Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

Huskies


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Husky Football Blog

Times reporter Bob Condotta keeps the news coming about the Montlake Dawgs.

E-mail Bob| RSS feeds Subscribe | Blog Home

July 22, 2008 12:06 PM

Lappano: "We know we have to win football games"

Posted by Bob Condotta

Interesting interview with UW offensive coordinator Tim Lappano on the Dave "Softy''Mahler show on KJR-AM today as the coach admitted that "we know we have to win football games'' to start reeling in recruits for the Class of 2009.

Lappano was on for 10 minutes or so and Mahler ended the questioning by asking about the fact that UW doesn't yet have any commitments (I don't have a real detailed transcript as I heard all this in the car, pulling over briefly to scribble a few notes).

Lappano said the encouraging thing is that "a lot of kids haven't told us no yet.'' But he said the UW coaches know that recruits also want to see where the program is headed before commiting.

"A lot of kids are testing the water, if you will,'' Lappano said.

He added that "that's how important the Oregon game is'' to get off to a good start and show recruits the corner is being turned. He said if UW wins a few games early "a lot of kids will start raising their hands saying yes.''

On other matters:

--- Lappano said he is hearing good reports on UW's voluntary workouts this summer, saying that the team decided to do some 11-on-11 work this year for the first time, opposed to all 7-on-7, to involve the offensive linemen more. "From what I gather, they are going well,'' he said.

--- He said Jake Locker has come away impressed with the play of some of the 2008 recruits who are now on campus. "He says they are everything everybody thought they were and maybe a little bit more,'' Lappano said.

--- Freshmen he mentioned as having a chance to play immediately were Chris Polk, Kavario Middleton, Cody Bruns and Jermaine Kearse (I'm sure he figures more could, as well, but that's just who he mentioned). "They have a chance to get on the field,'' he said.

--- He said that while Locker has taken the lead in guiding the offensive workouts that Donald Butler and Daniel Te'o-Nesheim have been the leaders on the defensive side.

--- Asked about the tough early schedule, he said it is what it is but also puts a premium on the coaches getting the freshmen ready to play. "They can't be freshmen,'' he said.

--- He repeated something he has said often before, asserting that this team "will have the most speed'' of any since he has been at UW since 2005. "That's something you can't coach,'' he said. He said he thinks the speed will be a particular factor on the perimeter.

--- He said the key task the first few weeks of camp will be "identifying playmakers.'' He said he thinks the young guys possess a lot of talent and the goal will be to "get them the football in a lot of different ways.''

--- He said playing Oregon the first game could be a real advantage for UW since "I'm not sure that they know who their quarterback is right now .... Why not get that guy right out of the blocks''' instead of waiting until six or seven weeks into the season. "I like that,'' he said. (One thing to remember is that the Oregon game was originally set for Sept.13 so it really hasn't been moved up all that much).


Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine

Submit a comment

*Required Field



Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Posted by Husky Fan In New York

12:40 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Bob, I'm glad you highlighted Lappano's comments about team speed and play-makers. Other than Rankin, are we really losing any other play-makers?

I understand people have concerns about the young RBs, WRs, and the DL. However, let me ask people this: were you happy with the performance of the WRs and 3 DL starters who graduated? If yes, then you were happy with all the dropped balls, the inability to get open, the lack of consistent game-breakers, and the difficulty in beating bump and run coverage. For the DL, were you happy with the lack of pass-rush outside of Daniel Teo'Nesheim, especially from the inside? How about the inability to get off blocks or keep OLmen off our LBs?

People are making such a big deal about the inexperience at WR and DL but what does it matter if that experience doesn't perform? I do know that Elisara and Kirton were more highly recruited than the DTs who graduated, same with Wood, Duncan, Noble, and Ta'amu. Same goes for many of the WRs who have been in the program 1 to 3 years.

I am concerned about RB but an improved OL and Locker makes life easier for the running game. I don't see Brandon Johnson running for 1,200 yards like Rankin or hitting home-runs with his speed, but perhaps he will make up for it with a more move the chains style along with some other promising RS-Frosh.

All in all, if we lost Locker, Ossai, Tolar, Garcia, and Homer on offense and Daniel Teo'Nesheim and our good LBs, I'd be much more concerned. Frankly, the players who won't be returning and that I wish we really still had are just Rankin and Roy Lewis b/c they won't be easy to replace, at least not at the beginning of the season. I would throw Gunheim in there but from what I've read, I wouldn't be surprised if Jones gets at least 6 sacks opposite Daniel Teo'Nesheim.

