Wes Welker says he has nine and a half million reasons to play

[Off The Grid]

BOO YAH!!! :rocker:

Let me add this:

1 ~ Wes Welker is the best Slot End in the history of the Galaxy. Agreed?? Agreed!!

2 ~ In Pursuit of Winning Championships, Domination of the Center of the ChessBoard is most vital.

3 ~ As a Slot End ~ the very best of'm!! ~ Wes Welker has been essential to that Pursuit.

4 ~ Yet the phenomenal Ascension of G+H ~ that's "Gronkowski + Hernandez", to those scoring at home!! ~ has ~ astonishing but true ~ rendered Welker's dominance of the Center of the ChessBoard...redundant.

5 ~ This is all the more true because Brother Wes is only a Passing Threat: As he's a mediocre Run Blocker, his presence tips our hand to "Pass", giving the Defense an enormous competitive edge against us in Late Winter.

6 ~ To Get Over The Hump ~ Read: expand our Offense Horizontally, allowing us to Spread The Field against Elite D's like the 2010 Jets and 2011 Giants ~ it's not enough to dominate the Center of the ChessBoard if we completely neglect the Perimeter of the ChessBoard, as we have for 24 months...And the Salary Cap dictates that addressing the Perimeter of the ChessBoard ~ as we MUST, if we're interested in actually WINING Super Bowls ~ requires that we ease off on expenditure ELSEWHERE.

7 ~ Here's the Good News: G+H aren't due for raises until 2014.

8 ~ That means that we've got 24 months ~ 24 SWEET MONTHS ~ in which to roll with Brother Wes ~ Born Patriot and Super Warrior ~ AND G+H...AND Brandon Lloyd, Jabar Gaffney, Deion Branch, and Donte StallWorth, FIELD SPREADERS...IF we so choose...I say we ROLL!!

***

 

[Off The Grid]

Well I'm a recent crazy here, so it isn't over and over for me.

I love Wes, but there is only so much money available.

How much of the cap do you think the Pats should give him? Is he worth Megatron or Fitzgerald money.

Poor cap management will kill a team faster than anything.

Well Said!! :rocker:

It's hard to face up to reality, but too much sentimentality can KILL a team.

The Cap is an AWFUL impediment to building a team.

Even Bill The Mad (Genius) gave into sentimentality ~ or Public Pressure ~ when he loaded up on Randy Moss after that WILD 2007 Season, when he PROBABLY could've baked the Skins for a 1st Rounder or TWO!!

*****

 

[Banjo]

I get the feeling Welker will play one more season for the Patriots and then move on to get a better offer.

maybe the Broncos?

 

[Off The Grid]

Wes will get a multi-year deal. He'll get 3 or 4 years, and he'll make somewhere between $8 million and $10 million per season. The deal would have been easier to do if the Patriots hadn't decided to sit on their hands while several other other top receivers got big money in their contracts. Unfortunately, the Patriots tend to be penny wise and pound foolish with their top players.

My apologies for the Time Warp, Brother Deus!! That's 3x in 2 years but 2x today!!

PF's format is a bit difficult to perfect...and I AM a Perfectionist!!

***

You're probably right about what'll happen with Welker.

My HOPE is that it's 2 years at Top Dollar...and then either a Divestiture or a Steep Discount!!

 

[Off The Grid]

I get the feeling Welker will play one more season for the Patriots and then move on to get a better offer.

maybe the Broncos?

A LONG while back, I brought up the notion of Divestiture ~ Selling High with Welker for as much as a #1 or #2...and Brother Mayo'nd I'ave discussed this possibility at Length.

But Wes Welker IS a Died In The Wool Belichickian Patriot...

And I do believe that...Well...I'll post it as its own separate post:

 

[Off The Grid]

But then I got to thinking about the fact that Brady is poised to have FOUR Go To guys, in 2012, with Welker, Lloyd, Gronkowski, and Hernandez...And it struck me that having FOUR dynamic threats ~ leaving aside the half dozen or so other rich possibilities ~ and having that HORIZONTAL threat, in particular ~ Lloyd ~ for the fist time in two long years...might very well produce a Tipping Point.

What I mean is: retaining the first three and adding the fourth in Lloyd, a fourth who would not only increase their numbers but spread the field ~ by forcing Defenses to respect our Horizontal game in a way they haven't had to since the rise of G+H, because it corresponded with the departure of Moss ~ seems to me has great potential to trigger an Historical Tipping Point: A Tactical Advantage SO acute as to be potentially UNMANAGEABLE...even by the best Defenses in the Game!!

Put another way: The difference between 3 Top Shelf Threats and 4...might be FAR greater than 1.

With G+H's contracts not coming due for two years, it seems to me that we have a rare and scintillating Opportunity, over the next 24 months, to assault the league with a truly unprecedented constellation of weaponry!!

MIND you...

The very retention of Welker, himself, by producing this potentially historical Opportunity...also makes it considerably more likely that we ~ Mad Bill and Mad Tom ~ will continue that focus on the Arial Assault I both fear and loathe.

However, I'm thinking that they're continuing in that direction, regardless: Not quite an abject neglect of the Running Game, but a continuing failure to see its Impact on the Championship Quest ~ and Tom's longevity ~ and a consequent failure to get behind it as they should.

Thinking this, as I do, I figure: If we're gonna be "Pass First"...then I'd just as soon see us hit'm with everything we've got.

And while we've had an effective Horizontal Passing Game, before, on the Flanks, and've had a DEMOLISHING MidField Passing Game, for the last 2 years...We've never had both.

Yes: A truly unprecedented Constellation of Weaponry!!

I'd be VERY happy to see us set ALL those guys against the rest of the league for the next 24 months...and dare the bastards to STOP us!! :rocker:

 

[Husse]

...

But, but, but... He doesn't play in the trenches, you can't like him!

 

[mayoclinic]

Well I'm a recent crazy here, so it isn't over and over for me.

I love Wes, but there is only so much money available.

How much of the cap do you think the Pats should give him? Is he worth Megatron or Fitzgerald money.

Poor cap management will kill a team faster than anything.

Let me add this:

1 ~ Wes Welker is the best Slot End in the history of the Galaxy. Agreed?? Agreed!!

2 ~ In Pursuit of Winning Championships, Domination of the Center of the ChessBoard is most vital.

3 ~ As a Slot End ~ the very best of'm!! ~ Wes Welker has been essential to that Pursuit.

4 ~ Yet the phenomenal Ascension of G+H ~ that's "Gronkowski + Hernandez", to those scoring at home!! ~ has ~ astonishing but true ~ rendered Welker's dominance of the Center of the ChessBoard...redundant.

5 ~ This is all the more true because Brother Wes is only a Passing Threat: As he's a mediocre Run Blocker, his presence tips our hand to "Pass", giving the Defense an enormous competitive edge against us in Late Winter.

6 ~ To Get Over The Hump ~ Read: expand our Offense Horizontally, allowing us to Spread The Field against Elite D's like the 2010 Jets and 2011 Giants ~ it's not enough to dominate the Center of the ChessBoard if we completely neglect the Perimeter of the ChessBoard, as we have for 24 months...And the Salary Cap dictates that addressing the Perimeter of the ChessBoard ~ as we MUST, if we're interested in actually WINING Super Bowls ~ requires that we ease off on expenditure ELSEWHERE.

At the risk of being tarred and feathered, I'm going to go even further and enter into the realm of blasphemy ... Would the Pats' offense be better off WITHOUT Wes Welker at this point?

Now I fully grant that Welker is the greatest slot receiver of all time, and is in many respects a "perfect" Patriot. But against that consider the following:

- As Grid acknowledges, Welker's strength is to a large extent redundant with the strength of Gronk and Hernandez in the middle of the field.

- To get over the hump requires expanding our defense horizontally and vertically, which means taking some of the focus AWAY from the center of the field.

- There is no way to accomplish this without reducing Welker's role. He was targeted 172 times out of 611 pass attempts in 2011, or over 28% of the time. That's got to change.

- It makes no sense to pay $9.5M to a 31 year old slot receiver whose role is going to be reduced, no matter how great he is or how much he has contributed over the past 5 years. And paying him for a long term deal may get in the way of signing Gronk and/or Hernandez long term.

Or, to put it differently, my goals for the Pats' offense are:

1. The offense needs to become more diversified.

2. The offense needs more run/pass balance, and needs to integrate the RBs more into the passing attack.

3. The offense needs to spread out the passing game more both horizontally and vertically in order to make it harder for defenses to take away the middle of the field.

4. The offense needs to continue to be built around the TEs. They are the "compound multipliers" which make the offense so difficult for opposing defenses to scheme against.

I see no way to achieve these 4 goals that does not involve reducing the degree to which the slot receiver is an integral part of the offense. If Welker is going to be targeted 28% of the time and account for almost 30% of the receiving yards and over 23% of the receiving TDs, then it will be impossible to achieve all 4 of those goals. Something has to give. And for me, it's the role of the slot receiver. And if that decreases, then there is no reason to spend $10M/year on a 31 year old slot receiver.

We saw with the Randy Moss trade that the offense actually got BETTER by dumping one of the greatest receivers of all time, because it allowed BB to channel the offense through the TEs. Now we're at the point where Welker plus Gronk/Hernandez is causing the offense to become too focused in the middle of the field.

Continuing my blasphemous argument, reducing the role of the slot receiver is necessary IMHO in order to diversify and improve the overall offense. So we are looking at a scenario in which we drastically reduce Welker's workload but drastically increase his compensation. Not a good business move, regardless of his past contributions to the team.

Do I really want to get rid of Welker? Of course not. But (1) Brady focuses on him way too much and needs to spread the ball around more, and (2) his age and cost are reaching the point where they outweigh his value. That's usually the time when the Pats dump a player - the way they did Richard Seymour.

I'd be fine with Welker in a reduced role for an acceptable cost. But I'm not sure how to make that happen. And the Pats have made Welker expendable by getting enough weapons to have an effective "WR by committee" approach. Lloyd, Gaffney, Stallworth, Ochocinco, Branch, Gonzalez and Edelman are more than capable of giving Brady enough targets and options. Heck, we won't be able to keep them all as it is.

Emotionally, I don't want to see Welker leave. But the Pats never let emotions drive their decision making. I can see them letting Welker sign his tender. If he's willing to accept a 2-3 year deal with a reasonable cap number, fine. Otherwise, IF someone wants to give us a 1st round or high 2nd round pick for him, I could see a scenario where they seriously consider trading him and moving on.

Blasphemy.

 

[NEP4Life]

<snip>

This is a great analysis, and I think it superbly parallels the Pats' thinking vis-a-vis enlarging the offensive field vertically and horizontally.

Furthermore, this analysis is consistent with tagging Welker for one or possibly two years, since the Pats' offense is likely transitioning away from being Welker-centric.

 

[Off The Grid]

But, but, but... He doesn't play in the trenches, you can't like him!

I can't Carbon Date it, because it was back in my SportingNew.com days...

But I expect I was pounding the table for Wes Welker, in the Winter of 2006, before ANYBODY, hereabouts.

 

[Off The Grid]

Yeah, as duly noted, I explored that notion a while back ~ even had a title for a thread I was gonna start: "Getting Brady off The Welker Crack" or something like it!!

But then I figured: We have room under the Cap for the next two years ~ before G+H's contracts come up ~ to pay Gronk, Hernandez, Welker, AND Lloyd and the rest'f'm!!

So I figure: Let's tear it UP for the next two years!! :rocker:

Let the rest of the league TRY to stop us!!

At the risk of being tarred and feathered, I'm going to go even further and enter into the realm of blasphemy ... Would the Pats' offense be better off WITHOUT Wes Welker at this point?

Now I fully grant that Welker is the greatest slot receiver of all time, and is in many respects a "perfect" Patriot. But against that consider the following:

- As Grid acknowledges, Welker's strength is to a large extent redundant with the strength of Gronk and Hernandez in the middle of the field.

- To get over the hump requires expanding our defense horizontally and vertically, which means taking some of the focus AWAY from the center of the field.

- There is no way to accomplish this without reducing Welker's role. He was targeted 172 times out of 611 pass attempts in 2011, or over 28% of the time. That's got to change.

- It makes no sense to pay $9.5M to a 31 year old slot receiver whose role is going to be reduced, no matter how great he is or how much he has contributed over the past 5 years. And paying him for a long term deal may get in the way of signing Gronk and/or Hernandez long term.

Or, to put it differently, my goals for the Pats' offense are:

1. The offense needs to become more diversified.

2. The offense needs more run/pass balance, and needs to integrate the RBs more into the passing attack.

3. The offense needs to spread out the passing game more both horizontally and vertically in order to make it harder for defenses to take away the middle of the field.

4. The offense needs to continue to be built around the TEs. They are the "compound multipliers" which make the offense so difficult for opposing defenses to scheme against.

I see no way to achieve these 4 goals that does not involve reducing the degree to which the slot receiver is an integral part of the offense. If Welker is going to be targeted 28% of the time and account for almost 30% of the receiving yards and over 23% of the receiving TDs, then it will be impossible to achieve all 4 of those goals. Something has to give. And for me, it's the role of the slot receiver. And if that decreases, then there is no reason to spend $10M/year on a 31 year old slot receiver.

We saw with the Randy Moss trade that the offense actually got BETTER by dumping one of the greatest receivers of all time, because it allowed BB to channel the offense through the TEs. Now we're at the point where Welker plus Gronk/Hernandez is causing the offense to become too focused in the middle of the field.

Continuing my blasphemous argument, reducing the role of the slot receiver is necessary IMHO in order to diversify and improve the overall offense. So we are looking at a scenario in which we drastically reduce Welker's workload but drastically increase his compensation. Not a good business move, regardless of his past contributions to the team.

Do I really want to get rid of Welker? Of course not. But (1) Brady focuses on him way too much and needs to spread the ball around more, and (2) his age and cost are reaching the point where they outweigh his value. That's usually the time when the Pats dump a player - the way they did Richard Seymour.

I'd be fine with Welker in a reduced role for an acceptable cost. But I'm not sure how to make that happen. And the Pats have made Welker expendable by getting enough weapons to have an effective "WR by committee" approach. Lloyd, Gaffney, Stallworth, Ochocinco, Branch, Gonzalez and Edelman are more than capable of giving Brady enough targets and options. Heck, we won't be able to keep them all as it is.

Emotionally, I don't want to see Welker leave. But the Pats never let emotions drive their decision making. I can see them letting Welker sign his tender. If he's willing to accept a 2-3 year deal with a reasonable cap number, fine. Otherwise, IF someone wants to give us a 1st round or high 2nd round pick for him, I could see a scenario where they seriously consider trading him and moving on.

Blasphemy.

 

[mayoclinic]

Yeah, as duly noted, I explored that notion a while back ~ even had a title for a thread I was gonna start: "Getting Brady off The Welker Crack" or something like it!!

But then I figured: We have room under the Cap for the next two years ~ before G+H's contracts come up ~ to pay Gronk, Hernandez, Welker, AND Lloyd and the rest'f'm!!

So I figure: Let's tear it UP for the next two years!! :rocker:

Let the rest of the league TRY to stop us!!

That may make sense in some respects. But I still believe strongly that unless Josh McD diversifies the offense Welker will be as much of an obstacle as an advantage. Nothing against Wes - he's a team player. But one of my few criticisms of Tom Brady is that he tends to focus too much on guys with whom he has "chemistry", and gets too predictable. Consider:

- In 2007 Welker was targeted 145 times out of 586 pass attempts, or almost 25% o the time. Together, Welker and Moss were targeted on over 52% of all pass attempts (305/586).
- In 2008 Welker was targeted 150 times out of 534 pass attempts, or 28% of the time. Welker and Moss combined for over 51% of all pass attempts (275/534).
- In 2009 Welker was targeted 162 times out of 592 pass attempts, or over 27% of the time. Welker and Moss combined for almost 51% of all pass attempts (300/592).
- In 2010 Welker was coming off an ACL injury and started only 11 games, recording his lowest reception total and yards/reception in his 5 years with the Patriots. But he was still targeted 122 times out of 507 pass attempts, or almost 25% of the time.
- In 2011 Welker was targeted 172 times out of 612 pass attempts, or over 28% of the time. Welker, Gronkowski, Gronkowski and Hernandez accounted for over 2/3 of all pass attempts (409/612).

Of those offense, the 2010 version was the most diverse in terms of the pass distribution and use of different receiving options, perhaps because it changed from a spread offense to a TE-based approach in the middle of the season. Brady had his lowest totals for attempts and yardage since 2006 (discounting 2008 since he was injured), but also had best TD:INT ratio and his second best QB rating and completion percentage of that period.

I don't think targeting Wes Welker 25-28% of the time will help the Pats' offense become more diversified and less focused on the middle of the field. Even if he is a great weapon to have in Brady's arsenal, that ultimately makes the offense more predictable and easier to stop in my book.

 

[Snake Eyes]

That may make sense in some respects. But I still believe strongly that unless Josh McD diversifies the offense Welker will be as much of an obstacle as an advantage. Nothing against Wes - he's a team player. But one of my few criticisms of Tom Brady is that he tends to focus too much on guys with whom he has "chemistry", and gets too predictable. Consider:

- In 2007 Welker was targeted 145 times out of 586 pass attempts, or almost 25% o the time. Together, Welker and Moss were targeted on over 52% of all pass attempts (305/586).
- In 2008 Welker was targeted 150 times out of 534 pass attempts, or 28% of the time. Welker and Moss combined for over 51% of all pass attempts (275/534).
- In 2009 Welker was targeted 162 times out of 592 pass attempts, or over 27% of the time. Welker and Moss combined for almost 51% of all pass attempts (300/592).
- In 2010 Welker was coming off an ACL injury and started only 11 games, recording his lowest reception total and yards/reception in his 5 years with the Patriots. But he was still targeted 122 times out of 507 pass attempts, or almost 25% of the time.
- In 2011 Welker was targeted 172 times out of 612 pass attempts, or over 28% of the time. Welker, Gronkowski, Gronkowski and Hernandez accounted for over 2/3 of all pass attempts (409/612).

Of those offense, the 2010 version was the most diverse in terms of the pass distribution and use of different receiving options, perhaps because it changed from a spread offense to a TE-based approach in the middle of the season. Brady had his lowest totals for attempts and yardage since 2006 (discounting 2008 since he was injured), but also had best TD:INT ratio and his second best QB rating and completion percentage of that period.

I don't think targeting Wes Welker 25-28% of the time will help the Pats' offense become more diversified and less focused on the middle of the field. Even if he is a great weapon to have in Brady's arsenal, that ultimately makes the offense more predictable and easier to stop in my book.

If Lloyd and Gaffney deliver the good do you think TFB will spread it around more?

 

[mayoclinic]

If Lloyd and Gaffney deliver the good do you think TFB will spread it around more?

I certainly hope so. And I hope that Vereen and Woodhead will be more involved in the passing attack as well, including being split out wide or used in the slot at times. But Brady has a tendency, especially during crunch time, to focus on the guys he trusts the most. Understable, but it makes it a bit easier for opposing defenses to focus on stopping certain guys, and it has backfired at a number of critical moments.

 

[Jackson 2]

I get the feeling Welker will play one more season for the Patriots and then move on to get a better offer.

maybe the Broncos?

I believe he can be franchised again next year.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

At the risk of being tarred and feathered, I'm going to go even further and enter into the realm of blasphemy ... Would the Pats' offense be better off WITHOUT Wes Welker at this point?

Now I fully grant that Welker is the greatest slot receiver of all time, and is in many respects a "perfect" Patriot. But against that consider the following:

- As Grid acknowledges, Welker's strength is to a large extent redundant with the strength of Gronk and Hernandez in the middle of the field. Either of whom or both could be injured and/or decide to hold out for a deal BB can't live with while they still have the ability to attempt to leverage themselves...reference Branch and Givens.

- To get over the hump requires expanding our defense horizontally and vertically, which means taking some of the focus AWAY from the center of the field. An endeavor Bill seems at best inclined to invest no draft picks and no more than $1-4M per on multiple 30 something FA's with some system experience who can work outside the numbers or stretch the field vertically. So it's a limited interest. Were it an over riding one Wallace or an early round draft pick would probably be here.

- There is no way to accomplish this without reducing Welker's role. He was targeted 172 times out of 611 pass attempts in 2011, or over 28% of the time. That's got to change. Although the only way that will happen is if the other guys are playmakers who are open in the right place at the right time and catch the ball 75% of the time.

- It makes no sense to pay $9.5M to a 31 year old slot receiver whose role is going to be reduced, no matter how great he is or how much he has contributed over the past 5 years. And paying him for a long term deal may get in the way of signing Gronk and/or Hernandez long term. But his roll won't be reduced unless others can consistently replace his consistent production. And a long term deal won't get in the way of signing Gronk or Hernandez long term. Their deals if they can be reached will be based on their value. And Welker's deal will not limit the budget any more than Mankins limits extending the tackles. Sometimes choices have to be made, but that is why Bill makes best use of the draft and FA to balance the books.

Or, to put it differently, my goals for the Pats' offense are:

1. The offense needs to become more diversified.

2. The offense needs more run/pass balance, and needs to integrate the RBs more into the passing attack.

3. The offense needs to spread out the passing game more both horizontally and vertically in order to make it harder for defenses to take away the middle of the field.

4. The offense needs to continue to be built around the TEs. They are the "compound multipliers" which make the offense so difficult for opposing defenses to scheme against.

I see no way to achieve these 4 goals that does not involve reducing the degree to which the slot receiver is an integral part of the offense. If Welker is going to be targeted 28% of the time and account for almost 30% of the receiving yards and over 23% of the receiving TDs, then it will be impossible to achieve all 4 of those goals. Something has to give. And for me, it's the role of the slot receiver. And if that decreases, then there is no reason to spend $10M/year on a 31 year old slot receiver.

As long as you grasp that these are your goals and this is your vision and that has nothing to do with Bill's historically speaking (much to your chagrin).

We saw with the Randy Moss trade that the offense actually got BETTER by dumping one of the greatest receivers of all time, because it allowed BB to channel the offense through the TEs. Now we're at the point where Welker plus Gronk/Hernandez is causing the offense to become too focused in the middle of the field.Had he still been a playmaker and had he been as versatile and dependable and unselfish as Welker and had he not fallen victim to his own predictably fragile psyche and ego driven need to be catered to, Randy might still be here. He left as much as a result of being a PITA to deal with - and because his freakish albeit fading and self limited skillset didn't make the best use of everyone else's including the QB.

Continuing my blasphemous argument, reducing the role of the slot receiver is necessary IMHO in order to diversify and improve the overall offense. So we are looking at a scenario in which we drastically reduce Welker's workload but drastically increase his compensation. Not a good business move, regardless of his past contributions to the team. Not a good football move, either, which is why it isn't what they are aiming for.

Do I really want to get rid of Welker? Of course not. But (1) Brady focuses on him way too much and needs to spread the ball around more, and (2) his age and cost are reaching the point where they outweigh his value. That's usually the time when the Pats dump a player - the way they did Richard Seymour. Again, Syemour was dumped for a variety of reasons none of which remotely correlate to Welker's situation.

I'd be fine with Welker in a reduced role for an acceptable cost. But I'm not sure how to make that happen. And the Pats have made Welker expendable by getting enough weapons to have an effective "WR by committee" approach. Lloyd, Gaffney, Stallworth, Ochocinco, Branch, Gonzalez and Edelman are more than capable of giving Brady enough targets and options. Heck, we won't be able to keep them all as it is.Some of them won't make it regardless of the numbers/roster game because some of them won't be consistent or productive or dependable enough.

Emotionally, I don't want to see Welker leave. But the Pats never let emotions drive their decision making. I can see them letting Welker sign his tender. If he's willing to accept a 2-3 year deal with a reasonable cap number, fine. Otherwise, IF someone wants to give us a 1st round or high 2nd round pick for him, I could see a scenario where they seriously consider trading him and moving on.

Blasphemy.

You see them "letting" him sign his tender? This is less blasphemy than delusion - as is the trade scenario... You and Grid are prime examples what happens when fans get caught up in amateur over analysis.

 

[patsderoer]

At the risk of being tarred and feathered, I'm going to go even further and enter into the realm of blasphemy ... Would the Pats' offense be better off WITHOUT Wes Welker at this point?

Now I fully grant that Welker is the greatest slot receiver of all time, and is in many respects a "perfect" Patriot. But against that consider the following:

- As Grid acknowledges, Welker's strength is to a large extent redundant with the strength of Gronk and Hernandez in the middle of the field.

Blasphemy.

Yeah right. It's not like G + H benefit immensely from the presence of Welker. No way. /end sarcasm

 

[patsderoer]

5 ~ This is all the more true because Brother Wes is only a Passing Threat: As he's a mediocre Run Blocker, his presence tips our hand to "Pass", giving the Defense an enormous competitive edge against us in Late Winter.

***

Only a passing threat. The very successful reverses Welker ran in the SB must have been just an illusion, right?

New England Rushing
CAR YDS AVG TD LG
W. Welker 2 21 10.5 0 11

Yep, just an illusion.

 

[Frezo]

Brady has to be on cloud 9 thinking about his receivers. I don't want to change that. Besides. there are going to be injuries. Remember, this isn't a young group. There's also the O-line. Light is gone, Mankins will likely start on PUP, Vollmer's sore back...This offense may well need that shifty slot guy for short, quick release passes to cover for it at least early on. Welker is one of the best. I say keep him.

Hey, if Brady spends too much time focusing on Welker, you don't fix Brady by eliminating Welker. You sit Brady down and give him a good "what for".

 

[Off The Grid]

Only a passing threat. The very successful reverses Welker ran in the SB must have been just an illusion, right?

New England Rushing
CAR YDS AVG TD LG
W. Welker 2 21 10.5 0 11

Yep, just an illusion.

So now Welker's a Running Back?? :bricks:

Try not to think, Dero.

You'll only hurt yourself.