Wilcox comments:future outlook

4,400 Views | 46 Replies | Last: 5 mo ago by calumnus
SouthKBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We still have no QB. Wilcox will continue to have Jackson and Finley split reps. "If you got two QBs, you have no QB". Neither of these two will be the guy. We will have the same issue we did with Garbers and McIlwain. Wilcox inability to recruit or get a transfer of a talented qb is only the tip of the iceberg.

Luckhurst is still the kicker. Wilcox believes in this kicker while he has missed 6-9. What's worst is that if this kid is still our kicker, we have no better options. Even if we get in close games that we had no reason for it to be close to begin with, will prolly lose because of a missed game winning field goal.

Wilcox really needs to be fired. If he's not fired by mid October, we are more screwed than we know.

We all see Wilcox is not the guy, what's worst is that Ott, hunter and co sees that too. If we don't find our game and win 6 plus games, will lose our talent and the beginning ACC will be worst then they already will be.

I hope I'm wrong and our stars transferring, but bottom line is Fire Wilcox.
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SouthKBear said:

We still have no QB. Wilcox will continue to have Jackson and Donnely split reps. "If you got two QBs, you have no QB". Neither of these two will be the guy. We will have the same issue we did with Garbers and McIlwain. Wilcox inability to recruit or get a transfer of a talented qb is only the tip of the iceberg.

Luckhurst is still the kicker. Wilcox believes in this kicker while he has missed 6-9. What's worst is that if this kid is still our kicker, we have no better options. Even if we get in close games that we had no reason for it to be close to begin with, will prolly lose because of a missed game winning field goal.

Wilcox really needs to be fired. If he's not fired by mid October, we are more screwed than we know.

We all see Wilcox is not the guy, what's worst is that Ott, hunter and co sees that too. If we don't find our game and win 6 plus games, will lose our talent and the beginning ACC will be worst then they already will be.

I hope I'm wrong and our stars transferring, but bottom line is Fire Wilcox.


What did Ott and Hunter say about Wilcox not being the guy?
C6Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's obvious that Jackson is considered the #1 QB since he has played the bulk of the offensive snaps when not out of the game due to injury concerns. I'm not sure who Donnelly is, but Finley has been used as a backup and was quickly pulled from the Auburn game and replaced by Jackson which tells me Jackson plays if not injured. Finley better stay ready because Jackson is an injury waiting to happen unless he learns to start sliding and not taking on defenders head on. Don't mind both getting playing time since both are raw and need reps.

I'm a little surprised Luckhurst is struggling but is there anyone behind him who's better? I don't know, do you?

I don't see Wilcox or Knowlton as an answer to anything but we're stuck with them until a new chancellor hopefully fixes the problems.
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wilcox cannot be fired. There is no money to have a competitive team in the near future anyway. Just hang on until the Great Realignment".
GoOskie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SouthKBear said:

We still have no QB. Wilcox will continue to have Jackson and Donnely split reps. "If you got two QBs, you have no QB". Neither of these two will be the guy. We will have the same issue we did with Garbers and McIlwain. Wilcox inability to recruit or get a transfer of a talented qb is only the tip of the iceberg.

Luckhurst is still the kicker. Wilcox believes in this kicker while he has missed 6-9. What's worst is that if this kid is still our kicker, we have no better options. Even if we get in close games that we had no reason for it to be close to begin with, will prolly lose because of a missed game winning field goal.

Wilcox really needs to be fired. If he's not fired by mid October, we are more screwed than we know.

We all see Wilcox is not the guy, what's worst is that Ott, hunter and co sees that too. If we don't find our game and win 6 plus games, will lose our talent and the beginning ACC will be worst then they already will be.

I hope I'm wrong and our stars transferring, but bottom line is Fire Wilcox.
Can we all wait a couple more games before we crap all over the season?
StarsDoMatter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's only going to get worse. Much worse.

Wilcox actually has a decent out of conference record. It's in conference where he loses most of his games. In 7 years at cal he has never had a winning conference record.

