Call it now: who will start at QB?

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Tequilla said:

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Sirmon's thrown 3 passes in a game and nobody has really seen anything about him in over 12 months minimum and really more like 18 months. To say that a QB isn't going to grow a bit in that time period is probably missing the mark.

The thing about Sirmon is that UW doesn't need him to be great. They need him to make the throws that are there. They are going to be a 60/40 run to pass team at minimum in my mind. But there's going to be a lot of play action and the ability for Sirmon to push the ball down the field and I'm confident that he's got the best arm on the roster.

If he is showing a lot of bad decisions and inaccuracy that leads to turnovers, then he clearly won't start and losing him as a transfer isn't that big of a deal obviously.

My guess though is that Sirmon's marginally the better option and as you mentioned his "experience" is going to win the day for him. Morris would have a shot but in my view really only if Sirmon's turnover propensity is large. Garbers would have to lap the field in my mind to earn the job.

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Sirmon's thrown 3 passes in a game and nobody has really seen anything about him in over 12 months minimum and really more like 18 months. To say that a QB isn't going to grow a bit in that time period is probably missing the mark.

The thing about Sirmon is that UW doesn't need him to be great. They need him to make the throws that are there. They are going to be a 60/40 run to pass team at minimum in my mind. But there's going to be a lot of play action and the ability for Sirmon to push the ball down the field and I'm confident that he's got the best arm on the roster.

If he is showing a lot of bad decisions and inaccuracy that leads to turnovers, then he clearly won't start and losing him as a transfer isn't that big of a deal obviously.

My guess though is that Sirmon's marginally the better option and as you mentioned his "experience" is going to win the day for him. Morris would have a shot but in my view really only if Sirmon's turnover propensity is large. Garbers would have to lap the field in my mind to earn the job.

I’ll be shocked if they are 60-40 run-pass. If so that means we don’t have a QB.

We’ve been 60/40 effectively over the last handful of years I believe

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Sirmon's thrown 3 passes in a game and nobody has really seen anything about him in over 12 months minimum and really more like 18 months. To say that a QB isn't going to grow a bit in that time period is probably missing the mark.

The thing about Sirmon is that UW doesn't need him to be great. They need him to make the throws that are there. They are going to be a 60/40 run to pass team at minimum in my mind. But there's going to be a lot of play action and the ability for Sirmon to push the ball down the field and I'm confident that he's got the best arm on the roster.

If he is showing a lot of bad decisions and inaccuracy that leads to turnovers, then he clearly won't start and losing him as a transfer isn't that big of a deal obviously.

My guess though is that Sirmon's marginally the better option and as you mentioned his "experience" is going to win the day for him. Morris would have a shot but in my view really only if Sirmon's turnover propensity is large. Garbers would have to lap the field in my mind to earn the job.

I’ll be shocked if they are 60-40 run-pass. If so that means we don’t have a QB.

We’ve been 60/40 effectively over the last handful of years I believe

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Sirmon's thrown 3 passes in a game and nobody has really seen anything about him in over 12 months minimum and really more like 18 months. To say that a QB isn't going to grow a bit in that time period is probably missing the mark.

The thing about Sirmon is that UW doesn't need him to be great. They need him to make the throws that are there. They are going to be a 60/40 run to pass team at minimum in my mind. But there's going to be a lot of play action and the ability for Sirmon to push the ball down the field and I'm confident that he's got the best arm on the roster.

If he is showing a lot of bad decisions and inaccuracy that leads to turnovers, then he clearly won't start and losing him as a transfer isn't that big of a deal obviously.

My guess though is that Sirmon's marginally the better option and as you mentioned his "experience" is going to win the day for him. Morris would have a shot but in my view really only if Sirmon's turnover propensity is large. Garbers would have to lap the field in my mind to earn the job.

I’ll be shocked if they are 60-40 run-pass. If so that means we don’t have a QB.

We’ve been 60/40 effectively over the last handful of years I believe

There’s no fucking way

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Sirmon's thrown 3 passes in a game and nobody has really seen anything about him in over 12 months minimum and really more like 18 months. To say that a QB isn't going to grow a bit in that time period is probably missing the mark.

The thing about Sirmon is that UW doesn't need him to be great. They need him to make the throws that are there. They are going to be a 60/40 run to pass team at minimum in my mind. But there's going to be a lot of play action and the ability for Sirmon to push the ball down the field and I'm confident that he's got the best arm on the roster.

If he is showing a lot of bad decisions and inaccuracy that leads to turnovers, then he clearly won't start and losing him as a transfer isn't that big of a deal obviously.

My guess though is that Sirmon's marginally the better option and as you mentioned his "experience" is going to win the day for him. Morris would have a shot but in my view really only if Sirmon's turnover propensity is large. Garbers would have to lap the field in my mind to earn the job.

I’ll be shocked if they are 60-40 run-pass. If so that means we don’t have a QB.

We’ve been 60/40 effectively over the last handful of years I believe

There’s no fucking way

2016: 57%/43% Run/Pass for both all games and in conference (heavy pass games against USC, Arizona St, Alabama)

2017: 58%/42% all games; 60%/40% conference (highest pass game was Game 1 vs Rutgers at 56% pass)

2018: 58%/42% all games; 63%/37% conference (only games over 50/50 were North Dakota and Ohio St)

2019: 53%/47% all games (excluding the Boise game); 52%/48% conference (very skewed passing in games we chased at Stanford and Utah)

My sense is that last year a mix of injuries, being enamored with "arm talent" and game situations pushed the mix more towards 50/50. I think in general the goal is to be much closer to 60/40 (see 2016-2018 - all years we either won or shared the North title outright). A young QB would also suggest to me that we're going to return to the 2016-2018 levels.

The comment about "QB Sacks" is a fair one on the mix and it does likely push the "play call" mix down a bit. That being said, trying to parse that data out is much more of an exercise that IMO isn't super value added.

I think with the way that UW's built its program (strong on both sides of the line, bad weather back half of the year, emphasis on TEs) that the 60/40 mix is really something to keep an eye on. If/When we've traditionally been in that 60%+ run ratio, it's an indication of dominating play at the LOS and a big time leading indicator of our success. Where that indicator will change a bit is when it comes to playing the elite programs where we may not be as dominant on the LOS and that's where you're going to need the high end QB/WR skills needed to pick up chunk plays as sustaining drives on the ground vanishes.

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Sirmon's thrown 3 passes in a game and nobody has really seen anything about him in over 12 months minimum and really more like 18 months. To say that a QB isn't going to grow a bit in that time period is probably missing the mark.

The thing about Sirmon is that UW doesn't need him to be great. They need him to make the throws that are there. They are going to be a 60/40 run to pass team at minimum in my mind. But there's going to be a lot of play action and the ability for Sirmon to push the ball down the field and I'm confident that he's got the best arm on the roster.

If he is showing a lot of bad decisions and inaccuracy that leads to turnovers, then he clearly won't start and losing him as a transfer isn't that big of a deal obviously.

My guess though is that Sirmon's marginally the better option and as you mentioned his "experience" is going to win the day for him. Morris would have a shot but in my view really only if Sirmon's turnover propensity is large. Garbers would have to lap the field in my mind to earn the job.

I’ll be shocked if they are 60-40 run-pass. If so that means we don’t have a QB.

We’ve been 60/40 effectively over the last handful of years I believe

There’s no fucking way

2016: 57%/43% Run/Pass for both all games and in conference (heavy pass games against USC, Arizona St, Alabama)

2017: 58%/42% all games; 60%/40% conference (highest pass game was Game 1 vs Rutgers at 56% pass)

2018: 58%/42% all games; 63%/37% conference (only games over 50/50 were North Dakota and Ohio St)

2019: 53%/47% all games (excluding the Boise game); 52%/48% conference (very skewed passing in games we chased at Stanford and Utah)

My sense is that last year a mix of injuries, being enamored with "arm talent" and game situations pushed the mix more towards 50/50. I think in general the goal is to be much closer to 60/40 (see 2016-2018 - all years we either won or shared the North title outright). A young QB would also suggest to me that we're going to return to the 2016-2018 levels.

The comment about "QB Sacks" is a fair one on the mix and it does likely push the "play call" mix down a bit. That being said, trying to parse that data out is much more of an exercise that IMO isn't super value added.

I think with the way that UW's built its program (strong on both sides of the line, bad weather back half of the year, emphasis on TEs) that the 60/40 mix is really something to keep an eye on. If/When we've traditionally been in that 60%+ run ratio, it's an indication of dominating play at the LOS and a big time leading indicator of our success. Where that indicator will change a bit is when it comes to playing the elite programs where we may not be as dominant on the LOS and that's where you're going to need the high end QB/WR skills needed to pick up chunk plays as sustaining drives on the ground vanishes.

Once you count sacks as passes rather than runs you get the following percentages the past 5 seasons:

2019: 50.3% run, 49.7% pass
2018: 55.7% run, 44.3% pass
2017: 55.2% run, 44.8% pass
2016: 53.7% run, 46.3% pass
2015: 50.9% run, 49.1% pass

Considering some of those runs were still designed passes where the QB scrambled for yards (Browning was oddly decent at this, I don't think Eason did it as much) your true play call percentages are more varying from 50:50 to 55:45.

I can't see them going 60:40 this year.

dnc said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

haie said:

Tequilla said:

The Game 1 starter should be Sirmon ... it's the "politically correct" thing to do and here's why:

If Sirmon doesn't win the job then you can almost guarantee that he's gone ... he's already given you plenty of warning on that.

