someone was observing the Colts practice. Later, the observer asked a member of the Colts staff why Peyton Manning got all the reps (the backup(s) didn’t get any). The coach said, “if 18 goes down, we’re F’d. And we don’t practice F’d.”

I imagine that’s how most contenders view it as well. If Mahomes goes out for an extended period, the Chiefs are screwed. If Burrow goes down, the Bengals are screwed.

If the starter goes down, they aren’t scrambling to find a third guy to save the season. They’re punting on the year. So why would they give up an asset to “save” a season with Zach Wilson when the season is already lost?

It’s the same thing with other teams who aren’t contending. They’ve already got their QB of the future (who is presumably out for the year) or they’re jockeying to draft him. Why would they give up assets to get a guy to maybe win an extra game or two? There’s no reason for a bad team to waste an asset on Zach.

My post wasn’t a shot at Zach. At this point, he’s trying to rehab his career. The best thing for him is to stick around Denver for awhile as a backup. But when contenders lose their starters, they don’t replace them with rehab projects. They replace them with journeyman guys that have the experience to go out and just “not lose.” Joe Flacco, Joe Johnson, those kind of guys.