The "mess" he inherited won 5 games and beat Rutgers (now in the Big 10 and playing in a bowl game) and Memphis (now the conference co-champ). How did he invest in the future - by playing Whitmer at QB instead of Boyle?
I can appreciate your frustration. But it's not that simple. I agree, on the surface it appears to be a contradiction, however the entire situation was a constant, very fluid balancing act that has more complexity than a simple black and white answer. Let me throw out some of the variables that make it more difficult to give one answer:
1. Remember, Diaco did make commitments to Whitmer to lure him back - Above all Diaco proved to the players and future recruits that he could be trusted. Her reached out to Whitmer and told him the team needed him. He may have offered
some promises to reel him back. Not sure of that but I imagine that may have been the case. Whitmer got shafted last year and Diaco wanted to give him the shot once Casey went down.
2. It was reported that Boyle had some type of lower leg injury, thus limiting his play. There were games he wasn't 100%
3. Up until the Army game UCONN was still bowl possible and it's evident that Whitmer gave us a better chance than Boyle.
4. Early in the year when O line play was way worse, Whitmer took Boyle's beating
5. Diaco may be giving the fans a glimpse of Boyle's lack of "intangibles" and "tangibles" because unless he improves a lot,
Boyle will not start next year.
6. Once it was determined that UCONN was out of the tournament, Boyle got the start to gain valuable experience.
There may be more and again, in the interest of Boyle gaining more valuable playing time, in retrospect, the simple answer is he should have started and played the majority in all the games. The problem is, life is just not that simple. There are always variables.