Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options
Letter grade for the game
Fire_Marshall_Bill
Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 23,017
I didn't see the game until almost noon (thanks Larry Scott, hypen name, and Cox), so it was already 24-0 when I tuned in. Honestly, they looked like the same old seven or eight win Huskies, but it's hard to judge when the game is pretty much out out of hand.
Letter grade for the game 67 votes
A
2%
2 votes
B
56%
38 votes
C
19%
13 votes
D
1%
1 vote
F
4%
3 votes
Janet Reno
14%
10 votes
Comments
Comparing stats only for the first half (when it was starters vs starters), it was pretty much domination. Downgraded to B for lack of strong rushing game, but Rutgers did stack the box almost every time.
F
Y
F
E
I'd go with b too.
Too bad they kind of sucked but at least they are juicing again
Jake can throw. He can scramble and throw too. He had a couple of dandies (we say that in Lewis County) on the runs. I said that on my poddings. @DerekJohnson didn't believe me. He'll take a big step forward this year. He'll play on Sundays if only as a backup.
Our defense is good. We knew that.
The coaches took the opportunity to give minutes to replacements. can't evaluate that.
I stand behind my doogish predictions because I saw NOTHING yesterday that would dissuade me from that.
If we had a close game yesterday, I'd be in Hillsboro bleaughing someone.
D looked pretty good but might be undisciplined. Hard to say.... Rutgers sucks
If we don't improve a good chunk by Zona, we'll flub it away there and hit like 8-4/7-5.
Yes, @Tequilla was right, I watched it again. 8 in the box at a minimum. They set up to stop Gaskin. So we beat them over the top.
That's not a bad thing strategically. Show the rest of the fuckers that Brownsocks has an arm so play us straight up. I think a lot of you assclowns miss the strategic thinking in scrimmages.
BUT, as a man, who I hope, has some integrity, I will say, even with 8 in the box, we should run over people. (It didn't work for Stanford in the 2nd half...holla!) But we should have been better on the run. @PurpleJ et al are correct.
Overall. My boy Jake can hit the deep and scramble and throw as I predicted. Don't judge anything on the rest of the game. My boy Pete, strategic thinker that he is, took the opportunity to scrimmage. We gained more value in putting in 75th stringers than we would have by winning 105-3.
Oh, and btw, Don James talked about 3 phases. Our special teams, to quote a skinny jean wearing midget are "special". And its not just fast dudes. That's coaching.
So to quote Charlie Brown, "Be of Good cheer!"
And @TierbsHsotBoobs is mostly right.
I Tequillaed myself. I apologize.