Saturday, November 05, 2005


The Washington Huskies could be an instructional video on what a terrible football team looks like. This is simply a bad football team in every way. Their would be so much to choose from.

The offensive line had their worst game of the year Saturday against Oregon State. The brutal tackling on Bernard’s 3rd and 17 run was the epitome of terrible. Punter Sean Douglas, dropping the punt snap and giving up points. Craig Chambers dropping a would be 74 yard touchdown pass. The Huskies just make every bad play imaginable in a football game.

We saw Johnny DuRocher for the first time in competitive action. He was not good. His final numbers were 11 for 31. The disturbing thing was how slow he looked in the pocket and how slow he seemed to be reading plays. His arm looked solid, but the conditions were so poor that it was really very hard to evaluate.

What the coaching staff decides from here will be interesting. I can’t imagine that it is fair to put DuRocher back on the bench considering the weather circumstances made it impossible to evaluate his performance. In addition, if the hook of Stanback was solely for his play this week, then it was unfair. However, it was for his conglomerate lack of development then that should hold into next week as well.
Bottom line, none of it matters, because this is a terrible football team.


Dawgfan1980 said...

I can't see how you would think DuRocher is good for this team in anyway right now. He isn't fast enough to elude the rush that this offensive line will give up in the next two contests, his decision making is poor. As for the Chambers ball, he should have caught it, but I think that was part of the football gods for the great pick thrown to spring him free.

If you don't want to play IS, which is understandable as his record dictates, why not play Bonnell, just to see what he has? I don't know if his injury has cleared up or not. The problems with this team do not lie at the feet of the QB, our offensive line is offensive.

Has anyone else seen a guy get 17 tackles and look worse doing it? I like Benjiman as a person, and as a student, he is great. As a football player, he is a liability to the largest degree. His "tackle" on the 3rd and 17 run is not the first nor the tenth play he has missed that has sprung a player. The piggyback ride Hass gave him for an extra six yards was great as well, and maybe his only solo tackle of the night. Like I said, I love Benjiman as a human and a student, but he seems like he has never played football before in his life.

Matt Fountaine needs to find a new position, as he is going to be beaten out by all of the JC's who commit and make it into school, hell Moss beat him out and had a trial by fire that he didn't fair that badly in playing against Jarrett and Hagan. I like Fountaine as a person, but he isn't good as a CB.

In closing, starting Stanback makes more sense if you want to win, because he has the arm to make throws that DuRocher can't (that corner route to Shackleford in the first quarter) and can elude the rush. Granted he makes poor decisions now and then, but DuRocher hasn't shown the greatest decision making abilities in his games. We need a win in one of these last two wins, but I fear we won't find one out there for us without a UCLA type performance. Too many injuries and too much undisciplined football (you can't take a false start on 2nd and Goal from the 4, bad teams make that play) leads to this road. It will take a few years to remove the chaff and start all over...

Myk said...


- How on earth can you say that starting Stanback is the right thing to do, he does not bring anything to the table? How many more games does he need to play to prove this to you? I keep hearing how "athletic" he is and yet he makes NO plays using his athletic ability. Is DuRocher the answer? I don't know but I would at least like to know, there is absolutely no point in starting Isaiah he is just not a division one qb. How can you say that Johnny D hasn't shown good decision making when he has never been given a chance to succeed? Basically Isaih has been given EVERY chance to succeed and he just can't do it.

Loved his throw after crossing the LOS a good 2 yards at the beginning of the game.

Dawgfan1980 said...

I say that because I watched Johnny D make poor throws yesterday time and time again. DuRocher had a lower completion percentage, less yards per attempt, and lead the team to a TD when the Beavers packed it in.

You did see the throw that IS made in the corner, right? You did see that after his admittedly boneheaded play (If you were sitting within three sections of the student section, the wacko who was throwing his hat on the slanted wood at the back of section 25 was the Dawgfan, and after that play I did call him every name in the book, admittedly), he completes a pass into the wind to Chambers to erase that mistake.

I watched our O-Line give up three sacks in the second half, and they were responsible for a grounding call. Why do I say play IS? How many games have you seen IS see the rush coming up the middle and escape out of it by busting containment. My only knock on IS after he makes the great play to bust containment is that he starts trying to be what we all wanted him to be at the start of the year, a throwing QB. He needs to tuck it and run for the sure five. Johnny D can not escape the rush, and with our vaunted O-Line, we need someone to escape the rush.

Has DuRocher had a fair shake? In my opinion, yes, because every week after Idaho, it has been an open competition. If Johnny D did something to impress you against OSU, please tell me, because maybe I missed it, but he looked no better than IS, and IS has the capability and athletic ability to, with this current group (especially on the O-Line) to get a win. DuRocher will be blitzed, and we can't pick up blitzes up the middle, unfortunatly.

