Home› Hardcore Husky Board

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register
Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

O-Line Thoughts

RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,123
edited June 2013 in Hardcore Husky Board
When our OL inevitably sucks, these will be the excuses.

Do you know how much better we would be if our two best lineman (Porter and Tanigawa) didn't have career ending injuries? No team could overcome that!

Kohler played too soon and got damaged. It wasn't Sark's fault he had to play. We had nobody else. Same goes for Brostek!

The guys on our OL are only juniors! They still have another year. Lots of guys break out their senior year! Lineman take time to develop.

Things will be much better with (insert new OL coach) next year and JC transfers!


· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • TailgaterTailgater Member Posts: 1,389
    RoadDawg55 said:

    When our OL inevitably sucks, these will be the excuses.

    Do you know how much better we would be if our two best lineman (Porter and Tanigawa) didn't have career ending injuries? No team could overcome that!

    Kohler played too soon and got damaged. It wasn't Sark's fault he had to play. We had nobody else. Same goes for Brostek!

    The guys on our OL are only juniors! They still have another year. Lots of guys break out their senior year! Lineman take time to develop.

    Things will be much better with (insert new OL coach) next year and JC transfers!


    I'd like the last "Things will be much better..." part of your post if I knew or understood anything about how the Husky OL got so mediocre so fast compared to it's past traditional quality, but I don't and therefore I can't. You see, somewhere during the last 9 or 10 years, the Husky OL went into the OL dumpster where no other Husky OL unit had ever gone before...... at least not during my 50-years of fanatical watching. Although most everyone believes they know why that happened, none in my opinion can know what to do to reverse the OL curse in Husky Football. I think it's going to continue to go south, but am always hopeful of being shocked when it doesn't.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Steve_BowmanSteve_Bowman Member Posts: 442
    Although most everyone believes they know why that happened, none in my opinion can know what to do to reverse the OL curse in Husky Football. - Tailgater

    No one knows for sure, but here's the thing. We are not able to recruit linemen because of the coaching staff. Cream Puff places little value on linemen, he's a marginal head coach and we've got a weak O line coach. Who wants to play for this system?

    The opposite has a good chance of reversing the trend......

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ACSlaterDawgACSlaterDawg Member Posts: 200
    The root cause is poor recruiting. The 2010 class was great but we've gotten basically nothing aside from that. Maybe 1-2 starters from the 2011-2013 classes. Injuries are why you have to recruit 4-5 OL every year.

    Sark was right about the 2012 OL.....the 2011 OL was half-decent and on track to be better in 2012. Problem was the injuries happened. But, thats not bad luck. You cant blame bad luck for the lack of any backups resulting from poor recruiting.

    The 2013 OL will be better but the big problem is actually the DL.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TailgaterTailgater Member Posts: 1,389
    Steve_Bowman said:

    Although most everyone believes they know why that happened, none in my opinion can know what to do to reverse the OL curse in Husky Football. - Tailgater

    No one knows for sure, but here's the thing. We are not able to recruit linemen because of the coaching staff. Cream Puff places little value on linemen, he's a marginal head coach and we've got a weak O line coach. Who wants to play for this system?

    The opposite has a good chance of reversing the trend......

    I think you're right about the causes for weak OL performance for far too many years now:..... mediocre recruiting and an OL development/preparation program that weirdly seems to have just about everything missing. Knowing that or thinking I know what's missing gives me no comfort that at this point in our decline on the line, the opposite direction can still be found to reverse what needs to be reversed. Sorry,.... but I just don't see another Gilbytype waddling into Montlake to save the day. Thus, I will go to the stadium on Aug.31 hoping for improvement and being pleasantly surprised if there is any.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,123
    edited June 2013
    ACSlaterDawg said:

    The root cause is poor recruiting. The 2010 class was great but we've gotten basically nothing aside from that. Maybe 1-2 starters from the 2011-2013 classes. Injuries are why you have to recruit 4-5 OL every year.

