Thanks Bob for those statistics

Hey Bob,
What kind of deffence can UW muster to slow down the UO offence. Do we sell out and rush or do we contain and force the pass do we mix it up based on down and D. or are we hosed?

Norm- I think we really need to try and contain Dixon. He has never been the most accurate QB in the league. Force him to beat you by throwing it. But of course that hasn't really been our strong point on defense. Also, playing a contain type defense will eliminate a lot of what Stewart does well. They try and run him over the tackles.

huskiesjv,
I think you are right about trying to contain. Not an easy prospect but with Johnson out and the bulk of the run workload on Stuart and Colvin out (big play guy)we may have some sucess. The real question is: Can we contain a mobile Dixon? and if we do can we count on him reverting to his former self? He has been very accurate in his senior year. Any way it's a bit of a pickel I'm glad I'm not the O.C.

Since I can't get the entire thread on my computer from the previous posts: Re Neuheisal and Tui....yes..Tui led a large number of comebacks for Neu...but you must not forget...that number come from behinds was equalled or beaten by the young man from Chicken Dinner Road the next season....IT WASN'T TUI ALONE. The players loved playing for Neu and never gave up.

Huskiesjv, do you think the duck fans are glad cryalotti ignored dixon's stats from last year and let him start as a 5th year senior?

I think it just came down to Dixon gave them the best chance to win. Leaf doesn't work that well with the spread offense they run. He seems to be a guy that would thrive in a 3 step drop and pass offense.

I hate Oregon!!! Please can we beat them so this season is not a bust!!!!! We must continue the Oregonless Rose Bowl tradition.

i hate Oreogn. Please can we beat them so that the streak of Oregonless Rose Bowls continue!!!! They do not deserve it. Belliotti is a cry baby who pouts unless he gets his way. Upset in the making. Dawgs 31-Ducks 28

Oops it said the first one did not go through!!

After reading Bob's post about stats and a handful of the comments on the previous thread I decided to crunch some numbers of my own on the offensive drives and how well we do with Locker. I don't know if these statistics are posted anywhere but I would love to know how we rate in the nation for them. So here goes..

I excluded all drives that are concluded by the end of the 2nd and 4th quarters as well as all drives in which Carl Bonnell is the QB. Also not included are drives that never began due to special teams turnovers.

Through All 6 Games:
-Washington offense total drives: 72
-Drives resulting in scores: 22 (30.55%)
-Drives ending on an inc. pass of 10 yards or less on 3rd or 4th down (or 2 inc. passes in the final set of downs for longer than 10 yards): 27 (37.5%)
3-and-Outs: 26 (36.11%)
-Turnovers: 10 (All of these are by Locker, 8 int's and 2 fumbles) (13.88%)
-% of non-scoring drives killed by Locker (Turnovers and drives ending on passes " " combined): 74% (To be fair I'm interpreting this as drives in which Locker has a turnover or does not convert on 3rd or 4th down on a passing play)

Minus Syracuse Game:
-Washington offense total drives: 65
-Drives resulting in scores: 17 (26.15%)
-Drives killed by inc. pass of 10yds or less (or 2 inc. passes in the final set of downs for longer than 10 yards): 25 (38.46%)
-3-and-Outs: 24 (36.92%)
-Turnovers: 10 (15.38%)
-% of non-scoring drives killed by Locker: 72.92%

These numbers aren't perfect for a lot of reasons; dropped passes, penalties (I tried to account for long 3rd downs with the 2 incompletes stat), short drives due to special teams and defensive plays, to name a few. But in general when a drive ends 73% of the time it is because Jake doesn't make the play or turns the ball over.

I'm not interested in the coaching debate or the Locker vs. Bonnell debate but I will say that you guys need to remember he's a redshirt freshman and the coaches are putting a significant amount of the game on his shoulders. Obviously the passing game is struggling more than it should due to the poor running game and when your offense goes 3-and-out 36% of the time your defense is going to get tired very quickly. But a lot of the struggles can still be directly attributed to the quarterback play so everything doesn't seem as bad to me as a lot of you make it out to be. Freshmen and redshirt freshmen quarterbacks almost always struggle and while there are some exceptions Locker doesn't seem to be one of them.

