It is now four years in a row Huskies have been tougher

[CougEd]

and our receivers are dropping key passes that are happening at key moments. Does that mean we would have won? No, but they change the complexion of the game.

And Lake is right, this offense is easy for them to defense. They keep everything in front of them and make Leach string together 17 play drives. If anyone can do it as a play caller it is Leach, but we saw twice we stalled at the goal line.

Leach has such a firm belief in his offense he is a but stubborn. Why is it Peterson can have a trick play or two, and when was the last time we had one? We don't. After Saturday I am thinking as long as Peterson is in Seattle, we may not win another Apple Cup. Maybe Leach should stop with the mantra this is just another game. We have played scared for the last four years.

Sometime it is better to be lucky than good. we played Oregon, OSU, Arizona, ASU and UCLA with their back up QB's. We played CU last year with a back up QB. This year we played CU and UW with their starters and got handled in the UW game, and couldn't stop CU.

And I agree with Socal. Leach has done a good job on the oline. His receivers are functional. But losing Cracraft had the impact on the offense that I knew it would. Is he fast? No. But he is adept at finding the holes. Getting key third downs. Working the middle of the field to open up the outside.

The runningbacks are good as well. We are now short on Dt's. They are functional but as we saw on Saturday the difference between their dline and ours. Our linebackers are slow and we are slow in the secondary. Why no Jason David? Trufant? John Rushing? Torey Hunter? Eric Coleman. Are they looking at the right guys?

Food for thought.

 

[SaveFerris]

and our receivers are dropping key passes that are happening at key moments. Does that mean we would have won? No, but they change the complexion of the game.

And Lake is right, this offense is easy for them to defense. They keep everything in front of them and make Leach string together 17 play drives. If anyone can do it as a play caller it is Leach, but we saw twice we stalled at the goal line.

Leach has such a firm belief in his offense he is a but stubborn. Why is it Peterson can have a trick play or two, and when was the last time we had one? We don't. After Saturday I am thinking as long as Peterson is in Seattle, we may not win another Apple Cup. Maybe Leach should stop with the mantra this is just another game. We have played scared for the last four years.

Sometime it is better to be lucky than good. we played Oregon, OSU, Arizona, ASU and UCLA with their back up QB's. We played CU last year with a back up QB. This year we played CU and UW with their starters and got handled in the UW game, and couldn't stop CU.

And I agree with Socal. Leach has done a good job on the oline. His receivers are functional. But losing Cracraft had the impact on the offense that I knew it would. Is he fast? No. But he is adept at finding the holes. Getting key third downs. Working the middle of the field to open up the outside.

The runningbacks are good as well. We are now short on Dt's. They are functional but as we saw on Saturday the difference between their dline and ours. Our linebackers are slow and we are slow in the secondary. Why no Jason David? Trufant? John Rushing? Torey Hunter? Eric Coleman. Are they looking at the right guys?

Food for thought.

The Morrow fumble (when was his last fumble?) really put us in a hole. If you went in thinking UWs defense was somehow overrated I would assume that feeling has changed. They are big and talented upfront and their secondary is excellent as we knew from last year. They controlled us along the line but I believe we have the talent to get better along the OL. It still will probably take a couple years to get there.

They dominated us, are the better team, but I don't think any fundamental change in what we were doing this season is necessary. We just need to continue to get better. The most important thing this year was to get bowl eligible and get to a bowl. We have a shot to get to the Holiday or FF Bowl, which is an improvement over the Sun. Do the same thing next year in terms of getting to a bowl and that's 3 straight, 4 of 5 years, and starting to cement we are a Bowl program.

 

[M-I-Coug]

They have better players, it's simple as that. Of course, a lot of these guys came to the program because of their coach.

The reality is, this is going to be a hard train to stop, unless Petersen bolts to marque school, (which is not his makeup).

 

[Fab5Coug]

and our receivers are dropping key passes that are happening at key moments. Does that mean we would have won? No, but they change the complexion of the game.

