I like the passion (hardy har har) ... but seriously ... FUCK OFF with this BS ...
1) Blah Blah Blah stats are for losers ... I've largely been saying that for years ... at the same time, over a large sample size, they do directionally tell some of the story. That's called statistical significance.
2) LOL at saying "I watch the games" and how it is important to "look beyond the stats" ... those are clearly 2 things that I NEVER do ... but continue taking your talking points from idiot announcers.
3) Watching the games doesn't matter if you can't figure out what is going on around you ... against ASU, there's a reason we didn't get significant pressure on the QB. That's called quick reads with a lot of maximum 3 step drops before getting rid of the ball. There were a ton of quick WR screens that were trying to take advantage of Myles Bryant's lack of size. I hate to break it to you but you're not going to get a ton of pressure on the QB in those situations. Similar to ASU, Stanford's game plan was to largely get themselves in 3rd and very manageable situations. By and large, you're not going to succeed against the UW defense through explosive plays. The way to attack our defense is to get short, steady gains while minimizing opportunities for taking large losses and turnovers. When you see a QB with the kind of arm talent that Josh Rosen have continually check the ball down tells you a lot about how teams are attacking our defense.
4) Football is a team sport. If the offense can't stay on the field and sustain drives, it puts a ton of pressure on your defense. I don't disagree that the defense could have done a lot more against both ASU and Stanford, but to suggest that the ineffectiveness of the offense in both games for significant stretches didn't leave the defense on the field and exposed is also inaccurate. As I mentioned above, when teams are converting on 3rd down at a high rate it's not necessarily because your 3rd down defense is terrible but because you're not getting a win on 1st and 2nd down.
5) Where have I defended Browning? Please point out where I've done that ... the closest that you can find is confusing what I said that Babushka doesn't do a good job of putting Browning into positions to succeed (which is truth) ... given Browning's general shortcomings he desperately needs a coordinator that can scheme in a way to make him look good. If you still think that I defend Browning ... then you perhaps should go look at the scathing piece I wrote on him after the ASU game.
I like the passion (hardy har har) ... but seriously ... FUCK OFF with this BS ...
1) Blah Blah Blah stats are for losers ... I've largely been saying that for years ... at the same time, over a large sample size, they do directionally tell some of the story. That's called statistical significance.
2) LOL at saying "I watch the games" and how it is important to "look beyond the stats" ... those are clearly 2 things that I NEVER do ... but continue taking your talking points from idiot announcers.
3) Watching the games doesn't matter if you can't figure out what is going on around you ... against ASU, there's a reason we didn't get significant pressure on the QB. That's called quick reads with a lot of maximum 3 step drops before getting rid of the ball. There were a ton of quick WR screens that were trying to take advantage of Myles Bryant's lack of size. I hate to break it to you but you're not going to get a ton of pressure on the QB in those situations. Similar to ASU, Stanford's game plan was to largely get themselves in 3rd and very manageable situations. By and large, you're not going to succeed against the UW defense through explosive plays. The way to attack our defense is to get short, steady gains while minimizing opportunities for taking large losses and turnovers. When you see a QB with the kind of arm talent that Josh Rosen have continually check the ball down tells you a lot about how teams are attacking our defense.
4) Football is a team sport. If the offense can't stay on the field and sustain drives, it puts a ton of pressure on your defense. I don't disagree that the defense could have done a lot more against both ASU and Stanford, but to suggest that the ineffectiveness of the offense in both games for significant stretches didn't leave the defense on the field and exposed. As I mentioned above, when teams are converting on 3rd down at a high rate it's not necessarily because your 3rd down defense is terrible but because you're not getting a win on 1st and 2nd down.
5) Where have I defended Browning? Please point out where I've done that ... the closest that you can find is confusing what I said that Babushka doesn't do a good job of putting Browning into positions to succeed (which is truth) ... given Browning's general shortcomings he desperately needs a coordinator that can scheme in a way to make him look good. If you still think that I defend Browning ... then you perhaps should go look at the scathing piece I wrote on him after the ASU game.
How many wins in “9-win” Browning’s career would UW have lost with KJCS at QB? Even though I think it’s pretty debatable, I’ll concede Utah ‘17 for the sake of argument. Any others?
1. Poor edge pass rush. In this conference particularly, you need to bring heat. For much of this year our interior defensive linemen and some creative blitzes were able to mask or poor edge pass rushers. It’s now been figured out.
