[Goose]

I suppose this is semantics but it hinges on the word "can". If Chryst plays like he did against Oregon (where he wasn't asked to do too much because of our run game, but still hit some great passes) then we'd likely win. But Chryst is ridiculously streaky, so who knows if that Chryst would show up? At this point I wouldn't bet on it and assume that we'll get "bad Chryst", but you never know! We might get "good Chryst"!

So, yeah, Chryst can beat WSU, but I'm not confident at all that he would.

My problem is that I have never seen the "Good Chryst" when we needed it. We always get it when we are running well and probably would be fine with a "doesn't suck too bad Chryst". Certainly, running well can be connected to a good passing game, but from what I have seen, the running game has already done significant damage before we see "good Chryst". He has had his chances, particularly against SDSU, to take the game on his back. He hasn't yet come close to doing that.

[Goose]

I suppose this is semantics but it hinges on the word "can". If Chryst plays like he did against Oregon (where he wasn't asked to do too much because of our run game, but still hit some great passes) then we'd likely win. But Chryst is ridiculously streaky, so who knows if that Chryst would show up? At this point I wouldn't bet on it and assume that we'll get "bad Chryst", but you never know! We might get "good Chryst"!

So, yeah, Chryst can beat WSU, but I'm not confident at all that he would.

My problem is that I have never seen the "Good Chryst" when we needed it. We always get it when we are running well and probably would be fine with a "doesn't suck too bad Chryst". Certainly, running well can be connected to a good passing game, but from what I have seen, the running game has already done significant damage before we see "good Chryst". He has had his chances, particularly against SDSU, to take the game on his back. He hasn't yet come close to doing that.