Breer: Welker at OTAs, in uniform, brace on

[JMarr]

hahahahahah!!! Welker rules!

F the doubters.

 

[Reckedtrek]

WW: Yo Randy... you're good and all, but... tell your fanboys to get their own thread...

RM: Okay, Wes- you got it li'l man!

 

[Reckedtrek]

hahahahahah!!! Welker rules!

F the doubters.

Big time! Now all the chicken littles can go b1tch and moan about the Mankins contract or whatever else they can come up with.

 

[JoeShmoe]

Sorry if been posted but heres the video

BostonHerald.com - Blogs: Rap Sheet Blog Archive Check out footage of Patriots WR Wes Welker back on the field during OTAs (video!)

Awesome - I thought he'd be jogging but he's running at pace and cutting, turning etc

No idea how they got this out of Gillete

 

[BradyFTW!]

Awesome news, but I'm not going to get too pumped until we see him looking like his old self in a game situation.

 

[PowerRunRevival]

great sight to see. I just hope he's not rushing back too soon.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Anyway back on topic; I don't think this has been posted

Bastards!
That duplicitous Belichick has some small high school player running around out there with a distracting brace on pretending to be Welker!

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Dude's a beast make no bones about it

 

[BradyBranch39]

Anyway back on topic; I don't think this has been posted

that looks extremely awesome.

 

[DaBruinz]

If Wes can fully return by early September (three months away), then I think you might have to give serious thought to at least sending out trade feelers for Moss. Like Seymour, it looks increasingly unlikely that Moss will be back next season. With Welker, Edelman, Holt, Tate, Price, and Patten, you have six fairly sure-handed receivers. None of them can come close to stretching the field like Moss can, but that is not how the Patriots won Super Bowls. Brady won them by throwing to the open man - whether it was Branch, Givens, Troy, or Patten - and with some good playcalling and a respectable running game, taking shots downfield when the defense was off-balance, not just chucking it up to a well-covered Moss.

If trading Moss can precipitate bringing in a respectable running back (or other player) either now or in the future (2011 Draft), then I think it is something you have to consider.

It really seems as though the future of Moss, Maroney, Light, and/or Kaczur may be up the air with this team.

If Price and/or Tate show they should be getting playing time, and Patten and/or Holt show they still have something left, then roster spots are going to come at a steep, steep premium at the wide receiver position, once you add Edelman, Moss, Welker, and then your special teamers - Aiken and Slater - to the mix. When that happens, you almost always see a guy going on the trading block.

Price, Tate, Welker, and Edelman aren't going to get cut. Belichick isn't going to cut Holt or Patten if they can provide a veteran presence, run precise routes, and show solid hands. Who does that leave? A 33-year old wide receiver who is in the final year of his contract, has arguably shown diminishing skills and/or effort over the past three seasons, has publicly stated his future is in doubt with the team, and would definitely have some trade value on the open market.

Just sayin'.

Pats1 - There are a few problems with your theorizing..

1) Welker and Tate have to prove that they are 100% healthy
2) Patten hasn't played in 2 years. And he wasn't exactly playing well the last time he suited up for the Pats. So I have a hard time putting any credence into the idea that he'll make the roster
3) How you go from talking about Welker to talking about Kaczur and Light is kinda.. um... out in left field. The Pats have always carried 4 OTs to open a season under Belichick. Right now, the 4 OTs are Light, Vollmer, LeVoir, and Kaczur. All of who are above average. I know that people who followed Welch know that he's got a very good pedigree, talent and athleticism. That MIGHT make Kaczur or LeVoir expendable. But not Light. Not with 3 brand new TEs on the roster.
4) Aiken is the person most likely to lose his position on special teams, imho. He's just not as good as Slater or the others that the Pats have.
5) I don't think Moss would have a lot of trade value at all. For the same reasons you mentioned. The diminishing returns (though he's played through injuries and a lack of talent at the WR position).

