Washington @ Colorado

hawkfan68

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
1,701
Location
Sammamish, WA
kearly":3pwc5e9x said:
Weird game. Colorado had a solid edge in all three phases through 2.5 quarters, but UW dominated the last 1.5 quarters in all three phases. UW didn't even have their first lead until fairly late in the game, and yet by the end it felt like they dominated Colorado.

Petersen still has some stuff to fix. The tackling around the LOS was a disaster. It was a weird game where UW made the difficult tackles but couldn't make the easy ones.

Colorado has a sneaky good OL and they deserve a ton of credit in both run blocking and protection. They were helped out some by some really stupid blitzes (sending six, two of them delayed blitzers, on 4th and 8 ), but for the most part they protected their QB better than any UW opponent this season. Their QB had 52 pass attempts but was only sacked 3 times, and one of those was a play where he ran out of bounds for a 1 yard loss. He didn't take his first real sack until mid-way through the 4th quarter.

Colorado has a lot of speed and a lot of skill, with an athletic / smart / skilled QB, it's almost like facing Sark's UW team last year. And before they started shooting themselves in the foot, they came very close to running away it. UW deserves a lot of credit for hanging around in this game early on despite getting their butts kicked.

Hang around, come back, take over, salt away a win. Great display of mental toughness as a team, especially with the three backbreaking RZ turnovers UW had.

I really hated it when draft pundits hyped Andrew Luck to the moon because of the athleticism he showed making one stupid catch at WR. I hate it when Miles Jack gets hyped because he can play both LB and RB, something that almost every decent LB/RB in existence did in HS. It's stupid. And until today, I thought it was kind of stupid that Shaq Thompson was getting all this hype because of big plays and "versatility".

But after today, I think he's erased any remaining doubt in my mind that he's a 1st round pick. Today he looked Heisman-esque at RB. Couple that with his defensive TDs and he might end up being the highest drafted outside 4-3 LB since Aaron Curry (lol). Scouts also obsess about versatility and Shaq has the physical tools to play any position on the field other than OL/DL. Some will view him as Andre Ellington+, some will view him as Lavonte David+, some will view him as Dashon Goldson+, and all of them will probably have first round grades on Shaq.

Maybe we lucked out and got an easy going officiating crew, but penalties were way down in this game and only one of them hurt UW in a meaningful way. After penalties were such a nightmare early in the year I have to credit the coach for cleaning it up. UW's offense looks so much sharper now, it's night and day from the first few weeks of the season.

Petersen also impressed me with his halftime adjustments. Colorado only scored 3 points in the second half.

And I really like the way he's developed Miles, who's shown improvement every single week. I don't know if Miles developed better technique or hit the weight room, but his wimpy arm is a distant memory now. His arm strength is no longer an issue at all. I'm at the point now where I am actually not horrified by the thought of Miles starting in '15 and '16, especially if the weekly improvement continues.

It took awhile, but slowly it seems that Petersen is living up to the hype.

The coach for Colorado seems likable in kind of a Dennis Erickson sort of way. He had some incredibly creative and effective plays in this game that he called on 3rd and short. But for as smart and as likable as he is, his clock management in the 2nd half was horrible. He wasted a timeout on a hopeless challenge when his team was trailing, then he used up almost the entire remaining clock on a drive when down by 15 points, then he wasted a timeout at the end to save maybe 10 seconds. It probably wouldn't have mattered, but it was still incredibly dumb.

Great write-up Kearly. I don't see what improvement you are seeing with Miles. He's the definite weak link on the offense. As a matter of fact it's befuddling that a college QB like Sark has no eye to find and recruit a decent QB. He left the UW cupboard bare as far as QB goes. Jeff Lindquist is another guy that is full of suck. I don't know why the Huskies even bother running plays with him...it's really no surprise what they do since he can't throw. Now it gets about as much yards as the Seahawks did with Percy Harvin plays. I believe the only reason Miles is still a Husky is because of the poor depth at the position. If they had a capable QB, he would have been gone from the school. Just like his pal, Stringfellow.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,674
Reaction score
1,692
Location
Roy Wa.
kearly":2enp98qs said:
chris98251":2enp98qs said:
Based on his play he could be listed as athlete instead of a position, that could cause him to slide a bit.

Not if you look amazing everywhere you play.

Oh I think he will go 1st round, the issue will be what they grade him out as based on what position they think he will play, that decision is why I think he could slide.

One team could think he will be the next Kam, another a Lynch type or Gore. The one coach that would jump on him I think may be Belichick.

Supposedly ran a 4.4 40 in high school
 

RunTheBall

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
696
Reaction score
0
Seattle owns Colorado at football.

UW has beat Colorado by 15+ points all 4 years they have been in the Pac-12

Seahawks beat Broncos in Super Bowl and this season.
 

zifnab32

New member
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
274
Reaction score
0
hawkfan68":1rcmhtnv said:
Great write-up Kearly. I don't see what improvement you are seeing with Miles. He's the definite weak link on the offense. As a matter of fact it's befuddling that a college QB like Sark has no eye to find and recruit a decent QB. He left the UW cupboard bare as far as QB goes. Jeff Lindquist is another guy that is full of suck. I don't know why the Huskies even bother running plays with him...it's really no surprise what they do since he can't throw. Now it gets about as much yards as the Seahawks did with Percy Harvin plays. I believe the only reason Miles is still a Husky is because of the poor depth at the position. If they had a capable QB, he would have been gone from the school. Just like his pal, Stringfellow.

13/19 for 206 and 2 TDs is enough to win in the Pac-12, especially if you have a decent defense and a capable running game. He's got limitations, but he's good enough you can gameplan around them. He'll work as a transition QB until this Browning kid is ready to go.

