Is Wes Welker a "System Receiver"?

[NEP4Life]

This is your chance to vote on whether Welker, given his current age and ability, is a "system receiver".

Let's define a system receiver as a receiver who puts up much better numbers in a particular offense (including that offense's quarterback ) than he would with most of the other 31 teams, assuming equal playing time.

 

[Jangles]

What an original thought.

Thanks for making a thread

 

[Sciz]

Every receiver is a system receiver.

 

[Observer]

Welker is totally a system receiver... just not in the way you are thinking.

He is a system receiver in that he is one of the few receivers that can actually be effective in this system. And that makes him all the more valuable.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

BB wanted Welker because he thought WW was uncoverable and saw his potential. This is the reason we got him for a 2nd (and yeah the 7th was a token offer for any potential poison pill contract).

WW does what he does and it's all him. We just emphasize those abilities and he clicks on pretty much all cylinders with Brady. That last part is the most important for a receiver to be productive here.

The system doesn't make him juke receivers, run proper route trees or get up after getting laid out. He's the real thing.

 

[hovis]

No. He would thrive anywhere.

 

[TyronePoole]

He's like a high end car that only a high end driver can drive. He needs a very good QB, but for a very good QB who knows how to use him he's an elite WR and a serious weapon. There's probably about 5-6 teams in the NFL where he'd put up similar numbers, and he'd be similar to what he was in Miami on the rest of them.

 

[ausbacker]

At one point in his career Tom Brady was referred to as a system Quarterback. Great players are great players where ever they are. Wes Welker is a great player.

 

[Off The Grid]

At one point in his career Tom Brady was referred to as a system Quarterback. Great players are great players where ever they are. Wes Welker is a great player.

For The Win.

Nobody exists in a Vacuum.

Welker is greater because of Brady.

And Brady is greater because of Welker.

But either would be great, regardless.

 

[PatsDeb]

Yes, he's a "system" receiver and he plays with a "system" QB in that the "system" has been developed to take advantage of each of their special skills. He catches more balls because he plays for the Pats and with Tom Brady, but the Pats and Tom Brady have more completions because Wes Welker is there to make them.

The Pats are being stupid for playing hard ball with Welker.

 

[supafly]

The Pats are being stupid for playing hard ball with Welker.

I think you are right to some degree, Deb; but I think that I would change that to "the Pats are being stupid for playing hard ball with Welker on this level."

In other words, (and we don't know for sure, but it sure seems this way) we already have a guy who by all accts isn't really looking to 'break the bank,' has proven his worth to this system and team, and is likely willing to take a bit less to stay here in N.England.

Those are all important factors that should help facilitate a deal.

This deal should not really be THAT hard to complete in my opinion, unless there's something that we don't know like Wes asking for 10+ million or 5-6 yrs, but I find that hard to believe.

 

[FarScapeR]

He's great within the pats system, and catching passes from Brady doesn't hurt, but he's also one of the greatest slot receivers of all time.

He was the most productive receiver in Miami before joining the pats, productive opposite Moss, productive without him, productive still without Brady. Comparatively, the offense wasn't quite the same when he was less than 100% while returning from ACL injury, or when he missed games.

 

[TealSox]

Whenever you have a guy like Tom Brady throwing you the ball, you stand to put up inflated numbers (esp in a pass first offense). On what other team could Welker put up the numbers he has for the last few years? Maybe the Saints? Green Bay?

Not the Dolphins, Browns or Raiders - that's for sure!

I don't want to take away too much from him, because he is a huge 'effort' guy that comes to play on every down. The Patriots have been lucky to have him, since he isn't easily replaced.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Whenever I hear the phrase 'system' (fill in the position) referred to a player it is usually a derogatory reference to a player's skills; i.e., he is productive not due to his own abilities but because of the scheme and game plan of the coach.

In my opinion it's one of the most over used and improperly used adjectives in the game of football; it has degenerated into simple smack talk for fans of one team to put down a player on a rival team.

My response: if (name of player) is strictly a 'system' (name of position), then why does said team pay him so much money? I f he was simply a system player then why wouldn't they hire another player at vet minimum wage and use that money elsewhere?

Response #2: if the task this player did was so simple, then how do you explain it being so productive? If it was that simple that anybody could do it (which is the implication with the term 'system player'), then why aren't the 31 other NFL teams doing the same thing?

We are constantly reminded that the NFL is a copy-cat league; if this player's skills are so easily replaced, then why isn't that happening by either the current team, or by other teams?