We will beat asu and Stanford, but that's it. PAC-12 is great this year. It's going to be long long season.
CarmelBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sure - write the buyout check and you can even hire the new guy.
Read but not Signed (from somewhere in Colorado)
AD Knowlton
JimSox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
When Jackson got hurt and left the game briefly against Idaho Finley came in and completed a crucial fourth down pass. So I'm not surprised Wilcox hinted both may play vs. Washington. Other teams switch up quarterbacks during games. I think it might be a good idea for us, depending on the situation, given their different skill sets. At least until one of them steps up and wins the job outright, hopefully SJV.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JimSox said:

When Jackson got hurt and left the game briefly against Idaho Finley came in and completed a crucial fourth down pass. So I'm not surprised Wilcox hinted both may play vs. Washington. Other teams switch up quarterbacks during games. I think it might be a good idea for us, depending on the situation, given their different skill sets. At least until one of them steps up and wins the job outright, hopefully SJV.
Maybe throwing them a bone. At least, you'll be able to say that you played against UW.

Or, they really are close to even, in their own ways. If so, if one goes off track, the other one can go in.

Seeing Mendoza on video recently, I'm not sure that he has the presence to go in and keep it together. Looked pretty good in his hs films, but that was with rubber bullets flying. Or maybe, he's just taking more time to learn the Spav system.

Whoever's back there needs to let it fly. We've got guys who can bring it in.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SouthKBear said:

We still have no QB. Wilcox will continue to have Jackson and Finley split reps. "If you got two QBs, you have no QB". Neither of these two will be the guy. We will have the same issue we did with Garbers and McIlwain. Wilcox inability to recruit or get a transfer of a talented qb is only the tip of the iceberg.

Luckhurst is still the kicker. Wilcox believes in this kicker while he has missed 6-9. What's worst is that if this kid is still our kicker, we have no better options. Even if we get in close games that we had no reason for it to be close to begin with, will prolly lose because of a missed game winning field goal.

Wilcox really needs to be fired. If he's not fired by mid October, we are more screwed than we know.

We all see Wilcox is not the guy, what's worst is that Ott, hunter and co sees that too. If we don't find our game and win 6 plus games, will lose our talent and the beginning ACC will be worst then they already will be.

I hope I'm wrong and our stars transferring, but bottom line is Fire Wilcox.


Do us all a favor, dont pretend you speak for everyone. The arrogance in your post is astounding.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JimSox said:

When Jackson got hurt and left the game briefly against Idaho Finley came in and completed a crucial fourth down pass. So I'm not surprised Wilcox hinted both may play vs. Washington. Other teams switch up quarterbacks during games. I think it might be a good idea for us, depending on the situation, given their different skill sets. At least until one of them steps up and wins the job outright, hopefully SJV.


I honestly took wilcox's comments as more gamesmanship and forcing UW to prepare for both QBs. I fully expect Jackson is the guy.
Strykur
How long do you want to ignore this user?
For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
PtownBear1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
Strykur
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
If we want to bring in coaching, the coaching is now way better, so to me it's a wash.
JRL.02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Just me but I would be surprised if Wilcox was fired after this season. If changing conference's was not on the horizon then maybe, but there is going to be so much to do that I think a football coach search would not be wise.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
According to Buddhist philosophy, "unfulfilled" expectations cause suffering . Given the causal assumption is correct, logically, if we do not have any unfulfilled desires, we cannot suffer; in other words, we find something we may call "happiness".

I suspect there is very high likelihood that the majority of CFB {including(especially?) Cal fans} will live/endure a life of unfulfilled CFB expectations.
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
I'm with you. Garbers' last one and one third seasons (one being the COVID season) here were really derailed by Musgrave. As it turns out, it would have been better to keep Baldwin through the end of Garbers' time in Berkeley.

Jackson could turn out to be better than Garbers, but Garbers was a good QB for the Golden Bears.
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
chazzed said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
I'm with you. Garbers' last one and one third seasons (one being the COVID season) here were really derailed by Musgrave. As it turns out, it would have been better to keep Baldwin through the end of Garbers' time in Berkeley.

