Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 4.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"We're not trading that guy"
#54
(10-10-2019, 05:49 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Even if AJ had played in all 5 games this season, and performed to his typical standards of production, some fans would still be griping.  They would just be saying "But he's missed 14 of the last 38 games.  We can't give that guy $18M/per, he might stub his toe and miss a few games.  THEN where would we be??"

Easy...Boyd is an elite and #1 receiver; his numbers this year and last year are making valid points for that. That said having another true #1 should help the offense out. The issue isn't the WR but AD and his lack of awareness. Those issues won't go away if the coaches are not working with AD to resolve them. 
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
"We're not trading that guy" - pally - 10-10-2019, 05:10 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Okeana - 10-10-2019, 08:06 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - MEBengalsFan - 10-11-2019, 12:04 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - JSR18 - 10-12-2019, 12:24 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - J24 - 10-10-2019, 06:30 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-10-2019, 08:58 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 08:27 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 02:09 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 02:33 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 08:20 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Synric - 10-10-2019, 09:39 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - Synric - 10-11-2019, 07:29 AM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - HuDey - 10-11-2019, 12:42 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 05:28 PM
RE: "We're not trading that guy" - jason - 10-11-2019, 06:07 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)