EVERY WEEK, I try to act smart in this space and convince folks I know what's going on with Washington.
This is what I have this week: I have no clue.
The Huskies looked like a pretty good football team while dominating the first half Saturday against UCLA. The offense was efficient, if not overwhelming. The defense held the Bruins to 147 yards and a single touchdown. Washington controlled both lines of scrimmage.
Then the Huskies looked unredeemably rotten while giving up 39 unanswered points in the second half of an embarrassing 46-16 defeat to a team that had averaged 16 points in its previous four games.
It was really ugly. It was Miami, 65-7, ugly.
"They outcoached us and outplayed us in the second half, simple as that," defensive coordinator Phil Snow said. "They beat us in every way you could. The whole team got beat."
That about sums it up.
How about you? Any explanations?
What would you have thought of the Huskies' chances this year if some psychic had told you in August that the UW would: 1) rank second in the Pac-10 in total defense; 2) tailback Rich Alexis would average 84 yards rushing per game and 4.4 yards per carry; 3) and the punter and kicker would be solid?
Those sound like positive answers to the three primary issues the Huskies faced before the season began. What it has turned out to be thus far is a 3-2 record, a 1-1 Pac-10 mark and a nosedive out of the national rankings.
Four schools of thought figure to develop this week:
The Huskies just stink. They couldn't physically match up with Ohio State, a team that has been unimpressive since burying Washington. The three victories were recorded against inferior opponents that will be lucky to win more than three games. UCLA is a mediocre Pac-10 team, so the Huskies will be lucky to record a winning record.
The second half was an anomaly. Sometimes disaster strikes and the momentum change is inexorable. Washington might not be a top-10 team -- OK, definitely isn't a top-10 team -- but it still is a threat to win the conference title and reach the Rose Bowl.
The Huskies are talented but not mentally tough. They looked adversity in the eye and wilted like a daisy facing a lava flow.
Why does there have to be a judgment now? It's way too early. The Huskies have the same conference record as No. 9 USC, which lost at California, the team with the fewest returning starters in the nation.
I've subscribed to each over the past 24 hours, most lately clinging to the cop-out behind door No. 4.
And now here comes Nevada. The rich history of this series extends to a single game -- a 2-0 Washington victory in 1903. Husky Stadium figures to reach a new level of somnolence on Saturday.
The Wolf Pack, 3-2 under Chris Tormey, won close games over Southern Utah and SMU and beat San Jose State by 12. They lost to Oregon and UNLV by eight and three points, respectively.
Obviously, if the Huskies are upset in front of the already nervous home folks, things could take a nasty turn. That doesn't figure to happen, though. The real question is, do they bounce back with verve or do they just muddle by?
A more valid verdict will be available on Oct. 18, when the UW visits Oregon State, now ranked 24th in the country after an impressive 35-21 victory at California.
Six teams have won the Pac-10 title with two conference losses, but it doesn't happen often. That game against the Beavers figures to be when we know if the Huskies are still in the race for the roses or merely crossing their fingers and shooting for a return trip to El Paso. Or perhaps staying home for the holidays, for that matter.
In the meantime, here's some advice for the Huskies: Throw the ball to Reggie Williams. When that becomes predictable, do it some more.
That's not saying it's time to abandon the improving running game. That's not saying don't throw to Charles Frederick, the tight ends or mix in a couple of screens. That's saying if seven or eight plays go by and a ball hasn't headed Williams' way, it's time to make a withdrawal from Mr. Money.
Quarterback Cody Pickett completed 21 of 29 passes in the first half against UCLA, and Williams caught eight of them for 80 yards. Pickett was 5 of 13 for 63 yards in the second half, and just two of those passes went Williams' way.
In the red zone? Throw it to Williams. The Huskies' only touchdown came on a 9-yard pass that amounted to Pickett rolling out and waiting until Williams made room for himself.
It's not like the red-zone offense is working anyway. The Huskies rank eighth in the conference with just 10 touchdowns (and three turnovers) on 21 trips inside their opponents' 20-yard line.
Pickett, the only conference quarterback completing more than 60 percent of his passes, is a great quarterback when he and Williams hook up regularly. And not just because Williams makes him look good. Pickett's confidence and comfort level depend on consistently making plays, and connecting with Williams puts a skip in his stride and helps him execute when he decides to look elsewhere.
The lack of balls Williams saw in the second half was a significant issue after the game, though Williams and the coaches were reluctant to blame Pickett directly.
"There were some routes there that I thought were wide open that I thought should have gone there, but I'm not playing quarterback," coach Keith Gilbertson said.
UCLA's players said they altered their defensive scheme to confuse Pickett. At the line of scrimmage, Pickett tries to read what the safeties are doing -- note how he points before every play -- and the Bruins decided they didn't want to show their cards (not, by the way, a revolutionary defensive tactic).
"(Pickett) was checking on the plays based on me and (free safety) Ben Emanuel a lot, so we made him wait," Bruins strong safety Jarrad Page told the Los Angeles Daily News. "When he had to wait he was kind of getting frustrated, getting confused."
The important point here is the coverage really doesn't matter that much against Williams. If he can touch the ball, he will make the catch.
This may sound like the biggest piece of gee-whiz analysis in the history of me trying to act smart. But the same principal applies in this space as with the UW.
