Washington's recent woes on offense have Husky fans rightfully asking questions about the coaching staff. Mad Son addresses those worries in this week's Ramblings.
Read the full story here
Last edited by a moderator:
Mad Son's Ramblings: Even if we're doomed it is too early to tell
- Thread starter administrator
- Start date
Washington's recent woes on offense have Husky fans rightfully asking questions about the coaching staff. Mad Son addresses those worries in this week's Ramblings.
Read the full story here
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Seems like a good article for the Tug Tavern.
If you would allow me about 25 seconds, articles always post to the Tug Tavern and I have to manually switch them to the main bored.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Fuck the Devs.
Would this team be looked at as better if the offense was throwing up huge numbers and we had a typical Sarkesque defense. Guys on the radio were saying that the team was wasting an awesome defense today. I guess I don't totally disagree, though this defense is really only awesome compared to the Sark/ty kind of defense. It has improved though since the beginning of the year. And if Peterman, as an offensive coach, can get the defense to improve, no reason to think that he can with the offense also.
I'm beginning to think the defense is teachable because Sark ignored it for 5 years, so they don't have to unlearn a bunch of crap, unlike the offense. It has 5 years of Sark gumming up the works.
I'm beginning to think the defense is teachable because Sark ignored it for 5 years, so they don't have to unlearn a bunch of crap, unlike the offense. It has 5 years of Sark gumming up the works.
Losers love a flashy offense that entertains them while losing. That's why Kim misses Sark so much
Husky fans love a good third down stop
Allegedly
Its a good article. We need to get the offense fixed but we also need a defense for the first time in 25 year
LIPO
Husky fans love a good third down stop
Allegedly
Its a good article. We need to get the offense fixed but we also need a defense for the first time in 25 year
LIPO
SpoonieLuv
New Fish
Last edited:
CuntWaffle
New Fish
There is enough talent on this offense to be at least 11th in the conference.
That's a battle cry if ever I heard one.
I don't think anyone would say the talent is good on offense, but of course the talent looks bad on the worst offense in the PAC 12. The talent looked terrible on defense in 2011. A year later, many of the same guys were remarkably better.
The article is spot on and Petersen will get time to work things out. A couple points on offense.
1) In regards to the offense, this is the third straight year of mediocre or worse offenses from Petersen's teams. 6 points against Wilcox and Sark last year with a returning QB off an 11 win team, a beast RB who is getting NFL buzz in Ajayi, Matt Miller was a junior who had 1900 yards over the previous two years, Kellen Moore's brother was a steady contributor, Amsterdam the WR on Hard Knocks was also on the team and would have made the Falcons if not for injury. They weren't without talent. UW was certainly not a great defense last year. We saw the same boring offense last year that we are seeing now.
2) Hiring Jonathon Smith as OC. He was the QB coach of the mediocre offenses the past two seasons at Boise State. It was a really bad hire on paper that was mostly glossed over because we were so excited about 92-12 and Petersen. Petersen obviously sees something in Smith, but he didn't have anywhere close to the ideal resume for the job. We always talk about assistants not mattering. I agree about position coaches, but coordinators do matter. I would feel a lot better about everything with a proven OC or at least a position coach from an actual explosive offense.
The QB and talent issues are certainly valid. That said, there are some negative trends playing out that should at least be acknowledged. We don't play a good defense the rest of the way. Improvement should be expected, and if not, maybe there should be same changes with the staff and possibly the scheme.
1) In regards to the offense, this is the third straight year of mediocre or worse offenses from Petersen's teams. 6 points against Wilcox and Sark last year with a returning QB off an 11 win team, a beast RB who is getting NFL buzz in Ajayi, Matt Miller was a junior who had 1900 yards over the previous two years, Kellen Moore's brother was a steady contributor, Amsterdam the WR on Hard Knocks was also on the team and would have made the Falcons if not for injury. They weren't without talent. UW was certainly not a great defense last year. We saw the same boring offense last year that we are seeing now.
2) Hiring Jonathon Smith as OC. He was the QB coach of the mediocre offenses the past two seasons at Boise State. It was a really bad hire on paper that was mostly glossed over because we were so excited about 92-12 and Petersen. Petersen obviously sees something in Smith, but he didn't have anywhere close to the ideal resume for the job. We always talk about assistants not mattering. I agree about position coaches, but coordinators do matter. I would feel a lot better about everything with a proven OC or at least a position coach from an actual explosive offense.
