Tequilla Long Thoughts - Hawaii
Comments
-
imagine how confident Hawaii will be when they take on Oregon State now though!!!!
-
I agree the game was rough, but at the end of the day I'm not sure what the expectation was in terms of QB play. We heard all last year how Lindy wasn't ready(or maybe not even good enough) to play D1 football as a starter. Fast forward to the preseason and we have a group think exercise attempting to convince ourselves that our QB's are a whole lot better than they are. Cyler is still a mystery, but at least he had shown a whole lot more promise than anyone else on the roster.
I'm shocked it was a 1 point win, but I wasn't shocked we didn't blow out hawaii. Realistically the close loss could be a blessing. It will refocus players on what is needed to win, the coaches have a lot to reevaluate and push players, and it keeps us from having a QB controversy.
I have seen a lot of people convincing themselves Lindy was going to be a very good option and when it didn't materialize everyone has the sky is falling posts. Kinda comical when people build up someone outside their talent range and then freak out when they actually perform at that level.
-
Brock and anyone who had watched practice the past two years warned us about Lindquist. Brock is close to the program and his brother works for it. They would obviously have Lindquist's ability dialed in. Expecting him not to suck was wishful thinking.
-
And here's what the play calling should have been:Tequilla said:
Always good to pop off when the facts don't support your opinion ...TTJ said:
If Peterman had it all figured out by mid-Q3, why did it take until mid-Q4 to just give the ball to Coleman and Washington? Several of us noted on Friday that the sure way for Lindy to seal his career starting record at 1-0 was to just hand it off and stay out of the way. The Q3 playcalling was horrid, did the deer-in-headlights QB no favors.Tequilla said:...By the middle of the 3rd quarter, you could see that Petersen had made a decision to do whatever he could to protect the defense and asked them to go win the game. If you want a bright spot for the offense in the 2nd half, it was having 2 reasonably good drives with 8 minutes to go...
The run/pass mix for the game was 48 runs to 26 passes - no chance in hell Sark would have had a game that was that imbalanced run/pass. He would have forced the pass to get Lindy going, creating at least one turnover in the process, and that would have been the difference in the game.
As for the 3rd quarter, here are the drives:
Drive #1: run, run, pass
Drive #2: run, pass, pass (drive started backed up at the 2, first run got 1 yard as Hawaii stacked the box big time - the pass on 2nd down was the right play call)
Drive #3: pass, pass, run, run
Drive #4: pass, run, pass
Drive #5: run, pass, run
The play calling was balanced ... the whole concept of running the ball and forgetting the passing game wasn't working because the OL was getting ZERO push during the quarter. What finally started turning the game in the 4th was that the OL finally did start getting some movement starting with the 2nd to last drive of the game and then carried it over into running out the clock.
Drive #1: run, run, run, run, run, run, PAT
Drive #2: run, run, run, punt
Drive #3: run, run, run, run, run, PAT
Drive #4: run, run, run, run, FG
Drive #5: run, run, run, run, run, run, run, run, PAT
Drive #6: run, run, run, run, victory formation
I sincerely HTH.
-
Louise Rankin thinks Washington's running style is just fine.chuck said:
Washington has become an overrated message board legend. He has some great runs in him but he takes too long to decide. It looks like he's still learning which, well, seems like it shouldn't be the case this far into his career. He killed an important drive by running to the sideline and coming up short when he could have bulldozed a couple of defenders for the 2 yards he needed to gain the marker. That was a huge fuckup that killed a drive where UW had momentum. Coleman is better. -
Good comparison. Not exactly the same type of ability but similar issue.H_D said:
Louise Rankin thinks Washington's running style is just fine.chuck said:
Washington has become an overrated message board legend. He has some great runs in him but he takes too long to decide. It looks like he's still learning which, well, seems like it shouldn't be the case this far into his career. He killed an important drive by running to the sideline and coming up short when he could have bulldozed a couple of defenders for the 2 yards he needed to gain the marker. That was a huge fuckup that killed a drive where UW had momentum. Coleman is better. -
Too long, read it anyway, agree with most if it, looking for an accelerant and a match.
