If Tanner still stunk as bad as he did last year while Zach was showing tons of potential; I mean come on, guys. Think about what you're saying. You're saying an entire coaching staff, including an OC who turned down more money so he could have the chance to prove himself as an OC, are willing to all sink their careers just so a senior can not suffer the indignity of having a freshman start over him. Does that sound legit at all?


So, what? What are the only options that can be true? Either both are equally good, both equally suck, or Tanner really did pull ahead of Zach. In any of those scenarios, Tanner is not a bad choice to start.