This whole conversation is so abstract. The ultimate question that people don't ever really grapple with is: If you're down on Mac and expressing it, what's your point?
1. I'm frustrated with the team. I feel like our QB sucks. Expressing that makes me feel better.
Ok. Right on. That's not really a discussion, unless what you're looking for is "yeah, me too." There's no real reason for that discussion, but, whatever, just get it out of your system.
2. I want to see Zappe this year.
Ok. This is actually something at least. Something specific and concrete. But is it really worth getting lathered up? If BB thinks that the best thing for the team is to play Mac -- even if only for evaluation -- really, who gives a crap? We're not winning the Super Bowl. Even if you disagree and think Zappe could be great, this is not a big deal.
3. I want to see them move on from Mac next year.
I'm glad you're not our coach. Not because I think this is right or wrong, but because this is not a ripe decision, and there's absolutely no reason to make it right now. And so really this is just number 1 -- venting -- at this point. This reminds me of the posters who go ballistic that a pitcher was not pulled, but when you ask them whether they even know who was available in the bullpen they have to look it up. And then when called on that they say, "anyone was better, it's obvious."
You can't make any decision in football in the abstract. It all depends on what's available. What might be there in the draft. Who could you sign or trade for. At what cost? Would the cost make the team worse in the long or short term? When these things are knowable, here's a newsflash. It may very well turn out that Mac is still the best option for the team, all things considered. In other words, the choice could be between shitty options of which he's the "best," all things considered including what else is available, cap room, what else is needed, etc., and the long and short term needs of the team. Sometimes it really just do be like that.
I kind of feel like people should have to state the "therefore."
He sucks. He doesn't. He might. One of these is probably more correct than the others, but I just don't understand what it means, even if you have more insight than the next guy.
Edit: I should say I'm not criticizing those who are attempting to quantify how good or bad he is, based on plays or stats or whatever. But I feel like we've gone way way beyond player evaluation here.