07-25-2017, 11:53 AM
The view from Seattle...
07-25-2017, 01:00 PM
Interesting how this fella's tone has changed. In previous years, when Stanford came up, he was fulminating in the "I'm joking so please don't call me angry, I'm really not at all angry" way that's so popular on the internet these days.
Anywhoo his read on the team seems pretty much on-consensus. Almost all the issues are pretty easy to spot. It'd be worth splitting out "uncertainty" from "definite weaknesses." For example, at receiver, I don't think there'll be a fast-take-the-top-off-the-defense wideout no matter how aggressively we project various players. On the other hand both OL and QB look more uncertain than weak, if that makes sense.
Anywhoo his read on the team seems pretty much on-consensus. Almost all the issues are pretty easy to spot. It'd be worth splitting out "uncertainty" from "definite weaknesses." For example, at receiver, I don't think there'll be a fast-take-the-top-off-the-defense wideout no matter how aggressively we project various players. On the other hand both OL and QB look more uncertain than weak, if that makes sense.
Interesting how this fella's tone has changed. In previous years, when Stanford came up, he was fulminating in the "I'm joking so please don't call me angry, I'm really not at all angry" way that's so popular on the internet these days.
Anywhoo his read on the team seems pretty much on-consensus. Almost all the issues are pretty easy to spot. It'd be worth splitting out "uncertainty" from "definite weaknesses." For example, at receiver, I don't think there'll be a fast-take-the-top-off-the-defense wideout no matter how aggressively we project various players. On the other hand both OL and QB look more uncertain than weak, if that makes sense.
Anywhoo his read on the team seems pretty much on-consensus. Almost all the issues are pretty easy to spot. It'd be worth splitting out "uncertainty" from "definite weaknesses." For example, at receiver, I don't think there'll be a fast-take-the-top-off-the-defense wideout no matter how aggressively we project various players. On the other hand both OL and QB look more uncertain than weak, if that makes sense.
07-25-2017, 01:17 PM
That's an amazingly balanced look at Stanford, though his bullishness on Stanford's LB corps outstrips much of what's been posted here :p Also, he leaves out Walker Little from the true frosh OT discussion. It's okay though because if Little sees the field vs. UW, I don't think Dawg fans will forget him after that.
Myabe we do need to just put IBS in punter gear and have him run go routes (or jet sweeps?). He's got track speed; let it shine, let it shine, let it shine...
Myabe we do need to just put IBS in punter gear and have him run go routes (or jet sweeps?). He's got track speed; let it shine, let it shine, let it shine...
That's an amazingly balanced look at Stanford, though his bullishness on Stanford's LB corps outstrips much of what's been posted here :p Also, he leaves out Walker Little from the true frosh OT discussion. It's okay though because if Little sees the field vs. UW, I don't think Dawg fans will forget him after that.
Myabe we do need to just put IBS in punter gear and have him run go routes (or jet sweeps?). He's got track speed; let it shine, let it shine, let it shine...
Myabe we do need to just put IBS in punter gear and have him run go routes (or jet sweeps?). He's got track speed; let it shine, let it shine, let it shine...
07-25-2017, 02:33 PM
I would split a few hairs with the author. I don't see RB depth as a weakness, more RB experience. We have at least 3 if not 4 very capable guys in my opinion, unfortunately at least half have never taken a snap in college. That said, RB is one position where a frosh can make a big impact. I believe you are more apt to see a standout freshman RB than a standout freshman OLine man.
I don't think the success of the offensive line is dependent upon Herbig. He has proved he can play. I believe the key will be left tackle. If we can line up a left tackle who can block an edge rusher, it will be a major boost to our offense.
I don't see safety experience as a big issue. The returners have proven they can play. I am far more concerned about whether we can put two guys on the field who can take some pressure off of Philips. We are one injury away from some major issues on the defensive line.Â
Lastly, I think Special Teams should be part of write ups. Mac provided us with a major threat on returns, often causing opponents to kick away from him, often giving us pretty good field position. Field Goal wise we also had probably the best kicker we have ever had, and our punting was also pretty darn good. All told, special teams were a major contributor last year, can they come close that level this year?
I don't think the success of the offensive line is dependent upon Herbig. He has proved he can play. I believe the key will be left tackle. If we can line up a left tackle who can block an edge rusher, it will be a major boost to our offense.
I don't see safety experience as a big issue. The returners have proven they can play. I am far more concerned about whether we can put two guys on the field who can take some pressure off of Philips. We are one injury away from some major issues on the defensive line.Â
Lastly, I think Special Teams should be part of write ups. Mac provided us with a major threat on returns, often causing opponents to kick away from him, often giving us pretty good field position. Field Goal wise we also had probably the best kicker we have ever had, and our punting was also pretty darn good. All told, special teams were a major contributor last year, can they come close that level this year?
