Half or more of the threads lately dissolve into a conversation about whether or not AM is good or should be benched. And I trying to follow the logic.
This seems to be the evidence:
1. Our OL didn't start the year very strong. Center snaps were an issue (but improved). Some rotation on the line helped during the year, but no one could say OL was a strength from game one.
2. Our WR never seemed to get going. huge class of WR brought in.
3. Our fastest RB was dismissed half way through the year. The RB we are all excited about for next year didn't bust onto the scene until the last game or two.
4. Our Offensive Coordinator parted ways. Something was off with planning/play calling/execution all year. Major changes made to the offensive coaching staff and how they are assigned, including Austin to run game coordinator.
5. TE production was down.
6. Super low scoring in the red zone.
The entire offense was off all year long.
So why is the conclusion to hang it all on the quarterback who was injured all year long? Problems everywhere and I keep reading that peoples' guts are saying that the back-up to the back-up will start and AM got special treatment for being the chosen one and the rest of it?
AM is a stud. LM is too, based on the ways we used him and heard talk about him in limited samples.
We have to fix the whole offense and then our quarterback is going to look like all of the quarterbacks that Frost helped mold. We are lucky to have AM and the other quarterbacks we have. I hope he is the starter and I don't see any reason to question his ability. If it isn't him, then we know the person they choose has so much talent and is deserving, as well. Unless you know something I don't know.