I think that the Pats and Brady are better off having a Moss/Welker combination than trying to rely on Welker, 2- 2nd year players, a rookie, and Holt. Also, considering the additions of Gronkowski and Gonzalez, it's more likely that they will be able to create the mismatches that will get Moss open, thereby increasing his effectiveness. If teams decide to cover Moss, then you are leaving mismatches underneath with Welker and the others.

 

[ausbacker]

Welker is not human. Dwight Howard is not superman.

 

[DaBruinz]

So was Lawyer, so was Bledsoe, so was Seymour, so was Rodney, so was Bruschi, so was Willie, so was Vrabel, so was Troy, so was Dillon, so was Adam, so was Givens, so was Branch, so was Graham, so was Andruzzi, so was Asante, so was Woody...

Fans have short memories. The wide receiver who makes SportsCenter highlight catches and has legions of young fans thinking he is what made the Patriots' dynasty has won zero rings with the team.

The fact that the elementary schoolers and middle schoolers of today growing up thinking that Randy Moss and Tom Brady are what the "winning" Patriots are really all about is somewhat troubling. Someone needs to buy them a DVD and show "way back when" when the Patriots were actually winning Super Bowls by shutting down the Colts 20-3 or pounding the rock to beat the Titans in zero degree weather. Back then it wasn't about individual players, but about out-smarting and out-physicaling opponents.

Somewhere along the way fans have gotten away from the romanticism of that success and have gotten caught up in the star of Randy Moss and Tom Brady, when it was really that sort of thing that Patriots fans mocked seven or eight years ago (Peyton to Harrison? Warner to Bruce? LT?). An effective team and scheme-based strategy to winning has taken a back seat to sheer athleticism and talent.

Trying the same approach to another season will just lead to another disappointing January where Moss goes 3, 45, 0, the running game is ineffective, the defense can't stop a QB from throwing at will, and the offense can't pull through when it counts because it's too caught up in trying to force passes to that superstar WR who "is the man."

And 1+1=3... Talk about frigging conjecture on your part. WOW..

The fact that they added Crumpler, Gonzalez, Gronkowski, Holt and Price says that they AREN'T going to follow the same approach as last year REGARDLESS of whether they have Moss or not. And keeping Moss doesn't lead to anything to do with the defense.

You're all over the place with this.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Brainless Nonsense.

WRs take three years to fully develop. If Price and Tate had three years of playing experience all this Moss speculation might have the significance of a bucket of Warm Spit. Today, without that experience, it doesn't merit a shotglass full of such liquid.

The Patriots were 10-6 and the AFCE divisonal champ so they are a contender. Nor do they need to tear down and rebuild, with the prospect of a complete collapse, where such a purge might have some possibilities.

The Defensive reconstruction is actually about over, with the defensive cutdown done just before last season. The defensive low point was last season, when they slid all the way to 11th in the League. The final rebuilding defensive pieces are probably already on board and that half of the team is rising, again.

Meanwhile the Offense still needs to score to win, and Moss & Brady makes up a large piece of that.

 

[DaBruinz]

Who was the #1 WR in 2001? Brown? Was he the prototypical "X?" No! Who was the #2 WR in 2003? There wasn't one. Who was the #3 WR in 2004? There wasn't one. Who played "X" in 2003? Branch, Givens, Brown. Who played "Z" in 2003? Branch, Givens, Brown. Who played "X" in 2004? Branch, Givens, Patten. Who played "Z" in 2004? Branch, Givens, Patten."

I don't know why we have to keep pidgeon-holing "Welker must play slot." Moss must play "X." Price/Holt/Edelman/Aiken/Galloway/Tate/Gaffney must play "F."

The number 2 in 2003 started off as Patten and then became Branch. By 2004, Patten had fallen to the #4 WR behind Branch, Givens and Brown.

Those 4 knew the all the routes but they still lined up in the X, Y, and Z positions. You thinking otherwise is foolishness.

