Had a similar thought last night.
The way the league is set up, a QB not being a dual-threat or able to pocket scramble consistently is detrimental. Besides Goff, Burrows is the only one who is viewed as the QB of the future.
Besides his injury-shortened rookie season, all Burrows knows is playing with those 2 guys. His determined effort to re-sign both to an extent showed his lack of belief that he could thrive just the same without having 2 elite WRs in the league.
The whole point of being an elite QB is that they transcend the offense and both the O-line and skills players are put in positions to maximise their skills and limit the exposure of their flaws, which makes the offence operate at a higher level than the sum of its parts would suggest.
He also can't complain much and certainly shouldn't want out or he'll look spineless for not wanting to sleep in the bed he asked for.
"Defence travels", that's cause its more consistently reliable than offence. The weather factors don't change or limit the defence as much as offence. Same applies to playing on the road.
I've come to the realisation that having a porous defence is worse than a porous offence cause there's less realistic optimism for a surprise, random game where they perform well like you can have with offence.
So when a defence is consistently awful for multiple seasons, both the coaching and front-office (and it's philosophy) has to change or things will certainly remain the same.