Posted by Designtime

12:41 PM, Jul 22, 2008

The coaching staff can't really think that winning at Oregon is what is going to save this recruiting class. We would be going into September.

There won't be many impact recruits left at that point. Right now, there are no 5 star and almost no 4 star recruits that have UW in it's top 5.

I think Lappano's statement is an admission that this recruiting season is almost lost.

Posted by TurbineSeaplane

12:43 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Lappano: "We know we have to win football games"

...

And in other news, the sky is blue, the moon is round and the ocean is deep...

Posted by Williams3

12:49 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Bob,
I know I could look this up, but perhaps you or others know it off the top of your head...

How many members of this Coaching staff were actually with Willingham at Notre Dame? Denbrook is the only one that comes immediately to my mind...

Posted by danny

12:49 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Why not run the Wishbone? Or some other form of option attack? Our strengths are (a) Jake Locker's running ability and (b) our offensive line. I hate to abandon the traditional offense but we do not have the personnel to go head-to-head with Oklahoma, USC, etc. Plus this tends to keep our very young defense off the field. If Jake throws as a change of pace, it should be pretty easy to get some of those young, fast receivers open. I hate to risk injuring him but how else can we match up? (I refuse to acknowledge that other teams named for certain acquatic birds have better personnel, but I'm concerned at the same time.)

Posted by doug

12:51 PM, Jul 22, 2008

try being more creative with ur calls timmah boy. ur crap was the easiest to detect EVER oh 10 yard pass RUN RUN RUN. creative, wonder why this lozer is employed

Posted by mfsthorn

12:56 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Current staff:
OC - Lappano (not at Notre Dame)
OL - Denbrock (yes)
RB - Gervais (no)
WR - Baggett (no)
TE/ST - White (no)
DC - Donatell (no)
DL - Hart (no)
LB - Tormey (no)
DB - Williams (no)

Posted by Husky Fan In New York

1:02 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Williams3, I think you're right. OC Lappano was at OSU with Erickson, RB coach Gervais came over from Skyline, WR coach Baggett was with the Minnesota Vikings, TE/ST coach White was at Wisconsin and Syracuse, OL coach Denbrock was with Willingham at ND, DL coach Hart has been with the Huskies since I can remember, Tormey has been at UW, Nevada, and Idaho, DB coach Williams was at Cal, and DC Donatell was with Green Bay and Atlanta. Even Trent Greener was with OSU and the 49'ers like Lappano and Yarber.

Ty's staff at ND who came over and now gone now gone: RB coach Miles (good coach who left for head coaching job at Indiana State), Bob Simmons (TE/ST), Kent Baer (DC), and Steven Wilks (DB coach for one year who left to take same position with Chicago Bears).

Posted by Reality Check

1:04 PM, Jul 22, 2008

I'm not as concerned about youth at the RB and WR positions. But the youth on the D-line scares me. A 22 year old O-lineman has had four years to bulk up, learn technique, and pretty much exploit a young D-lineman. (Just think of how Juan Garcia would feel if he lined up across from a Frosh! "Time to teach the kid some football!")

Anyway, in addition to being very concerned about so much youth on the field, I also worry about burning so many talents as true freshmen. One of the ways to build up a great program is to redshirt your frosh and bring 'em out as redshirts. Some could argue against burning the redshirt in case of injury, but I recall Don James having a lot of success trying to redshirt most of his newbies in order to give them a year to grow into the program.

I just hope we aren't mortgaging our future.

Finally, going into year 4 of the rebuild, why are we being forced to play so many frosh??? What the heck was Ty doing the first 3 years? Shouldn't we at least be looking at RS-frosh, Sophs, or older on the field? It seems awfully desperate to be forced to play true freshman, and it makes me wonder what happened with the last few recruiting classes!

Posted by Yakima Sundodger

1:06 PM, Jul 22, 2008

One more question, Bob. My daughter, my 24 year-old light of my life, is getting married next month. Before setting the date, I told her to make sure it doesn't conflict with a Husky game, as I'd really like to attend the wedding. After arranging the church, reception hall and all that for August 30th, the AD's in Seattle and Eugene decide to move the season opener to.....you guessed it....August 30. After mulling it over, I decided to do the mature thing and explained to my wife and daughter that it wouldn't be a problem because I'd just watch the replay.....because I know I wrote a check for a videograpaher to tape the wedding.

