Petersen and Smith
Jonathon Smith days after the Cal game : I think at times we could’ve been more stubborn in the run game as I look at it.
Petersen after the USC game : “I think we were a little more stubborn with it, just kinda kept sticking to it. We kinda made a decision to be more stubborn which I thought was a good decision because you have to give it a chance.
These assholes would never talk about being stubborn in the pass game. Using the word stubborn about running the football is nauseating. Doing what has worked is considered stubborn? Stubborn is sticking with your fucking horrible offense Petersen, even after it has sucked for four fucking years! Stubborn is still trying to be balanced when for the last three weeks we ran the ball well, but the passing game sucked.
I'm telling you, they might be polar opposites, but Pete and Sark both want, or in Sark's case wanted, to be seen as offensive geniuses with innovative schemes and play calling. Both have balanced offenses, but deep down they want to air it out.
Comments
-
Pete was a college QB and WR coach at Oregon way back when...
-
This is one of the reasons why I generally fucking hate having former QBs or QB coaches doing the play calling.
-
(looks at Mark Helfrich and Scott Frost)Houhusky said:This is one of the reasons why I generally fucking hate having former QBs or QB coaches doing the play calling.
Agreed. -
Smith should be fired but won't because his boss loves him. Who needs to pressure the head coach? Well that would be Woodward but he obviously feels no heat from his boss who is the dyke version of Rachel Dolezel. Dawg fans are fucked.
-
Right now Washington is 11th in the league for rushing attempts.
Ahead of only Wazzu.
Right behind USC.
Last year they were second to only Oregon. -
Smith will be gone, but I still don't care. There is no way he is allowed back after two years of having the worst offense in the Pac 12. I doubt a coordinator has ever survived that, at any school.DuckHHunterisafag said:Smith should be fired but won't because his boss loves him. Who needs to pressure the head coach? Well that would be Woodward but he obviously feels no heat from his boss who is the dyke version of Rachel Dolezel. Dawg fans are fucked.
-
Some of that has to do with how few plays the Huskies run, but it also has to do with these assholes being enamored with their new Kellen Moore.topdawgnc said:Right now Washington is 11th in the league for rushing attempts.
Ahead of only Wazzu.
Right behind USC.
Last year they were second to only Oregon. -
Yeah, but this is UW we're talking about.RoadDawg55 said:
Smith will be gone, but I still don't care. There is no way he is allowed back after two years of having the worst offense in the Pac 12. I doubt a coordinator has ever survived that, at any school.DuckHHunterisafag said:Smith should be fired but won't because his boss loves him. Who needs to pressure the head coach? Well that would be Woodward but he obviously feels no heat from his boss who is the dyke version of Rachel Dolezel. Dawg fans are fucked.
No doubt youth will be used as an excuse to keep him. -
Stubborn is what Sark did with the passing game. Continuing to force the running game isn't being stubborn, it's being patient. You have that ability when you have a defense of Washington's calibur. The defense keeps you in the game, and in the second half, when the opponent is tired out, you have your way with them. This has been the Stanford blue print since Harbaugh arrived. It's especially ideal when you have a quarterback that isn't yet ready to win you football games. But don't ask me, I'm just an unemployed basement dweller, living on free rent and endless Hot Pockets.
-
Lambo not only embraced shitty defense once he became head coach, he also changed to the Palouse Puke or kill your QB offense. Shout out to Tailgater for those names. Imagine Brock with a running game and throwing when you want to, not when you have to. Like 1996 with Dillon. Dumb old Lambo still didn't get it and was back to spreading it out and playing shitty offense as fast as he could.
In comes Rick who starts out 0-2 with his west coast shit offense. Scraps it for a running attack and wins a Rose Bowl. Can't wait to dump that and start throwing it all over so we can go 8-4 which at the time was a bad season.
Gilby was basically as fucked up as Petersen when it came to offense as a head coach. Uses the throw all this shit against the wall and see what sticks offense as long as we throw sideways instead of downfield.
Ty was another west coast offense puke. Sark was Sark, Road nailed both Sark and Pete - they want to be genius.
We just want to fucking win. If all those loser coaches with their loser offenses had worked then great. They didn't.
