Edelman > Welker!?

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Welker has proven over time that he's a uniquely talented guy and quite durable.  I do have to agree that he's had issues making the clutch catch in the post season. 

    Only issue I've ever had with Edelman (as it seems others have had) is his durability.  Guy has talent, is fast with good hands.  He's certainly done his share for the Pats this year.

    Totally agree the slot receiver is not an issue for the Pats this year.

     



    Paying Danny Amendola $6 million per year for what exactly?  The guy is the 6th highest paid player per year for this team and has been a bigger flop then when he was laid out by the Saints.  I would say that is an issue, wouldn't you?

     

    Edelman has had 4 quality games out of 11.

    The rest of his games are:

    5 rec 57 yards

    5 rec 44 yards

    3 rec 27 yards

    1 rec 11 yards

    2 rec 7 yards

    7 rec 44 yards

    2 rec 35 yards

    Please tell me what is impressive about this?

     



    I typically wait just a skosh longer before labeling a guy a flop but hey different strokes.

    [/QUOTE]

    I wouldn't label Amendola a flop, but he hasn't been all that impressive recently either, maybe because of the lingering effects of the groin injury.  I still think Welker is a better, more consistent, and more reliable receiver than either Amendola or Edelman, but Amendola and Edelman have been good enough, so as you say above, the slot receiver position hasn't been an issue for the Pats, and not having Welker hasn't hurt the team. 

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from EastTraveler. Show EastTraveler's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    At the end of the day the Patriots need to pay him and keep the man on the team for years to come... I can't say how many years of contract but at least 3 IMHO...

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Welker has proven over time that he's a uniquely talented guy and quite durable.  I do have to agree that he's had issues making the clutch catch in the post season. 

    Only issue I've ever had with Edelman (as it seems others have had) is his durability.  Guy has talent, is fast with good hands.  He's certainly done his share for the Pats this year.

    Totally agree the slot receiver is not an issue for the Pats this year.

     



    Paying Danny Amendola $6 million per year for what exactly?  The guy is the 6th highest paid player per year for this team and has been a bigger flop then when he was laid out by the Saints.  I would say that is an issue, wouldn't you?

     

    Edelman has had 4 quality games out of 11.

    The rest of his games are:

    5 rec 57 yards

    5 rec 44 yards

    3 rec 27 yards

    1 rec 11 yards

    2 rec 7 yards

    7 rec 44 yards

    2 rec 35 yards

    Please tell me what is impressive about this?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I typically wait just a skosh longer before labeling a guy a flop but hey different strokes.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I wouldn't label Amendola a flop, but he hasn't been all that impressive recently either, maybe because of the lingering effects of the groin injury.  I still think Welker is a better, more consistent, and more reliable receiver than either Amendola or Edelman, but Amendola and Edelman have been good enough, so as you say above, the slot receiver position hasn't been an issue for the Pats, and not having Welker hasn't hurt the team. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You lost me at reliable, Unless you consider Welker reliably dropping the most important passes in a game being reliable. And Welker is much more consistant at dropping those really important passes too. Welker is the Peyton Manning of receivers. Great stats but lousy in the clutch situations.

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to NEGAME2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TFB12's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to NEGAME2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     +1


    as Brady said today in the news conference, Welker was here and established when Edelman came in and hasn't had the opportunities other players have.   Love to see Brady and Edelman connect like Brady and Welker

    here are Brady's comments

    "He’s been great. Very hard worker, he’s dedicated, nobody works harder than Julian," Brady said Wednesday in a more serious moment. "It’s hard when you’re playing behind Wes for all these years. You’re just not going to get a lot of opportunity because Wes was such a great player, was durable and Jules never got a chance. Now he’s got it and it doesn’t look like he’s slowing down at all."

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So what I got out of reading that was..........

     

     

    Wes was so much better then Edelman that Jules was never going to get much time behind him.

    and

    Edelman wasn't as durable, he was always hurt.

     

    Now that the better, more durable receiver is gone Edelman gets his chance.

    [/QUOTE] no he said welker was durable so Edelman didn't get the chance to play, what don't you understand. your unending love for welker is sad, he's good because Brady made him good. in my mind he's a traitor as is Vinatieri . both had the chance to stay with the Patriots, but egos got in the way. Please change your name to welkersuckup, and get rid of TFB12 or manningimmrperfectandiwantyoualltoknowit.


    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to TFB12's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NEGAME2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    as Brady said today in the news conference, Welker was here and established when Edelman came in and hasn't had the opportunities other players have.   Love to see Brady and Edelman connect like Brady and Welker

    here are Brady's comments

    "He’s been great. Very hard worker, he’s dedicated, nobody works harder than Julian," Brady said Wednesday in a more serious moment. "It’s hard when you’re playing behind Wes for all these years. You’re just not going to get a lot of opportunity because Wes was such a great player, was durable and Jules never got a chance. Now he’s got it and it doesn’t look like he’s slowing down at all."

