Howdy, Stranger!

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

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

What is considered "Success" for DeBoner?

1235»

Comments

  • AtomicDawgAtomicDawg Member Posts: 7,091 Standard Supporter
    edited December 2021
    Win the North year 1
    Tequilla said:

    Year 1 is all about instilling the culture change, developing the roster, and getting people bought in or bought out

    8-4 is a really good bar … anything less and we should be really concerned

    There’s reasons to be overly optimistic but there will be steps backwards before taking steps forward

    The offense should turn the corner next year IMO … the talent is there

    The defense is going to be a concern until proven otherwise … could be looking at a 1-3 year rebuild there to be honest

    Agree for the most part but….

    Wazzu had a decent defense with far less talent. It doesn’t take 3 years to build a defense. That’s crazy.

    If uw has good quarterback play and an avg defense there’s enough on this roster to win the north. That’s more about how shitty the conference is more than anything else. This may require finding a starter via the portal.

    Utah had a shitty offense and their best player died in the off season, their best wideout transferred and they figured out how to improve and dominated the conference. They hit the portal for 3 tailbacks and improved. Coaching matters, especially when the majority of programs really do suck.
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,877
    Win the North year 2

    Tequilla said:

    Year 1 is all about instilling the culture change, developing the roster, and getting people bought in or bought out

    8-4 is a really good bar … anything less and we should be really concerned

    There’s reasons to be overly optimistic but there will be steps backwards before taking steps forward

    The offense should turn the corner next year IMO … the talent is there

    The defense is going to be a concern until proven otherwise … could be looking at a 1-3 year rebuild there to be honest

    Agree for the most part but….

    Wazzu had a decent defense with far less talent. It doesn’t take 3 years to build a defense. That’s crazy.

    If uw has good quarterback play and an avg defense there’s enough on this roster to win the north. That’s more about how shitty the conference is more than anything else. This may require finding a starter via the portal.
    In fairness I said 1-3 years on the defense

    My bigger point is that at least initially what success looks like for UW probably is going to reside in games going over the total

    The secondary looks like a mess to me … good news is that creates opportunity in recruiting and it’s a position you can start early

    LB is a bit of a LIPO to me as I don’t think we are terrible but probably lack some athleticism

    DL we are big but not really athletic enough IMO … perhaps some scheme change will help here but it’s also a large concern

    OLB/DE we have some guys there that could hit if they continue to develop

    It’s probably an average at best Unit across the board

    Just warning that things are likely to be very different defensively than what we’ve been used to for effectively a decade
  • HFNYHFNY Member Posts: 4,878 Standard Supporter
    Win the North year 2
    I agree with Tequilla though 7-5 is a possibility depending on who the QB is and how good Michigan State is in 2022.

    I actually feel pretty good about the D except for the corners. The DL does have talent and the LBs will be good / experienced. Dom Hampton is a bad man at SS and there are some decent options for FS.

    Covid eligibility rules helped UW due to the small 2021 and 2022 classes and the 2023 class can then be a loaded one.



  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,877
    Win the North year 2
    HFNY said:

    I agree with Tequilla though 7-5 is a possibility depending on who the QB is and how good Michigan State is in 2022.

    I actually feel pretty good about the D except for the corners. The DL does have talent and the LBs will be good / experienced. Dom Hampton is a bad man at SS and there are some decent options for FS.

    Covid eligibility rules helped UW due to the small 2021 and 2022 classes and the 2023 class can then be a loaded one.