Jackson could turn out to be better than Garbers, but Garbers was a good QB for the Golden Bears.
Yah I think Garbers and Baldwin were finally on the same page at the end of 2019 culminating in a bowl win v. Illinois. In true Cal fashion we got rid of Baldwin when things were getting better (not when things were immeasurably bad his first few seasons).
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Yeah, but I'd rather just have Garbers. Garbers is a fascinating QB to me. Weak arm and didn't see the field well, but has been able to stick around on some practice squads. He was good at mostly only attempting throws he knew he could make, and had great instincts about when to run to pick up yards. I think how sneakily good Garbers was covered up a lot for our bad OCs.
bencgilmore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concernedparent said:


Yeah, but I'd rather just have Garbers. Garbers is a fascinating QB to me. Weak arm and didn't see the field well, but has been able to stick around on some practice squads. He was good at mostly only attempting throws he knew he could make, and had great instincts about when to run to pick up yards. I think how sneakily good Garbers was covered up a lot for our bad OCs.
Definitely. For a guy who ran a 4.83 at the combine he sure had a knack for timely 15 yard runs for first downs. And his arm was similarly deceptive.. nothing flashy for the most part, but the occasional 30 or 40 yard rainbow thats perfectly placed.
eastbayyoungbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KoreAmBear said:

chazzed said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
I'm with you. Garbers' last one and one third seasons (one being the COVID season) here were really derailed by Musgrave. As it turns out, it would have been better to keep Baldwin through the end of Garbers' time in Berkeley.

Jackson could turn out to be better than Garbers, but Garbers was a good QB for the Golden Bears.
Yah I think Garbers and Baldwin were finally on the same page at the end of 2019 culminating in a bowl win v. Illinois. In true Cal fashion we got rid of Baldwin when things were getting better (not when things were immeasurably bad his first few seasons).
I think there's a lot of reasons why Beau was probably gone at the end of that season no matter what. From recollection his family was very unhappy in Berkeley.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.


You are comparing a QB in his 4th season starting as a 5th year senior to a QB in his 2nd game starting. Jackson has far more upside. But yes, if we had a 5th year senior Garbers, he should be starting.

And while I believe Spavital is a huge upgrade over Baldwin and Musgrave, I have seen little evidence of it in his playcalling this far.
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
eastbayyoungbear said:

KoreAmBear said:

chazzed said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
I'm with you. Garbers' last one and one third seasons (one being the COVID season) here were really derailed by Musgrave. As it turns out, it would have been better to keep Baldwin through the end of Garbers' time in Berkeley.

Jackson could turn out to be better than Garbers, but Garbers was a good QB for the Golden Bears.
Yah I think Garbers and Baldwin were finally on the same page at the end of 2019 culminating in a bowl win v. Illinois. In true Cal fashion we got rid of Baldwin when things were getting better (not when things were immeasurably bad his first few seasons).
I think there's a lot of reasons why Beau was probably gone at the end of that season no matter what. From recollection his family was very unhappy in Berkeley.
Stark contrast to another OC, TFS, who is single and embraced Berkeley enough to actually live in town. Who does that?
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.


You are comparing a QB in his 4th season starting as a 5th year senior to a QB in his 2nd game starting. Jackson has far more upside. But yes, if we had a 5th year senior Garbers, he should be starting.
Garbers' best statistical season was his RS Soph year... the same year that Jackson is.
eastbayyoungbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KoreAmBear said:

eastbayyoungbear said:

KoreAmBear said:

chazzed said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
I'm with you. Garbers' last one and one third seasons (one being the COVID season) here were really derailed by Musgrave. As it turns out, it would have been better to keep Baldwin through the end of Garbers' time in Berkeley.

Jackson could turn out to be better than Garbers, but Garbers was a good QB for the Golden Bears.
Yah I think Garbers and Baldwin were finally on the same page at the end of 2019 culminating in a bowl win v. Illinois. In true Cal fashion we got rid of Baldwin when things were getting better (not when things were immeasurably bad his first few seasons).
I think there's a lot of reasons why Beau was probably gone at the end of that season no matter what. From recollection his family was very unhappy in Berkeley.
Stark contrast to another OC, TFS, who is single and embraced Berkeley enough to actually live in town. Who does that?


I'm hoping TF is still doing analyst work for us. Would love to know if Sam is going through the Manning drill regularly.
Cal Strong!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoOskie said:


Can we all wait a couple more games before we crap all over the season?
Wilcox has had seven years. Why would a few more games be necessary to make an evaluation?
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concernedparent said:

calumnus said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.


You are comparing a QB in his 4th season starting as a 5th year senior to a QB in his 2nd game starting. Jackson has far more upside. But yes, if we had a 5th year senior Garbers, he should be starting.
Garbers' best statistical season was his RS Soph year... the same year that Jackson is.