The QB and talent issues are certainly valid. That said, there are some negative trends playing out that should at least be acknowledged. We don't play a good defense the rest of the way. Improvement should be expected, and if not, maybe there should be same changes with the staff and possibly the scheme.
sarktastic
New Fish
When Sark was hired, I didn't need any time to wait and see. I (and many others) knew we were doomed.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Disagree.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Great
Referral Denied
You don't have permission to access "http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTY4MDMyODQwM15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwNTY5Mzk5._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg" on this server.
Reference #24.3c6ccc17.1414709995.32c1081c
as always
HFNY
Active poster
I totally agree with you except for #1. Washington's D did very well against teams that had less talent and other than the drubbing by Oregon, in Husky Stadium we gave up just 13 to Arizona, 0 to Idaho State, 17 to Cal, only 7 to Colorado, and 17 to WSU.
As for total scoring, BSU was 19th in 2013, 54th in 2012, 5th in 2011, 2nd in 2010, tied for 1st in 2009, and #12 in 2008. If anything, 2012 was the exception and not the norm right?
As for total scoring, BSU was 19th in 2013, 54th in 2012, 5th in 2011, 2nd in 2010, tied for 1st in 2009, and #12 in 2008. If anything, 2012 was the exception and not the norm right?
Tequilla
Active poster
RoadDawg's focus here is questionable IMO
It's clear he doesn't like Smith and is using revisionist history to go back and say that "we glossed over" and "should have know" that we'd expect that while completely discrediting that we have substandard QB play. When QB play is brought up, it circles back to the coaching. Then on top of that, pointing out that Petersen's last 2 years (the years AFTER Kellen Moore) are indications that Petersen is losing it - even though as DNC and HFNY are pointing out there's a lot of cherry picking going on.
I don't know if you were at the Boise game in 2013, but I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that Boise had no shot of winning that game. I actually thought that considering the circumstances Boise played really well on offense. At no point the entire night were they able to gain any kind of separation in the passing game. On top of that, Southwick was a good, but not great, Boise QB and definitely not a PAC caliber QB game in and game out against a tanned, rested, and focused PAC defense playing at home. Between that game, and looking at a similar situation in Vegas where Boise clearly lacked the athletes on the field yet somehow won the game, convinced me that Petersen was in fact a far better coach than I had historically given him credit for (well before the hire).
You're fitting your narrative into a perspective that you are trying to lead on. What you're not considering at all is how AFTER Kellen Moore games like the 2013 game in Seattle magnified to Petersen how difficult it would be to continue winning at such a high level at Boise. No matter how well he coaches up his players, there's a certain reality that the overall depth and quality of the program will not hold up against a higher end Big 5 conference team. Even with Petersen gone this year, Boise played very well for about 3 quarters in Atlanta this year against Ole Miss before they started to wear down, made some mistakes, and Ole Miss pulled away. In fact, it's a very similar story to what happened in Seattle last year.
There's a reason that Petersen continually is dropping hints to the media talking about how Miles is doing a lot of what they are asking of him but also noting that one of his biggest areas of improvement will come in the area of recognition and playing with anticipation. We've seen 3 QBs play this year and at this point 0 of the 3 show the ability to really do either. That's a MASSIVE problem. With Miles specifically, while you can play the position without a gun for an arm if you can play with anticipation and recognition, it's almost impossible to play at a high level without those traits and an arm. If you have the arm, it can help minimize weaknesses with anticipation and recognition - much like a 100 mph fastball can help offset some problems with location. We talk often about finding ways to get Ross the ball, but a lot of getting him the ball is tied to weaknesses in the QB position as the routes that Ross will run well are the drags and quick slants that you need to throw the WR open vs. waiting for the WR to come open.
There is talent on this offense - but there's also a lot of guys being asked to do things that quite honestly they aren't really prepared to do. Mickens is being asked to be a #1 WR when really he's suited to be a #3 slot WR. One common trait of a great team (regardless of sport) is that players are slotted appropriately and asked to do what they are capable of and not what they aren't capable of. In that regard, we have massive problems on offense.
Things will get better, but it's going to take a little bit of time. We will need a offseason to reassess what strengths and weaknesses we have on offense and find something that will highlight and minimize. All the while, we need to also keep a mindset on what the ultimate vision that we have and finding the players that fit that vision. There will obviously be tweaks in the interim, but the worst thing that we could do is completely switch up our offense to fit the current players and allow the current players (and their existing limitations) shape the future direction and identity of the offense.
