Good Lord. How? How does a turnover prone, weak armed immobile QB in a "spread" offense gives us the best chance to win? He no longer has Floyd. Floyd commanded double teams which opened up decent passing lanes for Rees. No Floyd means less space for all the other receivers. Just because Kelly plays Rees does NOT mean he is the only option we have. We don't know the other options because the coach doesn't play them.
Hendrix, Golson, and even Kiel gives us a better shot to win. Why? If they play, Kelly will have to apply a more conservative, more efficient, and a more run based attack on offense. Recall how kelly called plays when an inexperience Rees took the reins. When Rees took over the QB position, we won as a team. We ran the ball. We played field position. In spite of Rees's propensity to turn the ball over, we were winning. The simple minded lot concluded that Rees was the reason why were winning. He was gamer...he didn't have the deer and headlights BS. The truth is that we were winning because we were employing a more conservative, team oriented, tough style of football. We struggle and lose when we deviate from that style.
Rees starting means hello grab bag offense...where there is no rhyme nor reason with the play calls.
