Julian Edelman visiting Giants

[ctpatsfan77]

By that reasoning, I actually think that there could be a much more realistic case of Belichick simply not wanting either one based on the fact that there hasn't been one hint to the contrary--so it works both ways.

According to Jeff Howe's twitter, the Pats and Edelman have talked, but it's not clear how far apart they are.

 

[Deus Irae]

There's 'Dowling' seemingly injured every year, and standard fare ST player injured here and there every year.

And none of that magically turns Edelman into a reliable player, which is what his problem's been.

Last I heard, ST play was pretty important. We signed a specialist KR. Edelman is one of the best PR in the game.

Last I heard, Washington returned 41 punts in each of the past two seasons.

Whatever your evaluations of him, I'm not confident his replacement will be anywhere as good.

I'm confident his replacement, assuming he doesn't return, will either find a way to improve on a 17 catch per year average or be allowed to leave/shipped off. My evaluations have nothing to do with it.

 

[supafly]

According to Jeff Howe's twitter, the Pats and Edelman have talked, but it's not clear how far apart they are.

Thanks.

It isn't as issue with not wanting either player back, I would be happy with either one for different reasons, and I think that either one could offer something to benefit the team.

The issue I have is seeing all of the comments over and over and over again with the assumption that states "I expect both Llyod and Edelman to return..."

Why?

I would have to think the odds of that happening are extremely slim.

 

[Deus Irae]

I like what Edes can bring to the Pats in STs and versatility. Hate to lose a charter member of The Glass Menagerie.

It's not that I want to get rid of Edelman. It's that he's not a guy I view as a significant loss, because he hasn't been able to stay healthy enough to warrant counting on him, and he hasn't exactly lit the world on fire when he [highlight]has[/highlight] been on the field. He had 21 catches 2012. We're talking Sam Aiken/Brandon Tate/Chad Johnson in terms of raw production here, not Brandon Lloyd.

 

[supafly]

It's not that I want to get rid of Edelman. It's that he's not a guy I view as a significant loss, because he hasn't been able to stay healthy enough to warrant counting on him, and he hasn't exactly lit the world on fire when he [highlight]has[/highlight] been on the field. He had 21 catches 2012. We're talking Sam Aiken/Brandon Tate/Chad Johnson in terms of raw production here, not Brandon Lloyd.

Depending on his contract and of course whether or not there's actually a chance of him coming back, I would think that there'd be just as good of a chance of him being on the bubble again...only this time I would agree with those who saw him on the bubble unlike last year, when he was still under a rookie contract and we needed him more for ST's.

I think the writing has been on the wall since we brought L.Washington in, and only increased with the suspected addition of Amendola who has also returned KR and PR throughout his career. That signified 2 returning positions. That writing became clearer when 3+ weeks went by and we made many other minor moves, which also included lower level receiving options.

His production as a receiver obviously needs improved upon, and there is potentially a strong argument that there isn't even a ST spot that's a need anymore either. So unless Belichick feels that strongly about him being signed to back up Amendola (probably not even a thought from Belichick), there's probably not much of a need or space for him any longer, is there? There may be a spot as depth on the WR grouping, but once again..that would place him squarely on the bubble in TC again.

 

[Deus Irae]

...So unless Belichick feels that strongly about him being signed to back up Amendola (probably not even a thought from Belichick), there's probably not much of a need or space for him any longer, is there? There may be a spot as depth on the WR grouping, but once again..that would place him squarely on the bubble in TC again.

While I could be wrong, I doubt that any team would feel confident enough about his history to have him penciled in as a top 3 WR on their list if/when he gets signed. His ST ability could well make him more likely to stick on a team as a WR4-WR5 than a lot of older veterans, though.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

edelman is not a #3 WR in this league...he can't stay healthy..good ST'er...but that's really it

It was funny when people here thought he could come in and be Welker II

 

[ctpatsfan77]

edelman is not a #3 WR in this league...he can't stay healthy..good ST'er...but that's really it

It was funny when people here thought he could come in and be Welker II

Well, to be fair, remember that in his very first regular-season game, he was asked to fill in for Welker, and was targeted 16 times, which is almost unheard of for rookies who played WR in college, let alone converted QBs.

That said, Edelman's biggest problem since 2009 has been that the Patriots ALWAYS had at least pass catchers on the field more experienced than Edelman.

 

[Kontradiction]

Uh oh. If he signs with the Giants, this team is in deep ****. After all, Edelman was supposed to seemingly replace Welker and he was playing like an elite #2 last season.

 

[PatsDeb]

I've been wondering what's up with him.

Apparently, nothing much. I assume he won't get any decent offers and we'll see him in camp. If not, meh.

 

[PatsDeb]

Well, to be fair, remember that in his very first regular-season game, he was asked to fill in for Welker, and was targeted 16 times, which is almost unheard of for rookies who played WR in college, let alone converted QBs.

That said, Edelman's biggest problem since 2009 has been that the Patriots ALWAYS had at least pass catchers on the field more experienced than Edelman.

I think Edelman's biggest problem since 2009 is that he can't stay healthy and on the field.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I'd miss him but eh well. Would rather have Lloyd and Sanders anyway. When those ships sail I'll be

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Well, according to the tweet box up above, if the Gints made Edelperson an offer, it wasn't good enough to make him sign right away on the dotted line.

 

[captain stone]

This situation is closer to 2006 than it is away from it. Doesn't Bill want to retain anybody
who has actually played WR in this offense?

 

[Sciz]

This situation is closer to 2006 than it is away from it. Doesn't Bill want to retain anybody
who has actually played WR in this offense?

And completely unlike 2006, Brady has two Pro Bowlers to throw to no matter what happens the rest of this offseason.

 

[Sciz]

Well, according to the tweet box up above, if the Gints made Edelperson an offer, it wasn't good enough to make him sign right away on the dotted line.

Exactly, and it might not be long before he realizes the Pats' offer wasn't that bad after all.

 

[JackBauer]

And completely unlike 2006, Brady has two Pro Bowlers to throw to no matter what happens the rest of this offseason.

Exactly. This is nothing like 2006.

 

[Deus Irae]

This situation is closer to 2006 than it is away from it. Doesn't Bill want to retain anybody
who has actually played WR in this offense?

It's similar, but the timing of the Branch/Welker screw ups is different enough that Amendola will have a lot more time to get up to speed than Gaffney had.

 

[Rob0729]

This situation is closer to 2006 than it is away from it. Doesn't Bill want to retain anybody
who has actually played WR in this offense?

Other than being completely different in every possible way from 2006, it is exactly like 2006. Let's compare:

In 2006, Deion Branch was still under contract and the Pats had every intention of not only keeping him on the roster, but giving him an extension. The Pats did not target a #1 WR in free agency or the draft that year because they believed they had their #1 WR (I think they were expecting Jackson to be the #2 and him getting injured in training camp didn't help the situation). Also, they let Givens walk because they felt they couldn't afford both Givens and Branch and chose to pay Branch. Lastly, they had no other receiver on the roster capable of getting 1,000 yards.

This year, the Pats knew from the second day of free agency they lost Welker and have signed what they think is an adequet replacement. Could still add another in the draft. Also, they have Gronk and Hernandez who are both capable of getting 1,000 yards each. They could re-sign Lloyd or possibly sign Cruz or Sanders and at least two of them are capable of getting 1,000 yards.

The 2006 situation is a completely unique situation that had never happened before or since to any team. If the Pats knew how the situation was going to play out in September back in March or April of 2006, they would have probably re-signed Givens, traded Branch and might have gotten someone in free agency and via a trade.

But I see no correlation between 2006 and today. In 2006, the Pats best WR was Reche Caldwell who was at best a solid #2 WR on a team. Now the Pats have Gronk who is one of the top receivers in the league and Hernandez who is also a very good receiver. Amendola, assuming he can stay healthy, has the potential to be Welker 2.0 with added dimensions of speed down the field. Potential is nothing unless it is reached, but Caldwell's ceiling was never a solid primary threat.

 

[Rob0729]

And completely unlike 2006, Brady has two Pro Bowlers to throw to no matter what happens the rest of this offseason.

All you have to do is compare Gronk (the best receiver on the team now) to Reche Caldwell (the best receiver on the team in 2006) and you can see the situations are different.