-
Run game wasn't working with 8 in the box and Hawaii not having a single DB more than 10 yards from the line of scrimmage. They got burned twice on the Ross TDs ... but Lindy couldn't make any kind of big throws, Mickens pretty much played like shit, and Kasen isn't anywhere close to 100%.TTJ said:
And here's what the play calling should have been:Tequilla said:
Always good to pop off when the facts don't support your opinion ...TTJ said:
If Peterman had it all figured out by mid-Q3, why did it take until mid-Q4 to just give the ball to Coleman and Washington? Several of us noted on Friday that the sure way for Lindy to seal his career starting record at 1-0 was to just hand it off and stay out of the way. The Q3 playcalling was horrid, did the deer-in-headlights QB no favors.Tequilla said:...By the middle of the 3rd quarter, you could see that Petersen had made a decision to do whatever he could to protect the defense and asked them to go win the game. If you want a bright spot for the offense in the 2nd half, it was having 2 reasonably good drives with 8 minutes to go...
The run/pass mix for the game was 48 runs to 26 passes - no chance in hell Sark would have had a game that was that imbalanced run/pass. He would have forced the pass to get Lindy going, creating at least one turnover in the process, and that would have been the difference in the game.
As for the 3rd quarter, here are the drives:
Drive #1: run, run, pass
Drive #2: run, pass, pass (drive started backed up at the 2, first run got 1 yard as Hawaii stacked the box big time - the pass on 2nd down was the right play call)
Drive #3: pass, pass, run, run
Drive #4: pass, run, pass
Drive #5: run, pass, run
The play calling was balanced ... the whole concept of running the ball and forgetting the passing game wasn't working because the OL was getting ZERO push during the quarter. What finally started turning the game in the 4th was that the OL finally did start getting some movement starting with the 2nd to last drive of the game and then carried it over into running out the clock.
Drive #1: run, run, run, run, run, run, PAT
Drive #2: run, run, run, punt
Drive #3: run, run, run, run, run, PAT
Drive #4: run, run, run, run, FG
Drive #5: run, run, run, run, run, run, run, run, PAT
Drive #6: run, run, run, run, victory formation
I sincerely HTH.
I'm worried a bit about the offense ... the defense for the most part was exactly what I thought it was. -
All I have to say is Dwayne Wawrshington sucks and Lavon Coleman is good. If you can't see that you're JohnnyPatronNansenFS.
Coleman was playing his first game and looked good. -
Give it more than a game. Washington looked good in limited action last year. Coleman looked pedestrian until the final drive where he gained 43 yards on 6 carries. His stats were almost identical to Washington's before that. Great sample size on one.Dennis_DeYoung said:All I have to say is Dwayne Wawrshington sucks and Lavon Coleman is good. If you can't see that you're JohnnyPatronNansenFS.
Coleman was playing his first game and looked good. -
Agreed, the difference here is one drive. I'm definitely in LIFPO mode on the backs.RoadDawg55 said:
Give it more than a game. Washington looked good in limited action last year. Coleman looked pedestrian until the final drive where he gained 43 yards on 6 carries. His stats were almost identical to Washington's before that. Great sample size on one.Dennis_DeYoung said:All I have to say is Dwayne Wawrshington sucks and Lavon Coleman is good. If you can't see that you're JohnnyPatronNansenFS.
Coleman was playing his first game and looked good.
-
RoadDawg you ignorant slut. I saw Wawrshington last year and that's all I needed to see. He runs upright and has no feel for the position. He's good in practice, because everything is predictable. He's good in the HUSKY TUFF-FS COMBINE because he's a "specimen". However, he sucked all year last year because he hits the wrong hole (2 hole?) and can't make anyone miss.RoadDawg55 said:Give it more than a game. Washington looked good in limited action last year. Coleman looked pedestrian until the final drive where he gained 43 yards on 6 carries. His stats were almost identical to Washington's before that. Great sample size on one.
He looked great in the OSU game, but so did Deontae fucking Cooper. SFW. He is not an intuitive runner--he has little to no vision, and every moron out there thinks speed and power make for great runners. Sankey was great because he had a feel for how to run, when to accelerate, etc. Wawrshington has none of that shit.
Coleman is good.
