Well, it appears to me that this entire staff is pretty happy with his response to their game plan and situation based instructions on risk/reward on exercising his manhood as a backup or THE starter without a healthy schollie backup. I have no idea why so many folks jumped on the urban legend he ran out of bounds on THE play,
View attachment 540045
Or that he grossly overthrew that tight end in the endzone,
View attachment 540046
NOBODY I know has any idea "how many" of his overthrows were his method of complying with don't put the ball at risk instructions instead of throwing it OOB or at someone's feet. Most have been go routes, not back shoulder throws or 50/50 ball type attempts, but the inferences just keep on coming. Like every play type, some incompletions were probably wrong or different reads by receivers leading to unexpected routes with two colors in his view finder. Those should be diminished with him getting the 1 practice and game reps with the guys usually on the field.
I don't have any reason to believe that the staff if faking their APPEARANT confidence in him in the past or currently as our QB. The way he processes game situations will not be like HH, but neither are his skill sets and I bet the gameplans and parameters on when and how to extend plays and drives. Too many times people make NO BRAINER assumptions in an all plays are equal world. The biggest flaw in analysis and application of statistics on a football field. Taking hits while running and putting the ball in tighter windows will be staff driven for him. Cowboying up and Farving passes may not be in his game instructions. Fact is, his and HH's interception numbers seem to indicate a different set of criteria. HH's exit surely demonstrates the risk in running, contact or not.
If he does not follow staff instructions, it will be easy to see as he exits the field and puts the headphones on the bench. Then I will more graciously accept factually supported game relevant pot shots and rhetorical questions if trends are really there.