My Biggest Concern

3rd Down Completions = 5/16



This is an indication to me that the two QB concept is a short-term solution for a quandry. And by short-term, I mean it needs to end before we roll into Tallahassee. Third down completion percentage is an indication of sustaining momentum and consistency--two hallmarks of a Mendenhall/Anae offense. Last year we were over 55% on the season, cooling off from about 70% after the first few games.



We need to move the ball more consistently and score more than 23 points to beat TCU, FSU, and even Utah. Problem is, those teams have two significant advantages UW didn't have--(1) much MUCH better defenses, and (2) game film showing them how the 2 QB system will be implemented.



We need to pick a horse and ride it or learn how to sustain momentum whilst tag-teaming the QB spot. I think we have one more game to toy with this--if it doesn't work, we need to name a #1 and #2, otherwise we are going to get blowed up.

agreed. If we are going to play 2 qb's we need to have an "end game" scenario. We need to keep in mind why we are doing it and where we are heading. We also need to do things circumstantially if we are going to have 2 qb's play. 3rd and 4? I want Riley in there. 3 and 12? Riley needs to grab a drink real quick and get ready for a shorter yardage play... There was at least 3 or 4 times in the game last night when I was like, "Man, I wish the other guy was in right now..." I am surprised that we won with a 2 qb system against a decent opponent. We will not be so lucky in the future rotating like that.

IMO our 3rd down efficiency last year was mostly a function of good yardage on first down (usually picked up on Unga's back) which led to short distances on 3rd, which required D to cover the run (Unga usually converted) and the pass (often to Pitta). This is where we missed Unga and Pitta the most.

byutx wrote:
IMO our 3rd down efficiency last year was mostly a function of good yardage on first down (usually picked up on Unga's back) which led to short distances on 3rd, which required D to cover the run (Unga usually converted) and the pass (often to Pitta). This is where we missed Unga and Pitta the most.

yeah, you are absolutely right, but with all that said 30% conversion isn't going to get it done, not with the bend AND break defense we are flirting with. So we don't need to return to 09 numbers, but we do need to find some middle ground to keep the ball on the field.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
agreed. If we are going to play 2 qb's we need to have an "end game" scenario. We need to keep in mind why we are doing it and where we are heading. We also need to do things circumstantially if we are going to have 2 qb's play. 3rd and 4? I want Riley in there. 3 and 12? Riley needs to grab a drink real quick and get ready for a shorter yardage play... There was at least 3 or 4 times in the game last night when I was like, "Man, I wish the other guy was in right now..." I am surprised that we won with a 2 qb system against a decent opponent. We will not be so lucky in the future rotating like that.

I think the only time I did that was after BYU was called for the chop block and it was 1st and 25, but I was impressed how Nelson almost picked up the first down if Ashworth would have caught that 3rd down pass.



I too was very surprised at the lack of 3rd down accuracy, but I started to think about it a little more and I think it is something that can be fixed. The biggest thing I remember from the game was the recievers cutting their routes short of the markers and if that wasn't the case we could have had at least 2 more conversions, still not the numbers we saw last year but certainly needs to be improved. Ashworth ran his routes short once with both QB's when BYU was in Washington territory, on one BYU punted and on the other kicked a field goal. Very well with both of those BYU could have put more points on the board.



Here is how the 3rd downs shaped up



.........3rd downs....pass....run....5yds or less....more than 5yrds

Nelson....2-7..........1-4.....1-3.......1-4..............1-3

Heaps....3-9...........1-7.....2-2.......3-6..............0-3

snoscythe wrote:
3rd Down Completions = 5/16



This is an indication to me that the two QB concept is a short-term solution for a quandry. And by short-term, I mean it needs to end before we roll into Tallahassee. Third down completion percentage is an indication of sustaining momentum and consistency--two hallmarks of a Mendenhall/Anae offense. Last year we were over 55% on the season, cooling off from about 70% after the first few games.



We need to move the ball more consistently and score more than 23 points to beat TCU, FSU, and even Utah. Problem is, those teams have two significant advantages UW didn't have--(1) much MUCH better defenses, and (2) game film showing them how the 2 QB system will be implemented.



We need to pick a horse and ride it or learn how to sustain momentum whilst tag-teaming the QB spot. I think we have one more game to toy with this--if it doesn't work, we need to name a #1 and #2, otherwise we are going to get blowed up.

Amen!!!!



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

It was the first game of the season. Our inexperienced and young team managed to come out in the first game of the season and do what few EXPERIENCED teams are able to do in their opening game: Protect the ball and not commit any turnovers.



The first time we met FSU: their defense sucked, and our defense sucked. The difference was that our offense turned the ball over and theirs did not. The difference on defense was that their D managed to at least make a few stops, ours did not.



The key to the FSU game will be the same as the key was to the UW game: The defense making enough stops to win the game. Our offense is not going to put up big points against FSU, no matter who the QB is. Our defense needs to stop Ponder enough times to allow our offense to score a fair amount of points.



We will not get "blowed" up if that happens.