That was Garbers' second year as a starter, his third year in the system under the same OC. And you are looking at full year stats.

Jackson has been here since Spring and has had two starts, both of which we won. Why so quick to dismiss him?
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
StarsDoMatter said:

It's only going to get worse. Much worse.

Wilcox actually has a decent out of conference record. It's in conference where he loses most of his games. In 7 years at cal he has never had a winning conference record.

We will beat asu and Stanford, but that's it. PAC-12 is great this year. It's going to be long long season.

That (4-8) may end up being the case, but to state a depressing future definitively like that sounds really bizarre, coming from a fan. We're 2-1 and we played Auburn closely. I'm not ready to throw in the towel quite yet.

I would describe our performance thus far as "a little bit disappointing", based on...
1) our lack of offense against Auburn
2) special teams
3) passing game and slow start against Idaho
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

StarsDoMatter said:

It's only going to get worse. Much worse.

Wilcox actually has a decent out of conference record. It's in conference where he loses most of his games. In 7 years at cal he has never had a winning conference record.

We will beat asu and Stanford, but that's it. PAC-12 is great this year. It's going to be long long season.

That (4-8) may end up being the case, but to state a depressing future definitively like that sounds really bizarre, coming from a fan. We're 2-1 and we played Auburn closely. I'm not ready to throw in the towel quite yet.


I agree we probably end up at 4 or 5 wins, but I'm also not going to get upset about the games we haven't lost yet. Getting mad over something that hasnt happened yet seems futile to me.
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SouthKBear said:

We still have no QB. Wilcox will continue to have Jackson and Finley split reps. "If you got two QBs, you have no QB". Neither of these two will be the guy. We will have the same issue we did with Garbers and McIlwain. Wilcox inability to recruit or get a transfer of a talented qb is only the tip of the iceberg.

Luckhurst is still the kicker. Wilcox believes in this kicker while he has missed 6-9. What's worst is that if this kid is still our kicker, we have no better options. Even if we get in close games that we had no reason for it to be close to begin with, will prolly lose because of a missed game winning field goal.

Wilcox really needs to be fired. If he's not fired by mid October, we are more screwed than we know.

We all see Wilcox is not the guy, what's worst is that Ott, hunter and co sees that too. If we don't find our game and win 6 plus games, will lose our talent and the beginning ACC will be worst then they already will be.

I hope I'm wrong and our stars transferring, but bottom line is Fire Wilcox.


You have been paying too much attention to what Wilcox is saying and too little attention to what Wilcox is doing.
Whenever Jackson is healthy, he plays. If he is hurt he does not. If he is questionable, he might or might not play depending on the circumstances.

Finley is an excellent backup. Tall and accurate as a passer. NOT quite as accurate as Jackson but close and is nowhere near the runner that Jackson is.
Clearly Jackson is our starter Finley is a backup. A good backup but a backup nevertheless

Wilcox is doing what coaches do to confuse opposing coaches and to encourage his backup QB's to stay out of the Transfer Portal
But "actions speaks louder than words" as is commonly acknowledged

Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Strykur said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
If we want to bring in coaching, the coaching is now way better, so to me it's a wash.
You're joking, rights? Our coaching absolutely stinks.
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

concernedparent said:

calumnus said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.


You are comparing a QB in his 4th season starting as a 5th year senior to a QB in his 2nd game starting. Jackson has far more upside. But yes, if we had a 5th year senior Garbers, he should be starting.
Garbers' best statistical season was his RS Soph year... the same year that Jackson is.


That was Garbers' second year as a starter, his third year in the system under the same OC. And you are looking at full year stats.

Jackson has been here since Spring and has had two starts, both of which we won. Why so quick to dismiss him?
Really have to stretch for the narrative there. He played basically a quarter against North Texas (a win brought home by the running backs and Finley), didn't start but played 3/4 of the game against Auburn (loss), and beat an FCS team with an awful statline. Of course he can and will improve but we're starting from maybe the rawest starting QB I've ever seen at Cal. The ceiling might be higher than Garbers but the floor is a sinkhole.
Strykur
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

Strykur said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.
If we want to bring in coaching, the coaching is now way better, so to me it's a wash.
You're joking, rights? Our coaching absolutely stinks.

