mgteich

First, I would hope that the total number of receptions goes down this year, with us running th ball a bit more.

Last year, the team had 402 receptions. Half of these receptions were by tight ends and running backs. I see no reason for this to change.

In 2011, we had only 23 receptions for the total of the #3, #4, #5 and #6 receivers. 15 were by the #3 receiver. The #3 wide receiver was the 5th or 6th receiving target. The #4, #5 and #6 receivers were irrelevant, totaling 8 receptions all year.

OPTION 1
Continue 2011. After all, we had a top receiving game. Plug in Lloyd as our #2 receiver.
Expect fewer receptions from Welker, but for Lloyd to have more that Branch last year to make up any reduction.

We'd have an improved offense with Lloyd as our #1, Welker in the slot (and #2), and the rest competing for #3.

In this scheme, we can fuss about our #3, #4 and #5 receivers all day. In the end they don't matter much. They might increase production to a total of 2 receptions a game.
Stallworth, Johnson, Branch, Gonzo, Underwood and a rookie can all fight for those meager roster spot and opportunities.
================================================== ====
OPTION 2

Just maybe, Josh wants the vertical game to be more than a couple of shots a game downfield. Just maybe, the vertical game should be an integral part of our offense.

In this option, we have 2 wide receivers having the potential to go down the field almost always. We have 2 TE's almost always on the field. They are the go-to guys over the middle. This has to be our base set with our two great TE's. The question is what kind of wide receivers to have in the game.

THIS SCHEME IS VERY DIFFERENT than 2011. When 2 wideouts are in, they both can go intermediate or long. They both have the ability to stretch the field. Occasionally, other wideouts can be in as a change of pace, depending on field position.
============================
Our expected base starting offense would be
Lloyd, Gronkowski, Brady, Ridley, Hernandez, Stallworth

The open question is who what we would need for the additional wide receiver positions. For these secondary roles we would have the following available: Welker, Johnson, Branch, Gonzalez, draftee and Edelman.

One possibility is to have Welker in a diminshed role. This may be best. The question is whether that makes sense for anyone at $9.5M a year or even $6M a year.

Big-T

I wouldn't be surprised to see some sets like this:
QB: Brady
RB: Hernandez
WR: Welker, Lloyd, Stallworth
TE: Gronkowski

Then pass from there, you have all the receiving weapons on the field there and Hernandez will more than likely be matched up on a LB.

mgteich

The issue is protection for Brady. Calling hernandez a RB, does not make him Brady's protector (and an outlet). I prefer a running back. Faulk had this role for many years.

Also, by putting Hernandez in the backfield, you remove him as a intermediate deep threat. I prefer to have Hernandez to have the option to go downfield.

Deus Irae

I'm not seeing what you're seeing. I am seeing a team that, if it can find a genuine WR3 and WR4, among all the signing and (possibly) draft picks, will be able to be more diverse in its attack.

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

mgteich

We will be more diverse with Lloyd as our #2 with Welker. Our offense changes with Lloyd on the field. If Stallworth is running down the other side, offenses will have serious problems. I guess it doesn't matter if you call Stallworth the #3. The issue is the value of Welker in a system where we stretch the field on both sides. Is that value $9.5M a year or more? After all, $8M a year fot two years was an insult.

We have many months to analyze this.

One perspective is to use the 3 wide receiver positions instead of WR#1 #2 and #3. In our system, our slot receiver has been the most productive receiver in the league.

Deus Irae

My point is that it could well be that we'll see more rest for top offensive weapons if WR3 and WR4 are legitimate.

Lloyd
Welker
WR3
Gronk
Hernandez (open backfield/Hernandez in backfield)

Lloyd
Welker
Gronk
Hernandez
RB

Lloyd
Welker
WR3
Gronk
RB

Lloyd
Gronk
Fells
Hernandez
RB

Etc.....

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

Mainefan

Welker's job is to get the first downs. He does it extremely well and it is an important job. He's going to be open nine times out of ten. Anything longer than that--from him--is gravy.

Arrington Planet

I don't see a radical change in our offense, of course we'll have more options to throw it deep, but our base game will still be the short-intermediate zone with Welker and the TEs. Welker may not play every possible snap, but anything different than him being the WR with more snaps would surprise me.

mgteich

I agree.

We have brought in Lloyd. We also hope what you call WR3 and WR4 to be legitimate threats. In your analysis, you didn't even mention WR4, which is fine.

Also, you talk about rest for "top offensive weapons". Are you talking about more than Welker; I think not. After all, I expect Lloyd to be more productive that our 2011 WR2. It seems very, very likely that Welker's role will be reduced in 2012 and 2013.

My open question is the value of Welker. We all agree that he is "very" valuable to us.

Deus Irae

I wasn't going to list every possible configuration, which is why I used "etc...".

Yes, I'm talking about more than Welker. Gronk was in for 94.6% of the offensive snaps, which was even higher than Welker (89.2%), for example.

Other than Brady, Welker's the most valuable player on the offense, with Gronk right there at #3 and Light (possibly Solder moving forward) at #4.

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius