This is actually the first mid-season QB controversy I’ve ever been a part of. I didn’t know enough to actually care who started between John Fox and Mike Van Raaphorst in 19-whatever. When Carson Palmer was at USC it was pretty simple: Palmer over Van Raaphorst and Fox, even if #3 threw a bazillion interceptions. Even after the Cal loss Leinart seemed like the guy to stick with (the doubt lasted about 6 days, anyway). Booty’s tipped passes vs. Oregon State and UCLA didn’t really seem like big dents in his resume.
But now? Mark Sanchez looked so good against a woeful Notre Dame team that I just don’t know. He’s exciting. He gets me tingly. I don’t care what that says about me, or you, for that matter.
So this is all pretty new to me. It’s taken about a decade for me to witness a QB controversy. My pick? Sanchez.
Mike MacDonald ftw
My previous inane comment notwithstanding, I just opened up the LA Times’ sports page to see that Bill Plaschke is calling for Sanchez to keep the starting job, which makes me think that Booty should – and will – be starting again in the next 2 weeks.
I know Plaschke makes us all illogical with rage.
He has that effect.
It’s profound, sometimes.
Particularly when all his columns are one sentence paragraphs like this.
Or like this one.
And they’re not even real sentences.
But perhaps he’s right when he calls for Sanchez?
Maybe not for the right reasons, but Plaschke has proven again and again that given a coin flip, even Jim Murray’s dull waterboy can sometimes make the correct call.
Sorry for that long sentence.
As a Texas fan, I have some experience with this from the Applewhite/Simms days…
You, as a loyal, crazed fan, are ALWAYS supposed to favor the backup QB. If that’s Booty, you’re for Booty. If that’s Sanchez, he’s your guy. If Booty starts, you gripe to holy hell until Sanchez comes in the game in the 2nd quarter. At that point, bitch and moan on behalf of Booty until he reappears. Rinse, lather, repeat. Hope that helps.
That is the wisest thing anyone has ever written at me.