That loss hurt. Like Michigan 2002 hurt. Like damn near SB 49 hurt.
We had them beat and we blew it.
A few random thoughts that have probably already been covered but there's no way I'm reading through everything I missed the past 48 hours.
1. The loss is on Pete, Completely. It's one thing to do everything you can and have to settle for a field goal. It's another thing to play for a field goal. Pete played for a field goal and that shit almost never works. It's been my biggest frustration (among many) with Pete Carroll the past few years. Anytime your game management is being compared to Pete Carroll you've done something massively wrong. Playing for a FG, with a kicker whose done nothing to chinspire confidence, is just a complete and total fail. My only hope is that Pete learns from this. We know he hates losing. Hopefully we never see that shit again.
2. I've seen a few people on Twitter mention that running one or two more plays doesn't necessarily mean you make the kick. Of course it doesn't. Which is why you don't run one or two more plays, you play to score a TD. IIRC, we had 50 seconds and two time outs when we started sitting on it. The problem is not that we didn't run it into the middle of the line one or two more times to gain three more yards. The problem is we chose to try and win it with a FG. If you run your plays and you get down to fourth down or out of time to where you have to try the FG that's a different thing. You played to win. Chintentionally putting the ball in the hands of your shit kicker is just awful.
Yes, I realize playing to score the TD means you have to risk a sack or a turnover. It means you might not get a FG attempt or a longer FG attempt. There's some risk involved. But you have to accept the risk, dial up some play calls that get the ball out quickly and safely, and try and score. Sitting on the ball is for pussies.
3. I know everybody hates Bush but I think you guys are wrong. He called a terrible game at Auburn but he's gotten significantly better. There were two or three calls Saturday that pissed me off but the overall game plan was beautiful. We only threw the ball 25 times with maybe another 4 or 5 called passes that Browning was sacked or ran on. We called 40 runs. FORTY. That's over 60% run. And they were quality, effective runs for the most part. And he did all that with Gaskin banged up all game and Ahmed banged up for a lot of it. The last drive in regulation was brilliant until Pete put the brakes on. We got the ball at our own 8 yard line, then moved the ball 70 yards with both of our top 2 RB's on the bench. It was perfectly called, including the 4th down pickup.
It wasn't a perfect game obviously. The 3rd and 2 pass on the opening drive of the 3rd was annoying and the last two calls before the field goal in OT were bad. But I've seen a bunch of people say he's worse than Babushka and I think that's insane. He's a clear upgrade, and most importantly he's getting better. The chart just needs to have a talk with him about the damn goalline fade and we'll be good.
4. Did the rule change about a chinjury in the final minutes of the half costing you a timeout? On Oregon's TD drive in the first half Sewell went down on the fourth and one, but Oregon wasn't charged a timeout. They also didn't take advantage of the injury timeout to review the spot, which was highly questionable. Since Oregon doesn't burn a TO there they have a timeout left which they use at 3rd and 7 with 21 seconds and throw the TD on the next play.
Then on UW's end of regulation drive Jordon Scott goes down with 2:15 left. I think anything outside of 2 minutes never costed a timeout anyway but I can't remember what the exact cutoff was, but regardless Scott's chinjury didn't cost them a TO either. So of course Cristoball has the extra timeout to ice Henry, Henry makes the kick but it doesn't count, and the rest is history.
I don't think the second one should have cost a TO but Sewell's absolutely should have unless the rules have completely changed. Anyone have any explanation of this?
5. Scheduling isn't the reason we lost but it clearly was a factor in the loss and damn it's frustrating. The Pac needs to get it's shit together, but we know it won't.
6. Cristoball impressed me. He might not be Taggart 2.0. He was really patient, willing to stick with the run, but mostly didn't try to force Herbert for some bullshit Heisman or All America purposes. He wanted to win and realized Herbert wasn't his best shot in this specific game. Also his willingness to repeatedly go for it on fourth down was the difference in this game. He showed balls. I still don't think he's likely a great coach but he's probably a good one, and with the talent he's bringing in he'll be an issue. That said I imagine this was the best game he called and the best his team will play all year.
7. Targeting is such an awful rule. Both targeting calls were correct by the book but it's just not fair to kick a kid out of a game when the QB turns into him and he has basically no choice but to hit him that way. There has to be an in between level where it's still a flag but you're not removing someone from the game. Such a shit rule.
8. Win the North. Win the Pac. That's always the first goal. Assuming we don't have a letdown against
@RuffaloSoldier we should be able to win out. But damn we should have won this game, and if we had we'd be in prime playoff position. This one's going to sting awhile. Maybe forever.
