Wes Welker: Contract talks with Pats have gotten worse

[MoLewisrocks]

Deus - The 2years/16million was an extension offer that the team made during the 2011 season according to the article.

I do agree that asking Welker to take a 23% discount off the franchise tag is not good business. However, that could have also been the Pats initial offer and they might have expected Welker to counter. However, I can remember that Welker said, specifically, that he wasn't going to worry about a contract during the season last year. So, if that is the case and he chose not to send a counter offer, who's fault is it, really?

Welker saying he wasn't going to worry about his contract isn't an indication that his agents stopped attempting to negotiate one. What we heard on that down the stretch was when they couldn't get the 2 year $16M deal done with him they moved on and got a deal done early with Jerod Belichick... And I don't call him that to be unkind, his teamates call him that. Perhaps jokingly, perhaps only half jokingly...

Thing is the $16M they offered him was likely really a 3 year $20M deal with his remaining year on his 2007 deal rolled in. So less than $7M per. Now they are offering him less than they were offering him last season. Considering the season he had, that is bizarre indeed. I would definitely give some reason to believe he is being penalized for the way the last game of the season ended. And that would be wrong on so many levels...

Felger has long contended that they have to win at everything, even the negotiations. I think there is something to that. We're almost all in favor of this organization not going out and paying stupid money to players just to attract or retain them. Unfortunately they tend to take (almost) every negotiation to the mat. Mayo being the lone recent exception. And the odd thing there was he didn't appear to have to take the early discount everyone else who played ball and signed early did. His new money AAV on the extension is $9.7M, top 3 LB money. I know he was DROY, but after that he battled some injuries and struggled some and didn't turn in another pro bowl performance in the interim. I know he sleeps on a cot in Bill's office in the offseason, but what you do on the field matters too and it's not like Welker didn't attend every off season workout or didn't bust his ass to make it back before the bell rang on the next season after he tore his ACL playing in a last regular season game even Bill debated playing him in... And then last season he trumped that by playing his best season ever, at 30, 18 months removed from an ACL.

Mediots keep mistakenly reporting his age as 32. I think that's because the fact that he just turned 31 a couple of weeks ago makes it all even more mindboggling. They handed Chad $6M and extended him for $6M more at age 33 coming off the worst year of his career. Then again, like Mayo... I remember thinking and even saying back in 2005 that people this seemingly bright couldn't also possibly be so dense on another level that they would alienate a guy who had done so much for them while consistently bending over backwards to be a team first player. Yet they were, until Brady's situation went public via Tom E Curran delivering a basically dictated piece courtesy of the Brady camp detailing what the holdup on the extension was... They did the same thing to Wilfork and Mankins, each of whom spoke up - and the one who was most extreme ended up eventually getting the larger deal and one that paid him almost $2M more than they were planning to and made him the highest paid guard in the league.

So don't be so sure they don't hear what gets said about them. I fully expect Jonathan, who has rabitt ears, to take to the airwaves shortly to spin the fabulosity of whatever it is they offered Welker - probably like that deal Adam walked away from to be the highest salaried player at his position - only per the fine print absent any guarantees...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Here are Larry Fitzgerald's and Wes Welker's stats from 2007-2011. I also included stats from Mike Wallace 2009-2011.

Pay attention to the bold. That is what makes elite receivers. Do you think Welker is a threat to score from anywhere on the field.

Wes Welker-2007-2011 avg
554 total receptions 110.8 receptions per year avg.
6105 total receiving yards 1221 yearly receiving yards avg.
31 total touchdowns 6.2 per year avg.
11.01 yard per catch avg.
Every 17.87 receptions is a touchdown.
197 yards to get a touchdown

Larry Fitzgerald-2007-2011 avg
463 total receptions 92.6 receptions per year avg.
6480 total receiving yards 1296 yearly receiving yards avg.
14 yard per catch avg.
49 touchdowns 9.8 per year avg.
Every 9.45 catches is a touchdown
132 yards to get a touchdown