I respect Wawrshington's speed/power combo or whatever, but you got to have vision. -
Voted down for saying WASHINGTON (dammit) sucked all last year. The sample is very limited, of course, and I'm not declaring him as some great RB based on his performance, but he looked good to me and the stats back that up. In the 8 games he saw carries he averaged less than 4 YPC in just two of them (Illinois with 2 carries and Arizona State with 1) and averaged over 5 YPC in 5 of them. Yes, one of those games was the FO, Gs, and the Arizona game he only had two carries, but in the other three he had 18 carries for 130 yards. Overall the dude averaged over 7 YPC on 47 carries last year.Dennis_DeYoung said:
RoadDawg you ignorant slut. I saw Wawrshington last year and that's all I needed to see. He runs upright and has no feel for the position. He's good in practice, because everything is predictable. He's good in the HUSKY TUFF-FS COMBINE because he's a "specimen". However, he sucked all year last year because he hits the wrong hole (2 hole?) and can't make anyone miss.RoadDawg55 said:Give it more than a game. Washington looked good in limited action last year. Coleman looked pedestrian until the final drive where he gained 43 yards on 6 carries. His stats were almost identical to Washington's before that. Great sample size on one.
He looked great in the OSU game, but so did Deontae fucking Cooper. SFW. He is not an intuitive runner--he has little to no vision, and every moron out there thinks speed and power make for great runners. Sankey was great because he had a feel for how to run, when to accelerate, etc. Wawrshington has none of that shit.
Coleman is good.
I respect Wawrshington's speed/power combo or whatever, but you got to have vision.
Quibble all you want about the competition, and I'm not saying that's anything close to repeatable, but to say he sucked last year is pure fucktard. -
He sucked last year. He just wasn't good. Watch Sankey run. That is a good running back. Wawrshington came in in easy situations and tried to ram his way through every hole (75k?).
Wawrshington is just not that great. Maybe he doesn't totally suck, but he sucks. -
If you average 7.1 yards per carry you employed the correct running style.Dennis_DeYoung said:He sucked last year. He just wasn't good. Watch Sankey run. That is a good running back. Wawrshington came in in easy situations and tried to ram his way through every hole (75k?).
Wawrshington is just not that great. Maybe he doesn't totally suck, but he sucks.
-
We will see. I thought Washington was trying to be too patient for the holes to open which made him look tentative. He had a bad game, no question about it. The OL played bad too. I didn't see tons holes for any RB. Coleman looked like a decent back, I didn't see anything wowing. He ran hard and came up big on the final series. He's looked a little slow and lumbering to me, but obviously there is a lot more that goes into being a RB. In the first game, he looked better than Washington though.Dennis_DeYoung said:He sucked last year. He just wasn't good. Watch Sankey run. That is a good running back. Wawrshington came in in easy situations and tried to ram his way through every hole (75k?).
Wawrshington is just not that great. Maybe he doesn't totally suck, but he sucks.
In their freshman years, both Washington and Sankey looked good in limited samples. How did Sankey look against San Diego State in 2012? 22 for 66. 3 YPC at home against a MWC team. 30 for 82 after the second game. He didn't start out great either and looked nothing like the player he would become. Sankey was great and everyone knows how hard it will be for Washington to be as good as him, but I'm not ready to write him off after one game and I'm not ready to anoint Coleman after a decent (far from great) game. -
I'm hearing Dwayne Washington's got a fumbling problem.
-
The defense was fine considering they were on the field most of the 2nd half. Roaddawg made a good observation where UW was subbing a lot on defense during that game which helped quite a bit in that regard. It was one of the few examples of good coaching during the game.
Norm Chow helped the most, that 3rd and 10 pass to the flats near the 50 late in the 4th was fucking stupid and probably destroyed any confidence the team had left. Not even going to mention the trick play they tried.
Lindquist had a lot of wide open receivers in the 2nd half he just plain missed. Hoping to see a different offense with Cyler next week (god damnit I'm going to waste another day watching a shitty scrimmage). We win rather easily, say 44-10? -
I always thought Washington was getting overrated on this board. Coleman looks like he is going to be pretty decent. We were spoiled by having the luxury of 2 of the best backs to play at UW ever in Polk/Sankey back to back.
Still too early to jump to conclusions for either Coleman or Washington but my first impressions from the Hawaii game is that Coleman is going to be the guy soon. -
Fuck that, I'm watching Stanford/USC. Not going to watch a scrimmage against a D2 team where we yield 400+ passing yards. No thanks.SteveInShelton said:The defense was fine considering they were on the field most of the 2nd half. Roaddawg made a good observation where UW was subbing a lot on defense during that game which helped quite a bit in that regard. It was one of the few examples of good coaching during the game.
Norm Chow helped the most, that 3rd and 10 pass to the flats near the 50 late in the 4th was fucking stupid and probably destroyed any confidence the team had left. Not even going to mention the trick play they tried.
