[Goose]

When your team's starting QB goes down with an apparent injury, you should be horrified, begging the universe to make sure he is OK and can come back in the next play.  How many Stanford fans can honestly say they felt this way when Chryst went down?  The fact that many Stanford fans thought "hey, maybe this will give Costello a chance," and a coaching staff learning it's #1 QB is the guy it thought was #3, is a sad commentary, but better late than never I guess.

"Doesn't know the offense as well" is just a canard.  It doesn't matter if QB A knows the offense better than QB C, if he can't execute more than 50% of it effectively.  If QB C knows 50% of the offense, but can execute it effectively 75% of the time, that's who has to play.  Even assuming you buy into the notion Chryst was the better QB option because he knew the offense more than Costello, it's really, really hard to tell exactly what Chryst does better than Costello after watching the UCLA game. And it's especially difficult to think Chryst does more valuable things for Stanford's team than what Costello can do for it. Small sample size, I know, but...

Costello has the best throwing arm of any available Stanford QB.  He is the most fluid athlete of all the available QBs.  He operates with a greater sense of urgency than any Stanford QB.  And - and I think this is important due to Shaw's calm demeanor - Costello has a fiery passion and enthusiasm that provides life to the game that is simply lacking with Burns and Chryst.  As Bryce Love said, KJ has a command of the huddle that inspires the offense. 

Last year U$C switched to RS Frosh Darnold after brutal games from Max Browne, and from 1-3, ended up 9-3, with a Rose Bowl trophy.  In 2012, after starting with Nunes, Stanford went with RS Frosh Hogan and won its own Rose Bowl.  Costello may not be Darnold, but it sure seems he can be Hogan, maybe even a bit better?

OutsiderFan, this must be a record. I agree with ALMOST everything in your post. I think many of us were afraid that Costello wouldn't get a real chance to play more than a series in this game. It is unfortunate that Chryst got hurt, but it did force a "make do" approach with Costello. To his credit, Shaw said that while they had to simplify things for Costello, it wasn't a problem. Shaw also said they has to change some things during the game and Costello coped with it. While I like what Costello did last night, I am sure that he will have his issues too. Accuracy is still a problem for all our QBs, and UCLA has a truly BAD defense. We shouldn't make the same error that many did last year, that Chryst was much better than Burns because he beat six teams with really bad defenses. Against a more technically complex defense, it is possible Chryst is the better option. However, as you say, if he can't make the plays, it doesn't matter that he knows what to do. I think right now almost everyone would like to see Costello get the nod. He doesn't fix everything, but he plays!

[Goose]

When your team's starting QB goes down with an apparent injury, you should be horrified, begging the universe to make sure he is OK and can come back in the next play.  How many Stanford fans can honestly say they felt this way when Chryst went down?  The fact that many Stanford fans thought "hey, maybe this will give Costello a chance," and a coaching staff learning it's #1 QB is the guy it thought was #3, is a sad commentary, but better late than never I guess.

"Doesn't know the offense as well" is just a canard.  It doesn't matter if QB A knows the offense better than QB C, if he can't execute more than 50% of it effectively.  If QB C knows 50% of the offense, but can execute it effectively 75% of the time, that's who has to play.  Even assuming you buy into the notion Chryst was the better QB option because he knew the offense more than Costello, it's really, really hard to tell exactly what Chryst does better than Costello after watching the UCLA game. And it's especially difficult to think Chryst does more valuable things for Stanford's team than what Costello can do for it. Small sample size, I know, but...

Costello has the best throwing arm of any available Stanford QB.  He is the most fluid athlete of all the available QBs.  He operates with a greater sense of urgency than any Stanford QB.  And - and I think this is important due to Shaw's calm demeanor - Costello has a fiery passion and enthusiasm that provides life to the game that is simply lacking with Burns and Chryst.  As Bryce Love said, KJ has a command of the huddle that inspires the offense. 

Last year U$C switched to RS Frosh Darnold after brutal games from Max Browne, and from 1-3, ended up 9-3, with a Rose Bowl trophy.  In 2012, after starting with Nunes, Stanford went with RS Frosh Hogan and won its own Rose Bowl.  Costello may not be Darnold, but it sure seems he can be Hogan, maybe even a bit better?

OutsiderFan, this must be a record. I agree with ALMOST everything in your post. I think many of us were afraid that Costello wouldn't get a real chance to play more than a series in this game. It is unfortunate that Chryst got hurt, but it did force a "make do" approach with Costello. To his credit, Shaw said that while they had to simplify things for Costello, it wasn't a problem. Shaw also said they has to change some things during the game and Costello coped with it. While I like what Costello did last night, I am sure that he will have his issues too. Accuracy is still a problem for all our QBs, and UCLA has a truly BAD defense. We shouldn't make the same error that many did last year, that Chryst was much better than Burns because he beat six teams with really bad defenses. Against a more technically complex defense, it is possible Chryst is the better option. However, as you say, if he can't make the plays, it doesn't matter that he knows what to do. I think right now almost everyone would like to see Costello get the nod. He doesn't fix everything, but he plays!