Generally, we are the "authors" of "content" around here - "here" being a blog and not a message board. Recognize, we do, that you've come here not to contribute, but to consume. Nevertheless, there is the sporadic occasion where, either for our benefit or for to exercise the thinkifiers of the masses, we ask you a question. Today's question is ...
Are the 2010 Rebels better without Jevan Snead?
If you're thinking "asked and answered," you might be close to right. We must have angered the internet Gods when we went to the law library and used
Who would have thought at the apex of Snead hype just one year ago that our hopes would blow up in our face almost as bad as bad draft advice. Almost. We actually had to Google Snead to find out what the heck he's doing (going back to the Bucs, per Bleacher report ... so probably starting training to be the non-athlete-kind of Texas Ranger). Twenty interceptions later and a hyped-up transfer later, some Rebels feel pretty good about how everything has gone down. Snead's (possibly) ill-advised decision opened the door for Nate Stanley to get a whole spring as the presumptive starter. While that's not the same thing as being the starter, it's a lot more reps and experience than he would have gotten otherwise.
Also, we've reintroduced Operation: Highly-touted Quarterback Transfer from Big-time Program. Maybe we should just keep employing that strategy. I hear Zach Mettenberger is available. Does Mitch Mustain have any eligibility left-over? One would hope; poor bastard sure hasn't used any of it on the field. Sure, every year we could tell our guy that he's the guy, so that he uses that starting-quarterback ambition to become a top-notch back-up. <------ PLAN IZ FUL PROOF.
We're going to ask this question again in a few months, just to show you all how wrong you probably will have been proven by then. Vote early and often.