Roof Think Browning Should Start
Comments
-
Way to give AoG (RIP) another option for his shitty pole.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the sanctions really fucking decimated us. Look at that '96 team: no talent at all.dnc said:
It actually goes back even further than that to the ultimate doogism of all doogisms.Dennis_DeYoung said:The 15 practices was the original, Lambo-generated/Baird-coveted, doog excuse for sucking. 'Why did we piss away the Rose Bowl in '95 and '96?' 'You have no idea the amount of development we lost in the underclass kids in the last 2 years without those 15 practices. Those make a huge difference.'
Sort of like having a shit-for-brains coach also makes a huge difference: looking at you Lambo.
#Sanctions #CostUsTwoBowels #Thats30Practices
How can you expect to win without those practices? -
Honestly, that was when I realized Lambo was a fucktard. It was so obvious that talent was not our problem, coming from 21 ahead at half to tie USC 21-21 in the rain has nothing to fucking do with 30 practices. It has to do with a coach getting a tight asshole at half-time.dnc said:
The sad thing is I was young and doogpid and lapped up all that shit at the time.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the sanctions really fucking decimated us. Look at that '96 team: no talent at all.dnc said:
It actually goes back even further than that to the ultimate doogism of all doogisms.Dennis_DeYoung said:The 15 practices was the original, Lambo-generated/Baird-coveted, doog excuse for sucking. 'Why did we piss away the Rose Bowl in '95 and '96?' 'You have no idea the amount of development we lost in the underclass kids in the last 2 years without those 15 practices. Those make a huge difference.'
Sort of like having a shit-for-brains coach also makes a huge difference: looking at you Lambo.
#Sanctions #CostUsTwoBowels #Thats30Practices
How can you expect to win without those practices?
95 is going to be special! -
If you didn't want to fire Lambo when Wheaton crossed midfield, you were a Doog.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Honestly, that was when I realized Lambo was a fucktard. It was so obvious that talent was not our problem, coming from 21 ahead at half to tie USC 21-21 in the rain has nothing to fucking do with 30 practices. It has to do with a coach getting a tight asshole at half-time.dnc said:
The sad thing is I was young and doogpid and lapped up all that shit at the time.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the sanctions really fucking decimated us. Look at that '96 team: no talent at all.dnc said:
It actually goes back even further than that to the ultimate doogism of all doogisms.Dennis_DeYoung said:The 15 practices was the original, Lambo-generated/Baird-coveted, doog excuse for sucking. 'Why did we piss away the Rose Bowl in '95 and '96?' 'You have no idea the amount of development we lost in the underclass kids in the last 2 years without those 15 practices. Those make a huge difference.'
Sort of like having a shit-for-brains coach also makes a huge difference: looking at you Lambo.
#Sanctions #CostUsTwoBowels #Thats30Practices
How can you expect to win without those practices?
95 is going to be special!
-
At that time I was not really dooging for Lambo, but I was trying to process everything. That '94 team should've been a 10 win team. We had a lot of talent, but the malaise had already clearly set in.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
If you didn't want to fire Lambo when Wheaton crossed midfield, you were a Doog.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Honestly, that was when I realized Lambo was a fucktard. It was so obvious that talent was not our problem, coming from 21 ahead at half to tie USC 21-21 in the rain has nothing to fucking do with 30 practices. It has to do with a coach getting a tight asshole at half-time.dnc said:
The sad thing is I was young and doogpid and lapped up all that shit at the time.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yeah, the sanctions really fucking decimated us. Look at that '96 team: no talent at all.dnc said:
It actually goes back even further than that to the ultimate doogism of all doogisms.Dennis_DeYoung said:The 15 practices was the original, Lambo-generated/Baird-coveted, doog excuse for sucking. 'Why did we piss away the Rose Bowl in '95 and '96?' 'You have no idea the amount of development we lost in the underclass kids in the last 2 years without those 15 practices. Those make a huge difference.'
Sort of like having a shit-for-brains coach also makes a huge difference: looking at you Lambo.
#Sanctions #CostUsTwoBowels #Thats30Practices
How can you expect to win without those practices?
95 is going to be special!
Really the '94 Stanford game told you all you needed on Lambo. Also the all-white recruiting class could've given you a hint, too. -
Bingo.
Every time I think I know who will start, I return to the assumptions and hypotheticals pertaining to all of the options.
