Tequilla Quick Thought
Comments
-
Bullshit.Tequilla said:You win the Stanford game with just average QB play. Hard not to see Locker being able to make a play either with his arm/legs to be able to make a difference in that game.
We definitely beat Arizona with Locker as a couple of extra drives get finished off.
And given the way the ASU game went, you'd have to like the chances of Locker as a runner in that game combined with how Shaq was running. Not to mention that he'd have been a far better passing option than Williams was in that game.
UCLA? Who knows. Oregon? Probably not. But with the current offense, you're definitely looking at a situation that once a team gets 2 scores up on us that it's hard for the confidence of the team to be positive knowing that the offense is unlikely to come back. Even with both of those being losses, you're looking at 11-2 then.
That game was lost on 4 plays.
1 - Baby hands fumbling in the red zone ... Lockner was notorious for choking in the red zone.
2 - Baby hands fumbling right before the half ... Lockner would have turned it over at some point too.
3 - The holding call on 4th down that lead to...
4 - The women's soccer team manager walking in for the score.
Lockner would have had the same result as Baby Hands in half the game changing plays. -
Hypotheticals are for doogs and 12s.. fuck off
-
you sound eerily similar to Race.Rapeculturedawg said:Hypotheticals are for doogs and 12s.. fuck off
-
One of his dads.jecornel said:
you sound eerily similar to Race.Rapeculturedawg said:Hypotheticals are for doogs and 12s.. fuck off
-
It's heartening to see that not everyone has forgotten just how hard Locker sucked as a QB.
Since we're dealing in hypos, what if Lockner had been a consensus AA free safety? would sark still be coaching UW without those embarrassing defensive collapses that marked his tenure? -
He was also 2-2 in those games where he threw for under 100 yards passing.RoadDawg55 said:I do understand the thinking, but Locker sucked in 2010 with a better running game and better WR's. 4 games under 100 yards passing.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13969/type/college/jake-locker -
Because Polk went off in both of those games. Locker sucked.Tequilla said:
He was also 2-2 in those games where he threw for under 100 yards passing.RoadDawg55 said:I do understand the thinking, but Locker sucked in 2010 with a better running game and better WR's. 4 games under 100 yards passing.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/13969/type/college/jake-locker -
The best play in the playbook for Locker was ALWAYS the handoff to Polk
-
Most important stat for a QB is wins and losses ...
It's so easy to get a rise out of the Locker haters on this board ...
They are also so quick to point out the times that Locker sucked, but they never point out the times where he was really good. -
Unfortunately those times became increasingly rare after his first season. He was good against USC twice but still almost fucked away one of those by fumbling a breakaway TD across the goal line for a touch back. I can't really remember a "big" game after his first season where he carried the team or was even really good.Tequilla said:Most important stat for a QB is wins and losses ...
It's so easy to get a rise out of the Locker haters on this board ...
They are also so quick to point out the times that Locker sucked, but they never point out the times where he was really good.