My question, Bob, is what are the odds I'll still be alive on August 31?

Before answering, check this link on one more reason to hate the Ducks and watch them go down in their spoiled flames on August 30.

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/tailgate/index.ssf?/base/sports/1216693532241250.xml&coll=7

Posted by Williams3

1:20 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Again, I may be late to the table, but we are really looking at a completely different Willingham staff with the departures of Baer, Simmons and Miles.

From what I have seen and read, I really like the make-up of this current staff, I like Lappano, and like what he brings to the table.

It may be the annual end of summer hype and optimism, but I think not only do we need to win right now, but I think we can. I like what I am hearing so far.

Posted by NorCalDawgFan

1:22 PM, Jul 22, 2008

HFNY,

I think you are correct. I think Goodwin will be a pleasant surprise in Pac 10 this year, especially in comparison to Reese and Russo's cement in their boots routes last year. I also think Johnson last year ran into the pile, moved the pile backwards and that was a refreshing change from the last several years of James and Rankin dancing and looking for holes. If Johnson consistently runs like that, he will eventually have 15 to 20 yard breakaway runs.

Posted by jh

1:39 PM, Jul 22, 2008


...""a lot of kids haven't told us no yet.''...

...wow! what a recruiting indictment that statement is...talk about trying to put a positive spin on whistling past the graveyard...

Posted by poster

1:49 PM, Jul 22, 2008

From what limited footage I've seen of Curtis Shaw, he has a chance to contribute either in the backfield or alongside De'Andre Goodwin. Goodwin has had a lot of good press, and should be promising at WR, but note Shaw's speed (and he has pretty good hands). Goodwin ran a 10.8 in HS while Shaw ran a 10.56, in the 100m. 10.56 is close to breakaway speed (Reggie Bush ran a 10.42 in HS). Time will tell who is a better WR, but the talk has been a little quiet on Shaw over the summer and he could really surprise (at WR or RB).

Posted by OlyDawg

1:50 PM, Jul 22, 2008

We really need a local guy to step up and commit to UW soon. There has to be at least 1 or 2 guys who want to stay in Seattle no matter who is the coach, especially with the possibility of playing on a far more experienced and talented 2009 team.

And HFNY, I share your cautious optimism for WR, RB, and DL.

With so many big guys waiting in the wings (who should have been on the field a lot more last year), the DL seems like it might be the most promising unit in my opinion.

I'm actually more worried about RB, as I wasn't entirely impressed with Johnson's elusiveness last year, but he runs straight ahead like a beast.

I was most impressed with Griffin during the Spring Game. He seemed like he could slash to the holes, but also push forward for those last 3-4 yards for a first down that Rankin just couldn't do. Add to that Chris Polk, who seem to be just as elusive as Rankin, but he had that natural ability to bounce and spin off of would-be tacklers at the line.

Our style of offense (lots of quick slanting passes) is actually a great thing for our young WR corps, as quickness makes up for a lack of route running ability. Molly at the PI liked what Charles Hawkins was doing in practice last night (great to hear), and Goodwin was living up to his billing in the Spring Game, with some great jumping grabs in the open field. And you cant discount Cody Bruns in the immediate future, who has national high school records for receptions.

Posted by poster

1:55 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Additionally, it was interesting to note that Bruns was picked out by Jake as having a chance to play immediately. Certainly, you can't discredit the guys HS campaign, but he still remained a little bit of a question mark to me. I was picturing more Paul Skansi but he could also be along the lines of a Mike Haas (OSU), although both of those comparisons are premature and really only meant to highlight their respective styles.

Posted by jh

2:03 PM, Jul 22, 2008


...things have gotton so bad the Olydawg is begging for commitments...my, my, my...

Posted by Huskiebob

2:08 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Reality Check,

Remember many of the "freshmen" playing next year redshirted last year so there were not 3 wasted years. I am really looking forward to next season and it will be interesting to see the attitude of the naysayers if the Huskies exceed expectations.

When Lappano says what everyone knows is the truth - "We know we have to win football games" - Turbine Seaplane blasts him. Makes me wonder what he is supposed to say! Maybe Seaplane can answer that for me.

