Unpopular opinion
Comments
-
I'm not disputing that. In fact, he might be the best possible hire a team could make right now, but if the process starts and ends with him being OKG, regardless of the outcome, that process is fucked. You can make a decision for the wrong reasons and have it end up working out perfectly.RoadDawg55 said:
Not in the conversation but he would be considered a bright young coach if he wasn’t a Pete guy. It goes both ways.dtd said:If Moore weren't a former BSU player under Peet would he even be in the conversation? If not, then he shouldn't be now.
-
-
This. The ultimate "paint by numbers" hire post Pete. Straight out of central casting. I'd rather we stick our necks out a little and give that fella PGOS a chance. I hear good things.GrundleStiltzkin said:
That's a big sun.dnc said:
Sun shines on a doog's ass every now and thendirtysouwfdawg said:
Flagged for having the same opinion as fatters.dnc said:I actually don't think Kellen Moore would be a bad hire.
I would have been much more scared about him under Pete given Pete's feelings for him. We probably could have never fired him.
But under Lake...I would be pretty happy with it honestly. The Dallas offense was actually very productive this season. He worked magic with Dad Prescott. He never coached under Pete to get infected by Pete's offensive toxicity.
I think he'd be a win.
Flag away.
My issue with hiring Kellen Moore is that it just feels too by-the-script and unimaginative. -
-
DNC ... ever the bully.
I might hurt myself now. -
I have changed my minddnc said:In defense of Kellen
-
The more @Gladstone posts the better.FireCohen said:
-
@Gladstone caz you being a little hurt cunt. Going to double in 2020
-
1) Monken
2) Moore - unproven but maybe the highest ceiling
3) Lashlee
4) Lindgren
5) Long
All are somewhat even because we don’t really know and will get a year before I make any harsh judgements. -
I'd put Lindgren last and maybe Lashlee even with Moore but this is basically my list.RoadDawg55 said:1) Monken
2) Moore - unproven but maybe the highest ceiling
3) Lashlee
4) Lindgren
5) Long
All are somewhat even because we don’t really know and will get a year before I make any harsh judgements. -
I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
-
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense. -
I really agree with paragraph 1&2.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense.
Living in cowboy country I hear sooo much about the offense and specifics about play calling and other shit.
Couple that with the stats about how dem boyz offense did against shitty teams and against good teams and it’s a hard pass for me.
Plus saying fatters was right about something goes against my religion. -
Furthermore, the offense changed every week to adapt to the opponents and their personnel with different gadget plays and whatnot.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense.
While it makes sense in theory, it never worked in practice and is responsible for pretty much all of our losses over the last 3 years. -
Cristobal wasn't shy about telling people what Oregon was going to do this year. And then he did it. Oregon fans hate the OC for the game plans but they worked and they help the defense. Scoring at will exposes your defense
Seeing Hubert run tells me that we need to consider changing our QB philosophy. We've been talking about Tui all morning. He ran for 200 yards and passed for 300 in the same game. If you have a running QB then receivers are wide open. And if that running QB can throw you have the Ravens. Or the 2000 DAWGS
I'm sure they didn't run Hubert because of his NFL stock which is a shame. His last two games showed he is really a good runner. And it won those games
You really don't need to be tricky. You need to have a plan and be able to tweak it as the game goes on. Play to your strengths.
Lombardi told the entire NFL how they ran the sweep and still no one could stop it
Eliminate 81% of the play book and become excellent at what you do and build around who you have not who you don't have -
I was there. I also shook his hand after the game and said, "Great game Tui!" He said, "Thanks!"RaceBannon said:Cristobal wasn't shy about telling people what Oregon was going to do this year. And then he did it. Oregon fans hate the OC for the game plans but they worked and they help the defense. Scoring at will exposes your defense
Seeing Hubert run tells me that we need to consider changing our QB philosophy. We've been talking about Tui all morning. He ran for 200 yards and passed for 300 in the same game. If you have a running QB then receivers are wide open. And if that running QB can throw you have the Ravens. Or the 2000 DAWGS
I'm sure they didn't run Hubert because of his NFL stock which is a shame. His last two games showed he is really a good runner. And it won those games
You really don't need to be tricky. You need to have a plan and be able to tweak it as the game goes on. Play to your strengths.
Lombardi told the entire NFL how they ran the sweep and still no one could stop it
Eliminate 81% of the play book and become excellent at what you do and build around who you have not who you don't have
True story. -
dnc said:
I actually don't think Kellen Moore would be a bad hire.
I would have been much more scared about him under Pete given Pete's feelings for him. We probably could have never fired him.
But under Lake...I would be pretty happy with it honestly. The Dallas offense was actually very productive this season. He worked magic with Dad Prescott. He never coached under Pete to get infected by Pete's offensive toxicity.
I think he'd be a win.
Flag away.
Am I the only motherfucker here that doesn’t want to be Boise by the Sea?dnc said:I actually don't think Kellen Moore would be a bad hire.
I would have been much more scared about him under Pete given Pete's feelings for him. We probably could have never fired him.
But under Lake...I would be pretty happy with it honestly. The Dallas offense was actually very productive this season. He worked magic with Dad Prescott. He never coached under Pete to get infected by Pete's offensive toxicity.
I think he'd be a win.
Flag away. -
Kellen Moore is more likely to be offered a HC gig in the NFL than to come to UW. Cook it.
