I've been lurking for a while, but this is my first post. I've actually spent a good 30 minutes searching for an answer to this question: where can I find a reasoned, analytical argument for why it is that Jake Browning sucks? It seems to be an article of faith and baseline assumption of many participants here. Despite all of the stats (including yards per completion), all-time UW and conference records, and win %, it seems that Jake draws almost nothing but ire and snide digs. I understand the relatively weak arm strength, but why is that not mitigated by the above? Is it presumed that if the Dawgs had had a more physically impressive QB during the Browning era they'd be running the table and winning nattys? Honest question. Thanks.
I've been lurking for a while, but this is my first post. I've actually spent a good 30 minutes searching for an answer to this question: where can I find a reasoned, analytical argument for why it is that Jake Browning sucks? It seems to be an article of faith and baseline assumption of many participants here. Despite all of the stats (including yards per completion), all-time UW and conference records, and win %, it seems that Jake draws almost nothing but ire and snide digs. I understand the relatively weak arm strength, but why is that not mitigated by the above? Is it presumed that if the Dawgs had had a more physically impressive QB during the Browning era they'd be running the table and winning nattys? Honest question. Thanks.
I've been lurking for a while, but this is my first post. I've actually spent a good 30 minutes searching for an answer to this question: where can I find a reasoned, analytical argument for why it is that Jake Browning sucks? It seems to be an article of faith and baseline assumption of many participants here. Despite all of the stats (including yards per completion), all-time UW and conference records, and win %, it seems that Jake draws almost nothing but ire and snide digs. I understand the relatively weak arm strength, but why is that not mitigated by the above? Is it presumed that if the Dawgs had had a more physically impressive QB during the Browning era they'd be running the table and winning nattys? Honest question. Thanks.
Jake would be one of the greatest QBs ever if we? played Portland State every week.
Good point, I'm looking into that further (in comparison w/ win rates for other QBs with strong defenses). I'd note that 6 of the 12 losses were in 2015, when the total defense was 31st nationally, and scoring defense 15th. Great for sure, but not as good as the subsequent years.
I've been lurking for a while, but this is my first post. I've actually spent a good 30 minutes searching for an answer to this question: where can I find a reasoned, analytical argument for why it is that Jake Browning sucks? It seems to be an article of faith and baseline assumption of many participants here. Despite all of the stats (including yards per completion), all-time UW and conference records, and win %, it seems that Jake draws almost nothing but ire and snide digs. I understand the relatively weak arm strength, but why is that not mitigated by the above? Is it presumed that if the Dawgs had had a more physically impressive QB during the Browning era they'd be running the table and winning nattys? Honest question. Thanks.
Comments
Ps, LEAVE
DIAFF YOU STUPID FUCKING PIECE OF DOOGY SHIT
"QB WINS AS A STAT ARE FUCKING STUPID" - why? link?
Are all his other stats "FUCKING STUPID"?
2016: #1 Defense in PAC
2017: #1 Defense in PAC
2018: #1 Defense in PAC
Jake lost 12 games despite his defense NEVER allowing more than 35 points in four years.
Fuck off