I have to jump in here on the supporting cast deal Solar7. I disagree with you based on what Murray had, because of what Mayfield had. Let's compare. 2017 - Mayfield Oline - basically the same oline as Kyler's, except that Mayfield had the LT Orlando Brown, drafted in 2018 in the 3rd round by the Ravens WRs - Mayfield's top two were M. Brown, and Lamb. (Just like Murray) RB - here's the biggest difference. Mayfield had a kid named Rodney Anderson with him in the backfield, and Anderson was an absolute difference maker. Solar7, Mayfield had a significantly better running game (and receiving option out of the backfield) supporting him than did Murray. TE - Mayfield had Mark Andrews, drafted in the 3rd round by the Ravens (weird I know, there are about 50 sooners on BAL roster). Significant advantage to Mayfield here too. 2018 - Murray Oline - great oline. Cody Ford (drafted in the 2nd round in 2019) replaced Orlando Brown. WRs - M. Brown and Lamb RB - Anderson blew out his knee vs UCLA (2nd game) in 2018. Trey Sermon was a bruiser, but not as good a runner, and nowhere near the receiver that Anderson was. TE - A capable kid named Calcevecia, but not nearly as dangerous as M. Andrews. My overriding point Solar7, is that Mayfield had a better supporting cast than Murray, and yet despite having an excellent supporting cast, Mayfield has not failed at the NFL level. My conclusion is, that Murray's very good supporting cast shouldn't be counted against him, in terms of evaluating his chances to be successful at the NFL level. Does that makes sense sir?