And, how many games does he need? How many games would you like to lay at his feet this year? He kept us in UCLA, Air Force, ASU was his worst game, and we are a Sims fumble away from stealing that game. The problem with this team isn't at QB, it is the lack of production from seniors up and down the field and the lack of play on the lines. IF we had an offensive line, then maybe DuRocher can be entertained, but it is hard to make accurate (which didn't look so accurate in the weather, but we'll blame the weather, the same weather IS played in) when you are staring at sky on your back.

It is moot though, because if IS starts, he is on a short leash, if Johnny D starts, he is on a short leash. I would rather play with one and let the other sit, unless they are throwing picks like they are color blind.

Myk said...


- So Johnny D gets less than half the snaps in practice all week, comes into a game with the team already down, and it is pouring down rain and you want to say that is a fair shake for him? What I am saying is that he hasn't had the chance to be the starter, take most of the snaps during practice and be copmletely prepared for the opponent

- How has this been an open competition? Just like my references above if Johnny D gets only 10% of the snaps that is not an open competition.

- What is the point of touting a players athletic ability as one of the reasons to play him when in the next sentence you admit that he doesn't use that ability except for maybe avoiding the rush once out of 10 plays and then throwing a dumb pass? It doesn't matter how athletic you are if you just are not a good quarterback AND if you refuse to use that ability to gain positive yards.

- How can you say that Johnny D looked no better than Isaiah and yet still think that no matter what Isiaih should start? All Isaiah has shown to me is that he can lead his team to a 1-9 season as a starter...if Casey Paus was 1-9 people would be screaming for a change, why isn't Stanback held to the same standards?

- Finally, your last point about keeping us in the Air Force, UCLA games is EXACTLY my point why he just doesn't seem to be the answer. As the season goes on he is actually regressing. Making more and more boneheaded plays. His three worst games have been his three last games...isn't that a bad sign. If you think he can lead us to victory shouldn't his performance be improving. I understand that he may not be able to singlehandedly lead the team to victory but his specific performance looks considerably worse as the season goes on...that is not a good sign.

Isaiah looks like he could be a great QB because he can run fast and throw a decent deep pass. However, since he can't scramble for yards to save his life (how can he be 5xs more athletic than Tui, and yet be -5xs the threat in the running game???) once his team gets into the red zone they are screwed because you can't throw a 30 yard bomb when you are at the 10.

Is DuRocher better? I have no idea, and I am really not sure how you can say that the second half of a rainy day when the team is already behind would prove to you otherwise. All I know is that with Stanback we are 1-7 and getting expodentitally worse, so what is the point in not at least trying a new QB?

Diezel said...


when are u going to start puttin some blame on Ty???? the guy has made NO improvements from last year, the players are always saying that its a whole new attitude when are we gonna see some results, look at Mike Shula this year??? look at how improved Penn state is?? look at Spurrier in South Carolina already bowl eligable.

Cmmon the same arguement with Isiah is the same with Ty, why is there not any more heat on this guy, what has this guy ever done besides start 8-0 at ND to deserve this untouhable status???

And you want to bench Isiah, look at Brady Quinn under Ty and look at him under Charlie Weiss....ENOUGH SAID!!!!!1

Myk said...


- I agree that Ty should be held accountable. But you don't just change coaches in the middle of the season like you do a QB...I am not sure what these two items have in common??

- Also, I think that your comparisons are pretty poor considering:

---Penn St. doesn't have a new coach

---South Carolina was a better team than UW and it is not like they have significantly improved.

---Shula has coached Alabama for what three years? They also were better than UW at the beginning and he didn't drastically turn him around.

- So the only reason that Quinn got better was that he has a new Coach. That seems like an odd assumption and one that would be very hard to prove. One could also say that Ty got fired the year before all the pains he had with a young team were about to pay off. Also, I am sick about hearing how great ND is, who have they played and beat? Not one very good team..

Finally, one thing I dont think people understand is that I do not think that Isaiah is a horrible QB, he would be a GOOD QB if he was a freshman or a sophomore. Unfortunately, he is a Junior and there is just no way he is going to be able to make the improvements necessary in his game to be a good enough QB to lead us to victory BEFORE his eligibility expires. He readily admits that he didn't even really know how to play QB until this year so really it is his fault for sitting on his ass not trying to get better all these years

Biggie said...

Hey MYK, don't worry abgout it dude, Durocher broke his wrist in that game so it's Izzi all day baby. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

Myk said...


- Hmmm that is pretty funny. Of course if I said the same thing about Isaiah you would say I am racist.

Oh well, its not like I thought Johhny D would lead us to two big victories. Just means the Locker Era countdown continues and we will have another dismal season next year with our "athetic" QB who doesn't run worth crap

Biggie said...

I would say you were racist because Stanback broke his wrist?? Or because you thought it was funny??? I don't think that it's funny that a kid broke his wrist in a game, I think it's funny that you guys don't have anything to bitch about anymore. BTW, Ty is a gangsta, and what's a gangsta's motto??? Ride or die!!! and that is exactly what he is doing with Izzi, and he'll do it next year too. It's funny because you have no say in the matter whatsoever and it just kills you. LOL!!!!

