Petersen's Presser

[Homebrew_Dawg]

not saying that I 100% agree with him as I do agree that pressure is real. That being said, if you know you can do the job and do it repeatedly in practice the odds of doing so when the lights go on increases substantially.

Tha fuck? Seriously?

Stick with tldr.

Live fire is a completely different theatre.

Having a tire hanging from the tree in the backyard and a “Specialist” coach Mom and Dad pay for you to fag off with (picture: OR strengmf coach) during High School is great,

Until they aren’t there and your snowflake ass melts.

G’s up ho’s down - same as it ever was

Pressure is real and until you go through those live reps you're going to have to learn to do that ... that's generally true across all aspects of sports.

That being said, you don't go to complete shit too often as what I was talking about was much more tied to general mechanics and whatnot.

Henry's miss made a lot of sense to me ... that's pressure coming from speeding up the process and a hook is what happens.

Haener just flat out doesn't see the field that well and forces balls over the middle ... that was something I've seen out of him in practices as well.

"Our practices under coach James were so hard that the games felt easy by comparison." - Dave Hoffmann

If Pete defined OKG according to the attitude and aggressiveness Dave Hoffman embodied, becoming an elite program would be much likelier. James had undersized, try hard white guys, but they were badass. One thing I especially loved about James is that he was color blind.

 

[FremontTroll]

Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs

That's a great defense.

We don't have one. We have a scheme

Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team

Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?

Do you have a point?

DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.

College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.

Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.

2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.

It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.

 

[Kaepsknee]

Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs

That's a great defense.

We don't have one. We have a scheme

Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team

Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?

Do you have a point?

DNC[/b] got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.

College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.

Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.

2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.

It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.

What’s a DNC?!!

 

[jecornel]

Race is spot on here

The defense does a lot right ...

But for as much as people shit on Browning for his issues (and fairly so), the defense has shit the bed in key spots more than many would care to admit

@Tequilla is one of the smartest posters here

Race a tequila fluffer?? I call bullshit.. haha. You may have a read a sentence or two of his novella's. You made tequila's year though! Your validation will have him beaming through Christmas. His co-workers will notice his strut in the office with his chin held high!

 

[jecornel]

Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs

That's a great defense.

We don't have one. We have a scheme

Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team

Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?

Do you have a point?

DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.

College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.

Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.

2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.

It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.

[/b]

This type of reasoning and facts is not welcomed at HH. It's too logical!!!

 

[Homebrew_Dawg]

Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs

That's a great defense.

We don't have one. We have a scheme

Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team

Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?

Do you have a point?

DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.

College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.

Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.

2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.

It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.

Is yards per game the proper “stat for losers” to compare these defenses? How do total yards, scoring, and 3rd down conversions compare?

The 2018 defense seems to bend more and is on the field more than the two prior years squads, but this may be because the offense isn’t. With the offense scoring as many Husky TDs for themselves as for the opponent last game, it may be cerebral to keep the defense on the field.

I agree the defense is not the problem, but Pete’s neutering seems to have affected the defense too.

 

[RaceBannon]

Stats remain for losers. Hasn't changed

 

[jecornel]

Stats remain for losers. Hasn't changed

Pete agrees with you.

 

[dirtysouwfdawg]

Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs

That's a great defense.

We don't have one. We have a scheme

Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team

Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?

Do you have a point?

DNC[/b] got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.

College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.

Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.

2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.

It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.

What’s a DNC?!!

It’s a venereal disease that can’t be cured with a VD shot.

 

[whuggy]

I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.

 

[FremontTroll]

I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.

If the defense were taking risks resulting in more negative plays but also more big plays allowed you'd probably be complaining that with THIS offense we can't afford to give up big plays and we need to minimize downside.

The bottom line is 10 points scored is not enough.

 

[Kaepsknee]

I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.

Yikes!! It’s sad that a lowly sodbuster has to spell this out. But Myles Gaskin is, has and will be the MVP of this Squad. Without him on the field, you’re fucked. Your D gave up 6 pts. You held the other “hot squad” in the Conference to 7 pts. They’ve had one bad game at Oregon. Probably the last one they will have all year.

 

[Neighbor2972]

I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.

While it seems like we have been 'bend but don't break', the lack of turnovers is just awful luck, we should be forcing way more

shoutout @AIRWOLFhttps://twitter.com/redmondlonghorn/status/1057343488465952769https://twitter.com/redmondlonghorn/status/1057345683194241026

 

[FremontTroll]

Let me put it this way - the 84 defense won a game when the offense had 3 first downs

That's a great defense.

We don't have one. We have a scheme

Intellectual football on both sides of the ball makes for a soft fucking losing shit team

Do you think the game may have changed since 1984?

Do you have a point?

DNC got it. Pretty sure you did too but you like to pretend to be dense when it suits you.

