He's played 6 good quarters (4 against a high school level defense) after ~15 crap performances, and this is supposed to proof of people being wrong?
Because if I admit to being wrong after such a tiny sample of success, and then he shits the bed against the team Mahomes just put 40 on, does that mean you would have to admit you were wrong? We could end up doing this back and forth every week.
I get that you fanboys are absolutely desperate to shove it down the critics' necks in the worst way, but let's see if he can play like a franchise QB over the course of a season before we start with the declarations of victory, shall we?
These are the kind of statements that invite these threads when he does well. He wasn’t playing “like crap” before the Bucs game. Probably lower third in the league but passable for a young player.
If the Bucs D was so bad when why he he get better numbers than Brees, Ryan and Big Ben? You can’t just sort out the parts that don’t fit your theory, the great quarters of Mitch get counted with okay or not good.
Lastly, who’s declaring him a franchise QB? Even if he pulls similar numbers the rest of the year I doubt I’d do that? All I want to see is him on a similar track to QB who have become really good. So far I’ve seen that. Can we stop with the Watson and Mahomes comparisons? If he has a bad game against the Pats, it means nothing for the long run. The Bears offense is similar to KC and Belicheck will have counters set up for what beat them last game.
The more important things are, is he showing more poise in the pocket, throwing on time, throwing guys open, reading the defense correctly and not forcing the ball. That’s what I look at, not stats, not other QB, not even winning or losing, when judging Mitch
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk