Watson

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

    Watson

    Read watson is as good as gone come Mar 5. Who replaces him?

    oh I know, Jimmy Graham from the U
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from AlpharettaPat1. Show AlpharettaPat1's posts

    Re: Watson

    I think so as well, I really think he's a good player just not used enough. I would like to keep him if he does not break the bank

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from EASON11. Show EASON11's posts

    Re: Watson

    To bad cause he has all the tools...........he will go to Denver or KC and have 70 catches and ten td's...........he will be in a offense more oriented toward the te.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsfaninsatx. Show patsfaninsatx's posts

    Re: Watson

    Owen Daniels, Tony Shelfler, some draft Pick....it doesnt really matter, Pats never use the TE anyways. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from natesubs. Show natesubs's posts

    Re: Watson

    i think watson is a great athlete, who will have a great year next year, when we actually get him the ball rather than constantly having him back for blocking due to the inadequacies of the O-line he is a very good threat.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from nyjoseph. Show nyjoseph's posts

    Re: Watson

    In Response to Re: Watson:
    To bad cause he has all the tools...........he will go to Denver or KC and have 70 catches and ten td's...........he will be in a offense more oriented toward the te.
    Posted by EASON11


    In that case, he will be thrown to about 130 times, have about 30 drops, and 6 lost fumbles.  He will never be confused with Russ Francis or Ben Coates, both studs at the position.  IMO he has bad hands, goes down on first contact, and never is a threat to take it to the house.  Add to all of that (as others have noted) the Pats don't emphasize the position.  Time to rotate the stock, let him walk, and get a more physical specimen with good hands.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2. Show Tcal2's posts

    Re: Watson


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

    Re: Watson

    Jeez Tcal, where did you find that?  LOL

    I think Watson has been a non-factor.  He is like a slightly bad Adam Sandler movie that you keep watching to the end in the hope that it will eventually get better, but never does.

    I don't see how it can hurt to try someone else.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Watson

    Mike Vrabel said he'd come back "in a heartbeat".
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Watson

    In Response to Re: Watson:
    Mike Vrabel said he'd come back "in a heartbeat" .
    Posted by digger0862


    i'd rather have willie mcginnest back
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from NOISE. Show NOISE's posts

    Re: Watson

    For now, looks like Chris Baker.  - Like Patsfaninsatx mentioned, the pats don't use their TE anyways  - would be nice if they went back to the dink n dunk a bit to get the TE more involved.  (esp since welker will be out)....Is another Dallas Clark coming out in this years draft?????
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Watson

    In Response to Re: Watson:
    In Response to Re: Watson : i'd rather have willie mcginnest back
    Posted by kansaspatriot

    lol To replace Watson?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SICOFITALL. Show SICOFITALL's posts

    Re: Watson

    Can we please get rid of this guy , along with the morons who are STILL waiting for his and Maroneys potential to be filled. How many years can we wait , they su ck. Its not the o-line , they way there used , how many touches they get , they su ck! Watson is a tight end who cant perform tight end duties , the guy has run the same seem route for 5 YEARS! Whens the last time he made a big catch , took a big shot over the middle. My boy 81 takes more shots then him. So can he block...WOW , lock him up...whatever it takes...millions! Please ! You can get a blocking tight end who cant catch in any round and in every draft. Im hoping the PATS go after a Scheffler , great hands , can run and block a lil' for you. This guy can run almost any route you want and has no problem going over the middle and making that big catch and taking a shot. Eason you need to get a clue buddy , its not the offense hes in or the amount of targets he gets. In fact this offense caters to receivers and tight ends , their giving the initial play along with everyone else. If 12 has to check down , it gets busted or if the play just isnt there , rec's/te 's become QB's. They can revert back to a pervious play , have a saftey route or spot to go to , or freelance to get open. This offense is coveted by alot of receivers and tight ends in the league , right now we just dont have the guys to run it. I would agrue we havent for the past 3 years. We got away with it in 07' because of the myriad of options we had and oh yea Moss caught 23 TD's! This team really needs someone who can the X position , Ill say it again , spend the money trade a couple draft picks and bring in Marshell. At 26 hes a top 5 receiver who can play the short game and catch bubble's and short slants and crossing patterns. And he can beat you deep on a post , slugo and 9 route. Hes in the prime of his career , has 5-6 great years left and everyone knows him and Denver are parting ways. Seriously how could one not want this guy? So what he "has issues"  , this is the NF'inL , who doesnt have problems. Guys like him want disipline , they want structure and want to be a part of something bigger. I really think we could get him for two seconds and maybe a 5-6. Like I said everyone knows he wants out and they want to deal him , he was pretty close to becoming a Seahawk. I also heard the 49ers are very interested in him depending on the price. He goes there and all of a sudden they have the peices and potential to be a great offense , they would still need help at O-line , but he would a huge help in transforming that O. Im assuming they have an actual person playing QB as opposed to a broom with an automatic slingshot chucking up balls. LOL I actually think Smith has what it takes to get the job done. He has the skills , he just needs a little more help and has to gain some confidence back. Marshell/Crabtree/Morgan/Davis/Gore/Coffee make up a freat core for your skill positions and could really do some damage by putting up some high numbers on the score board.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from haldager. Show haldager's posts

