Jake Locker continues to struggle
Comments
-
Race's "dumb as a bag of hammers" quote is conspicuously absent from dis thread.
-
Trent Dilfer has more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
[citation needed]puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Lockner is not Tebow. Jake is an NFL passer, Tebow is not. Tebow is a frigging Turd who talks like a little sissy faggot with a lisp. Don't ever make this silly comparison again. Is Jake an all pro? No, not yet.Travis Morris said:the myth of Lockner will never die. The doogs will never concede he sucked at QB. Locker was born for a Chip Kelly or Urban Meyer offense. Sark wanted to make him a pocket passer.
Did Sark succeed and mold him into a great QB in a pro system? Fuck no. You'd be fucking shocked how many people believe the opposite.
Jack's senior season he had 4 fucking games where he didn't crack 75 yards passing. His last game as a Husky he went 5/16 for 56 yards.
As for the NFL, Lockner is Tebow without the playoff win.
Tebow has more playoff wins than Locker does. -
Not your best effort. Not even close.IrishDawg22 said:
Trent Dilfer has more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
[citation needed]puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Lockner is not Tebow. Jake is an NFL passer, Tebow is not. Tebow is a frigging Turd who talks like a little sissy faggot with a lisp. Don't ever make this silly comparison again. Is Jake an all pro? No, not yet.Travis Morris said:the myth of Lockner will never die. The doogs will never concede he sucked at QB. Locker was born for a Chip Kelly or Urban Meyer offense. Sark wanted to make him a pocket passer.
Did Sark succeed and mold him into a great QB in a pro system? Fuck no. You'd be fucking shocked how many people believe the opposite.
Jack's senior season he had 4 fucking games where he didn't crack 75 yards passing. His last game as a Husky he went 5/16 for 56 yards.
As for the NFL, Lockner is Tebow without the playoff win.
Tebow has more playoff wins than Locker does.
Marino differentiated himself from Dilfer with sustained excellence over a long period of time. What has Locker done in the NFL to show he is better than Tebow?
-
Has he ever had a "good" effort or even a "7-6" effort on this bored yet?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Not your best effort. Not even close.IrishDawg22 said:
Trent Dilfer has more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
[citation needed]puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Lockner is not Tebow. Jake is an NFL passer, Tebow is not. Tebow is a frigging Turd who talks like a little sissy faggot with a lisp. Don't ever make this silly comparison again. Is Jake an all pro? No, not yet.Travis Morris said:the myth of Lockner will never die. The doogs will never concede he sucked at QB. Locker was born for a Chip Kelly or Urban Meyer offense. Sark wanted to make him a pocket passer.
Did Sark succeed and mold him into a great QB in a pro system? Fuck no. You'd be fucking shocked how many people believe the opposite.
Jack's senior season he had 4 fucking games where he didn't crack 75 yards passing. His last game as a Husky he went 5/16 for 56 yards.
As for the NFL, Lockner is Tebow without the playoff win.
Tebow has more playoff wins than Locker does.
Marino differentiated himself from Dilfer with sustained excellence over a long period of time. What has Locker done in the NFL to show he is better than Tebow? -
My take on Lockner is the same as it ever was. He was both a below average QB at UW AND UW's best QB (abundance and shit!). Our record with Jack under center was poor, but much better than it was in the games he missed due to injury. The idea that he should have been moved to safety makes sense in a vacuum - he would have been a better safety than QB. The same could be said about LB, IMO.
But the team would not have been better with Jake on defense, because the QB's behind him were terrible. I suppose it's possible you could say a RS frosh Price would have given us a better chance to win than Lockner, but a) when was the last time any RS frosh QB straight beat out a three year starter b) I'm not sure it's a given by any means c) if that was seriously a possibility, Jack would have just gone into the NFL after his RS junior year anyway.
Fouch was a disaster, and no one would have started a true frosh Price over junior Locker.
Jake was a guy who looked the part - big, fast, strong, TUFF. There's a reason he was a first round pick, and not just because Tennessee is stupid. He went too high, but somebody was going to roll the dice on a guy with his upside, betting that his college coaching and line was the problem.
