I remember when the team signed Coles. Many thought he was overpaid and not really a true #1 WR. Then he goes out and has some good games to start out his 'Skins tenure, and everything is A-OK, critics are silenced for a short time.
Then he gets the toe injury, which is kind of similar to the current situation with Garcon, where it is an injury that you can technically play while having, but it will take away a portion of the player's ability.
That leads to a lose-lose situation, where the player has to make a choice to try and "rest it out" or "play at 60%" or Get season ending surgery to truly fix the problem.
Well, the situation with Coles turned ugly, he didn't want to get the surgery, felt the organization was putting too much pressure on him, and he was never the same player for the 'Skins before eventually going back to the Jets and magically becoming a solid WR again.
Now the present day, a lot of similarities with Garcon, when he was signed, most thought he was paid way to much, and not a true #1 WR....he has that huge explose play in Week 1, and everyone is suddenly willing to say he is THAT good now. And the rest you know....(so far)
So the question is:
Have we seen enough from Garcon to assume he truly is a #1 WR and will perform like one upon his return.
How does the organization get this problem resolved in the quickest and most efficient way possible? At 3-6, if the 'Skins lose another game they are pretty much out of it, does Garcon at that point immediately get the surgery?
Does this have the potential for being another Toverneous Coles situation, and if so, how do we avoid it?