Also an interesting stat, Lockers completion percentage has dropped every single week as seen here, http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=184374
This is something you probably can pin on coaching.

Bob, thanks for the stats. It is pretty disheartening to think we have put ourselves in a position to win a bunch of games this season, only to have such dismal performances in the 2nd half [ie coug it].

Also: I've heard some commentators talk about how Ohio State hasn't played anyone this year. I think we are one of the better teams they have played, it's just too bad we didn't have a better showing against them [and got a couple more wins] so we could get some love.. I know that a lot of "what ifs", but just a thought.

see you all at the Oregon game.

Joe, I wish I had the time that you seem to have. I can't double-check your numbers, but if accurate, you did a great job.
I think the Locker vs. Bonnell debate is dead, in terms of if he is going to finish out the year. Locker is the man, for better or for worse. (Though the debate about whether starting him in the first place was a good idea, or not, seems to be taking on new life.) I agree that Locker is asked to do far too much. And, so far, it's easy to stop the Husky offense because all the defense has to do is contain Locker, make him throw, and like you pointed out in your above post, he doesn't seem to be able to do anything throwing the ball. The fact that his completion percentage has gone down every game, in my opinion, isn't coaching. It's that the defenses have learned more quickly, week after week, it is to stop Locker and that is to make him throw.

I had to read the play-by-play off the gohuskies.com website, a very painful experience. In terms of the completion percentage I suppose you're right but I was looking at it more from the perspective that he "should" improve the further into the season we go and as I watch the games it's not so much that they're defending the pass better as it is he's just missing receivers (or in many situations throwing the ball right at a linebacker and making me throw my hat right at the floor). Right now his major issues seem to be overthrows and recognizing linebackers that drop into coverage. I just hope he can turn things around but if he can't at least playing a 13th game at Hawaii is kind of like a bowl game...

I think at this point in the season, at 2-4, the coaching staff has got to look at every position and see grade it.
To me, it doesn't seem the Dawgs can make very many up-grades, anywhere.
There is, however, one position that has seemed to be off-limits, and that's the QB position.
Nevermind that the Huskies passing offense ranks dead last in the Pac10, and 109th out of 119 D1 teams.
Nevermind that UW is dead last in total offense in the Pac10.
Nevermind that UW is dead last in TD passes.
Nevermind that UW is dead last in passing yards per game.
Nevermind that UW is dead last in yards per attempt.
Nevermind that UW is dead last in completion percentage.
And now, thanks to Joe, we know that the completion percentage is decreasing each game. In other words, "He's NOT improving."
Sometimes I wish we hadn't opened that bright and shiny package that is Jake Locker. Then, we wouldn't have found out that he's not quite ready, that he has a long ways to go. At least we'd still have some hope that he could come in and save UW football.

Like I said in an earlier post tonight. Jake is a freshman. What did everyone really expect with him leading the team?
He's shown what everyone should have expectde; flashes of brilliance, but overall inconsistent play.
And now, the defenses have figured it out.
I think that Husky Nation was so enamoured with Locker, that they let the idea of him block intelligent thinking, that RS freshman QB's historically don't do well.
So now, many people want to blame the coaching staff for inconsistent play? Will you give TW and Lappano credit in 2009 when Locker is seasoned and experienced, and playing much better than he has this season? That's the question...

Many people were upset last year when Locker's redshirt wasn't removed. What a mistake that would have been. I think he has a great future and I expected these downer games but I also thought he'd throw in one or two 'wow' games that would result in a blowout win over someone like Stanford or Arizona or result in a big upset over someone like ASU or Oregon. I hope he can find even one of those games now.

Several posts above have been critical of Locker's inconsistent and at times very inadequate play especially as it relates to the passing game. That's true. However its the coaches job to put a young player in a position to at least have a chance at success. The whole offense in the second half looked completely helpless. Everyone watching knew they had no hope of moving the chains. They had two good gaining plays with Jake running for his life and completing one low percentage pass to Cody Ellis and the other on a great catch by Daniels. The commentator even said they can't hope to be able to do that on a regular basis. The implication was clear, they better have more to their offense than that. It was painful for everyone to watch, like a bully beating up on a mentally retarded kid. No one enjoys seeing that.

