Question

[AZOldDawg]

Why aren’t we using Newton in first and goal situations?

[Michael K.]

He may not be healthy, I'm not sure. I think it is a headache that a lot of fast paced spread teams face. When the field condenses they struggle. I'd like to see them just say fuck it and throw the ball down close. I understand the risk, but the run game has looked good this year, just not in short yardage. Shot gun runs are tough. The back isn't really attacking the LOS downhill.

[D-train]

I find my 50 cents a day investment in my Times subscription to yield a good return:

Goal-line mishaps
About those botched fourth-and-goal quarterback sneaks …

UW twice had first-and-goal from inside the 2-yard line Saturday, and twice the Huskies were stoned on four running plays … including drive-ending quarterback sneaks.

Grubb attributed the troubles to a “lack of execution,” referencing pad level and poor blocking angles.

“We went back, and you have to be honest when you take a look at stuff. Was it just a bad concept?” he said. “Honestly, it was the look we expected, and we just misfired. Lack of execution. There’s no excuse for it. We know the detail that has to be put into those kind of plays. We’ll learn from it. We’ll be better.”

It might help if UW can turn to junior running back Richard Newton, a proven bruiser who was essentially a healthy scratch against Michigan State.

The 6-0, 212-pounder will likely have a more significant workload against Stanford on Saturday.

“Rich is going to be continuing to increase his role,” Grubb said. “Again, some of the practice limitations and things like that … I feel like Rich, probably this week I would say he’s full strength. Sometimes when guys get a little bit limited in the game planning and reps during the week it gets a little bit harder to get him in. But Rich will continue to get more involved. I would be surprised if you don’t see a lot more of ‘6’ out there this week.”

[57reasons]

It's even more puzzling after how good he looked in week 2 against Portland St. granted he came in late against a tired D, but he was running through tackles right and left when everyone knew they wanted to run clock to protect the big lead.
that said how great is it that our biggest beef with the new staff three weeks in is not using a certain one of several capable backs in goal line situations?

[Michael K.]

It's even more puzzling after how good he looked in week 2 against Portland St. granted he came in late against a tired D, but he was running through tackles right and left when everyone knew they wanted to run clock to protect the big lead.
that said how great is it that our biggest beef with the new staff three weeks in is not using a certain one of several capable backs in goal line situations?

I think maybe they just liked Davis more? He isn't as big, but still not small. I still am not sure I am sold on the big back at the goal line idea. Myles Gaskin is one of the best we have ever had. That said, I just looked up Chris Polk. I don't know what he played at while here, but he listed at 5'10" and 224! He was pretty darn good around the goal line too.