Edelman and Welker

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

     

     Part of the reason Edelman is getting so many receptions is because BB didn't give Brady any one else to throw to (at least anyone else who is not either injured or inexperienced).  Elway, meanwhile, seems to have given Manning a plethora of options, so Welker is just one choice of many. For Brady, Edelman is the only choice who is on the field and ready for prime time.

     

    Say what you want about Welker, the Broncos' offense is way ahead of the Pats' right now.  We'll see how things shake out as the season progresses, but after two games, there's no comparison between the two offenses.  The Broncos' is better. 

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gravelten4. Show Gravelten4's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    In response to Gravelten4's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I agree that Edelman has been lights out so far. More than I thought he would and I am happy. 

    However. Are you comparing Edelman and welker? Is this fair?

    in terms of money, Danny and Wes are more comparable. The pats gave Danny the money they would pay welker and Edelman got nothing in comparison. Meaning, we could have had both Edelman and welker. I think Danny is the fair comparison in terms of cap allocation.

     

     



    Valid. Apples to lobster. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Absolutely incorrect. Another plus with Edelman, more so than what I already posted, is that Edelman is effective on the perimeter, Welker is not.

     

    Even when Welker ran his routes outside the hashes tonight, that's where his drops were.

    Try again, Gravelboy.

    [/QUOTE]

    Is that realy necessary? I remember your first posts from years ago and have resisted following the Majority in calling you queenie. I see the respect is not reciprocated.  Apples to lobsters was my opinion. May be right...may be wrong...but its mine.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    You know what rust? I am now convinced that you don't even watch football. Anyone who thinks one of the most injury prone players on the Patriots (Edelman) can replace Welker's production, not only doesn't watch football, but is insane. I like what Edelamn has done...I think he has improved...I've said he looks like our best offensive weapon to this point, but if anything is guaranteed, it's that Edelman will get injured.

    Thank heavens we have Bill Belichick the coach to make up for Bill Belichick the GM...Brady too.

     



    Why it is a "guarantee"? He played 15 games in 2010 and 13 in 2011.  You act as if he's a regular to only play a handful of games per year.

     

    Is it a guarantee that Welker will have multiple drops per game, too?

    What's weird with fans like you is you all but root for bad things to happen to this team just so you can pretend we must have All Pro WRs 1-6 for Brady to use.

     




    No, fans want Brady to have the best, because that gives them the best chance to win.  It's not to appease  anyone.  Look around the league, dog crap, you see any other QB's playing with rookies  and a converted QB as their whole reciever group.  That's ludicrous! The DEfense has been a collection of broken and inferior pieces for years.

    Now the O is, too.  Perfect.  This is not a well put together team and I don't care what any of you fanboys say.  It's not.

    I would think that YOU would want your QB to have the best team around him too, but you are not a Patriots fan.  NFW!

    Even Jimmy Johnson, BB's bbf, said today that Miami has a great shot at winning the division because of Bill's problem team.   Media bias or a best friend telling it like it is?

    Sorry your Panthers lost today

     

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from magicalhobo. Show magicalhobo's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    I feel like I'm one of the few who isn't all that upset about getting rid of Welker. Rusty is right, the guy is getting older and it shows. The drops have been increasing every year, and soon his quickness is going to see a large drop off as well.


    Getting Amendola was the right move in my opinion, even with the injury concerns. You could tell over the years that the Pats had plans to move Edelman into Wes' role, but he was still adjusting to the position. Unfortunately, what we feared about Amendola's health was for good reason. Time to let Edelman step up and get some new receivers who can actually stretch the field.

    __________________________________________________

    Come on if you think you can take us on
    You and whose army?
    You and your cronies.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gravelten4. Show Gravelten4's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    In response to Gravelten4's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to Gravelten4's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    I agree that Edelman has been lights out so far. More than I thought he would and I am happy. 

    However. Are you comparing Edelman and welker? Is this fair?

    in terms of money, Danny and Wes are more comparable. The pats gave Danny the money they would pay welker and Edelman got nothing in comparison. Meaning, we could have had both Edelman and welker. I think Danny is the fair comparison in terms of cap allocation.

     

     

     

     



    Valid. Apples to lobster. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Absolutely incorrect. Another plus with Edelman, more so than what I already posted, is that Edelman is effective on the perimeter, Welker is not.