Mike Wallace 2009-2011
171 total receptions 57 receptions per year avg.
3206 total receiving yards 1068. 66 yearly receiving yards avg.
24 total touchdowns 8 per year avg.
18.7 yard per catch avg.
Every 7.13 receptions is a touchdown.
134 yards to get a touchdown

Guess what elite WR's get paid? If the tag was still figured out the old way, average of the top 5 at the position for the previous year, it would be $11.5M per for WR. Larry Fitzgerald's deal signed last season averages $15M per. Wallace is looking for that if not more. Megatron's 2012 deal averages $16.5M per. The oft injured 33 year old Steve Smith who was 5th in receiving yards last season, his best season in a while, just signed a four-year, $37.75 million contract w/2016 Option. The deal contains $16.8 million guaranteed, including a $10 million signing bonus and each of Smith's first three base salaries. 2012: $1 million, 2013: $3.75 million, 2014: $4 million (+ $3 million option bonus), 2015: $7 million, 2016: $9 million (Option Year when he will be 37).

31 year old Wes Welker at $8M per for 4 years would be a comparative bargain...

 

[goheels22002]

enjoy his last season here..becasue after this year he is gone

You might be correct, but I doubt it. It's May, and Welker is signed for this year. The Patriots have no urgency whatsoever to do a deal with Welker until after the 53 man roster starts to shape up and they know what deals they'll have to honor and who gets cut.

It's important to look at this roster and see all the veterans and what their contracts might call for, and who they ultimately keep. Welker's already said publicly he'll be in the off-season workouts and he wont miss any games due to the $9.5 million franchise contract. What's the rush?

I see this turning into a three-year deal around $25 million with a big piece guaranteed, depending on what happens between now and the fifth or sixth week of the season.

Welker flapping his gums after signing his tender is a ploy to keep his contract on the radar with management. In the end, anything he says in May is meaningless.

 

[Deus Irae]

I have a hard time understanding this. Brady was the highest paid player in the NFL when he signed his deal. Wilfork, Mankins and Mayo were all among the top-5 paid players at their respective positions when they signed their deals. I'm not sure how that is a problem in terms of how the players at the top are compensated. It seems pretty equitable to me.

It's obvious, basic and rudimentary. If you can't understand it, it's something deliberate on your part and nothing anyone says will change your position because your position isn't a reasoned one.

The Pats tend to value depth and the middle-to-bottom part of the roster more than most teams, so they are perhaps less prone to throw huge contracts at players who haven't earned them only to find that they underperform their contracts. They learned that mistake the hard way with Adalius Thomas. And no player is immune to injury, or good enough to help the team when injured. The Pats value quality depth perhaps more than they value "elite" starters, and given the salary cap, that creates some strain. Given their track record of success over the past decade, it is hard to argue with their philosophy.

First, Thomas was a new player to the team, whereas Mankins, Wilfork, Brady, Seymour, Samuel and Branch were players who'd been around for years, so your argument doesn't apply.

Second, it's football. You pay knowing there are injuries.

Third, your elite starters theory is inconsistent with everything the Patriots have done and said in terms of contracts, according to your own, earlier words. You're twisting your own positions in order to defend the team. That should be a sign to you that you're on the wrong side.

Fourth, I didn't argue with their philosophy. I noted that their system has problems. There's a difference.

You say that the Pats view loyalty as a "one way street". I don't think so. I think they generously reward players who have proven themselves and who have present and future value. But they are a business, and they manage to keep their personal feelings for players separate from their business dealings. I'm sure many people in the organization revere Wes Welker more than anyone on this board. But that won't cause the FO to give him a deal that outweighs his perceived present and future value. That may seem callous and "disloyal", but it's also prudent business practice.

Again, your argument is not internally consistent, since you're essentially saying "The Patriots aren't loyal, but I'm saying they're loyal because they probably like some people", so there's really nothing to say in response.