During Gilby's last year it was clear the players were definately inferior physically and talent wise to other teams. The OL couldn't open up a hole if their life depended on it. This team may not have the best talent but it is much better talent wise than 2-3 yrs. ago. The offense looks confused, "out of cinc" and poorly coached. Its unrealistic in this setting to have Locker look poised and settled into a rhythm. Bonnell was sent in near the end and literally buried.

Mark Brunell was one of the most competitive and innovative QBs UW has ever had especially his senior year( his performance in his last Rose Bowl albeit a loss was a thing of beauty) but he would be hard pressed to make this offense go. Jake is inexperienced and makes mistakes but the problems go far beyond just quarterback play.

Jed, good points. One thing, however... How do the coaches do that when they've already had to simplify the playbook for the QB?
I just don't think he's ready, and that's not a slam on him. It's just that, when your team isn't great defensively, and your running game is average, how can a RS freshman QB hope to succeed? History says it almost never happens. Then, you add footwork and release point problems, along with the fact that this particular freshman came from a wing-t offense in high school, and laments that he's never thrown this much, and you've got problems.
The results of this experiment are there... Dead last in passing offense. A one dimensional offense.

The problem seems to be that there is so much wrong right now. It isn't just Jake Locker, the bend don't break defense has gone to breaking when the chips are down. The front seven have been unimpressive since BSU, the offensive line continues to struggle and Rankin is alternately explosive and inept. There are coaching questions on scheme and game planning as well as adjustments. The shocking thing is that the only area of "improvement" is special teams and we have gone so low as to think not having a kick off run back for a TD is an improvement. The most disappointing thing is that there was so little accomplished during the two weeks off that it looks the rest of the season will look like a re-run of UCLA etc. I'm not sure what can be done here and hoping that new players will change everything seems to be more of a wish than a certainty. One thing for sure, if the coaching staff cannot change the team, the drum beat to change the coaches is going to get louder. The really sad part is that I think all parties, players and coaches, are really trying -it just isn't working right now.

Some good points and if Locker was surrounded by better talent, he'd have much better numbers. If Jake was a RS-Jr or Sr., then he'd share much more of the blame but he's not. Jake, we still believe in you!!!!!-------------------------------------------I think Lappano should kick a lot of the spread coast to the curb and go back to traditional Husky Football. You can still utilize Jake's running ability but a 2 back set seems to provide more flexibility in the running game. In the first half, I saw guards pulling and Rankin following them for decent gains. The first play of the 2nd half, we run from under center and Rankin had a nice gain but it was called back b/c of holding. Then Lappano seemed to abandon regular formations for solely the spread coast and we lost our way. Lappano has a good track record from OSU and needs to go back to that offense and using the TEs, Homer/Kravitz, and the RBs for short passes. When ASU started bringing more pressure in the 2nd half, how come we didn't run more screens?---------------------------------------------I'm excited to see how Wood and Duncan do next year after redshirting. It's pretty clear we need more beef on the DL. Lobos needs to rotate in more, he's a big boy!

Oregon has the #4 rushing offense in the country.

Washington has the #102 rushing defense in the country.

Do you need to know anything else about this Saturday's matchup?

Sven, totally agree. Against their spead, we should have 7 guys in the box and run cover 2 or cover 3 to make Dixon beat us. Plus, Paysinger and Colvin are out for the year so force Dixon to make low percentage throws by taking away the TE option too. If we blitz him, blitz him from his right so he can't naturally roll to his strong side.

Sitting here in my office with not much hope for this season, I am struck by this question.
.
If Todd or Mark called you today asking for a big donation for the stadium upgrade, what would you ask of them before writing the check?