Thompson has obvious game experience but unless he wows he's the guy that you have as a package and/or backup QB.

Morris I don't think is a lost cause but I also don't expect him to ever take a meaningful snap at UW. It'd be TERRIBLE optics for him to start unless he's decidedly better. Starting Sirmon over him makes sense and is hard for Morris to not look at that move as working to gear up for the eventual battle between Morris/Garbers/Huard.

Garbers IMO is probably the most talented of the current QBs on the roster but I can't imagine that COVID has helped him in being able to play this year and he's almost assuredly heading for a redshirt season. I'm FASCINATED in seeing how Lake carves out a meaningful role for both Garbers and Huard because the giant risk with Huard is that he clears out Morris/Garbers on the roster and our depth goes to dogshit.

Sirmon's the right play because not only do I think he has the most arm talent of the existing group, but I also think he buys the staff time to get Huard in next year and allow everything to play itself out in additional competition over the next 10 months before Game 1 of 2021. Worst thing that this staff can do right now is go about looking at the QB position that thins it out. I'm not saying that this season doesn't matter (it does, don't twist), but roster management is going to be critical given the recruiting challenges that we've had for the 2021 class and implications moving on to 2022.

There is no right play this year. They're going with Sirmon because of his years in the program, but the constant bad decisions and terrible inaccuracy on a lot of throws can't have changed much from last year.

Thomson isn't here to start, Morris would have a chance if Pete still coached here which thank Christ he doesn't, and they aren't throwing a year away on a true freshman.

You're FASCINATED by all this? Bored of tweeting about garbage ass mountain west fucking TCU?

Sirmon's thrown 3 passes in a game and nobody has really seen anything about him in over 12 months minimum and really more like 18 months. To say that a QB isn't going to grow a bit in that time period is probably missing the mark.

The thing about Sirmon is that UW doesn't need him to be great. They need him to make the throws that are there. They are going to be a 60/40 run to pass team at minimum in my mind. But there's going to be a lot of play action and the ability for Sirmon to push the ball down the field and I'm confident that he's got the best arm on the roster.

If he is showing a lot of bad decisions and inaccuracy that leads to turnovers, then he clearly won't start and losing him as a transfer isn't that big of a deal obviously.

My guess though is that Sirmon's marginally the better option and as you mentioned his "experience" is going to win the day for him. Morris would have a shot but in my view really only if Sirmon's turnover propensity is large. Garbers would have to lap the field in my mind to earn the job.

I’ll be shocked if they are 60-40 run-pass. If so that means we don’t have a QB.

We’ve been 60/40 effectively over the last handful of years I believe

There’s no fucking way

2016: 57%/43% Run/Pass for both all games and in conference (heavy pass games against USC, Arizona St, Alabama)

2017: 58%/42% all games; 60%/40% conference (highest pass game was Game 1 vs Rutgers at 56% pass)

2018: 58%/42% all games; 63%/37% conference (only games over 50/50 were North Dakota and Ohio St)

2019: 53%/47% all games (excluding the Boise game); 52%/48% conference (very skewed passing in games we chased at Stanford and Utah)

My sense is that last year a mix of injuries, being enamored with "arm talent" and game situations pushed the mix more towards 50/50. I think in general the goal is to be much closer to 60/40 (see 2016-2018 - all years we either won or shared the North title outright). A young QB would also suggest to me that we're going to return to the 2016-2018 levels.

The comment about "QB Sacks" is a fair one on the mix and it does likely push the "play call" mix down a bit. That being said, trying to parse that data out is much more of an exercise that IMO isn't super value added.

I think with the way that UW's built its program (strong on both sides of the line, bad weather back half of the year, emphasis on TEs) that the 60/40 mix is really something to keep an eye on. If/When we've traditionally been in that 60%+ run ratio, it's an indication of dominating play at the LOS and a big time leading indicator of our success. Where that indicator will change a bit is when it comes to playing the elite programs where we may not be as dominant on the LOS and that's where you're going to need the high end QB/WR skills needed to pick up chunk plays as sustaining drives on the ground vanishes.

Once you count sacks as passes rather than runs you get the following percentages the past 5 seasons:

2019: 50.3% run, 49.7% pass
2018: 55.7% run, 44.3% pass
2017: 55.2% run, 44.8% pass
2016: 53.7% run, 46.3% pass
2015: 50.9% run, 49.1% pass

Considering some of those runs were still designed passes where the QB scrambled for yards (Browning was oddly decent at this, I don't think Eason did it as much) your true play call percentages are more varying from 50:50 to 55:45.

I can't see them going 60:40 this year.

And, of course, who knows how many of these were RPOs full blown audibles from run to pass or vice versa.

There's a lot of noise in the data but I don't see anything to suggest they want a 60-40 split other than the idea that if they're up big they will naturally run more so of course everyone wants a split like that for those reasons.