    It’s imperative that we have a massive 2023 class … lots of opportunity for this staff to sell
  • UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,791 Swaye's Wigwam
    Win the North year 1
    Tequilla said:

    Year 1 is all about instilling the culture change, developing the roster, and getting people bought in or bought out

    8-4 is a really good bar … anything less and we should be really concerned

    There’s reasons to be overly optimistic but there will be steps backwards before taking steps forward

    The offense should turn the corner next year IMO … the talent is there

    The defense is going to be a concern until proven otherwise … could be looking at a 1-3 year rebuild there to be honest

    8-4 could be good enough to win the North next year...
  • 1to392831weretaken1to392831weretaken Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,629 Swaye's Wigwam
    I just want clean games where everyone has fun
    Tequilla said:

    The secondary looks like a mess to me … good news is that creates opportunity in recruiting and it’s a position you can start early

    I've pointed this out as well, and I think it's a really underrated aspect of the challenge for next year. There are two corners off to the NFL. What was behind them? Mishael Powell, who I thought played pretty well for a young walk-on, but there's a big difference between that and a pair of NFL guys. I didn't watch ever game, and punished my liver when I was stupid enough to watch, but I don't recall even seeing a fourth corner put into the games. Surely it happened, but it must have been awfully rare. What does that suggest to me about the guys like Covington, who many here seem to think will pop right in there and be fine? It means that they couldn't be trusted on the field. At least not as much as the walk-on.

    That's what's coming up at corner.

    As for the safeties, I liked Bookie, but he's gone. I didn't see anybody else who wasn't a liability against either run or pass. Those hoping that it was just terrible scheme holding these guys back are setting themselves up for disappointment.

    The front six has not proven to be able to cover every gap and stop the run, but I just don't see a secondary that's good enough to move out of base nickel on all but the most obvious run downs. Not enough strength/explosiveness at DT, not enough speed at LB, and a secondary without a single player who has demonstrated three-down reliability and upper tier playmaking.
  • chuckchuck Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 11,050 Swaye's Wigwam
    Win the North year 2

    Tequilla said:

    The secondary looks like a mess to me … good news is that creates opportunity in recruiting and it’s a position you can start early

    I've pointed this out as well, and I think it's a really underrated aspect of the challenge for next year. There are two corners off to the NFL. What was behind them? Mishael Powell, who I thought played pretty well for a young walk-on, but there's a big difference between that and a pair of NFL guys. I didn't watch ever game, and punished my liver when I was stupid enough to watch, but I don't recall even seeing a fourth corner put into the games. Surely it happened, but it must have been awfully rare. What does that suggest to me about the guys like Covington, who many here seem to think will pop right in there and be fine? It means that they couldn't be trusted on the field. At least not as much as the walk-on.

    That's what's coming up at corner.

    As for the safeties, I liked Bookie, but he's gone. I didn't see anybody else who wasn't a liability against either run or pass. Those hoping that it was just terrible scheme holding these guys back are setting themselves up for disappointment.

    The front six has not proven to be able to cover every gap and stop the run, but I just don't see a secondary that's good enough to move out of base nickel on all but the most obvious run downs. Not enough strength/explosiveness at DT, not enough speed at LB, and a secondary without a single player who has demonstrated three-down reliability and upper tier playmaking.
    A lot of things have to get a lot better or UW is a .500 team next year. Secondary play I'm coverage and run support both have to be huge concerns, along with ILB, OLB, and DL.

    I think the long snapper should make a huge leap and Henry is really good at getting touch backs. It's just all the other units that need a near total turnaround. Piece of cake.
  • GreenRiverGatorzGreenRiverGatorz Member Posts: 10,165
    I just want clean games where everyone has fun
    chuck said:

    Tequilla said:

    The secondary looks like a mess to me … good news is that creates opportunity in recruiting and it’s a position you can start early

    I've pointed this out as well, and I think it's a really underrated aspect of the challenge for next year. There are two corners off to the NFL. What was behind them? Mishael Powell, who I thought played pretty well for a young walk-on, but there's a big difference between that and a pair of NFL guys. I didn't watch ever game, and punished my liver when I was stupid enough to watch, but I don't recall even seeing a fourth corner put into the games. Surely it happened, but it must have been awfully rare. What does that suggest to me about the guys like Covington, who many here seem to think will pop right in there and be fine? It means that they couldn't be trusted on the field. At least not as much as the walk-on.