As it turns out, he's no longer a below average QB, he's simply bad. There's still a chance he figures some things out and becomes a passable starter in the league, but that chance is low. He'll never be a franchise guy. Most likely he'll be a decent backup for most of his career and look awesome holding a clipboard.
UW is better off that he came here and played QB, but only because Ty was an epic failure at recruiting anyone else who could play the position until Price. -
Wow, tell me you didn't take that seriously.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Not your best effort. Not even close.IrishDawg22 said:
Trent Dilfer has more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
[citation needed]puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Lockner is not Tebow. Jake is an NFL passer, Tebow is not. Tebow is a frigging Turd who talks like a little sissy faggot with a lisp. Don't ever make this silly comparison again. Is Jake an all pro? No, not yet.Travis Morris said:the myth of Lockner will never die. The doogs will never concede he sucked at QB. Locker was born for a Chip Kelly or Urban Meyer offense. Sark wanted to make him a pocket passer.
Did Sark succeed and mold him into a great QB in a pro system? Fuck no. You'd be fucking shocked how many people believe the opposite.
Jack's senior season he had 4 fucking games where he didn't crack 75 yards passing. His last game as a Husky he went 5/16 for 56 yards.
As for the NFL, Lockner is Tebow without the playoff win.
Tebow has more playoff wins than Locker does.
Marino differentiated himself from Dilfer with sustained excellence over a long period of time. What has Locker done in the NFL to show he is better than Tebow? -
I am man enough to admit that I struggle with telling the stupid and the Sarkasm apart in your posts.IrishDawg22 said:
Wow, tell me you didn't take that seriously.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Not your best effort. Not even close.IrishDawg22 said:
Trent Dilfer has more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
[citation needed]puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Lockner is not Tebow. Jake is an NFL passer, Tebow is not. Tebow is a frigging Turd who talks like a little sissy faggot with a lisp. Don't ever make this silly comparison again. Is Jake an all pro? No, not yet.Travis Morris said:the myth of Lockner will never die. The doogs will never concede he sucked at QB. Locker was born for a Chip Kelly or Urban Meyer offense. Sark wanted to make him a pocket passer.
Did Sark succeed and mold him into a great QB in a pro system? Fuck no. You'd be fucking shocked how many people believe the opposite.
Jack's senior season he had 4 fucking games where he didn't crack 75 yards passing. His last game as a Husky he went 5/16 for 56 yards.
As for the NFL, Lockner is Tebow without the playoff win.
Tebow has more playoff wins than Locker does.
Marino differentiated himself from Dilfer with sustained excellence over a long period of time. What has Locker done in the NFL to show he is better than Tebow? -
So Sark is to Ty and Locker is to Fouch?HillsboroDuck said:My take on Lockner is the same as it ever was. He was both a below average QB at UW AND UW's best QB (abundance and shit!). Our record with Jack under center was poor, but much better than it was in the games he missed due to injury. The idea that he should have been moved to safety makes sense in a vacuum - he would have been a better safety than QB. The same could be said about LB, IMO.
But the team would not have been better with Jake on defense, because the QB's behind him were terrible. I suppose it's possible you could say a RS frosh Price would have given us a better chance to win than Lockner, but a) when was the last time any RS frosh QB straight beat out a three year starter b) I'm not sure it's a given by any means c) if that was seriously a possibility, Jack would have just gone into the NFL after his RS junior year anyway.
Fouch was a disaster, and no one would have started a true frosh Price over junior Locker.
Jake was a guy who looked the part - big, fast, strong, TUFF. There's a reason he was a first round pick, and not just because Tennessee is stupid. He went too high, but somebody was going to roll the dice on a guy with his upside, betting that his college coaching and line was the problem.
As it turns out, he's no longer a below average QB, he's simply bad. There's still a chance he figures some things out and becomes a passable starter in the league, but that chance is low. He'll never be a franchise guy. Most likely he'll be a decent backup for most of his career and look awesome holding a clipboard.