People are "pidgeonholing" Moss as the "X" receiver because that is what he is. The "X". And it's based on where he starts out on a majority of the plays. Sometimes, he is the Z receiver. Sometimes he is the Y, but 90% of the time, he is the "X" receiver.

That's not how this offense works, or at least used to work when it was actually winning titles. There wasn't a guy who just played "#1 WR" or a guy who just played "slot WR." There were 3-4 guys who played all three-four WR positions and who were capable of catching the ball when they were open because of a well-run route and a well-called play.

Yes, it is how it works. And it's how it worked when they were winning titles. The difference is that they had 4 receivers who were very similar in ability in running the short to intermediate routes, compared to now where we have Moss who can run all the routes, including the deep ones. Welker, who runs the short routes. Edelman who also can run the short routes and should develop into a medium route runner, ala a Branch. Then you have Holt, who still has the speed to run the intermediate routes and can also run the shorter routes. Then you have Price and Tate who we don't know what they can bring just yet.

One of the things that you aren't figuring into the equation is Brady. Brady has a LOT to do with how the offense was run last year. BRADY needs to be the one to get back to spreading the ball around and not relying just on Welker and Moss. But the receivers have to show that they have the HANDS to gain Brady's confidence. Moss, Welker, Edelman, Holt and Crumpler should do that. Price, Tate (whom Brady has sung high praises of), Gonzalez and Gronkowski have to show that they can make the catch when Brady goes to them. If that happens, then you'll see the offense back similar to the 2003/2004 offense or even the 2007 offense instead of the 2009 offense.

I can't believe we are now caught up in how many Pro Bowl WRs the team has when we once mocked other teams for having the most Pro Bowl players and then failing in the playoffs as this team has done for the last half decade.

What the hell happened to "we're building a team, not collecting talent" or "the whole is better than the sum of its parts?"

When did we go wrong?

You need to stop pretending like everyone is caught up in this "PRO BOWL" WR crap. That is you exaggerating. People still see what Moss can do and know that he can do it when he's part of a team that is running well and where he can be spelled.

"WE" didn't go wrong anywhere. You exaggerating and acting like everyone else who believes that keeping Moss is better than not keeping him is on crack is where it's wrong. Moss, NOW, is still better than 90% of the WRs in the league. And he's still the best receiver on the Patriots. You add him with the veterans like Welker, Holt, and Crumpler, as well as the rookies/youngsters like Edelman, Tate, Gonzalez, Price, and Gronkowski and you've got one of the best mixes of talent in the league. A mix that could be among the best and that should give other defenses fits.

 

[PatsChamp88]

Welker always looks better in high resolution...

 

[pats1]

Pats1 - There are a few problems with your theorizing..

1) Welker and Tate have to prove that they are 100% healthy

Fair enough.

2) Patten hasn't played in 2 years. And he wasn't exactly playing well the last time he suited up for the Pats. So I have a hard time putting any credence into the idea that he'll make the roster

He would be the 5th WR in my scenario. Not counting on him to do much.

3) How you go from talking about Welker to talking about Kaczur and Light is kinda.. um... out in left field. The Pats have always carried 4 OTs to open a season under Belichick. Right now, the 4 OTs are Light, Vollmer, LeVoir, and Kaczur. All of who are above average. I know that people who followed Welch know that he's got a very good pedigree, talent and athleticism. That MIGHT make Kaczur or LeVoir expendable. But not Light. Not with 3 brand new TEs on the roster.

There was a little discussion about this on PFW in Progress recently that I tend to agree with. If the Pats deem Kaczur and Vollmer to be the best two options at OT (which is unlikely, I don't care too much for Kaczur), then Light is gone, because he's not the type of guy who stays on the team as a swing tackle. LeVoir already has that position nailed down. In the scenario that Vollmer does not win a starting job (unlikely), he becomes that swing tackle and LeVoir either gets traded or kept as the 4th OT. In the case that Vollmer and Light win the jobs (most likely scenario), then I think Kaczur is more valuable as trade bait than as a swing tackle when you already have LeVoir. So that's why I said "Kaczur and/or Light." I just don't see there being room in this town for Kaczur, Light, Vollmer, and LeVoir at OT.