    That's what's coming up at corner.

    As for the safeties, I liked Bookie, but he's gone. I didn't see anybody else who wasn't a liability against either run or pass. Those hoping that it was just terrible scheme holding these guys back are setting themselves up for disappointment.

    The front six has not proven to be able to cover every gap and stop the run, but I just don't see a secondary that's good enough to move out of base nickel on all but the most obvious run downs. Not enough strength/explosiveness at DT, not enough speed at LB, and a secondary without a single player who has demonstrated three-down reliability and upper tier playmaking.
    A lot of things have to get a lot better or UW is a .500 team next year. Secondary play I'm coverage and run support both have to be huge concerns, along with ILB, OLB, and DL.

    I think the long snapper should make a huge leap and Henry is really good at getting touch backs. It's just all the other units that need a near total turnaround. Piece of cake.
    Not sure I agree. This limp dick team was already close to .500 as it was. Going 8-4 or worse is really fucking easy when you play in a conference like this. If you have a coach who isn't a raging retard then you're already 81% of the way there.
  • chuckchuck Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 11,050 Swaye's Wigwam
    Win the North year 2

    chuck said:

    Tequilla said:

    The secondary looks like a mess to me … good news is that creates opportunity in recruiting and it’s a position you can start early

    I've pointed this out as well, and I think it's a really underrated aspect of the challenge for next year. There are two corners off to the NFL. What was behind them? Mishael Powell, who I thought played pretty well for a young walk-on, but there's a big difference between that and a pair of NFL guys. I didn't watch ever game, and punished my liver when I was stupid enough to watch, but I don't recall even seeing a fourth corner put into the games. Surely it happened, but it must have been awfully rare. What does that suggest to me about the guys like Covington, who many here seem to think will pop right in there and be fine? It means that they couldn't be trusted on the field. At least not as much as the walk-on.

    That's what's coming up at corner.

    As for the safeties, I liked Bookie, but he's gone. I didn't see anybody else who wasn't a liability against either run or pass. Those hoping that it was just terrible scheme holding these guys back are setting themselves up for disappointment.

    The front six has not proven to be able to cover every gap and stop the run, but I just don't see a secondary that's good enough to move out of base nickel on all but the most obvious run downs. Not enough strength/explosiveness at DT, not enough speed at LB, and a secondary without a single player who has demonstrated three-down reliability and upper tier playmaking.
    A lot of things have to get a lot better or UW is a .500 team next year. Secondary play I'm coverage and run support both have to be huge concerns, along with ILB, OLB, and DL.

    I think the long snapper should make a huge leap and Henry is really good at getting touch backs. It's just all the other units that need a near total turnaround. Piece of cake.
    Not sure I agree. This limp dick team was already close to .500 as it was. Going 8-4 or worse is really fucking easy when you play in a conference like this. If you have a coach who isn't a raging retard then you're already 81% of the way there.
    I was joking but it's a big task to shake off the lose that set in. If UW had gotten up at least a bit for the AC and not turned it into the ugliest loss since the Sark days I'd be a little less concerned. That was my last image of the team though.
  • digitsdigits Member Posts: 1,530
    Janet Reno/Other
    Same as it ever was with a new HC: Win the conference by the third season. Anything less, cut bait, and start over.
  • RoadTripRoadTrip Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,799 Founders Club
    There can be no real success until gender equity is achieved on the field
  • ChillyDawgChillyDawg Member Posts: 1,469
    Win the North year 2
    He should gain his footing in year one but a winning record and a decent bowl game are in order this upcoming season...
  • Mad_SonMad_Son Member Posts: 10,179
    I just want clean games where everyone has fun
    It all starts with winning the off-season natty. If we don't do that then we're on the wrong trajectory. If we're on the right trajectory then if it is year 1, 2, or 3 it doesn't matter so much as long as we get there. Realistically year 1 or 2 should be achievable but it could be 3 if things are close in earlier seasons.
Sign In or Register to comment.