Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To avoid more distraction from TFB12's Incredelman thread, he has asked I move this portion of the conversation to a new thread, so I have obliged.

    I have picked it up with the last 2 exchanges, where he still does not admit the 6 million to two players who have put up far more production, with added bonues with what Edelman bring, is the superior to approach:

     

    TFB12:

    Once again, I have always like Edelman, I say it all the time on here, and have for many years here even when many were pushing him out the door a few years back when he was on the bubble.

    You pushed for Amendola to join the Pats over re-signing Welker and then you continued to tell me how Amendola was so much better and how he would come here and do all these wonderful things.  You provided all these false facts about Amendola compared to Welker, I provided true facts based on real numbers debunking your false claims.  This where we really went at it. Looks like my thoughts on Amendola were correct.  He hasn't done much.  Doesn't mean I don't like the guy or that he isn't capeable of maybe doing good things in the future.  He hasn't done them this year and not having Welker has hurt the team, as I redicted.  Thank goodness Edelman has done very well.  Still not Welker numbers from prior seasons but a solid effort.

    I don't agree with every decision BB makes.  I believe he is very capable of fielding much better defenses then he has over the last 5 years.  I also think letting Moss go hurt the Pats.  They went without a deep threat for a few years, which I feel hurt this team.  They still don't have a solid, dependable deep threat yet.  Still hurting the team.  I like BB, greatest coach ever in my eyes, reason I started following the Pats but he isn't perfect.  He makes mistakes.  He has done some things that cost the team at least 1 SB, possibly more.

    We can discuss this forever, I gave it a rest about a month ago.  You keep bringing it up, we will never agree.  You want to continue it, make a thread for it and we can do it there or we can just spare everyone all the headshaking and grief and leave it this.  Go a head, get the last word in but don't expect a response from me unless like I said, you start a different thread for it.

    [/QUOTE]

     

    DeadAhead:

    He hasn't done much? He's gotten better every week and is trending up. Just how many passes do you want Brady to throw around the field here?

    I made no false claims whatsoever:

    This is what was said:

    1. Amendola is younger, has never played with a good QB, is cheaper than what Welker wanted BB to go with here (8 mil+ per) and has a lower drop rate. 

    The only question was durability, which I believed to be overrated due to when his injuries occurred. I also feel Gronk's injuries are purely bad luck. It's not a week to week durability problem like we've seen with some other players in this league.

    2. Edelman could handle the Welker role. He may not be quite Welker level, but he could produce and represent in similar fashion.

    So, you get TWO younger players for the price of ONE older, fading player.

    3. Edelman saves a roster spot so BB can only need to carry 2 QBs. He's also the all tim (ALL TIME) punt return leader in terms of yard average.  These two elements alone make Edelman over Welker 

    4. Each Amendola and Edelman can line up at the X and Z, which widens the field for us, which has been a major problem for us in general in recent years with Brady's binky addiction over the middle of the field (Gronk and Welker).  This is a MAJOR aspect as to why the approach was the right move.  Brady has not worked the perimeter in years. He's either refused to or pretended he needed two HOF flankers, or a binky like Branch, in order to do so.  

    These are all massive pluses as the case over ONE Welker.

    6 million invested. No brainer. Combine all of these elements and facts and look at Welker's current production and the Edelman/Amendolsa production:

    Welker 73 Rec, 778 Yards, 10 TDs  (13 games)

    Edelman 89, 914 Yards, 6 TDs

    Amendola 51, 579 Yards, 2 TDS (10 games)

    140 receptions, 1493 yards and 8 TDS is superior to what Welker has for the money.

    So, at 6 million per, you lose and lose cold. So just admit it and we can move on.

    Also, lower drop rate and CLUTCH.

     

    As for Moss, that trade saved our 2010 season. It brought back Branch and made the offense far less predictable. No way Brady wins the MVP and we go 14-2 without that move.

    See, this is how I know you started following our team in 2007 when Moss arrived. No one in their right mind would watch Weeks 1-4 with Moss demanding balls from Brady to get a new contract before the lockout and make that absurd statement, thinkning Moss should have been above the team. BB saw it, and dealt him. Thanks BB. BB should have won Exec of the year w/Reese and Caserio in a a RUN AWAY that year along with COach of the Year.

    You were warned and you;ve been warned. We will win a SB again when  we run the ball and get Brady to legit playaction status.  We would have had a worse seed in 2010 with Moss. That finesse offense has as much to do with a perceived "bad" D as anything else.   

