HISTORY! UTES GET FIRST PAC-12 WIN!
by JazzyUte on Oct 29, 2011 8:44 PM MDT
in Football
Email
PrintSure, the second half was an exercise in futility, but I'll damn well take OWOOOOOO!!!!!
THE WOLFMAN!!!
54 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I felt like we would win this one...
I like the progress made by the Offense, but it’s obvious that we’re nowhere near Pac-12 ready, as evidenced by the 2nd half…although I can console myself with the idea that we went ultra-conservative just to protect the lead.
Defensively we did a good job, but Arizona is looking like an offensive juggernaut with the firing of Stoops. I don’t think we get the win there…we just can’t match them.
UCLA beating up Cal has put that game in question now…in my mind anyway.
My expectations are 6-6 at the moment…wins over Washington St. & Colorado. We’re not out of the woods yet kids…
One game, especially directly following the firing
does not an offensive juggernaut make of AZ.
They're playing a pretty strong game against tonight...
…but not nearly as high scoring as I would expect vs. Washington’s D.
I still not convinced if we have a repeat of tonight’s performance that it will be enough to beat Arizona. I’ll have a better formulated opinion after their game tonight…but it’s clear that they’re a better team than the one Stoops was coaching.
I wouldn't say that
Just look at the quality of opponents Arizona faced pre-firing. Then look at the quality after.
True...except Oregon St.
Looks like they’re turning it on now. If we win that game, I’ll be impressed…
I think you're relying a bit on that elusive transitive property
Utah took USC down to the last play of the game, which USC did to Stanford tonight. UCLA, who barely beat OSU, just worked over Cal that worked over Utah. Throw in the OSU – UA game and things get convoluted trying to compare teams.
The big problem next week is Foles . . . shudder.
If anyone found my snowboarding gloves after storming the field following the 2004 TDS game, I want them back!
Hope your D
loves bubble screens. As for my Dawgs, we don’t have to see that guy ever again. Yay!
Foles scares the shit out of me right now.
Hopefully Mo Lee keeps playing lights out!
by khaostheory117 on Oct 30, 2011 7:33 AM MDT up reply actions
My Dawgs softened him up for you.
He took some shots towards the tail-end of that game. His ribs ought to be tender.
A win over Washington State?
I don’t know about that…don’t look now but they put up 28 points on Oregon’s Defense… not a good sign for us.
...but they also lost to Oregon St.
Not that any win is a guarantee, but if I were to rate them right now from the games that appear most to least difficult…
Arizona
UCLA
Washington St.
Colorado
Not that I think any of these games are guaranteed wins, but I think those are the likeliest of the 2. UCLA & Arizona feel like losses to me right now…but not so much that I think we couldn’t win either. Obviously if we keep the turnovers under control we’re capable of winning all of these games.
Funny how you list them in chronological order.
In this conference, the opponents mysteriously seem to improve as the game approaches. The closer you examine the resume, the tougher and more motivated they look. Colorado might be a given, but IMO you can put a blanket over the other three.
With each team, it's a question of bowl eligibility...
Arizona can’t lose a game.
UCLA is playing for Neuheisel’s job…and possibly the Pac-12 South division champion…that’s a strange but true twist. If they lose to ASU, they really need the win vs. Utah, because I don’t see them beating USC.
Washington St. really depends on if they win @ Cal this weekend. If they do, I’m guessing they lose vs. ASU…and again, winning vs. Utah becomes a question of bowl eligibility…and it may also be on the line for Utah…making that game a real dogfight.
…but if they lose to Cal, I think the dynamic of the game changes favoring Utah.
…and Colorado…again, bowl eligibility is likely on the line for Utah, possibly which bowl as well. I know as a Utah fan, I’d love to see us get to the Vegas Bowl…prove our (and our conference’s) superiority to the MWC.
I certainly understand the dynamic of one game at a time…but it really seems to be double for Utah at the moment.
Congratulations.
Very nicely conceived defensive package. The Ute defense was well prepared, and completely overwhelmed Oregon St.’s rs-fr qb.
(It’s nice to see a team that actually has a defensive package conceived.)
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
by AndyPanda on Oct 29, 2011 10:18 PM MDT reply actions 2 recs
between 2008 and the first Pac win in Utah history....do I smell an emerging rivlarly?
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
If the talking heads are anything to go by
Apparently every team in a conference is a “rival” of every other team. I’ve never understood that. I’ve always figured it’s one big rival and two or three “other” rivals.
My prognostication is that Utah-USC will be a bigger rivalry than Utah-CU
If anyone found my snowboarding gloves after storming the field following the 2004 TDS game, I want them back!
Every team wants to beat USC
I am not sure that is where the rivalry will come from unless we consistently beat them. I am thinking we are going to have a good rivalry with ASU.
