D.J. Johnson, 2017 7* BUCK, Miami (Da U), FL - transferring?
Comments
-
Love your face Roadie, but this one will age as well as @JHopkinsFS Twitter feed.RoadDawg55 said:http://hardcorehusky.com/forums/#/discussion/16085/chris-warrens-top-4/p3
I didn’t like Warren either. I also said Ngata would be a better than DJ Johnson. DJ Johnson has a long way to go. The only reason he would be worth celebrating is because we have nobody else to play Buck. -
Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward. -
So you're saying the game evolves over time? Shocking!!Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
I am starting to become a loser that worships the QB position. -
Personally, I think pressure from the edge is overrrated. We don’t need it. UW will just work that much harder on defense and easily overcome it.
-
So you're saying that Donald Jones and Andy Mason were not elite college pass rushers?Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
The reason michigan had more offense in '93 is because we lost a lot of the "elite" players, including losing Donald Jones and replacing Emtman with Steve Hoffman.
-
10/10 whooshtvoie said:Personally, I think pressure from the edge is overrrated. We don’t need it. UW will just work that much harder on defense and easily overcome it.
-
Emtman was beyond elite ...Passion said:
So you're saying that Donald Jones and Andy Mason were not elite college pass rushers?Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
The reason michigan had more offense in '93 is because we lost a lot of the "elite" players, including losing Donald Jones and replacing Emtman with Steve Hoffman.
Jones/Mason were great college players that were largely unique for its time period ... that was a defense where each player magnified the other
The reality is that we are unlikely to ever have a roster stacked with elite can’t miss guys ... the key is to get as many as we can and outplay the handful of potential talented opponents we may run up against -
I never thought he was very good. We’ll see.MisterEm said:
Love your face Roadie, but this one will age as well as @JHopkinsFS Twitter feed.RoadDawg55 said:http://hardcorehusky.com/forums/#/discussion/16085/chris-warrens-top-4/p3
I didn’t like Warren either. I also said Ngata would be a better than DJ Johnson. DJ Johnson has a long way to go. The only reason he would be worth celebrating is because we have nobody else to play Buck. -
Neither IMO played at an elite level ... at least on a consistent basis.BallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
Obviously you need good line play ... which traditionally we tend to hold our own there.
But let’s be clear, we are never competing for the National Title with a team that can run it down someone’s throat. The only way we do so is having a QB with no fear that is willing and capable of making the throws and plays necessary. -
Maybe the staff will move Brayden Dickey to that side of the ball and have him put his hand in the dirt.
He’s a big kid.
-Kim, somewhere....probably. -
USC and UCLA didn't have elite QBsBallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward. -
I'm too lazy to read through this thread. Where is he transferring to?
-
The evidence of a Tier II school needing an elite NFL caliber QB to get to the NT game is overwhelming in the BCS/CFP era. Georgia is an outlier because they are a Tier II school that has recruited at a Tier I level for a while.Tequilla said:
Neither IMO played at an elite level ... at least on a consistent basis.BallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
Obviously you need good line play ... which traditionally we tend to hold our own there.
But let’s be clear, we are never competing for the National Title with a team that can run it down someone’s throat. The only way we do so is having a QB with no fear that is willing and capable of making the throws and plays necessary. -
NFL potential =/= elite college QBBallzDeep said:
Both will be drafted in the top-10. What is your definition of elite?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
USC and UCLA didn't have elite QBsBallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
Both were high level, but elite college QBs don’t shit the bed in the way Darnold did against Ohio St. or lose as many games as Rosen did. That would be smearing the definition of elite.
An example of an actually elite QB is Deshaun Watson -
I would consider Lamar Jackson an elite college QB, and he threw 4 picks against MSSU.NEsnake12 said:
NFL potential =/= elite college QBBallzDeep said:
Both will be drafted in the top-10. What is your definition of elite?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
USC and UCLA didn't have elite QBsBallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
Both were high level, but elite college QBs don’t shit the bed in the way Darnold did against Ohio St. or lose as many games as Rosen did. That would be smearing the definition of elite.
An example of an actually elite QB is Deshaun Watson
-
They were great athletes that had unusual body types that were put in a great position to succeed by (1) the 46 defense, and (2) Emtman.Passion said:
So you're saying that Donald Jones and Andy Mason were not elite college pass rushers?Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
The reason michigan had more offense in '93 is because we lost a lot of the "elite" players, including losing Donald Jones and replacing Emtman with Steve Hoffman.
-
No, that can't be right. That wouldn't fit Tequilla's narrative.Passion said:
So you're saying that Donald Jones and Andy Mason were not elite college pass rushers?Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
The reason michigan had more offense in '93 is because we lost a lot of the "elite" players, including losing Donald Jones and replacing Emtman with Steve Hoffman. -
For fuck sake please stop posting in this thread
-
This very thread is about an ELITE defensive recruit that UW could have had with better/harder recruiting.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward. -
It was both. The defense was always a high risk/high reward defense. With the right personnel, it could dominate the offenses of the time period. With corners that weren't quite as good in coverage or a defensive front that wasn't quite as dominating, the defense was a big play waiting to happen for the other team.FremontTroll said:
No, that can't be right. That wouldn't fit Tequilla's narrative.Passion said:
So you're saying that Donald Jones and Andy Mason were not elite college pass rushers?Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
The reason michigan had more offense in '93 is because we lost a lot of the "elite" players, including losing Donald Jones and replacing Emtman with Steve Hoffman. -
I'll settle this all right now, since it's clearly causing too much strife within our close knit family.
I just saw a picture of him and he without question has the face of Precious and Seal morphed together. He looks dumb and very pussy.
Wait what's that I hear?? He was elite and 100 skools offered? Well he wouldn't be the first to fool big time places with his measurable's.