I would split a few hairs with the author. I don't see RB depth as a weakness, more RB experience. We have at least 3 if not 4 very capable guys in my opinion, unfortunately at least half have never taken a snap in college. That said, RB is one position where a frosh can make a big impact. I believe you are more apt to see a standout freshman RB than a standout freshman OLine man.
I don't think the success of the offensive line is dependent upon Herbig. He has proved he can play. I believe the key will be left tackle. If we can line up a left tackle who can block an edge rusher, it will be a major boost to our offense.
I don't see safety experience as a big issue. The returners have proven they can play. I am far more concerned about whether we can put two guys on the field who can take some pressure off of Philips. We are one injury away from some major issues on the defensive line.Â
Lastly, I think Special Teams should be part of write ups. Mac provided us with a major threat on returns, often causing opponents to kick away from him, often giving us pretty good field position. Field Goal wise we also had probably the best kicker we have ever had, and our punting was also pretty darn good. All told, special teams were a major contributor last year, can they come close that level this year?
I don't think the success of the offensive line is dependent upon Herbig. He has proved he can play. I believe the key will be left tackle. If we can line up a left tackle who can block an edge rusher, it will be a major boost to our offense.
I don't see safety experience as a big issue. The returners have proven they can play. I am far more concerned about whether we can put two guys on the field who can take some pressure off of Philips. We are one injury away from some major issues on the defensive line.Â
Lastly, I think Special Teams should be part of write ups. Mac provided us with a major threat on returns, often causing opponents to kick away from him, often giving us pretty good field position. Field Goal wise we also had probably the best kicker we have ever had, and our punting was also pretty darn good. All told, special teams were a major contributor last year, can they come close that level this year?
07-25-2017, 04:40 PM
On the other side of the coin, as a Seattle resident, I have never seen such optimism regarding the Huskies' prospects - even from the notoriously ego-centric Dawg-fan. I suppose they have the right to believe they will be great:
- returning 9 starters on offense (lost John Ross, who was undeniably a unique play-maker; and one of their o-linemen). They believe they have more than adequate replacements.
- returning Jake Browning who set the conference record with 45 TDs last year.
- returning Miles Gaskin, who is on pace to be the Huskies' all time leading ground gainer. His backup, Lavon Coleman, led the conference in YPC.
- returning two o-line who are projected to be 1st round picks in next year's draft.
they lost some key pieces on defense, but
- returning several massive d-line, including Vita Vea who some say will be a top-10 pick in next year's draft
- returning all of their LBs
- lost 3 starters in the secondary (all drafted), but they think the next guys are just as good
And they have Chris Petersen to guide them, another ultra-weak non-conference schedule, and no U$C. Stanford and WSU on the road are circled on the calendar.
Expectations are that anything short of a return trip to the playoffs will be disappointing. Frankly, it's hard to argue with that.
- returning 9 starters on offense (lost John Ross, who was undeniably a unique play-maker; and one of their o-linemen). They believe they have more than adequate replacements.
- returning Jake Browning who set the conference record with 45 TDs last year.
- returning Miles Gaskin, who is on pace to be the Huskies' all time leading ground gainer. His backup, Lavon Coleman, led the conference in YPC.
- returning two o-line who are projected to be 1st round picks in next year's draft.
they lost some key pieces on defense, but
- returning several massive d-line, including Vita Vea who some say will be a top-10 pick in next year's draft
- returning all of their LBs
- lost 3 starters in the secondary (all drafted), but they think the next guys are just as good
And they have Chris Petersen to guide them, another ultra-weak non-conference schedule, and no U$C. Stanford and WSU on the road are circled on the calendar.
Expectations are that anything short of a return trip to the playoffs will be disappointing. Frankly, it's hard to argue with that.
On the other side of the coin, as a Seattle resident, I have never seen such optimism regarding the Huskies' prospects - even from the notoriously ego-centric Dawg-fan. I suppose they have the right to believe they will be great:
- returning 9 starters on offense (lost John Ross, who was undeniably a unique play-maker; and one of their o-linemen). They believe they have more than adequate replacements.
- returning Jake Browning who set the conference record with 45 TDs last year.
- returning Miles Gaskin, who is on pace to be the Huskies' all time leading ground gainer. His backup, Lavon Coleman, led the conference in YPC.
