Originally Posted by dlphg9:
It absolutely was anti Cook. There was like 3 people that were in favor of Cook.
Cook took a heaping handful of crow and shoved it down our throats, but the consensus absolutely was anti Cook. Got booed pretty heavily before the KSU game. Quite glad he proved me wrong and stupid and am hoping Drinkwitz will do the same when we get into the rough portion of the schedule. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
I saw what Cook did last year. What did he do that was supposed to instil confidence? He was bad.
He continued to grow and mature in the system, one would assume. People were dumping on Drink (the guy who literally saw him every single day in practice) for starting him. We're, somehow, to the point where the fans know more than the coaches who live and breathe this program for their livelihood.
What did YOU see from the other players that led you to believe they'd be a better option? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Snatch:
Cook took a heaping handful of crow and shoved it down our throats, but the consensus absolutely was anti Cook. Got booed pretty heavily before the KSU game. Quite glad he proved me wrong and stupid and am hoping Drinkwitz will do the same when we get into the rough portion of the schedule.
Why? Why would anyone be dumb enough to boo a player BEFORE a game? WTF is wrong with people? [Reply]
Brady Cook was awful last season & frankly not any good the first two weeks this season. No need for revisionist history. It also appears that maybe (?) the injury he had last season in fact did affect his performance. Either that or he's improved, maybe some of both IDK.
That said I thought the biggest issue was the offense itself. He isn't Corbin Berkstressor, you can win with him & we're seeing the evidence of that as its plain as day they held things back relative to changes in the offense the first two weeks & unleashed them on KState.
There are still issues with respect to 3rd down efficiency, those #'s are atrocious & reflect on Cook as well as the offense itself. How much on each? No idea, just that it's an issue.
At this point the Cook narrative is developing & ultimately TBD. [Reply]
Originally Posted by warpaint*:
No need for revisionist history.
Exactly. Some of us noted, from the beginning, that Drink would play the guy that gives us the best chance of winning, whether that is Cook, Horn, or whomever. Others noted that if Drink started Cook, he should be fired. THAT was the difference.
Horn may still start some games this season. Who knows? But I'm not sure anyone should be surprised/upset that the guy with the C on his chest is leading men/winning some games. [Reply]
Typically coaches play the best player but not always. I get the frustration clamoring for a ballyhooed guy you haven't seen play given what we've been served up until the last two weeks. (One of the more famous screw ups happened here with Rich Gannon 25ish years ago.)
Especially given the number of times we've seen Drink do stupid things on the field & look generally clueless.
IDK where this thing is going ultimately which is tremendous improvement from where I thought we were before the season. The league is down, this team could have a really good yr. Or not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by warpaint*:
Typically coaches play the best player but not always. I get the frustration clamoring for a ballyhooed guy you haven't seen play given what we've been served up until the last two weeks. (One of the more famous screw ups happened here with Rich Gannon 25ish years ago.)
Especially given the number of times we've seen Drink do stupid things on the field & look generally clueless.
IDK where this thing is going ultimately which is tremendous improvement from where I thought we were before the season. The league is down, this team could have a really good yr. Or not.
In that case, though, we'd very thoroughly seen both play significant snaps in live action games.
I have no idea what you're talking about regarding "look generally clueless." Did the camera catch him looking some way that you felt was "clueless"? Regardless, how the **** could you possibly know what was going through his head? I'd like to think we're better than this as fans, but we clearly are not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
It absolutely was anti Cook. There was like 3 people that were in favor of Cook.
It wasn't anti-Cook as much as being anti-Drink not having a QB competition and basically gifting Cook the starting job.
The three people I know on record here going into the season saying Cook should regardless start were myself, DJLN, and Pitt Gorilla off the top of my head. There might be more but I know those are the 3 I remember.
Originally Posted by warpaint*:
Brady Cook was awful last season & frankly not any good the first two weeks this season. No need for revisionist history.
No, it's not revisionist history when there are literally posts here from before the season saying Cook gave the team the best chance to win this season.
He's doing exactly what I thought he would, honestly probably better than I thought. I thought he would mitigate turnovers and be athletic enough to run the offense. His deep ball (maybe Luther deserves more credit on that) is a pleasant surprise. [Reply]