Heck, we don't even know who the starting Right Tackle will be so it's that much harder to try to guess who will start @ BSU on September 4th.
I will say this, unless Browning will have taken some big steps by September 4th, it's an awful lot to ask of a true frosh to go into hostile territory with a bunch of Bronco Fans pitching tent at the thought of returning ass-kicking they received to start the 2013 season.
Also, it's not like we return 4 of 5 or 5 of 5 starters on the OL with our LT being a pre-season All Pac 12 choice; we only have 1 guy who has started more than 10 games and he was out this spring (RS-SR Dex Charles). The next guy has started 7 games (RS-So Coleman Shelton) and he also missed the spring. A guy who has started about 5 games over his career redshirted last year (RS-JR Brostek) and I am only hoping another guy who started a few games last year (RS-SR Tufunga) can make it to being average in his 5th year.
Living in fantasy land, imagine yourself playing EA Sports College Football. I'd probably go with Wild Swede since he'd be less likely to get rattled, use him in the option game and then do play-action off of the running game, and lean on my reasonably talented D and good special teams to pull out a win.
TSIO but also have to win the turnover battle and I don't know if starting a true frosh who isn't really a running threat is the best way to take care of the ball on offense.RoadDawg55 said:
A lot of the thread is dealing in hypotheticals, which we don't do, but the margins for winning and losing are often so slim which is why the best guy has to play. Marginally better can be a 2-3 win difference.dnc said:
I just don't think Browning is 2-3 wins better than the alternatives. If he's 3 wins better I agree you play him.RoadDawg55 said:
I really doubt the coaches feel the same way. Winning now also helps builds the program. I get that we are tired of 7 and 8 win seasons, but they are better than 4 or 5 win seasons. Petersen wins 4 or 5 this year with Lindquist/KCS and there are concerns. He wins 7 with Browning and there is much more momentum and optimism surrounding Husky Football which imo would help the program more than pining for 2019.dnc said:
The goal is to build a program, not squeek into some shit bowel this season. I think the best long term option is redshirting a guy like Browning. Starting a true freshman QB is almost never beneficial in the short term, and IMO exposes kids to injury and destroys his confidence unnecessarily. How many quality QB's started as true frosh in the Pac? I can't think of many. I just think Browning is unlikely to be more than a game better than Kijana Carter or Lindy this season, but will be much better prepared for next season and beyond after a RS year.RoadDawg55 said:
Completely agree, but let's take into consideration who the presumed starter is going to be. Thinking he should redshirt no matter what, even if he's the best guy is FS. Judging from the Spring, he's probably not the best guy, but if he is during fall camp, then what?dnc said:Nothing erects a doog dick like a kid getting 15 extra practices. Spring enrollee, bowel game, etc. We haven't developed a kid over five seasons in the last 15 years but 15 practices means a true freshman is ready at QB.
SoFuckingIrritating.gif
And if Lindquist goes out and completely sucks (very likely), then what? Same for Carta Samuels. A lot of hypotheticals, but the QB position is pretty fluid when Jeff fucking Lindquist is the assumed starter.
Add in that he's not the NFL prototype as someone else alluded to and he's less likely to leave early anyway and I think it's a no brainer to redshirt him.
If he plays this year he better be the shit.
You are right that not many true freshman QB's are good. For a real program, Browning wouldn't sniff the field. For a program with Jeff Lindquist are the starter, I'm not so sure. -
Also Kellen Moore and Aaron Murray (the QBs to which Browning is most similar IMHO) both redshirted. Hard to think Browning won't.
-
I cannot wait for PuppyLoveLamboSpooge to find this thread.
-
Browning is going to be the guy. He wasn't that far behind the others and with a lot more reps and a few live games he'll be at worst where the others are.
Lindquist just doesn't have it. He's had three full years. He was terrible against a bad Hawaii team, missing guys that were wide open. Also, he was far enough behind Miles last year that he didn't come in for relief in any games despite Miles' shitty play.
The biggest reason Browning will play this season is it gives UW the most upside next season without sacrificing much this year. He will be a lot better as a true soph than rs freshman.
Goff played as a true freshman and his QBR the next year went from 53 to 75. Even Sefo at Colorado went from 54 to 60. Miles QBR was only 49 last year. -
But do you mean:
He's going to be the guy to start at BSU?
Come in after halftime or at some point during the BSU game?