Of course, it's a subjective calculation what a player's actual "value" is. The FO's perception may not be the same as yours, mine, or the market's. You can argue that the Pats under-valued Asante Samuel and foolishly lost him when they could have locked him up long term. You can also argue that the market over-valued Samuel and that the Eagles paid him way too much. The same goes for guys the Pats have signed. The Ravens decided in 2007 that Adalius Thomas was a product of their system, that Jarrett Johnson was a capable replacement, and that his value on the open market exceeded his worth to the organization. History has proven them correct, and the Pats were the ones who over-valued and over-compensated Thomas.

While there is some subjectivity, there's also plenty of objective information that goes into it as well. You're confusing mistakes in evaluation with subjectivity. Thomas, whom you keep going back to as a cautionary tale as if it means something when it doesn't, was valued as a top-level free agent in the year he became a free agent. That's precisely what he was. Whether he worked out as a player for a particular team, or for any team, is irrelevant to that.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

You might be correct, but I doubt it. It's May, and Welker is signed for this year. The Patriots have no urgency whatsoever to do a deal with Welker until after the 53 man roster starts to shape up and they know what deals they'll have to honor and who gets cut.

It's important to look at this roster and see all the veterans and what their contracts might call for, and who they ultimately keep. Welker's already said publicly he'll be in the off-season workouts and he wont miss any games due to the $9.5 million franchise contract. What's the rush?

I see this turning into a three-year deal around $25 million with a big piece guaranteed, depending on what happens between now and the fifth or sixth week of the season.

Welker flapping his gums after signing his tender is a ploy to keep his contract on the radar with management. In the end, anything he says in May is meaningless.

You only have until July 15th, a couple of weeks before training camps open, to get a long term deal done with a franchise tagged player. After that you have to wait until the regular season ends. They could get a deal done thereafter before or after FA opens in 2013, but once it does they are no longer the exclusive team negotiating with him - unless they tag him again.

 

[patfanken]

You only have until July 15th, a couple of weeks before training camps open, to get a long term deal done with a franchise tagged player. After that you have to wait until the regular season ends. They could get a deal done thereafter before or after FA opens in 2013, but once it does they are no longer the exclusive team negotiating with him - unless they tag him again.

Of course, that little detail wouldn't stop the 2 sides from reaching an agreement that satisfies both sides and make it official after the season ends.

Wes if free to pursue any and all strategies to make the maximum amount of money he can make. What I can't stand is the keen and whine that comes from the media (and sometimes here) that the Pats are OBLIGATED to pay him whatever he wants. And if they don't, they are mistreating him. That is simply ludicrous.

Wes Welker is a very good player, outstanding in fact. However NO WR is indispensable to a team. Just by injury alone they can be gone in a single play. If Wes Welker were gone tomorrow, the Pats offense would STILL be a top 5 group by the end of the season. But FORTUNATELY we don't have to worry about it for the 2012 season.

History tells us they will likely get a LT deal done. But if they don't the Pats WILL survive and thrive, just like they have when OTHER "indispensable" players were gone.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I have a hard time understanding this. Brady was the highest paid player in the NFL when he signed his deal. Wilfork, Mankins and Mayo were all among the top-5 paid players at their respective positions when they signed their deals. I'm not sure how that is a problem in terms of how the players at the top are compensated. It seems pretty equitable to me.

Brady was kinda the highest paid player when he signed his deal, except that they folded in the remaining year on his existing deal which allowed them to prorate some of his new money that averaged $18M per into his old deal that averaged $12M per. So over the entire term his average is not really $18M, although his new money was. And Brady had to fight for it. He should have gotten in a year sooner, but they wanted to see a full season back and a bit more before they extended him, and that is probably why the extension was shorter but for likely more in per year value than they had hoped... Wilfork got snookered into being the highest paid NOSE TACKLE, which is a unique subset to a 3-4 defense... Mankins ended up getting $2M more than they'd previously offered, apparently because he proved to them he wasn't a candidate for snookering. Jerod has an in in the FO.

The Pats tend to value depth and the middle-to-bottom part of the roster more than most teams, so they are perhaps less prone to throw huge contracts at players who haven't earned them only to find that they underperform their contracts. They learned that mistake the hard way with Adalius Thomas. And no player is immune to injury, or good enough to help the team when injured. The Pats value quality depth perhaps more than they value "elite" starters, and given the salary cap, that creates some strain. Given their track record of success over the past decade, it is hard to argue with their philosophy.

Wes has earned it. And while no player is immune to injury works for the 22 years olds the same as the 31 year olds, some players do play good enough to help the team when injured. Wes is one of them. As is Brady. Wes played throughn 3 cracked ribs a while ago, or so I now hear via Curran. We know about some of Brady's injuries. Yet the only thing that keeps either of them off the field and performing is catastrophic injury. And in Welker's case that barely did.

You say that the Pats view loyalty as a "one way street". I don't think so. I think they generously reward players who have proven themselves and who have present and future value. But they are a business, and they manage to keep their personal feelings for players separate from their business dealings. I'm sure many people in the organization revere Wes Welker more than anyone on this board. But that won't cause the FO to give him a deal that outweighs his perceived present and future value. That may seem callous and "disloyal", but it's also prudent business practice.

Bottom line is they do, with very few exceptions. And you basically have to both play at a consistently high level and be a doormat for it to be reciprocated. No one here is expecting them to give Wes a deal that outweighs his perceived present and future value. They haven't even offered him a deal that remotely approaches it yet. That's the rub.

Of course, it's a subjective calculation what a player's actual "value" is. The FO's perception may not be the same as yours, mine, or the market's. You can argue that the Pats under-valued Asante Samuel and foolishly lost him when they could have locked him up long term. You can also argue that the market over-valued Samuel and that the Eagles paid him way too much. The same goes for guys the Pats have signed. The Ravens decided in 2007 that Adalius Thomas was a product of their system, that Jarrett Johnson was a capable replacement, and that his value on the open market exceeded his worth to the organization. History has proven them correct, and the Pats were the ones who over-valued and over-compensated Thomas.

I don't think they undervalued Asante. Some think they did by not offering him a deal earlier, but they did try to - just not at a number he felt reflected his value and talent. He was in denial about his own performance in 2005 and early 2006 (when Hobbs beat him out for LCB in camp). It's just the way his last contractual season unfolded with the 10 picks - albeit largely in bunches and off bad QB's - his perceived value rapidly exceeded his actual value and by then he was determined to get that perceived value. And there is almost always one team who will pay a player based on perception, and find out it wasn't reality. I don't think they overvalued or overpaid Thomas. I think they miscalculated on his attitude and makeup (who rather than what he was), which is what I think Baltimore had some insight on that you only get when a guy has been in your system. Has nothing to do with gauging Welker since he's been in theirs and consistently outperformed expectations and his contract.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Of course, that little detail wouldn't stop the 2 sides from reaching an agreement that satisfies both sides and make it official after the season ends.

There are no wink and nod deals in the NFL, ken. If he went down in week 17 the team would develop amnesia and there wouldn't be a thing Wes could do about it.

Wes if free to pursue any and all strategies to make the maximum amount of money he can make. What I can't stand is the keen and whine that comes from the media (and sometimes here) that the Pats are OBLIGATED to pay him whatever he wants. And if they don't, they are mistreating him. That is simply ludicrous.

Knock off the hyperbole. NO ONE is whining that the Pats are OBLIGATED to pay him whatever he wants. What they have offered him is insulting barring them releasing medical data that proves he will fall off a cliff after this season. He's just 31 THIS MONTH, not 33 or 34. He had his best season in a string of 5 impressive seasons just this past year. And they are offering him less than 2 years $16M. That's an insult.

Wes Welker is a very good player, outstanding in fact. However NO WR is indispensable to a team. Just by injury alone they can be gone in a single play. If Wes Welker were gone tomorrow, the Pats offense would STILL be a top 5 group by the end of the season. But FORTUNATELY we don't have to worry about it for the 2012 season.

Any player can be gone in a single play. What is amazing is when that happens and the guy only misses that game... If Stallworth's hammy acts up or Branch's knees finally give out or Ocho never gets it or Gronkowski gets dragged down by an ankle again or lands on his head and throws out the back or Hernandez hip is reinjured...the D could be better than the O by the end of this season, unless several of them get injured too... And just so you know Ocho and Lloyd are it for under contract WR's come 2013...aside from a 7th round rookie.

