Originally Posted by keg in kc
Let's throw out some career numbers just for shits and giggles: he's over 65% on his career, he threw 98 TDs against 21 INTs, and in three years as a starter he threw more than 2 picks in a game exactly once. That's one time in 39 games. In those same 39 games, he throw more picks than TDs exactly 3 times.
Career: 988-1465 (67.4%) for 11662 yards, 98 TD, 21 INT
If he so obviously forced balls into guys, you'd go into something like a man-over coverage and have a safety spy Bailey or Austin. Those interception figures would be significantly higher.
I just don't buy the 'lock on' argument.
A fair argument would be "We don't know
that he can cycle through his progressions quickly" because he really doesn't have to that often; his #1 is often open. It's a fair question, but not a fair criticism.
But the progression of that argument - "We know he can't
cycle through his progressions because he doesn't do it" doesn't fly.
Call it an unknown and I'll listen. Then I'll point out the strengths that he has
clearly demonstrated and say that those are good enough for me to take the risk. Call it something he can't do and I'll just say you're full of shit because there's nothing in time at WV to suggest that he cannot and does not go through progressions well when needed.
As I've typed this post I've decided that this is the biggest problem with the anti-Geno crowd: They do not recognize the clear distinction between a question and a criticism.
You can question whether or not he's able to do something without saying that he can't. The former is fair, the latter is absurd, at least in this instance.