He was very accurate in College. This kid, once he learns the Offense, can make reads, throw on time and into small windows. He can execute the back shoulder throws and he can throw you open. His statistics, while at UCLA are skewed because he did not have a great receiving core there. Lots of drops, lots of plays left on the field because of it and some INTs that he probably should not have gotten but for the poor play of the WRs in general. He's pro style, drop back QB in the more traditional style Offense. He fits Garretts Offense IMO. So what are you basing the production statement off of? If it's off of last year, I don't think that's smart or fair. Nobody, and I mean nobody was going to post stats in Az last year. How could you, they have no Offense, to speak of. This kid was literally running for his life on almost every play. Did he play well last year, no. No question, he did not but if you are asking me if anybody could have gone to Az and played well in that Offense, the answer is again, no. Nobody could have done well there because they don't have enough developed firepower there right now. The Worst OL in the League last year. That wasn't on Rosen because Az shortened their Offense up and went to a quick short route scheme and still, they struggled protecting him so that was all on the OL, for the most part.
If you look at other situations where top QBs went to bad teams and played in their rookie seasons, the results are not really all that different, in general. It takes time to learn the NFL game and that was not something that Rosen got. Just look at Aikmans Rookie year and compare it to what we see with Rosen.
Lets put aside the discussion about is he better then Dak and whatever else, for just a second. Let me ask you this, why does he have to be? Why do you say that this kid has to be better in order for us to be interested in him? How is that even a logical way to look at this situation?