-
Pretty classy of you after such a tuff loss at Montlake.creepycoug said:
I was there. I also shook his hand after the game and said, "Great game Tui!" He said, "Thanks!"RaceBannon said:Cristobal wasn't shy about telling people what Oregon was going to do this year. And then he did it. Oregon fans hate the OC for the game plans but they worked and they help the defense. Scoring at will exposes your defense
Seeing Hubert run tells me that we need to consider changing our QB philosophy. We've been talking about Tui all morning. He ran for 200 yards and passed for 300 in the same game. If you have a running QB then receivers are wide open. And if that running QB can throw you have the Ravens. Or the 2000 DAWGS
I'm sure they didn't run Hubert because of his NFL stock which is a shame. His last two games showed he is really a good runner. And it won those games
You really don't need to be tricky. You need to have a plan and be able to tweak it as the game goes on. Play to your strengths.
Lombardi told the entire NFL how they ran the sweep and still no one could stop it
Eliminate 81% of the play book and become excellent at what you do and build around who you have not who you don't have
True story.
Very uncanelike. -
Hurtful that I cause you to doubt your religion but also fattering.dirtysouwfdawg said:
I really agree with paragraph 1&2.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense.
Living in cowboy country I hear sooo much about the offense and specifics about play calling and other shit.
Couple that with the stats about how dem boyz offense did against shitty teams and against good teams and it’s a hard pass for me.
Plus saying fatters was right about something goes against my religion. -
Alabama Hills. Nice.DerekJohnson said:dnc said:
Sun shines on a doog's ass every now and thendirtysouwfdawg said:
Flagged for having the same opinion as fatters.dnc said:I actually don't think Kellen Moore would be a bad hire.
I would have been much more scared about him under Pete given Pete's feelings for him. We probably could have never fired him.
But under Lake...I would be pretty happy with it honestly. The Dallas offense was actually very productive this season. He worked magic with Dad Prescott. He never coached under Pete to get infected by Pete's offensive toxicity.
I think he'd be a win.
Flag away.
-
Lies. The offense was the same shit every game. The only wrinkle was the brilliant addition of the Eason option play at a crucial down. Otherwise it was just as fucktarded as ever regardless of the opponent or our own injuries. See wildcat without Newton.whatshouldicareabout said:
Furthermore, the offense changed every week to adapt to the opponents and their personnel with different gadget plays and whatnot.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense.
-
Pretty much this. 90% of whatever UW was running was always too slow-developing and gave defenses ample time to adjust, locate the ball, recover their angles and hold UW to short gains over and over and over. Painful to watch and eventually predictable and not hard to defend.LawDawg1 said:
Lies. The offense was the same shit every game. The only wrinkle was the brilliant addition of the Eason option play at a crucial down. Otherwise it was just as fucktarded as ever regardless of the opponent or our own injuries. See wildcat without Newton.whatshouldicareabout said:
Furthermore, the offense changed every week to adapt to the opponents and their personnel with different gadget plays and whatnot.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense.
It's as much a reason for Pete's 8-5 Year 6 as anything. -
Yep, the offenses complete unwillingness to game plan for opponents weaknesses or even self scout their own based on availability was completely inexcusable. Sark level bullshit.LawDawg1 said:
Lies. The offense was the same shit every game. The only wrinkle was the brilliant addition of the Eason option play at a crucial down. Otherwise it was just as fucktarded as ever regardless of the opponent or our own injuries. See wildcat without Newton.whatshouldicareabout said:
Furthermore, the offense changed every week to adapt to the opponents and their personnel with different gadget plays and whatnot.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense. -
Pete had a dumb quote in his early years at UW about experience being needed to best attack the defense. It was dumb. Put your best player out there and run the same shit every week with a couple wrinkles. We weren’t really good at anything and there was nothing we could fully depend on week in and week out.whatshouldicareabout said:
Furthermore, the offense changed every week to adapt to the opponents and their personnel with different gadget plays and whatnot.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense.
While it makes sense in theory, it never worked in practice and is responsible for pretty much all of our losses over the last 3 years. -
Hey sark was better than bushdnc said:
Yep, the offenses complete unwillingness to game plan for opponents weaknesses or even self scout their own based on availability was completely inexcusable. Sark level bullshit.LawDawg1 said:
Lies. The offense was the same shit every game. The only wrinkle was the brilliant addition of the Eason option play at a crucial down. Otherwise it was just as fucktarded as ever regardless of the opponent or our own injuries. See wildcat without Newton.whatshouldicareabout said:
Furthermore, the offense changed every week to adapt to the opponents and their personnel with different gadget plays and whatnot.RoadDawg55 said:
I’m not that concerned about the experience aspect. If you can do it in the NFL, you can do it in college. There are dozens of guys that would like to be UW’s OC but very few are going to have the experience or success we would deem acceptable.chuck said:I dont understand why Moore is even in the conversation. Get someone who has proven they can install and run a college offense. There must be dozens of guys like that who would prefer OC at UW over what they're doing.
We need a guy that can form his offense around the personnel we have. Too many coaches need to have the perfect players in order for their scheme to work. Be flexible, keep it somewhat simple, play fast, and make sure your players ante confident.
Our players in recent years were bogged down by the “details”, they weren’t confident, and Pete was very inflexible with his offense. -
You already aredooginthehall said:dnc said:I actually don't think Kellen Moore would be a bad hire.
I would have been much more scared about him under Pete given Pete's feelings for him. We probably could have never fired him.
But under Lake...I would be pretty happy with it honestly. The Dallas offense was actually very productive this season. He worked magic with Dad Prescott. He never coached under Pete to get infected by Pete's offensive toxicity.
I think he'd be a win.
Flag away.
Am I the only motherfucker here that doesn’t want to be Boise by the Sea?dnc said:I actually don't think Kellen Moore would be a bad hire.
I would have been much more scared about him under Pete given Pete's feelings for him. We probably could have never fired him.
But under Lake...I would be pretty happy with it honestly. The Dallas offense was actually very productive this season. He worked magic with Dad Prescott. He never coached under Pete to get infected by Pete's offensive toxicity.
I think he'd be a win.
Flag away.
