PeterMbangala
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 25, 2015
- Posts:
- 2,747
- Liked Posts:
- 1,391
- Location:
- Te Anau, NZ
We've had a number of threads on here from people that don't want to see Trubisky play against the Steelers. Their reasons vary between...
- Glennon apologists blaming the putrid receiving corps (Collins77)
- Blaming turnovers exclusively for the loss against the Bucs, despite the fact that 3 of them where on Glennon (Overrated)
- Posters worried that Trubisky will be set up to fail unless he has a much improved offense to work with (HBK)
- Posters actually saying Glennon is playing well statistically which I guess echo Glennon's "fighting to the end" comments
- We're not winning the Super Bowl/going to the playoffs/being competitive this year anyway (so we should just avoid giving the most important person in the building live reps)
My question is this. What would change these people's minds? How much worse would Glennon have to play than...
- 41 yards in the first three quarters of Atlanta
- throwing a pick six
- throwing a pick on a stick route into double coverage when he had Shaheen wide open in the flat
- multiple examples of his lack of mobility leading to sacks and one leading to a turnover
- throwing a six yard incompletion to Miller on a 4th and 10 down four scores
- being one dropped interception in the end zone away from being shut out by the god damn Bucs.
What would you need to see against the Steelers? The only thing I can think of that he hasn't done so far is run out of the back of the end zone for a safety. Would that do it?
For my part, I was down with the signing of Glennon because I thought the money was not an issue (still isn't) and if there was even a 10% chance he could be something and protect Trubisky until he's ready, I saw it as a reasonable investment. I certainly didn't come into the season wanting him to fail. But the time has come for Trubisky now. Other rookie QBs have had worse offense to run, taken their lumps and come back better.
- Glennon apologists blaming the putrid receiving corps (Collins77)
- Blaming turnovers exclusively for the loss against the Bucs, despite the fact that 3 of them where on Glennon (Overrated)
- Posters worried that Trubisky will be set up to fail unless he has a much improved offense to work with (HBK)
- Posters actually saying Glennon is playing well statistically which I guess echo Glennon's "fighting to the end" comments
- We're not winning the Super Bowl/going to the playoffs/being competitive this year anyway (so we should just avoid giving the most important person in the building live reps)
My question is this. What would change these people's minds? How much worse would Glennon have to play than...
- 41 yards in the first three quarters of Atlanta
- throwing a pick six
- throwing a pick on a stick route into double coverage when he had Shaheen wide open in the flat
- multiple examples of his lack of mobility leading to sacks and one leading to a turnover
- throwing a six yard incompletion to Miller on a 4th and 10 down four scores
- being one dropped interception in the end zone away from being shut out by the god damn Bucs.
What would you need to see against the Steelers? The only thing I can think of that he hasn't done so far is run out of the back of the end zone for a safety. Would that do it?
For my part, I was down with the signing of Glennon because I thought the money was not an issue (still isn't) and if there was even a 10% chance he could be something and protect Trubisky until he's ready, I saw it as a reasonable investment. I certainly didn't come into the season wanting him to fail. But the time has come for Trubisky now. Other rookie QBs have had worse offense to run, taken their lumps and come back better.