And Lake is right, this offense is easy for them to defense. They keep everything in front of them and make Leach string together 17 play drives. If anyone can do it as a play caller it is Leach, but we saw twice we stalled at the goal line.

Leach has such a firm belief in his offense he is a but stubborn. Why is it Peterson can have a trick play or two, and when was the last time we had one? We don't. After Saturday I am thinking as long as Peterson is in Seattle, we may not win another Apple Cup. Maybe Leach should stop with the mantra this is just another game. We have played scared for the last four years.

Sometime it is better to be lucky than good. we played Oregon, OSU, Arizona, ASU and UCLA with their back up QB's. We played CU last year with a back up QB. This year we played CU and UW with their starters and got handled in the UW game, and couldn't stop CU.

And I agree with Socal. Leach has done a good job on the oline. His receivers are functional. But losing Cracraft had the impact on the offense that I knew it would. Is he fast? No. But he is adept at finding the holes. Getting key third downs. Working the middle of the field to open up the outside.

The runningbacks are good as well. We are now short on Dt's. They are functional but as we saw on Saturday the difference between their dline and ours. Our linebackers are slow and we are slow in the secondary. Why no Jason David? Trufant? John Rushing? Torey Hunter? Eric Coleman. Are they looking at the right guys?

Food for thought.

I don't give 2 shakes what that blowhard Jimmy Lake said. It's not an "Air Raid thing"; they did that to everybody. Everything is fairly easy to defend when you have 8 future NFL players on the field. He wouldn't run his mouth like that if he had Cal's talent on defense.

 

[HHusky]

and our receivers are dropping key passes that are happening at key moments. Does that mean we would have won? No, but they change the complexion of the game.

And Lake is right, this offense is easy for them to defense. They keep everything in front of them and make Leach string together 17 play drives. If anyone can do it as a play caller it is Leach, but we saw twice we stalled at the goal line.

Leach has such a firm belief in his offense he is a but stubborn. Why is it Peterson can have a trick play or two, and when was the last time we had one? We don't. After Saturday I am thinking as long as Peterson is in Seattle, we may not win another Apple Cup. Maybe Leach should stop with the mantra this is just another game. We have played scared for the last four years.

Sometime it is better to be lucky than good. we played Oregon, OSU, Arizona, ASU and UCLA with their back up QB's. We played CU last year with a back up QB. This year we played CU and UW with their starters and got handled in the UW game, and couldn't stop CU.

And I agree with Socal. Leach has done a good job on the oline. His receivers are functional. But losing Cracraft had the impact on the offense that I knew it would. Is he fast? No. But he is adept at finding the holes. Getting key third downs. Working the middle of the field to open up the outside.

The runningbacks are good as well. We are now short on Dt's. They are functional but as we saw on Saturday the difference between their dline and ours. Our linebackers are slow and we are slow in the secondary. Why no Jason David? Trufant? John Rushing? Torey Hunter? Eric Coleman. Are they looking at the right guys?

Food for thought.

I think there's a ceiling for Air Raid/Bear Raid systems. To the extent the Cougs were physically tougher this year, I think it had to do with running more than in the past. But the Cougs still pass first. You can debate whether it's chicken or the egg, but I think running breeds toughness. I wouldn't have wanted us to hire either Leach or Dykes. You'll get some system wins every year, but not 11 or 12 of them. Really good lines will beat the system many more times than not.

 

[SaveFerris]

I think there's a ceiling for Air Raid/Bear Raid systems. To the extent the Cougs were physically tougher this year, I think it had to do with running more than in the past. But the Cougs still pass first. You can debate whether it's chicken or the egg, but I think running breeds toughness. I wouldn't have wanted us to hire either Leach or Dykes. You'll get some system wins every year, but not 11 or 12 of them. Really good lines will beat the system many more times than not.

It comes down to talent most of the time. The bigger the gap in talent the tougher it is to beat a team regardless of the system. The UW goes up against SC and and offense that has run through the Pac 12 can only generate 13 points. Was that system to?

