Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Is or was Coleman under utilized?..

NeGgaPlEaSeNeGgaPlEaSe Member Posts: 5,736
edited November 2016 in Hardcore Husky Board
Why not run and re run Coleman all night long for 20 carries. Rest Gaskin and let him get heathy for USC
Coleman might actually get to 1000 yards on the season. Gaskin will get there, but Coleman May actually make it.
600 yards at 9.1 yards per carry, 4 games left and now Gaskin is dinged up
«1

Comments

  • BaphometBaphomet Member Posts: 1,511
    edited November 2016

    Why not run and re run Coleman all night long for 20 carries. Rest Gaskin and let him get heathy for USC
    Coleman might actually get to 1000 yards on the season. Gaskin will get there, but Coleman May actually make it.
    600 yards at 9.1 yards per carry, 4 games left and now Gaskin is dinged up

    I agree, I'd like to see Coleman running more. Maybe they thought Cal was weaker against the pass then they were against the run, so we ran more.

    But how cool would it be to have two backs getting 1,000 yards in a season? I can only dream.
  • mobeymobey Member Posts: 3,254
    edited November 2016
    That would require us(?) to, you know, RUN THE FUCKING BALL.

    And we know that will never happen.

    After looking at the box score I guess we(?) ran more than I thought. It just felt like we(?) could have bludgeoned them on the ground early and often if we(?) wanted.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    I like the Gaskin wildcat call in the fourth quarter. That was money.
  • mobeymobey Member Posts: 3,254

    mobey said:

    That would require us(?) to, you know, RUN THE FUCKING BALL.

    And we know that will never happen.

    There was no reason to run against Cal.
    There's always a reason to run.

    No better way to demoralize a team than to just kick the shit out of them on the ground.
  • mobeymobey Member Posts: 3,254

    mobey said:

    That would require us(?) to, you know, RUN THE FUCKING BALL.

    And we know that will never happen.

    After looking at the box score I guess we(?) ran more than I thought. It just felt like we(?) could have bludgeoned them on the ground early and often if we(?) wanted.

    Yea lets run the ball against a team who pretty much plays without any DBs.

    Good call.
    Gaskin only avged 15 YPC so good call on your part.

    No way to win with that little effectiveness.

    Dumbass.
  • MisterEmMisterEm Member Posts: 6,685
    edited November 2016
    mobey said:

    mobey said:

    That would require us(?) to, you know, RUN THE FUCKING BALL.

    And we know that will never happen.

    After looking at the box score I guess we(?) ran more than I thought. It just felt like we(?) could have bludgeoned them on the ground early and often if we(?) wanted.

    Yea lets run the ball against a team who pretty much plays without any DBs.

    Good call.
    GaskinCement Shoes only avged 15 YPC so good call on your part.

    No way to win with that little effectiveness.

    Dumbass.
    But still...
  • PassionPassion Member Posts: 4,622

    Over the past 30 years, have we ever seen such a dramatic transformation of a running back at UW? Two years ago I viewed him as filler. More or less the way I view Dotson now. But now when I see Coleman take a handoff I'm excited to see what will happen.

    How excited?
  • CuntWaffleCuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,499
    mobey said:

    mobey said:

    That would require us(?) to, you know, RUN THE FUCKING BALL.

    And we know that will never happen.

    After looking at the box score I guess we(?) ran more than I thought. It just felt like we(?) could have bludgeoned them on the ground early and often if we(?) wanted.

    Yea lets run the ball against a team who pretty much plays without any DBs.

    Good call.
    Gaskin only avged 15 YPC so good call on your part.

    No way to win with that little effectiveness.

    Dumbass.
    Lol you don't get it clearly.
  • doogsinparadisedoogsinparadise Member Posts: 9,320

    mobey said:

    That would require us(?) to, you know, RUN THE FUCKING BALL.

    And we know that will never happen.

    There was no reason to run against Cal.
    Cal was literally the worst team in the country against the run. But still.
  • dhdawgdhdawg Member Posts: 13,326

    mobey said:

    That would require us(?) to, you know, RUN THE FUCKING BALL.

    And we know that will never happen.

    After looking at the box score I guess we(?) ran more than I thought. It just felt like we(?) could have bludgeoned them on the ground early and often if we(?) wanted.

    Yea lets run the ball against a team who pretty much plays without any DBs.

    Good call.
    quiet down. all the "shit on john smith even when we score 66" crowd is gonna get angry
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,994 Standard Supporter

    Over the past 30 years, have we ever seen such a dramatic transformation of a running back at UW? Two years ago I viewed him as filler. More or less the way I view Dotson now. But now when I see Coleman take a handoff I'm excited to see what will happen.

    He's a very different back now. Faster, leaner, more aggressive.

    The new strength and conditioning coaches are earning their paychecks.

    But imagine if Ivan had gotten ahold of him!
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,994 Standard Supporter
    doogie said:

    I like to bitch about how my undefeated team is underutilizing a bench player during blowouts.

    *, because that's what I do.

    Fixed it for ya.
Sign In or Register to comment.