2. Injuries. Particularly the secondary, but also Hunter Bryant and Trey Adams. A poor edge pass rush plus injuries has produced back to back 30 point games by our opponents. Myles Bryant should be playing nickel, not CB.
3. Browning. Nine-win-Jake Is good at blowing out average to poor teams. But teams that come in with a good game plan expose his many weaknesses.
4. Babushka. Similarly, like his quarterback our offensive coordinator simply cannot adjust during games. His play calling at key moments makes you want to put your foot through the television.
Taking just a little bit of time and doing research is hard ...
1) We didn't have much of an edge rush last year either (unless you think PSALM was a huge loss) ... depending on the source that you look at we have 32 or 33 sacks so far this year in 11 games. On a per game basis, that's tied for 14th in the country (on 32 sacks) ... a strong game against the Cougs likely gets us to Top 10. As a point of reference, we had 39 sacks last year in 14 games. So yeah, we're right on the same pace as last year.
2) Injuries haven't helped ... but at the same time, pinning injuries on the opposition getting to 30 points isn't accurate. In both of our losses, the undercurrent of those losses resided in failures on the offense ... particularly true with Stanford. The Murphy injury hasn't helped the secondary out, but I'd say the bigger problem is that teams have identified that Myles Bryant is this year's PSALM and attack wherever he is on the field religiously. And when you look at the games that we've lost (or been close to), the common theme is that the defense has been on the field for 70+ plays ... I'd argue that there's a bigger theme here in that teams are starting to figure out what they can do successfully against our defense and there's a blueprint (albeit a difficult one) for how to beat us.
3) It's not about having a game plan to expose Browning ... it's having the athletes in the secondary to force him to have to make throws into tight windows (which he doesn't want to do) and therefore he holds the ball too long. Given that Babushka doesn't do a tremendous job in scheming in those situations it causes Browning to look terrible. Browning's got his own issues ... but the key to beating UW is not by necessarily outscoring us ... it's forcing Browning into pressing and keeping him off the field so that he feels an unneeded sense of urgency.
4) Babushka is the definition of a guy without a plan ... you have to have some kind of identity. My answer to anything in this regard is that you should aspire to have the kind of identity that is similar to Kevin McHale's post moves. By that I mean that you have a handful of go to moves (plays) that you are going to utilize ... but then when your opponent starts cheating to stop those moves you start using their aggressiveness against them by throwing a what you see isn't what you get into their life. This is Babushka's primary failure to me.
5) Because you need 5 (massive fail by you here) ... the kicking game has been a significant issue this year. When you compete at the highest levels, the smallest details really matter. Against ASU, we lost by 6 and missed 2 FGs in the red zone ... those have to be made. Against Stanford, kicking a chip shot FG on 4th and 1 (yes, I realize that many would still say go for it and that Gaskin likely didn't play tremendous situational football here) ... but you also have to know your opponent and momentum. Getting points there to go to a 2 score game put all the pressure on Stanford to respond ... get a stop and another TD heading into half completely changes the game and what Stanford would have been able to do going forward with their offense (i.e. ground and pound starts to vanish).
Disagree that Babushka lacks identity. His identity is to pass his way out of everything, because, to his blind fucking eyes, the running game doesn't work well enough.
Regarding wither D or O to blame for Stanford loss, it was mismatch heaven for Stanford on every third down. They didn't just seal the ends, they crushed them, and Joyner played shitty D that game, too. Anyone who thinks our CBs were as good as King and Jones were last year is nuts. They're good, but King and Jones were fucking great and nobody we have on D this year tackles like Budda.
1. Poor edge pass rush. In this conference particularly, you need to bring heat. For much of this year our interior defensive linemen and some creative blitzes were able to mask or poor edge pass rushers. It’s now been figured out.
2. Injuries. Particularly the secondary, but also Hunter Bryant and Trey Adams. A poor edge pass rush plus injuries has produced back to back 30 point games by our opponents. Myles Bryant should be playing nickel, not CB.
3. Browning. Nine-win-Jake Is good at blowing out average to poor teams. But teams that come in with a good game plan expose his many weaknesses.
4. Babushka. Similarly, like his quarterback our offensive coordinator simply cannot adjust during games. His play calling at key moments makes you want to put your foot through the television.
