Did you ever consider Greater Gargadon in a red splash version?  It allows you to activate Land Tax at times when your opponent has less than/the same number of lands as you do in play.  Land Tax allows you to feed it, to some extent.  It also plays nicely with balance.

Does MUD have an answer to Solitary Confinement?  Seems like this could be something to consider, although 3 might be too much and you do have Moats in the board.

God you are missing the point. 

The point of the post you're responding to isn't that "Yawgmoth's Will is probably not good because of these four things," but more a "we shouldn't rush to make ANY broad, sweeping statements about decks (no matter how obvious these seem) just because those things have been true in the past."

Regarding Will: past results would dictate that it deserve a slot in any Gush based deck.  However, arguments for or against splashing black in a deck for Will + 2/3 tutors (or for that matter, for or against ANYTHING in the deck) mean nothing if those arguments are not backed up by testing in the current metagame.   

Apologies if this post comes of as condescending or whatever (this was not my intention).  I'm responding to your post mainly because my initial testing with Gush has shown that some Gush decks might not want one such card that people here assume is an auto-include.  I've been goldfishing a GAT style deck with Bobs, and have found that the deck just gets hurt a lot with Fastbond + 8 five cmc cards (force + gush).  In response to this, I've cut Force of Will and am toying with the idea of cutting Fastbond for Lotus Cobras.  Cutting Fastbond might ultimately turn out to be the wrong thing to do (although I'm still interested in trying to fit Cobra into the deck), but so far my initial testing without Force has been going well, as Confidant seems like it might be better against MUD than Force of Will is.

Anyway, before we bash the deck posted in the original post (or, for that matter, before the original poster posts his decidedly untested list), I really think we should all spend a week or so testing our preliminary Gush lists against what is theoretically this deck's worst matchup (MUD), paying particular attention to the following questions:

1) What colors do I want?  Some people used to splash R in GAT's board for Ingot Chewer/Shaterring Spree a couple of years back.  Is this still necessary?  Green now has access to Nature's Claim, and something like Viridian Shaman, which gets around Thorn and Golem, might also be helpful.  Red, however, still has REB for Drains/Blue.

2) How can I reconfigure my mana base in order to combat MUD's sphere/waste effects?  IIRC, three color GAT tended to run ~ 18 mana sources (14 lands, 3 on color mox, 1 lotus).  Does GAT want another mana source?  If so, is this another land, or another piece of artifact mana?  Does GAT in the current meta even want to run moxen? 

2b) We now have access to an U/G fetch.  Do Gush decks want basic forest in order to combat spheres and wastes, even if the inclusion of basic forest slows down the deck's ability to Gush?

3) Are the best Gush decks the ones that chain Gushes together in something we might recognize as a Gushbond engine, or those that just seek to Gush once or twice to gain CA and eventual permanent advantage over MUD?  If the former, then how can we stall out that deck before we can bounce their shit eot and go crazy?  If the latter, then how can we make our mana base more resilient to their hate before we overwhelm them?

4) Exactly how much artifact removal/bounce do we want in the main?

5) What are the best creatures?  Can we really afford to run a 3 cmc creature when we're playing against MUD?

I understand that some of these questions might seem ridiculous to explore (no moxen?  basic forest?), and that there are probably a lot of other points worth investigating, but frankly, I'm sick to death of reading people theorize about their untested lists on this website + make suggestions that are not backed up by any testing.  Instead of trying to come up with hypothetical "best lists" before we've played any games, can we instead just agree on a couple of points we'd like to explore in testing, and then actually test, before we post further about Gush?

nevermind

Have you played any games versus MUD yet?  I guess Tarmogoyf helps, but it still seems like multiple sphere effects might give you problems.

Have you considered adding another creature to combat Shops?  No idea what you'd want here; Trygon Predator is sort of costly when your main draw engine requires you to return lands to your hand and you only have three moxes, and Dark Confidant is sort of scary with ten cards that cost five mana (although by my count, you're still only doing about 1.6 damage to yourself on average per turn) + fastbond.  Alternatively, you might try playing more bounce.

Too bad they included "spell;" the interaction this could have had with artifact lands would've been powerful,.

I had a bomberman list a couple years back that included Confidants and Jotun Grunts in addition to Trinket Mage and Auriok Salvagers.  This might be better to include than Grunt.  Unless I'm reading this incorrectly, this allows you to cycle your deck with Salvagers + Lotus?  From here I guess you could find Yawgmoth's Will and replay your yard. 

I always hated Aether Spellbomb in that deck :/

Is this thing really any good in MUD?  He costs one more than Juggernaut, likely doesn't get as big, doesn't have any form of evasion (this is huge), doesn't disrupt at all.  Honestly, I'm not convinced that being indestructible is worth all of these trade offs (Your opponent can just target other artifacts with their artifact removal.  Additionally, indestructible doesn't save him from E. Flux or Rebuild/Hurkyl's Recall). 

I think the best thing to compare this to is Arcbound Crusher.  Personally, I'd rather have Crusher (Trample + costing one less + slightly better pump method).  Admitedly though, Crusher is sort of a poor top-deck in the mid to late game.

Do you have someone lined up to sell cards at this event? 

Blue Land

Legendary land

As ~ enters the battlefield, choose an opponent
~ comes into play tapped
~ doesn't untap during your untap phase
During the chosen opponent's upkeep, you may untap ~
T: Add U to your mana pool

This is sort of inelegant, but I've always really liked the idea of a land that a control player could tap on their turn without impunity.