Lindquist had a lot of wide open receivers in the 2nd half he just plain missed. Hoping to see a different offense with Cyler next week (god damnit I'm going to waste another day watching a shitty scrimmage). We win rather easily, say 44-10?
-
@RoadDawg55 I honestly cannot see how anyone could compare Sankey and Wawrshington's freshmen years. Stats are fine, but ypc in a low sample size as the second back isn't really going to be indicative of much. Especially when you're coming in as a change-up back for Sankey.
With Coleman, I saw a guy who has great 'leg drive', is tough and has good vision.
I think he's our best back. Wawrshington runs like a converted WR in my book.
Also, a lot of his vaunted production last year came in garbaggio time.
ALSO I'M HEARING HE HAS A FUCKING FUMBLING PROBLEM!!! -
Do you remember Sankey as a freshman? He got limited carries behind Polk and garbage time. That's exactly what Washington got last year behind Sankey. Then Sankey struggled in his first extended playing time once he became the guy his sophomore year. Point is, it's too early to write off Washington. I never thought he was going to average 7.1 per carry this year and obviously he has to perform against good competition which he has yet to do.Dennis_DeYoung said:@RoadDawg55 I honestly cannot see how anyone could compare Sankey and Wawrshington's freshmen years. Stats are fine, but ypc in a low sample size as the second back isn't really going to be indicative of much. Especially when you're coming in as a change-up back for Sankey.
With Coleman, I saw a guy who has great 'leg drive', is tough and has good vision.
I think he's our best back. Wawrshington runs like a converted WR in my book.
Also, a lot of his vaunted production last year came in garbaggio time.
ALSO I'M HEARING HE HAS A FUCKING FUMBLING PROBLEM!!!
He had a bad first start. Did you write off Sankey after a bad start to 2012? I was on dawgman at the time and a lot of idiots did. Coleman could end up being the guy but it's going to take more than one solid game. They are both young players getting their first REAL playing time. Before the last drive, their stats were basically the same. -
RoadDawg55 said:
Wait, you were on dm.c and posters flamed out when a highly rated scout prospect didn't perform out of the gate and to their rating? They even went to the level as to blame the * system for "missing" on a guy who just started to play? That just isn't possible!Dennis_DeYoung said:
He had a bad first start. Did you write off Sankey after a bad start to 2012? I was on dawgman at the time and a lot of idiots did. Coleman could end up being the guy but it's going to take more than one solid game. They are both young players getting their first REAL playing time. Before the last drive, their stats were basically the same. -
@RoadDawg55 Of course I remember Sankey as a Freshman. I loved him. He had a spark every time he touched the ball. I thought it was just as JohnnyNansenFS that Callier and Sankey were to 'share' carries as it was for Coleman and Wawrshington.
Here's a hint - if there are two equal RBs and one is a year younger, go with him.
Also, stats don't mean shit in this case. If you have eyes and understanding of football it was easy to see that Coleman was doing better than Wawrshington prior to the final drive. To your point, stats are interesting in aggregate, but need sample size. YPC in one game is not enough to say they were equal, unequal or otherwise.
Look, the Doogie fuckers that were against Wawrshington because of a fumbling problem were FS, obviously. However, just because Doogie fuckers are wrong doesn't make Wawrshington good.
I never liked him and I still don't. There are no 'stats' to say why Coleman is better, other than, when the game was on the line -- having had both of them in there -- Coleman was trusted to get the key yards after Wawrshington ran into the back of our OL all game. -
Will this fucking slap fight ever end?
-
-
Does not deliver.
-
Your post should be nominated for the fucktarded post of the week ...SteveInShelton said:The defense was fine considering they were on the field most of the 2nd half. Roaddawg made a good observation where UW was subbing a lot on defense during that game which helped quite a bit in that regard. It was one of the few examples of good coaching during the game.
Norm Chow helped the most, that 3rd and 10 pass to the flats near the 50 late in the 4th was fucking stupid and probably destroyed any confidence the team had left. Not even going to mention the trick play they tried.
Lindquist had a lot of wide open receivers in the 2nd half he just plain missed. Hoping to see a different offense with Cyler next week (god damnit I'm going to waste another day watching a shitty scrimmage). We win rather easily, say 44-10?
The defense wasn't fine just in the 2nd half ... the young guys were picked on for the first drive then they basically kicked ass the rest of the game allowing 3 FGs. If you tell me the defense gives up 16 ppg for the season, I'm going to tell you that we'll have a damn good season.
