For fun:
Let's assume that our line finally gels this season for the sake of this argument (I'm not asking anybody to believe it until they see it). Cody's limitations (i.e. slow release and delivery, and limited mobility and height) are further amplified by a porous line. But the kid is a natural leader, and a warrior who knows the offense inside and out. IF CU has a line, his physical limitations become less of a factor and his accuracy and understanding of the offense can be exploited. He may even find time to progress through his checks.
At the end of last season, CU's offense looked mildly potent for the first time in, say, four years. Tyler's skill set, particularly his mobility, made that difference in my mind.
Here's the questions. If we're only examining our recent history with a pretty shoddy offensive line and applying that to this coming season...assuming our offensive line gets it together, are we comparing apples and oranges? Or if we have a stellar line, does it negate the relevance Cody's recent struggles and make him a contender at the position?
Just for fun, is all...
I'll play. Even with a good line, TH is the better option because he can throw over the top. The word is out on CH. Load the box shut down the run and make him beat you with his arm. Suffice it to say very few DC's are worried about getting beat by 30 3-5 yard out completions a game.