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So what I got out of reading that was..........

     

    Wes was so much better then Edelman that Jules was never going to get much time behind him.

    and

    Edelman wasn't as durable, he was always hurt.

     

    Now that the better, more durable receiver is gone Edelman gets his chance.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really need to take a reading comprehension course if that is what you got out of Brady's remarks. He never said Welker was better, just already established. BIG difference.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In the biggest game of the year, Edleman shined and Welker stunk.  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I wouldn't label Amendola a flop, but he hasn't been all that impressive recently either, maybe because of the lingering effects of the groin injury.  I still think Welker is a better, more consistent, and more reliable receiver than either Amendola or Edelman, but Amendola and Edelman have been good enough, so as you say above, the slot receiver position hasn't been an issue for the Pats, and not having Welker hasn't hurt the team

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd disagree on this. From the point that 2 of the loses the Pats went a combined 2 for 24 on 3rd downs. Now in those games Edelman and Amendola weren't effective on 3rd downs and nuetralized or in Amendola's case weren't even on the field for one of the loss I believe. Welker, was the team leader in 3rd down conversions every year he was here. With the scores being so close in the end having a more reliable 3rd down converter might have made a difference in both of those games. So, I would say not having Welker might have cost them 1 maybe 2 games. In the end, if they get homefield through the playoffs then those loses didn't hurt the team but if they need to travel at any point because of a lose or two I would say it did hurt them.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to Getzo's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    RkPlayerTeamPos Rec Yds Avg Yds/G Lng TD 20+ 40+ 1st 1st% FUM 1 Julian Edelman NE WR 27 201 7.4 67.0 35 2 1 0 9 33.3 0 11 Wes Welker DEN WR 19 190 10.0 63.3 32 4 3 0 13 68.4 0

     

    Edelman leads the league in catches!!! LOL

    Sorry I'm just having fun - I know Welker is a better receiver, but I think we at least need to be happy we have Edelman on our team.

    He does have a great rapport with Brady, and is a top 3 punt retuner IMO.  He hasn't broken open a big one yet, but he has brought one back for a TD in 3 consecutive seasons.  Only active player to do so!  

    Great punt returner...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ei-LZuLos3c

    And he can play DB in a pinch...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdIG2IvNI2Q

    Loves to block for his guys... wow

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YDJ5VP1EEQ

    Maybe I should have titled this the julian edelman appreciation thread.  Wink

    [/QUOTE]


    Wes has done for years what Eds is just doing now so I wouldnt go there yet. Wes is still superior in reading defenses and being available and being tough. What Eds DOES have over him is he is slightly taller. More athletic.  Eds is faster in the open field but not as quick getting out of breaks as Wes. I will say Eds likely has more b*lls as he fielded every punt without hesitation while Wes was thinking of his week 1 muff and backed away from a punt that should have been fielded. So while he may not be better than wes, he is better in the most important aspect which is clutch and grit and not being afraid of the moment.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from profootball. Show profootball's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    Edelman is deserved a new contract with the Pats.  He is dependable guys from the begnning of the season compare to Amendola.

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    JE is clutch, Wessie is not. No comparison in this area and that is most important. It is the difference between making the biggest plays when the pressure is highest and building great stats but failing at the worst times. If Wessie steps up, regardless of anybody else's prior failures during recent games we've all watched, he bery likely has a ring right now Alomg with the rest of his PATS teammates.  He can't be the guy. JE is proving he is. We shall see. Wes has had several chances and now with Gomer and the Broncos, he has only ONE TD in the last 5- games and greatly contibuted to a last Sunday's catestrphic, historic loss to our PATS. He is already hitting his skid and the season is only 2/3rds done. JE IS STEPPING UP. At this point, YES, JE>WW. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    Who will be better in 2-3 yrs from now?

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Welker has proven over time that he's a uniquely talented guy and quite durable.  I do have to agree that he's had issues making the clutch catch in the post season. 

    Only issue I've ever had with Edelman (as it seems others have had) is his durability.  Guy has talent, is fast with good hands.  He's certainly done his share for the Pats this year.

    Totally agree the slot receiver is not an issue for the Pats this year.

     



    Paying Danny Amendola $6 million per year for what exactly?  The guy is the 6th highest paid player per year for this team and has been a bigger flop then when he was laid out by the Saints.  I would say that is an issue, wouldn't you?

     

    Edelman has had 4 quality games out of 11.

