to wrong conclusions. Example is when people people say things like, "When your QB runs it more than twice as many times your leading RB (like the Washington game), then the QB hasn't made enough good decisions to win. His decision making both on option runs and on passing plays is just plain inconsistent."

Taysom had 31 runs. Jamaal had 12 runs, looks bad right? Until you subtract 5 from Taysom's 31 for sacks and then subtract another iirc 8 for pass plays that turned into scrambles or else he would have been sacked even more. So it's more like 18 to 12 for Taysom.

But why did Jamaal only have/get 12 runs!? Mostly cause by the time we got the ball in the third quarter we were down 28-16. So we were plaing from behind the whole second half and therefore had to turn into pretty much a pass only team for the rest of the game. That's why Jamaal only had 4 carries in the second half and 0 from 12:30 left in the game on.

Plus, Washington was doing great at stuffing our line and shutting down Jamaal when Hill did hand it off to him. Jamaal's longest run was for 8 yards. Is Taysom supposed to just hand it to him anyway when it's not there?

Jamaal's runs were for 2,5,4,8,0,3,1,4,-4,5,2,0 yards. 2.6 Avg. It's not like a guy had it going on and Taysom decided to just ignore him/go away from him.

Taysom had 10 runs of 8+ yards.

Taysom passed/ran the ball 79 times in the game and made good decisions on the vast majority of them IMO. The game being a team game and with each game taking on a life of its own, circumstance of the game often dictate how it is played by a QB in any one game.