we would have to lose multiple games because of the quarterback before we benched the quarterback that is currently 4–0
I’m talking about situational playcalling. Like the beginning of a game or even the beginning of a half when you want your young quarterback to get some easy completions. Zach has missed a lot of easy throws but we aren’t really setting him up for success considering what his strengths and weaknesses are plus the fact that he basically just completed one seasons worth of games yesterday. He’s still very young and inexperienced. I would hope that a former Super Bowl winning WB and 15 year veteran gets the ball out quicker than a 23 year old second year guy.
They're winning in spite of him. It's the defense and run game that's helping us win. If Breece is out for an extended time, he's about to be exposed along with MLF. Anway, you can't continue starting a QB that doesn't give you confidence he'll get 100 passing yards. Even in his ''4-0'' streak, he's already had games where he should've had 3-4 interceptions, but guys are just dropping them. It's only a matter of time when he has a 4-interception game.
Sounds like a whole lot of hypotheticals. Maybe the best course of action is to keep winning this way until we don't win anymore then discuss whether or not the QB needs to be replaced.
Flacco put up a bunch of yards but was 1-2, until such time as the mythical 4 INT game comes up you don't sit a QB that is 4-0.
They keep winning whatever way they can with the QB that has been winning, while working on a game plan that helps him develop. It can be slowly if they keep winning. Not sure why others are so quick to want to sit Wilson and put a statue back there, Flacco would have been sacked 7-8 times against Denver.
I truly can't fathom how a fully functioning human can watch the first three weeks where we lost 2 of our 3 games and barely won the third and think "lets go with that guy because he throws for more yards in garbage time" instead of the one who has managed the game to the point of four straight wins.
In the first 3 games our defense gave up 81 points, and Hall had 21 total carries. Our o-line was also in disarray. The next 3 games our defense gave up 47 points and Hall had 55 carries. Even yesterday was one big run, and the defense that won the game. Zach led two FG drives the entire game (the third FG was gravy from a pick). People thinking we're winning because we changed QBs are mistaken. Our defense turned a corner and we started running the ball, with a better o-line.
4 out of our first 5 possessions yesterday netted a total of minus 8 yards. *The third possession was the one where Breece ran it in from 62 yards out...
I understand trying to make it work in year 2, but if there's little to no progress this year, there should at least be competition for him in 2023.
Partly, but we are also making less mistakes and giving the opponents longer fields. I would say you are mistaken. we did not magically take a turn we changed our QB and started winning.
What do you suggest LaFleur should have done differently in the first series yesterday? You can't develop a rhythm with missed passes and goofy penalties.
...oh. Sorry. Misread the thread title and thought maybe Zach got caught with another... mature lady.
You don't get a QB of any age into a rhythm by running the ball. There was nothing at all taxing about the first and third down pass plays. Second down he had a total mental breakdown. This was the opening people here have been calling for since he got back. Be careful what you wish for...
He went from two runs up the middle and a 3rd/long to three straight passes. That's just dopey. I could be wrong but I don't think any of those plays had an option underneath which is exactly what we should be giving Zach considering the playmakers around him.