Taking just a little bit of time and doing research is hard ...
1) We didn't have much of an edge rush last year either (unless you think PSALM was a huge loss) ... depending on the source that you look at we have 32 or 33 sacks so far this year in 11 games. On a per game basis, that's tied for 14th in the country (on 32 sacks) ... a strong game against the Cougs likely gets us to Top 10. As a point of reference, we had 39 sacks last year in 14 games. So yeah, we're right on the same pace as last year.
2) Injuries haven't helped ... but at the same time, pinning injuries on the opposition getting to 30 points isn't accurate. In both of our losses, the undercurrent of those losses resided in failures on the offense ... particularly true with Stanford. The Murphy injury hasn't helped the secondary out, but I'd say the bigger problem is that teams have identified that Myles Bryant is this year's PSALM and attack wherever he is on the field religiously. And when you look at the games that we've lost (or been close to), the common theme is that the defense has been on the field for 70+ plays ... I'd argue that there's a bigger theme here in that teams are starting to figure out what they can do successfully against our defense and there's a blueprint (albeit a difficult one) for how to beat us.
3) It's not about having a game plan to expose Browning ... it's having the athletes in the secondary to force him to have to make throws into tight windows (which he doesn't want to do) and therefore he holds the ball too long. Given that Babushka doesn't do a tremendous job in scheming in those situations it causes Browning to look terrible. Browning's got his own issues ... but the key to beating UW is not by necessarily outscoring us ... it's forcing Browning into pressing and keeping him off the field so that he feels an unneeded sense of urgency.
4) Babushka is the definition of a guy without a plan ... you have to have some kind of identity. My answer to anything in this regard is that you should aspire to have the kind of identity that is similar to Kevin McHale's post moves. By that I mean that you have a handful of go to moves (plays) that you are going to utilize ... but then when your opponent starts cheating to stop those moves you start using their aggressiveness against them by throwing a what you see isn't what you get into their life. This is Babushka's primary failure to me.
5) Because you need 5 (massive fail by you here) ... the kicking game has been a significant issue this year. When you compete at the highest levels, the smallest details really matter. Against ASU, we lost by 6 and missed 2 FGs in the red zone ... those have to be made. Against Stanford, kicking a chip shot FG on 4th and 1 (yes, I realize that many would still say go for it and that Gaskin likely didn't play tremendous situational football here) ... but you also have to know your opponent and momentum. Getting points there to go to a 2 score game put all the pressure on Stanford to respond ... get a stop and another TD heading into half completely changes the game and what Stanford would have been able to do going forward with their offense (i.e. ground and pound starts to vanish).
Disagree that Babushka lacks identity. His identity is to pass his way out of everything, because, to his blind fucking eyes, the running game doesn't work well enough.
Regarding wither D or O to blame for Stanford loss, it was mismatch heaven for Stanford on every third down. They didn't just seal the ends, they crushed them, and Joyner played shitty D that game, too. Anyone who thinks our CBs were as good as King and Jones were last year is nuts. They're good, but King and Jones were fucking great and nobody we have on D this year tackles like Budda.
Let's go with your comments on Smith ... if his identity is to throw the ball ... does he have a go to play in the passing game? There's not a single play that I can point to and say that when things get hard that's the play he knows we're going to execute. The closest is the outside receiver driving down the field for 15 yards before coming back 5 yards for a catch.
The big problem with our outside players right now against a team like Stanford is that we're built to go side to side against teams that are spreading out. We just don't quite have the bulk to hold the edge against a pure power team like last year.
But to your point, the difference between what we have this year versus guys like King/Jones/Budda is that by and large we have good players, but we don't have guys that make game changing plays on defense. We absolutely got beasted at Stanford by bigger more physical WR/TE types.
Sacks can be a bullshit stat. I don’t think our edge rush is that good, but it’s not terrible. Tevis and Bowman have had big games.
Bowman needs to be on the field more. He doesn’t have the all the measurables of Potato but he’s been more productive and consistently disrupted opposing backfields.
How many wins in “9-win” Browning’s career would UW have lost with KJCS at QB? Even though I think it’s pretty debatable, I’ll concede Utah ‘17 for the sake of argument. Any others?
I like the passion (hardy har har) ... but seriously ... FUCK OFF with this BS ...
1) Blah Blah Blah stats are for losers ... I've largely been saying that for years ... at the same time, over a large sample size, they do directionally tell some of the story. That's called statistical significance.