.As we near mid-season it beomes increasingly apparent that the Husky running game is broken. Whether the offensive is not tough enough to knock. the defensive line off of the line of scrimmage, or if Louis Rankin does not have the running instincts of a modern tailback. At this point I f. eel safe in predicting that Louis Rankin is not going to blossom anytime during the remainder of the season. Willingham must know this by now.
Having watched JR Hasty for two seasons at Bellevue High School I have to say that he is a better running back than Rankin. Now that it is time to consider the future as well as the present of the Husky football program, what Willingham needs to do is:
1. Tell those offensive linemen to tighten up their chin straps and start sticking. their helmets into the gizzles of the opposing defensive line. This is not chicken figthing like pass defense. Whether blocking straight ahead, trapping, or pulling to lead the back the UDub offensive line needs to suck it up and knock defenders down.
2. JR Hasty needs to get the ball enough to knock the rust off and begin to be the cog in the offense that he has the talent to be. Six carries in the first five games really doesn't represent much of an opportunity.
I respect Willingham's loyalty to Rankin but it is time - for him to qive up tweaking the players on the field give others a chance. Football players who may be able to salvage this season -- and the next two.
Les Johnson

We saw more man/drive blocking against ASU and to get an identity on offense, we should do it more with Jake under-center. We need to do everything we possibly can to support a RS-Frosh QB with a running game. Our big OL is better suited to drive blocking (Husky Football style) instead of zone blocking so let's do it more!!!!!!!!!

If Washington follows the game plan HF in NY proposes, the defense will get steamrolled by the run just as did last year in Autzen...it's essentially the same plan that Baer used there.

Washington can't stop Oregon's rushing attack with only seven in the box.

I see young inexperienced QB's making plays on many teams around the country and playing beyond there years. The differences is, those young QB's usually have a running game to fall back on, putting them in managable 3rd down situations throughout the game and allowing them to effectively use the play action pass. Jake has NOTHING of a running game. Which is really sad. After three years of TW I wanted our boys to do three things well, run the ball, stop the run and play solid special teams. We don't do any of the three very well.

Here's a stat/fact that was reported by BOB about two weeks ago... to paraphrase:

Because of the bye week, UW coaches were out on the recruiting trail...except for head coach Willingham. I wonder how many rounds of golf were included in those two weeks.

Does this guy have his priorities in order, or what?

One thing I've constantly wondered is why we aren't using more of a controlled passing game? I just remember when Hobart took over for Brunell (on a much more talented team, I admit...) the focus was on calling short, high-percentage passes. The passes I saw are longer passes that Jake isn't accurate enough to throw or touch passes (fades, etc.) and he doesn't have good touch.

I do not pretend to be an expert, but after watching a succession of second half blowouts I have to wonder if the problem is
1) conditioning
2) failure of the coaching staff to anticipate the opposition's adjustments and adjust accordingly
3) complacency (but how can you be complacent when you are 2-4?)
4) something else.
I suspect the problem is #2 and, if so, I conclude that we need to recruit a new coaching staff. All this talk about the need for continuity and how a coaching change will be terribly disruptive seems myopic to me. Doesn't a losing program need some disruption? Who wants continuity of a burgeoning losing tradition?

Sven, you need to read more closely. I said "against their spread" which generally means 4 WRs, their QB in shotgun with a RB near him. Don't think it would be wise to put 8 in the box with 4 receivers out wide now would it? Against UO's spread last year, Baer only kept 5 or 6 guys in the box.

Baydog, I tend to agree with you that the secoond half adjustment problem is a coaching issue. I don't think the players are coming out with less effort, although the other teams may have a second half effort that surpasses the Huskies. It seems to be a problem that is compounded by the coaching philosophy. They simplified the offense, which means that there are fewer plays to go to when the old ones are not working; Locker is not allowed to audible (I wonder if he is incapable or what) so on field adjustmenst are non-existent; the formations remain unchanged and the same for personnel. The defense is even more of a mystery and that may be the one area where conditioning is an issue - but there is also the coaching tendency to leave players in all game long. Either the young players everyone is waiting for are not that good, or they are so afraid that inexperience will cost them that they can't take the risk.