    Re: Watson

    I think Greg Olsen might be possible. There are rumors about him going to the Pats.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Watson

    In Response to Re: Watson:
    Jeez Tcal, where did you find that?  LOL I think Watson has been a non-factor.  He is like a slightly bad Adam Sandler movie that you keep watching to the end in the hope that it will eventually get better, but never does. I don't see how it can hurt to try someone else.
    Posted by chrisakawoody


    Two things about Adam Sandler movies:

    1. The term "slightly" should never be used when describing how bad they are.

    2. Every single one of them gets exponentially better the minute the credits begin to roll.






    oh . . .   and I think Watson is an okay tight end, but the Pats don't take advantage of his abilities.


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

    Re: Watson

    In Response to Re: Watson:
    Owen Daniels, Tony Shelfler, some draft Pick....it doesnt really matter, Pats never use the TE anyways. 
    Posted by patsfaninsatx

    I think you're looking at it the wrong way. 

    If we had a dependable TE, one who could get open and not drop 50% if the passed thrown his way, he'd be getting plenty of use. Watson has shown he's totally undependable, especially when it counts.

    Another guy with all the tools but somehow they always stay in the toolbox. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BrooklineRob. Show BrooklineRob's posts

    Re: Watson

    Was Watson that bad?  He gets ripped for being a first round miss, and probably rightly so since his considerable skill set never seemed to match his production.  But as part of the TE rotation, I think the Pats could do worse.  This has to be an asking price issue.  Probably will get paid a bit too much for the Pats' liking. 

    What is it with the Pats and the tight end position?  Guaranteed they draft 1 or more this year.   
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from agill1970. Show agill1970's posts

    Re: Watson

    While he has never lived up to the expectations that came with drafting him in the 1st round, he still is a solid TE that shows bursts of greatness.  I pefer we keep him so long as he isn't looking for unrealistic money.  I can say the same thing about Maroney. 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from CubanPete. Show CubanPete's posts

    Re: Watson

    Don't know, but whoever they find, I hope he can block.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimNotJimmy. Show JimNotJimmy's posts

    Re: Watson

    you guys can't begin to tell me Happy Gilmore was a bad movie!!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from dafoe. Show dafoe's posts

    Re: Watson

    I'm with the Watson really isn't that good camp. This isn't baseball. Five years is more than enough time to evaluate a player. Most people say the magic number is three years.

    Yes, it's possible that he was underused. But he played with one of the best QBs in the history of the game and still managed to be mostly invisible. That tells me that he can't get open on a regular basis.

    Some guys, for all thier ability, don't have that knack. Think of Troy Brown or Wes Welker. Nobody is ever going to confuse either guy with Jerry Rice. But they both became All Pros by running percise routes and finding the holes in defenses. It's not a knack that everyone has and it requires some brain power. I'm not saying Watson has a low football IQ. I don't know if he does or he doesn't. But when he was in college he could just run by guys. He can't do that now. And so far, the transition has been difficult for him. It's like Ron Dayne. He gets into the NFL and suddenly he's not big enough to run people over anymore. He just wasn't cut out to be a star in the NFL. It happens.

    I'm not saying Watson is a terrible player. I just think it's safe to say he is never going to be anything more than a mediocre player. And I didn't even mention the hands issue.

    My only concern with losing Watson would be on the Oline, especially if they have Matt Light at left tackle again this year. They are going to need somebody to chip. Hopefully Watson's replacement is up to it 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2. Show Tcal2's posts

    Re: Watson

    In Response to Re: Watson:
    you guys can't begin to tell me Happy Gilmore was a bad movie!!
    Posted by JimNotJimmy



     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Watson

    Crazy isn't it, that Belichick values the TE position enough to use first round picks (Graham and Watson) to get them but under utilizes TE in his offense. Perhaps they'll take a fresh look at how Indy uses Dallas Clark. 

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

    Re: Watson

    In Response to Re: Watson:
    Crazy isn't it, that Belichick values the TE position enough to use first round picks (Graham and Watson) to get them but under utilizes TE in his offense. Perhaps they'll take a fresh look at how Indy uses Dallas Clark. 
    Posted by RonF


    Ron

    That's what I was thinking too.  The Pats used high picks on Watson and Graham and they both had solid but not spectacular careers here, arguably neither was worth the pick it took the get them, but Graham was a pretty good all around TE.  They also used a #3 on Thomas a few years back, signed Baker to a pretty good FA deal last year and traded a #5 for a guy that couldn't even make it out of camp.  Was it them?  Was it the offense?  Do they value blocking that much that they use high picks and pay decent dollars?  For a position that the team seems to put a fair amount of emphasis on, the bang for the buck in the receiving game is not that impressive.   

    Of course I could be under-emphasizing blitz pickup and sealing the edge in the running game.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share