08-21-2016, 02:41 PM
(08-21-2016, 10:42 AM)Go Cards Wrote: It can be said that it is much easier for a WR to put up big #'s on a mediocre team.
If you are always losing and the defense plays prevent while your offense passes almost exclusively in 4th, the #'s get exaggerated. This is why mostly only winners are remembered in history.
I like you man, but what a load of horse honkey. Chad's best season (arguably) came on an 11-5 team. He made his 6th Pro Bowl with the Bengals going 10-6 and sweeping the division. Not to mention when he put up great numbers for teams that were in playoff contention deep into the season. You can't blame Chad for the '06 debacle (that falls on Brad St Lois). He was also the biggest reason the team jumped up to 8-8 in '04.
Saying Chad "would've had a great season elsewhere if he was any good" is also foolish, as you're overlooking the fact that he was 33 and showing signs of physical decline when he left. On top of that, he had very little time to learn a complicated Pats playbook thanks to the lockout (he couldn't be traded during).
As for Ernest Givens, I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but Givens averaged 821 yards and 4.9 TDs while Chad averaged 1005 yards and 6.1 TDs. So your numbers were wrong on both counts. Not to mention Chad had 6 Pro Bowls to 2 for Givens. No comparison really.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