Thanks for the stats Bob. I sat in Sun Devil stadium at half time trying not to think about what previous second halfs had given us. I was confident that this weekend was going to be different. This week the team had two weeks to let the wounds heal. The coaches had an extra week to prepare. This was going to be different. But it wasn't and and as the game unfolded I started to wonder, are my Huskies ever going to return to the glory days. If so what is it going to take. I have been a supporter of TW. Saying he is what the program needed three years ago, and that a coach needs 4 years to make a difference. And we are seeing progress. I knew that the blog would bring up the coaching issue and the Bonnell versus Locker issue. But these statistics hit you right in the face. And I believe that you can go back even further and find similar results with this head coach. So the question is do we want to have a false hope that things are going to change or do we need to make them change. And I am sad to say I now believe that things can and will only change if the coaches are changed. I think one of the reasons I have come to this conclusion, beyond the obvious presented in Bobs statistics, is that I don't think Locker will ever reach his potential under this bunch of coaches. And I don't think that it is just the OC. It is top to bottom. This has been such a fun season for so many teams. Every week I am sure that most fans across the country go to the game with a believe that their team can win, regardless of who they are playing. They are able to have this hope because of the Michigan game opening weekend, the Stanford game a week ago. The list is long and it is what make college ball so much fun. I had lots of hope when the season started. Now I have none. I say that because I don't see things changing. So forget all those times that I said give TW another season. Start the hunt for a new coach now. And maybe there will be hope next year. I will continue to scream myself hoarse over the coming weeks but it will be for the players. I want them to understand that I support them and I cheer for them, but I have no hope. So why spend time debating how they are going to stop the ducks. It is not likely to happen. Hope I am wrong but the statistsics make me believe I am not.

Didn't Notre Dame fans warn us about the 3rd year of the Willingham era? Here it is? As I watched the Seahawks game last night, I couldn't help but think of Mora as the new coach of the Dawgs.

I keep wondering why Lappano was so successful at OSU and so dreadful here. Was it the input from his head coach, Mr. Erickson? Does he have total control here (who plays, play calling) and what was the situation there? Any thoughts or insight?

Lots of good, painful point here. The team has so many weaknesses that we cannot focus on individual players or play calling. This is all aout playoing to our strengths and the other teams weaknesses....and we really have no strengths. Overall, this Husky team has absolutely NO offensive attibutes, nothing offensively even close to adequate, way below average. They do exactly what bottom of the PAC-10 teams do. Get killed in a few games, play tough for a half, and almost always lose. I honestly think with an offense that could run, get a few first downs and provide time of prosession the defense could be adequate against the lousy teams. Against ASU the devils ran 16 more plays (22%) that UW. Now a really good D can overcome that sometimes.....a marginal defense will get eaten alive every time. Interesting that those big plays have NOT been given up until now this season.

I read all our views and opinions and one fact comes to mind: Our team seems to have NO strengths, none. I am not sure what players or coaches can do....it seems they really ahve no chance against decent teams. Fivew minutes into the 3rd quarter there was no doubt in my mind ASU was going to win. Even in the good games this teams's offense gets shut down for tow or more quarters, and it is easy. Even in the BSU game the offense did nothing after halftime. Ifthis team is to win even two more games they must start scoring....nothing else will matter...and again, lousy teams always get beat in the second half. Those third quarter are not "collapses" when they happen over and over...every week poor teams play good ones tough for one or two quarter only to get run over in the second half. Oh yeah, it would be OK if the UW was shutout in the third qtr if they scored 28 or more in the first half....like New Orleans.

With all due respect, TW gets 4 years. We knew it would be tough b/c it's a rebuilding year (would've gone to a bowl if Stanback hadn't gotten hurt) with the toughest schedule in the country and we lost productive vets such as Shackleford, James, Scott White, CJ Wallace, Dashon Goldson, and two veteran guards. I'm mad as hell but it would be best to reassess at the end of the year after we hit the easier part of our schedule. The records of teams from BSU to the Yucks are ridiculous and if we don't win at least 5 games some assistant coaches should fall on their swords. In year 4, the magnifying glass will appropriately be on Willingham since he'll return a veteran OL (4 of 5 starters) and awesome QB with a year of starting under his belt.--------------It hurts this year b/c Gilby's one recruiting class wasn't very good and then we followed it up with a very small class during the coaching change.

You mean, the Seahawks game where the lowly Saints kicked our ass and our secondary (coached by Mora) was ripped up by Brees (70% completion percentage)at will throughout the game?

I still think Willingham has us on the right track overall, but he needs to inspire this team to bury our opponents in the second half. This season won't be the telling season for Ty, but next year will be. Even Turner wouldn't deny that.

Regarding the Huskies poor performance in the 3rd qtr. this year, did anyone happen to listen to the halftime interview that Elise Woodward (sideline reporter for the Washington ISP Sports Network) had with Coach Willingham at halftime? She asked him about UW's 3rd qtr. performances this year and he said it wouldn't happen again and he was very adamant and even rude to Elise about it. The Dawgs then proceed to give up 3 3rd qtr. TDs and score 0. I just thought that was pretty interesting.

