Julian Edelman bash thread

[Ring 6]

Yeah, you're so unbiased that you ignore Game 1 and focus on Game 2, where he was literally the only reliable weapon on the field, and made a lot of tough catches but for short yardage.

Umm, the discussion was about whether the Bucs would double him and put Revis on him as the primary weapon. Why would game 1 be part of that discussion when Amendola was the primary weapon?

The use of a term like "mediocre dog" certainly shows no bias, either.

Umm dog, as in underdog.

In your eyes, he can't carry an offense, so he sucks.

Please show me where I said he sucks.

 

[Ring 6]

This is such a ridiculous statement. The more accurate way to put it would be to say that eight of his catches came on drives that resulted in a punt. You know, because there are additional downs and 10 other guys on offense.

What is your point? You like your semantics better than mine?
Does saying it your way change what happened?

 

[Fixit]

Umm, the discussion was about whether the Bucs would double him and put Revis on him as the primary weapon. Why would game 1 be part of that discussion when Amendola was the primary weapon?


Umm dog, as in underdog.



Please show me where I said he sucks.

Yeah, because "mediocre dog" and "underdog" are often interchangeable. Roll eyes.

And you said you place little value on a receiver that gets the catches he gets. Pardon me for boiling it down.

I can't wait until Gronk gets back and Edelman has a really good game so you can say he only played well because Gronk was there, in your own thoroughly unbiased analysis.

 

[Fixit]

What is your point? You like your semantics better than mine?
Does saying it your way change what happened?

What happened? No. But it's a great illustration of how you'll cherry pick and play word games. You went out of your way to say x = y, when it's a little more complicated than that. I'm not surprised that you won't recognize that it's not semantics.

I'm going to go eat. You keep on with your completely unbiased self.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah, because "mediocre dog" and "underdog" are often interchangeable. Roll eyes.

Context is a wonderful thing.

And you said you place little value on a receiver that gets the catches he gets. Pardon me for boiling it down.

I place little value in the catches he made in that game yes. Do you put great value in them?
Again, how does that mean i said he sucked?

I can't wait until Gronk gets back and Edelman has a really good game so you can say he only played well because Gronk was there, in your own thoroughly unbiased analysis.

I will assess how he plays honestly as I always do. If he does what he did against the Jets I will be underwhelmed, if plays like he did vs the Bills, I will praise his play, and the way he was used.

 

[PP2]

And btw we didn't play Pittsburgh last year.

I am well known for never checking my facts. It however still remains that the last time we played Pittsburgh, they changed their entire scheme just because of us.

That is not what we are talking about. Edelman is not the primary weapon. No defense is scared of 18 targets for 78 yards. If defenses thought that was acceptable to the Patriots they would engourage them to do it. They would not take it away so they can do something else, which almost certainly would be more effective. The 78 yards did little to help the offense do well.
You have to look beyond rudimentary numbers. If a RB carries 31 times for 78 yards, are you saying he moved the chains?
That is about the same thing. A good passing game gets 8 yards per target, Edelman got 4. A good running game gets 5 yards a carry, 31/78 is about 2.5. No team will put 8 men in the box against a runner that gets 31/78 against 7. That is the analogy here.

It still doesn't change the philosophy that what you basically want to do is shut down the QB's best option, and Edelman clearly has been the go to guy.

This has nothing to do with how good or how bad he is. In my opinion Edelman is not an elite receiver, but he does get by. The point here is that for many good reasons (and absences) he is now the go-to guy and because he is not elite, he will most likely get shut down tomorrow.

 

[Ring 6]

What happened? No. But it's a great illustration of how you'll cherry pick and play word games. You went out of your way to say x = y, when it's a little more complicated than that. I'm not surprised that you won't recognize that it's not semantics.

I'm going to go eat. You keep on with your completely unbiased self.

My statement was perfectly correct, and no one without a bias would find a rhetorical issue with it.
The discussion was in response to 'he moved the chains' to which I pointed out that was not correct, at least on 8 of his catches. Like it or not, he could have dropped those 8 passes, and had a 5 catch for 32 yard game and the overall results would not have been different.
While you see this as a slight to Edelman, it is actually an exercise in assessing the value of his production which is substantially less than it is being made out to be.

 

[PP2]

Is there some reason we should be glorifying a player who's 13 catch night was part of a 13 point offensive explosion? What did he do that was so awesome that it deserved a preemptive strike thread?

Hit reset on your sarcasm meter.

The point is not whether he's elite or not, it's that he's been thrust into the role of being the go-to guy because so many of our other options are out. My feeling is that he will get shut down tomorrow, and as a result will get hung, quartered, and drawn on this board even though he was never intended to be used as a no. 1 receiver, from day one.

 

[Triumph]

Is there some reason we should be glorifying a player who's 13 catch night was part of a 13 point offensive explosion?

Thompkins dropped a TD in the endzone and Hobson ran the wrong way on another endzone pass.

What did he do that was so awesome that it deserved a preemptive strike thread?

Caught the football?

 

[Deus Irae]

Hit reset on your sarcasm meter.

The point is not whether he's elite or not, it's that he's been thrust into the role of being the go-to guy because so many of our other options are out. My feeling is that he will get shut down tomorrow, and as a result will get hung, quartered, and drawn on this board even though he was never intended to be used as a no. 1 receiver, from day one.