2) LOL at saying "I watch the games" and how it is important to "look beyond the stats" ... those are clearly 2 things that I NEVER do ... but continue taking your talking points from idiot announcers.
3) Watching the games doesn't matter if you can't figure out what is going on around you ... against ASU, there's a reason we didn't get significant pressure on the QB. That's called quick reads with a lot of maximum 3 step drops before getting rid of the ball. There were a ton of quick WR screens that were trying to take advantage of Myles Bryant's lack of size. I hate to break it to you but you're not going to get a ton of pressure on the QB in those situations. Similar to ASU, Stanford's game plan was to largely get themselves in 3rd and very manageable situations. By and large, you're not going to succeed against the UW defense through explosive plays. The way to attack our defense is to get short, steady gains while minimizing opportunities for taking large losses and turnovers. When you see a QB with the kind of arm talent that Josh Rosen have continually check the ball down tells you a lot about how teams are attacking our defense.
4) Football is a team sport. If the offense can't stay on the field and sustain drives, it puts a ton of pressure on your defense. I don't disagree that the defense could have done a lot more against both ASU and Stanford, but to suggest that the ineffectiveness of the offense in both games for significant stretches didn't leave the defense on the field and exposed is also inaccurate. As I mentioned above, when teams are converting on 3rd down at a high rate it's not necessarily because your 3rd down defense is terrible but because you're not getting a win on 1st and 2nd down.
5) Where have I defended Browning? Please point out where I've done that ... the closest that you can find is confusing what I said that Babushka doesn't do a good job of putting Browning into positions to succeed (which is truth) ... given Browning's general shortcomings he desperately needs a coordinator that can scheme in a way to make him look good. If you still think that I defend Browning ... then you perhaps should go look at the scathing piece I wrote on him after the ASU game.
Taking just a little bit of time and doing research is hard ...
1) We didn't have much of an edge rush last year either (unless you think PSALM was a huge loss) ... depending on the source that you look at we have 32 or 33 sacks so far this year in 11 games. On a per game basis, that's tied for 14th in the country (on 32 sacks) ... a strong game against the Cougs likely gets us to Top 10. As a point of reference, we had 39 sacks last year in 14 games. So yeah, we're right on the same pace as last year.
2) Injuries haven't helped ... but at the same time, pinning injuries on the opposition getting to 30 points isn't accurate. In both of our losses, the undercurrent of those losses resided in failures on the offense ... particularly true with Stanford. The Murphy injury hasn't helped the secondary out, but I'd say the bigger problem is that teams have identified that Myles Bryant is this year's PSALM and attack wherever he is on the field religiously. And when you look at the games that we've lost (or been close to), the common theme is that the defense has been on the field for 70+ plays ... I'd argue that there's a bigger theme here in that teams are starting to figure out what they can do successfully against our defense and there's a blueprint (albeit a difficult one) for how to beat us.
3) It's not about having a game plan to expose Browning ... it's having the athletes in the secondary to force him to have to make throws into tight windows (which he doesn't want to do) and therefore he holds the ball too long. Given that Babushka doesn't do a tremendous job in scheming in those situations it causes Browning to look terrible. Browning's got his own issues ... but the key to beating UW is not by necessarily outscoring us ... it's forcing Browning into pressing and keeping him off the field so that he feels an unneeded sense of urgency.
4) Babushka is the definition of a guy without a plan ... you have to have some kind of identity. My answer to anything in this regard is that you should aspire to have the kind of identity that is similar to Kevin McHale's post moves. By that I mean that you have a handful of go to moves (plays) that you are going to utilize ... but then when your opponent starts cheating to stop those moves you start using their aggressiveness against them by throwing a what you see isn't what you get into their life. This is Babushka's primary failure to me.
5) Because you need 5 (massive fail by you here) ... the kicking game has been a significant issue this year. When you compete at the highest levels, the smallest details really matter. Against ASU, we lost by 6 and missed 2 FGs in the red zone ... those have to be made. Against Stanford, kicking a chip shot FG on 4th and 1 (yes, I realize that many would still say go for it and that Gaskin likely didn't play tremendous situational football here) ... but you also have to know your opponent and momentum. Getting points there to go to a 2 score game put all the pressure on Stanford to respond ... get a stop and another TD heading into half completely changes the game and what Stanford would have been able to do going forward with their offense (i.e. ground and pound starts to vanish).