"I still think Willingham has us on the right track overall..."

Wow...by what measurement has Willingham succeeded in your estimation? Coaching? Recruiting? Fan/Community relations? Player camaraderie? Please advise...

I was at the game on Saturday night and saw a T-shirt that said "In Locker we Trust." On the front it said, "WWLD", i.e., "What would Locker Do?" This kid has amazing pressure on him. I saw him after the game and he said sorry to the first husky fan he saw. My kids who worship him got their picture taken with him and he signed their football. As I saw how gracious he was with my kids, I realized that he really is just a kid and is carrying the weight of Husky nation on his shoulders. Then it hit me, this coaching staff is destroying this kid. His numbers are getting worse not because of his lack of talent, but because of lack of a coach who knows how to coach qbs. There really is no one there to teach him. I really feel bad for him because he has to deal with this staff. They may be nice coaches who care about the "youn men," but they are jnot doing anything to help out Jake and develop him as a qb. He has the talent, he just needs a coach that can develop that talent (i.e,. Norm Chow or Steve Sarkisian). So please, give Jake a break and address the people who are truly responsible for the debacle that is taking place in front of our eyes.

I see three problems with this team:
1) halftime adjustments are not working- I have to wonder if this is due to Ty's approach- too calm and mellow at halftime- not enough fire and of course the adjustments are not being made. Ty has been outcoached in five of six games in the second half (including BSU). Only the USC game did we hang in and have a decent second half.
2) Not enough rotation on Defense: At this point I do not understand why more kids are not playing on defense? the excuse of inexperience does not wash- and even if they don't all understand the game plan 100% it's not like the starters are doing much in the second half. Put in the RS-Frosh D-lineman, use 8 D-lineman, use six LB's - the missed tackles in the UCLA game and the ASU game were by good players who made tired plays that lead to long runs. The rotation does two very critical things- first it keeps the starters fresh and secondly it prepares the young kids for the future. If we are going to give up 200 plus yards on the ground anyways- then playing more players hurts how? We might find out by playing the young guys that the bright lights and playing time in a real game bring out thier best.
3) Find a REAL RB: I understand the frustration with Jake- but please- a Frosh QB behind an average line with WR's who don't get open and drop passes...The real issue- is everything is on him to create - the running game- creating time in the pocket- passing...What we need is to forget the Rankin experiment, yes he has wheels- but at this point in the season and in his career he is a lost cause. He will not stop dancing- period. Put in Hasty and Johnson and see what they can do- if not for this season (again it's not like Rankin is hugely productive) then for next. At the very least if they can gain 3-4 tough yards they put Locker in a much better position to make plays in second and third and short. Rankin needs to go to the bench- there is ZERO reason to play him (let him return kicks)- but they need to see if they have any TB of the future or present for that matter.

Still not fully recovered. Almost. Believe it or now, I WILL have "How the Huskies Can Win" tomorrow evening. I admit, it's getting harder. But I have a few thoughts that can give us some hope and a shot at winning. Also, I have e-mailed Bob about our meet and greet and pix with Bob on Saturday before the game. I suggested a couple of times, before the Player Walk or just after Willingham's 3 p.m. appearance at the Husky Huddle. Whatever works for Bob. As soon as that is set, I'll pass it along several times before heading to Seattle on Thursday night with my 5 officers of the Malibu Husky Club.
Malibu

Bad offensive coordinator is what we have. His play calling is terrible and always at the wrong time. He's too conservative and not very savy with the talent that we have on offense. I play sport and my coach will max my abilities. That's what lappano need to do. If Jake is good at running then design a scheme that will allow him to max his ability. His passing will improve as he mature as a quarterback but asking him to become a better passser overnight isn't fair.
Work will what you have don't ask them do something that they not good at or don't bad think just happen.

Honestly, we need to cut back drastically on the spread coast. Run I formation and off-set I with Homer and Kravitz lead blocking. Pull Bulyca/JWF and Tolar since they are massive. Get Jake in as many 3rd and shorts as possible. Drive block with our big OL----------Lappano has a good track record with Jonathan Smith and Derek Anderson. Erickson didn't try to hire him as his OC for nothing and we also have Luke Huard to help Locker.

