Husky Fan Podcast: Post USC, Pre-Oregon

RoadDawg55 said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

RoadDawg55 said:

creepycoug said:

RoadDawg55 said:

BallSacked said:

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

I inteded to give @BallSacked a shoutout but forgot. His consistent and steadfast call for a UW win should be its own profile in courage.

Thanks Chestes. I do it for the calls and message board glory, not the pub, but appreciate your ts & ps all the same.

Maybe confirmation bias but I thought SCs line play was going to be pretty mediocre without Leonard Williams and Pullard...and it is. I could see them losing the next two games, and hopefully my Bruins beat them too.

Thanks to the dawgs of war for blowing out Tureks ACL. Much appreciated for doing us that solid.

My bold prediction is that USC will beat Notre Dame and Utah. They will play a lot better without the Sark distraction. Then they lose to your Brooins.

Maybe they get up for one, but not both. The emotional aspect in football is like getting hopped up on Mountain Dew. It's great for 5 minutes, then reality comes crashing in on you along with your blood sugar level.

I do not see them beating Utah, frankly, and Washington beating them was not in any way whatsoever a surprise to me.

That's how shitty Sark is, and SC teams, in general, tend to get a little too much hype relative to what's really there.

Notre Dame gets a little lot of undeserved hype every year. Other than the 2012 title appearance (where they were plungered) they have been a mediocre program for a long time.

Utah is a good team, but they are bound to lose a couple games.

ND was good to very good at the start of the season. Injuries knocked them back down quite a bit.

How so? They played one game before Zaire got hurt and he was an unproven QB who was 7-18 before breaking his ankle at Virginia. They aren't terrible, but they aren't good either. They are overrated at some point every season.

Zaire was one of 4-5 starters lost in the first two weeks. But you know me, I'm just propping up Brian Kelly.

One thing that I thought was a very important point made in the podcast, one that has been made on the boards, and a discussion that I had with Chest at the last trip to the Taki Tiki was about the offense finding an identity and playing to the strengths of the team. In the USC game, for the first time all year, we saw the identity being established by playing smart on offense, running the ball, and taking shots when available. Even though we didn't hit on the shots, the ability to play in this manner had lasting implications to our defense and special teams ... which are both far bigger strengths. Petersen called out as much during his presser yesterday talking about the need to continue to run the ball even when it isn't working and having faith that at some point it will pay off.

As alluded to during the predictions, the above #script for us this year has us playing a lot of these types of games where things look ugly but get to the 2nd half and 4th quarter due to the defense and special teams keeping us in the game. We'll have some good/bad days on offense as we go. But we won't be looking at many situations where we are going to blow teams out of the water because of our explosive offense. It's not who we are. Not in the script.

Also, when you think about it, this is also one of the reasons that I said before the season that I could see this season shaping up a lot like the 99 team that was very ugly at times but also got late into the year with a legit chance to win the conference. I can see the same playing out this year. We win this weekend and Stanford loses to UCLA. Head down to the Farm next weekend and beat them. Cal will get at least another loss in them between the games against the LA schools and Stanford. Could very easily be in a great position in the conference. I still don't think that we'll win the North this year by being so inconsistent offensively with how young we are ... but there will be enough there that by the end of the year the team can look back at it and realize not only how close they are, but how winning next year is right there for them to take. Good days are on the horizon. Let's start it this weekend.

Pretty good Lee Corso impression. I would encourage a regular segment where you check in with "Lee" and then spout some silly nonsense about UWs opponent of the week. Your welcome for the ratings boost.

Also, FREE PUB!! with the shoutout

You're* very best effort. Good chit.

droggins said:

Good pod guys. I still want another episode each week.

I think Chest is looking through browning colored glasses when making an assessment of the QB play lately. Jake has been progressing in some areas such as staying in the pocket longer. But accuracy was a real issue last game. If you are immobile then you have to make good decisions and be accurate. The UW win has silenced the QB criticism.

You guys pointing out the sub packages each week are great observations. 736 is the only linebacker combo that should be playing. Like you all mentioned, at least one them should always be present. Victor will be missed for a half next week. Royce may have 150 by the time he meets Victor.

Jake must improve accuracy for this game. I can't believe the other 3 QBs are less accurate as Jake lately. But then reality prevails. Miley was our starting QB last year. The others are placeholders.

What does every think about the run D? The wins masks the YPC. Early on the D line was getting blown off the line of scrimmage. The coaches seem to make the right in game adjustments If Sark would abandoned the pass game, I believe the coaches would have made the proper changes. Just one thing to look at during the Oregon game.

Speaking of the Oregon game, concerning the UW defense, the single most important key will be tackling. Royce is a beast. For the UW offense, Oregon's key will be stopping UWs run game. So Jake has to hit the open receivers if UW is going to win.

One last thing. Will storming the field be acceptable if UW wins the game?

Only if you dance on the O with cutoff white t shirts with NW Champions sharpied on them