    Sark was right about the 2012 OL.....the 2011 OL was half-decent and on track to be better in 2012. Problem was the injuries happened. But, thats not bad luck. You cant blame bad luck for the lack of any backups resulting from poor recruiting.

    The 2013 OL will be better but the big problem is actually the DL.

    2009, 2011, and 2012 were disasters. Every guy we got in 2012 was a plan B guy. The only decent year we had was 2010 which has been decimated by injuries. It's not only been a quantity issue, but a quality issue as well. The recruiting rankings and our on field performance prove that.

    Regarding the DL, if Danny Shelton tore his knee in the first game, we would go 4-8. That's how bad our recruiting has been at DT, and yet doogs still think we will be good this year. It is unbelievable.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ACSlaterDawgACSlaterDawg Member Posts: 200
    RoadDawg55 said:

    ACSlaterDawg said:

    The root cause is poor recruiting. The 2010 class was great but we've gotten basically nothing aside from that. Maybe 1-2 starters from the 2011-2013 classes. Injuries are why you have to recruit 4-5 OL every year.

    Sark was right about the 2012 OL.....the 2011 OL was half-decent and on track to be better in 2012. Problem was the injuries happened. But, thats not bad luck. You cant blame bad luck for the lack of any backups resulting from poor recruiting.

    The 2013 OL will be better but the big problem is actually the DL.

    2009, 2011, and 2012 were disasters. Every guy we got in 2012 was a plan B guy. The only decent year we had was 2010 which has been decimated by injuries. It's not only been a quantity issue, but a quality issue as well. The recruiting rankings and our on field performance prove that.

    Regarding the DL, if Danny Shelton tore his knee in the first game, we would go 4-8. That's how bad our recruiting has been at DT, and yet doogs still think we will be good this year. It is unbelievable.

    The 2013 DL will be a similar story to the 2012 OL.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • puppylove_sugarsteelpuppylove_sugarsteel Member Posts: 9,133
    RoadDawg55 said:

    ACSlaterDawg said:

    The root cause is poor recruiting. The 2010 class was great but we've gotten basically nothing aside from that. Maybe 1-2 starters from the 2011-2013 classes. Injuries are why you have to recruit 4-5 OL every year.

    Sark was right about the 2012 OL.....the 2011 OL was half-decent and on track to be better in 2012. Problem was the injuries happened. But, thats not bad luck. You cant blame bad luck for the lack of any backups resulting from poor recruiting.

    The 2013 OL will be better but the big problem is actually the DL.

    2009, 2011, and 2012 were disasters. Every guy we got in 2012 was a plan B guy. The only decent year we had was 2010 which has been decimated by injuries. It's not only been a quantity issue, but a quality issue as well. The recruiting rankings and our on field performance prove that.

    Regarding the DL, if Danny Shelton tore his knee in the first game, we would go 4-8. That's how bad our recruiting has been at DT, and yet doogs still think we will be good this year. It is unbelievable.

    we will be good this year. problem is were going to suck the following, and the following. Sark needs 7-10 years though as he took over an 0-12. team, WHICH WAS FUCKING BETTER THAN HIS 2012 VERSION.

    Its time for you complacent cocksuckers to get your head out your collective asses and realize Sark's best team was '09. His teams havent improved one bit in 4 years (OK, they improved one game in the win column, yippity fuckin doo daa ). I expect he'll have a pretty good team next year as Wilcox will have fast and stingy unit. Then back to 7-6 for '14 and '15. While Oregon goes to 2 more rose bowls and UCLA a fiesta.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 106,249 Founders Club
    There was once a podcast that compared loser programs like UW to the little boy with his finger in the dyke. Fix one thing and something else sucks. Lather rinse repeat.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TailgaterTailgater Member Posts: 1,389
    RaceBannon said:

    There was once a podcast that compared loser programs like UW to the little boy with his finger in the dyke. Fix one thing and something else sucks. Lather rinse repeat.

    What's a podcast? I used to know, but now it sounds like something fouling a floating line in flyfishing.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.