Simple Question What's Your Answer and Reason

[Whatever]

(03-21-2021, 12:02 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: (re: my P.S.) Why are we debating Mike Thomas? A question was asked, comparable stats were given. 1, from a span of 3 years, the other from a span of 8 games. We're not debating if Mike Thomas is good/averag/bad. We're pointing out that Burrow was able to use him better in a shorter amount of time. The highlighted red is exactly what i was saying. 

Give him the line and i bet a guy like Thomas would put up better numbers. I'm sure we both agree that's the way it would play out, regardless of what receiver we are talking about. BUT give him a better line with Boyd, Higgins, a guy like Rashod Bateman, a decent TE and a healthy Mixon and he should shred. 

P.S. maybe i read the attitude of your first couple lines wrong?

I think a point that I didn't illustrate very well is Thomas came from a team that went to the SB and they only threw the ball to him 21 times in 4 years.  He comes here to a shit team and we doubled his career targets in one year.

At the end of the day, I think we both agree he could have gotten more out of Thomas with a better OL.  But Thomas is a scrub we shouldn't be trying to get more out of, but we did last year because our WR's sucked.  Lots of people hypothesize that he wouldn't have been injured behind a better OL.  Nobody hypothesized that if he wasn't holding onto the ball trying to make a good receiver look great by throwing a fly route to a guy that runs a 4.58 40, maybe he wouldn't have gotten hurt, either.  We have slow WR's that struggle to get separation.  Joe took a lot of unnecessary shots holding onto the ball waiting for guys to uncover last year.  We need to address the G position, but we need to address the lack of talent at the skill positions, too.