     

     

     

    Even when Welker ran his routes outside the hashes tonight, that's where his drops were.

    Try again, Gravelboy.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Is that realy necessary? I remember your first posts from years ago and have resisted following the Majority in calling you queenie. I see the respect is not reciprocated.  Apples to lobsters was my opinion. May be right...may be wrong...but its mine.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Not really, but you are the one who tried to follow PatsLifer attempt to derail my thread in support of him.

     

    This thread is about the idea that Edelman has always had the potential of doing what Welker did for us here.

    Throw in the other pluses, like his superior punt returning, ability to line up and produce in all 3 main spots (X, Y or Z) which makes our offense less predictable, AND with less talent around him (for now) like when Welker was here, and you supported the Pats Lifer deflection troll tactic.

    Either contibute with an agree or disagree or don't bother.

    You disagreed by claiming Welker and Edelman aren't comparable in this case when Edelman was Welker's back up here for years...so...why is it lobsters to apples?

    Could it be that Brady, his style, and BB's coaching is why someone like Welker thrived here in this environment our great GM provides and Edelman can do similar things?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I was referring to the cap issue/ money allocated.  It seems to me that DA's budget came directly from WW's pot. edlemans money was from the couch cushions in comparisons. If you are talking purely on field style, results, talent...then yes...I Agree with you. Emphasis on the "on field" part. Time will tell. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    PatsLifer is also incorrect in saying Welker is the more versatile WR over Amendola. That is false because Welker is only effective in short range and inside the hashes.

    So, if Edelman is rivaling Welker's production or diversified use in the offense with less talent around him for now, why would Amendola at 6 million, Edelman at 1, Welker at 6, be so vastly different?

    Give me the younger, more diverse and superior skill sets over the one, older and limited, exclusive slot WR in Welker.

    Amendola is more than a slot WR if you have been paying attention, as is Edelman.

    So, 7 million for 2 players who can be effective in more than 1 spot.  That is the key here.

    We've lost SBs and playoff games because teams knew where Welker would be lining up and could just ignore his presecence on routes on the perimeter to widen the field.

    Get it?

    Jesus, are some of you this obtuse when it comes to why we lost those games?

    Welker had 3 drops tonight, where if the Giants didn't fumble at the goal line, or the TE didn't fall down, those 14 points may have shown his drops to be more costly than it ended up.

     

     

     

     



    Hello Houston, I think we lost our signal!

     

     

    i never said welker is more versatile than Danny. I can recall numerous posts agreeing that Danny can line up in multiple positions UNLIKE welker. Never said that Russ.

    i will go on record here for what it's worth. I would rather have a healthy amendola and Edelman than welker and Edelman. However, the one thing those if us were skeptical about in regards to Danny...his health, is proving us correct. You can't compare a guy who can suit up and a guy who cannot. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    But you are trying to make this a Welker vs Amendola argument when Amendola wasn't even mentioned in the original post.  Edelman has played better than Welker so far this year. That is what the OP stated and if you can't dipute that then don't bring another player into the discussion.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I am trying to make this a salary cap vs production argument. You know, Russ favorite topic.

    what I was saying in case you missed it is that the money welker could have got went to amendola, not Edelman. The pats I believe thought they would replace welkers production with amendola, not Edelman, otherwise Edelman would have been signed day 1 not amendola. 

    Who did they sign immediately when FA started and how much did they pay him? Not welker, not Edelman. 

    my point is Russ started off by comparing welker to Edelman, he tried the shell game like he is famous for. I introduced amendola because that is the truer comparison From a cap perspective. 

    If Edelman can play everywhere and more versatile than welker, then why compare the 2? 

    You would be wise to not hitch your wagon to rusty and his parrot. I think the parrot gives him advice For posting here.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    In response to Gravelten4's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to Gravelten4's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    I agree that Edelman has been lights out so far. More than I thought he would and I am happy. 

    However. Are you comparing Edelman and welker? Is this fair?

    in terms of money, Danny and Wes are more comparable. The pats gave Danny the money they would pay welker and Edelman got nothing in comparison. Meaning, we could have had both Edelman and welker. I think Danny is the fair comparison in terms of cap allocation.

     

     

     

     



    Valid. Apples to lobster. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Absolutely incorrect. Another plus with Edelman, more so than what I already posted, is that Edelman is effective on the perimeter, Welker is not.