Posted by Gabe

2:21 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Sundodger, you made the right choice. No doubt about it. Your wife and daughter--and future son-in-law--will all understand. Well, on second thought, maybe the son-in-law. Good luck, and see you at Autzen. Bring your construction helmet. Troy Must Be Destroyed (deranged ducks demolished)

Posted by Seattle Dave

2:30 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Rankin had a fine senior year but let's be honest, almost half of his rushing yardage (626 of 1294) came in only 3 of the 13 games, vs. Syracuse, Cal and Stanford, and for all the talk about his "home run threat" ability, he only ran for 6 TDs in 13 games. His production can be replaced. I'm more worried about the DL, not that the graduating DL were very good but young DL tend to get pushed around.

Posted by jh

2:33 PM, Jul 22, 2008


...I see the willingham Titanic Tea Party is still in denial...

Posted by Designtime

2:35 PM, Jul 22, 2008

HuskieBob,

Coach Lappano did say what he had to say. The folly is making it seem that it will somehow enable us to have a good recruiting class.

Even if we won our first 5 games, it would be hard to pull a recruiting class that wasn't in the bottom half of the Pac 10. There just aren't that many elite recruits left. That sounds funny to say in July, but the recruiting game has changed.

Posted by dawgdayzof summer

2:36 PM, Jul 22, 2008

I know it is popular to bash last years receivers but you can't say they weren't big play guys. In all but two games (predictably tOSU and USC) the longest gain from scrimmage was a Husky reception. Several of over 80 yards and one of 98! I know the hope is for more consistency but you can't say we didn't have play makers.

Posted by Husky19

2:50 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Designtime,

Going into September without a lot of 4 & 5 stars guys is not a problem, there will be a whole bunch of 4 & 5 star guys available. Even the committed ones can/will decommit, it happens every year. IF UW wins big, it won't matter who is committed where. If UW can land 10-12 4 & 5 star guys, that will be status quo (even during the Don James years).

Honestly I am not the least bit worried about the lack of recruits. It all works itself out one way or another.

Historically UW usually get's a pretty good class, they never get a top 5 class every year but they usually fall between 10-25 and on occassion will get a top 5 ranked class or the occassional bad class (usually during coaching changes). Look at last year, awesome class ranked 14th and everyone believes UW can win with that class.

The recipe to success is to find guys that fit your system, want to be at your school, have great character, desire, discipline and have a good balance.

People will believe that you need to be a top 5 ranked class every year if you want to have a successful program but if that was the case, ND would have won more than 3 games last year, Wisconsin would suck, Kansas and Missouri would have sucked last couple of years plus, Cal wouldn't have imploded last year, Oregon too, Arizona would have been good the last 3 years (best classes in arizona in a long time), ASU would be worse than Arizona (since the last few years Arizona out recruited ASU), Boise State wouldn't beat Okla in a BCS game, Utah wouldn't have won their BCS bowl game either, Miami and Fsu would not have taken a back seat last year to South Florida, heck South Florida would not even but considered a legitimate team, Alabama would be as good as LSU, Oregon State would be worse, I could seriously go on forever on this subject.

That is why the games are played on the field and not in the recruiting magazines. Plus UW's only really top ranked classes were 1992 and Neuheisels 2002 class. Top players in 2002; Nathan Rhodes, Donny Mateaki and Isaiah Stanback. Player not ranked in that class, Nate Robinson!

Would I want a top 5 class every year, of course, as long as the players have heart, character and a strong work ethic and bleed purple! Nothing worse than a top ranked class of prima donnas.

Posted by Husky19

2:52 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Designtime,

Recruits can't sign until at the earliest Feb. So why do you think that the class is doomed by Sep or Oct?

If that was the case, coaches would stop recruiting in Sep and Oct but they recruit up until that kid signs on the dotted line.

Posted by BoiseTruth

3:10 PM, Jul 22, 2008


poster, Mike Haas! Wouldn't that be sweet. That's exactly the type break we need to catch. Good thought, and insight. It would be great to have an over achiever like Haas step up. Sooner or later we're going to get one. Maybe it will be Bruns. Nice to think about anyway. Ya picked me up - Thanks

Posted by Seattle Dave

3:12 PM, Jul 22, 2008

On the WRs, Russo and Reece were decent as seniors. Reece made some big plays, he also failed to make some big plays that could've been made (potential GW TD vs. Hawai'i for example). Russo was steadier, but neither of them ever caught more than five balls in a game. They were a decent pair of starters but hardly playmakers to strike fear into the hearts of opposing DBs. And none of the other receivers really accomplished anything important for the offense last year.