Great points on #3/#4. Until last week, Jake's grade for handling game pressure has been a F. At the start of the year, my thought was to shorten the game and put all the pressure on the opponents O to score w/ limited possessions. In retrospect that hurt us more than ASU or Stanford.
#4) I'm no Smith fan and am in the camp of he can move on. That being said, If you don't think Pete has a huge say in the weekly game plan your FS. He's got to get over the Boise State mentality of formations, motions, putting 150 plays on tape so the 1-2 P5 teams he played a year would have to spend hours practicing it. He's shown by his recruiting and player development that we can compete and win the North and Conference more years than not. We have an identity on D, not on O. If he doesn't change that philosophy, it won't matter who the OC is.
One final thought. Go listen to Rondeau's interview on Go Huskies where he talks about his time here (36 minutes long) and what made the 91 team so great. His comment was how "deep, talented and nasty" they were. Today nasty is called "attitude or swag". Last year Azeem was that guy, and Kevin K and Budda also had that. Sidney didn't say a word, but he just made every team forget about throwing to a third of the field. We don't have a guy on D or O (maybe Tre but he went out at ASU) to simply stand up and say to his side of the ball "this shit stops right now". I don't know if that is enough versus Stanford, but it would have been versus ASU.
Taking just a little bit of time and doing research is hard ...
1) We didn't have much of an edge rush last year either (unless you think PSALM was a huge loss) ... depending on the source that you look at we have 32 or 33 sacks so far this year in 11 games. On a per game basis, that's tied for 14th in the country (on 32 sacks) ... a strong game against the Cougs likely gets us to Top 10. As a point of reference, we had 39 sacks last year in 14 games. So yeah, we're right on the same pace as last year.
2) Injuries haven't helped ... but at the same time, pinning injuries on the opposition getting to 30 points isn't accurate. In both of our losses, the undercurrent of those losses resided in failures on the offense ... particularly true with Stanford. The Murphy injury hasn't helped the secondary out, but I'd say the bigger problem is that teams have identified that Myles Bryant is this year's PSALM and attack wherever he is on the field religiously. And when you look at the games that we've lost (or been close to), the common theme is that the defense has been on the field for 70+ plays ... I'd argue that there's a bigger theme here in that teams are starting to figure out what they can do successfully against our defense and there's a blueprint (albeit a difficult one) for how to beat us.
3) It's not about having a game plan to expose Browning ... it's having the athletes in the secondary to force him to have to make throws into tight windows (which he doesn't want to do) and therefore he holds the ball too long. Given that Babushka doesn't do a tremendous job in scheming in those situations it causes Browning to look terrible. Browning's got his own issues ... but the key to beating UW is not by necessarily outscoring us ... it's forcing Browning into pressing and keeping him off the field so that he feels an unneeded sense of urgency.
4) Babushka is the definition of a guy without a plan ... you have to have some kind of identity. My answer to anything in this regard is that you should aspire to have the kind of identity that is similar to Kevin McHale's post moves. By that I mean that you have a handful of go to moves (plays) that you are going to utilize ... but then when your opponent starts cheating to stop those moves you start using their aggressiveness against them by throwing a what you see isn't what you get into their life. This is Babushka's primary failure to me.
5) Because you need 5 (massive fail by you here) ... the kicking game has been a significant issue this year. When you compete at the highest levels, the smallest details really matter. Against ASU, we lost by 6 and missed 2 FGs in the red zone ... those have to be made. Against Stanford, kicking a chip shot FG on 4th and 1 (yes, I realize that many would still say go for it and that Gaskin likely didn't play tremendous situational football here) ... but you also have to know your opponent and momentum. Getting points there to go to a 2 score game put all the pressure on Stanford to respond ... get a stop and another TD heading into half completely changes the game and what Stanford would have been able to do going forward with their offense (i.e. ground and pound starts to vanish).
Great points on #3/#4. Until last week, Jake's grade for handling game pressure has been a F. At the start of the year, my thought was to shorten the game and put all the pressure on the opponents O to score w/ limited possessions. In retrospect that hurt us more than ASU or Stanford.
