Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Jake Locker TD run against Arizona
Comments
-
Also, Browning threw another pick while in the red zone after he came back in that got called an incompletion while being a four-year starter yet a guy a defense would still all out blitz on any third down.
Also, fuck you for getting me to rewatch the highlights of that game. -
Also, just because teammates "love this guy" it doesn't make him great. I got into an argument (true story) with an older and fatter Kenny Easley when I suggested that the Hawks took too long to bench Krieg back in the day. Yeah, stupid move on my part. The love was deep for ol' Mudbone, but he sucked at the time and his teammates -- even many years later -- didn't want to hear any criticism about their boy.
It's common. In fact, I think if you secretly polled all the current players on UW, they'd say Dylan Morris should be the QB. They love him.
That said, Browning did some great things. But he had four years so he should have done some great things. -
We need to quit fucking with a proven formula.WoolleyDoog said:
A Rick type taking over in 2018 or 19 when Pete burned out would have been ideal. Guy was a disaster long-term but the perfect guy to take over a team that was talented and disciplined but who had been worn out a bit by the previous staffs.YellowSnow said:
We could have won a Natty with a 50/50 hybrid of Rick and Pete.RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH -
Without a QB playing and only fielding 10 men, we’d have lost all the games for which he was here. HTH.DerekJohnson said:
Was there ever a game where you went "Without Browning we lose that game".?JoeEDangerously said:
I wonder what he would have done on those Browning led teams. Browning was a pain in the ass but he was a winner. But Lockner had the multiple threat that makes it like you have twelve players on offenseYellowSnow said:
He would have beat USC in 2016.JoeEDangerously said:Lockner was awesome. Fuck the haters.
-
I didn't say he was great. But you'd think he was the worst quarterback to ever step on the field if all you read was Hardcore Husky, and that's not even remotely true. He was a good college quarterback. Certainly the best at Washington in a long-ass time.
-
Let's debate - Cobra Jack Browning Top 5 Husky QB all-time? I have a hard time saying yes or no.1to392831weretaken said:I didn't say he was great. But you'd think he was the worst quarterback to ever step on the field if all you read was Hardcore Husky, and that's not even remotely true. He was a good college quarterback. Certainly the best at Washington in a long-ass time.
-
He was just awesome at tims.
-
Top 5? LOL
Top 15? Suregif. -
Browning was refreshing after Cyler for the same reason Keith was refreshing after Locker.
You could count on them not to fuck up the easy 3rd and 4 throw. -
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH -
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH -
Petersen was initially loved because he brought defense back to UWRoadDawg55 said:
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
If only he was as good at offense as his press clippings
Statue of liberty play at the Fiesta Bowl gif -
How many times did we go three and out that year? A ton. And we finished 3rd in the conference as it was. Running the Tui offense might have netted 1-2 more wins, and thus put UW in the running heading into November. Only Oregon and Stanford had better conference records.RoadDawg55 said:
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
Now, does this mean I think we would have been a great team with an excellent shot at the RB? No. After all, Sark was our coach and Holt was our DC. I'm just saying the conference was so weak and we would have been better than trying to make Locker into something he wasn't, that we could have made it more interesting. -
I also think a better offense would have helped that defense a lot. There wasn't a ton of talent but they were playing with the Sark three and out handicap.DerekJohnson said:
How many times did we go three and out that year? A ton. And we finished 3rd in the conference as it was. Running the Tui offense might have netted 1-2 more wins, and thus put UW in the running heading into November. Only Oregon and Stanford had better conference records.RoadDawg55 said:
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
Now, does this mean I think we would have been a great team with an excellent shot at the RB? No. After all, Sark was our coach and Holt was our DC. I'm just saying the conference was so weak and we would have been better than trying to make Locker into something he wasn't, that we could have made it more interesting. -
2010 Oregon and Stanford were super legit to the point I have a hard time seeing a UW team of that era getting past them, but the rest of the conference was legit terrible.
Those Sark teams probably could have won the conference the past four years or at least been in serious contention. Pete and the program picked a terrible time to unnecessarily tank. -
Then we got the second half against Oregon three and outs and the settle for a field goal blues under Pete in 18 and 19chuck said:
I also think a better offense would have helped that defense a lot. There wasn't a ton of talent but they were playing with the Sark three and out handicap.DerekJohnson said:
How many times did we go three and out that year? A ton. And we finished 3rd in the conference as it was. Running the Tui offense might have netted 1-2 more wins, and thus put UW in the running heading into November. Only Oregon and Stanford had better conference records.RoadDawg55 said:
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
Now, does this mean I think we would have been a great team with an excellent shot at the RB? No. After all, Sark was our coach and Holt was our DC. I'm just saying the conference was so weak and we would have been better than trying to make Locker into something he wasn't, that we could have made it more interesting.
