Cydkar's post made me think of an interesting hypothetical to me in the Bates thread below.
Let's say Bates and Arnaud are even as QB's. It's pretty logical then that you go with Arnaud, so Bates can play WR.
However, what if Bates ends up being better, but by a slim margin? Would you think that Bates would not only have to be better, but better by a more than slight margin in order to win the job? Rational being, Arnaud and Bates are two of the best returning skill players on offense, and you would want them on the field together as much as possible, and Bates is much more flexible to play other positions than Arnaud.
I am not sure how I feel about it, but it makes for an interesting discussion nonetheless.
Let's say Bates and Arnaud are even as QB's. It's pretty logical then that you go with Arnaud, so Bates can play WR.
However, what if Bates ends up being better, but by a slim margin? Would you think that Bates would not only have to be better, but better by a more than slight margin in order to win the job? Rational being, Arnaud and Bates are two of the best returning skill players on offense, and you would want them on the field together as much as possible, and Bates is much more flexible to play other positions than Arnaud.
I am not sure how I feel about it, but it makes for an interesting discussion nonetheless.