So what you're basically saying is that Sam needs to play like he did the first half of the season for the "Big Game Failure narrative" to be over and done with. Really?
So let's say Sam game manages his way to a Lombardi and the running game is the main reason we win along with the Defense.
Are you saying that would be considered "being carried across the line"?
If Sam does just enough to not lose, while throwing for 1-2 ints per game, while Charbs and K9 are netting 150 plus combined, and the defense is shutting down opponents, then Darnold does nothing to overturn the narrative, and yes, I would consider it to be a case of the team carrying him over the line.
If he plays like he did against the Rams in December, then he is laying the foundation to overturn the narrative. He needs a couple of seasons like this to put the questions behind him.
If he goes on a tear through the playoffs, and plays like he did when he was an early season MVP favorite, then he can toss the narrative in one season.
JMHO
Actually it is 'cause it's an opinion due to the belief that he will fail based on his past instead of focusing on him succeeding based on what he's done recently.
If you (not you personally but people in general) are going to judge a QB based on their distant past when they struggled and use that as a reason to downplay any of the improvement that player had made over the years to the present day, then your mind has already been made up a long time ago about that QB and nothing done will change it.
One has to play phenomenally well or bad to overthrow history. Russ's fall from grace is a good example. One bad year in Denver was not enough to convince people that he was no longer the great QB that he once was. Two years wasn't enough for some. One bad year from Mahomes, is insufficient to claim that he is no longer the QB he once was. That's not moving the goal posts, that's integrating new info when judging a body of work. It takes a few seasons to really get people to believe.
