Yuge Mellon post game
Comments
-
CTE is real.
-
u shut your whore mouth. just run the ball we will win the conference
-
-
Peterman imposing running play quota on smith. Welcome to your souless job John!
-
Spoken like a true hack QB.
-
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
-
He also doesn’t like Browning. So it’s not all bad.
-
He's probably right, but it's better than passing 75% of the time like they did every other game.
-
woodSwaye said:
-
Stanford had Andrew Luck and 8 OL/TE's that played on Sundays. The only guy who starts for them on this team blew his knee out against ASUwhatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
Chip Kelly had better OL than people give him a credit for, a Heisman winner in Mariotta, skill wr's that all ran like Ross, and an offense system that no one had seen before at the P5 level
Hugh's point was unless you have those types of teams you can't do that in today's cfb over the course of a season in a P5 conference and I would agree with that.
That being said, you can tell he knows there is major issues going on with Jake and the passing game that aren't getting fixed in the next month.
-
Careful. Most on here called Chip's offense a gimmick.whatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
-
our current offense is a fucking gimmick. Chip was usually was able to put points up on anyone his defenses just could not stop shitwhuggy said:
Careful. Most on here called Chip's offense a gimmick.whatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
-
So then create those types of teams and recruit those types of players.godawgst said:
Stanford had Andrew Luck and 8 OL/TE's that played on Sundays. The only guy who starts for them on this team blew his knee out against ASUwhatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
Chip Kelly had better OL than people give him a credit for, a Heisman winner in Mariotta, skill wr's that all ran like Ross, and an offense system that no one had seen before at the P5 level
Hugh's point was unless you have those types of teams you can't do that in today's cfb over the course of a season in a P5 conference and I would agree with that.
That being said, you can tell he knows there is major issues going on with Jake and the passing game that aren't getting fixed in the next month. -
Hugh - post some nudies of Lisa G or STFU.godawgst said:
Stanford had Andrew Luck and 8 OL/TE's that played on Sundays. The only guy who starts for them on this team blew his knee out against ASUwhatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
Chip Kelly had better OL than people give him a credit for, a Heisman winner in Mariotta, skill wr's that all ran like Ross, and an offense system that no one had seen before at the P5 level
Hugh's point was unless you have those types of teams you can't do that in today's cfb over the course of a season in a P5 conference and I would agree with that.
That being said, you can tell he knows there is major issues going on with Jake and the passing game that aren't getting fixed in the next month. -
Untrue.whuggy said:
Careful. Most on here called Chip's offense a gimmick.whatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
-
true.... but how much are we really looking for from our offense?godawgst said:
Stanford had Andrew Luck and 8 OL/TE's that played on Sundays. The only guy who starts for them on this team blew his knee out against ASUwhatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
Chip Kelly had better OL than people give him a credit for, a Heisman winner in Mariotta, skill wr's that all ran like Ross, and an offense system that no one had seen before at the P5 level
Hugh's point was unless you have those types of teams you can't do that in today's cfb over the course of a season in a P5 conference and I would agree with that.
That being said, you can tell he knows there is major issues going on with Jake and the passing game that aren't getting fixed in the next month.
20 points while controlling the clock wins every game left on our schedule. Running the ball 65+% of the time accomplishes that. All we have to do is avoid ASU type games. If we had just used this gameplan against them they would have worn down a lot earlier than the fourth quarter. -
Chip completed the Oregon 35 year plan to lose a national championship game before Mariota.godawgst said:
Stanford had Andrew Luck and 8 OL/TE's that played on Sundays. The only guy who starts for them on this team blew his knee out against ASUwhatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
Chip Kelly had better OL than people give him a credit for, a Heisman winner in Mariotta, skill wr's that all ran like Ross, and an offense system that no one had seen before at the P5 level
Hugh's point was unless you have those types of teams you can't do that in today's cfb over the course of a season in a P5 conference and I would agree with that.
That being said, you can tell he knows there is major issues going on with Jake and the passing game that aren't getting fixed in the next month. -
I thought this thread was going to be about huge tits.
It kind of is, in a way. But what cunt would click on this thread... -
MOTHERFUCKING THIS. I wanted to scream listening to that segment. Say "different era" or "modern game" one more time and I swear I'll do something drastic. If your personnel is suited towards running the ball IDGAF what fucking year it is or what a majority of teams do. The fucking calendar is not gonna tackle anybody and a majority of teams are coached by vainglorious mouth-breathers. Jesus.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:He's probably right, but it's better than passing 75% of the time like they did every other game.
I'm not gonna call for death but I will cautiously suggest playing russian roulette with a semi-auto. -
Wild exaggerations are always fun.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:He's probably right, but it's better than passing 75% of the time like they did every other game.