    That's another concept you and the other BBWs don't get.  It showed up last week. Was the D that took out the Run, contained Wallace and Clay all day, allowing 17 points in 85 degrees against a desperate opponent really that bad, or was the second half offense the culprit?

    Hmmmm. I know the answer.

    [/QUOTE]


    so it took two guys to replace Welker...

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    Le vrai est trop simple, il faut y arriver toujours par le compliqué.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Le vrai est trop simple, il faut y arriver toujours par le compliqué.

    [/QUOTE]

    My french is a tad rusty (no relation or pun intended) but i do recognize the words truth? complicated? and obviously simple...

    Something about the truth is complicated?

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    Besides the touchdowns, Edelman has been outperforming Welker this year in terms of total production.  There is almost no need to include Amendola into the conversation.  I think what we have here are two guys that can do close to the same job for this team.  Both come with an injury risk, so you sign two guys hoping that at least one is healthy for the team all year.  This has worked out rather well in that regard.

    In terms of Amendola to Welker, it is Welker by a large margin this year.  We can not discount the time that Amendola spent on the DL as it took away from the team's production.  I am not sure what happens to Edelman next year as he is a free agent, but the next man up would be Amendola and I think he would do a fine enough job. 

    So in closing, Edelman has been the more productive player this season.  This is especially true when factoring in the great job he does on punt returns.  The problem is that he did so well, that it is likely that a team will sign him next year out from under us because his price just got very expensive.

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Le vrai est trop simple, il faut y arriver toujours par le compliqué.

    [/QUOTE]

    My french is a tad rusty (no relation or pun intended) but i do recognize the words truth? complicated? and obviously simple...

    Something about the truth is complicated?

    [/QUOTE]

    My French isn't great, but I think it translates "The truth is very simple, it must always be arrived at by the complex."

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Le vrai est trop simple, il faut y arriver toujours par le compliqué.

    [/QUOTE]

    My french is a tad rusty (no relation or pun intended) but i do recognize the words truth? complicated? and obviously simple...

    Something about the truth is complicated?

    [/QUOTE]

    My French isn't great, but I think it translates "The truth is very simple, it must always be arrived at by the complex."

    [/QUOTE]

    Merci

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    The truth is too simple; one must always get there by a complicated route.  (Unless i'm mis-remembering the quote)

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Le vrai est trop simple, il faut y arriver toujours par le compliqué.

    [/QUOTE]

    My french is a tad rusty (no relation or pun intended) but i do recognize the words truth? complicated? and obviously simple...

    Something about the truth is complicated?

    [/QUOTE]

    My French isn't great, but I think it translates "The truth is very simple, it must always be arrived at by the complex."

    [/QUOTE]


    Indeed.

    And DeadAhead is correct for once:   I am definitely "anti" Belichick bashing for bashing sake.

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The truth is too simple; one must always get there by a complicated route.  (Unless i'm mis-remembering the quote)

    [/QUOTE]

    This is a much better translation than mine! 

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    This doesn't matter at all anymore Welker's gone.

    In BB's words " He's not on our team"

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    For starters Moss still has never been replaced. Still waiting on a legit deep threat, something that has hurt this team since he has been gone.

    When the Pats let him go, yes they adjusted and did very well but come playoff time Moss was surly missed.  Lost against the Jets because the Pats didn't have a deep threat.  They stacked everyone in the box, and they stuffed the Pats.  Nobody to stretch the field.  It was a disaster, can't win against talented teams passing short all game, also if there is no deep threat, no reason to spread the defense, also hurts the run game.

    If the Pats had Moss it would have been a SB season.  Probably would have won 2011 SB.  Again, no deep threat.

    For the Welker/Amendola discussion, I can't believe you feel the need to keep it going.  I have stopped the Welker talk a month ago, you who complain about the Welker talk keep it going.

    In March you said Amendola was not injury prone.  Freak accidents.  Amendola comes here and gets hurt, game #1.  You provided all these false facts of how Amendola lined up with the Rams on the outside more then Welker did.  I provided actual figures that showed percentage wise Welker lined up on the outside more then Amendola did and gained more yards lining up outside then Amendola did.  You said Amendola's YAC was better, I provided actual stats that showed Amendola's YAC was one of the worse in the league.  You said Welker lead the league in dropped passes, I said it doesn't matter... look at the meaningful numbers drop rate which shows Welker was not even close to the top.  You said Amendola since taller (1 inch lol) would be a much bigger threat in the redzone.  WRONG!  He dropped a game winner TD last weekend.  I told you 1 inch wouldn't make a difference against 6'0"+ guys.  You wouldn't listen.  Welkers TD's this season are better then Amendola and Edelman combined.  How is that for redzone performance?.