History tells us they will likely get a LT deal done. But if they don't the Pats WILL survive and thrive, just like they have when OTHER "indispensable" players were gone.

There is an old adage ken that goes just because you got away with something doesn't make it right. And around here yet another that usually goes if you don't win it all you suck...after the fact.

 

[Triumph]

There is an old adage ken that goes just because you got away with something doesn't make it right. And around here yet another that usually goes if you don't win it all you suck...after the fact.

Its all about winning World Championships.

Thats the bottom line. Nobody cares about the Super Bowl loser. Going there and losing is worse than not going at all to me. This Super Bowl loss wasnt as bad as the others because most folks saw it coming.

 

[Sciz]

I don't think they undervalued Asante.

Not at all. And the Eagles have basically admitted that they vastly overvalued him, considering that this offseason was the third offseason that they had him on the trade block. While it looked bad at the time, refusing to give in to Samuel's contract demands was a big win.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

EDIT: As DaBruinz points out, the 5-6-7 yrs would not be in line w/ the 30% rule, and I didn't look at it long enough or catch that. Regardless, I think there needs to be a dummy yr in there somewhere, but it shouldn't have to be past the 3rd or 4th yr.

The 30% rule doesn't apply here: it only applies to contracts that extend into uncapped years (and the first one, ATM, is 2021).

 

[Sciz]

Guess what elite WR's get paid? If the tag was still figured out the old way, average of the top 5 at the position for the previous year, it would be $11.5M per for WR. Larry Fitzgerald's deal signed last season averages $15M per. Wallace is looking for that if not more. Megatron's 2012 deal averages $16.5M per. The oft injured 33 year old Steve Smith who was 5th in receiving yards last season, his best season in a while, just signed a four-year, $37.75 million contract w/2016 Option. The deal contains $16.8 million guaranteed, including a $10 million signing bonus and each of Smith's first three base salaries. 2012: $1 million, 2013: $3.75 million, 2014: $4 million (+ $3 million option bonus), 2015: $7 million, 2016: $9 million (Option Year when he will be 37).

31 year old Wes Welker at $8M per for 4 years would be a comparative bargain...

Smith had leverage because the Panthers had $600k in cap room and he had a $10.9M cap number. He got an extension with way too much guaranteed money for a 33 year old receiver, and the Panthers got almost $5M in cap room. Welker has no such leverage.

And Rotoworld's math is off. It's $37.75M for all 5 years, not 4. Take off the fake 5th year at $9M and it's $28.75M for 4 years.

 

[supafly]

The 30% rule doesn't apply here: it only applies to contracts that extend into uncapped years (and the first one, ATM, is 2021).

Thanks ct, much appreciated.

 

[goheels22002]

Of course, that little detail wouldn't stop the 2 sides from reaching an agreement that satisfies both sides and make it official after the season ends.

Wes if free to pursue any and all strategies to make the maximum amount of money he can make. What I can't stand is the keen and whine that comes from the media (and sometimes here) that the Pats are OBLIGATED to pay him whatever he wants. And if they don't, they are mistreating him. That is simply ludicrous.

Wes Welker is a very good player, outstanding in fact. However NO WR is indispensable to a team. Just by injury alone they can be gone in a single play. If Wes Welker were gone tomorrow, the Pats offense would STILL be a top 5 group by the end of the season. But FORTUNATELY we don't have to worry about it for the 2012 season.

History tells us they will likely get a LT deal done. But if they don't the Pats WILL survive and thrive, just like they have when OTHER "indispensable" players were gone.

MoLewisRocks might be correct that they cannot sign a deal once the season begins, although I'm uncertain that the CBA is so rigid on working out a deal to replace a signed franchise tender.

The notion that Welker (or any player) is being mistreated if they don't get a deal done that meets Welker's demands is annoying to me, too. The media and the callers they amp up are schizophrenic. It's always that the team is wrong if they don't pay the player, but geniuses if they enter each season in better cap condition than the other teams.