I'm not sick. I mean recovering from the loss. It takes me a couple of days. I usually watch the game again on Monday night. Maybe I'll watch just the first half this time . . . We can only take so much of this! Hey, I still think we have a shot at beating the Ducks. It's been a wacky year, Dawgs. Crazy upsets do happen. Don't give up yet.
Malibu

Locker is the best player on the field as a red-shirt freshman. He has 3-years of eligibility left after this year. Has anyone given any thought to Locker leaving UW because of the lack of adequate/effective recruiting? Great players want to at least have a chance of success...and that success comes with playing with other great/very good players. Besides signing Locker - you see I didn't say recruiting Locker - Willingham has failed in recruiting other great or even a very good "supporting" cast of players. Locker can read the recruiting charts at Rivals.com as well as y'all. Don't be surprised if he transfers at the end of this season.

jh, I think you should be more concerned about ND's 1-6 record (beating a walk-on led UCLA team) and all of the players leaving ND in droves. Please go to talk about ND's issues on their boards.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3064390

Maybe we can ask Todd Turner if he will cut ticket prices in half? Honestly- we should all email him and ask the question- If the team is only going to play one half- should we have to pay for the second half? The coaches need to really do a deep dive into what happens at halftime- whatever they have been doing is NOT working- and they need to be accountable- what were Ty's second half's like at ND and Stanford? anyone know?

There's too much talk on this blog that the season is over, TW needs to be fired, etc. Before the season started, I thought there was a chance we would be 0-6 at this point, but we are actually 2-4. The frustration to me is not so much the losses, but the noncompetitiveness in those losses. We have played less than 1/2 the season; there are still 7 games remaining. If the season is over, then don't watch the games. I'm not convinced we can win any of the remaining games, but I'm more interested to see whether we can compete in those games, whether Jake can learn how to pass, whether Hasty can start to emerge as a RB that will give us more running yards than the QB, whether Reece can get 5 to 8 catches a game, that the linebackers can learn the game's movements. All of these things are possible. I also know that Jake is a Husky fan in a Husky uniform. He wants the quacks to be cooked as much as anyone else and his mind all week is only going to be focused on beating the Beshotty gang. The defense is going to have to be up to the task and I think Howell will take it upon himself to keep the defense from thinking like several on this blog, that it's over before it starts. Forget the recruiting, etc. for the next 7 weeks. Let's help these young players gain something they need, confidence in themselves. When that happens, the missed opportunities will cease, the big plays for us will increase and the second half will be more competitive.

To try to answer your question from a ND fan's perspective, Dawg House:

Williingham was a "bad fit" for ND from day one. His lack of civility with ND alumni, fans, administration, players, player's parents, etc., etc. are historic. He left all recruiting up to his coaching staff and his golf trips during recruiting periods are legendary. What got Willingham fired was not his coaching, per say, but the lack of promise in his recruitment "efforts". In the final year of recruitment, year three, Willingham's recruitment fell to 42nd in the nation. When your 5-6 or 6-5...the 42 was unacceptable to the alumni, Board of Trustees...and finally the administration. Although supported by the AD, Kevin White, Willingham was fired and given $2,000,000 in severance to leave town.

This is all on coaching. I respect Willingham, but when he responds that he doesn't know what is wrong when most everyone on this blog and in the TV booth is saying it is scheme, play-calling, etc. That says a lot about how poor your coordinators are. Why do I have to hear Baer and Lappano call out players and have nothing to say about their own sorry efforts? That does nothing to inspire kids. Sounds like the corporate world to me...boss takes credit when everything goes well and scapegoats his staff when results suck.

It's funny that the second half issues are just coming into focus,even though it's been an apparent problem since Boise State. I'm still holding out hope, though. These Huskies are better than last year's and the one before that...We're on the upside (and if we're not, dont ruin it for me...)