I got the point of your O.P., no reset needed. What I don't get is the idea of making it a preemptive thread. You didn't avoid Edelman getting called out tomorrow. By trying to create a "discredit the messengers in advance" thread, you essentially just started a 'bash Edelman' thread even before the game began.

 

[Deus Irae]

Thompkins dropped a TD in the endzone and Hobson ran the wrong way on another endzone pass.



Caught the football?

There's literally nobody on this board who's takes, on any and all subjects, have less meaning to me than do yours. This absolutely inane post of yours is just one example of why.

 

[mb6592]

In other words 8 of his 13 catches resulted in a punt.

This is such a ridiculous statement. The more accurate way to put it would be to say that eight of his catches came on drives that resulted in a punt. You know, because there are additional downs and 10 other guys on offense.

What is your point? You like your semantics better than mine?
Does saying it your way change what happened?

What happened? No. But it's a great illustration of how you'll cherry pick and play word games. You went out of your way to say x = y, when it's a little more complicated than that. I'm not surprised that you won't recognize that it's not semantics.

My statement was perfectly correct, and no one without a bias would find a rhetorical issue with it.

You smugness doesn't change the fact that your statement wasn't "perfectly correct." You had the opportunity to proffer a mea culpa, but instead chose to double down with a pathetic "it's all semantics" argument, implying the difference between what you wrote and what Fixit set straight was a rhetorical difference - a difference of interpretation. It wasn't. Fixit was right to call you out on the factual untruthfulness of you statement.

 

[NEPettyOfficer72]

Poor Julian, I'm telling you right now this guy is going to earn people's respect this season. Unfortunately he hasn't played a full season to show his skill, but like I keep saying, as long as he is healthy, for his size or lack there of, his talent, and ability is second to none. Watch what I say, but then again no one will take this comment seriously except for maybe a few people. But you'll see, I'm sticking to my word. Excellent football player and competitor and outstanding talent that's fun to watch as long as he is healthy.

 

[PP2]

I got the point of your O.P., no reset needed. What I don't get is the idea of making it a preemptive thread. You didn't avoid Edelman getting called out tomorrow. By trying to create a "discredit the messengers in advance" thread, you essentially just started a 'bash Edelman' thread even before the game began.

Now you're getting it. You didn't think I knew it would eventually denigrate into an actual bash?

Let it go on a little while longer, lock thread, shuffle off to PS. Tomorrow, not so much Edelman bashing as the energy has already been depleted. Objective achieved.

 

[Triumph]

There's literally nobody on this board who's takes, on any and all subjects, have less meaning to me than do yours. This absolutely inane post of yours is just one example of why.

Butt hurt?

Edelmans contributions are less because Thompkins and Dobson made mistakes resulting in only 13 points. OK

 

[JoeSixPat]

Tampa is playing mostly zone, so there will be no Revis assignment or doubling, but even in man, who is going to focus on a guy catch screens and 4 yard slants.
Stats are a wonderful thing but when you catch a lot of passes in an area of the field the defense doesn't put a ton of effort into preventing receptions (because you can't cover every pass and route tightly, without risking getting burned) you don't change your defense to take it way.
I an sure the Bucs would be very happy to have Brady throw 18 times to Edelman and get 70 yards out of it. They won't be sacrificing something else to take that away.

I'd say your interpretation of the Buc's defensive scheme is the more likely one.

I think the Jets actually began to have Revis responsible for Welker in the slot over time, but you'd be correct that it would be generally odd to take Revis off the outside WRs and cover the slot receiver instead.

With Revis being new to the Bucs I think they'll do what you described - but if the equate Edelman to Welker and take Revis' input on how the Jets played Welker you might see Revis try to take Edelman away.

 

[Ring 6]

You smugness doesn't change the fact that your statement wasn't "perfectly correct." You had the opportunity to proffer a mea culpa, but instead chose to double down with a pathetic "it's all semantics" argument, implying the difference between what you wrote and what Fixit set straight was a rhetorical difference - a difference of interpretation. It wasn't. Fixit was right to call you out on the factual untruthfulness of you statement.

My statement was correct.
If it wasn't phrase tell me which of those 8 catches led to a first down in that series if downs.

 

[PittPatriot]

A 7th round draft pick that has become a switch blade kind of player who has been asked to do so many things to help the team is NOT someone any of us should bash.
The fact that he has a roster spot speaks to his tenacity and skill…or the inability of our management to find/develop better talent over the last 5 years.

I love Edelman and am always looking to see where he lines up in the hopes he gets the ball and is able to show the open field skill I believe he possess.

 

[Ring 6]

I'd say your interpretation of the Buc's defensive scheme is the more likely one.

I think the Jets actually began to have Revis responsible for Welker in the slot over time, but you'd be correct that it would be generally odd to take Revis off the outside WRs and cover the slot receiver instead.

With Revis being new to the Bucs I think they'll do what you described - but if the equate Edelman to Welker and take Revis' input on how the Jets played Welker you might see Revis try to take Edelman away.

The Bucs are a zone team.

 

[Deus Irae]

Now you're getting it. You didn't think I knew it would eventually denigrate into an actual bash?

Let it go on a little while longer, lock thread, shuffle off to PS. Tomorrow, not so much Edelman bashing as the energy has already been depleted. Objective achieved.

Edelman's not a good enough player to be insulated from eruptions about bad play. That was my point.