Anyone who reads my posts knows that I believe the reason why the Patriots are consistently good is because they live within the budget and pay the middle third and bottom third of the players better than other teams to create depth at every position, and they select guys with skills at multiple positions to respond with experience at every position when injuries hit.

Welker and his agent know that.

My guess is that Welker wants a minimum three-year deal with a big number guaranteed including 2012-13 and the Pats just aren't there yet. They other guys to sign right now and 40 guys to cut before they get there, frankly. They need to see what the salary structure looks like before they promise a big stack of guaranteed money to Wes Welker.

Now that he's signed the franchise tender, the Patriots don't need to get there until the deadline for this contract to be re-negotiated - two months from now if MoLewisRocks is correct. I think they have more flexibility than that, but I need to find the language on replacing a signed franchise deal with a standard multi-year contract.

Whatever, it's a little early for Welker to start complaining about his $9.5 million reasons to play football. He ought to go play a round of golf with Josh Becket, have a beer and get over it.

 

[RhodyPatriot]

Typical Patriots nonsense.
It's got to be so tiresome for the players in that lockerroom.
Wish the media would start taking this greedy little front office to the wood shed. They're quite petty.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I really hope as a pats fan, that one football play that gets made or not doesn't dictate contract negotiations that will effect the team for multiple years. That's not a shot at you, but a lot of people are saying this and as a person that thinks Welker should have made that catch its ridiculous everytime I hear it.

Those are two independent and quite different sentences.

Sentence one. I think you're naive if you think that a game-saving catch by a star player in his prime to seal the fourth Lombardi of the Belichick/Brady era wouldn't have had an impact on the negotiations, from a fan, media and substance perspective. It would have been far more than "one football play."

Sentence two. The catch would have been all the more important for the very fact that there is no way anyone can reasonably say that Welker "should have made" the catch. It would have been an over-the-top, almost miraculous catch made by a great player in his prime; the kind of catch that immortalizes the legacy of a great player and is the top of his "highlight reel" for decades to come.

 

[Kontradiction]

Pat Kirwin said it best: Don't insult Welker. Let him taste the market for a little bit. If someone else offers him $95, you offer him $90.

 

[patfanken]

Knock off the hyperbole. NO ONE is whining that the Pats are OBLIGATED to pay him whatever he wants. What they have offered him is insulting barring them releasing medical data that proves he will fall off a cliff after this season. He's just 31 THIS MONTH, not 33 or 34. He had his best season in a string of 5 impressive seasons just this past year. And they are offering him less than 2 years $16M. That's an insult.

Mo, sounds like you are studying up for the agents' test. INSULTING. You've GOT to be kidding. The only player I can think of who got anything CLOSE to that offer who is around Welker's age and size is Steve Smith (as was pointed out) But he plays a different position, is faster, and a PROVEN outside threat, playing in a completely different offense.....and his real deal only averages $7MM/yr So how is THAT an insult.

Name me a slot receiver Welker's age and size who has ever produced at an elite level when they were 32-35. Name me one whose production didn't fall off the table when the "hit the wall". And how is it insulting when you offer a player roughly a 33% raise, and guarantee it 2 years

Mo, the Pats seem perfectly willing to pay Welker a lot more than $6MM for THIS season because they think he probably has a at least on more great year in him. Paying him more than $6-7MM past that point you are playing with fire, and are likely to end up overpaying.

You are clearly in the camp that believe Welker should be paid for his PAST production. And if I believed in this philosophy, I'd be hammering the Pats too. But I believe in creating contracts that pay for expected FUTURE production.

So why don't we compromise. Why not create a contract that Guarantees Welker $16-18MM, and averages $6-7MM/yr in base salaries, but then has incentives that would expand that income into the 8-10MM range IF he defies the odds and continues to put up similar numbers to what he's done the past 5 years.

This way the agent is happy because he can say he's got Welker a deal that averages 9MM/yr, and the Pats are happy because they know that if his production slips, they're only on the hook for 6MM/yr, or the $16MM guarantee.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

MoLewisRocks might be correct that they cannot sign a deal once the season begins, although I'm uncertain that the CBA is so rigid on working out a deal to replace a signed franchise tender.