- returning two o-line who are projected to be 1st round picks in next year's draft.
they lost some key pieces on defense, but
- returning several massive d-line, including Vita Vea who some say will be a top-10 pick in next year's draft
- returning all of their LBs
- lost 3 starters in the secondary (all drafted), but they think the next guys are just as good
And they have Chris Petersen to guide them, another ultra-weak non-conference schedule, and no U$C. Stanford and WSU on the road are circled on the calendar.
Expectations are that anything short of a return trip to the playoffs will be disappointing. Frankly, it's hard to argue with that.
- returning 9 starters on offense (lost John Ross, who was undeniably a unique play-maker; and one of their o-linemen). They believe they have more than adequate replacements.
- returning Jake Browning who set the conference record with 45 TDs last year.
- returning Miles Gaskin, who is on pace to be the Huskies' all time leading ground gainer. His backup, Lavon Coleman, led the conference in YPC.
- returning two o-line who are projected to be 1st round picks in next year's draft.
they lost some key pieces on defense, but
- returning several massive d-line, including Vita Vea who some say will be a top-10 pick in next year's draft
- returning all of their LBs
- lost 3 starters in the secondary (all drafted), but they think the next guys are just as good
And they have Chris Petersen to guide them, another ultra-weak non-conference schedule, and no U$C. Stanford and WSU on the road are circled on the calendar.
Expectations are that anything short of a return trip to the playoffs will be disappointing. Frankly, it's hard to argue with that.
07-25-2017, 05:08 PM
Losing John Ross is big. That guy was practically undefendable.
Losing John Ross is big. That guy was practically undefendable.
(07-25-2017, 04:40 PM)bbm233 link Wrote:- returning 9 starters on offense (lost John Ross, who was undeniably a unique play-maker; and one of their o-linemen). They believe they have more than adequate replacements.They could be wrong there. John Ross made the other guys look better by drawing the doubles and stretching the field. Without that, things may not be as easy. However, the replacements are certainly competent, if not world-beaters.
Quote:- returning Jake Browning who set the conference record with 45 TDs last year.This is the "guts" of it. Having these guys back makes them a real, real strong offense, no matter who the receivers are. They are right to be optimistic with this group of guys.
- returning Miles Gaskin, who is on pace to be the Huskies' all time leading ground gainer. His backup, Lavon Coleman, led the conference in YPC.
- returning two o-line who are projected to be 1st round picks in next year's draft.
Quote:they lost some key pieces on defense, butAnd they may be. They may be "just as good". But, they are not experienced, and in the secondary, that really matters. This is where they could have a problem against Stanford. If our receivers can beat the DBs in a one-on-one situation, that could easily be fatal. And, WSU can also attack this unit. Fortunately for Washington, it is near the end of the year when these games will be played.
- returning several massive d-line, including Vita Vea who some say will be a top-10 pick in next year's draft
- returning all of their LBs
- lost 3 starters in the secondary (all drafted), but they think the next guys are just as good
Quote:And they have Chris Petersen to guide them, another ultra-weak non-conference schedule, and no U$C. Stanford and WSU on the road are circled on the calendar.Hard, but not impossible. When John Ross was hurt, Washington wasn't the same team. In 2015, even though they had a great defense, had Gaskin, had Browning, they weren't nearly as good as last year. I expect that Ross being gone will make more of a difference than people in Seattle expect. They will be good, but just how good, we shall see.
Expectations are that anything short of a return trip to the playoffs will be disappointing. Frankly, it's hard to argue with that.
(07-25-2017, 04:40 PM)bbm233 link Wrote:- returning 9 starters on offense (lost John Ross, who was undeniably a unique play-maker; and one of their o-linemen). They believe they have more than adequate replacements.They could be wrong there. John Ross made the other guys look better by drawing the doubles and stretching the field. Without that, things may not be as easy. However, the replacements are certainly competent, if not world-beaters.
Quote:- returning Jake Browning who set the conference record with 45 TDs last year.This is the "guts" of it. Having these guys back makes them a real, real strong offense, no matter who the receivers are. They are right to be optimistic with this group of guys.
- returning Miles Gaskin, who is on pace to be the Huskies' all time leading ground gainer. His backup, Lavon Coleman, led the conference in YPC.
- returning two o-line who are projected to be 1st round picks in next year's draft.
Quote:they lost some key pieces on defense, butAnd they may be. They may be "just as good". But, they are not experienced, and in the secondary, that really matters. This is where they could have a problem against Stanford. If our receivers can beat the DBs in a one-on-one situation, that could easily be fatal. And, WSU can also attack this unit. Fortunately for Washington, it is near the end of the year when these games will be played.