 

[CougPatrol]

Your entire post was focused on our offense, which wasn't the problem on Friday. Our defense got run off of the field in the first quarter. It was 28-3 before we knew what hit us. It was a championship game against a championship defense. We were playing at home. You cannot get boat raced like that in the first quarter.

We got stuffed on the goal line twice; Falk lofted a pass up for grabs before halftime like a true freshmen making his first start. We could have, and should have easily put up 31+ points against a top-5 team. How much better should an offense expect to do against that caliber of competition? Same with the Colorado game. We had plenty of chances to score more points, and the game was on the road against a tough team. We gave up over 600 yards. You don't win doing that.

I've been following the Cougs passionately since the early 1980's, and the only WSU team that I've felt was a legitimate National contender was the 1997 team. That team could outscore you, but if you had had a top-tier defense, they could beat you in a slug fest.

Looking at the 2016 team and comparing them to 1997 (or 2002/2003), where are the biggest differences, offense or defense? It's not even close. The 2016 offense could hang with those teams. The 2016 defense would maybe have 1 player (Luani) challenge for playing time, and I doubt he'd start on those teams. We give up multiple big plays every game, no matter who we're playing.

If the Apple Cup came down to a play here and there, I might agree with some of your points, but UW's offense put up video game numbers against our defense in the 1st quarter. Running trick plays on offense wasn't going to matter. A dropped pass here and there wasn't going to matter. We're fortunate UW didn't score 70.

 

[dgibbons]

I don't give 2 shakes what that blowhard Jimmy Lake said. It's not an "Air Raid thing"; they did that to everybody. Everything is fairly easy to defend when you have 8 future NFL players on the field. He wouldn't run his mouth like that if he had Cal's talent on defense.

Exactly. How about recruiting and coaching up another set of DBs instead of just inheriting Sark's players.

Who the hell heard of Jimmy Lake before he started running his mouth anyway? I guess I forgot how great Eastern's DBs were....

 

[dgibbons]

and our receivers are dropping key passes that are happening at key moments. Does that mean we would have won? No, but they change the complexion of the game.

And Lake is right, this offense is easy for them to defense. They keep everything in front of them and make Leach string together 17 play drives. If anyone can do it as a play caller it is Leach, but we saw twice we stalled at the goal line.

Leach has such a firm belief in his offense he is a but stubborn. Why is it Peterson can have a trick play or two, and when was the last time we had one? We don't. After Saturday I am thinking as long as Peterson is in Seattle, we may not win another Apple Cup. Maybe Leach should stop with the mantra this is just another game. We have played scared for the last four years.

Sometime it is better to be lucky than good. we played Oregon, OSU, Arizona, ASU and UCLA with their back up QB's. We played CU last year with a back up QB. This year we played CU and UW with their starters and got handled in the UW game, and couldn't stop CU.

And I agree with Socal. Leach has done a good job on the oline. His receivers are functional. But losing Cracraft had the impact on the offense that I knew it would. Is he fast? No. But he is adept at finding the holes. Getting key third downs. Working the middle of the field to open up the outside.

The runningbacks are good as well. We are now short on Dt's. They are functional but as we saw on Saturday the difference between their dline and ours. Our linebackers are slow and we are slow in the secondary. Why no Jason David? Trufant? John Rushing? Torey Hunter? Eric Coleman. Are they looking at the right guys?

Food for thought.

You're taking basically WSU Hall of Fame players and asking why the current roster is not full of them. Luani ain't bad in case you haven't noticed.

You almost mentioned that Leach recruited and developed an Outland Trophy finalist at OG. Leach recruited and developed a recording setting QB and WR. So nice job on almost realizing where this program is at.

 

[CougPatrol]

I think there's a ceiling for Air Raid/Bear Raid systems. To the extent the Cougs were physically tougher this year, I think it had to do with running more than in the past. But the Cougs still pass first. You can debate whether it's chicken or the egg, but I think running breeds toughness. I wouldn't have wanted us to hire either Leach or Dykes. You'll get some system wins every year, but not 11 or 12 of them. Really good lines will beat the system many more times than not.

