- Joined
- Sep 1, 2010
- Messages
- 30,775
- Reaction score
- 38,038
True. WES was a beast that postseason and may have been sb mvp if defense had held up.Not to be facetious, but Welker wasn't any part of the reason the 2007 team didn't get it done.
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.True. WES was a beast that postseason and may have been sb mvp if defense had held up.Not to be facetious, but Welker wasn't any part of the reason the 2007 team didn't get it done.
Well that stretch wouldn't be Jules "at his best" which is the primary comparison the writer was making. The best of Wes and the best of Jules. Although the conversation seems to be evolving.people have short memories..Welker in his prime was better, imo...but its getting close. Jules went through a stretch where he was dropping many passes .
Yes, this. Apparently not many people here are actually comprehending what the writer is saying.Well that stretch wouldn't be Jules "at his best" which is the primary comparison people are making. The best of Wes and the best of Jules.
Well that stretch wouldn't be Jules "at his best" which is the primary comparison the writer was making. The best of Wes and the best of Jules. Although the conversation seems to be evolving.
Hard to say for me but luckily it's all just harmless conversation. Both excellent players.
I'd go with Edelman. He can do everything in the slot that Welker could do, he can be moved around, he's a better blocker, he's a better punt returner, and I can count on him to make the catch when it absolutely has to be made.
I think we've reached the point where people are starting to exaggerate just how good a guy was. Wes was real good in the slot, probably the best ever in terms of production. But what, exactly, did he do that JE can't? Teleport? Turn invisible?Good God, please say you're joking. Edelman is a very good slot player, not on Welker's level.
If you want the inferior receiver because he's a better punt returner/blocker, well, fair enough. That's your choice.
You can also take Anquan Boldin. I'll take Calvin Johnson.
Like I said, people are having a hard time grasping the writer's point, and are stuck on comparing best seasons.JE can run all the same routes as Welker, sure. What's your point? Any slot guy in the NFL can do that. What, other than production, can you go by?
Welker, 123 rec, 1,569 yds, 9 TDs
Edelman, 105rec, 1,056 yds, 6TDs
If the production was close I could see your argument, but it's not.
25% of passes thrown by Tom Brady went to Welker during his tenure. 25% of the offense went through him, he was not just a regular solder.Comparing generals when reviewing decisions that affect a war makes sense. Blaming the loss of a war on a foot soldier, absent some "butterfly effect" logic, is absurd. You let me know when Welker or Edelman were calling audibles at the line and thus dictating play calls, and I will agree with your logic with regard to why QBs and other players are not judged under the same standard. Anyone who has played football knows there are coaches, QBs and players, in terms of how game plans are executed and their degree of importance with regard to how games turn out in the end.
Returning to your 'winners' assessment, so what is your opinion on Walter Payton, who is generally regarded as one of the greatest running backs in history - scrub or stud? He only ran for 61 yards on 22 carries in the Super Bowl against the Pats (no TDs), but his team won the game on defense. But that Bears team with one of the greatest single defensive units in history never made it back. So he couldn't carry that Bears team, thus his 16726 career rushing yards makes him a loser. Antowain Smith was the running back for the Pats in 2001 and 2003, averaging 4 and 3.5 ypc and about 850 yds per season. But he has two rings. So I assume by your logic Smith is a better running back than Walter Payton.
John Hannah never won a ring. Nor did Andre Tippett. Loser, and loser. They cannot be favorably compared to any LB or guard on the Pats teams with rings, because both must have sucked not to win a ring. The fact is it is a team sport, and outcomes for role players on that team often turn on decisions and actions that have nothing to do with the roles they executed at a high level. That is why they are both in the Hall of Fame without rings. Hannah could not hold off the entire '85 Bears defense on his own. Even lousy offenses can block 1 linebacker with enough people. A single QB, entrusted with the keys to the city, can ruin an entire offense. If you doubt that assessment, see Rex Grossman and the '06 Bears.
That season occurred when Welker was in his 5th seasons as a primary option with the team, he was 30 years old and at the peak of his career. He was also on the field with Gronkowski and Hernandez playing at the their best. You compare that to Edelman’s first seasons as a primary option when he was the only viable WR. That is flawed as flawed can be.JE can run all the same routes as Welker, sure. What's your point? Any slot guy in the NFL can do that. What, other than production, can you go by?
Welker, 123 rec, 1,569 yds, 9 TDs
Edelman, 105rec, 1,056 yds, 6TDs
If the production was close I could see your argument, but it's not.
I do not see the irony at all. I think posters are taking Welker’s 6 seasons here as a top option and comparing it to the 2 seasons Edelman has been a top option, which in my opinion is something only an idiot would think is a reasonable comparison.Do you not see the irony of your posts? You're knocking a player, WR no less, for being part of 3 of the greatest offenses in NFL history and making it to 3 Super Bowls. Those are accomplishments, not failures.
