Take Navy. Do you really believe Pyne could throw 4 TD passes in first half and have zero completions in second and blame difference on Pyne's performance?

The difference was Navy blitzed 10 in second half. Yes, Pyne continually held ball and got sacked. Pyne should have gotten rid of ball. But who was the guy who kept calling the 40/60 yd pass plays? Receivers were open in first and second half. Only difference was Rees play calling. He continued to call the same plays in 2nd half as first. First half Pyne had time. 2nd half he didn't. No team can defend 10-man blitz.

Can say the same against Marshall and Stanford. Your right to say Pyne zeroes in on target. He threw two pics against Marshall. But both happened because Rees called play to Mayer. Rees always called pass to Mayer on 3rd and short yardage. No creativity.

Against Stanford they were blitzing corners and went straight to Pyne. Rees even put wide receivers in motion toward Pyne (rather than have them pivot and go to sideline) leading corners to Pyne.

My point? Pyne has serious problems holding ball and going though progression. With time however he is reasonably accurate. With right OC much of Pyne's downside could have been limited. What did the defensive coordinators for Marshall, Stanford and Navy games did was "gamble" to take advantage of Pyne's weaknesses. And Rees failed to adjust. Instead, he compounded problem by calling plays that allowed defenses to exploit Pyne's weaknesses.

I could go on. The problem was the primary call made by Rees. Sure, experienced QB would have checked out or gotten rid of ball. But if Rees's call out of huddle had been a play where Pyne got rid of ball in one to two seconds in 2nd half against Navy -- for example, say a swing pass to Tyree, Navy's 10 man blitz would have exploded in their face and Tyree would have taken it to the house.