Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moooo
I think you'd be suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform. There's a reason they don't even allow any but the cream of the crop to do so, the others would be a JOKE. I bet you if Croyle were to start the first game this year, he would have maybe 1 TD and probably about 5 INTs.
And Peyton Manning if I'm not mistaken also had a low 70s QB rating. If that's good by your standards though...
|
Your point appears to be a moving target. You said name one rookie QB that has performed well. I did, then you shifted your point.
I wouldn't be "suprised at how poorly most rookie QBs perform." I'm fully aware of the odds of Croyle or Printers coming in and doing well. What I
would be surprised by is Huard coming in and doing any better than the average rookie QB.
This isn't a question of which back-up is capable of taking us to the Superbowl (the answer to that is likely none). It's a question of which back-up is likely to be better. I'm saying that I'll take the chance with Croyle who
might suck, over Huard who has already established that he sucks.