Neither is Petersen's. Fix it or get the fuck out -
This is amazing considering we are starting a true freshman QB, talk about putting him in a position to fail. Not that he needs any help with that, he fucking sucks.topdawgnc said:Right now Washington is 11th in the league for rushing attempts.
Ahead of only Wazzu.
Right behind USC.
Last year they were second to only Oregon. -
You should be proud of your living situation. In all seriousness.greenblood said:Stubborn is what Sark did with the passing game. Continuing to force the running game isn't being stubborn, it's being patient. You have that ability when you have a defense of Washington's calibur. The defense keeps you in the game, and in the second half, when the opponent is tired out, you have your way with them. This has been the Stanford blue print since Harbaugh arrived. It's especially ideal when you have a quarterback that isn't yet ready to win you football games. But don't ask me, I'm just an unemployed basement dweller, living on free rent and endless Hot Pockets.
-
3rd and 1 and the play call is a 25 yard shot to jaydon fuck face.
That sums up SmithFS -
....who was blanketed by a LINEBACKER.section_332 said:3rd and 1 and the play call is a 25 yard shot to jaydon fuck face.
That sums up SmithFS -
Where do I sign up? Is there some kind of Hot Pocket for life lotto game in Washington now? My sweatpants just grew slightlyjecornel said:
You should be proud of your living situation. In all seriousness.greenblood said:Stubborn is what Sark did with the passing game. Continuing to force the running game isn't being stubborn, it's being patient. You have that ability when you have a defense of Washington's calibur. The defense keeps you in the game, and in the second half, when the opponent is tired out, you have your way with them. This has been the Stanford blue print since Harbaugh arrived. It's especially ideal when you have a quarterback that isn't yet ready to win you football games. But don't ask me, I'm just an unemployed basement dweller, living on free rent and endless Hot Pockets.
-
i think i need recovery time. im so disappointed i feel like i just dont even fuckin care anymore.
meh. blah. shrug. -
Pete thought he was finding Kellen part two in Browning. Browning threw the ball more than anyone in the country in high school, and that won't work here. Jeff Lockie or the OSU fag qb could have optioned UW to a win probably.
Not only did the coaches set out a game plan that wasn't good, it was bad enough to highlight all the weaknesses while shutting down anything that worked. -
i have a message for smith and petermen:
-
We averaged 6 yards per play ... this was our best offensive performance of the year outside of Utah State (not counting Sac St)
-
Browning 32 attempts, Gaskin 18 carries is all that has to be said. Reverse those and you're probably looking at a win.
-
Post of the Weekdoogsinparadise said:Browning 32 attempts, Gaskin 18 carries is all that has to be said. Reverse those and you're probably looking at a win.
-
Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays. -
You're a great poster, but sometimes you don't see the forest for the trees.Tequilla said:Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays. -
Gaskin surely can take 25 carries? My main point was just what were they thinking having Browning throw 32 passes.Tequilla said:Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays. -
You're never going to know if gaskin can handle it until you feed him 32 times
-
Tequilla, it's the same thing every fucking week regardless of who plays RB. Browning throws 30 plus passes every week. If Washington played, They would have split the 21 carries that were called in the game.Tequilla said:Might be post of the week but is Gaskin capable of 32 carries at this point in time of his career? Is it something that the coaching staff is interested in?
Missing Washington in this game was HUGE and probably resulted in 5-7 of those Browning attempts instead of being run plays at least.
We averaged 6 yards per play in the game ... problem wasn't our ability to move the ball. It was our inability to finish drives and have explosive plays. -
I highly doubt Petersen fires anyone, especially since Woody will give him, at the very least, five years (regardless of his job performance)... especially since Woody has the AD job for as long as he wants it... especially since we now have a pres. who has no prior experience being a U pres., let alone firing and hiring an AD... especially since the BOR are appointed by the governor... and on, and on, and on.RoadDawg55 said:
Smith will be gone, but I still don't care. There is no way he is allowed back after two years of having the worst offense in the Pac 12. I doubt a coordinator has ever survived that, at any school.DuckHHunterisafag said:Smith should be fired but won't because his boss loves him. Who needs to pressure the head coach? Well that would be Woodward but he obviously feels no heat from his boss who is the dyke version of Rachel Dolezel. Dawg fans are fucked.
