Thinking Back To August
I read today that Gaskin is leading the PAC 12 in rushing. Browning has the best passer rating of all P-5 QB's. Coleman is leading the country in YPC for anyone with at least 50 carries.
Weak schedule or not, this offense is elite. We played dreck the past two years and the offense was terrible.
This is the best OL since at least 2000, if not '96 or '97. Ross and Pettis ball out every game. The other WR's, especially Chico have played well too.
Can anyone here honestly say they saw this coming?
Comments
-
Um, no. I expected what we've seen defensively. I did not expect to have the best WR corps and the best OL in the P12. And Coleman -- da fuq did this come from?
-
Did someone say the D word?
-
@PhilBleenor knew this would happen in 1968
-
I think there are a lot more people who demanded excellence than expected excellence. I thought we would likely be in close games, win most but drop a couple. The defense was clearly going to be a strength but the offensive improvement was unanticipated, and honestly based on what we'd seen from JSFS to that point, unprecedentedford.RoadDawg55 said:
Can anyone here honestly say they saw this coming? -
We don't know for sure if they are good, great, or ELITE yet. So LIPO.
13-0 or GTFO. Then we can find out how good they actually are in the playoffs. -
Nope. I thought this was the 9-3 year or maybe 10-2. I didn't see Oregon and Stanford sucking like this though. 2017 was going to be (hopefully) the top five year if everything absolutely went perfectly.
People were bitching about the offensive line and other things incessantly in the cream puff games. I probably did too at some point. But people were losing their minds because the 35-3 lead over Rutgers or whatever wasn't done correctly apparently.
I probably would have taken the sixth best offense in the Pac 12 six weeks ago TBH (just learned that acronym from Millennials). -
RoadDawg55 said:
We were hoping for an above average offense. We ended up getting one of the best offenses in the country.
I read today that Gaskin is leading the PAC 12 in rushing. Browning has the best passer rating of all P-5 QB's. Coleman is leading the country in YPC for anyone with at least 50 carries.
Weak schedule or not, this offense is elite. We played dreck the past two years and the offense was terrible.
This is the best OL since at least 2000, if not '96 or '97. Ross and Pettis ball out every game. The other WR's, especially Chico have played well too.
Can anyone here honestly say they saw this coming?
A little something called player development.TTJ said:Um, no. I expected what we've seen defensively. I did not expect to have the best WR corps and the best OL in the P12. And Coleman -- da fuq did this come from?
-
I didn't see this big of improvement coming but I did think it would get better.
I don't understand how it was so hard for people on this board to realize that all the linemen Sark left were dogshit and you can't just recruit a starting freshman oline to be elite. Our offense was so bad partially to JS but mostly because you can't develop plays when the defenders are already in the backfield right after the snap. Felt like everyone here thought a good coach should be able to coach dogshit into elite just because good coaching herp derp. -
*boredCuntWaffle said:I didn't see this big of improvement coming but I did think it would get better.
I don't understand how it was so hard for people on this board to realize that all the linemen Sark left were dogshit and you can't just recruit a starting freshman oline to be elite. Our offense was so bad partially to JS but mostly because you can't develop plays when the defenders are already in the backfield right after the snap. Felt like everyone here thought a good coach should be able to coach dogshit into elite just because good coaching herp derp. -
Remember in 2009 when we were saying just wait for 2016 it's gonna be special? Well we're here!
-
Yes, I expected this.
Petersen's player development has been unreal, and unlike last year, UW doesn't have true freshman at the 3 most important positions on offense. In addition, every other team in the Pac-12 lost a shit load of experience last year. -
I feel vindicated
-
I would love to see a post that predicted Browning being a Heisman contender or having the best offense in the conference.bananasnblondes said:Yes, I expected this.
Petersen's player development has been unreal, and unlike last year, UW doesn't have true freshman at the 3 most important positions on offense. In addition, every other team in the Pac-12 lost a shit load of experience last year. -
Pretty sure @HeretoBeatmyChest did.
-
Let's slow the horses down until they beat Utah and USC, then we can say that they'll have actually beat "someone."
-
I know he was bullish on UW, but I don't recall him ever talking about an offense this good.Dennis_DeYoung said:Pretty sure @HeretoBeatmyChest did.
-
Those are now the standards J. You're still being the opposite of a Tequilla, Aubbie type of doog. They aren't putting up 30 a game. They regularly put up 40+ and running out the clock in every game except Arizona. A bad game doesn't make them not elite. Quit the Ricky Bobby act.PurpleJ said:We don't know for sure if they are good, great, or ELITE yet. So LIPO.
13-0 or GTFO. Then we can find out how good they actually are in the playoffs. -
Frankly the bullying you had to endure was outrageous.RaceBannon said:I feel vindicated
-
I predicted an undefeated season.
So yeah. I got that goin' for me. -
Perhaps we have a different definition of elite. Ever think of that?RoadDawg55 said:
Those are now the standards J. You're still being the opposite of a Tequilla, Aubbie type of doog. They aren't putting up 30 a game. They regularly put up 40+ and running out the clock in every game except Arizona. A bad game doesn't make them not elite. Quit the Ricky Bobby act.PurpleJ said:We don't know for sure if they are good, great, or ELITE yet. So LIPO.
