Well here is what Les and Jimbo said about it in the same article. They may or may not, it depends on the situation and they are keeping all options open.
Yes and in the same sense, some of the biggest idiots in the world are those who try to fix stuff that isn't broken. I have no problem with letting both Flynn and Perriloux play a series here and there. But it is a fools move to pull the guy that got you down the field so someone else can get the glory. And I'm not talking about in fans eyes, I'm talking about the message you send to your leader and the rest of the team.
Your comment above didn't make sense at first, either. A little editing magic, however: "Yeah another weapon, but you don't take (A GUY WHO HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE, BUT HAS YET TO CONSISTENTLY SHOW ON THE FIELD THAT HE IS,) your best player out of the game after he drives the field and gets into the redzone so that you have a better chance to score." Now it makes sense to me.
Makes sense, but I have enough faith in JR and the team overall that smart, targeted use of more than 1 QB can and will work. All 3 have talent, all three (best we can tell) have the confidence of their teammates...so, sure, why not give it a go? Again, David Greene remained the starter thru the day he left Athens (as one of the winnngest QBs in Div I history, I might add)...yet he was secure enough to not feel threatened when DJ made cameo appearances. The net effect that arrangement had on team chemistry were 13-1, 11-3 and 10-2 records (2002-2004). I'd take that kind of "QB rotation" 8 days a week, with results like this. Also, it looks like Russell has responded very well to LM's approach so far. A quote from today's Times Picayune:
Yes, but shockley never came in the game in the red zone. He was givien his own series to do what he could. Different situation.
