clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Second half turnaround finishes up confusing Washington non-conference slate with a win

The Huskies needed a huge 180 to get a blowout win over Georgia State.

Joe Nicholson-USA TODAY Sports

The word I would best use to describe Washington's performance is _____________ because _____________.

Patrick Cormier: Follow on Twitter Concerning, because right when you thought Washington was done with shaky performances against weak opponents, they enter halftime down 14-0 to Georgia State in Seattle. The Huskies ended the game on a 35-0 run but it took Chris Peterson's team way too long to get up to play.

Sam Barbee: Follow on Twitter Resilient, because they scored 45 straight points after being down 14-0 at the half against a team they were far superior than. They could've punted on the game but they didn't, they took the field in the second half with a renewed energy and won running away.

James Crabtree-Hannigan: Follow on Twitter Affirmative because it was another very scary performance from Washington. They've played 4 games and 3 of them could be categorized under "concerning". Granted, they deserve credit for being 4-0, but being down 14-0 to Georgia State at halftime shows that the Illinois game, not Hawaii or EWU, was the flukier performance.

Patrick Ghidossi: Follow on Twitter That was weird. The Huskies haven't exactly started fast this season but to go down 14-0 to Georgia State at halftime is just bizarre. The sleeping dogs woke up and handled business, but there are clearly issues they need to work out. They have the talent, but they need to put it all together for 4 quarters.

Trace Travers: Follow on Twitter I'm gonna go with dishrag. In the first half, the Huskies looked and played like a dirty dishrag. But in the second half, after what I'm sure was the reaming of the century by Chris Petersen, they came out, did the dishes and took care of business.

Jack Follman Follow on Twitter Scary, but ultimately forgettable. The Huskies looked awful for one half, but most probably just ended up looking at the box score and seeing that the Huskies dominated in the second half. Had they spread it out with 23/22 points in each half while only giving up 7, this game would have been fine.

Check out the box score. What were the key stats of the game to you?

Sam Barbee: Dante Pettis had four punt returns for 98 yards. Although he didn't score, the punt returns gave Washington excellent field position on their first two second half drives and, more importantly, gave them momentum.

James Crabtree-Hannigan: Washington shutting out GSU in the 2nd half. Washington's offense was scoring a lot in the 2nd half, and doing so quickly, and GSU had just *one drive* in the 2nd half that was more than 3 plays (It was 6, for 22 yards). They had 37 yards of total offense in the 2nd half. That's an incredibly impressive turnaround from the first half where they didn't play horribly, but did give up 221 yards, on 5 drives (excluding the 2-play drive at the end of the half.)

Trace Travers: 45 points in a half is no small feat. That's how you have to take care of business against a team that went 0-12 the previous year.

Jack Follman: Georgia State had just one first down in the second half and it was late in the fourth quarter. That is a complete defensive 180.

  1. What was the most impressive part of Washington's performance and why? Who were the standout players and coaches and why?

Sam Barbee: There were no standout performers. Maybe John Timu for a 35-yard interception-return touchdown, but no one played exceptionally well. The second half went as the whole game should have, and that's the impressive part. Washington looked like they were playing a JV team in the first half and Georgia State made them look bad. The second half went as expected. Kudos to the Washington players and coaching staff for finally showing up in a game they looked like they were going to lose early on.

James Crabtree-Hannigan: The most impressive part was definitely just the turnaround from first half to second half. Obviously it's preferable to play at a high level for the entire game, but being able to recover and comeback from a very bad start is certainly better than starting badly and never picking it up. Can't say there was much of a standout player, Cyler Miles only had 154 yards and the leading rusher Dwayne Washington had 56.

Trace Travers: Bringing in Jeff Lindquist after Cyler Miles had fumbled was a ballsy move, but it paid off with a couple of td runs and it allowed Miles to get his mind straight.

Jack Follman: Simply the massive turnaround. I don't know if any individual stood out, but the way the entire team rallied and changed things was more relieving than impressive.

What were the most concerning aspect of Washington's performance and why? Which coaches and players struggled the most and why?

Sam Barbee: They showed they are capable of looking over teams. The UW had far and away the better talent, but they weren't mentally prepared to play today; that's not a good quality to have. Maybe this game showed them they have to be ready to play each and every week to win games at this level.

James Crabtree-Hannigan: Yet again the Huskies didn't play well, despite winning. There's having a tendency to play down to your opponents, and then there's being down 14-0 to Georgia State at halftime. Puzzling doesn't begin to describe it. The Huskies as a whole struggled during the first half, to say the least. I don't think the coaches struggled during the game, but whatever "inspiration" they provided leading up to it didn't exactly do its job.

Trace Travers: They didn't seem to care during the first half. Something needs to galvanize the Huskies into playing complete games every week.

Jack Follman: They once again looked uninspired and uneven while playing the worst half I have ever seen a Washington team play. The entire team and coaching staff looked horrible in that half and deserves some serious scrutiny.

What are your thoughts on the Huskies through the first few weeks?  How would you grade their chances on beating Stanford based on what you've seen so far?

Patrick Cormier: Like I said before, for the third time in four games, the Huskies have struggled with weaker competition with the exception of a dominant performance against Illinois. It'll be interesting to see how this team responds once they hit conference play because this team has played no where near their potential. I'm expecting a tougher performance against the Cardinal it's hard to think that Chris Peterson would not have his team prepared for a big time game against a team like Stanford, but who's to say, they could come out flat like we've seen so far this season. It's really a toss up with these guys so far.

Sam Barbee: I like what I see, but the Dawgs are a bit of a wild card. They seem to understand they have lots of talent, but there is a little bit of reliance on said talent. The games against Hawaii, Eastern Washington and Georgia State are evidence of that, but it's encouraging they played such a good second half against the Panthers. I would be shocked if the UW didn't come to play against Stanford. The stadium will be packed, the players will be fired up and will be prepared. The Huskies run defense is tough and the secondary can play when they feel like it. It'll be a fun game to watch, at least.

James Crabtree-Hannigan: The Huskies probably win the award for most confusing team in the conference at this point in the season. You look at the way they've played and you want to bury them. You look at their record and talent level and think this could really turn into something. I don't think they have a great chance against Stanford. The Cardinal are probably still seething after completely outplaying USC but losing, and they should be focused and ready to play coming off their bye this week. Washington would have to play their best football of the season by a longshot to win, and even then would need some help.

Trace Travers: I don't think Washington is going to beat Stanford next week, if only because they haven't played a complete game and they haven't really played a good team yet. If they can motivate themselves to levels that they are capable of, then maybe they can pull an upset. I'd be very wary though.

Jack Follman: Of all of the confusing teams in the Pac-12 this season, Washington is the most confusing in my opinion. I would give their grade so far this season an incomplete and  I don't know how they are going to look once they start playing Pac-12 teams.