(11-24-2018, 03:14 AM)JPR36 Wrote: The Washington DC fired a shot or two across the Pirate's bow when he said he hopes Leach sticks around for a long time because he is so easy to prepare for. "They have done the same thing year in and year out for five years now".
I wish Lance Anderson were able to say that.
Yes, I saw that statement by Jimmy Lake and was surprised at how in-your-face it was. One Husky fan opined on a Stanford football blog that the best way to neuter Leach's air-raid is to rush three and drop eight, which is what the Dawgs have been doing successfully since Petersen arrived. But the defensive scheme is just a bunch of Xs and Os. You need the athletes to execute. We could do the same thing if we had three pass-rushers that could consistently pressure the QB and eight LBs/DBs that could blanket the receivers and allow minimal YAC.
A further secret of the Husky success vs. the Cougars is a strong O-line and an effective run-game. Hmm, that sounds familiar. Year-after-year, the Husky O-line has had their way with the fast, but undersized Cougar front seven. Is it scheme or just better athletes, because we have failed to establish an effective run-game against the Cougs for three years in a row? By comparison, here are the rushing stats for Stanford and UW vs. Wazzu for 2016-2018:
Stanford UW
2016: 26 168
2017: 93 328
2018: 120 258
Stanford had McCaffrey (2016) and Love (2017-18) in the backfield; UW had Coleman (2016) and Gaskin (2016-18) in the backfield. We managed 239 yards in three years; UW rushed for more than that yesterday. And nobody can tell me Coleman and Gaskin are superior to McCaffrey and Love.
Guess we're back to deterioration in the O-line's performance. A recurring theme in recent years.