Finding a way to lose -
They just needed to replace Smith.RaceBannon said:
Then we got the second half against Oregon three and outs and the settle for a field goal blues under Pete in 18 and 19chuck said:
I also think a better offense would have helped that defense a lot. There wasn't a ton of talent but they were playing with the Sark three and out handicap.DerekJohnson said:
How many times did we go three and out that year? A ton. And we finished 3rd in the conference as it was. Running the Tui offense might have netted 1-2 more wins, and thus put UW in the running heading into November. Only Oregon and Stanford had better conference records.RoadDawg55 said:
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
Now, does this mean I think we would have been a great team with an excellent shot at the RB? No. After all, Sark was our coach and Holt was our DC. I'm just saying the conference was so weak and we would have been better than trying to make Locker into something he wasn't, that we could have made it more interesting.
Finding a way to lose
Oh wait... -
DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
-
I will never understand why he wasn't a grand slam. I thought it was all over for us?.RaceBannon said:
Petersen was initially loved because he brought defense back to UWRoadDawg55 said:
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
If only he was as good at offense as his press clippings
Statue of liberty play at the Fiesta Bowl gif -
I can't believe crystalballz beet Peet twice.RaceBannon said:
Then we got the second half against Oregon three and outs and the settle for a field goal blues under Pete in 18 and 19chuck said:
I also think a better offense would have helped that defense a lot. There wasn't a ton of talent but they were playing with the Sark three and out handicap.DerekJohnson said:
How many times did we go three and out that year? A ton. And we finished 3rd in the conference as it was. Running the Tui offense might have netted 1-2 more wins, and thus put UW in the running heading into November. Only Oregon and Stanford had better conference records.RoadDawg55 said:
No. Mason Foster was the only good player on defense. We got destroyed often.DerekJohnson said:
Seriously, we might have been in the running for a Rose Bowl berth in 2010RaceBannon said:
The oft maligned Rick would have used him like Tui. Which would have been greatAtomicDawg said:
He was a great talent but avg qb. Would have looked great for chip Kelly though.RaceBannon said:Locker was the ultimate cock tease
Didn't FINISH
Now, does this mean I think we would have been a great team with an excellent shot at the RB? No. After all, Sark was our coach and Holt was our DC. I'm just saying the conference was so weak and we would have been better than trying to make Locker into something he wasn't, that we could have made it more interesting.
Finding a way to lose
Ohhh, Peyton Henry, now I remember. Fuck kickers. -
-
YVBE.MikeDamone said:
We have finally have an image that says Wood. Ossai. -
Browning was a good quarterback. He wasn't a finisher or a difference maker, or frankly a good leader.WoolleyDoog said:
I get what you're saying. We're a little too hard on ol Cobra Jack Browning too much sometimes. He had some tricks in the ol back like being a little more mobile than people thought/remember and he had a few games where he correctly wasn't throwing the ball around when they could win the game on the ground.1to392831weretaken said:
Yes. Many. So many that this is a silly statement. Off the top of my head, they beat Cal if our boy Hainer doesn't step in. Browning was the perfect quarterback to ball-protect and hold on to a boring win instead of a what-the-fuck loss.DerekJohnson said:Was there ever a game where you went "Without Browning we lose that game".?
If there's one way in which I part ways with the collective wisdom of this bored (TDS/BDS/TTTT aside), it's the prioritizing of looking the part and big-dick/gunslinging over actual wins and losses and on-field effectiveness on a college football field. Thinking BBK was a liability, or thinking he was until his senior year, is very on-brand for Hardcore Husky and yet completely wrong. Having a guy who could cover as much field as he did and make EVERY tackle in his gap allowed the rest of the defense to take fewer risks, and this more than made up for a couple embarrassing incidents per game of him getting "dragged." Sure, you'd like to have a 250 lb. monster who's just as fast and smart, but my daughter wants a pony, too.
It's the same with Browning. The dude was a winner, but he wasn't a 6'5" Adonis, didn't risk the ball for the sake of a big play, didn't tuck it and run for 50 yards, and expressed disappointment when his kicker misses a chip shot on a day when nothing's going right, so he fucking sucks. The most important things a quarterback can do are get the offense into the right play and throw an accurate ball, and he's the best at that at UW since I've been old enough to remember. He took some embarrassing sacks like just about any other quarterback, put a lid on the offense with his arm strength, and largely avoided the middle of the field to protect the ball. Not perfect, but consider the alternative: Over his starting career, the Huskies lose at least a half dozen more games with anyone else on the roster starting. Easily.
So, yeah, if Trevor Lawrence or Joe Burrow are sitting on the bench, there's not a single game that I felt they'd lose without Jake Browning. With Cyler Myles, Troy Williams, Jeff Lindquist, and a young Jake Haener? Plenty. Myles Gaskin is rightfully a Hardcore Husky hero, and Gaskin apparently LOVED this guy. He very often called the right shots to put Gaskin in a position to succeed. There are things going on on the field that you don't see from the stands or your couch.
I don't know about that Cal game though. He threw an int where he was just trying to throw the ball way but was such a shithead it got intercepted and it was the second time he did that that season.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9a_MHlO3xo
