I don't expect Tate to be the next Moss, but all I heard about this guy is that he would of been a 1st round pick if it wasn't for the injury/and he was better then Nicks at UNC. So I'm expecting, (or was) a lot.
Branch can't say healthy.
Welker is OK, Edelman didn't produce, not sure why he can't play together with Welker.
Price I'm optimistic, but I don't see him as a #1 WR. and before I hear the same old tired argument that we didn't win anything with Randy, and we did better with a bunch of #2's. Well we never had a stud TE like Gronk when we won all those SB's, we had Wiggins, and Fauria. So should we have not drafted him?
Yeah. I remember some hype about Tate leading up to the 2009 draft, but it was mostly about him being a very fast and effective KR who had also shown considerable
raw talent as the #2 WR behind Nicks. In that regard, I think he's probably lived up to expectations considering that his injury kept him from practicing/playing for nearly two years and that he had a lot of receiving targets (not limited to WR) ahead of him.
Edelman, in fact, DID produce as our best PR since Troy Brown in 2002. But his route repertoire is nearly identical to Welker's and we already had a lot of guys who were successful work the short/intermediate zones between the numbers (Hernandez, Gronkowski and Woodhead included), so Edelman was really surplus/relief man in that regard. Admittedly, he didn't do much with his few relief opportunities.
WRT TE, we really only had Wiggins for the end of the 2000 season and 2001. He wasn't a "stud" for
us (30/333, 5TDs in 20 games with 8 starts), but, oddly, later became one for Minny - 186/1659 in 3 seasons with Culpepper and Brad Johnson. Fauria, though, was only the #2 TE behind Daniel Graham in 2003-04. Graham contributed 68/773, 11 TDs over those two SB seasons, so, though not a "stud" on Gronk's level, he was certainly a significant weapon in those offenses and more consistent than Watson was as his successor.