Posted by poster

3:19 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Hey Boise,

That would definitely be sweet if Bruns is of the Mike Haas mold. An interesting question is how much of Oregon State's success (how many games) did Mike Haas make the difference in? The guy was unbelievable. For being allegedly slow (4.6 in the 40), he always seemed to be open or making very tough catches.

I believe Mike Haas was the first receiver in Pac-10 history to have 3 consecutive 1000 yard seasons.

Bruns may end up more than a possession receiver, here's hoping.


Posted by Designtime

3:52 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Husky19,

Recruits do certainly change their minds. That is the exception though, not the rule. Even if we were to say that 25% did (I don't think it is nearly that high), we are not in a good position to get them.

If we were ranked in some of these recruits' top 5, there would be more reason to believe we could steal some with a strong start. As it stands now, if they decommit, they are still likely to go somewhere other than UW.

Again, most of the blue chippers have already committed, and there will be precious few in early Oct.

Many of the Pac 10 schools already have excellent classes. I am not trying to be overly negative, but it would be a huge surprise if we had a good recruiting class in 2008.

Posted by jh

4:07 PM, Jul 22, 2008


..."Going into September without a lot of 4 & 5 stars guys is not a problem."

September???...how many 4 and 5-star players has willingham "signed" in the last three years?...what's his average per year?...feel free to use either Scout or Rivals...

...oh!...don't want to touch that one...do we?...

Posted by rickdawg

4:50 PM, Jul 22, 2008

I think Lappano has as much to prove as TW himself. In three years all I've seen on the field is a lot of ill-prepared confusion, broken plays, and bad play selection. Other than great individual efforts by Jake and others, it's been a train wreck. I'll be watching very closely to see a coherent offense emerge for the first time in Lappano's UW career.

Posted by MelloDawg

5:13 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Oooh hooray....

So let's see, if historically, UW usually gets a good class, that pretty much deflates the argument that Ty had zero talent on the team when he arrived here. Thanks guys. I was almost going to go dig up recruiting rankings so that we could rehash this argument, but now I don't need to.

Posted by BoiseTruth

5:24 PM, Jul 22, 2008


poster, I heard a lot of things said about Haas early on, and most things weren't very impressive. However, I had some really good opportunities to see what he could do against BSU. He was almost unstoppable. We had good guys on him, and it looked like we had him all the way. Unfortunately he always killed us (and a lot of others that thought they had him). I'd be sitting there saying, damn, how'd that guy beat us again. After awhile, I just enjoyed watching what he could do. Here's hoping is right.

Posted by Husky19

5:54 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Mello,

I never said Ty didn't have talent on the team, I have always felt there was talent. Was the talent to the level of the 1991 team (we should always use this as a benchmark) absolutely not.

Now in my post I also mention that UW usually signs good classes year after year, not great but good. However I did also mention that during times of coaching changes UW has typically signed a lower than top 25 ranked class. This was the case when Ty took over.

I also said that the good classes could win and beat great classes because there are factors such as heart, discipline, character, desire (yes intangibles) that can elevate a good class to great.

The same can be done in reverse (see how ND and Weis can turn great classes into 3 win teams).

So yes Ty had talent, did he underperform? In my opinion yes on the field but no off the field. Off the field his players outperformed. Unfortunately for all people that hate Ty, off the field is not important. But just ask Wuff about the APR mess that Doba left him, along with a bunch of criminals.

Do I think that Ty needs to now blend off-field success with on-field success, ABSOLUTELY! These are not mutually exclusive, just look at Wsu. Losing both off and on the field (sorry I couldn't resist).

Ty needs to win and take the talent on the team and produce. I honestly felt that Baer caused the majority of underperformance for the Huskies the last 3 years and this is why I predict DAWGS WILL WIN 9-10 GAMES THIS YEAR!

Posted by jh

6:12 PM, Jul 22, 2008


...husky 18...if I had the time I'd refute each and every one of your faulty assertions...starting with willingham's success at ND and his 32 recruitment rating compared to Rick and Gilbertson's 20 rating (Rival.com)...and your last sentence...wow!...delusional...