You think that subbing on defense was one of the few signs of good coaching. Let me give you a few other examples of good coaching:
1) Using Coleman on the last drive when he was by far the most effective runner during the game and not punishing him or showing a lack of faith based on his prior fumble
2) Coaching up the young DBs during the game so that they learned and didn't make the same mistakes multiple times
3) Playing a field position game and trusting the strength of your team (defense) to win you the game instead of the offense (something that would have never happened under Seven Win Steve who would have forced the issue with the offense during the game)
4) The execution on the last 2 drives of the game to essentially bleed off 8 minutes of the 4th quarter and give Hawaii no margin for error in their attempt to win the game ... this included putting Lindy in position to make plays that he was capable of making (and keeping those plays in the back pocket until they were really needed)
Now, you criticize Norm Chow for a fucktarded 3rd down pass to the flats at midfield ... you act like he just decided that that was a good play call nominated by John Madden. Instead if you were paying any attention whatsoever, you'd have noticed in the 2nd half in particular that the Hawaii WRs were getting basically ZERO separation whatsoever from our DBs. Moreover, the QB was getting hit on just about every single play. The pass to the flats wasn't designed to get 10 yards ... it was designed to get them into 4th and manageable so that they could go for it. Instead, Peters made a great play (because that's what he does), Hawaii lost yardage, they knew that they had almost zero chance to make a play in that situation, so they decided to punt it, leverage their defense that was playing well, and play the timeout game (which they had 3 left).
And you do realize that they tried 3 trick plays in the first quarter plus of the game? Two of them worked? The third would have worked if he had another half second to get his shoulders squared up to his target. -
Tequilla Long. Ho Lee Fuck.Tequilla said:
Your post should be nominated for the fucktarded post of the week ...SteveInShelton said:The defense was fine considering they were on the field most of the 2nd half. Roaddawg made a good observation where UW was subbing a lot on defense during that game which helped quite a bit in that regard. It was one of the few examples of good coaching during the game.
Norm Chow helped the most, that 3rd and 10 pass to the flats near the 50 late in the 4th was fucking stupid and probably destroyed any confidence the team had left. Not even going to mention the trick play they tried.
Lindquist had a lot of wide open receivers in the 2nd half he just plain missed. Hoping to see a different offense with Cyler next week (god damnit I'm going to waste another day watching a shitty scrimmage). We win rather easily, say 44-10?
The defense wasn't fine just in the 2nd half ... the young guys were picked on for the first drive then they basically kicked ass the rest of the game allowing 3 FGs. If you tell me the defense gives up 16 ppg for the season, I'm going to tell you that we'll have a damn good season.
You think that subbing on defense was one of the few signs of good coaching. Let me give you a few other examples of good coaching:
1) Using Coleman on the last drive when he was by far the most effective runner during the game and not punishing him or showing a lack of faith based on his prior fumble
2) Coaching up the young DBs during the game so that they learned and didn't make the same mistakes multiple times
3) Playing a field position game and trusting the strength of your team (defense) to win you the game instead of the offense (something that would have never happened under Seven Win Steve who would have forced the issue with the offense during the game)
4) The execution on the last 2 drives of the game to essentially bleed off 8 minutes of the 4th quarter and give Hawaii no margin for error in their attempt to win the game ... this included putting Lindy in position to make plays that he was capable of making (and keeping those plays in the back pocket until they were really needed)
Now, you criticize Norm Chow for a fucktarded 3rd down pass to the flats at midfield ... you act like he just decided that that was a good play call nominated by John Madden. Instead if you were paying any attention whatsoever, you'd have noticed in the 2nd half in particular that the Hawaii WRs were getting basically ZERO separation whatsoever from our DBs. Moreover, the QB was getting hit on just about every single play. The pass to the flats wasn't designed to get 10 yards ... it was designed to get them into 4th and manageable so that they could go for it. Instead, Peters made a great play (because that's what he does), Hawaii lost yardage, they knew that they had almost zero chance to make a play in that situation, so they decided to punt it, leverage their defense that was playing well, and play the timeout game (which they had 3 left).
And you do realize that they tried 3 trick plays in the first quarter plus of the game? Two of them worked? The third would have worked if he had another half second to get his shoulders squared up to his target. -
This Washington vs. Coleman argument is also FS ...
Washington may very well be a very good back ... but Coleman is better, runs harder, shows better instincts, and isn't afraid to stick his nose into the pile to get extra yards.