It appears you're judging Welker's entire career on one bad play. Even more ironic, since you're the one who was railing on someone for getting emotional about players.
Super Bowls are great, but this is a team game. QBs reputations can live and die by SBs because they have such a large effect on the outcome of the team's play, whereas WRs and most other positions have limited impact. Is Charles Haley talked about as one of the greatest LBs of all time because he has 5 SB rings? Of course not, LBs like WRs don't make or break Super Bowls.
Welker doesn't have the best hands ever, anyone could have told you that before he ever dropped that ball. He wasn't known for making tough catches. He dropped his share. The SB drop was unfortunate, but basing his legacy on it is misguided.
25% of passes thrown by Tom Brady went to Welker during his tenure. 25% of the offense went through him, he was not just a regular solder.
In my opinion, which comes from decades of playing sports wins/loses are the #1 thing that matters when judging any player. Welker and Edelman if you look at just their first 2 seasons as a primary option in the offense are very similar statistically, so the advantage goes to Edelman because of his having a ring if you ask me.
Posters are considering what Welker did as a member of the Patriots when he was ages 29, 30, 31, and 32 when comparing him to a player who is only age 28. Does that make sense to you? Look at their first 2 seasons as a primary option for the Patriots, compare that, and it is very close, so I give the edge to Edelman because he won a ring.
That season occurred when Welker was in his 5th seasons as a primary option with the team, he was 30 years old and at the peak of his career. He was also on the field with Gronkowski and Hernandez playing at the their best. You compare that to Edelman’s first seasons as a primary option when he was the only viable WR. That is flawed as flawed can be.
I was 9 when Tippett retired and 1 when Hannah retired so I could really tell you what they were as players.And was Brady a robot throwing to Welker, or was there a reason he, the QB, trusted Welker to catch the ball? Brady made that decision. He could have thrown to other targets. He threw to Welker. Welker was not the Death Star tractor beam affecting the course of the passes when released from Brady's hand. The fact Welker was 25% of the offense does not dispute what has been said about Welker in these comparisons. It confirms it.
And you dodged the questions about Andre Tippet and John Hannah. Are they great players, or not so great because they couldn't lead the Pats to the promised land? How about Walter Payton? Didn't do much in '85 when he got a ring. Never made it back with one of the best defenses ever. Great or not?
Welker was 26 when he joined the Pats (5/81 - 2007 would be 26). Younger than Edelman, who is now 28. And 23 receptions and 300 yards less is not that close for about the same number of targets.
In the end, I say they are different and are not easily compared. I am not arguing Welker is better or worse than what Jules offers, which is very different. My bone to pick is directed at those who seek to diminish Welker's contributions to exalt Jules relying on game outcomes that are (1) not necessarily within a role player's control and (2) tend to smack of bitterness over a single difficult catch in 2012 rather than the reality of what he did throughout the regular season and playoffs over the year. That would be as ridiculous as calling David Tyree the greatest receiver ever because he made a single catch that defined his career and was lucky enough not to have the ball smacked away by Harrison.
Every season except for 1 Peyton Manning has produced more than Brady statistically, does that make Manning better than Brady in your opinion?Every season, except the post ACL season, Welker outproduced Edelman's best season. Let me repeat. 5 of 6 seasons as a Patriot, Welker outproduced Edelman's best season as a Patriot.
Edelman has not produced at the level Welker did, regardless of who was on the field. He outproduced Edelman with Matt Cassel throwing to him. Welker is the superior receiver by every conceivable measure.
Maybe Edelman could get there. That would be nice. He's not there yet.
The idea that the offense is the difference is ludicrous. Welker outproduced Edelman because he was open in every play. Edelman would put up the same numbers if he got open like Welker did. Alas, he doesn't.
I was 9 when Tippett retired and 1 when Hannah retired so I could really tell you what they were as players.
I'm not diminishing Welker I'm simply saying that if Edelman continues to perform for the remainder of his contract and another year or 2 he could overtake Welker. The drop by Welker was a big drop though and just like Butler will be remembered for what he did do Welker will be remembered for what he didn't do. That's sports.
Every season, except the post ACL season, Welker outproduced Edelman's best season. Let me repeat. 5 of 6 seasons as a Patriot, Welker outproduced Edelman's best season as a Patriot.
Edelman has not produced at the level Welker did, regardless of who was on the field. He outproduced Edelman with Matt Cassel throwing to him. Welker is the superior receiver by every conceivable measure.
Maybe Edelman could get there. That would be nice. He's not there yet.
The idea that the offense is the difference is ludicrous. Welker outproduced Edelman because he was open in every play. Edelman would put up the same numbers if he got open like Welker did. Alas, he doesn't.