     

     

     

    Even when Welker ran his routes outside the hashes tonight, that's where his drops were.

    Try again, Gravelboy.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Is that realy necessary? I remember your first posts from years ago and have resisted following the Majority in calling you queenie. I see the respect is not reciprocated.  Apples to lobsters was my opinion. May be right...may be wrong...but its mine.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Not really, but you are the one who tried to follow PatsLifer attempt to derail my thread in support of him.

     

    This thread is about the idea that Edelman has always had the potential of doing what Welker did for us here.

    Throw in the other pluses, like his superior punt returning, ability to line up and produce in all 3 main spots (X, Y or Z) which makes our offense less predictable, AND with less talent around him (for now) like when Welker was here, and you supported the Pats Lifer deflection troll tactic.

    Either contibute with an agree or disagree or don't bother.

    You disagreed by claiming Welker and Edelman aren't comparable in this case when Edelman was Welker's back up here for years...so...why is it lobsters to apples?

    Could it be that Brady, his style, and BB's coaching is why someone like Welker thrived here in this environment our great GM provides and Edelman can do similar things?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Seems like you are the one that has been sleepwalking.

    did you already forget your original post?,..here let me remind you...

    "So far, so good. Paying a slot WR 8 million per or more would have been a mistake.  Welker looked a bit old out there today.Thanks, BB."

    just in case you missed it, we paid amendola Wes like money...not Edelman. Edelman was to be had either way...wes or Danny. 

     

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    You know what rust? I am now convinced that you don't even watch football. Anyone who thinks one of the most injury prone players on the Patriots (Edelman) can replace Welker's production, not only doesn't watch football, but is insane. I like what Edelamn has done...I think he has improved...I've said he looks like our best offensive weapon to this point, but if anything is guaranteed, it's that Edelman will get injured.

    Thank heavens we have Bill Belichick the coach to make up for Bill Belichick the GM...Brady too.

     



    Why it is a "guarantee"? He played 15 games in 2010 and 13 in 2011.  You act as if he's a regular to only play a handful of games per year.

     

    Is it a guarantee that Welker will have multiple drops per game, too?

    What's weird with fans like you is you all but root for bad things to happen to this team just so you can pretend we must have All Pro WRs 1-6 for Brady to use.

     

     

     




    No, fans want Brady to have the best, because that gives them the best chance to win.  It's not to appease  anyone.  Look around the league, dog crap, you see any other QB's playing with rookies  and a converted QB as their whole reciever group.  That's ludicrous! The DEfense has been a collection of broken and inferior pieces for years.

     

     

    Now the O is, too.  Perfect.  This is not a well put together team and I don't care what any of you fanboys say.  It's not.

    I would think that YOU would want your QB to have the best team around him too, but you are not a Patriots fan.  NFW!

    Even Jimmy Johnson, BB's bbf, said today that Miami has a great shot at winning the division because of Bill's problem team.   Media bias or a best friend telling it like it is?

    Sorry your Panthers lost today

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ANother troll post.^^

     

    Another guy trying to deflect to yet again try to pretend BB the GM is why Brady chokes in SB 42 or 46 in the differing ways he and Welkie did.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ^^^^^The only guy trying to blame Brady for BB's ineptitude^^^^^

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    I wasn't comparing progress of each offense.

    In fact, in the other thread about games people were watching today, CrazyWorldofTroyBrown and I were talking about how Moreno scored TWICE from 20 yards out on toss sweeps.   How refreshing. How come we don't run a toss sweep with Mankie pulling?  Why are we in a race to throw 45 times with a lead. Gomer wasn't today.

    With Welker here, Brady would be trying to throw in the red zone underneath over and over, mosty to Welker. Or Gronk.  

    Do you remember Seattle last year?  5/6 in the red zone. Case closed.

    Denver's offense is run better because Gomer is AHEAD Of Brady in terms of being the better game manager at this point of their careers.

    That's why BB walked from Welkie and has given Brady no binkies. It's why Branch, Stallworth and Gaffney were given no vet minimum invites here in camp.

    Pretty sad that Gomer Manning runs his offense better than Brady now, when freaking Brady invented it in 2001.

    You weren't complaining these last few years when Welkie was being targeted as much as Edelman now, Why is that, Prolate?

    In fact, you're walking right into my trap.