Myk said...

Yeah I suppose you are right if Stanback starts next season Ty will definately be that much closer to dying...

I have no idea what you are talking about regarding the fact I have no say in the decision and it kills you think I ever thought I had a say in the matter??

I am just dissapointed that one of the great joys of my life so far (UW Football) has turned into a completely depressing matter who the QB is. It seriously gets harder and harder to watch each week, pretty soon it is going to turn into a train wreck.

Biggie said...


Would you like cheese with that????

RUSSIAN B said...


You whine like little girl!!!!

Diezel said...

myk...cmmon dude, first Mike Shula is in his second year remember Mike Price??? and he hasnt made that drastic of a turnaround??? they havent scored a offensive TD in like 16 quarters and are #3 in the BCS so U got to be smoking crack on that one!!!

Steve Spurrier when he took ove SC it was in shambles u remember the postgame fight from last year?? or the fact that a bunch of guys got busted stealing computers from school. They are already bowl eligable and have 3 games left including this week vs. Florida, he wins this game hes a king in SC.

I'm not saying fire Ty midseason but in my opinion if he doesn't get it going next year we have to seriously think about a move. I mean what are TY's Qualifications??? what has he ever done that makes him a great coach??? tell me, and i might change my opinion.

I never said anything about ND the team, but if u look at Quinn from last year to this year its not even a arguement. Charlie Weiss has 3 rings as a O coordinator, what does Ty have.

They even interviewed Quinns mom during tht UT game and she said the reason that Brady is improved is because of the Coaching change. and whats your arguement on how Stanford has improved this year with Walt Harris???

Luckily I was able to buy for 200 dollars but its not that time yet...i highlight the word yet, even u have to agree if he goes 1-10 next year then theres a problem.

Mike Price took Utep to a bowl game last year in his first season, freaking UTEP cmmon man, this is flat out embarrising. The only BCS shcools not to win a game against a bcs school in the last two years are us, Duke and Syracuse, a awesome group to be in if this was hoops, but not football.

Biggie said...

Great points all, and I'm a Willingham supporter.

Biggie said...


Anonymous said...


Myk said...


- My point was all of those teams flat out had more talent than the Huskies. South Carolina was bowl elegible for gods sake last really think that UW was on their same level?

- I am not a Willinham supporter or detractor. I really don't know what to say about him. He did take a couple of teams to the Rose Bowl right? He did recruit every one of the players that Weiss is winning with in Notre Dame and supposedly Stanford has put the most players in the NFL the last two year over any school (including USC) in the Pac-10, which are again all of Ty's recruits.

- What is Brady Quinn's mom supposed to say...umm yeah I really like the old coach. I really hope you aren't putting too much stock into sideline reports during games.

- Washington might be able to go to a bowl if the were in the MWC, so again I don't think the UTEP comparison is a valid one.

- Washington's talent is really really really bad. I mean doesn;t it really say something that a coach like Tedford actually thought he would have a better chance to win at Cal than up here at Washington? The problem isn't only the Quarterback but most of the other position players...but you are really sticking your head in the stand if you think that our QB is any good. I would bet that Stanback would not start on any othe Pac-10 team, might not even be 2nd string on most of them...and this is the guy some people want to hook their horses too and be led to the promised land...just plain stupid

Biggie said...



Dawgfan1980 said...


I think we both can agree that even if we started Matt Lineart for this team, it wouldn't make much of a difference. Our lines are horrible, we can't stop anyone, and can't block to save ourselves. If we started IS, DuRocher, Bonnell, Paus or Sweetman even, it wouldn't matter. I just said that with our OL as bad as it is, IS gives us the best chance to keep plays alive. Sacks are drive killing plays, Incompletions aren't.

As for Willingham, (this isn't directed at Myk, but everyone who is a detractor) our talent is BAD. There is zero talent on this team, save maybe Chambers and Wallace, and that is marginal talent. Out of 22 starters, that is 2 that are marginal starters. In the Pac-10 we ranked in the preseason polls of scouts as 10th on Offense and 10th on Defense. What did you want Willingham to do? I think moves he could have made (burning Hasty's redshirt year, etc.) were the right moves. The one true frosh that has played well (Chris Stevens) has been a pleasant suprise. What did you want Willingham to do though, honestly?

The future of the program hinges on the massive shoulders of one Steve Schilling. If he commits here (which I don't think he will) it signals that big recruits will still come here from the area, and next year he will play. You will see Hasty start at RB barring a major catastrophe. Also, remember UW is on their 4th running back right now. What did you really expect from this team anyway?

Oh and as for the comment that if Paus was 1-8 we would be clammoring for change? Well, yeah, because Paus showed ZERO ability to make any throw or any plays. I think he is on Punt coverage as a secretive way to get himself removed for the season. Paus was horrible. JK Scott horrible.