Agree 100%, but what many outsiders (and some of our more casual fans) fail to factor into that logic is that you have to be able to recruit to your system. One thing Leach's system has going for it (and WSU) is that it's predicated on athletes that WSU can recruit. Big, pass blocking linemen, accurate pocket passers, smaller WRs, 3rd down type running backs.

Like you said, we're limited in that we probably won't have too many 11 or 12 win seasons, but we can probably string together a lot of 7-9 system wins every year. For a program that doesn't have a consistent winning tradition like a UW, USC, Stanford, etc., we need to establish a run of moderate success, like Leach did at Texas Tech. If we do that, then maybe the bar will be raised a bit to where we can look at coaches like Peterson.

For now, despite the Apple Cup drubbing by a better opponent, WSU is moving in the right direction. Consecutive bowl games (and the 3rd in 4 years), more conference wins than anyone over 2 years, played for the division title this year.

Their might be a ceiling for the Air Raid, but 100+ years of football suggests strongly that there's also a ceiling for WSU football. Leach is doing his part to change that.

 

[Coug-Vandal]

Well we came a missed field goal away from making it to the Pac-12 title game last year and simply got beat by a very good team in the Apple Cup this year. If someone had told everyone five years ago that we would be in the running for the Pac-12 championship each of the last two years I suspect we all would have taken that. The offense can get us there--we do need a better defense.

 

[HHusky]

It comes down to talent most of the time. The bigger the gap in talent the tougher it is to beat a team regardless of the system. The UW goes up against SC and and offense that has run through the Pac 12 can only generate 13 points. Was that system to?

SC was the better and more physical team that night. UW isn't passing more than running. But if you want to say being tougher is more conducive to winning football games, I agree.

 

[HHusky]

Agree 100%, but what many outsiders (and some of our more casual fans) fail to factor into that logic is that you have to be able to recruit to your system. One thing Leach's system has going for it (and WSU) is that it's predicated on athletes that WSU can recruit. Big, pass blocking linemen, accurate pocket passers, smaller WRs, 3rd down type running backs.

Like you said, we're limited in that we probably won't have too many 11 or 12 win seasons, but we can probably string together a lot of 7-9 system wins every year. For a program that doesn't have a consistent winning tradition like a UW, USC, Stanford, etc., we need to establish a run of moderate success, like Leach did at Texas Tech. If we do that, then maybe the bar will be raised a bit to where we can look at coaches like Peterson.

For now, despite the Apple Cup drubbing by a better opponent, WSU is moving in the right direction. Consecutive bowl games (and the 3rd in 4 years), more conference wins than anyone over 2 years, played for the division title this year.

Their might be a ceiling for the Air Raid, but 100+ years of football suggests strongly that there's also a ceiling for WSU football. Leach is doing his part to change that.

Stanford fans might have said the same thing 15-20 years ago. Their greatest success has come playing downright "old fashioned" football. Stanford's years of offensive "geniuses" didn't produce championships.

 

[SaveFerris]

SC was the better and more physical team that night. UW isn't passing more than running. But if you want to say being tougher is more conducive to winning football games, I agree.

Being tougher, being more talented, both are more conducive to winning football games. I'm not dismissing system but UW running more than they pass (i.e., conventional) didn't mean a hill of beans when they played a better team.

 

[CougEd]

Exactly. How about recruiting and coaching up another set of DBs instead of just inheriting Sark's players.

Who the hell heard of Jimmy Lake before he started running his mouth anyway? I guess I forgot how great Eastern's DBs were....

The guys behind the starters at CB are at least as good...they just don't have the experience.

 

[dgibbons]

The guys behind the starters at CB are at least as good...they just don't have the experience.

I guess we're doomed.

 

[HHusky]

Being tougher, being more talented, both are more conducive to winning football games. I'm not dismissing system but UW running more than they pass (i.e., conventional) didn't mean a hill of beans when they played a better team.

