downhill...arm tacklers need not apply...
-
Would a 4/3 defensive alignment be better suited as long as Bobby greggy still around?
-
Run a 5-1-5 with Ulo as the only LB.animate said:Would a 4/3 defensive alignment be better suited as long as Bobby greggy still around?
Or a 3-0-8 if we have 3 NTs -
not stopping the run, not enough qb pressure, too many special teams gaffes, secondary scheme issues or we're "young" there again and it's another pathetic doog excuse
main issues IMO
The playcalling isn't great, but it's not bad either
and Morris isn't the issue at the moment -
Who does Jimmy hand out the first participation balls to?
-
Molden and Taylor should be down in the box on every play right next to Sirmon and Ulo helping them against a team like Stanford... and it should almost look like a 4-4 with Molden and Taylor always in the box.whatshouldicareabout said:
Run a 5-1-5 with Ulo as the only LB.animate said:Would a 4/3 defensive alignment be better suited as long as Bobby greggy still around?
Or a 3-0-8 if we have 3 NTs
Instead we ran a small DL and put only 6 guys in the box against 7+ Stanford run on nearly every fucking play... -
the problem with our defensive "scheme" is that it relies on high-end defensive lineman to do the job of 1.5 players and high end edge players that are disciplined to seal edges and contain and also put pressure.
If we have the likes of Vita Vea and Gaines and outside like a 3rd year Smalls and ZTF/Tryon ... and BBK and Mason Foster/Donald Butler and our death row secondary then we would be awesome.
Our defensive front can contain and our secondary can overmatch.
But until the kids develop and everything comes together - then games against the likes of Stanford will tend to be like this.
Stanford is strong at the beginning, and fresh. They can ram it down our throats. Confidence takes a long time to build and it takes a long time for Stanford to lose confidence and UW to build ... and if it's a big deficit to overcome it's tough for college players and a questionable coaching staff.
There. That's my quick take. -
34 for 117
23 for 254
Pass the damn
