Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
What player surprised you the most (positive and negative)?
Gladstone
Member Posts: 16,419
Positive: Victor! What a fucking stud! Can't wait to see him light people up in conference play. #playerdevelopment
Negative: D Washington. Same straight edge running nonsense. Spare me the OL being bad, he was worse.
Negative: D Washington. Same straight edge running nonsense. Spare me the OL being bad, he was worse.
Comments
-
They all sucked.
-
Positive: Win a fucking game and we will talk
Negative: D-line. Pick anyone. They all looked undersized and couldn't generate a pass rush. -
First half maybe, but the d-line was least of our problems.PurpleJ said:Positive: Win a fucking game and we will talk
Negative: D-line. Pick anyone. They all looked undersized and couldn't generate a pass rush. -
It said surprised by, not who was the least of our problems. I wasn't surprised at all by the offense. I was surprised that our DL was average. I expected them to be good, but I'm not really worried because I like our DL coach.GrundleStiltzkin said:
First half maybe, but the d-line was least of our problems.
-
Pretty much agree on both.
Not sure anyone surprised me that much in a positive way.
I was expecting at least something from DWash. Didn't expect him to play even close to that horribly -
Biggest positive surprise was definitely Victor.
Negative was the run game. I expected we'd struggle to run the ball but figured we'd come up with more than 29 net yards. At least 60-70.
Dwayne Washington's entire game actually improved because he was an effective blocker and looked good catching passes. That gives him some space to work. Unfortunately he just wont do anything against good run defenses and will never be a bell cow type back.
On the series that made it 13-16, he made the wrong read on a play that was well blocked. Would have scored a TD had he made the right read. -
Gaines looked good, I never noticed dissly
-
I did notice Dissly actually. Wasn't amazing or anything but he shows up.brchco12 said:Gaines looked good, I never noticed dissly
-
#OurDissly blew the fuck up out of a guy once.brchco12 said:Gaines looked good, I never noticed dissly
-
Aren't Gaines' and dissly's numbers very similar? I kept confusing them in a way only DDY would appreciate
-
Gaines is the fatty.brchco12 said:Aren't Gaines' and dissly's numbers very similar? I kept confusing them in a way only DDY would appreciate
-
Hippopeteamus said:
Chris Gaines is the fatty. -
I was most positively surprised by Browning. That is of course relative to expectations.
I didn't really have an expectation before but I most negatively noticed Bierria with his big whiffs. Sure, they could have been awesome hits had he connected but close doesn't count. -
The biggest negative surprise is that Mickens is still on the roster.
-
Seriously mickens is cancer, the better he plays in spurts the worse he affects the team overall. He's like Mike Cameron hitting 4HRs, then striking out for the rest of the season.TierbsHsotBoobs said:The biggest negative surprise is that Mickens is still on the roster.
-
I was impressed with Eldrenkamp. He was pushing guys around on pass block. passes the look test. Run game away a clusterfuck and I didn't see how he performed there.
Negative: wide receivers. Would name one but who cares. -
Surprised Browning didn't play better. And don't give me that true freshman bullshit - Josh Rosen absolutely lit it up for UCLA. Hope I'm wrong but he didn't show me much to get excited about. Oh, he could develop but doubt it's this year.
-
Positive - McIntosh didn't look worthless and Long Ass Neck looked good at corner
Negative - Peterman -
I was most positively surprised when we came out in the beginning of the game. I saw some new formations.
"Finally!, Jonathan Smith opened up the playbook because we have a QB worth a damn"
Then, the game unfolded. Despite the fact that we had some new plays, and lots of motion. We still threw at the line of scrimmage all day.
"Ok, maybe we'll have a screen heavy offense, that's okay, that can win games too, now that we have a QB like browning, we can stretch the defense and this can work. It will help our run game too since our backs are either young, or very flawed."
We didn't try to stretch the field. We kept trying to run lateral passes/screen all day. Again.
And Again
and Again.
"if we keep trying the same thing over and over, it will work eventually. That makes sense. That's what I like to think." - Jonathan Smith
It didn't work.
