Need to find a pass rush next week
Comments
-
- Cal's OLine will help give us a pass rush.
- Cal has not faced a secondary like ours.
- Cal has not faced a run game like ours.
-
Disagree on last 2. They just played SC.PineapplePirate said:- Cal's OLine will help give us a pass rush.
- Cal has not faced a secondary like ours.
- Cal has not faced a run game like ours. -
No more 3 man front bullshit.
-
You can make an argument for 3, with Utah, USC, San Diego State, but I still think our run game is better.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Disagree on last 2. They just played SC.PineapplePirate said:- Cal's OLine will help give us a pass rush.
- Cal has not faced a secondary like ours.
- Cal has not faced a run game like ours.
USC's secondary better than UW? -
Yea Cals OLine is garbage compared to Utahs who's held our line the entire time.
-
The pass rush this year has been better than usual. There really wasn't a pass rush since about the 2000 season up until lately at all, so what the fuck are you bitching about?
-
I'd be surprised if we see much else.Gladstone said:No more 3 man front bullshit.
-
I've wondered whether we change our pass rushing strategy depending on the QB.
Against Stanford, QB was a statue so go knock him down.
Against Oregon and Utah, QB was more dangerous running than throwing, so don't break contain and then try to sack him.
-
Whats wrong with lining up Wooching at NT and rushing 2?Gladstone said:No more 3 man front bullshit.
-
If Hansen is back you might have a game on your hands. They never reached the red zone on us but scored with the long ball.
-
Our secondary is a bit more stout than yours. Id be surprised if they do that.89ute said:If Hansen is back you might have a game on your hands. They never reached the red zone on us but scored with the long ball.
What is more likely is Cal gets unlimited 10 yard gains on slants and curls. -
cal's defense can't stop anyone. don't need a huge passrush. Get mathis back and disrupt just enough, UW should be able to escape with a 41-27 win or something
-
I think you just contradicted yourself. You say UW doesn't need an improved pass rush, but then you state the need to get Mathis back. Get him back and the pass rush gets markedly better.dhdawg said:cal's defense can't stop anyone. don't need a huge passrush. Get mathis back and disrupt just enough, UW should be able to escape with a 41-27 win or something
-
I was actually surprised by the Cal OL's pass protection against USC last week. USC has better talent across the bored, but Webb was rarely hit or hurried. Maybe he just has better pocket presence than Goff did, I dunno.
-
2 guys getting held, tackled or clipped.bananasnblondes said:For the first time all year, UW will be going against a QB who is not a complete retard when it comes to throwing the ball. Same can be said for Darnold and Falk. As good as our secondary is, those guys will pick us apart in the mid-range game if we let them have 7-seconds to throw the ball because we're rushing 2 guys.
-
that's not what I said. Don't need a huge pass rush, but it needs to be better than no passrush, which is what UW had this weekPassion said:
I think you just contradicted yourself. You say UW doesn't need an improved pass rush, but then you state the need to get Mathis back. Get him back and the pass rush gets markedly better.dhdawg said:cal's defense can't stop anyone. don't need a huge passrush. Get mathis back and disrupt just enough, UW should be able to escape with a 41-27 win or something
-
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
-
Levi says hi!ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
-
You mean it's difficult to get pressure on a real OL without sending linebackers?
-
ApostleofGrief said:
I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard. -
Seems kinda raysiss iyam.ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
-
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.RoadDawg55 said:ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard. -
@NeedsMoreStringDawg, true?ApostleofGrief said:
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.RoadDawg55 said:ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard. -
Yes, Saturday was poor, but our pass rush has been good to great since Kwatkowski got here.ApostleofGrief said:
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.RoadDawg55 said:ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
Polynesian DL weren't the problem.
Coaching was the problem. -
Kinda?doogsinparadise said:
Seems kinda raysiss iyam.ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
-
Serious question:
Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
-
There are a lot of good poly players. My point is more like there appeared to be for a long time that a player was recruited just because he was a big polynesian dude... what that appears to be is a bias based upon race. The other word for that is racism. I'm just calling it as it really is. The bored here is supposed to be for free speech. Probably saying we need more big fucking black guys is racist sounding. But what does it look like they are doing in the SEC SEC SEC SEC?dnc said:
Yes, Saturday was poor, but our pass rush has been good to great since Kwatkowski got here.ApostleofGrief said:
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.RoadDawg55 said:ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
Polynesian DL weren't the problem.
Coaching was the problem.
Yes, the pass rush has improved. That was my original point above which was buried. I asked what you assholes were complaining about since it had improved! -
The complaints were specifically about the lack of pressure on the QB Saturday. Did you watch the damn game?ApostleofGrief said:I asked what you assholes were complaining about since it had improved!
-
Hi there.ApostleofGrief said:
There are a lot of good poly players. My point is more like there appeared to be for a long time that a player was recruited just because he was a big polynesian dude... what that appears to be is a bias based upon race. The other word for that is racism. I'm just calling it as it really is. The bored here is supposed to be for free speech. Probably saying we need more big fucking black guys is racist sounding. But what does it look like they are doing in the SEC SEC SEC SEC?dnc said:
Yes, Saturday was poor, but our pass rush has been good to great since Kwatkowski got here.ApostleofGrief said:
I don't agree. The long term trend is to recruit along what appears to be a racial profile of big guys with last names typical European Americans can't pronounce. Just saying that is not racist. Actually recruiting along racial lines is "racism" because there is what appears to be a preference for players meeting a certain ethnic profile. It's not racism to say that. I am not talking about field goal kickers or the special Olympics; your analogies fall flat. I'm saying they've been doing the same thing with the DL for about the last 15 or 16 years and in all this time we have had a disappointing pass rush. That is my point and it is spot on.RoadDawg55 said:ApostleofGrief said:I don't see why you assholes are so touchy about my comment and buried my post. The pass rush has been lousy since Neuheisel started the practice of recruiting based on last name. If it was a name like Falahalawallawalla from Papua New Guinea you were on scholarship. But the fact is what is needed are big fucking mean black guys. Until you do that the pass rush is still going to be disappointing. But, this year has been better than usual. For years that has been utterly stagnant!!!
Nobody watches the game and thinks, "We're barely ever getting to the QB, but at least it's not as bad as 2004."
"That was a horrible ball by Browning, but I've seen Johnny DuRocher throw a worse pass."
"I don't care that Van Winkle missed that FG because he's better than Michael Braunstein."
"Budda Baker looked like a flailing hurdler at the special olympics on the long pass against Arizona, but I've seen Tripper Johnson look like an ever bigger retard.
Polynesian DL weren't the problem.
Coaching was the problem.
Yes, the pass rush has improved. That was my original point above which was buried. I asked what you assholes were complaining about since it had improved!
We had a pass rush last year. And the year before.
Hth. -
It's the preference of every coach (Excluding Todd Graham, of course). If you can get pressure without bringing more than 4 players you are at a decided advantage. Even better yet, if you have a secondary good enough that when you do bring 3/4 and still don't get to the QB that they can still hold a play to limited yards or force the QB to throw it away because there is no where to go, you have an even bigger advantage.AIRWOLF said:Serious question:
Is the Huskies' extreme reluctance to blitz likely a preference of Kwiatkowski, Petersen or both?
This seems like the kind of big picture philosophy thing that isn't totally up to the DC, right?
