The CardBoard
I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so (/thread-631.html)


Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - washingtonismoney - 10-23-2010

Maybe it\'s a small sample si....

ah, whatevs: WE\'RE TERRIBLE! We\'re going to finish 6-66 this year!

I have heard Johnson Bademosi was less than good, but frankly he\'s been less than good throughout this season, even when the defense was playing well. It\'s frightening to think of what happens next year, when Bademosi is (presumably) the top cover corner.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - Farm93 - 10-23-2010

Let\'s not get carried away.  The score was 31-7 at one point, so the final score was a bit misleading.

Washington State is getting better.  Bademosi was picked on all day long and if the opponent was better my bet is he does not see that much action.  The reunion crowd, likely more concerned about post game events and staying dry was just not as passionate as that USC crowd.  It was just a laid back, old Stanford Stadium style game.

In the fourth quarter Stanford took the foot off the gas and let some non-starters play.  The mediocre team play, the score situation, the weather and the lack of any crowd all contributed to that late flurry.

No need to read too much into it.  Next week and Big Game are the two big tests left in the regular season.  But no matter what happens Stanford is going to a bowl game in back to back years.  That has not happened in a long, long, time.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - JeffInCorvallis - 10-23-2010

It\'s no secret that our secondary is questionable, and has been for a long time.  Yes, this was not our best effort, which was somewhat surprising to me as I though Harbaugh would have them ready to play.  Next week will be a challenge.  Even though Locker hasn\'t looked like a Voldemort hopeful much this season, he is still very dangerous.  And Luck, as good as he is, still is underthrowing some wide open receivers.  There were flashes of our power running game, especially in the second half.

I think we\'re good enough to win 3 or 4 of the last 5, but as today showed, it sure won\'t be easy.  I\'m also picking WSU to win the Apple Cup this year in Pullman.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - Farm93 - 10-23-2010

USC had Barkley.  Barkley is at least as good as Locker.
UW is not that good, honestly.  I know UW beat SC, but it seems clear now that SC was looking ahead a touch to the "What\'s your deal?" rematch.  Locker is apparently NFL material, but the team and the system are not at that standard.

That said, UW and C.a.l appear scary.  UW because of Locker and the possibility of rain and noise.  C.a.l, because they seem to play so well at home.

If Wazzu was a better team, I suspect Bademosi would have been given more help.  Since the game was out of reach for Wazzu, I suspect the call was to let him struggle through rather than show UW the adjustment they will make next week.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - washingtonismoney - 10-23-2010

Farm93, love the Bademosi theory, but I doubt they\'ve let Bademosi underperform (relative to the average corner) for a few weeks now so that they can spring a trap on UW.

(NOTE, however, that I did not actually see the game and so I can\'t say whether or not Bademosi got safety help.)

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - Spiny_Norman - 10-23-2010

I am troubled by the last of pressure on the QB the last 3 games.  No sacks against Oregon, 1 against USC, 2 against Washington State.  Contrast that with 14 sacks during the first four games.

If you don\'t pressure the QB, even Kevin Riley can look like an All American.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - Farm93 - 10-24-2010

Quote:Farm93, love the Bademosi theory, but I doubt they\'ve let Bademosi underperform (relative to the average corner) for a few weeks now so that they can spring a trap on UW.

(NOTE, however, that I did not actually see the game and so I can\'t say whether or not Bademosi got safety help.)

Bademosi was not playing as much when Howell was healthy.  This was Howell\'s first game with this arm/hand injury, so the staff needed Bademosi like never before.

In this first game as a starter in a conference game the staff never let seemed to alter the coverage to protect Bademosi.  A bit more nickel probably would have been helpful.  Consistent with our year-long effort for all DBs, Bademosi was up in press coverage a fair amount.

Locker can and will exploit that man-press coverage, so I am hopeful the coaches will do something more profound than leave Bademosi on an island in Seattle.

Put it a different way.  Bademosi is our guy at one CB slot as long as Howell is out.  At this point in the season the staff would play another DB if he was really superior to Bademosi.  Bademosi is the man.  So either Bademosi will need to fly up the learning curve, or the staff will need to develop schemes ASAP to help him out.

And by help, I mean something deeper than JH complaining to the refs that the WR pushed off after every big Wazzu catch.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - washingtonismoney - 10-24-2010

Howell has never played CB this season, and certainly not substituting for Bademosi. Do you mean helping Bademosi? That\'s certainly possible, as Howell has nearly exclusively played safety. Michael Thomas shifts from safety to the nickel corner in passing downs, so maybe you\'re thinking of him. But Howell hasn\'t played in a one-for-one swap for Bademosi, and I\'m pretty sure of this.


Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - Farm93 - 10-24-2010

WAisMoney. You are correct.  But Howell seemed to correct so much.  A few of those throws to Bademosi would have had Howell coming in a knocking the ball free.  I am thinking of the USC game type hits.

Howell\'s absence seemed to leave the CBs on true islands, like never before.  Down by 17-24 Washington State needed to pass and yet the coverage allowed fantastic gains on each pass.  The last Wazzu TD was absolutely inexcusible.  With Howell back there the team wins by 17-31 points because those 4th quarter plays simply do not happen, and all looks a little better.

As I write that I can recall expressing that I thought resting the injured would be a decent option since the team should win without a lot of starters.  So I just hope that is exactly what happened, and therefore the Wazzu game is not really a good predictor of future results.  

Trying to project from this game, I still have the same concern...
The DB group needs Howell, apparently a lot.

If that was the default game plan without Howell, then the coaches need to a different plan.  No QB pressure and no Howell looks like a dangerous formula.  Bademosi is likely the best talent available, so the plan will need to include him too.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - Leftcoast - 10-24-2010

A cast ..... so that\'s what\'s meant by game time decision.  Groan....

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - fyao - 10-24-2010

I wonder if Corey Gatewood would consider going back to db, as he is may the 6th WR?  (R Whalen, Owusu, Baldwin, G Whalen, Patterson, then maybe Gatewood or Reuland)  I know he didn\'t beat out but Bademosi or Sherman, but having additional options never hurts, and he might be the 3rd or 4th db?

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - gbiddulph - 10-24-2010

I have it on tape that Garvin said Stanford would win by 10 points and that WSU would make the game look competitive at times.  He was right.  I said we would win by 20 points, which looked possible until that last TD pass by WSU.

In any case, we really need to step up our game if we are going to finish off the season the way we should.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - terry - 10-24-2010

Quote:I have it on tape that Garvin said Stanford would win by 10 points and that WSU would make the game look competitive at times.  He was right.  I said we would win by 20 points, which looked possible until that last TD pass by WSU.

In any case, we really need to step up our game if we are going to finish off the season the way we should.
Garvin was half right. Stanford won by 10, and Garvin called it. Kudos for that! But the game was not competitive. At no time was the result in doubt. The only question was the margin of victory.

Re: I told you so -- well, I told SOME of you so - washingtonismoney - 10-24-2010

A postscript: Jeff Sagarin\'s PREDICTOR ratings have moved us down to #7. Apparently the computers liked the win just as little as we liked it.