Neither does trying to run down Davis, which is what you're doing. There's no running down here, just fact. Using wins and losses is more trying to run down than that. Football is a team sport, losses aren't indicative of players, you know this.
Hill didn't survive one game with this line, fact. Hill made his fair share of bad decisions with this line, hell the last play he made before his injury took him was a pick, do in most part to the fact that he had a fella in his face during. Hill isn't above making bad decisions. So while you're allowed to think he might not have made those throws, I'm allowed to think in the face of pressure he might have. Also I don't really imagine Hill would be much better at holding onto the football when he's getting hit from the blindside than Davis, that's where a majority of his fumbles came from. S'not like he's dropping it left and right, he's getting hit HARD when he's not expecting it, I doubt any QB can stand to claim they'd do better. Also I really doubt with his limited and lesser mobility that Hill would have avoided any sacks, in fact I'd wager he'd have taken several more by now. Davis' feet have saved him from quite a few. Being better at blitz pick up means very little when your blockers aren't very good at doing their assignments. I'd say that Bradford was pretty good at blitz pick up(Better than Davis is currently) and much more mobile than Hill, but he still took his lumps because no matter what you audible into your guys still have to do their jobs, and guess what's not being done?
You're also not giving Davis credit for the things he did right, IE the fact that we were in those games to begin with by him keeping drives alive, making good throws and generally being on the money often times. Does he make mistakes? Yeah, he's young and he's not in the best situation, they suck but they come. That doesn't do away with the fact that he's done good, and that he's had a lot of good done away by either the refs or his own teammates. Cook and Pettis basically dropped game winners on him multiple times and the refs have shattered our momentum multiple times, if you're gonna look at the negative you gotta look at the positive too. S'not fair to hang the losses on him solely because they weren't, not even close.
Of course if Hill comes in and he sucks and causes us even more unacceptable losses that'd suck too, what does rhetoric have to do with this?