I expect him to room with Dawson Jaramillo and then later on get pancaked repeatedly by an autistic kid from Stadium.
-
Exactly. That's a good thing. It depends on your verbatim, but if we're talking about QB tiers then there has to be a pretty exclusive top tier to distinguish the very good QBs from the transcendent ones, which I (and many others) call the elite tier. It's not fair to put Darnold and Rosen in the same tier as guys like Watson and Mariota who are undeniably a step ahead of them as COLLEGE QBs.BallzDeep said:
Bullshit, that would mean there is only maybe one or two elite QB's in the entire nation every year and some year's zero. Put Darnold or Rosen at Alabama or Georgia and all of a sudden they look way better playing with a better team.NEsnake12 said:
NFL potential =/= elite college QBBallzDeep said:
Both will be drafted in the top-10. What is your definition of elite?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
USC and UCLA didn't have elite QBsBallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
Both were high level, but elite college QBs don’t shit the bed in the way Darnold did against Ohio St. or lose as many games as Rosen did. That would be smearing the definition of elite.
An example of an actually elite QB is Deshaun Watson
Why is it that Bama has won so many titles with average game managers at QB? Why did Ohio State butt fuck SC when Darnold is better than Barrett. Why is Georgia in the national title with a true Freshman QB who throws less than 20 passes a game? You don't need a fucking elite QB. You need an elite team that has no weaknesses at any position.
ESPN and other shit media likes to throw around the "elite" word a lot to generate pointless discussion and get clicks. But if we're being honest there's a lot fewer players, especially QBs, who are truly elite.
Also, the fuck are you talking about? I never said you need an elite QB to win natty's. -
Baker Mayfield will get drafted behind them both but he was 10x their superior as a college QB.BallzDeep said:
Both will be drafted in the top-10. What is your definition of elite?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
USC and UCLA didn't have elite QBsBallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
Mayfield was elite. Watson was elite. Lamar Jackson was probably elite.
This is a dumb argument because a) no one is arguing you just need an elite qb b) no one but you is arguing you don't need an elite qb.
UW is probably never winning the NT without an elite QB. That doesn't mean that elite qb won't need other elite players around them.
DJ Johnson is a potentially elite player that our coaching staff is apparently betting against. It's a bold move, one I disagree with. Their bet may well pay off though.
LIFPO. -
Next time you poast a picture of a cripple please be providing @puppylove_sugarsteel a trigger warning.BallzDeep said:I hope he's allowed to play for Oregon next season and he knocks Browning the fuck out and then stands up and points right at Petersen with a glare on his face like Gary Bertier in Remember the Titans.
-
A guy on dawgman made a post along the lines of "I help pay Petersen's salary and as a fan I demand a statement from him on why DJ isn't coming to UW".
And I thought this place went to shit when we don't get a guy.
It will be chinteresting to find out if DJ had an "offer" from UW this time around. -
NoWeakarmCobra said:For fuck sake please stop posting in this thread
-
So, if you think Washington is going to recruit at a level that is going to be putting a team on the field that is just going to run over Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia, or Clemson, you are fooling yourself.BallzDeep said:
Bullshit, that would mean there is only maybe one or two elite QB's in the entire nation every year and some year's zero. Put Darnold or Rosen at Alabama or Georgia and all of a sudden they look way better playing with a better team.NEsnake12 said:
NFL potential =/= elite college QBBallzDeep said:
Both will be drafted in the top-10. What is your definition of elite?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
USC and UCLA didn't have elite QBsBallzDeep said:
How'd that work out for USC and UCLA this season? It takes an entire team and you have to be elite on both lines of scrimmage to compete at that level. Having an elite QB doesn't mean shit if you don't have studs across the board in the trenches on both sides.Tequilla said:Unpopular opinion alert ...
UW’s ability to win a National Title will require us to have a Top 10 National Defense that is generally sound and having an elite level QB that plays at an elite level
For those of you think that 1991 is the only way to do it, that was less because we had elite players (outside of Emtman) but more because we had a defensive strategy that was largely new to college and teams weren’t largely ready to combat. In the 1992 Rose Bowl the D dominated Michigan. In 1993, Michigan put up 38 and Tyrone Wheatley ran all over us as teams started finding ways to exploit the defense.
So unless we have plans on revolutionizing defensive football our best shot is to have an elite QB. And guess what you have a great chance of finding on the West Coast compared to the SEC ... it’s the ONLY competitive advantage we almost always will have on the field going forward.
Both were high level, but elite college QBs don’t shit the bed in the way Darnold did against Ohio St. or lose as many games as Rosen did. That would be smearing the definition of elite.
An example of an actually elite QB is Deshaun Watson
Why is it that Bama has won so many titles with average game managers at QB? Why did Ohio State butt fuck SC when Darnold is better than Barrett. Why is Georgia in the national title with a true Freshman QB who throws less than 20 passes a game? You don't need a fucking elite QB. You need an elite team that has no weaknesses at any position.
On an average star basis, if we're trending anywhere close to even with them, then we're in a great position. -
That fucker needs to go walk down the middle of the Aurora Bridge at 5 pm on a weeknight for some perspective.bananasnblondes said:A guy on dawgman made a post along the lines of "I help pay Petersen's salary and as a fan I demand a statement from him on why DJ isn't coming to UW".
And I thought this place went to shit when we don't get a guy.
It will be chinteresting to find out if DJ had an "offer" from UW this time around. -
holy fuck is next season now over too?
damn recruiting fucks some of you up. -
Another nugget from the doogman DJ thread
"It's going to be interesting to see this team moving forward with no Sark recruits. I think coach Pete was fortunate with the talent he inherited."