The culture of the state of Washington is the problem. The state legislature, along with the governor, are buffoons, and these are the ones appointing the BOR, and on down the hill the shit flows. Case in point: UW's new pres. Year in, year out, rated as one of the best public universities in the world, and they hire the interim pres., who started off as an associate professor in '86. I'd argue that such a highly acclaimed university deserves better. Apparently, she is the only pres. of major university that was appointed from within. Speaks volumes. -
I know the narrative is that Coleman and Cooper suck. And they do. They aren't very good RB's. That said, both had some success last season. Both were better than Washington for parts of the season. It's FS to pretend like giving them 5 or 6 carries is going to really hurt the offense.
Other than Oregon State's QB who is also a true freshman, Browning is probably the worst QB in the conference. Yeah, he's a true freshman and he shouldn't be playing, and he will get better, but right now, he sucks. -
While 19 of 30 for 199 and a TD doesn't seem like much, it's on par with what we did in the running game.
Generally speaking, I lean towards wanting to run the ball more than throw it.
I wasn't enthused with the play calling during the game, but didn't hate it either. Just thought we had a lot of lengthy fields to go and that isn't going to turn out good for our offense too often as we're going to run into a hold, sack, etc. Given Oregon's defense has had more struggles against the pass than the run, it didn't shock me that we tried to exploit them more in the passing game. With Browning completing a high percentage of his passes during the season, it's not a terrible approach.
The one reason I would advocate more plays to Gaskin is that particularly without Washington playing he's by far our most explosive player. That being said, about 100 of his 150 yards came on 2 carries ... so it's not like we were running for a consistent 4-6 yards per play.
Two days after the fact when looking at what our numbers did look like, 6 yards per play both running/passing, it's hard for me to be overly critical of what we did offensively. That's by far our best offensive game in conference this year and only the Utah St game was better (excluding Sac St).
And no, I don't think that if you change Browning's numbers to 16 of 25 for 175 and up Gaskin's numbers to 23 for 180 that that changes the outcome of the game.
There are plenty of things to get really critical of Smith on ... the one that I'd point to in this game was that we didn't take quite enough shots down the field to test the Oregon secondary (and I think that this is the biggest general criticism that I have of him right now). But I'd sign up for 6 yards per play by the offense the rest of the year right now. -
The worst thing is you actually think you are being analytical and smart by posting this. I don't give a shit what Browning's numbers were. He fucking sucked. And that's been the case in quite a few games. Oregon's secondary is really, really bad. Averaging 6.6 per attempt is bad. Cyler Miles averaged 7.29 last year.Tequilla said:While 19 of 30 for 199 and a TD doesn't seem like much, it's on par with what we did in the running game.
Generally speaking, I lean towards wanting to run the ball more than throw it.
I wasn't enthused with the play calling during the game, but didn't hate it either. Just thought we had a lot of lengthy fields to go and that isn't going to turn out good for our offense too often as we're going to run into a hold, sack, etc. Given Oregon's defense has had more struggles against the pass than the run, it didn't shock me that we tried to exploit them more in the passing game. With Browning completing a high percentage of his passes during the season, it's not a terrible approach.
The one reason I would advocate more plays to Gaskin is that particularly without Washington playing he's by far our most explosive player. That being said, about 100 of his 150 yards came on 2 carries ... so it's not like we were running for a consistent 4-6 yards per play.
Two days after the fact when looking at what our numbers did look like, 6 yards per play both running/passing, it's hard for me to be overly critical of what we did offensively. That's by far our best offensive game in conference this year and only the Utah St game was better (excluding Sac St).
And no, I don't think that if you change Browning's numbers to 16 of 25 for 175 and up Gaskin's numbers to 23 for 180 that that changes the outcome of the game.
There are plenty of things to get really critical of Smith on ... the one that I'd point to in this game was that we didn't take quite enough shots down the field to test the Oregon secondary (and I think that this is the biggest general criticism that I have of him right now). But I'd sign up for 6 yards per play by the offense the rest of the year right now.
Maybe we should have thrown a lot more last year considering Miles averaged more per attempt than the running game got? Enough with your pseudo intelligent, analytical bullshit. Are you watching these fucking games?