#4) I'm no Smith fan and am in the camp of he can move on. That being said, If you don't think Pete has a huge say in the weekly game plan your FS. He's got to get over the Boise State mentality of formations, motions, putting 150 plays on tape so the 1-2 P5 teams he played a year would have to spend hours practicing it. He's shown by his recruiting and player development that we can compete and win the North and Conference more years than not. We have an identity on D, not on O. If he doesn't change that philosophy, it won't matter who the OC is.
One final thought. Go listen to Rondeau's interview on Go Huskies where he talks about his time here (36 minutes long) and what made the 91 team so great. His comment was how "deep, talented and nasty" they were. Today nasty is called "attitude or swag". Last year Azeem was that guy, and Kevin K and Budda also had that. Sidney didn't say a word, but he just made every team forget about throwing to a third of the field. We don't have a guy on D or O (maybe Tre but he went out at ASU) to simply stand up and say to his side of the ball "this shit stops right now". I don't know if that is enough versus Stanford, but it would have been versus ASU.
Comments
1) Blah Blah Blah stats are for losers ... I've largely been saying that for years ... at the same time, over a large sample size, they do directionally tell some of the story. That's called statistical significance.
2) LOL at saying "I watch the games" and how it is important to "look beyond the stats" ... those are clearly 2 things that I NEVER do ... but continue taking your talking points from idiot announcers.
3) Watching the games doesn't matter if you can't figure out what is going on around you ... against ASU, there's a reason we didn't get significant pressure on the QB. That's called quick reads with a lot of maximum 3 step drops before getting rid of the ball. There were a ton of quick WR screens that were trying to take advantage of Myles Bryant's lack of size. I hate to break it to you but you're not going to get a ton of pressure on the QB in those situations. Similar to ASU, Stanford's game plan was to largely get themselves in 3rd and very manageable situations. By and large, you're not going to succeed against the UW defense through explosive plays. The way to attack our defense is to get short, steady gains while minimizing opportunities for taking large losses and turnovers. When you see a QB with the kind of arm talent that Josh Rosen have continually check the ball down tells you a lot about how teams are attacking our defense.
4) Football is a team sport. If the offense can't stay on the field and sustain drives, it puts a ton of pressure on your defense. I don't disagree that the defense could have done a lot more against both ASU and Stanford, but to suggest that the ineffectiveness of the offense in both games for significant stretches didn't leave the defense on the field and exposed is also inaccurate. As I mentioned above, when teams are converting on 3rd down at a high rate it's not necessarily because your 3rd down defense is terrible but because you're not getting a win on 1st and 2nd down.
5) Where have I defended Browning? Please point out where I've done that ... the closest that you can find is confusing what I said that Babushka doesn't do a good job of putting Browning into positions to succeed (which is truth) ... given Browning's general shortcomings he desperately needs a coordinator that can scheme in a way to make him look good. If you still think that I defend Browning ... then you perhaps should go look at the scathing piece I wrote on him after the ASU game.
How many wins in “9-win” Browning’s career would UW have lost with KJCS at QB? Even though I think it’s pretty debatable, I’ll concede Utah ‘17 for the sake of argument. Any others?
Regarding wither D or O to blame for Stanford loss, it was mismatch heaven for Stanford on every third down. They didn't just seal the ends, they crushed them, and Joyner played shitty D that game, too. Anyone who thinks our CBs were as good as King and Jones were last year is nuts. They're good, but King and Jones were fucking great and nobody we have on D this year tackles like Budda.
The big problem with our outside players right now against a team like Stanford is that we're built to go side to side against teams that are spreading out. We just don't quite have the bulk to hold the edge against a pure power team like last year.
But to your point, the difference between what we have this year versus guys like King/Jones/Budda is that by and large we have good players, but we don't have guys that make game changing plays on defense. We absolutely got beasted at Stanford by bigger more physical WR/TE types.
I'm surprised you doogs think its sudden.
Taking just a little bit of time and doing research is hard ...
1) We didn't have much of an edge rush last year either (unless you think PSALM was a huge loss) ... depending on the source that you look at we have 32 or 33 sacks so far this year in 11 games. On a per game basis, that's tied for 14th in the country (on 32 sacks) ... a strong game against the Cougs likely gets us to Top 10. As a point of reference, we had 39 sacks last year in 14 games. So yeah, we're right on the same pace as last year.
