Locker vs. Crouch

[irafreak]

I remember watching Locker early on in his college career and was really impressed...that said...crouch had the type of blazing speed that could score on every play...that 01 missouri run out of his own endzone was just sick...

[Never Skerd']

Apples and Oranges

 

That highlight video has me convinced Crouch is the better QB. In the first 1:00.

[huKSer]

Umm, the OP was not talking about the players, but how Locker gets a free vacation to NYC to promote himself to the media and the NCAA looks the other way while with Crouch he gets investigated when a friend gives him a sandwich.

[Foppa]

Umm...all I was comparing between the two was the off-field possible NCAA allegations, it's way too obvious the differences on the field. But I guess it was inevitable that the comparison would be made eventually anyway.

 

Sorry huKSer, didn't see your post, but what you said!

[huKSer]

Umm...all I was comparing between the two was the off-field possible NCAA allegations, it's way too obvious the differences on the field. But I guess it was inevitable that the comparison would be made eventually anyway.

 

Sorry huKSer, didn't see your post, but what you said!

Great minds think alike

[deedsker15]

i watched a couple games of locker...i was impressed...with that being said he isn't on the same level as crouch when it comes to college qb...will he do better in the pros...more than likely

[bshirt]

Locker vs. Crouch... the difference.

 

Locker probably plays in the pros.

 

Crouch had better support players.

The difference between Crouch and Locker? Hmmm... one of the two owns more Heisman's than both Washington and Iowa St combined. Other than that, the difference is Locker is better in the passing game while Crouch is light years ahead of him on the ground. Funny how people seem to have forgotten how good of a player Crouch was.

 

The Eric Crouch tape:

 

I don't think you realize how good Locker is. He is equal to, if not better, than what Crouch was at running, he is just in a different offense. He also doesn't have a supporting cast around him. If he played at Nebraska during the Crouch years, there would have been another 3 year dynasty. Unfortunately, Washington's cupboards were (are?) bare.

 

 

Locker can run as well as Crouch?? I find that very, very hard to believe.

[knapplc]

Locker can run as well as Crouch?? I find that very, very hard to believe.

 

He cannot, and it's not even close. Locker is a pocket passer with just-above-average scrambling ability. He's not anywhere near Crouch's running ability - different in every way. Locker's first step is lumbering, not explosive. He's got in-line speed but nothing remotely close to Crouch's elusiveness. It's an absurd comparison.

[HuskerJosh]

Yeah, when Locker makes a run like Crouch's 95-yarder against Missouri, let me know. Locker is a much better passer (both in terms of arm strength and accuracy), Crouch was a much better runner.

[cornhuskerfan1988]

From what I have noticed Locker uses his passing as a threat to open up his scrambles/runs. Crouch ran, the defense knew he was going to run, and he still got lots of yardage.

 

But to the original intent of the the thread: I'm not sure that is very interesting. Maybe he paid for it but UWash put it all together?

[junior4949]

Boy, the hits just keep a coming in this thread. It was obvious to me what the OP was suggesting with this thread. Then, everyone derails it by comparing the running ability of the two QBs rather than comparing the NCAA rules and how it applied to both. The OP then comes in and emphasizes what he was comparing only to have posters continue to compare the running ability of the two QBs. I think the NCAA only flexes their muscles when it applies to dominating schools/teams in sports. This is just another example of this. Crouch played for a team that played for a NC while Locker is playing for a team hoping to win half its games.

[knapplc]

Boy, the hits just keep a coming in this thread. It was obvious to me what the OP was suggesting with this thread. Then, everyone derails it by comparing the running ability of the two QBs rather than comparing the NCAA rules and how it applied to both. The OP then comes in and emphasizes what he was comparing only to have posters continue to compare the running ability of the two QBs.

 

Yeah, Hi - welcome to the Internet. Threads rarely stay on topic and often have organic flows of conversation. You've been around long enough to know this. Why gripe about it?

[Joe_5700]

Locker vs. Crouch... the difference.

 

Locker probably plays in the pros.

 

Crouch had better support players.

The difference between Crouch and Locker? Hmmm... one of the two owns more Heisman's than both Washington and Iowa St combined. Other than that, the difference is Locker is better in the passing game while Crouch is light years ahead of him on the ground. Funny how people seem to have forgotten how good of a player Crouch was.

 

The Eric Crouch tape:

 

I don't think you realize how good Locker is. He is equal to, if not better, than what Crouch was at running, he is just in a different offense. He also doesn't have a supporting cast around him. If he played at Nebraska during the Crouch years, there would have been another 3 year dynasty. Unfortunately, Washington's cupboards were (are?) bare.

 

Please tell me this is a joke? I have seen Locker play in many games on TV. I have not seen anything that even remotely resembles the speed that Crouch had with Nebraska.

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

Yeah, when Locker makes a run like Crouch's 95-yarder against Missouri, let me know. Locker is a much better passer (both in terms of arm strength and accuracy), Crouch was a much better runner.

Yeah that 95 yd run was the best play I've seen in person.

 

Regarding the intent of the thread it is a joke that Locker got such perks and shame on the NCAA.

[WashingtonRed]

Locker can run as well as Crouch?? I find that very, very hard to believe.

 

He cannot, and it's not even close. Locker is a pocket passer with just-above-average scrambling ability. He's not anywhere near Crouch's running ability - different in every way. Locker's first step is lumbering, not explosive. He's got in-line speed but nothing remotely close to Crouch's elusiveness. It's an absurd comparison.

 

 

Actually, it is the opposite. He is a runner, and only under Steve Sarkisian has he started to stay in the pocket. Locker runs between a 4.4 and 4.6 40 time, very explosive, and can lay a hit. Unfortunately, I have had to watch UW games way too much.