Let me clarify
I meant in a few years, most Utah fans will care more about the USC game than the CU one.
But yes, I think between BB and football, a nice animosity will form with the AZ schools.
If anyone found my snowboarding gloves after storming the field following the 2004 TDS game, I want them back!
Lets hope its the first of many!
This team would be so good if we had a good QB. Really miss Wynn. Not hating on Jon Hays, but he isn’t cutting it. Maybe with more experience he would be better.
Anyways, its a great day to be a Ute!
Bull shit.
Hays had a great first half while Chow was letting him throw in situations other than 3rd and very long. If DVC was 100%, the very first pass would have been a TD. Hays’ block on White’s first TD would have been a season ending injury for Wynn. Hays played very well within the limits that were placed on him. No reason for criticism this week.
Agree
That block from Hays was awesome! Ya White carried the team, but who cares? Whitt and Chow knew what we had to do to win the game and we executed…no need to put unnecessary pressure on Hays. Hays gets more and more comfortable with every game and Chow will keep using him more and more. He made a lot of great decision today…throwing it away when necessary, running for first downs, throwing mad blocks, etc… I think the kid is doing pretty good.
I still think our DB’s need to work a little harder to get their heads around…there were a few bombs from OSU that should have been caught and our DBs didnt even know they were coming. Still frustrating.
Not BS.
I knew the minute I said something about Hays someone would have an issue. First off I didn’t anything bad about Hays. All i said is he isn’t cutting it right now. Hays played very well? If you want me to criticize him I will. 6-14, 62 yds, 42% completion is not good any way you look at it. You gave the pass to DVC as an example of him doing better, but the matter of the fact is that he overthrew a wide open DVC. It doesn’t matter if DVC is 100% or not the QB has to put it where the receiver can get to it. Was I demanding Hays to be benched? Not at all. Do I think and wish Hays can be better? Absolutely. All I was saying is that this team would be so good if we had Wynn still.
Your points are valid until the last line.
The part of your statement that is utter BS is the recent trend mythologizing how much better we were with Wynn. Wynn was also “not cutting it”. The offense was miserable under Wynn, especially in the red zone. Your response will be that he was improving in the first half of the UW game, but he threw a red zone int in that half. Our red zone offense was better yesterday than in had been all season. Two plays, the pass to DVC and the White’s first TD run, both were made possible by Hays. Both were plays that Wynn could not make. There are some valid criticisms of Hays’ inability to convert 3rd and long, but I argue it’s hard to make those throws cold as Hays wasn’t throwing any other passes in the 2nd half. I have less a problem with criticizing Hays than with the false characterization of Wynn’s vast superiority.
Hays
Was 6/14 with 62 yards. Two out of those six completions were touchdowns (and good looking throws, at that), but we have to face the reality that even when Hays has a ‘good game’, it’s not good.
by Joseph Silverzweig on Oct 30, 2011 9:00 PM MDT up reply actions
Hays good game is not good
I’ll agree with that. A mediocre passing game seems to be enough to keep the opposing D honest and give JWIV a chance to run. I wouldn’t characterize any of Wynn’s performances this year as good either though. I’m hoping Wynn’s shoulder improves by next year, but I’m not planning on it. I’m just advocating letting Hays take some chances with the offense opened a little more in our remaining games. I think Hays will faceplant in one game and make mistakes in the rest, but I just don’t see us winning any games with JWIV running into a completely stacked box.
Gotta disagree
Jon Hays ‘good’ game isn’t mediocre, it’s pretty abysmal. Sub 50% completions, sub 100 yards.
I think it is easy to read too much into getting beat by Cal, who had the personnel to dominate us on the LOS, if they threw in a few extra guys. I don’t think CU, AZ, or WSU have the players they need to stop us, even with 8 up front. 4 yards and a cloud of dust works.
As for letting Hays take some chances, he just isn’t accurate enough passing vertically to justify the risk. Those overthrows and underthrows are recipes for lots and lots of interceptions. If we want to stretch the field, we are going to have to do it horizontally and from the backfield, throwing screen passes and using bootlegs and reverses to keep the eighth man off of the line. Hays doesn’t have the accuracy for downfield passes, and he doesn’t have the mechanics or the cool required to execute slants and in routes.
by Joseph Silverzweig on Nov 1, 2011 10:01 AM MDT up reply actions
was that a pac-12 team we were facing..
or we were back in the mwc?..just kiddin, i’ll take the win. but damn we need our offense needs to get better
People really need to stop hoping for our offense to get better.
What we saw tonight is the best we can hope for.
A ton of running, A few open shots downfield, and a QB who doesn’t crap his pants.
That’s it. That’s all we are getting.
And honestly with our defense that should be enough to get us a couple more wins.
We had a balanced run/pass attack until 17-0.