If you're going to go down, at least go down fighting with your best weapon.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/cfootball/142718_miller06.html
This is what I have this week: I have no clue.
The Huskies looked like a pretty good football team while dominating the first half Saturday against UCLA. The offense was efficient, if not overwhelming. The defense held the Bruins to 147 yards and a single touchdown. Washington controlled both lines of scrimmage.
Then the Huskies looked unredeemably rotten while giving up 39 unanswered points in the second half of an embarrassing 46-16 defeat to a team that had averaged 16 points in its previous four games.
It was really ugly. It was Miami, 65-7, ugly.
"They outcoached us and outplayed us in the second half, simple as that," defensive coordinator Phil Snow said. "They beat us in every way you could. The whole team got beat."
That about sums it up.
How about you? Any explanations?
What would you have thought of the Huskies' chances this year if some psychic had told you in August that the UW would: 1) rank second in the Pac-10 in total defense; 2) tailback Rich Alexis would average 84 yards rushing per game and 4.4 yards per carry; 3) and the punter and kicker would be solid?
Those sound like positive answers to the three primary issues the Huskies faced before the season began. What it has turned out to be thus far is a 3-2 record, a 1-1 Pac-10 mark and a nosedive out of the national rankings.
Four schools of thought figure to develop this week:
The Huskies just stink. They couldn't physically match up with Ohio State, a team that has been unimpressive since burying Washington. The three victories were recorded against inferior opponents that will be lucky to win more than three games. UCLA is a mediocre Pac-10 team, so the Huskies will be lucky to record a winning record.
The second half was an anomaly. Sometimes disaster strikes and the momentum change is inexorable. Washington might not be a top-10 team -- OK, definitely isn't a top-10 team -- but it still is a threat to win the conference title and reach the Rose Bowl.
The Huskies are talented but not mentally tough. They looked adversity in the eye and wilted like a daisy facing a lava flow.
Why does there have to be a judgment now? It's way too early. The Huskies have the same conference record as No. 9 USC, which lost at California, the team with the fewest returning starters in the nation.
I've subscribed to each over the past 24 hours, most lately clinging to the cop-out behind door No. 4.
And now here comes Nevada. The rich history of this series extends to a single game -- a 2-0 Washington victory in 1903. Husky Stadium figures to reach a new level of somnolence on Saturday.
The Wolf Pack, 3-2 under Chris Tormey, won close games over Southern Utah and SMU and beat San Jose State by 12. They lost to Oregon and UNLV by eight and three points, respectively.
Obviously, if the Huskies are upset in front of the already nervous home folks, things could take a nasty turn. That doesn't figure to happen, though. The real question is, do they bounce back with verve or do they just muddle by?
A more valid verdict will be available on Oct. 18, when the UW visits Oregon State, now ranked 24th in the country after an impressive 35-21 victory at California.
Six teams have won the Pac-10 title with two conference losses, but it doesn't happen often. That game against the Beavers figures to be when we know if the Huskies are still in the race for the roses or merely crossing their fingers and shooting for a return trip to El Paso. Or perhaps staying home for the holidays, for that matter.
In the meantime, here's some advice for the Huskies: Throw the ball to Reggie Williams. When that becomes predictable, do it some more.
That's not saying it's time to abandon the improving running game. That's not saying don't throw to Charles Frederick, the tight ends or mix in a couple of screens. That's saying if seven or eight plays go by and a ball hasn't headed Williams' way, it's time to make a withdrawal from Mr. Money.
Quarterback Cody Pickett completed 21 of 29 passes in the first half against UCLA, and Williams caught eight of them for 80 yards. Pickett was 5 of 13 for 63 yards in the second half, and just two of those passes went Williams' way.
In the red zone? Throw it to Williams. The Huskies' only touchdown came on a 9-yard pass that amounted to Pickett rolling out and waiting until Williams made room for himself.
It's not like the red-zone offense is working anyway. The Huskies rank eighth in the conference with just 10 touchdowns (and three turnovers) on 21 trips inside their opponents' 20-yard line.
Pickett, the only conference quarterback completing more than 60 percent of his passes, is a great quarterback when he and Williams hook up regularly. And not just because Williams makes him look good. Pickett's confidence and comfort level depend on consistently making plays, and connecting with Williams puts a skip in his stride and helps him execute when he decides to look elsewhere.
The lack of balls Williams saw in the second half was a significant issue after the game, though Williams and the coaches were reluctant to blame Pickett directly.
"There were some routes there that I thought were wide open that I thought should have gone there, but I'm not playing quarterback," coach Keith Gilbertson said.
UCLA's players said they altered their defensive scheme to confuse Pickett. At the line of scrimmage, Pickett tries to read what the safeties are doing -- note how he points before every play -- and the Bruins decided they didn't want to show their cards (not, by the way, a revolutionary defensive tactic).
"(Pickett) was checking on the plays based on me and (free safety) Ben Emanuel a lot, so we made him wait," Bruins strong safety Jarrad Page told the Los Angeles Daily News. "When he had to wait he was kind of getting frustrated, getting confused."
The important point here is the coverage really doesn't matter that much against Williams. If he can touch the ball, he will make the catch.
This may sound like the biggest piece of gee-whiz analysis in the history of me trying to act smart. But the same principal applies in this space as with the UW.
If you're going to go down, at least go down fighting with your best weapon.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/cfootball/142718_miller06.html