- returning several massive d-line, including Vita Vea who some say will be a top-10 pick in next year's draft
- returning all of their LBs
- lost 3 starters in the secondary (all drafted), but they think the next guys are just as good
Quote:And they have Chris Petersen to guide them, another ultra-weak non-conference schedule, and no U$C. Stanford and WSU on the road are circled on the calendar.Hard, but not impossible. When John Ross was hurt, Washington wasn't the same team. In 2015, even though they had a great defense, had Gaskin, had Browning, they weren't nearly as good as last year. I expect that Ross being gone will make more of a difference than people in Seattle expect. They will be good, but just how good, we shall see.
Expectations are that anything short of a return trip to the playoffs will be disappointing. Frankly, it's hard to argue with that.
07-25-2017, 05:09 PM
Responses to both:
We could be exceptional at linebacker. Phil Steele ranks us in the nation's top five and another pub has his second behind Washington. Okereke looked great this spring and Bryce Love thinks Robinson is our next star on defense. Alfieri can make more of an impact as an ILB, and Palma, as one sign of this group's quality, is a returning hm all conference ILB yet at risk of losing the starting slot to Okereke.Â
Agree we are solid at safety. Edwards has played plenty and Simmons has years in the system. And Reid is Reid. Buncom has moved there to give us a sold and fairly experienced two deep.
Washington lost its starting outside linebackers, Mathis and Wooching. Mathis got injured half way through the season and was a force, and Wooching earned hm all conference.
We could be exceptional at linebacker. Phil Steele ranks us in the nation's top five and another pub has his second behind Washington. Okereke looked great this spring and Bryce Love thinks Robinson is our next star on defense. Alfieri can make more of an impact as an ILB, and Palma, as one sign of this group's quality, is a returning hm all conference ILB yet at risk of losing the starting slot to Okereke.Â
Agree we are solid at safety. Edwards has played plenty and Simmons has years in the system. And Reid is Reid. Buncom has moved there to give us a sold and fairly experienced two deep.
Washington lost its starting outside linebackers, Mathis and Wooching. Mathis got injured half way through the season and was a force, and Wooching earned hm all conference.
Responses to both:
We could be exceptional at linebacker. Phil Steele ranks us in the nation's top five and another pub has his second behind Washington. Okereke looked great this spring and Bryce Love thinks Robinson is our next star on defense. Alfieri can make more of an impact as an ILB, and Palma, as one sign of this group's quality, is a returning hm all conference ILB yet at risk of losing the starting slot to Okereke.Â
Agree we are solid at safety. Edwards has played plenty and Simmons has years in the system. And Reid is Reid. Buncom has moved there to give us a sold and fairly experienced two deep.
Washington lost its starting outside linebackers, Mathis and Wooching. Mathis got injured half way through the season and was a force, and Wooching earned hm all conference.
We could be exceptional at linebacker. Phil Steele ranks us in the nation's top five and another pub has his second behind Washington. Okereke looked great this spring and Bryce Love thinks Robinson is our next star on defense. Alfieri can make more of an impact as an ILB, and Palma, as one sign of this group's quality, is a returning hm all conference ILB yet at risk of losing the starting slot to Okereke.Â
Agree we are solid at safety. Edwards has played plenty and Simmons has years in the system. And Reid is Reid. Buncom has moved there to give us a sold and fairly experienced two deep.
Washington lost its starting outside linebackers, Mathis and Wooching. Mathis got injured half way through the season and was a force, and Wooching earned hm all conference.
07-25-2017, 05:16 PM
Agree that Ross is a brobdingnagian loss. We've never had a receiver that had the impact on a game that Ross did, only partly because he was easily the fastest man on the field in every game he played. Ross was basically the UW offense against USC; they'd likely have been shutout with him
But yes. all their other returning offensive players make this a very good offense.
They simply won't approach at DB what they had with King, Jones, and Baker, the best defensive backfield in this conference n the years I've watched. They have some highly rated young CBs, but they are rookies.
But yes. all their other returning offensive players make this a very good offense.
They simply won't approach at DB what they had with King, Jones, and Baker, the best defensive backfield in this conference n the years I've watched. They have some highly rated young CBs, but they are rookies.
Agree that Ross is a brobdingnagian loss. We've never had a receiver that had the impact on a game that Ross did, only partly because he was easily the fastest man on the field in every game he played. Ross was basically the UW offense against USC; they'd likely have been shutout with him
But yes. all their other returning offensive players make this a very good offense.
They simply won't approach at DB what they had with King, Jones, and Baker, the best defensive backfield in this conference n the years I've watched. They have some highly rated young CBs, but they are rookies.
But yes. all their other returning offensive players make this a very good offense.
They simply won't approach at DB what they had with King, Jones, and Baker, the best defensive backfield in this conference n the years I've watched. They have some highly rated young CBs, but they are rookies.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »