ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Is Keeping Hernandez and Gronkowski the Reason Welker is Without an Extension?
Is Keeping Hernandez and Gronkowski the Reason Welker is Without an Extension?
By: Ian Logue
When you assemble as much talent as the New England Patriots have over the past few seasons, eventually it reaches a point where tough decisions have to be made because you can't keep everybody....
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: Is Keeping Hernandez and Gronkowski the Reason Welker is Without an Extension?
Welker is a great player, but the Patriots offense could be more dynamic from the I formation.
With two true outside receivers, two TEs, a RB, and a FB on the field, the Patriots offense can truly do anything. They can spread teams out with Hernandez and the RB, they can run with power, play-action and go deep.
Having Welker on the field hurts the Patriots personnel groupings. He is a slot receiver who often lines up on the outside because the patriots don't have two outside receivers. Playing in 3 receiver sets cuts down on the number of "big guys" they can put on the field, they can't use a FB and if they want to use 2 TEs, Welker goes to the outside or Hernandez goes to the outside, which is less than ideal IMO.....or they can go empty backfield, which makes it difficult to offer the threat of running the ball.
I formation is where it is at, Welker while an excellent player, isn't suited for an offense that the Patriots are moving towards with two dynamic TEs...it isn't the contract so much as the flexibility that they lose by having Welker on the field.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
Re: Is Keeping Hernandez and Gronkowski the Reason Welker is Without an Extension?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle eye
Why did they franchise him then?
Because this year there is no impact from paying Welker on Gronkandez. In 2013 the Pats will probably try to extend at least one of them, so there will be more competition for $$. And in 2014, paying Welker big money could mean letting one of them go. And given Hernandez' hybrid role, the team may end up treating him as a WR from a positional cap allocation perspective.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
Re: Is Keeping Hernandez and Gronkowski the Reason Welker is Without an Extension?
To give some sense of what extending Gronk and Hernandez may take, consider the following:
1. The highest paid "non-movement" TE (or FlexEnd, to use OTG's terminology) include Dallas' Jason Witten (5 year/$37M deal with $19M guaranteed signed in 2011), Antonio Gates (5 year/$36.175M deal with $20.4M guaranteed signed in 2010), Heath Miller (6 year/$36.3M deal signed in 2009) and Tony Gonzalez (signed a 1 year/$7M extension for 2012). It's hard not to see Gronk exceeding those deals, probably by a substantial amount. $8M/year would seem like the lower limit, with $10M/year still reasonable compared to what WRs with similar production make.
2. Green Bay's Jermichael Finley completed his rookie deal last year. His 4 year production totalled 1815 yards from scrimmage (all receiving), 137 receptions and 15 TDs. He was coming off a broken leg. But he still received the franchise tag designation from the Packers. Finley argued that he should be paid as a WR since he lines up as a WR a significant portion of the time. Green Bay - like the Pats a fairly conservative organization financially - disagreed. The two sides eventually decided on a "compromise" 2 year $14M deal to give them time to sort out his true market value.
In comparison, Aaron Hernandez in only 2 years has accounted for 1565 yards from scrimmage (92 rushing and 1473 receiving), 124 receptions and 13 TDs. I think it's pretty hard to imagine Hernandez being extended for anything less than the $7M/year that Finley got, and probably more.
It's hard to imaging the Pats paying 3 WR/TEs upwards of $7M/year in 2014. And assuming that Hernandez' money is allocated to the WR group because of the way he is used, that would put Hernandez in direct competition with the WR group, including Welker.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
Re: Is Keeping Hernandez and Gronkowski the Reason Welker is Without an Extension?
I just pray to all that is holy we keep Wes, Gronk, and Hernandez, the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd most productive and most efficient so-called skill position players on the team, outside of their QB
__________________
It is what it is, so just go out there and do your job!
Re: Is Keeping Hernandez and Gronkowski the Reason Welker is Without an Extension?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nunchucks
Welker is a great player, but the Patriots offense could be more dynamic from the I formation.
With two true outside receivers, two TEs, a RB, and a FB on the field, the Patriots offense can truly do anything. They can spread teams out with Hernandez and the RB, they can run with power, play-action and go deep.
Having Welker on the field hurts the Patriots personnel groupings. He is a slot receiver who often lines up on the outside because the patriots don't have two outside receivers. Playing in 3 receiver sets cuts down on the number of "big guys" they can put on the field, they can't use a FB and if they want to use 2 TEs, Welker goes to the outside or Hernandez goes to the outside, which is less than ideal IMO.....or they can go empty backfield, which makes it difficult to offer the threat of running the ball.
I formation is where it is at, Welker while an excellent player, isn't suited for an offense that the Patriots are moving towards with two dynamic TEs...it isn't the contract so much as the flexibility that they lose by having Welker on the field.
Been saying this for a long time. Welker isn't part of the future plan. Reflects in his contract offers.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.