Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Brett Hundley not yet drafted

2»

Comments

  • PostGameOrangeSlicesPostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 26,897 Swaye's Wigwam
    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley
  • BallSackedBallSacked Member Posts: 3,279

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
  • PostGameOrangeSlicesPostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 26,897 Swaye's Wigwam

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
    Sark

    and

    Ty Willingham...


    case fucking closed.
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680

    Hundley was pretty good. He's not an NFL starter, but he was probably the 2nd best QB in the Pac last year. He was way better than Locker, but they do have similarities.

    But how was the quarterbacking in the Pac-12 a fucking dreckfest?
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
    Sark

    and

    Ty Willingham...


    case fucking closed.
    Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.


    Oh. Never mind.
  • PostGameOrangeSlicesPostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 26,897 Swaye's Wigwam

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
    Sark

    and

    Ty Willingham...


    case fucking closed.
    Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.


    Oh. Never mind.
    SvenFS

    I'm not talking about the NFL.


  • MisterEmMisterEm Member Posts: 6,685

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
    Sark

    and

    Ty Willingham...


    case fucking closed.
    Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.


    Oh. Never mind.
    SvenFS

    I'm not talking about the NFL.


    Yea so... moving the goalposts works for his argument at the time.

    Picking and poaching of arguments IS the message board game.

    HTH
  • PostGameOrangeSlicesPostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 26,897 Swaye's Wigwam
    edited May 2015
    MisterEm said:

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
    Sark

    and

    Ty Willingham...


    case fucking closed.
    Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.


    Oh. Never mind.
    SvenFS

    I'm not talking about the NFL.


    Yea so... moving the goalposts works for his argument at the time.

    Picking and poaching of arguments IS the message board game.

    HTH
    You say hth as if I'm not already aware of that.
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
    Sark

    and

    Ty Willingham...


    case fucking closed.
    Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.


    Oh. Never mind.
    SvenFS

    I'm not talking about the NFL.


    My poont is that if multiple coaches at multiple levels couldn't make him a good quarterback, he probably was never going to be a good quarterback. He chose to pay for Ty after all.
  • PostGameOrangeSlicesPostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 26,897 Swaye's Wigwam

    Locker >>>> Hundley.

    UCLA is talented, and Mora, even with his issues, is >>>>>>>>>>> Sark and Ty fucking Willingham

    UCLA wouldve been a better team with Locker than Hundley

    I don't think UCLAs offense was super talented Brett's first few years. I don't think he had a RB better than Polk, or a WR much better than Kearse.

    He just played in an offense that in my opinion did a solid job of getting him into quick simple read then scramble situations. Locker had SarkFS try to make him Leinart.

    Brett's college stats are significantly better than Lockners. His NFL combine numbers are nearly identical as well. I don't think Locker was a better QB than Brett.
    Sark

    and

    Ty Willingham...


    case fucking closed.
    Lockner proved this poont by emerging to be an excellent quarterback with professional coaching.


    Oh. Never mind.
    SvenFS

    I'm not talking about the NFL.


    My poont is that if multiple coaches at multiple levels couldn't make him a good quarterback, he probably was never going to be a good quarterback. He chose to pay for Ty after all.
    He had no real coaching until getting to the NFL

    A college coach that just said, "run us to victory, Jack the Lad" was all the coaching he needed

    You're right about him being FS and not going to Oregon.

    He also kisses his mother on the lips.

    WOOF
  • Fire_Marshall_BillFire_Marshall_Bill Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 24,636 Founders Club

    Hundley was pretty good. He's not an NFL starter, but he was probably the 2nd best QB in the Pac last year. He was way better than Locker, but they do have similarities.

    But how was the quarterbacking in the Pac-12 a fucking dreckfest?
    I know. It's turned into the SEC.
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680

    Hundley was pretty good. He's not an NFL starter, but he was probably the 2nd best QB in the Pac last year. He was way better than Locker, but they do have similarities.

    But how was the quarterbacking in the Pac-12 a fucking dreckfest?
    I know. It's turned into the SEC.
    SEC quarterbacking is dreadful, but they are better in the trenches. That's why they win more natties.



    Expert analysis
Sign In or Register to comment.