2) Injuries haven't helped ... but at the same time, pinning injuries on the opposition getting to 30 points isn't accurate. In both of our losses, the undercurrent of those losses resided in failures on the offense ... particularly true with Stanford. The Murphy injury hasn't helped the secondary out, but I'd say the bigger problem is that teams have identified that Myles Bryant is this year's PSALM and attack wherever he is on the field religiously. And when you look at the games that we've lost (or been close to), the common theme is that the defense has been on the field for 70+ plays ... I'd argue that there's a bigger theme here in that teams are starting to figure out what they can do successfully against our defense and there's a blueprint (albeit a difficult one) for how to beat us.
3) It's not about having a game plan to expose Browning ... it's having the athletes in the secondary to force him to have to make throws into tight windows (which he doesn't want to do) and therefore he holds the ball too long. Given that Babushka doesn't do a tremendous job in scheming in those situations it causes Browning to look terrible. Browning's got his own issues ... but the key to beating UW is not by necessarily outscoring us ... it's forcing Browning into pressing and keeping him off the field so that he feels an unneeded sense of urgency.
4) Babushka is the definition of a guy without a plan ... you have to have some kind of identity. My answer to anything in this regard is that you should aspire to have the kind of identity that is similar to Kevin McHale's post moves. By that I mean that you have a handful of go to moves (plays) that you are going to utilize ... but then when your opponent starts cheating to stop those moves you start using their aggressiveness against them by throwing a what you see isn't what you get into their life. This is Babushka's primary failure to me.
5) Because you need 5 (massive fail by you here) ... the kicking game has been a significant issue this year. When you compete at the highest levels, the smallest details really matter. Against ASU, we lost by 6 and missed 2 FGs in the red zone ... those have to be made. Against Stanford, kicking a chip shot FG on 4th and 1 (yes, I realize that many would still say go for it and that Gaskin likely didn't play tremendous situational football here) ... but you also have to know your opponent and momentum. Getting points there to go to a 2 score game put all the pressure on Stanford to respond ... get a stop and another TD heading into half completely changes the game and what Stanford would have been able to do going forward with their offense (i.e. ground and pound starts to vanish).
Great points on #3/#4. Until last week, Jake's grade for handling game pressure has been a F. At the start of the year, my thought was to shorten the game and put all the pressure on the opponents O to score w/ limited possessions. In retrospect that hurt us more than ASU or Stanford.
#4) I'm no Smith fan and am in the camp of he can move on. That being said, If you don't think Pete has a huge say in the weekly game plan your FS. He's got to get over the Boise State mentality of formations, motions, putting 150 plays on tape so the 1-2 P5 teams he played a year would have to spend hours practicing it. He's shown by his recruiting and player development that we can compete and win the North and Conference more years than not. We have an identity on D, not on O. If he doesn't change that philosophy, it won't matter who the OC is.
One final thought. Go listen to Rondeau's interview on Go Huskies where he talks about his time here (36 minutes long) and what made the 91 team so great. His comment was how "deep, talented and nasty" they were. Today nasty is called "attitude or swag". Last year Azeem was that guy, and Kevin K and Budda also had that. Sidney didn't say a word, but he just made every team forget about throwing to a third of the field. We don't have a guy on D or O (maybe Tre but he went out at ASU) to simply stand up and say to his side of the ball "this shit stops right now". I don't know if that is enough versus Stanford, but it would have been versus ASU.
It was spectacular.
#4) I'm no Smith fan and am in the camp of he can move on. That being said, If you don't think Pete has a huge say in the weekly game plan your FS. He's got to get over the Boise State mentality of formations, motions, putting 150 plays on tape so the 1-2 P5 teams he played a year would have to spend hours practicing it. He's shown by his recruiting and player development that we can compete and win the North and Conference more years than not. We have an identity on D, not on O. If he doesn't change that philosophy, it won't matter who the OC is.
One final thought. Go listen to Rondeau's interview on Go Huskies where he talks about his time here (36 minutes long) and what made the 91 team so great. His comment was how "deep, talented and nasty" they were. Today nasty is called "attitude or swag". Last year Azeem was that guy, and Kevin K and Budda also had that. Sidney didn't say a word, but he just made every team forget about throwing to a third of the field. We don't have a guy on D or O (maybe Tre but he went out at ASU) to simply stand up and say to his side of the ball "this shit stops right now". I don't know if that is enough versus Stanford, but it would have been versus ASU.
Fuck off @Tequilla