Posted by Indiana Husky

8:24 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Bob,

I have heard some people defend last year's WRs by saying that Jake wasn't throwing a very catchable ball. I am not exactly sure what this means. Is there any truth to it? Other than just hitting the target, how much does a QB have to help his receivers catch the ball?

Boise,

Thanks for asking. I am back. I'm actually taking the bar exam tomorrow and Thursday (today was the first day); so I've been trying to limit my blog time.

Nate

Posted by Reality Check

9:46 PM, Jul 22, 2008

HuskyBob --

Yeah, I'm okay w/ that. It just looks like '08 might feature a number of true frosh playing (not RS frosh.) I'm sort of okay with that for WR or even RB. But I just feel like the older more experienced guys have much more success on the lines. It's almost unheard of for a true freshman to have a mammoth year on the O-line or D-line. But true frosh can make an impact at the skill positions (minus QB 99% of the time.)

Whatever the case, I am a believer in having the best talent possible on the field. And if that means we're playing true freshman, then so be it. It just makes me wonder what happened in our last few recruiting classes to leave voids like this -- requiring true freshman to step in and play.

Posted by Formerly Guest

10:08 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Designtime,
I share your fear about recruiting. But I also feel like if we win a lot of games early (big "if"), there are good recruits out there who will decide it looks exciting to play with Jake and commit. I think some people would also be willing to decommit from other programs (like Polk) did if UW looks like a winner, and TW's staff are willing to play dirty and try to pilfer other team's class down to the wire.

If you have open slots (which unfortunately we will) and you can look attractive, they will come. I think it is the looking attractive part that will be difficult, obviously.

Posted by Formerly Guest

10:09 PM, Jul 22, 2008

Boise Truth,

Do you see Peterson leaving BSU at any point? If so, what do you see getting him out of there, and what place do you see able to attract him.

Thanks.

Posted by MelloDawg

2:54 AM, Jul 23, 2008

Husky19,

Fair enough, fair enough. Personally I think that, for a school like UW, the on-field/off-field ratio in terms of what is important should be about 70/30. It's not THAT hard to instill discipline in your players. Neuheisel might not have but hot damn did he win football games most of the time. Now we have a coach who's won 11 in 3 years and somehow that's better than Rick. It all depends on what is more important to you: 100% angels off the field or a couple bad eggs that are dealt with.

As for 9-10 wins this year, I wish I shared your optimism. You said it's the coach's job to instill some kind of motivating factor in his players, but that's tough when the team has been down so long under Ty. It's a difficult thing to do and something that, if we start 0-3 (a possibility, you realize), could prove to be impossible.

Posted by Sam

10:59 AM, Jul 23, 2008

Sundodger, I'm pretty sure you're joking....but if you go to a football game and miss your daughter's wedding, you're a loser. Aside from the fact that it's a lame reason to miss such an important event (the wedding), why would you want to go to Autzen and watch the Ducks pound the Dawgs?

Posted by mfsthorn

11:18 AM, Jul 23, 2008

I don't get the people who bash Lappano -- he had one real playmaker last year, ONE. Rankin, Reece, Russo -- none of those guys put fear in our opponents' DCs. And his one playmaker was a redshirt freshman QB with an accuracy problem. Yet, we still managed to average nearly 30 points a game against the most difficult schedule in the nation.

If our defense had even been mediocre we would have won 8 games ... and, if our defense had improved at the rate our offense had over the last three years, we would have won 10 games. Look at where our offense was in 2004 -- 14 points a game, -19 in turnover margin, a pitiful rushing attack. And, the defense was the side of the ball heading into last season with fewer question marks.

Posted by onewoodwacker

9:58 PM, Jul 23, 2008

What was the point Lappano was attempting to make? Duh coach - we know you have to win football games too.

Recent entries

Jul 23, 08 - 07:28 PM
ACC to release official injury reports

Jul 23, 08 - 02:56 PM
Price talks about commitment

Jul 23, 08 - 12:54 PM
Do Huskies have their first commit?

Jul 23, 08 - 09:37 AM
Poll time

Jul 22, 08 - 03:59 PM
Media guides released

Advertising

Marketplace

Advertising

Advertising

Categories
Calendar

July

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Browse the archives

July 2008

June 2008

May 2008

April 2008

March 2008

February 2008

Advertising

Buy a link here