Well it meant instead of getting their doors blown off, they lost by 13 points. A solid win for SC to be sure, but not a rout.

 

[SaveFerris]

Well it meant instead of getting their doors blown off, they lost by 13 points. A solid win for SC to be sure, but not a rout.

CU has a good defense and I wouldn't say they blew our doors off. Drops in the end zone, overthrows without pressure. You have a really good defense. Give yourself some credit. There are enough other reasons that have nothing to do with system.

Last team to go undefeated in the Pac 10/12?

 

[YakiCoug]

I guess we're doomed.

Don't get in the way of Ed's jumping onto the husky bandwagon. Big Dick Baird has a seat waiting for him...

 

[CougSinceBirth]

CU has a good defense and I wouldn't say they blew our doors off. Drops in the end zone, overthrows without pressure. You have a really good defense. Give yourself some credit. There are enough other reasons that have nothing to do with system.

Last team to go undefeated in the Pac 10/12?

What are the 2010 Oregon Ducks, Alex?

 

[SCglory]

I don't give 2 shakes what that blowhard Jimmy Lake said. It's not an "Air Raid thing"; they did that to everybody. Everything is fairly easy to defend when you have 8 future NFL players on the field. He wouldn't run his mouth like that if he had Cal's talent on defense.

I suggest that it might be profitable to watch this "game in 30 minutes" vid of the SC/UW game. I have not been a big fan of Tee Martin or Helton for that matter, but their offensive game plan really shows up in this concentrated game, and you can see they are deliberately attacking the middle of the field (for the most part). That was good coaching. I think it is obvious that not having BC hurt the cougs in that area (as many have said), but that's not all the story, as Leach's attack traditionally attacks the middle of the field from more angles than the slot. It seemed to me--as I think back on it--that Falk threw more to the outside than Darnold did. Just my observation. But this 30 minute "game" really illustrates that gameplan well.... CLIP

 

[SCglory]

Well it meant instead of getting their doors blown off, they lost by 13 points. A solid win for SC to be sure, but not a rout.

We'll take it. Anytime you can go into another team's house--esp. a tough place like Husky stadium and, as an underdog--beat them by two TDs....you take it. I like the way it panned out, and at the end, Browning looked like just got beaten up. I was actually surprised that Martin and Helton were adept enough to come up with that gameplan about attacking the middle...and stick to it. I do think Darnold is the best QB in the conference, and I suspect that he & Browning will be having numerous duels in the next couple years....

 

[Coug90]

I think there's a ceiling for Air Raid/Bear Raid systems. To the extent the Cougs were physically tougher this year, I think it had to do with running more than in the past. But the Cougs still pass first. You can debate whether it's chicken or the egg, but I think running breeds toughness. I wouldn't have wanted us to hire either Leach or Dykes. You'll get some system wins every year, but not 11 or 12 of them. Really good lines will beat the system many more times than not.

Just like Stanford did right?

There's not necessarily a ceiling for the offense if its run well. Falk ran it like crap on Friday, we didn't execute well, we left two TDs on the 1 yard line, and UW is too talented to do that. Pretty simple really. Oregon State would have beat us on Friday the way we played.

Neither Leach or Dykes would have been a fit at UW for many reasons, but both have the chops to be every bit as successful as Peterson.

 

[SideWaysDown]

and our receivers are dropping key passes that are happening at key moments. Does that mean we would have won? No, but they change the complexion of the game.

And Lake is right, this offense is easy for them to defense. They keep everything in front of them and make Leach string together 17 play drives. If anyone can do it as a play caller it is Leach, but we saw twice we stalled at the goal line.

Leach has such a firm belief in his offense he is a but stubborn. Why is it Peterson can have a trick play or two, and when was the last time we had one? We don't. After Saturday I am thinking as long as Peterson is in Seattle, we may not win another Apple Cup. Maybe Leach should stop with the mantra this is just another game. We have played scared for the last four years.

Sometime it is better to be lucky than good. we played Oregon, OSU, Arizona, ASU and UCLA with their back up QB's. We played CU last year with a back up QB. This year we played CU and UW with their starters and got handled in the UW game, and couldn't stop CU.

