I don't really get all the angst over this play, outside of the unfortunate outcome.
It was likely a scripted play, and almost certainly designed more for sniffing out how the defense was going to react to it, rather than to have much success with it. It was likely also designed to set up both the Tampa Bay defense, and future defenses, for different plays with the same look.
It was executed at a relatively safe time and field position in the game. 8 times out of 10, it gets stopped for minimal to no gain, but typically, gain isn't the point of the play. It's setting things up for the future.
It was first and ten in their end of the field, with plenty of time and space for Darnold to make up for it on second and third down.
There are a lot of options with that look. Darnold was on the field and in motion, crossing behind Milroe at the snap. Milroe could have handed it off to him, for a deep pass. Milroe could take the RPO, designed QB run, or pass it himself. Or, you could run the option. Darnold could run in front of Milroe, and take the direct snap. Or you could swap Milroe and Darnold, and have Milroe in motion, taking the direct snap, on a designed counter run.
Yes NFL defenses are well versed at defending the option, but the next time you give them that look, they will likely over-pursue the option play, while you are running something else.
I like the call in that situation, it just had a bad outcome. Occasionally, bad outcomes happen in the NFL.
The main argument I see against it is that it disrupted the rhythm that Darnold was settling into. Maybe so. In retrospect he was. At the time, it wasn't entirely clear.
Was it a great call? No. Was it a reasonable call, given the down, distance, field position, and the fact that we hadn't scored yet, and it appeared that our defense was coming on strong? I would argue that it was.