13-0 or GTFO. Then we can find out how good they actually are in the playoffs.
Lots of teams put up big numbers in the modern age of football. No doubt this offense is good and much improved. Elite means you can do it against the best competition and we haven't played anyone close to that.
In order to be elite you have succeed against elite competition, such as a playoff team. -
The play of the wr's was the #1 question going into the season, and they have blown past even the most optimistic doog.
Pettis is a different player from last year, same for Ross two years ago. Chico has continued his upward trajectory, and Bachelli, Fuller have been more than solid for what they are being asked to do.
Ironically, for the first two years under JS/CP the only consistent production we got in the pass game was from the tight ends, yet if you would have told anyone here what the te's have as a group for catches (around 15 is my guess) after 7 games back in August, we would have thought the offense would have been screwed.
I would love to be a fly on the wall and hear what C.P. in private would say how much of it is Pease versus Hamden and his effect on the group and how much it's the maturity of Jake at qb. -
In my wildest dreams, what we're seeing is what I thought was at the edge of being possible ...
Before Spring Practice, I was a little concerned about the WRs and the offense ... watching practice and seeing how dominant the defense was didn't help ...
After seeing about 3 drives against Rutgers and what John Ross brought to the table told me everything with the offense was going to be fine ..
The defense is really fucking good ...
The offense has raised their game practicing against that defense every single day ...
For those that didn't see Stanford and Oregon regressing, you weren't paying attention (although they have arguably regressed far more than one would have thought) ... -
Winning at Cal is going to be a lot harder than beating SC at homedoogsinparadise said:Let's slow the horses down until they beat Utah and USC, then we can say that they'll have actually beat "someone."
-
Jesus Christ, what a load of doogs! Wait until the next few games before you rack up the natty trophy. They are all eminently losable, with or without those big lines ready to rumble. Playing on the road is still a huge question mark in my mind.
-
backthepack said:RoadDawg55 said:
We were hoping for an above average offense. We ended up getting one of the best offenses in the country.
I read today that Gaskin is leading the PAC 12 in rushing. Browning has the best passer rating of all P-5 QB's. Coleman is leading the country in YPC for anyone with at least 50 carries.
Weak schedule or not, this offense is elite. We played dreck the past two years and the offense was terrible.
This is the best OL since at least 2000, if not '96 or '97. Ross and Pettis ball out every game. The other WR's, especially Chico have played well too.
Can anyone here honestly say they saw this coming?
A little something called prayer warriors..TTJ said:Um, no. I expected what we've seen defensively. I did not expect to have the best WR corps and the best OL in the P12. And Coleman -- da fuq did this come from?
-
So if they go 13-1 and lose the natty to Bama on a last second 52-yard field goal, you want Petersen to GTFO.PurpleJ said:We don't know for sure if they are good, great, or ELITE yet. So LIPO.
13-0 or GTFO. Then we can find out how good they actually are in the playoffs. -
I lived in Boise for much of Petermen's tenure there. I knew quite a few former players and obviously a lot of fans who followed the program closely. And every time they'd lose a stud to graduation or the NFL, it would boggle my mind that none were concerned because some redshirt junior was going to replace him. Sure enough, some unathletic 4th year white kid from Mountain Home or Weiser with no other offers would step in without noticeable drop-off.bananasnblondes said:Yes, I expected this.
Petersen's player development has been unreal, and unlike last year, UW doesn't have true freshman at the 3 most important positions on offense. In addition, every other team in the Pac-12 lost a shit load of experience last year.
I didn't understand this foreign notion. You expect players to get better every year simply because they're a year older with more experience? Nonsense! I was used to John Timus, Ben Bandels, Greyson Gunheims, James Johnsons, ASJs, Jack Lockners and Nate Fellners being better as freshmen than as juniors. This whole concept was completely foreign to me and I was secretly jealous. Looking back, it really is pathetic that we've? gone 15? 20? 25? fucking years without a coaching staff that made kids significantly better over time on a consistent basis. Guys like Mason Foster who significantly improved (in spite of the coaching staff) were an anomaly. -
If winning at Cal is hard, the season is over.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Winning at Cal is going to be a lot harder than beating SC at homedoogsinparadise said:Let's slow the horses down until they beat Utah and USC, then we can say that they'll have actually beat "someone."
-
Hi.DerekJohnson said:
So if they go 13-1 and lose the natty to Bama on a last second 52-yard field goal, you want Petersen to GTFO.PurpleJ said:We don't know for sure if they are good, great, or ELITE yet. So LIPO.
13-0 or GTFO. Then we can find out how good they actually are in the playoffs.
UW would have already been 14-0 in that scenario.
Doogs hate math. -
If you can't tell that @DerekJohnson doesn't deal with hypotheticals around here and didn't know UW would be 14-1 in his scenario then I can't help you.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Hi.DerekJohnson said:
So if they go 13-1 and lose the natty to Bama on a last second 52-yard field goal, you want Petersen to GTFO.PurpleJ said:We don't know for sure if they are good, great, or ELITE yet. So LIPO.
13-0 or GTFO. Then we can find out how good they actually are in the playoffs.
UW would have already been 14-0 in that scenario.
Doogs hate math.
