If who we thought was our back up QB has a lights out game against NC State and we win, that's a problem? I'd be willing to pay a huge price to take that and move on to Georgia State right now.
Keep in mind I was responding to a post that said, we should announce a particular QB was the best, but the other guy is going to start due to injury.
I wasn't arguing that, the win was a problem (clearly a win is the best case, regardless)... but if you weren't sure who would start, then, when there wasn't a clear #1 going into the final week... why would you say hey this is our best guy, but we're going to start someone else due to injury?
If you get the win (a good thing)... Week 2 comes up.. you've gotten a big upset with your "back-up;" do you go with the "back-up" who proved themself against high-level competition, or the guy you anointed the starter, who did nothing other than get injured. It's a recipe to divide the fan-base and potentially, the locker-room... for no reason other than to answer a question that did not need to be answered at that point.
In that scenario most coaches would've said something like we're dealing with a few nicks and we want to see how things play out before arriving at a final decision for next Thursday. Announce as your starter whomever is ready that day and then if you see the tape and want to keep the "back-up" in, no one knows. If you want to make a change, you mention that the "starter" was ahead all camp, but hadn't been able to shake some injuries in time to make the opening day start. No controversy, no drama.
Edit - That was entirely too much explanation of a hypothetical that isn't an issue anymore, since they've decided on the starter.