    The rest of his games are:

    5 rec 57 yards

    5 rec 44 yards

    3 rec 27 yards

    1 rec 11 yards

    2 rec 7 yards

    7 rec 44 yards

    2 rec 35 yards

    Please tell me what is impressive about this?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I typically wait just a skosh longer before labeling a guy a flop but hey different strokes.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I wouldn't label Amendola a flop, but he hasn't been all that impressive recently either, maybe because of the lingering effects of the groin injury.  I still think Welker is a better, more consistent, and more reliable receiver than either Amendola or Edelman, but Amendola and Edelman have been good enough, so as you say above, the slot receiver position hasn't been an issue for the Pats, and not having Welker hasn't hurt the team. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You lost me at reliable, Unless you consider Welker reliably dropping the most important passes in a game being reliable. And Welker is much more consistant at dropping those really important passes too. Welker is the Peyton Manning of receivers. Great stats but lousy in the clutch situations.

    [/QUOTE]

    People forget all the big catches Welker makes to move the chains in big games because he makes them and just remember the three or four he missed.  Also, Edelman and Amendola have whole games where they disappear.  Welker rarely did that.  

    I think people have a lot of selective memory here. 

     

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I wouldn't label Amendola a flop, but he hasn't been all that impressive recently either, maybe because of the lingering effects of the groin injury.  I still think Welker is a better, more consistent, and more reliable receiver than either Amendola or Edelman, but Amendola and Edelman have been good enough, so as you say above, the slot receiver position hasn't been an issue for the Pats, and not having Welker hasn't hurt the team

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd disagree on this. From the point that 2 of the loses the Pats went a combined 2 for 24 on 3rd downs. Now in those games Edelman and Amendola weren't effective on 3rd downs and nuetralized or in Amendola's case weren't even on the field for one of the loss I believe. Welker, was the team leader in 3rd down conversions every year he was here. With the scores being so close in the end having a more reliable 3rd down converter might have made a difference in both of those games. So, I would say not having Welker might have cost them 1 maybe 2 games. In the end, if they get homefield through the playoffs then those loses didn't hurt the team but if they need to travel at any point because of a lose or two I would say it did hurt them.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is a good point Eng, and gets to the point that Welker is about as clutch as anyone on third down, regardless of one or two missed balls.  Everyone forgets about the hundreds of big catches he made and seems to remember just the three or four misses.  His completion to drop ratio was great.  But when you get targeted 10 or more times a game, you will have some drops.  No receiver is perfect. 

     

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Iceman4. Show Iceman4's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?


    Edelman needs to be signed..........

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    One clarification.  As a punt returner Edelman truly is > Welker.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Welker has proven over time that he's a uniquely talented guy and quite durable.  I do have to agree that he's had issues making the clutch catch in the post season. 

    Only issue I've ever had with Edelman (as it seems others have had) is his durability.  Guy has talent, is fast with good hands.  He's certainly done his share for the Pats this year.

    Totally agree the slot receiver is not an issue for the Pats this year.

     



    Paying Danny Amendola $6 million per year for what exactly?  The guy is the 6th highest paid player per year for this team and has been a bigger flop then when he was laid out by the Saints.  I would say that is an issue, wouldn't you?

     

    Edelman has had 4 quality games out of 11.

    The rest of his games are:

    5 rec 57 yards

    5 rec 44 yards

    3 rec 27 yards

    1 rec 11 yards

    2 rec 7 yards

    7 rec 44 yards

    2 rec 35 yards

    Please tell me what is impressive about this?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I typically wait just a skosh longer before labeling a guy a flop but hey different strokes.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I wouldn't label Amendola a flop, but he hasn't been all that impressive recently either, maybe because of the lingering effects of the groin injury.  I still think Welker is a better, more consistent, and more reliable receiver than either Amendola or Edelman, but Amendola and Edelman have been good enough, so as you say above, the slot receiver position hasn't been an issue for the Pats, and not having Welker hasn't hurt the team. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You lost me at reliable, Unless you consider Welker reliably dropping the most important passes in a game being reliable. And Welker is much more consistant at dropping those really important passes too. Welker is the Peyton Manning of receivers. Great stats but lousy in the clutch situations.

    [/QUOTE]

    People forget all the big catches Welker makes to move the chains in big games because he makes them and just remember the three or four he missed.  Also, Edelman and Amendola have whole games where they disappear.  Welker rarely did that.  

    I think people have a lot of selective memory here. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree, 100%. Welker caught what 700 something balls for us, I remember quite a few of those being on 3rd down, and in key situations. Can't understand why 1 player who was great has to sux or be better then another guy who plays a similar position?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    JE is clutch, Wessie is not. No comparison in this area and that is most important. It is the difference between making the biggest plays when the pressure is highest and building great stats but failing at the worst times. If Wessie steps up, regardless of anybody else's prior failures during recent games we've all watched, he bery likely has a ring right now Alomg with the rest of his PATS teammates.  He can't be the guy. JE is proving he is. We shall see. Wes has had several chances and now with Gomer and the Broncos, he has only ONE TD in the last 5- games and greatly contibuted to a last Sunday's catestrphic, historic loss to our PATS. He is already hitting his skid and the season is only 2/3rds done. JE IS STEPPING UP. At this point, YES, JE>WW. 