     



    So let me get this straight.  Belichick is taking away all of Brady's "binkies" . . . so he has only Edelman to throw to.  That way, rather than just throwing to one receiver named Welker, he can throw to just one receiver named Edelman (who's pretty much the same as Welker, according to you) . . .

    End result seems to be an offense that scores 1.5 TDs a game rather than one that scores 3.7 per game as it did in 2012.

    Meanwhile, Denver who now has Welker, has an offense that is scoring 5.5 TDs a game, up from 3.1 TDs per game in 2012.

    Brilliant!

     

     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from rtuinila. Show rtuinila's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    PatsLifer is also incorrect in saying Welker is the more versatile WR over Amendola. That is false because Welker is only effective in short range and inside the hashes.

    So, if Edelman is rivaling Welker's production or diversified use in the offense with less talent around him for now, why would Amendola at 6 million, Edelman at 1, Welker at 6, be so vastly different?

    Give me the younger, more diverse and superior skill sets over the one, older and limited, exclusive slot WR in Welker.

    Amendola is more than a slot WR if you have been paying attention, as is Edelman.

    So, 7 million for 2 players who can be effective in more than 1 spot.  That is the key here.

    We've lost SBs and playoff games because teams knew where Welker would be lining up and could just ignore his presecence on routes on the perimeter to widen the field.

    Get it?

    Jesus, are some of you this obtuse when it comes to why we lost those games?

    Welker had 3 drops tonight, where if the Giants didn't fumble at the goal line, or the TE didn't fall down, those 14 points may have shown his drops to be more costly than it ended up.

     

     

     

     

     



    Hello Houston, I think we lost our signal!

     

     

     

    i never said welker is more versatile than Danny. I can recall numerous posts agreeing that Danny can line up in multiple positions UNLIKE welker. Never said that Russ.

    i will go on record here for what it's worth. I would rather have a healthy amendola and Edelman than welker and Edelman. However, the one thing those if us were skeptical about in regards to Danny...his health, is proving us correct. You can't compare a guy who can suit up and a guy who cannot. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    But you are trying to make this a Welker vs Amendola argument when Amendola wasn't even mentioned in the original post.  Edelman has played better than Welker so far this year. That is what the OP stated and if you can't dipute that then don't bring another player into the discussion.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I am trying to make this a salary cap vs production argument. You know, Russ favorite topic.

     

    what I was saying in case you missed it is that the money welker could have got went to amendola, not Edelman. The pats I believe thought they would replace welkers production with amendola, not Edelman, otherwise Edelman would have been signed day 1 not amendola. 

    Who did they sign immediately when FA started and how much did they pay him? Not welker, not Edelman. 

    my point is Russ started off by comparing welker to Edelman, he tried the shell game like he is famous for. I introduced amendola because that is the truer comparison From a cap perspective. 

    If Edelman can play everywhere and more versatile than welker, then why compare the 2? 

    You would be wise to not hitch your wagon to rusty and his parrot. I think the parrot gives him advice For posting here.

    [/QUOTE]

    My point is still the OP was comparing welkers production to Edelmans production. They said nothing about cap implications. And why bring the cap implication of a player not mentioned in the original premise into the discussion. The only reason I can see for doing that is to change the discussion into an argument that is more easily winnable though off topic. It's like playing basketball and because you can't beat him throwing two pointers, you suddenly declare you scored a six point touchdown.

    And sonny, don't tell me what is wise and unwise like what I write hear will have dire consequences in my life. I think your little turf wars are rediculous and I'll agree or disagree with whoever I want whenever I want.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from rtuinila. Show rtuinila's posts

    Re: Edelman and Welker

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     Part of the reason Edelman is getting so many receptions is because BB didn't give Brady any one else to throw to (at least anyone else who is not either injured or inexperienced).  Elway, meanwhile, seems to have given Manning a plethora of options, so Welker is just one choice of many. For Brady, Edelman is the only choice who is on the field and ready for prime time.

     

    Say what you want about Welker, the Broncos' offense is way ahead of the Pats' right now.  We'll see how things shake out as the season progresses, but after two games, there's no comparison between the two offenses.  The Broncos' is better. 

     



    And none of what you say changes or discredits Edelmans production vs Welkers production .  This thread wasn't about Denvers offense vs the Pats offense. It was about Edelman's production vs Welker's production. 

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share