-
Some valid points here and I'm not saying that UW could stand to win a game against a legit CFP contender type team without being able to pass the ball a lot more effectively, so don't twist. But keep in mind that UW's 2017 Defense is giving up considerably fewer points in conference play than any of those Stanford or Oregon teams did in conference play. Goal #1 is win the conference, and if our receivers suck and our QB is playing like poo, we need to run the ball down the throats of shitty Pac defenses and play good defense. Passing game can be fixed in 2018 through the various aforementioned factors.godawgst said:
Stanford had Andrew Luck and 8 OL/TE's that played on Sundays. The only guy who starts for them on this team blew his knee out against ASUwhatshouldicareabout said:
You mean like Chip Kelly's offense at Oregon that averaged 300y/g over half a decade? Or like Stanford which went to 4 straight BCS bowls?YellowSnow said:Doesn't think 58 rushes is a sustainable model for winning modern era PAC 12 games. Maybe not every single game. But fuck QB perspective on this topic. No reason not to run 45 plus a game unless the other team proves they can stop it. Only 3 things can happen when you pass and 2 of them aren't good.
Chip Kelly had better OL than people give him a credit for, a Heisman winner in Mariotta, skill wr's that all ran like Ross, and an offense system that no one had seen before at the P5 level
Hugh's point was unless you have those types of teams you can't do that in today's cfb over the course of a season in a P5 conference and I would agree with that.
That being said, you can tell he knows there is major issues going on with Jake and the passing game that aren't getting fixed in the next month. -
Gil Dobie coached nine seasons at Washington without ever losing a game. And Gloomy Gil despised the forward pass.
So there's that. -
The game shifts. The spread originally came because it gave less talented teams a way to compete. The big boys weren’t used to the field being spread out and having to defend in space.
Now, if you run it right at teams, it’s easy to find success. Teams practice against the spread, recruit for it, and are too soft to man up and shut down the run for an entire game. -
Great point RoadDawg.RoadDawg55 said:The game shifts. The spread originally came because it gave less talented teams a way to compete. The big boys weren’t used to the field being spread out and having to defend in space.
Now, if you run it right at teams, it’s easy to find success. Teams practice against the spread, recruit for it, and are too soft to man up and shut down the run for an entire game. -
Asians are fucking smart.RoadDawg55 said:The game shifts. The spread originally came because it gave less talented teams a way to compete. The big boys weren’t used to the field being spread out and having to defend in space.
Now, if you run it right at teams, it’s easy to find success. Teams practice against the spread, recruit for it, and are too soft to man up and shut down the run for an entire game.
-
There's some truth to this- e.g., the top of their Bell Curve in IQ tests is higher than that of white peoples.Swaye said:
Asians are fucking smart.RoadDawg55 said:The game shifts. The spread originally came because it gave less talented teams a way to compete. The big boys weren’t used to the field being spread out and having to defend in space.
Now, if you run it right at teams, it’s easy to find success. Teams practice against the spread, recruit for it, and are too soft to man up and shut down the run for an entire game.
I miss RoadDawg being on the air; maybe Coker and DDY have him call in as a special guest. -
YellowSnow said:
There's some truth to this- e.g., the top of their Bell Curve in IQ tests is higher than that of white peoples.Swaye said:
Asians are fucking smart.RoadDawg55 said:The game shifts. The spread originally came because it gave less talented teams a way to compete. The big boys weren’t used to the field being spread out and having to defend in space.
Now, if you run it right at teams, it’s easy to find success. Teams practice against the spread, recruit for it, and are too soft to man up and shut down the run for an entire game.
I miss RoadDawg being on the air; maybe Coker and DDY have him call in as a special guest.
-
Bama is obviously the prime example. Over the past decade you barely remember who the Bammer QBs were, but you can name almost all their RBs off the top of your head.
Every once in awhile you get a QB like Deshaun Watson who is just has “it” that doesn’t mean you need to lean on the run game as much. Even then, Clemson had a stable of great running backs too.
So if you dont have a QB who can win then you just need to pound the ball on the ground and have a QB that doesn’t fuck that shit in the ass with a stout defense. -
Don James philosophy, run the football, defense, and special teams were the key to winning. So there's that.
I believe it still applies to "modern" shit ball. -
And break the chemistry of DDY's rants and Coker barely audibly nodding in agreement?????YellowSnow said:
There's some truth to this- e.g., the top of their Bell Curve in IQ tests is higher than that of white peoples.Swaye said:
Asians are fucking smart.RoadDawg55 said:The game shifts. The spread originally came because it gave less talented teams a way to compete. The big boys weren’t used to the field being spread out and having to defend in space.
Now, if you run it right at teams, it’s easy to find success. Teams practice against the spread, recruit for it, and are too soft to man up and shut down the run for an entire game.
I miss RoadDawg being on the air; maybe Coker and DDY have him call in as a special guest.
I didn't think so.
