SalishHawkFan":3b9fdlmn said:
It DOES assume the staff didn't make the right decision. Making the decision to start a rookie QB in his first year is almost invariably the WRONG decision if you have ANYONE capable of starting instead. Look at Peytons first year. Look at any elite QB's rookie year when he was thrown into the fire. The teams that do that HAVE to do that. Choice isn't an option. They picked so high in the draft because they already sucked and needed a QB.
But when you've got THREE QB's, one with extensive experience - albeit he'd never improve past mediocre - one with excellent credentials and potential who'd already shown he can succeed in the NFL and one who's a wet behind the ears QB you took in the third round, you're making a mistake to start him.
The results of that mistake are so obvious that even Kearly sees it despite how hyped up he's been about Wilson. The guy is regressing.
Starting a rookie is a gamble. But this was a move not entered into lightly, and made based on the player's potential being much higher than the next guy(Flynn) with a full understanding that the road would be bumpy. And I do not care one bit about all Flynn's years in the NFL, he had precisely as many wins as Charlie Whitehurst before coming here. 132 NFL throws is not a seasoned veteran with pelts on the wall, and the fact that he didn't wreck the Ferrari when he got to drive it against the Lions last year does not mean he can drive the Checker Marathon here in Seattle. Flynn is barely more than a rookie himself.
Last year, Pete made a point of saying that you don't really know what a QB can do until he has over 30 starts in the NFL. He said this in defense of Tarvaris, who passed the 30 start milestone during the 2011 season. Well, this preseason, what did Pete say about Tarvaris? We know what we have in Tarvaris. He really does believe that it takes two full seasons to know what you have. Of course, really crappy QBs andwer taht question a lot faster, see Charlie Whitehurst.
Think about that. Flynn had exactly a 2 start advantage on Wilson, which is now gone, by the benchmark we KNOW Pete uses.
Saying that the game in Detroit should decide if Flynn starts here is dumb beyond the pale, and as dumb as saying Wilson should start because he had the highest Lewin index score ever recorded. With a two game difference in real NFL start experience, pretending that Flynn is some kind of veteran who should have been handed the starter job is a bullshit premise based, not on knowledge of what you know, but a reaction to what you have seen and don't like. Anything has to be better than this is no way to choose your starter.
That said, I don't know if Wilson is going to be very good. I just know he won the job by doing things right both on and off the field. I know that he has made mistakes, but I also know that the flashes of talent from him are there, while he is a tick or two off on making plays, he has not been fooled be defenses as many times in 4 games as Romo got fooled by in just one game last night. Even the 3 picks on Sunday, did even one of them come from him being fooled by a defense? Nope. Not one.
I heard, and said, both of those same tired arguments with Charlie, We need to see what we have on the bench, and nothing can be worse than what we are seeing on the field right now. I was wrong. I have no real reason to assume that Pete has lost his judgement in this area in the meantime.
