[msqueri]

We most certainly have not had a good QB for several seasons. Tanner McKee wasn't even good at Stanford and he's on an NFL roster. The tantalizing tease of a six game Covid season, even worse because Mills lost out on a game, was the last time we really were good at the position. Half a decade ago!

Ah, then we're on the same basic page.  I wasn't saying Gulb was the worst ever, or the entire reason Stanford looks bad, just that he's bad enough to give someone else a shot.  They seem determined to prove they were right with him, despite the results, so won't even try another in garbage time.  That's just bad for the program in my opinion.

Where we differ is that I don’t think it’s necessarily stubbornness, confirmation bias, or any other error in judgment leading to sticking with Gulbranson but rather a clear-eyed determination that he’s the best we’ve got and the most likely helmsman to scratch out the incremental progress and hope critical to having this season put something out there that doesn’t feel like a total waste. Fans often have magical thinking about backups and I don’t think the room that keeps getting beat out by Daniels and Gulbranson is likely to give us good QB play. You and others may say what is there to lose but from Reich and Luck’s perspective I think the answer might be quite a bit. An ethos of meritocracy. A culture of wanting to win every game and taking every moment seriously. A third or fourth win. 

The wildcard to me is Rizk. He actually showed some upside at the Power Four level last year and there are rumblings he has passed Brown and is looking more comfortable. We may have interesting developments ahead at QB.

[msqueri]

We most certainly have not had a good QB for several seasons. Tanner McKee wasn't even good at Stanford and he's on an NFL roster. The tantalizing tease of a six game Covid season, even worse because Mills lost out on a game, was the last time we really were good at the position. Half a decade ago!

Ah, then we're on the same basic page.  I wasn't saying Gulb was the worst ever, or the entire reason Stanford looks bad, just that he's bad enough to give someone else a shot.  They seem determined to prove they were right with him, despite the results, so won't even try another in garbage time.  That's just bad for the program in my opinion.

Where we differ is that I don’t think it’s necessarily stubbornness, confirmation bias, or any other error in judgment leading to sticking with Gulbranson but rather a clear-eyed determination that he’s the best we’ve got and the most likely helmsman to scratch out the incremental progress and hope critical to having this season put something out there that doesn’t feel like a total waste. Fans often have magical thinking about backups and I don’t think the room that keeps getting beat out by Daniels and Gulbranson is likely to give us good QB play. You and others may say what is there to lose but from Reich and Luck’s perspective I think the answer might be quite a bit. An ethos of meritocracy. A culture of wanting to win every game and taking every moment seriously. A third or fourth win. 

The wildcard to me is Rizk. He actually showed some upside at the Power Four level last year and there are rumblings he has passed Brown and is looking more comfortable. We may have interesting developments ahead at QB.