    Welkers stats as predicted by most everyone here, including me would be less in Denver.  Makes sense that would be the case since they have so many weapons. 

    The argument has always been between Amendola and Welker.  Edelman would have remained had Welker been re-signed.  Unless they had Amendola signed and if Welker re-signed they may have let Edelman go.  Regardless... Welker would have made this offense better this season, especially since so many new receivers (rookies.) 

    Bottom line is.... Welker/Edelman combo or Welker/Amendola combo would have been much better for this team then Edelman/Amendola combo.  I say the Pats lost 2 very important games this season without Welker here.  I doubt they would be struggling this bad with him.  If you don't see it then take those rose colored glasses off, empty the keg of BB koolaid and get out of that plastic bubble you are living in.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Le vrai est trop simple, il faut y arriver toujours par le compliqué.

    [/QUOTE]

    I took French and was in French Honor Sociey. See, I am kinda intelligent.  The truth sometimes is VERY simple and not complicated, professor. 

    Your lack of an in depth counter is duly noted and will be chalked up as a loss for Catfish, a known anti-BB basher here.

    Merci.

    [/QUOTE]


    anyone else ever notice Rusty has lived everywhere and experienced everything? Bring up a city he has lived there)speak another language he studied it in school. (honor society of course) - mention an author he did a dissertation on him - bring up gay marriage and viola! his sister is gay...whatever it is ge us an expert with first hand experience...funny how that works

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Le vrai est trop simple, il faut y arriver toujours par le compliqué.

    [/QUOTE]

    I took French and was in French Honor Sociey. See, I am kinda intelligent.  The truth sometimes is VERY simple and not complicated, professor. 

    Your lack of an in depth counter is duly noted and will be chalked up as a loss for Catfish, a known anti-BB basher here.

    Merci.

    [/QUOTE]


    Bill Bellichick is a .500 coach without Tom Brady...how's that simple truth? And you have never countered it yet. : )

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The truth is too simple; one must always get there by a complicated route.  (Unless i'm mis-remembering the quote)

    [/QUOTE]

    This is a much better translation than mine! 

    [/QUOTE]

    My French is awful; what I remembered was the English translation.  The quote was thrown in my face once.  Back story is much too dull to take up space here.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Final Debate (Welker vs Amendola/Edelman)

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxDOrtiz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Besides the touchdowns, Edelman has been outperforming Welker this year in terms of total production.  There is almost no need to include Amendola into the conversation.  I think what we have here are two guys that can do close to the same job for this team.  Both come with an injury risk, so you sign two guys hoping that at least one is healthy for the team all year.  This has worked out rather well in that regard.

    In terms of Amendola to Welker, it is Welker by a large margin this year.  We can not discount the time that Amendola spent on the DL as it took away from the team's production.  I am not sure what happens to Edelman next year as he is a free agent, but the next man up would be Amendola and I think he would do a fine enough job. 

    So in closing, Edelman has been the more productive player this season.  This is especially true when factoring in the great job he does on punt returns.  The problem is that he did so well, that it is likely that a team will sign him next year out from under us because his price just got very expensive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Good post, but the concept is the salary allocation of TWO players being superior ROI.

    This was what TFB12, Pats Eng and some others weren't grasping.  If you look at the entire package, IMO, it is clearly obvious BB made the right choice this year.

    Now, next year, when Edelman is a FA, he will need a raise, sure.  But, I don't think Edelman will be a guy who will jump to leave either, which is a reflection of BB's loyalty to players like this.

    Not many times would have given Edelman a chance at WR like that.  Compare Edelman's NFL career to Tebow's  for example.  

    As for Amendola, I fully expect him to keep trending up like he has been, after a bumpy start to the season for him. It's not totally surprising Brady has more of a rapport with Edelman than Amendola either, hence the doubled production.

    [/QUOTE]


    Salary allocation, W-T-F?  Your argument has gone from Welker vs Amendola, then to Welker vs Edelman, and now you are throwing in salary allocation, LOL!   My gosh, how many different excuses are you going to try and find before you will admit you were wrong about putting Welker out and Amendola in?  Welker vs Amendola was your argument all along.

    I am sure the Pats could have afforded both Welker and Edelman.  The extra million would be well worth where they would have been sitting at this point this season with Welker and Edelman then where they currently are with Edelman and Amendola..

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share