Saw an alert on my phone about Sammy Watkins and it made me think about the great Watkins/GRob debate. Not as heated as Warner vs Bulger or Bradford vs Suh, it is still the most heated currently debated one. While there can be no doubt that Sammy started out much better than GRob but now it seems that Watkins is decending while GRob might be seemingly ascending. Robinson was raw as expected coming into the draft but he seems to possibly about to start reaching his potential, while Watkins flashed early like Bradford and RG3 but now seems to be regressing, being left behind by other WR's taken in the same draft. However the OT that was Robinson's contemporary, Jake Matthews (PFF stats aside) has yet to impress. It might just be me but if offered the opportunity to claim either Watkins, Robinson or Matthews, I feel more NFL GM's would choose GRob over the other two. This isn't discounting the argument that the GM's have gotten more out of Watkins so far than Robinson (go more polished to get the max return over the early years). Sammy isn't living up to everything he was thought to be. I just don't find myself thinking, "man if only we had gone Sammy instead of GRob, like I do with LaVonte David over the waste that was Isaiah Pead, or going Quick over Alshon." However I realize a lot of that comes from getting your heart set on a draft pick, and the disappointment/bitterness when your team goes in another direction. I was more of a Wentz guy than a Goff guy but I am trying not to hold that against Goff.