Husky Jacks open thread [2020]
- Thread starter GrundleStiltzkin
- Start date
Jim was an alcoholic father figure at the Aloha Bowl
I meant inexcusable gap in my previous post. Kaho and Eifler being gone hurt even tho they haven’t shown much. Eifler is okay for a terrible team.
I do think it was a blip on the radar tho. What a disappointment Wellington was. And Manu ever seeing the field in a meaningful way was pathetic.
This year tho, we have a ton of young guys and Kwat is a no bullshit guy and reading what he said cements my option that the group would be pretty good and much improved from last year.
We’ve seen Ulo play very well. It wasn’t a huge sample size, but he didn’t play at a decent level, he played at a very high level.
I’m not huge on Sirmon, but he did improve as the season went on. I don’t see it with tho. He should improve at least one of the young R-Fr will pass him.
Heimuli was very highly rated. Calvert was a very solid recruit. Ah You seemed very underrated to me as well. Kwats comments about him being fast and decisive were exactly what his high school Hudl could be described as.
On paper, our D should be the best or 2nd best in the pac 12. Only team that comes close is Oregon and I like what we return at DL and Secondary better than what they bring back. At LB, we have 4-star guys waiting in the wings. If they step up, we could be elite. If everyone clicks (Levi, Tryon, and Molden have all-American seasons, Taylor tightens up, young LBs flash greatness), we could have one of the top defenses in the country again.
On offense, we should be better at WR and RB for sure (imo 3rd year Newton + Cam Davis > Ahmed). OL could actually be better as well. All the young guys who came in last year were competent. Adams was a shell of his former self last year. Since the guys moving up are all Huff's recruits, they might respond better to him. At QB, we have 3 high rated, 4* recruits. Find one that works.
Overall, we have the horses. If Lake is a good coach, we can win the Pac rather easily. If we struggle, we'll know Lake isnt the guy.
I think we have the horses, but if we don’t have a top 3-4 in the conference QB, we won’t win the conference. I don’t think we have that either despite their high star rankings. Donovan is a very suspect hire and Jimmy is a new head coach.
I think we will have the best defense in the conference. Our offense is bad until proven otherwise. The QB situation and Donovan make me have doubts.
I was thinking about the Bama game roster the other day and in retrospect it was pretty fucking loaded.
The big flaw in the level up logic of the 4star ratio automatically making us better was downplaying the actual talent of the 3star guys on the field that year.
The argument was something like “we’re this good with Sydney Jones and Kevin King, imagine what we can do with (insert 4 star recruits)”
Ballz was adamant we should never recruit guys like that moving forward because they weren’t “elite”. At a certain point, good is good.
The entire defense (outside of Psalm who honorably chose a professional rugby career) was drafted into the NFL.
Offense had 3 NFL receivers (including the fastest guy in NFL history), 2NFL TE, NFL RB, and at least 3 NFL lineman suited up.
Game was lost on the sidelines, just like all the big games were.
FremontTroll
New Fish
But we were never again gonna get those kinda results out of recruits stolen from OSU and Boise. It was a struck by lightning scenario. We needed to level up just to keep the momentum going let alone actually get to the next level.
I’m not arguing on leveling up recruiting being a bad thing, just the idea that we were automatically going to be better as Washington 2.0 because the new guys were higher ranked.
The players were at the “level” that year. The coaches weren’t on game day.
It’s always going to be a lightning strike scenario for Washington. We need a BillyJoe/Tui/Deshaun Watson type QB plus a 2016ish roster. That’s about as talented as it gets here.
That’s why Pete’s tenure is so frustrating, he consistently had us right there and odds are he would have broken through eventually but he lost his love for the game and the team fell off.
HoustonHusky
New Fish
Roster was good but it was the depth. Not having Mathis and pre-injury Victor killed us on D...BBK was the replacement at 200lbs at the time and got run over consistently because of it. On offense you had to start a 260 lb true freshman RG because you didn’t have anything else and that caused a ton of problems.
1to392831weretaken
New Fish
Your point is overall correct, but one detail deserves correction: For starters, 2016 was BBK's worst season, IMO, because that was the year he got too big too fast and lost his speed (can we abbreviate that into a new verb moving forward? I nominate "FSPing it"). So he was up closer to 215 that year. Moot point, though, because it was Beavers who came in for Victor in 2016, and, although he was no Victor (count on one hand guys who were 2016 Victor in Husky history), he balled the fuck out that season in reserve. Really pleasant surprise. My recollection of the Bama game was that there was maybe a play or two that Victor would have made that Beavers didn't. It wasn't a huge gap. Your point stands, though: Having Victor AND Beavers playing like that behind him is how you win big games like that.
It was surprising at the tim, considering how dominant and intimidating Victor was, but Mathis turned out to be the far bigger loss from that defense, as there was just nobody behind him who was close to that level.
/President of BBK fan club (pre-haircut, of course)
Last edited:
“If Junior Adams can do that with Cooper Kupp, imagine what he could do with better recruits.” I’ve seen this posted here and on Twitter before.
I’ve always said, obvious elite guys are important. After that, ignore the star ratings. There are so many mid to low four star recruits that are ranked that high for simply playing well at 7 on 7 camps, playing on good high school teams, playing with other elite talent, and being ranked high in the initial rankings.
UW will never be top 5-10 in recruiting for many reasons. We haven’t historically won at a high enough level. Our in state base is good, but not great. Then we compete with tons of schools in California. Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Texas, LSU, Florida, Florida State, Miami... All of them are in areas with a lot more talent. They may have more completion, but Washington/Oregon/Idaho don’t have even a 1/4 of the talent all of those regions have.