Spav? Much less stinkier than Musgrave and Baldloss.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concernedparent said:

calumnus said:

concernedparent said:

calumnus said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.


You are comparing a QB in his 4th season starting as a 5th year senior to a QB in his 2nd game starting. Jackson has far more upside. But yes, if we had a 5th year senior Garbers, he should be starting.
Garbers' best statistical season was his RS Soph year... the same year that Jackson is.


That was Garbers' second year as a starter, his third year in the system under the same OC. And you are looking at full year stats.

Jackson has been here since Spring and has had two starts, both of which we won. Why so quick to dismiss him?
Really have to stretch for the narrative there. He played basically a quarter against North Texas (a win brought home by the running backs and Finley), didn't start but played 3/4 of the game against Auburn (loss), and beat an FCS team with an awful statline. Of course he can and will improve but we're starting from maybe the rawest starting QB I've ever seen at Cal. The ceiling might be higher than Garbers but the floor is a sinkhole.


Fine his third "start," you are still comparing his initial games to a full season of Garbers in his third year in the system and his second season as a starter.

In Garber's first year he was at 119.9 QBR. In his college career thus far Jackson has a 125.6 QBR.

Jackson's only "bad" game of his brief career was Auburn, which he didn't start due to injury. He did throw his first two interceptions but the first was 4th and 20 with time expiring at the half. The second was 4th and 13 on the Auburn 18, down 4 with less than 2 minutes remaining in the 4th quarter, ie good risks trying to force it and make something happen. Without those two desperation throws Jackson's career stats are: 35 of 58 (60.3%) for 410 yards 3 TDs O Int and a 136.8 QBR, just ahead of Davis Webb 135.6 QBR in 2016.

And he is only going to get better and more comfortable, developing better timing with his receivers. Plus he can run. Give the guy a chance.


concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

concernedparent said:

calumnus said:

concernedparent said:

calumnus said:

PtownBear1 said:

Strykur said:

For what it's worth Finley and Jackson combined are way way way better than what we had with Garbers and McElwain.
Disagree. I prefer Garbers and think he would have really shined his final season with a better OC and game day coaching.


You are comparing a QB in his 4th season starting as a 5th year senior to a QB in his 2nd game starting. Jackson has far more upside. But yes, if we had a 5th year senior Garbers, he should be starting.
Garbers' best statistical season was his RS Soph year... the same year that Jackson is.


That was Garbers' second year as a starter, his third year in the system under the same OC. And you are looking at full year stats.

Jackson has been here since Spring and has had two starts, both of which we won. Why so quick to dismiss him?
Really have to stretch for the narrative there. He played basically a quarter against North Texas (a win brought home by the running backs and Finley), didn't start but played 3/4 of the game against Auburn (loss), and beat an FCS team with an awful statline. Of course he can and will improve but we're starting from maybe the rawest starting QB I've ever seen at Cal. The ceiling might be higher than Garbers but the floor is a sinkhole.


Fine his third "start," you are still comparing his initial games to a full season of Garbers in his third year in the system and his second season as a starter.

In Garber's first year he was at 119.9 QBR. In his college career thus far Jackson has a 125.6 QBR.

Jackson's only "bad" game of his brief career was Auburn, which he didn't start due to injury. He did throw his first two interceptions but the first was 4th and 20 with time expiring at the half. The second was 4th and 13 on the Auburn 18, down 4 with less than 2 minutes remaining in the 4th quarter, ie good risks trying to force it and make something happen. Without those two desperation throws Jackson's career stats are: 35 of 58 (60.3%) for 410 yards 3 TDs O Int and a 136.8 QBR, just ahead of Davis Webb 135.6 QBR in 2016.

And he is only going to get better and more comfortable, developing better timing with his receivers. Plus he can run. Give the guy a chance.



You are comparing Jackson's TCU garbage time completions against Tarleton State's 2nd string defense or whatever (10% of his attempts) and an FCS opponent (38% of his attempts) to an entire seasons worth of work (which smooths out outlier performances) against mostly P5 competition. That's not even the point I'm trying to make. I'm saying Jackson is a raw passer and that's very evident on tape. Moreover, I'm lamenting that the coaching staff was not able to land or develop a QB that is Pac 12 caliber right now. Of course I'm giving Jackson a chance, we don't have a choice, but the outlook is not optimistic for this year.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.