If UW doesn't fumble the ball inside the Colorado 10 twice - and once more inside the Colorado 35 - they score 50+ and win by 30.
 

Tical21

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
82
I don't think Shaq projects as a RB. He just stands straight up. He does this on defense too, but you can get by with it most of the time. I think he projects as a 4-3 OLB.
 

hawknation2014

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
0
Cyler Miles is our best option right now at QB, but he's still incredibly erratic. In two weeks, I believe we will be 6-5 (as predicted before the season).
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
hawkfan68":16ueat7c said:
Great write-up Kearly. I don't see what improvement you are seeing with Miles. He's the definite weak link on the offense. As a matter of fact it's befuddling that a college QB like Sark has no eye to find and recruit a decent QB. He left the UW cupboard bare as far as QB goes. Jeff Lindquist is another guy that is full of suck. I don't know why the Huskies even bother running plays with him...it's really no surprise what they do since he can't throw. Now it gets about as much yards as the Seahawks did with Percy Harvin plays. I believe the only reason Miles is still a Husky is because of the poor depth at the position. If they had a capable QB, he would have been gone from the school. Just like his pal, Stringfellow.

If you don't see improvement with Miles, than you must have had a much higher opinion of him than I did a month ago. I thought he was in the discussion for the worst UW quarterback of all time. Now I think he looks like Seneca Wallace, basically an average-ish QB who can do enough to win if the offense compensates for his limitations.
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
chris98251":2qhrtei5 said:
kearly":2qhrtei5 said:
chris98251":2qhrtei5 said:
Based on his play he could be listed as athlete instead of a position, that could cause him to slide a bit.

Not if you look amazing everywhere you play.

Oh I think he will go 1st round, the issue will be what they grade him out as based on what position they think he will play, that decision is why I think he could slide.

One team could think he will be the next Kam, another a Lynch type or Gore. The one coach that would jump on him I think may be Belichick.

Supposedly ran a 4.4 40 in high school

He will be first round as a defensive player for sure, and probably a 3rd rounder as a RB. He is a media hype job waiting to happen, and he's built a hell of a scouting resume at this point.

He is not a tweener. He is a high end playmaker at multiple positions. Huge distinction come draft day. We've seen guys like Barkevious Mingo and Anthony Barr go super high because evaluators felt that even if they busted at pass rusher, they could still play LB. Bruce Irvin too. And remember how ridiculously over-hyped Dion Jordan was because of his versatility? Shaq isn't a pass rusher so he won't go as high as those guys, but his flexibility to play LB/S/RB will be seen as a huge positive.
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
Tical21":2vaqb0eu said:
I don't think Shaq projects as a RB. He just stands straight up. He does this on defense too, but you can get by with it most of the time. I think he projects as a 4-3 OLB.

I think he's a Lavonte David type, so we agree there.

I understand the skepticism at RB. He doesn't run like a normal RB would, his success over the past month is almost identical to the success Denard Robinson has had in Jacksonville. When someone finds success doing things in a new way, he must withstand the test of time. Until then, skepticism is totally understandable, if not warranted.

I will say though, Shaq has looked like a freaking stud at RB. The other RBs on our team don't even come close to his ability to make defenses look bad. He turns every single defensive mistake into an explosive play. Kind of reminds me of what Oregon did at RB during the Chip Kelly years, though of course those RBs did jack squat in the NFL.
 

hawkfan68

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
1,701
Location
Sammamish, WA
kearly":224b3heg said:
hawkfan68":224b3heg said:
Great write-up Kearly. I don't see what improvement you are seeing with Miles. He's the definite weak link on the offense. As a matter of fact it's befuddling that a college QB like Sark has no eye to find and recruit a decent QB. He left the UW cupboard bare as far as QB goes. Jeff Lindquist is another guy that is full of suck. I don't know why the Huskies even bother running plays with him...it's really no surprise what they do since he can't throw. Now it gets about as much yards as the Seahawks did with Percy Harvin plays. I believe the only reason Miles is still a Husky is because of the poor depth at the position. If they had a capable QB, he would have been gone from the school. Just like his pal, Stringfellow.

If you don't see improvement with Miles, than you must have had a much higher opinion of him than I did a month ago. I thought he was in the discussion for the worst UW quarterback of all time. Now I think he looks like Seneca Wallace, basically an average-ish QB who can do enough to win if the offense compensates for his limitations.

Yeah...you're right my opinion was based on his game last year against Ore St. So it was skewed toward the higher end. I doubt it will go there again based on his play thus far this year.
 

hawkfan68

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
1,701
Location
Sammamish, WA
kearly":6gipvskg said:
Tical21":6gipvskg said:
I don't think Shaq projects as a RB. He just stands straight up. He does this on defense too, but you can get by with it most of the time. I think he projects as a 4-3 OLB.

I think he's a Lavonte David type, so we agree there.

I understand the skepticism at RB. He doesn't run like a normal RB would, his success over the past month is almost identical to the success Denard Robinson has had in Jacksonville. When someone finds success doing things in a new way, he must withstand the test of time. Until then, skepticism is totally understandable, if not warranted.

I will say though, Shaq has looked like a freaking stud at RB. The other RBs on our team don't even come close to his ability to make defenses look bad. He turns every single defensive mistake into an explosive play. Kind of reminds me of what Oregon did at RB during the Chip Kelly years, though of course those RBs did jack squat in the NFL.

Same with QBs that played for Chip Kelly and Mike Bellotti, none of them did much in the NFL.
 
Top