I appreciate that take. I'm trying to banish the doom and gloom.
Put it this way. We were likely to lose. They're a really good team, we're not proven to be good at all, and we weren't before the Jones injury. We had just seen Jones using Parker as the "true number one" it says he is on the tin, that's something. Now Jones is out. Meyers is out. Good to have Hoyer around. At his peak he could "not lose the game for you" but not as well as Jones was purported to be able to "not lose the game for you."
So yeah, we're looking at Hoyer the Employee, BUT -- believe it or not, this week, this is a positive thing -- to put it mildly, Mac was not playing lights out. It's a frustrating moment, because I felt with the connection he had with Parker in week 3 there were "green shoots" peeking through. But since we already had concerns, now Hoyer should be, we hope, a little closer to the QB he's replacing than the few times he came in for Brady.
And there's no pressure. If it were the JETE, it would be pressure. As Chris Rock would say, you're SUPPOSED to beat the JETE. You not SUPPOSED to beat the Packers. So, classic low-pressure set up. You can succeed, you can't really fail. (along those lines, if Hoyer stinks up the joint, it gives you latitude to put Zappe in... although I know many here think it's "throwing him to the wolves.")
But I mean, if we WIN this? That would drive a lot of insufferable narratives about how Jones was actually HOLDING BACK this team ( maybe Meyers too.) And God knows we'd hear how they finally embraced the playcalling they "should have been" dialing up when they were losing. All I know is it would be just a cool feeling to have that toughness proven out as their response to diversity. That is something to build on. Sorta.
Oh forget the rationalizing, just win for some reason known only to God.