Yeah, of course, it's not all Bell. My comment on "it's not all Bell" was not meant to be taken literally. But Bell was having everyone believe that he's worth being paid for 2 positions. What happened when he wasn't here? We got the same or better production out of Connor. That either means that rookie Connor is just as good as Bell thinks Bell is. OR we happen to have an O-line that makes a good back, great. Either way, it shows that Bell wasn't the key to the run game.
There are a lot of guys who, if you take them away, the team gets worse. Look what happened to us with Shazier. Bell is not as irreplaceable as he thought.
If you don't agree that Connor's success has hurt Bell's value, I think you're fairly alone in that assessment.
There are a lot of guys who, if you take them away, the team gets worse. Look what happened to us with Shazier. Bell is not as irreplaceable as he thought.
If you don't agree that Connor's success has hurt Bell's value, I think you're fairly alone in that assessment.
Comment