Classic Chicago quarterback thinking. The player fans have seen play the least, or never at all, is always the answer.
Where, ever, has it been shown that Fitz shows loyalty to players by playing less talented upper classmen over better freshman/sophomores. I think this thought is derivative of the type of quarterback thinking where the backup is always the best player on the roster.
A position is underperforming with a junior/senior starting, there is a freshman/sophomore on the roster that nobody has ever seen play outside of a few practices or plays, but everybody just KNOWS is the better player, therefore the reason the junior/senior starting is only because Fitz is loyal to the upper classman.
Someone cited a large number of examples of freshman/sophomores who have beaten out juniors/seniors for starting jobs, so I won't rehash them here. But where is the opposite true, that it was proven a more talented player was held off the field to give playing time to the junior/senior?
I know people LOVE to rag on Jacob Schmidt as such an example, but lets look at the younger player everyone was clamoring for then. Arby Fields. Uh, in hindsight, I'd have been playing Schmidt over Fields too. Who else?
