This isn't to say that I believe Hoyer's great I, just like i've always thought, they're the same guy just with different glaring weaknesses...except 1 guys' weakness arises every so often whereas the others arises every damn time
At the season's outset, i think Bob correctly chose Hoyer over Mallet b/c he felt like he could better control Hoyer's vapor lock than Mallet's accuracy issues. Easier to control the occasional brain farts than it is to control accuracy issues that arise every damn time a guy drops back to pass which at Mallet's rate is around 30 plays a game.
In his good games, Mallett is completing more than 60% of his passes, personally I think the accuracy thing is overblown. The trick is for O'Brien to figure out how to get more good games out of him than bad. It's the same with any inexperienced player.
I thinkit was Parcells who said you need 16 games to truly evaluate a QB. Of course some guys are so bad they don't deserve 16 games. I don't think Mallett is one of those.
He looked good to me. All the physical tools, several intangibles. He demonstrated a working knowledge of the offense. Enough to build on.
Hoyer may be the better QB now. He may very well be better than Winston, right now. I don't think that will be true by week10... maybe 12, definitely not by next September. I think it's the same for Mallett. We don't know how good he's going to be after 10 starts & it's foolish for us to not find out.
You want to know how to find a franchise QB? Drafting in the first round is definitely part of the process. Leaving no stone unturned helps as well. Looking under the same rock (Hoyer) again & again doesn't.
He completed 77% of his passes against Indy. If he can do similarly over the next three games, I'll admit I am wrong & maybe there's more growth to be had. But I've already seen four games where he looked like a scared little girl. I just don't see coaching that out of a player.