Start against Sacramento State?
Or start at some point in 2015?HeretoBeatmyChest said:Browning is going to be the guy. He wasn't that far behind the others and with a lot more reps and a few live games he'll be at worst where the others are.
Lindquist just doesn't have it. He's had three full years. He was terrible against a bad Hawaii team, missing guys that were wide open. Also, he was far enough behind Miles last year that he didn't come in for relief in any games despite Miles' shitty play.
The biggest reason Browning will play this season is it gives UW the most upside next season without sacrificing much this year. He will be a lot better as a true soph than rs freshman.
Goff played as a true freshman and his QBR the next year went from 53 to 75. Even Sefo at Colorado went from 54 to 60. Miles QBR was only 49 last year. -
OK!
goodbye sociopaths. The AOG is officially gone. put me back on the kill list. I leave you to cutting people off in traffic and making loud noises, talking on cell phones right next to somebody trying to concentrate, and all the other things you do all day long to annoy people.
There was a discordant hum of human voices! There was a loud blast as of many trumpets! There was a harsh grating as of a thousand thunders! The fiery walls rushed back! An outstretched arm caught my own as I fell, fainting, into the abyss. It was that of General Lasalle. The French army had entered Toledo. The Inquisition was in the hands of its enemies. -
Best. Player. Plays. Period.
-
Congrats Lindy.sarktastic said:Best. Player. Plays. Period.
-
Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play.
-
That is said a lot, and for good reason. Porter, Koehler, Brostek, etc.RavennaDawg said:
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
-
How would they be better by sitting on the bench?
They would not be.
-
They'd have a year in the strength and conditioning program before they got hurt. Also, confidence is a real thing and letting a QB get the playbook down and learn to read a defense before throwing him to the wolves can be beneficial as well.RavennaDawg said:How would they be better by sitting on the bench?
They would not be.
I can sort of agree that Browning is likely to be (slightly) better in 2016 if he plays in 2015, but he's likely to be much much better in 2019 than in 2015. -
Obligatory in any Roof poast:
-
Holy crap! It was actually that HIGH? I was thinking more along the lines of 29...HeretoBeatmyChest said:Miles QBR was only 49 last year.
-
True freshmen are allowed to participate in the strength and conditioning program, and learn to read defenses too. Really, they are.dnc said:
They'd have a year in the strength and conditioning program before they got hurt. Also, confidence is a real thing and letting a QB get the playbook down and learn to read a defense before throwing him to the wolves can be beneficial as well.RavennaDawg said:How would they be better by sitting on the bench?
They would not be.
I can sort of agree that Browning is likely to be (slightly) better in 2016 if he plays in 2015, but he's likely to be much much better in 2019 than in 2015.
You seem to be debating rs frosh vs true frosh. I am talking about true soph vs rs frosh. There will be nothing "(slightly)" better about Browning true soph vs Browning rs frosh; the difference will be significant. As the saying goes, Nothing prepares you for the NFL, like the NFL.
Irregardless, it will all be a mute point if Browning is not the qb who gives us the best chance to win this year. -
-
How did you come up with that? Johnny Manziel, Kellen Moore, Mariota, and Jameis Winston all played great as redshirt freshman. I'm not sure there is any proof that guys are so much better by playing as true freshman.RavennaDawg said:
True freshmen are allowed to participate in the strength and conditioning program, and learn to read defenses too. Really, they are.dnc said:
They'd have a year in the strength and conditioning program before they got hurt. Also, confidence is a real thing and letting a QB get the playbook down and learn to read a defense before throwing him to the wolves can be beneficial as well.RavennaDawg said:How would they be better by sitting on the bench?
They would not be.
I can sort of agree that Browning is likely to be (slightly) better in 2016 if he plays in 2015, but he's likely to be much much better in 2019 than in 2015.
You seem to be debating rs frosh vs true frosh. I am talking about true soph vs rs frosh. There will be nothing "(slightly)" better about Browning true soph vs Browning rs frosh; the difference will be significant. As the saying goes, Nothing prepares you for the NFL, like the NFL.