Get top 15 classes, evaluate your ass off, and develop. Also get a top flight QB like Huard to give you a chance when you are out talented.
We lost quite a few games the past few years that had a lot more to do with coaching error and playing shitty than talent. Both Oregon losses, both Cal losses, Stanford, Colorado. ASU in 2017.
Some think of how good we would have been in 2016-2018 with better talent. I think of how good we would have been with a better offensive system and a better QB. We will never have the talent to simply beat others by showing up.
TurdBomber
Active poster
I don't know what part of Pete's OKG philosophy caused him to put such a premium on practice performance when his starting WRs could not perform at game time and clearly were not giving maximum effort. The piss-poor WR playing decisions killed the UW offense not just because of a lack of talent, but the obvious negative impact on the Offense's confidence in their coaches and teammates.
There's only so long players can take the empty promises of "we'll put the tape on and work hard to see what 'adjustments' we need to make." If the fanbase was tired of hearing that empty, hopeless coaching plan, after each inexcusable loss or shitty O performance, imagine being a starter on the offensive side of the ball. Obviously, from the blank stares, deep breaths and looks of complete frustration we saw from many offensive players after another three-and-out, the team's offensive confidence was reduced to "I'll believe it when I see it, but I don't trust the coaches or my fellow players anymore." That's the recipe for never getting over the hump and winning the big games, and I pray to God that all through Pete's tenure, Jimmy was seething inside at the terrible game-time decisions and Pete's ever-growing delusions about who deserved to play.
Meek
New Fish
[/QUOTE]I don't know what part of Pete's OKG philosophy caused him to put such a premium on practice performance when his starting WRs could not perform at game time and clearly were not giving maximum effort. The piss-poor WR playing decisions killed the UW offense not just because of a lack of talent, but the obvious negative impact on the Offense's confidence in their coaches and teammates.
There's only so long players can take the empty promises of "we'll put the tape on and work hard to see what 'adjustments' we need to make." If the fanbase was tired of hearing that empty, hopeless coaching plan, after each inexcusable loss or shitty O performance, imagine being a starter on the offensive side of the ball. Obviously, from the blank stares, deep breaths and looks of complete frustration we saw from many offensive players after another three-and-out, the team's offensive confidence was reduced to "I'll believe it when I see it, but I don't trust the coaches or my fellow players anymore." That's the recipe for never getting over the hump and winning the big games, and I pray to God that all through Pete's tenure, Jimmy was seething inside at the terrible game-time decisions and Pete's ever-growing delusions about who deserved to play. [/QUOTE]
--------
This I also wonder...why didn't Pete simply adjust his equation to include a variable for in-game production...if someone's practice, playbook studying, schoolwork, attitude variables were all off the charts that's great, but if he had included a variable for in-game production that could have opened the door to making some adjustments.
Anyway, doesn't matter now since Pete decided that it's too annoying to be the head football coach at a top tier school.
There's only so long players can take the empty promises of "we'll put the tape on and work hard to see what 'adjustments' we need to make." If the fanbase was tired of hearing that empty, hopeless coaching plan, after each inexcusable loss or shitty O performance, imagine being a starter on the offensive side of the ball. Obviously, from the blank stares, deep breaths and looks of complete frustration we saw from many offensive players after another three-and-out, the team's offensive confidence was reduced to "I'll believe it when I see it, but I don't trust the coaches or my fellow players anymore." That's the recipe for never getting over the hump and winning the big games, and I pray to God that all through Pete's tenure, Jimmy was seething inside at the terrible game-time decisions and Pete's ever-growing delusions about who deserved to play. [/QUOTE]
--------
This I also wonder...why didn't Pete simply adjust his equation to include a variable for in-game production...if someone's practice, playbook studying, schoolwork, attitude variables were all off the charts that's great, but if he had included a variable for in-game production that could have opened the door to making some adjustments.
Anyway, doesn't matter now since Pete decided that it's too annoying to be the head football coach at a top tier school.
Last edited:
TurdBomber
Active poster
The short version is this: Pete didn't keep it real, and it hurt his team's performance. Lying to oneself while prioritizing loyalty and effort over actual in-game execution was his downfall. I hope Jimmy is burning inside to finally change that lasting image.
Yeah, there is no excuse to continue to play guys that aren’t producing. Ty Jones got that treatment in 2017 and Baccallia and you a lesser extent, Fuller did in 2019.
Same for Manu and Wellington. Our best LB last year was third string for most of the year. I never bought into Pete having nothing to do with the decisions either. I think the position coaches could choose who to play, but there were heavy consequences of a young guy fucked up. Something was going on.
BeerThirty
New Fish
I've heard quite a few times that Fuller did as little as possible in the weight room and on the practice field. Really makes me question the rationale for playing him when he stunk his SR year
TurdBomber
Active poster
Well that cements it then. He had lewd pics of Pete. End of story.
Last edited:
HoustonHusky
New Fish
Overall agree but we really missed Victor for that game...he was the only LB we had with legit size...Scarborough averaged something like 10 yards a carry running basically up the middle because we didn’t have another LB that could handle him...if our DL didn’t tackle him he carried a LB on his back until one of the safeties got there to tackle him.. Remember there being a 3rd and long play in the 2nd half Scarborough blew up our LB for a long run and thinking there was no way that would have happened with Victor. We were fortunate they kept running dumb misdirection plays instead of just running it up the middle over and over.
And God bless Nick Harris for not letting that game ruin his career...that wasn’t fair to him to have him out there but they didn’t have anyone else.
