Fortunately UW doesn't have the winning tradition to make your comparison a valid one. In the end, I believe he chooses what's best for his career, and goes to UT. He won't have an NFL career being constantly chased and hounded by Trojans, Golden Bears, Bruins, etc.
Can't show off your cannon-arm while laying flat on your back...I love your passion, but that won't change the fact that UW is a QB career killer. As one other gentleman recently stated..."Book It."
I'm not sure how there is this perception that UW is a school that is only in the count because of the home school factor.
First of all, UW DOES have a winning tradition. I'm not sure where you got that. Even after the worst 5 year drought in the Willingham era, UW still has a top 20 winning %. In a recent ESPN Prestige ranking (essentially tradition), UW, even after the worst 5 years ever, was ranked #17. U Tenn was #12. Does U Tenn have more tradition? Yes, but to say the margin is light years is totally false. Furthermore, in the past, UW and UCLA have been traditionally the schools that challenged USC for the top spot. Until recent years, that has been the norm.
As for producing NFL QBs, I'm also not sure where you guys got your information. In two Sporting News articles on QB U, one ranked UW at #4 and the other ranked it at #15. While #4 seems a bit high for one of them, top 10 is legit when every UW QB has at some point played in the pros. Yes, every QB since the Warren Moon (HOF) to even Isiah Stanback (4th rounder on Cowboys), who is considered a weaker QB from UW, has played in the pros. Right before UW fell in obscurity in 2000, they had the most QBs in the NFL (6). Remember, the point in this paragraph, like before, is not whether UW or Tennesse is better at producing QB, but rather that UW is a solid QB NFL factory. It's true that the UW hasn't produced a top QB in the NFL since Mark Bruenell in the 90s, but their productivity in the NFL depends on pro coaching. The school just has to get the player in, which the UW has done without any breaks since the 70s. Even right now, the streak will likely continue if Jake Locker can get his passing % to even 55%, which is very plausible since Locker has shown great improvement over Spring (16/18 passes. I don't care if it's against weak defense. 16/18 is impressive and is a improvement from before.)
Speaking of which, the Huskies hired two top of the line QB coaches in Sark (one of the 2 areas that I'm confident in Sark) and Doug Nuissmeir. Sark deserves 100% of the credit for Mark Sanchez and John David Booty. He deserves at least 50% of the credit for Matt Leinart because the QB coaches works with the QB more than the OC and I know because Doug currently is working more with Locker than Sark is. Carson Palmer is hard to tell since Sark just arrived on the scene during his junior year. Hard to tell. Doug was known to have coached a kid at Michigan State (don't know the Big 10 well) who threw over 4000 yards. Credentials at QB? Yes. Objectively, I'll say that UW's QB coaches are better than Reeves. Also, Heaps has developed a decent relation with Doug, so that should be interesting.
Lastly, UW does have talent, but it is extremely raw because it was completely undeveloped by the previous staff. Worst of all the units by far was the offensive line. They were slow, overweight, and raw. Talk about disaster. This is the only unit without much talent at all. The others such as TE have decent-great talent. Kavario Middleton was a 5 star TE (think of this year's Xavier Grimble) and showed great receiving abilities..., until he got injured. At WR, UW has 3 4 star recievers and a Pac Honorable Mention WR in D Andrew Goodwin. If I went on, it would take ages, but the point is that other than the Offensive line, UW has talent. If the revamped staff can develop it, then the team would quickly rise again.
And just for clarity, if Heaps were to commit, he would essentially redshirt ONE (not 2) year (Locker's RS Senior year) to learn the playbook and get some coaching before he starts. It's actually ideal in terms of a the depth chart.
Again, all of this is not to show whether UW is > than UT, but the general perception of UW as nothing other than a home school is wrong.
