On BGIF's points: they are all true. Tommy was capable of moving the ball with the best of them and we shouldn't forget that. The goodness of a quarterback is his goodness within whatever the system is that he is asked to run. Coach said it again in his presscon: WHEN WE DID NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE PLAY [i.e. fumble, interception, penalty, sack, wrong-headed RB run] we scored over 90% of the time. Despite all the extreme commentary, if Tommy could have avoided the interceptions and at least some of the sacks, we would have had one of the scariest offenses in the country. BUT HE COULDN'T.
So, LA is correct too. Tommy could not avoid certain failures so we are hoping that Everett [or Andrew, or Gunner] can. Everett's great mobility is being raised up as a hope that somehow mobility alone will cease these negative play issues. I hope so, but it does not seem directly related to anything but hopefully fewer sacks. [which was about the least of our troubles given our line and good blitz pick-up by Cierre].
To give us a true upgrade it's all about the turnovers. I've seen nothing yet to assume that Everett or Andrew will be less bad play prone. I HOPE [&hope, &hope, &hope] that they will not be negative play machines. I also hope for no fumbles. One adequate ball management QB with no propensity to take sacks nor throw to the wrong jersey is really all I'm wishing for.
Kelly said that he could manufacture offense. Scoring over 90% of the time when there were no serious negative plays proved that last season.
... and regarding irritating "oldness": I just didn't want to rain too much on Bog's "AFLAC QUIZ" with a bit of ancient history....