And I agree with Socal. Leach has done a good job on the oline. His receivers are functional. But losing Cracraft had the impact on the offense that I knew it would. Is he fast? No. But he is adept at finding the holes. Getting key third downs. Working the middle of the field to open up the outside.

The runningbacks are good as well. We are now short on Dt's. They are functional but as we saw on Saturday the difference between their dline and ours. Our linebackers are slow and we are slow in the secondary. Why no Jason David? Trufant? John Rushing? Torey Hunter? Eric Coleman. Are they looking at the right guys?

Food for thought.

Well said, Ed. Yep, so easy to stop. Unless you can't. Like most teams this year. The bottom line is the Cougs got conservative and dropped balls at the wrong moments. Otherwise, you bitching about Leach's offense is plain stoopid.

 

[HHusky]

CU has a good defense and I wouldn't say they blew our doors off. Drops in the end zone, overthrows without pressure. You have a really good defense. Give yourself some credit. There are enough other reasons that have nothing to do with system.

Last team to go undefeated in the Pac 10/12?

We'll take it. Anytime you can go into another team's house--esp. a tough place like Husky stadium and, as an underdog--beat them by two TDs....you take it. I like the way it panned out, and at the end, Browning looked like just got beaten up. I was actually surprised that Martin and Helton were adept enough to come up with that gameplan about attacking the middle...and stick to it. I do think Darnold is the best QB in the conference, and I suspect that he & Browning will be having numerous duels in the next couple years....

It was a solid win. I don't think anyone else in the conference would have stayed within four touchdowns of the Trojans. And that's really my point about toughness. It was a good, old fashioned physical game. USC was simply better.

And Darnold is great. I think Helton may prove to be an awfully good coach too.

 

[moondawgie]

Exactly. How about recruiting and coaching up another set of DBs instead of just inheriting Sark's players.

Who the hell heard of Jimmy Lake before he started running his mouth anyway? I guess I forgot how great Eastern's DBs were....

There's one guy in the two deeps for the DB's that was a Sark recruit.

 

[HHusky]

Just like Stanford did right?

There's not necessarily a ceiling for the offense if its run well. Falk ran it like crap on Friday, we didn't execute well, we left two TDs on the 1 yard line, and UW is too talented to do that. Pretty simple really. Oregon State would have beat us on Friday the way we played.

Neither Leach or Dykes would have been a fit at UW for many reasons, but both have the chops to be every bit as successful as Peterson.

Oregon probably did more with a "system" offense than anyone else has recently. And yet their Achilles heel was always playing some big, physical team from Stanford, Auburn, Ohio State, etc.

 

[Coug1990]

Exactly. How about recruiting and coaching up another set of DBs instead of just inheriting Sark's players.

Who the hell heard of Jimmy Lake before he started running his mouth anyway? I guess I forgot how great Eastern's DBs were....

Sarkisian did the heavy lifting of the uw program. Willingham destroyed California recruiting at the uw. Their name meant nothing. That changed under Sarkisian. It allowed Petersen to hit the ground running.

Wulff destroyed California recruiting at WSU. Leach is still climbing out of the hole. As good as Leach has recruited, it will get even better.

 

[Coug1990]

Oregon probably did more with a "system" offense than anyone else has recently. And yet their Achilles heel was always playing some big, physical team from Stanford, Auburn, Ohio State, etc.

They played in two national championship games. Not much of an Achilles heal.

 

[HHusky]

They played in two national championship games. Not much of an Achilles heal.

Why couldn't that offense win the big one? Gimmicky offenses just don't win championships.

 

[HHusky]

Sarkisian did the heavy lifting of the uw program. Willingham destroyed California recruiting at the uw. Their name meant nothing. That changed under Sarkisian. It allowed Petersen to hit the ground running.

Wulff destroyed California recruiting at WSU. Leach is still climbing out of the hole. As good as Leach has recruited, it will get even better.

