I bet there is some of that, but regardless, teams should not be in our backfield or hitting our RB before he hits the line with such regularity. You can blame that on Keenum but it is just happening too regularly. Now I can say also that I knew the play from watching on regular TV and I can't figure out why we have such slow developing plays where defenders are simply unblocked. I think we have potentially a real problem with our O-line calls but I am an armchair coach. Bottom line is that I just don't think it is cut and dry that Keenum is the main issue.
I want to see Goff too but with what I'm seeing, I don't know that what we want to see is in the long term best interest of the team.
I think, at least for me, that from a troubleshooting standpoint, Keenum is the last, easiest, most obvious piece to swap out. At least for now. Over the last several years we've had a few coordinators, lots of o line attempts, a decent run game, lots of different guys at wr. What we've never changed is having a backup level guy at qb. When Bradford was here, uninjured, etc, he did ok. He was serviceable. Maybe more. Not really the point. Other than sub par qb play, we've swapped out everything. If you're trying to fix a computer problem or a car, or anything else, you slowly swap out one piece at a time until you fix things.
That's how I see it anyway. We've basically changed everything but the qb, because Keenum, Hill, Davis, and whoever are all basically the same guy. Career backup, known quantity. Injured Bradford basically plays at that level. Keith null and Kyle Boller were that guy. It's the only thing we haven't tried to make a change to.
Otherwise, I totally get what you're saying. I just feel that logically, getting someone in there who we could assume (or at least guess) isn't the problem, would allow us to troubleshoot the offense better.