UW is better off that he came here and played QB, but only because Ty was an epic failure at recruiting anyone else who could play the position until Price.
It's a shame Sweetman didn't have any eligibility left. -
If Jake was switched to safety in '06 or '07, how do you know that we wouldn't have recruited a stud QB from high school or JUCO that saw an opportunity to take over by '08? Carl Bonnell had eligibility through '07 and was not a terrible QB and might have ended up with a decent career given the chance.HillsboroDuck said:My take on Lockner is the same as it ever was. He was both a below average QB at UW AND UW's best QB (abundance and shit!). Our record with Jack under center was poor, but much better than it was in the games he missed due to injury. The idea that he should have been moved to safety makes sense in a vacuum - he would have been a better safety than QB. The same could be said about LB, IMO.
But the team would not have been better with Jake on defense, because the QB's behind him were terrible. I suppose it's possible you could say a RS frosh Price would have given us a better chance to win than Lockner, but a) when was the last time any RS frosh QB straight beat out a three year starter b) I'm not sure it's a given by any means c) if that was seriously a possibility, Jack would have just gone into the NFL after his RS junior year anyway.
Fouch was a disaster, and no one would have started a true frosh Price over junior Locker.
Jake was a guy who looked the part - big, fast, strong, TUFF. There's a reason he was a first round pick, and not just because Tennessee is stupid. He went too high, but somebody was going to roll the dice on a guy with his upside, betting that his college coaching and line was the problem.
As it turns out, he's no longer a below average QB, he's simply bad. There's still a chance he figures some things out and becomes a passable starter in the league, but that chance is low. He'll never be a franchise guy. Most likely he'll be a decent backup for most of his career and look awesome holding a clipboard.
UW is better off that he came here and played QB, but only because Ty was an epic failure at recruiting anyone else who could play the position until Price.
-
Strongly disagree there. When Stanback went down Bonnell was terrible going 1-4 as a starter down the stretch.DerekJohnson said:
If Jake was switched to safety in '06 or '07, how do you know that we wouldn't have recruited a stud QB from high school or JUCO that saw an opportunity to take over by '08? Carl Bonnell had eligibility through '07 and was not a terrible QB and might have ended up with a decent career given the chance.HillsboroDuck said:My take on Lockner is the same as it ever was. He was both a below average QB at UW AND UW's best QB (abundance and shit!). Our record with Jack under center was poor, but much better than it was in the games he missed due to injury. The idea that he should have been moved to safety makes sense in a vacuum - he would have been a better safety than QB. The same could be said about LB, IMO.
But the team would not have been better with Jake on defense, because the QB's behind him were terrible. I suppose it's possible you could say a RS frosh Price would have given us a better chance to win than Lockner, but a) when was the last time any RS frosh QB straight beat out a three year starter b) I'm not sure it's a given by any means c) if that was seriously a possibility, Jack would have just gone into the NFL after his RS junior year anyway.
Fouch was a disaster, and no one would have started a true frosh Price over junior Locker.
Jake was a guy who looked the part - big, fast, strong, TUFF. There's a reason he was a first round pick, and not just because Tennessee is stupid. He went too high, but somebody was going to roll the dice on a guy with his upside, betting that his college coaching and line was the problem.
As it turns out, he's no longer a below average QB, he's simply bad. There's still a chance he figures some things out and becomes a passable starter in the league, but that chance is low. He'll never be a franchise guy. Most likely he'll be a decent backup for most of his career and look awesome holding a clipboard.
UW is better off that he came here and played QB, but only because Ty was an epic failure at recruiting anyone else who could play the position until Price.
In his career Bonnell was 112-271(41.3%) passing for 1,536 yards(5.7 YPA) with 10 touchdowns and 15 INT's. His career rating was 90.0.
As for bringing in another QB I don't know if Ty was capable of that. Locker was going to come here no matter what but the rest of Ty's QB's that he brought in while coaching weren't even D-1 quality.
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)