I'm surprised that I was surprised. -
J smith is not rosens OCRaccoonHarry said:Surprised Browning didn't play better. And don't give me that true freshman bullshit - Josh Rosen absolutely lit it up for UCLA. Hope I'm wrong but he didn't show me much to get excited about. Oh, he could develop but doubt it's this year.
-
1. BSU>VirginiaRaccoonHarry said:Surprised Browning didn't play better. And don't give me that true freshman bullshit - Josh Rosen absolutely lit it up for UCLA. Hope I'm wrong but he didn't show me much to get excited about. Oh, he could develop but doubt it's this year.
2.UCLA>>>>>>Washington
3.Malzone>>>>>>...>>>>>>Smith
Yes Rosen is better now, but I thought Browning showed good escapability, and some confidence. I really think having no running game handicapped how much UW could throw deep, especially after they got down by a few scores.
I am probably just dooging about it though... -
Did you even watch the game?PurpleJ said:Positive: Win a fucking game and we will talk
Negative: D-line. Pick anyone. They all looked undersized and couldn't generate a pass rush. -
I just read the headlines.2001400ex said:
Did you even watch the game?
-
Whooosh? How could you put the WRs as a negative given the scheme/playcalling?SpoonieLuv said:I was impressed with Eldrenkamp. He was pushing guys around on pass block. passes the look test. Run game away a clusterfuck and I didn't see how he performed there.
Negative: wide receivers. Would name one but who cares. -
Surprised nobody has mentioned vita Vea. For someone who hasn't played in 3 years he looked good. Really collapsed pocket and got a good push in run game. Victor wasn't a surprise to me. Got in argument with ceo Kent Saying he would be better than Timu in his first year as starter. Victor only needs a half of tfl to tie Timu's total of last year. More importantly Victors tackles were at 2 yards not 8 yards past LOS
Brostek was meh and Bierra -
Positive:
Kaleb McGary, Virta, Victor, Eldrenkamp, Littleton.
Negative:
Dwayne Warshington.
It was hard to have too many negative surprises because overall I was happy with the Defense (we played a shit ton of guys on D and didn't have much drop off) and the offense was so bad it was hard to get upset with players. -
Browning looked pretty good. He threw some nice balls, moved around in the pocket, barked orders, wasn't nervous, etc. He looked like he belonged, but objectively speaking, he played like shit. 20-34 for 150 and a pick is a terrible game.
We've harped on the offensive coaching enough, but our talent isn't that bad. It's really not. And even if it is bad, I still expect to have a good enough coach to coax something out of them. It's fucking pathetic. The defense and special teams set them up multiple times with outstanding field position and they twiddled their dicks and kicked FG's. I think they got one first down on either of those drives.
It's really depressing that Petersen and his staff had a long time to reflect on last year's dreckfest of an offense and improve it. All off season to make necessary tweaks and changes. And we come out and play arguably the worst offensive game of the Petersen era. We all know how bad some of those games were last year too. This was as bad or worse than ASU and Stanford last year. There were some good things going on, but it's hard to feel good about anything with this embarrassing of a showing. -
Positives: Halftime adjustments, special teams (Pettis TD on PR which is a product of players making their blocks; Baker blocking a PAT; Mickens blocking a punt), the defense getting a stop after Browning's INT, and the team not quitting at halftime.
The team doesn't fold like a lawn chair from Sam's Club after the slightest hint of adversity. This team was down 3 scores at halftime and put themselves in a position to win.
Negatives: everything that isn't a positive
The team lacks consistency and an identity. And Smith has to go. -
It's so goddamned maddening. For playcalling I could run a mysql script that randomly selected plays from an old NCAA Xbox game and I bet we generate more yards on offense. But as discussed, as we hate on Smith, just the same it stands to reason we hate on Petersen for hiring and sticking with this dumpster fire.
It's a glaring elephant in the room, which is a shame because you can see actual progress blossoming everywhere else in the program. As it relates to in-state recruiting the relationship with local HS coaches has improved drastically over Sark. The S&C is obviously working. The defense has generally been good, with lots of player development at all three levels. Special teams immediately improved. The effort level seems high. All the off the field bullshit doogs love is also very strong.
The whole 'offensive guru' dumpster fire reminds me of Charlie Weis. -
I'm dooging hard for Chico. SPSL!!!!
