Zipness in Seattle
Richard Linde, 15 October 2007

In their last five games, the Huskies haven’t scored a point in the third quarter, being outscored by their opponents 56-0. In their last four games, the Huskies have been outscored 105-41 in the second half. In two of those games, the Huskies enjoyed half-time leads, leading Ohio State 7-3 and ASU 17-13. They were tied 10-all with UCLA at half before losing 44-31.

Coach Tyrone Willingham recently told Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times: “...I don't have an explanation for our third quarter, why we are right there, and why we do some things, or a series of things, that let it get away."

The most obvious answer to the perplexing question is a lack of quality depth on the team. In other words, the Huskies may be running out of gas – when compared with their opponents -- in the second half, particularly in the third quarter when the game is on the line. For example, the players the Huskies are substituting on the OL may not be as good as the other guy's front seven subs. Or, in some cases, the coaches aren't substituting at all on the OL when they should be.

Outside of the trenches, the whole offense seems to rest on the collective running abilities of RB Louis Rankin and QB Jake Locker, with more errant passes tossed than completed. In the third quarter, UW needs better blocking and a different look on offense -- for starters, say, someone to pound the middle and another to stretch the field. Some say the offense has become too predictable by the third quarter and, as a consequence, has been replete with three and outs. Is a little more west-coast offense and a little less spread option -- or vice versa -- the answer to predictability? Or should UW run more power running stuff, like more two-back and two-tight-end sets to vary the look?

Zone blocking going one way and a cut-back run going the other is like Dobie's bunk play, one of profound misdirection. Did anyone else see Joe McKnight's cut-back run last week?

A lack of predictability buttressed by more versatility doesn't appear in the offing because of the lack-of-talent issue. There is no one to pound the middle, no one to complete 65% of his passes, no one to stretch the field and no one to throw a pancake block, none of them left over for the start of the third quarter -- as if, er hum, they were regular first-half occurrences.

Mike Bellotti, the head coach at Oregon, may have the answer. He says it's too complicated to mix other offensive strategies with the spread-option. I'll buy into that  being an advocate of simplicity, not that I know a whit about coaching. Simplicity on offense is a contradiction to our versatility theory. If complication is an issue, I would be surprised that conservative coach Tyrone Willingham would let that enervate his offense. This guy is KISS all the way. But then again, maybe Locker's pass efficiency would improve if the offense stayed with one scheme and worked harder to make it better.

One local writer suggests that backup QB Carl Bonnell and Locker share the same backfield at times. Ugh, another complication added to Bellotti's simplicity theory. Also, Bonnell provides the team with a quality backup quarterback. His proneness to injury must be considered. Playing the two quarterbacks together fits the versatility theory but runs smack in the face of our simplicity theory -- which I've bought into.

Maybe a two-back, power running game would help solve UW's non-Locker rushing dilemma?  Nope. The whole notion of the spread option is to offset weaknesses on the offensive line. Notice how well "simplicity" holds up under counterargument. It also fits nicely under Ockam's razor. ("Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem"). I wish I'd taken second-year Latin and beyond and had been a football coach. Boy would I have had some platitudes to spring on the press.

It's a shame we can't substitute for the coaches, some are saying, with a better game plan in mind, for it is simpler to blame the coaches than to look at some alarming statistics.

In that regard, some bleak looking statistics point to what could be a disappointing remaining schedule. The Huskies rank last in the conference in Pass Offense, Total Offense, Pass Efficiency Offense and Time of Possession.

The Huskies won't go to a bowl unless those four stats change big time. And, alas, we haven't even mentioned the defensive stats yet. That comes with the next article in this series.

Poor recruiting

It was our contention before the season began that most of those holes left by graduation last season were not  adequately filled and that rather than Washington's football fortunes being on the upswing, as the media were claiming, we believed their prophesy was so much drivel.    

Going into this season, Washington had lost 26 seniors, mostly out of its 2002 and 2003 classes, classes that scout.com ranked 23rd and 18th in the nation, respectively. In, particular, the 2003 class was a winner, with 11 remaining fifth-year seniors filling significant roles on this year’s team. [*] Give the much maligned Rick Neuheisel some credit here.

Washington's last four recruiting classes (2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007) were ranked 22nd, 55th, 35th, and 29th, respectively by scout.com. Two four-star recruits out of the 2004 class never played a down -- Matt Tuiasosopo and Keauntea Bankhead – their loss certainly worsening its relatively high ranking if it were to be computed again. And the same is true for the 2007 class, where WRs Anthony Boyles and Devin Aguilar were lost to non-qualifying SAT scores and had to retake the test to get into school. Currently, they are not on the roster. Rivals.com ranks the same classes: 19th, 66th, 35th, and 36th, respectively.

Not getting RB James Montgomery to sign with Washington as part of the 2006 class has contributed to the lack of quality at the running back spot. Montgomery orally committed to Washington but then signed with Cal. Four-star recruit J. R. Hasty, out of the 2005 class, has yet to fulfill his promise as a gifted running back.

These facts champion the notion that UW certainly had talent last season (from its 2002 and 2003 classes) ... but not enough of it, being shortchanged from Keith Gilbertson's 2004 class and Willingham's 2005/2006 classes. Washington finished 5-9 last season and 3-6 in the Pac-10 and, deceptively, its fortunes appeared to be on the upswing.

More help from this year’s freshmen class

Living with the 85-scholarship limitation, most coaches expect some immediate help from members of their incoming recruiting class. For example, USC played 13 freshmen last season. Seven of Washington’s freshmen have played this fall, and when they have, their contributions have been somewhat negligible and, at times, disappointing. Willingham recruited five running backs in 2007 and, as of yet, none of them have significantly spelled Louis Rankin, either on kickoff returns or at running back.

Thus far seven freshmen have played: Cornerback Vonzell McDowell (3-game starter), S Nate Williams, S Victory Aiewa, LB Mason Foster, LB/FB Austin Sylvester and TBs Curtis Shaw and Brandon Johnson.

Depth on the offensive line is certainly an issue; it was noted during last spring's scrimmages. It's not like Willingham brought in a Winston Justice as part of the 2007 freshmen class. [**]

Udub needs more playmakers

Locker, Marcel Reece, Anthony Russo, Quintin Daniels and Louis Rankin are the playmakers on offense. Another playmaker at running back, one at tight end and, especially, one or two on the offensive line would be ideal. The Huskies lack the threat of a power running back and need a chef on the offensive line who can turn a hunk of lard into the recipient of a pancake block.

Before the season began, hope sprang eternal for some help at the tight end position, long a Washington mainstay. Much heralded Johnie Kirton, out of Gilbertson's 2004 class, hasn't made much noise this season.

Locker needs to complete some passes

Although he has tons of potential, Locker, a redshirt freshman, is still on a learning curve. With the ASU game behind him, his passing efficiency rating has dropped to 99.8, ranking him last in the conference still. Inaccuracy and wildness with his throwing (49.1% completion average) is the main cause of his poor rating.

Locker comes out of Ferndale high school, which is not exactly a five-star nebula. We’d feel better about his growth potential if he’d come out of Long Beach Poly High, either that or had he thrown more passes in high school so we could get a better handle on him.

Prognosis

Washington has 14 commits for its 2008 class, in a class that scout.com ranks 29th in the nation as of now. The hope is that Locker's potential will attract some big-time recruits to fill out the class.

Losing its 11 fifth-year seniors (Garcia may play a sixth year) means that Washington will have even more shortages on its depth chart, in terms of quality, than it has this year.

Next time around we'll look at the defense.

----------------