Sark left some talent. Willingham did too. Petersen dismissed a first round NFL cornerback from the team and flipped Budda Baker from Oregon too. He's done plenty of lifting.

 

[Coug1990]

Why couldn't that offense win the big one? Gimmicky offenses just don't win championships.

Superior talent won both games. Ohio State and Auburn both ran a similar offense to Oregon. So, I guess gimmicky offenses do win championships. In fact, Meyer won championships at Florida as well using that same gimmicky offense.

 

[Coug1990]

Sark left some talent. Willingham did too. Petersen dismissed a first round NFL cornerback from the team and flipped Budda Baker from Oregon too. He's done plenty of lifting.

What does that have to do with how recruits in California perceived the uw program?

 

[HHusky]

Superior talent won both games. Ohio State and Auburn both ran a similar offense to Oregon. So, I guess gimmicky offenses do win championships. In fact, Meyer won championships at Florida as well using that same gimmicky offense.

In all those offenses, the center stands over the ball. The similarities aren't very great otherwise.

 

[HHusky]

What does that have to do with how recruits in California perceived the uw program?

Whatever perceptions there were, the chief perception was that Willingham hadn't done much with at least average talent, including from talent from California.

 

[SaveFerris]

It was a solid win. I don't think anyone else in the conference would have stayed within four touchdowns of the Trojans. And that's really my point about toughness. It was a good, old fashioned physical game. USC was simply better.

And Darnold is great. I think Helton may prove to be an awfully good coach too.

I think you are over playing the 'toughness' angle when it comes to system. It sounds similar to comments Millen managed to throw in today talking about Hawk's receiver Paul Richardson playing 'intramural sorority football in Pullman'. When I watched Tech take out UT under Leach I didn't see a soft team. If Leach is around another 5 years I hope to see that kind of mentality in Pullman. Time will tell though.

All I'm saying is what you also mentioned. The better team usually wins.

 

[longtimecoug]

Don't get in the way of Ed's jumping onto the husky bandwagon. Big Dick Baird has a seat waiting for him...

ed stays true to form, only showing up after a loss, and only providing a negative anti Leach dialogue

 

[longtimecoug]

Sarkisian did the heavy lifting of the uw program. Willingham destroyed California recruiting at the uw. Their name meant nothing. That changed under Sarkisian. It allowed Petersen to hit the ground running.

Wulff destroyed California recruiting at WSU. Leach is still climbing out of the hole. As good as Leach has recruited, it will get even better.

woof destroyed all recruiting , while at the same time preaching to his minions that he was the greatest recruiter in WSU history

 

[Cougatron]

This is the biggest load of bullshit.

Easy to stop?

We went 3/6 for points inside the 20 yard line.
We fumbled early and our defense was weak the first half letting us get way behind.

We are the #15 scoring offense in the country
We are the #17 total offense in the country.

That's with two losses at the end of the year.

We still had 335 yards despite having 4 turnovers.

UW's defense allowed on average 328.0 yards per game this year. Despite 4 turnovers we STILL did better than their average (not by much, but still we did better).

Their scoring defense allowed 17.8 points per game on average which we landed right at. Despite 50% red zone points scored.

So no matter what we still did pretty much what everybody else did against UW while we made tons upon tons of mistakes.

 

[spongeback]

Gabe Marks disagrees with you. We lost because we are soft.

This is the biggest load of bullshit.

Easy to stop?

We went 3/6 for points inside the 20 yard line.
We fumbled early and our defense was weak the first half letting us get way behind.

We are the #15 scoring offense in the country
We are the #17 total offense in the country.

That's with two losses at the end of the year.

We still had 335 yards despite having 4 turnovers.

UW's defense allowed on average 328.0 yards per game this year. Despite 4 turnovers we STILL did better than their average (not by much, but still we did better).

Their scoring defense allowed 17.8 points per game on average which we landed right at. Despite 50% red zone points scored.

So no matter what we still did pretty much what everybody else did against UW while we made tons upon tons of mistakes.