4) Aiken is the person most likely to lose his position on special teams, imho. He's just not as good as Slater or the others that the Pats have.

Well, Slater has been pretty awful as a return man (he just runs into blocks) and has been average as a coverage man (too many penalties). I don't know if either make the team (especially if Arrington and Lockett prove their worth), but I'm not really sure where that fits into what I was saying.

5) I don't think Moss would have a lot of trade value at all. For the same reasons you mentioned. The diminishing returns (though he's played through injuries and a lack of talent at the WR position).

I agree completely. If you don't get a 2011 #2 or a 2012 #1, then you don't make the trade. Like I mentioned before, non-playoff teams may be reluctant to trade for Moss because he may quit on them if they have no hope at the playoffs. That may eliminate most of the potential market.

I think that the Pats and Brady are better off having a Moss/Welker combination than trying to rely on Welker, 2- 2nd year players, a rookie, and Holt. Also, considering the additions of Gronkowski and Gonzalez, it's more likely that they will be able to create the mismatches that will get Moss open, thereby increasing his effectiveness. If teams decide to cover Moss, then you are leaving mismatches underneath with Welker and the others.

I don't necessarily disagree with this. The entire source of my idea was long-term gains. I think that having the draft pick asset you gain from a Moss trade, and having a solid WR corps with Welker-Edelman-Tate-Price for years to come is an appealing proposition at the expense of a short term loss (Moss). The fact of the matter is - and MoLewis touched on this - Brady doesn't need Moss to be good. We saw six or seven years ago that he can be an elite quarterback just throwing to the open receiver (as long as they can catch the ball; 2006 proved what happens if they can't). It may not have the glamour of the 2007 offense, but it's still pretty damn effective, and as I have argued, probably more effective when defenses force you to go to second, third, and fourth options. Again, not having Moss in the short term is obviously not an upgrade, but I think balancing long and short term needs is more important.

 

[pats1]

Brainless Nonsense.

WRs take three years to fully develop. If Price and Tate had three years of playing experience all this Moss speculation might have the significance of a bucket of Warm Spit. Today, without that experience, it doesn't merit a shotglass full of such liquid.

The Patriots were 10-6 and the AFCE divisonal champ so they are a contender. Nor do they need to tear down and rebuild, with the prospect of a complete collapse, where such a purge might have some possibilities.

The Defensive reconstruction is actually about over, with the defensive cutdown done just before last season. The defensive low point was last season, when they slid all the way to 11th in the League. The final rebuilding defensive pieces are probably already on board and that half of the team is rising, again.

Meanwhile the Offense still needs to score to win, and Moss & Brady makes up a large piece of that.

I think that may be overly optimistic, in terms of the defense. They still have a glaring hole at RDE, and are using a role player (Wright), an underwhelming draft pick (Brace), and stop-gap veteran FAs (Lewis and Warren) to try and fix it. They also have a glaring hole at OLB, and are using a raw rookie making a position change (Cunningham), and underwhelming draft pick (Crable), a stop-gap veteran FA (Burgess), and special teamers (Ninkovich and Woods) to try and fix it.

Of course, you could say the same thing about 4th WR - they are using a rookie (Price), an unknown draft pick (Tate), and stop-gap veteran FAs (Holt, Patten) to try and fix it. But at least that's not a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd WR, so if you trade your 1st WR, you're only moving that uneasy 4th WR situation to 3rd WR, and still have two proven or relatively proven options at 1st and 2nd (Welker, Edelman).

 

[condon84]

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I hope Welker is not being careless and using HGH to help him recover.

 

[pats1]

The number 2 in 2003 started off as Patten and then became Branch. By 2004, Patten had fallen to the #4 WR behind Branch, Givens and Brown.

Keep in mind Branch was injured for a good chunk of the season, and Troy didn't see quite as much time at WR (17 receptions), as he was working at DB.