That's not to say that there is absolutely no such thing as a system (name of position); I can think for example in college of many quarterbacks over the years where that term would be appropriate. But the implication that Wes Welker or Tom Brady are successful only because of Bill Belichick's 'system' and that they are bench warmers anywhere else is ludicrous - unless of course if you are going to apply the same tag to every other NFL player as well.

 

[TealSox]

Being a "system" player shouldn't be construed as a negative. While Welker doesn't necessarily transcend his position and may not be able to be the caliber of player for many other teams, he fits exactly what the Patriots do. Not just anyone can come in and fit a system. He is immensely talented and because he fits so well, he deserve some compensation for it.

That said, there may not be much of a market for him since what other teams run (offensively) doesn't match his skill set. Could he be an asset to other teams? Sure. Could he be a asset worth $9 mil to another team? Hard to say. So the Patriots have to ask themselves, who are they bidding against? Themselves?

That's just bad business.

 

[Gumby]

Being a "system" player shouldn't be construed as a negative. While Welker doesn't necessarily transcend his position and may not be able to be the caliber of player for many other teams, he fits exactly what the Patriots do. Not just anyone can come in and fit a system. He is immensely talented and because he fits so well, he deserve some compensation for it.

That said, there may not be much of a market for him since what other teams run (offensively) doesn't match his skill set. Could he be an asset to other teams? Sure. Could he be a asset worth $9 mil to another team? Hard to say. So the Patriots have to ask themselves, who are they bidding against? Themselves?

That's just bad business.

I hate these arguments that really revolve or devolve around semantics. We take a one word starting point (system) and then posters create 20 different definitions of that word; and then argue their position based on their definition. Words have meanings and if we can't agree on the meaning; then a discussion/argument is never going to be on the merits.

I think 90%+ of football fans would certify that calling someone a "system" player is DERAGATORY or NEGATIVE.

I thinkthe position Deus and a few others stated on the subject is most accurate: - that is, we dont know what either side has specifically asked for or been offered. It is all guesses.

it is true that you have to pay a player based on:

1 -position value to your team -this should set your bandwidth

2 - individual value to your team- this should set your floor

3 -value to other teams (what the competition is willing to pay)- this should set your maximum within the bandwidth. If others will pay more than your bandwidth; you gotta walk away from the table unless the guy has some once in a lifetime meaning to your club.

Welker has outperformed every contract so far. he deserves to get paid. I think no one disputes those.

I would have to join the club though that states Brady is a 1 in a lifetime player; welker is not. If you have to lease him for one year while the 9M franchise fits within your bandwidth max and let him go when/if his purported asked for >$10M cap exceeds the bandwidth then you do that instead of buying.

 

[Gumby]

Forgot my conclusion:

as to is welker a "system" player. I think emphatically NOT. (assuming that definition of system is one who is ONLY successful because of the system he is playing in.) As someone else said quoting BB 'he was uncoverable every time we played versus him [miami]'.

Welker would be successful anywhere. Would he be top 5 NFL wr ANYWHERE; unlikely. wr success is too dependent on the guy who throws; and moderately dependent on OC's scheme.

Would he be as successful as in Pats on ANY other team? I also think not. Although maybe at NO. some could argue GB; but I don't think they would use him as well as brady does.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

He's like a high end car that only a high end driver can drive. He needs a very good QB, but for a very good QB who knows how to use him he's an elite WR and a serious weapon. There's probably about 5-6 teams in the NFL where he'd put up similar numbers, and he'd be similar to what he was in Miami on the rest of them.

I bet Matty C in KC would love this thinking.

I wonder what body part he would give up to get Wes in a Chief's uniform.

 

[Gronkandez]

The Pats are being stupid for playing hard ball with Welker.

The Pats have tremendous depth at WR/TE. They can't pay everyone top dollar.

$9.5M for one season is great money and as long as he doesn't tear his achilles or ACL he'll either get another $12M next year (approx) or be a free agent where he'll cash in.

The Steelers are doing the exact same thing with Mike Wallace who is much younger.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

The Pats have tremendous depth at WR/TE. They can't pay everyone top dollar.

$9.5M for one season is great money and as long as he doesn't tear his achilles or ACL he'll either get another $12M next year (approx) or be a free agent where he'll cash in.

The Steelers are doing the exact same thing with Mike Wallace who is much younger.

This is what I don't get about the people advocating paying him. Right now the Pats pretty much control him for 2 years for 21M and only 9.5 of that is guaranteed. Most of the fair contracts talked about would increase the guaranteed money and length without dramatically cutting the salary. How does this benefit the Pats? It sucks, but it seems that there's no good way to work a contract for WW that's mutually beneficial.