Irregardless, it will all be a mute point if Browning is not the qb who gives us the best chance to win this year. -
Also Vick, Michael.RoadDawg55 said:
How did you come up with that? Johnny Manziel, Kellen Moore, Mariota, and Jameis Winston all played great as redshirt freshman. I'm not sure there is any proof that guys are so much better by playing as true freshman.RavennaDawg said:
True freshmen are allowed to participate in the strength and conditioning program, and learn to read defenses too. Really, they are.dnc said:
They'd have a year in the strength and conditioning program before they got hurt. Also, confidence is a real thing and letting a QB get the playbook down and learn to read a defense before throwing him to the wolves can be beneficial as well.RavennaDawg said:How would they be better by sitting on the bench?
They would not be.
I can sort of agree that Browning is likely to be (slightly) better in 2016 if he plays in 2015, but he's likely to be much much better in 2019 than in 2015.
You seem to be debating rs frosh vs true frosh. I am talking about true soph vs rs frosh. There will be nothing "(slightly)" better about Browning true soph vs Browning rs frosh; the difference will be significant. As the saying goes, Nothing prepares you for the NFL, like the NFL.
Irregardless, it will all be a mute point if Browning is not the qb who gives us the best chance to win this year. -
Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?RavennaDawg said:Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play. -
Disagree. Tui won a Rose Bowl and popped off in 2000. But if Shane Fortney would have stayed, Tui would have redshirted and been great in 2001!!1 It's stupid Jerry. Tui played because he had to, just like Browning might have to. They aren't the same scenario because the '97 team had Rose Bowl expectations, but it was a case of the best QB stepping in and playing when needed.TTJ said:
Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?RavennaDawg said:Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play.
Unrelated side note, Tui should have started in '98 too, but UW was somewhat understandably loyal to Brock. -
I'll take this a little further. Cody Pickett stepped in and was one of Washington's most prolific passers in 2001. It's about recruiting great players and having them be ready. People forget the Tui got hurt in the Rose Bowl and it was Pickett who stepped in and helped keep that game in hand. You're either good or you're not.TTJ said:
Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?RavennaDawg said:Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play.
If Browning is the best guy, he needs to play. And Pete needs to recruit somebody who will be ready to take over in 2019 that's not named Browning regardless. I think Browning is the guy, but i'm in the minority in thinking that Lindquist still has some game in him.
As mentioned before, the slightest improvement can be a 2-3 game difference. If Browning is worth those victories, it's better for the program to win 7-8 and go to a shit bowl and continue recruiting than go 4-5 and have serious doubts about the direction under Pete. -
2-2 for a whopping 11 yards, but stillDoogles said:
I'll take this a little further. Cody Pickett stepped in and was one of Washington's most prolific passers in 2001. It's about recruiting great players and having them be ready. People forget the Tui got hurt in the Rose Bowl and it was Pickett who stepped in and helped keep that game in hand. You're either good or you're not.TTJ said:
Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?RavennaDawg said:Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play.
If Browning is the best guy, he needs to play. And Pete needs to recruit somebody who will be ready to take over in 2019 that's not named Browning regardless. I think Browning is the guy, but i'm in the minority in thinking that Lindquist still has some game in him.
As mentioned before, the slightest improvement can be a 2-3 game difference. If Browning is worth those victories, it's better for the program to win 7-8 and go to a shit bowl and continue recruiting than go 4-5 and have serious doubts about the direction under Pete. -
IIRC both throws came on the game sealing TD drive. He could have gone 0-2 for 0 yards and a punt and who knows, maybe we have nothing to talk about since 92.brchco12 said:
2-2 for a whopping 11 yards, but stillDoogles said:
I'll take this a little further. Cody Pickett stepped in and was one of Washington's most prolific passers in 2001. It's about recruiting great players and having them be ready. People forget the Tui got hurt in the Rose Bowl and it was Pickett who stepped in and helped keep that game in hand. You're either good or you're not.TTJ said:
Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?RavennaDawg said:Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play.
If Browning is the best guy, he needs to play. And Pete needs to recruit somebody who will be ready to take over in 2019 that's not named Browning regardless. I think Browning is the guy, but i'm in the minority in thinking that Lindquist still has some game in him.
As mentioned before, the slightest improvement can be a 2-3 game difference. If Browning is worth those victories, it's better for the program to win 7-8 and go to a shit bowl and continue recruiting than go 4-5 and have serious doubts about the direction under Pete.