Those 4 knew the all the routes but they still lined up in the X, Y, and Z positions. You thinking otherwise is foolishness.[/quote]

I would have to go back and look at the tape, but I'm fairly certain that they used guys interchangeably at those positions, and certainly when guys were out. Branch didn't always play the Z, Givens not always the X, and Patten or Brown not always the F (Y is TE).

People are "pidgeonholing" Moss as the "X" receiver because that is what he is. The "X". And it's based on where he starts out on a majority of the plays. Sometimes, he is the Z receiver. Sometimes he is the Y, but 90% of the time, he is the "X" receiver.

I think we're drifting from my point here. I'm not even sure what you're trying to prove.

Yes, it is how it works. And it's how it worked when they were winning titles. The difference is that they had 4 receivers who were very similar in ability in running the short to intermediate routes, compared to now where we have Moss who can run all the routes, including the deep ones. Welker, who runs the short routes. Edelman who also can run the short routes and should develop into a medium route runner, ala a Branch. Then you have Holt, who still has the speed to run the intermediate routes and can also run the shorter routes. Then you have Price and Tate who we don't know what they can bring just yet.

I don't have very much confidence with Moss running short routes, and even some intermediate routes. People forget that he had a lot of dropped passes over the past few seasons. No doubt he has the knowledge to run them, he's a very smart football player, but I've never found his skillset to be overly conducive to making that over-the-middle tough catch. Maybe I'm wrong.

One of the things that you aren't figuring into the equation is Brady. Brady has a LOT to do with how the offense was run last year. BRADY needs to be the one to get back to spreading the ball around and not relying just on Welker and Moss. But the receivers have to show that they have the HANDS to gain Brady's confidence. Moss, Welker, Edelman, Holt and Crumpler should do that. Price, Tate (whom Brady has sung high praises of), Gonzalez and Gronkowski have to show that they can make the catch when Brady goes to them. If that happens, then you'll see the offense back similar to the 2003/2004 offense or even the 2007 offense instead of the 2009 offense.

That's something I've certainly thought about. In fact, that was one of the first things that came to my mind when Patten signed - keeping Brady comfortable; giving him a reliable option that wasn't given to him in Galloway last year. I also read into Brady's comments on Tate that he was feeling more comfortable working with him. And I also read into Holt and Patten almost working as coaches at OTAs, teaching younger guys proper route-running, that route-running and sure-handedness were going to MAJOR points of emphasis for the position this season.

You need to stop pretending like everyone is caught up in this "PRO BOWL" WR crap. That is you exaggerating. People still see what Moss can do and know that he can do it when he's part of a team that is running well and where he can be spelled.

Maybe you don't see it because you don't live around here, but the Moss hype is a little ridiculous sometimes. Not their fault, but the kids absolutely love him. There were a lot of fans that jumped onto the bandwagon in 2007, who never watched any games in the Super Bowl era. I truly believe that they genuinely think Tom Brady to Randy Moss is what Super Bowl football is all about. It isn't. Again, maybe it's just me but that's something that bothers me.

"WE" didn't go wrong anywhere. You exaggerating and acting like everyone else who believes that keeping Moss is better than not keeping him is on crack is where it's wrong. Moss, NOW, is still better than 90% of the WRs in the league. And he's still the best receiver on the Patriots. You add him with the veterans like Welker, Holt, and Crumpler, as well as the rookies/youngsters like Edelman, Tate, Gonzalez, Price, and Gronkowski and you've got one of the best mixes of talent in the league. A mix that could be among the best and that should give other defenses fits.

You are only looking at 2010. I am looking at future years. Don't tell me the decision makers aren't either.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I hope Welker is not being careless and using HGH to help him recover.

Well, just to play 'pharmacist', here...

possible 4 game suspension vs. 5 games missed on PUP.


It would still be a net gain.*


*In no way do I mean to imply that Welker has taken anything that would place him in the program. This was merely offered as a light reply to the previous poster's message of concern.