College football underwent many massive sea changes over the decades. The game is completely different than it was 15 years ago let alone 34. You can't compare statistics across eras instead you should compare to peers- 2018 teams and recent UW teams.

Ultimately, despite being saddled by an offense that can't stay on the field and despite not having much fumble luck (causing fumbles is a skill. recovering is luck) this defense will end up very close to the lauded 2016 and 2017 units.

2016 allowed 4.5 yards per play. 2017 4.4 ypp. 2018 4.5 thus far ties for 10th in the nation.

It might not be an all time great D as it obviously lacks an edge rusher but its very good- good enough to compete for a national championship. And would look better with a functional offense.

Is yards per game the proper “stat for losers” to compare these defenses? How do total yards, scoring, and 3rd down conversions compare?

The 2018 defense seems to bend more and is on the field more than the two prior years squads, but this may be because the offense isn’t. With the offense scoring as many Husky TDs for themselves as for the opponent last game, it may be cerebral to keep the defense on the field.

I agree the defense is not the problem, but Pete’s neutering seems to have affected the defense too.

Yes, yards per play is the most predictive simple statistic. Total yard or points are not great because games are not of equal length and neither are fields.

But 2018 we are allowing 16.8 points per game. 2017 also 16.8. 2016 18.8.

 

[AIRWOLF]

Anybody calling out the defense as the problem is an idiot. FULL STOP

Could it be better? Sure. Everything could always be better. It would be great to create more turnovers when there is the opportunity, to create more pressure, and to get home rushing the QB when there is pressure. But this is a very good defense, even while rotating multiple walk-ons in the front seven.

The #1 problem is the offense. Specifically its inability to convert scoring chances into points. Followed by a relative lack of big plays.

The #2 problem is special teams.

The defense falls in behind those.

 

[AIRWOLF]

I'll try one more time then I give up. With THIS anemic offense you need a defense that can HELP OUT the offense as much as possible. Bend and break scheme that lets the other team drive down the field and create long fields for the offense is the worst possible scheme to complement THIS offense. The scheme should be much more oriented to trying to create short fields for THIS offense. It is a good defense. They are the strength of the team. The passive scheme though is not a good fit
in trying to maximize opportunity for this abortion of an offense. I can't figure out any other way to say it. The whole point is for the stronger part of the team to do it's best to make things easier for the weaker parts of the team. Just like it was Petersen's job to make that kick easier for Henry. Or you can just believe in the tooth fairy and think Hamdan and Browning and Petersen are going to magically figure things out in the next 4 or 5 games.

While it seems like we have been 'bend but don't break', the lack of turnovers is just awful luck, we should be forcing way more

shoutout @AIRWOLFhttps://twitter.com/redmondlonghorn/status/1057343488465952769https://twitter.com/redmondlonghorn/status/1057345683194241026

While Bill Connelly terms it turnover "luck" and there is an element of randomness, I am persuaded that it isn't ALL random. Playmakers thrive on confidence and the defense doesn't have enough of either.

 

[Baseman]

Pete is not the GUY.

The guy replaces his QB when his QB wilts, time and again, under pressure. The guy gives his backup more reps in meaningless non-conference games so the backup can handle a close game late in the second half. The guy doesn’t let his petulant QB hold the program hostage and develops a contingency plan in case his starting QB isn’t getting it done.

The guy replaces his LB coach who has proven he can’t recruit championship level players or handle special teams with a coach who can.

The guy doesn’t keep telling everyone, including his team how “hard” it is to win. The guy sleeps in his office, figuring how to make it hard for other teams to win, then executes.

The guy doesn’t fuck the fan base that buy the tickets and make the donations to pay his salary, highest in the PAC-12, by allowing the above to continue.

Chris Petersen is NOT the GUY.

 

[Tequilla]

The problem is that there isn’t another QB on the roster capable of taking over from Jake ... that’s a different issue

I’m pretty sure Pete would move on from Jake if he had an option

 

[HillsboroDuck]

Pete is not the GUY.

The guy replaces his QB when his QB wilts, time and again, under pressure. The guy gives his backup more reps in meaningless non-conference games so the backup can handle a close game late in the second half. The guy doesn’t let his petulant QB hold the program hostage and develops a contingency plan in case his starting QB isn’t getting it done.

The guy replaces his LB coach who has proven he can’t recruit championship level players or handle special teams with a coach who can.

The guy doesn’t keep telling everyone, including his team how “hard” it is to win. The guy sleeps in his office, figuring how to make it hard for other teams to win, then executes.

The guy doesn’t fuck the fan base that buy the tickets and make the donations to pay his salary, highest in the PAC-12, by allowing the above to continue.

Chris Petersen is NOT the GUY.

This is so dumb

 

[RaceBannon]

From pre season overwhelming favorite to 6 and 3 playing out the string with no fire or care

Great job by everyone. Look at our stats!!!!!!