Hoyer Named Starting QB [Benched Week 2 - Mallett to Start]

[popanot]

Who cares about the why's, how's or appearance of it? We finally get someone that is young and at least has an unknown quality about him. We all know Hoyer sucks. I'm actually glad OB has the nads to pull the trigger despite eating crow over it in the media. And by all appearances he just swapped out our PR/KR too. And honestly, it won't shock me if a quick change is made at RB on Sunday. Now can we do something about Fat Randy???

[popanot]

BTW, I think if Foster were healthy, OB might have waited a little longer to make this move. Foster would have covered up some of Hoyer's flaws. Maybe OB thought coming out of camp that Blue and the running game would be a little better than it has been and he just came to the conclusion that the quicker gun and bigger arm is what they need to give them a chance at W's before the season is lost by Week4 with Hoyer at the helm and without Foster. Maybe I'm wrong here, but it looks to me the offensive pace is faster and the ball is out quicker with Mallett at QB.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by popanot

Who cares about the why's, how's or appearance of it? We finally get someone that is young and at least has an unknown quality about him. We all know Hoyer sucks. I'm actually glad OB has the nads to pull the trigger despite eating crow over it in the media. And by all appearances he just swapped out our PR/KR too. And honestly, it won't shock me if a quick change is made at RB on Sunday. Now can we do something about Fat Randy???

Neither am I so concerned about appearances as I am about O'Briens analytical, decision making abilities, and commitment to his own decisions. His actions during the Draft, the offseason including OTAs, and preseason should indicate he was committed to Hoyer for atleast the early stage of the 2015 season which surely means more than 3 quarters. I mean even the greatest QBs have bad games, and I would have thought O'Brien would give Hoyer 2 or 3 games before he gave up on him and went to plan B unless he just flat second guessed his own decision before the first game was complete.

[barrett]

I agree this doesn't look great for O'Brien. I have never seen a QB change during week 1 that didn't involve injury.

But maybe O'Brien is the first coach ever who was telling the truth when he said QB is like every other position. Either way I hope the trigger is not as quick with Mallett since there is nowhere else to go.

[HPF Bob]

I don't think Mallett and Hoyer are the same QB. Mallett has the arm to make the throws downfield but he is probably behind Hoyer on the quick, short throws.

Perhaps what OB saw was the Chiefs cheated up which shut down the running game and Hoyer couldn't force the issue deep. The only option, then, is to put in Mallett and hope he's accurate. Perhaps it is an overreaction to Mallett's performance in garbage time, but there is some sense in going with the guy more capable of stretching the field when you need the running game to have room to run.

If I were the head coach, I might even be willing to use Mallett in most situations then switch to Hoyer in the red zone where touch is more important than arm strength.

[chuck]

Mallett's throw on the two-point conversion was pretty damn good.

You know he's going to miss some short throws and you know that every once in a while he is going to do something profoundly stupid. I think you have to live with that because with no running game I don't think Hoyer is an option.

[HPF Bob]

Good point, Chuck.

[barrett]

Hoyer doesn't have much going for him as a QB, but when he's had success, it was downfield. His best games in Cleveland were early 2013 going downfield to Jordan Cameron and Josh Gordon. He is not an accurate QB. He threw almost all short passes Sunday and still barely completed 50%.