Where Exactly Are We Headed: A Response
Comments
-
Sure, but if we start the Browning and Haeners of the world, allow talent to transfer out, have an inept offense that prevents talent from playing, or simply are incapable of developing and exploiting QB talent then what does it matter?dnc said:
Not sure this is actually true. If there's one thing this state consistently produces it's highly rated QB's. Obviously a lot of them haven't panned out but it's not hard to fathom they'd have done better under Pete.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Poont of emphasis, you need an elite QB and QB coaching to mimic the Clemson model. Neither of which Petermen has displayed at this poont. Skinny could be great and could be gone after one year. He could be mediocre and be here two. If Petermen needs a Huard to drop into his lap continuously then we have an issue. The QB room mismanagement really is starting to concern me beyond Browning sucks and could be an ongoing limiting issue instead of just a browning thing.
In my lifetime:
84 - Chandler
86 - Conklin
89 - Hobert
91 - Damon
94 - Brock
97 - Tui
98 - Luke/Jared Jones
01 - Stanback
06 - Locker
09 - Heaps
13 - Browne
16 - Eason
18 - Sirmon
21 - Huard
Obviously only a few of those guys are at ISHIT's savior level, but clearly Hobert and Tui had what it took and Brock and Eason probably would have under the right coaching, with IS and Locker having outside shots.
Point being, if there's one position we need frequent transcendent talent at, QB is the best one.
We should also be able to pull the occasional Moon/Brunell out of Cali and should be in position to compete for the next Mariota/Tua out of Hawaii.
ATBSJBSS, and also, I think we're going to be fine.
I'm ready to LIPO this year and all but if the offense is still dogshit with this much talent at multiple positions then Pete is the problem. -
But we're not going to whiff on the Easons of the world going forward and won't be stuck starting the Brownings and Haeners.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Sure, but if we start the Browning and Haeners of the world, allow talent to transfer out, have an inept offense that prevents talent from playing, or simply are incapable of developing and exploiting QB talent then what does it matter?dnc said:
Not sure this is actually true. If there's one thing this state consistently produces it's highly rated QB's. Obviously a lot of them haven't panned out but it's not hard to fathom they'd have done better under Pete.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Poont of emphasis, you need an elite QB and QB coaching to mimic the Clemson model. Neither of which Petermen has displayed at this poont. Skinny could be great and could be gone after one year. He could be mediocre and be here two. If Petermen needs a Huard to drop into his lap continuously then we have an issue. The QB room mismanagement really is starting to concern me beyond Browning sucks and could be an ongoing limiting issue instead of just a browning thing.
In my lifetime:
84 - Chandler
86 - Conklin
89 - Hobert
91 - Damon
94 - Brock
97 - Tui
98 - Luke/Jared Jones
01 - Stanback
06 - Locker
09 - Heaps
13 - Browne
16 - Eason
18 - Sirmon
21 - Huard
Obviously only a few of those guys are at ISHIT's savior level, but clearly Hobert and Tui had what it took and Brock and Eason probably would have under the right coaching, with IS and Locker having outside shots.
Point being, if there's one position we need frequent transcendent talent at, QB is the best one.
We should also be able to pull the occasional Moon/Brunell out of Cali and should be in position to compete for the next Mariota/Tua out of Hawaii.
ATBSJBSS, and also, I think we're going to be fine.
I'm ready to LIPO this year and all but if the offense is still dogshit with this much talent at multiple positions then Pete is the problem.
I *get * the frustration and the skepticism, I just think it's going to work itself out, and probably quite soon. -
You know what?
This is a byproduct of our success.
Turnover of talent ... especially in a position where typically only one guy is "the man"
I would offer that any top 10-15 team trending upwards experiences this on the regular.
Someone check all the top programs ... You have highly rated players moving around all the time. It's actually a testament to Peterman and his "built for life" shit that keeps turnover low compared to other top programs.
We're just so used to it that people are freaking out now that Washington is levelling up.
Get used to it and suck Peterman's dick that turnover is relatively low. -
Where are we headed?
-
That's a helluva jacket Nick. Nice rings too.RaceBannon said:Where are we headed?
-
@KissTheRingBitchDawg!!! True???creepycoug said:
That's a helluva jacket Nick. Nice rings too.RaceBannon said:Where are we headed?