The notion that Welker (or any player) is being mistreated if they don't get a deal done that meets Welker's demands is annoying to me, too. The media and the callers they amp up are schizophrenic. It's always that the team is wrong if they don't pay the player, but geniuses if they enter each season in better cap condition than the other teams.

Anyone who reads my posts knows that I believe the reason why the Patriots are consistently good is because they live within the budget and pay the middle third and bottom third of the players better than other teams to create depth at every position, and they select guys with skills at multiple positions to respond with experience at every position when injuries hit.

Welker and his agent know that.

My guess is that Welker wants a minimum three-year deal with a big number guaranteed including 2012-13 and the Pats just aren't there yet. They other guys to sign right now and 40 guys to cut before they get there, frankly. They need to see what the salary structure looks like before they promise a big stack of guaranteed money to Wes Welker.

Now that he's signed the franchise tender, the Patriots don't need to get there until the deadline for this contract to be re-negotiated - two months from now if MoLewisRocks is correct. I think they have more flexibility than that, but I need to find the language on replacing a signed franchise deal with a standard multi-year contract.

Whatever, it's a little early for Welker to start complaining about his $9.5 million reasons to play football. He ought to go play a round of golf with Josh Becket, have a beer and get over it.

July 15th has always been the deadline for signing franchise tagged players to long term deals. In the current CBA it is stipulated in Article 10, Section 15 (k):

Any Club designating a Franchise Player shall have until 4:00 p.m., New York time, on July 15 of the League Year (or, if July 15 falls on a Saturday or Sunday, the first Monday thereafter) for which the designation takes effect to sign the player to a multiyear contract or extension. After that date, the player may sign only a one-year Player Contract with his Prior Club for that season, and such Player Contract may not be extended until after the Club’s last regular season game of that League Year.

The one year contract they refer to can be the tag or a replacement one year deal signed in lieu of the tag that basically gives teams the flexibility to sweeten the pot to get a tagged player to report to camp or for the season (tagged players can holdout without being fined). Often teams will add language prohibiting the use of a tag going forward as a sweetener. Wouldn't be a sweetener in this case. They could also agree to give the player the bulk of his money in the form of a signing bonus (because while the tag is guaranteed it is still paid out over 17 weeks during the regular season) and they could add performance escalators or incentives. Although I don't recall anyone adding to the tag on a one year deal because generally it's already a cap hit they are reticent about... And that's all moot in Wes' case since he's signed his tag and will report.

 

[DaBruinz]

Here are Larry Fitzgerald's and Wes Welker's stats from 2007-2011. I also included stats from Mike Wallace 2009-2011.

Pay attention to the bold. That is what makes elite receivers. Do you think Welker is a threat to score from anywhere on the field.

Wes Welker-2007-2011 avg
554 total receptions 110.8 receptions per year avg.
6105 total receiving yards 1221 yearly receiving yards avg.
31 total touchdowns 6.2 per year avg.
11.01 yard per catch avg.
Every 17.87 receptions is a touchdown.
197 yards to get a touchdown

Larry Fitzgerald-2007-2011 avg
463 total receptions 92.6 receptions per year avg.
6480 total receiving yards 1296 yearly receiving yards avg.
14 yard per catch avg.
49 touchdowns 9.8 per year avg.
Every 9.45 catches is a touchdown
132 yards to get a touchdown


Mike Wallace 2009-2011
171 total receptions 57 receptions per year avg.
3206 total receiving yards 1068. 66 yearly receiving yards avg.
24 total touchdowns 8 per year avg.
18.7 yard per catch avg.
Every 7.13 receptions is a touchdown.
134 yards to get a touchdown

That is only your myopic opinion. BTW, great that you included the year that Welker was coming back from an ACL just to suit you.

Welker falls into the ELITE POSSESSION receiver category. Possession receivers don't tend to get a lot of TDs because much of their work is done between the 20's.

Clearly, your ignorance knows know bounds.