In the interim, I'm perfectly content to see incremental progress, the team playing the right way, and learning how to develop the tools necessary to win when the going gets tough instead of just winning the games when we are front running the entire time. We didn't close the game against ASU. But we were down 10-0 with seemingly no expectation of doing anything that would lead us not only back into the game but to win. Instead we find a play out of Timu and then a drive that ideally would have finished in a TD but got us back to level. That doesn't happen last year. The next step in the growth of this program would be the defense coming out and following up the game tying drive by getting a stop and turning it back over to the offense. And the final growth is the offense following up that drive with a game winning drive. This program will grow from this adversity. We'll find ourselves some players and some pretenders.
It's clear he doesn't like Smith and is using revisionist history to go back and say that "we glossed over" and "should have know" that we'd expect that while completely discrediting that we have substandard QB play. When QB play is brought up, it circles back to the coaching. Then on top of that, pointing out that Petersen's last 2 years (the years AFTER Kellen Moore) are indications that Petersen is losing it - even though as DNC and HFNY are pointing out there's a lot of cherry picking going on.
I don't know if you were at the Boise game in 2013, but I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that Boise had no shot of winning that game. I actually thought that considering the circumstances Boise played really well on offense. At no point the entire night were they able to gain any kind of separation in the passing game. On top of that, Southwick was a good, but not great, Boise QB and definitely not a PAC caliber QB game in and game out against a tanned, rested, and focused PAC defense playing at home. Between that game, and looking at a similar situation in Vegas where Boise clearly lacked the athletes on the field yet somehow won the game, convinced me that Petersen was in fact a far better coach than I had historically given him credit for (well before the hire).
You're fitting your narrative into a perspective that you are trying to lead on. What you're not considering at all is how AFTER Kellen Moore games like the 2013 game in Seattle magnified to Petersen how difficult it would be to continue winning at such a high level at Boise. No matter how well he coaches up his players, there's a certain reality that the overall depth and quality of the program will not hold up against a higher end Big 5 conference team. Even with Petersen gone this year, Boise played very well for about 3 quarters in Atlanta this year against Ole Miss before they started to wear down, made some mistakes, and Ole Miss pulled away. In fact, it's a very similar story to what happened in Seattle last year.
There's a reason that Petersen continually is dropping hints to the media talking about how Miles is doing a lot of what they are asking of him but also noting that one of his biggest areas of improvement will come in the area of recognition and playing with anticipation. We've seen 3 QBs play this year and at this point 0 of the 3 show the ability to really do either. That's a MASSIVE problem. With Miles specifically, while you can play the position without a gun for an arm if you can play with anticipation and recognition, it's almost impossible to play at a high level without those traits and an arm. If you have the arm, it can help minimize weaknesses with anticipation and recognition - much like a 100 mph fastball can help offset some problems with location. We talk often about finding ways to get Ross the ball, but a lot of getting him the ball is tied to weaknesses in the QB position as the routes that Ross will run well are the drags and quick slants that you need to throw the WR open vs. waiting for the WR to come open.
There is talent on this offense - but there's also a lot of guys being asked to do things that quite honestly they aren't really prepared to do. Mickens is being asked to be a #1 WR when really he's suited to be a #3 slot WR. One common trait of a great team (regardless of sport) is that players are slotted appropriately and asked to do what they are capable of and not what they aren't capable of. In that regard, we have massive problems on offense.
Things will get better, but it's going to take a little bit of time. We will need a offseason to reassess what strengths and weaknesses we have on offense and find something that will highlight and minimize. All the while, we need to also keep a mindset on what the ultimate vision that we have and finding the players that fit that vision. There will obviously be tweaks in the interim, but the worst thing that we could do is completely switch up our offense to fit the current players and allow the current players (and their existing limitations) shape the future direction and identity of the offense.
In the interim, I'm perfectly content to see incremental progress, the team playing the right way, and learning how to develop the tools necessary to win when the going gets tough instead of just winning the games when we are front running the entire time. We didn't close the game against ASU. But we were down 10-0 with seemingly no expectation of doing anything that would lead us not only back into the game but to win. Instead we find a play out of Timu and then a drive that ideally would have finished in a TD but got us back to level. That doesn't happen last year. The next step in the growth of this program would be the defense coming out and following up the game tying drive by getting a stop and turning it back over to the offense. And the final growth is the offense following up that drive with a game winning drive. This program will grow from this adversity. We'll find ourselves some players and some pretenders.