We were moving the ball well when mixing in passes on first and second down. It was clear that Chos shut down the pass game for the second half.
It was a WAC team
As in the Beavers’ whole season has been WAC.
ahahahaha >_<
The offense looked good the first half.
In the first half, Chow let Hays throw the ball on downs other than 3rd and long. The offense was semi-balanced. The 36yd TD pass put us up 10 and was all we needed to win. Once we had the 24 point lead, they shut Hays down (maybe wisely) I would have preferred letting him make some more throws to develop confidence. The second half is what we get with Hays in game manager mode-awful. I hope Chow comes out against AZ with Hays in playmaker mode like he did first half against OSU.
I can't disagree with the decision to go conservative in the 2nd half.
We all know that Hays is a turnover waiting to happen. Going into this game, the Utes had 11 turnovers since halftime of the UW game. Hays was responsible for 9 of them.
Blowing a 24 point lead in the 2nd half would be cake for Hays. The smart decision was to just go ultra conservative, and that’s what they did. If not for an extremely bogus penalty it would have been a shut out, or very worst a 24-2 game.
Going conservative was the best option
for winning this game, but I really think the offense needed to be challenged to play four quarters. They’re going to have to play aggressively for 4 quarters to win against AZ, UCLA, and WSU. We needed to continue to build confidence and momentum for the offense.
My main problem are the people who read the turnover ratio...
and think we won because Hays managed the game and the defense forced turnovers. We won because the offense came out and made plays. The first 17 points (all we needed) came off of a mixture of play action passes, strong running, and a great return by McNabb. Many of these plays came from our most maligned players (Hays, the O-line, Peterson,and McNabb). We need to give them credit and also give them the opportunity to play aggressively. We will lose every game that we play conservatively (second half game plan), but we have a chance to win if we play aggressively. You win some and you lose some (see Maynard and Cal), but at least you give your team a chance.
Yes we got the lead because we were aggressive.
However going conservative in the second half was still the smarter plan of attack. Yes eventually the offense will have to play 4 quarters. But this weekend it wasn’t worth the risk.
Get the win, and the confidence that comes with said win. Work on the rest through the week.
Dead on sir
No way the coaches were willing to chance an OSU comeback by trying to run up the score.
They did it in the first half because that’s the only option.
I have to give it up to the Utes
your team was just the better team last night.
oh, them beavers
I feel for ya...
we sure know what it feels like to take a solid beating! We had fun with some Beav fans who travelled to the game…they were good sports and we are sure glad they came! Good luck with the next few games!
beav fans are good sports ...
… but wait until those Duck fans arrive for the first time. the civil and witty folks at ATQ are not reflective of the more … errrr …. raw element of that fan base.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
I would be scared to go to a game at Autzen
even if I were a Duck and not a Beaver!
It took 250 yards of offense but I will take it.
We are going to need more than 60 yards passing on the road against UofA.
by Utah-UCLA alum on Oct 30, 2011 12:51 PM MDT reply actions
this.
i think that’s what is most disappointing. considering the amount of time we had the ball I would have liked a bigger offensive output in the passing game. we only had one passing first down, one. we are going to get our ass beat my arizona if we can only rely on white to move the ball down the field.. they are going to load the box and force hays to beat them.
that doesn't always work tho
OSU tried it and it didn’t work. Pitt tried it and it didn’t work. Cal tried it and it worked.
If White can run all over the field, chances are great that we win.
Thus, I disagree with your assertion that we can’t win by running alone. Our defense is good enough that we can.
OSU didn't try it.
Read Coach Whit’s post game comments.
I doubt we can win by being one-dimensional on offense against Arizona.
by Utah-UCLA alum on Oct 31, 2011 4:35 PM MDT up reply actions
Yep...
60 yards of passing willl not cut it … and unless I am mistaken white has no put together back games og 100+ yards games this year.
I am a Utah Man sir... I will be till I die.
great first pac-12 win. i think we can beat everyone left except zona.
Public Enemy #1 and enjoying every minute of it. Tapology.
by wolfmanshowlforever on Oct 31, 2011 4:43 AM MDT reply actions
plus i can't wait till stanford lays the smackdown over the phil knight funded ducks.
its already set up in the bcs standings that if stanford wins out they will play the winner of lsu/bama. even if okie state wins out they don’t have a CG this year. i guarantee stanford would leapfrog them with a win over sun devils in the first Pac-12 CG.
Public Enemy #1 and enjoying every minute of it. Tapology.
by wolfmanshowlforever on Oct 31, 2011 4:46 AM MDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
- Urban Meyer
"Wow. Wow. Wow."
- Daryl Johnston after Utah took a 21-0 lead on Alabama in the 2009 Sugar Bowl
Related FanShots on Block U
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
