[BostonCard]

https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...5820720128

I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.

Yup, I would say it is a good example of epistemic closure.  Hard to be truly surprised, other than maybe not expecting an announcement before the game.  Certainly Shaw never gave an indication that Chryst was ahead (though I don't think he gave any indication that Burns was ahead).  Agreed that though they appeared close, Burns probably won the starting nod on the basis of performance that we are privy to (though, again, we don't have as much information as Shaw does).

Anyways, nice to see a starter named.  Now we can get ready for the Ryan Burns era at Stanford.

Next question... what does Chryst do?  Wait two years for his "turn" and hope he beats out KJ Costello?

BC

[BostonCard]

https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...5820720128

I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.

Yup, I would say it is a good example of epistemic closure.  Hard to be truly surprised, other than maybe not expecting an announcement before the game.  Certainly Shaw never gave an indication that Chryst was ahead (though I don't think he gave any indication that Burns was ahead).  Agreed that though they appeared close, Burns probably won the starting nod on the basis of performance that we are privy to (though, again, we don't have as much information as Shaw does).

Anyways, nice to see a starter named.  Now we can get ready for the Ryan Burns era at Stanford.

Next question... what does Chryst do?  Wait two years for his "turn" and hope he beats out KJ Costello?

BC