The point is he was ready to play. Last time we've had two NFL QBs on the roster at the same time. -
Why do you hate Picket and Stanback or Stanback and Jake. Before I get corrected, Stanback did play (at least practice) at QB for the Patriots.Doogles said:
IIRC both throws came on the game sealing TD drive. He could have gone 0-2 for 0 yards and a punt and who knows, maybe we have nothing to talk about since 92.brchco12 said:
2-2 for a whopping 11 yards, but stillDoogles said:
I'll take this a little further. Cody Pickett stepped in and was one of Washington's most prolific passers in 2001. It's about recruiting great players and having them be ready. People forget the Tui got hurt in the Rose Bowl and it was Pickett who stepped in and helped keep that game in hand. You're either good or you're not.TTJ said:
Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?RavennaDawg said:Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play.
If Browning is the best guy, he needs to play. And Pete needs to recruit somebody who will be ready to take over in 2019 that's not named Browning regardless. I think Browning is the guy, but i'm in the minority in thinking that Lindquist still has some game in him.
As mentioned before, the slightest improvement can be a 2-3 game difference. If Browning is worth those victories, it's better for the program to win 7-8 and go to a shit bowl and continue recruiting than go 4-5 and have serious doubts about the direction under Pete.
The point is he was ready to play. Last time we've had two NFL QBs on the roster at the same time. -
Came in last minute of the 3rd quarter and QB'd 3 plays for net 9 yards (first play being a near fumble on hand off exchange) and Tui came back first play in the 4th and handed off for a 4th down conversion.Doogles said:
IIRC both throws came on the game sealing TD drive. He could have gone 0-2 for 0 yards and a punt and who knows, maybe we have nothing to talk about since 92.brchco12 said:
2-2 for a whopping 11 yards, but stillDoogles said:
I'll take this a little further. Cody Pickett stepped in and was one of Washington's most prolific passers in 2001. It's about recruiting great players and having them be ready. People forget the Tui got hurt in the Rose Bowl and it was Pickett who stepped in and helped keep that game in hand. You're either good or you're not.TTJ said:
Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?RavennaDawg said:Whomever gives us the best chance to win should play. Why is this so difficult?
If Browning plays in 2015, he will be worlds better as a true soph in 2016 than he will as a rs-frosh. And he will be better in 2017, and 2018.
No one has ever said "That guy would be a better player if only he had spent last year on the bench in stead of seeing the field."
If Lindquist gives us the best chance to win, he should play.
If Browning is the best guy, he needs to play. And Pete needs to recruit somebody who will be ready to take over in 2019 that's not named Browning regardless. I think Browning is the guy, but i'm in the minority in thinking that Lindquist still has some game in him.
As mentioned before, the slightest improvement can be a 2-3 game difference. If Browning is worth those victories, it's better for the program to win 7-8 and go to a shit bowl and continue recruiting than go 4-5 and have serious doubts about the direction under Pete.
The point is he was ready to play. Last time we've had two NFL QBs on the roster at the same time.
Went on to score that possession.
You're not wrong, but you're not right
-
Drunk posting rules!TTJ said:Riddle me this, shit-for-brains: how good was Saint Marques in 2001?
Marques got *much* better every year he was on campus. People forget that, although he created a lot of (justified) excitement in '97, he wasn't actually very effective and didn't really win games. That came later.RoadDawg55 said:Disagree. Tui won a Rose Bowl and popped off in 2000. But if Shane Fortney would have stayed, Tui would have redshirted and been great in 2001!!1 It's stupid Jerry. Tui played because he had to, just like Browning might have to. They aren't the same scenario because the '97 team had Rose Bowl expectations, but it was a case of the best QB stepping in and playing when needed.
Had Marques redshirted, then been coming off a Rose Bowl MVP performance as a junior, he would have entered his senior year as a leading Heisman candidate. We can debate how good that '01 team could have been with Marques at the helm, but nobody can debate that both Marques and the Huskies would have been much better with him at QB in '01 than he and they were in '97. That's the valid comparison.
I freely concede Pickett was really good in 2001. (In retrospect, it was his best year by far.) But he wasn't as good as Marques would have been. UW with Marques doesn't lose at Corvallis in '01. And they sure as fuck don't lose that Holiday Bowl. Even the Miami game probably would have been a somewhat dignified (albeit losing) effort.Doogles said:I'll take this a little further. Cody Pickett stepped in and was one of Washington's most prolific passers in 2001. It's about recruiting great players and having them be ready. People forget the Tui got hurt in the Rose Bowl and it was Pickett who stepped in and helped keep that game in hand. You're either good or you're not.
