getnasty":grixv159 said:I should have done more research Russell doesn't have near a good enough winning percentage to mentioned in the same breath as Browning. Now Tom Brady in NE a better comp.
Wrong! Dilfer won at least ONE big game. Jake Browning won ZERO big games.getnasty":1zo00jn5 said:His legacy will be similar to Trent Dilfers legacy with the Hawks.
THIS!sdog1981":212kmo1q said:How can you defend him? He will always be remembered as the QB who held back the best defenses the school has had since the 1990's.
TwistedHusky":3ism1vrq said:Next year, we have that kid that transferred from (Georgia?) and everyone is going to see what they have been missing.
I am sure Browning did what he could. He just did not have the talent or tools to do the job.
The disappointing part was that so many pieces of a great team were in place. The comment on Gaskin is a good one too. Gaskin was the one that really carried this team.
Gaskin and that defense. However, with the quality of WRs and TEs this team had, it makes you wish the QB was not the massive weak link on the field that he was.
He did what he could, he was just overmatched. It was more just squandering the opportunity we had with all those other great players where not having a great QB made such a difference.
Uncle Si":1kaz5ei7 said:Why do people assert this last 4 years as poor? Played in a national championship semifinal. Played in a rose bowl. Continually a part of the national conversation.
Did it go as well as it could? Certainly not. But it was a remarkable 4 years considering the depths the program rose from.
Now... with the taste back in their mouths, can the Huskies build on it and even take the next (which again is the last) step... thats where they are.
Thats better than 95% of the programs in the country and miles ahead of anyone in the pac 12.
There are 4-6 truly elite programs. Washington is just on the outside of that... as are programs like michigan, auburn, maybe notre dame and Wisconsin in terms of consistency.
This is not bad. You can paint Brownings legacy within that however you want (great stats, didnt win the big one) but hes a significant part of a significant rise in husky football
DomeHawk":36j5dqov said:Uncle Si":36j5dqov said:Why do people assert this last 4 years as poor? Played in a national championship semifinal. Played in a rose bowl. Continually a part of the national conversation.
Did it go as well as it could? Certainly not. But it was a remarkable 4 years considering the depths the program rose from.
Now... with the taste back in their mouths, can the Huskies build on it and even take the next (which again is the last) step... thats where they are.
Thats better than 95% of the programs in the country and miles ahead of anyone in the pac 12.
There are 4-6 truly elite programs. Washington is just on the outside of that... as are programs like michigan, auburn, maybe notre dame and Wisconsin in terms of consistency.
This is not bad. You can paint Brownings legacy within that however you want (great stats, didnt win the big one) but hes a significant part of a significant rise in husky football
It's called perspective, EXCELLENT post!