Quote:He's talking about decision making and throwing appropriate, catchable balls.


He was much better than Bortles at that. Bortles routinely puts his receivers in danger by instead throwing into riskier coverages and putting balls where his guys have to lay out just to get to them and put themselves in dangerous positions, being exposed to vicious hits.


In Byron's case, it was him who was taking the hits instead. Byron's physical attributes held him back. He had a strong football mind. Bortles has problems with both that he needs to sort, both physical/mechanical and mental. He's still missing wide open receivers (missing the read, not just the throw) and forcing balls. Both are things he and the new staff need to correct quickly. He's no rookie anymore.

In other words, he's talking about things that can't be measured and are highly subjective as opposed to hard facts.


I'm not bashing Byron - he was a decent quarterback, but the revisionist history is strong here.


What specific facts support that Byron didn't make the same bad decisions as Blake? I just see a bunch of conclusory statements with nothing to back them. Statistically, they turn the ball over at a similar rate and complete balls at a similar rate.


Blake has a long way to go with mechanics and I'm sure he would like to command an offense better than he does, but inferring as fact that somehow Byron would have been better for this team is far-fetched.

---