I suspect HH gets the start and it isn't going to be pretty. Sims is most likely the best option we have for QB this year. Maybe sit him a game to let him get his head right. But if HH or Purdy couldn't beat him out this year, that means they aren't very good IMO.
I don't know what that means.
Fair enoughP.S. I don’t think you know what philosophical means. But the word you were looking for was “hyphothetical”.
Ypu act as of this staff has not already sat injured players longer then they wanted. See FidoneJust a hunch, but wouldn’t Sims know the extent of his own injury? Or is your conspiracy that he also wants Haaberg to start? Who all would be in on this hoax? Good lord.
Yes a few less big plays for way less TOs is a good tradeI'm going to disagree here. Maybe not as good, but likely not as harmful as Sims has been.
I think we win by ten whoever starts
Imo, we've seen the worst the O and Sims can play, combined.Yes a few less big plays for way less TOs is a good trade
After listening to the pc, Satt was that way at the beginning, but ended up saying something later that was way more frank and not contorted.I don't know why they think they have to do that, but Satterfield's comments border on ludicrous the degree to which he is trying to make the turnovers not be Sims' fault. He could say, "Jeff screwed up but it's my fault he was't ready for thd crowd noise." But instead he talks almost like there was no QB involved. Seems pretty weird.