    As it's been mentioned on here RallyC, Welker has only caught 4 TD's.. two in 2 games out of 11 games.  WOW!!

    Where was Edelman for the Bengals, Jets and Panthers game?

    Oh, here he is..

    Badpass_original

    There is your Mr. Clutch!

    Good post Rally!  You sure know what you are talking about! Hahaha!

    Oh, here is some more for you..

    Receiving stats:

    Targets: Welker 95, Edelman 89

    Receptions: Welker 65, Edelman 61

    TD's

    Welker 5th with 9

    Edelman 34th with 4

    Yards

    Welker 26th with 679

    Edelman 33rd with 610

    YAC

    Welker 22nd with 302

    Edelman 38th with 251

    The BIGGIE... 1st Downs

    Welker 10th with 42 = 65% of receptions are for 1st downs

    Edelman 42nd with 28 = 46% of receptions are for 1st downs

    HOW IS THAT FOR CLUTCH!

    The simple version: DYAR means a wide receiver with more total value. DVOA means a wide receiver with more value per play.

    Welker DYAR = 181 Rank 16th, DVOA = 11.1% Rank 24th

    Edelman DYAR = 53 Rank 51st, DVOA = -5.0% Rank 55th  OUCH!! That's bad!! Now wonder we lost those 3 games.

     

    Hmmm???  Might want to rethink your claims here RallyC.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    Welker choked on Sunday in the biggest game for him this season, first game back in NE. HE cost his team a devastating loss. This time it helped the PATS win. PERFECT ENDING! Speaks for itself. Go PATS!

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    PATRIOTS 34 BRONCOS 31

    JE, 110yrds, 9-catches, 2-TDs

    WESSIE , 31yrds, 4-catches, ZERO TDs and yet ANOTHER FATAL CHOKE LOL!

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    Look at this knucklehead Rally guy.  No wonder he was laughed off the forum.  His self esteem must be at an all time low because it looks like he has to get the last word in on these threads.  I used to do that stuff when I was 11 years old.  Hey rally, you are still wrong about Jules no matter how many times you post that.

    Hey rally, still waiting for my answer on who you played for in the NFL and CFL?  Apparently you were here bragging about it.  Why bring it up if you can't back it up? With the football knowledge you display on this forum you might have been the guy who walked around picking up everyone's jockstaps after the games.

    Is this you

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RallyC's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    PATRIOTS 34 BRONCOS 31

    JE, 110yrds, 9-catches, 2-TDs

    WESSIE , 31yrds, 4-catches, ZERO TDs and yet ANOTHER FATAL CHOKE LOL!

    [/QUOTE]

    I think Getzo's thread title about sums it up.  BB does it again.  Plain and simple.

    [/QUOTE]


    Jules had a career day.

    One time.

    Thank you Bill Belichick.

    Wait!

    What?

    Wes Welker has 9tds.

    And more receptions.

    And Yards.

    And first downs.

    Dam you Bill Belichick.

     

     

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to RallyC's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    PATRIOTS 34 BRONCOS 31

    JE, 110yrds, 9-catches, 2-TDs

    WESSIE , 31yrds, 4-catches, ZERO TDs and yet ANOTHER FATAL CHOKE LOL!



    I think Getzo's thread title about sums it up.  BB does it again.  Plain and simple.

    [/QUOTE]


    Agreed. Sunday was a most validating day. 

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

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    In response to RallyC's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    PATRIOTS 34 BRONCOS 31

    JE, 110yrds, 9-catches, 2-TDs

    WESSIE , 31yrds, 4-catches, ZERO TDs and yet ANOTHER FATAL CHOKE LOL!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I think Getzo's thread title about sums it up.  BB does it again.  Plain and simple.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Agreed. Sunday was a most validating day. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes it was.

    We were all correct.

    Horseface has a noodle arm.

    But now you look foolish.

    Because you think Jules is better.

    Then Wes Welker.

    Let me share wisdom.

    You lack it.

    11 games are better then 4.

    Give me Wes Welker 11.

    Over Jules 4.

    You can't get out.

    Of this argument.

    You try.

    But you can't.

    So you continue.

    To post.

    Things that are  not true.

    But you keep it up.

    You are not a smart man.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Edelman > Welker!?

    All I can say right now is WOW!  I'm speechless.  This is so very embarrassing for RallyC.   I don't know what is worse... RallyC being so wrong or embarrassing himself with how he acts. 

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share