AZ Husky, RE: Jake and the coaching/destruction of his talent...I couldn't agree more. The coaching staff is in denial of the talent they have to work with. They refuse to accept that they must make changes in schemes to fit the strengths of their players. As such, I wish for Jake's sake he'd gone to another program. The kid is everything any program could ask for...unfortunately ours, with this coaching staff, doesn't deserve him. The only consolation could come in that he might get to play his Jr/Sr years with a real coach. Anyone else think we'd be 6-0 if Neuheisel were still here? Wish he'd been coaching Jake for the past year and a half...

Move Rankin to slot receiver w/Hasty in the back field. Rankin can make plays, but apparently not up the gut so much.

I love seeing ND lose, it's good they have a contract on ABC so everyone can enjoy it!

I think you have take a step back here boys... Ask yourselves this... Did Isiah Stanback become a better quarterback once Lappanno and his staff got here? No question the answer is yes. If Isiah had stayed healthy last year we would have been in a bowl game and everyone (including Jake) would have gotten in 15 more practices in. I remember Lappanno commenting how he was stunned when he found out Isiah didn't know how to read a Cover Two Defense. Jake will get better too, just give him some time. As for the D giving up long TD runs on basic running plays... that's a bigger concern. Are we just so out of shape that we can't compete in the 2nd half?

Bob,

To partly answer your original question the answer is the Seahawks the majority of weekends excpet for the last four years and three years in the early eighties. The Huskies a weekend or two a year for the last 102 years excpet primarily for a time in the late seventies and the last seven years. And for the cougars every weekend of every year that they have ever played football with the exception of three seasons.

Bob,

To partly answer your original question the answer is the Seahawks the majority of weekends excpet for the last four years and three years in the early eighties. The Huskies a weekend or two a year for the last 102 years excpet primarily for a time in the late seventies and the last seven years. And for the cougars every weekend of every year that they have ever played football with the exception of three seasons.

I am not a football expert by any means so I am not going to argue for or against any certain schemes, play calling etc.

What I do see in the Huskies though is this:

There seems to be a total disconnect between the coach'd style, what he stands for and is known for, and what is showing up on the field.

Tyrone is known as a coach who teaches fundamentals and discipline. He wants his team to play smart and focussed. I just haven't seen that in his players. They continue to make stupid mistakes at critical times in the games: penalties, missed assignment, tackles, dropped passes. They are a team lacking in fundamentals.

I want to see Tyrone's team taking on Tyrone's personality. That is the fundamental part of coaching isn't it? Having your team buy into and incorporate your style. I don't see that with this team. Why is that? Who's fault is it?

For those of you who insist that Ty is on the right track and deserves at least 2 more years.

Pleae, OPEN YOUR EYES when watching the games!

The offensive play calling on this team is the worst I have seen in 30 years of watching college football. Tim Lappano does not have a feel for situational play calling.

When things start to unravel (usually the beginning of the 2 qtr) he limits his play calling even further. He runs no pass plays across the middle of the field and has no intermediate passing attack. EVERY PASS PLAY is WR in the FLAT or a Bomb down the sidelines. Jake is not even given a chance to complete a 5-10 yd pass. I think Lappano ran 1 slant pattern against ASU ... good for 7 yards. Does he run it again? NO.... why?

Go watch the tape of the ASU game again. THe offense didn't move the ball the ENTIRE GAME!
2 great plays in the first half. Long pass to Reece and Jake's TD run.

How is LAPPANO designing a offensive game plan that gives JAKE some confidence early on?

His success rate on 1st and 2nd downs is TERRIBLE! Leaving Jake to try to make a play on 3rd and long EVERY SERIES!

The reason he was successful at OSU is because of ERCIKSON... who is a offensive play calling genius!

The fact that the offense can't sustain a drive longer than 3 plays leaves the Defense on the field all day long... and this a major CAUSE of the defensive problems.

Fire LAPPANO and Ty can stay one more year to see if he can turn things around!

Otherwise, JIM MORA here we come.

Painful as all of this is, it is foolish to talk about coaching changes until the year is over. Recruits probably read this stuff, too. It seems that all of this goes back to the lack of a running game. Locker's difficulties as a quarterback and the defenses second-half collapses are certainly related to the inability of the offense to sustain drives using a running game. The offensive line doesn't come off the ball with authority. The offensive line plays more as a unit than any other, and takes loinger to develop. I think that we are still seeing the effects of the past years when linemen used poor technique, which continues.