- Joined
- Sep 16, 2004
- Messages
- 12,448
- Reaction score
- 13,165
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.Unofficially, Welker and Whosyourmomma from Cincy both finished with 112 catches. Very Probowl worthy, I must say.
If welker were selected who would you leave out, Braylon Edwards???
If welker were selected who would you leave out, Braylon Edwards???
If welker were selected who would you leave out, Braylon Edwards???
If yards after catch were an official stat, would Wes lead the league? Awesome year for Welker.
You leave out Houshmanzadeh. Here's why. First of all, the guy's team loses 9 games. Welker's team lost NONE, so you'd obviously make a pretty cut and dry case that WW's catches were FAR more important.
What? I said, WHAT?
RussFrancis, you have lost your mind. If you're going to use FLAKEY logic like how important the catches are based upon the team's record, why not calculate how unimportant they were on a Randy Moss team?
I mean, come on, what the hell kind of logic is that? This is about stats, not about who played for whom. Who scored more points and who caught more yardage, etc. is all that matters.
That's silly. Housh's catches meant less because the Bengals suck at everything besides WR. Considering they still won 7 games (i.e. bad but not horrible) pretty much with their passing game alone it's pretty stupid to say his contributions weren't important.First, those #s are cited for Housh in that game were a little off. I meant to identify them as the 5 catches he had on the final scoring drive. Anyway.
But you think Houshmanzadeh was a more valuable and more significant player to his team this year than Welker? Seriously? I was only referencing those TJ #s because I found them hilarious that leading the league in catches was obviously that important to either him or that team. But in real and somewhat intangible football terms, as far as who had the better and more significant year, its Welker over Housh here and its not close, imo. All that guy had were #s. Welker played a HUGE part in making this New England offense virtually indefensible. Im not sure what angle you were taking there with your logic.
That's silly. Housh's catches meant less because the Bengals suck at everything besides WR. Considering they still won 7 games (i.e. bad but not horrible) pretty much with their passing game alone it's pretty stupid to say his contributions weren't important.
Chad Johnson should've went ahead of Housh anyways and they should have more than 4 WRs.