Edelman national HOF discussion

upstater1 said:

A couple things caught my eye in this thread.

1. People would prefer Welker to Edelman. Really? I'd take Edelman 100 times out of 100 in that battle.

2. Curt Warner was a helluva running back, but probably doesn't deserve to be in the HOF.

Click to expand...

i would also take edelman over welker. edelman is clutch.

ZoisKing said:

Superstar playoffs means more than superstar regular season....

Click to expand...

Obviously not to a lot of dummy fans and dummy media, including pats fans here. “No chance”? .......why not? Guy has been a very good regular season player and is now 2nd all time in playoff receptions (despite missing a couple injury years) plus some huge clutch moments. A meaningful role in winning next weekend and he’d have my vote. Then again I care much more about playoff football than sports center regular season meaningless fluff and how “athletic” a player is (ie: is he black?) unlike 99 pct of sports fans. Idiots.

Edelman is an all time Patriot and athlete that’s for sure. I just want another ring for him and and of course for the GOAT.

captain insano said:

i would also take edelman over welker. edelman is clutch.

Click to expand...

Is this a real discussion? Edelman passed welker long ago.

upstater1 said:

1. People would prefer Welker to Edelman. Really? I'd take Edelman 100 times out of 100 in that battle.

Click to expand...

If you are taking Edelman 100 out of 100 over Welker I think you should put on some tape from 2010 and 2011 and remember how absurdly good Welker was. He is getting dinged for the 2-3 big drops (2011 SB and then the 2012 AFCCG drops against the Ravens) but has produced a lot.

On the flipside Edelman had his own fair share of drops but was lucky enough that his mistakes in big games mostly didn't matter because the team found a way to win despite it. Say you prefer one to the other all you want but going with 100 out of 100 is silly.

luuked said:

No chance.

Even if he would add a SB MVP and would have another run like this next year there is such a logjam at WR that it is unreasonable to think he will ever be considered.

Click to expand...

He's second all-time in post-season receptions. That would seem enough to earn him serious consideration.

Tunescribe said:

He's second all-time in post-season receptions. That would seem enough to earn him serious consideration.

Click to expand...

I might be in the minority here but personally I am not a fan of cumulative stats. This is not Tennis or Golf where every player has their own destiny in their hands. It is a team game and extremely gifted and talented players sometimes get no chance at the playoffs. In other words you gotta somehow take into account the number of opportunities he got to accumulate those stats and not take them at face value.

While this might seem like a knock on him I think it just makes his case a bit more diverse. Yes maybe we should not put that much weight to the exact stats he posted since he had more opportunities to do so but at the same time maybe we should also pay more attention to the fact that he put himself into the position to be the go-to person almost every year. But then again things like that are not as easily quantifiable so people revert back to the usual stats.

All that being said I just don't think Edelman has done enough to overcome the lack of absolute elite production in the regular season. Mind you I don't really give a rats ass about the HoF mostly because it is a narrative driven hellscape. And if players like Eli or Terrell Davis have a spot there then it is hard to argue against Edelman. But it all comes down to politics and timing.

Probably has zero chance, presently. But, imagine a point in time where you have people evaluating what made the Patriots so successful during the run. Clearly Brady/BB are the central part of why it was all so successful, but as Giselle pointed out, "He can't throw and catch the ball himself".

Brady might go on the PR front for some of these guys as well. Stats might show the impact a guy like Edleman has, catches to first downs, clutch performances, ability to return punts on special teams (which #1 WRs don't do).

He probably still falls short, but you can make a case that he was dominant in his own way. It was just not a traditional way as he typically made the tough plays/yards and not the flashy plays/yards. But, was a large/consistent part of the overall success of the 2nd half of this dynasty with Brady/BB.

luuked said:

If you are taking Edelman 100 our of 100 over Welker I think you should put on some tape from 2010 and 2011 and remember how absurdly good Welker was. He is getting dinged for the 2-3 big drops (2011 SB and then the 2012 AFCCG drops against the Ravens) but has produced a lot.

On the flipside Edelman had his own fair share of drops but was lucky enough that his mistakes in big games mostly didn't matter because the team found a way to win despite it. Say you prefer one to the other all you want but going with 100 out of 100 is silly.

Click to expand...

Welker throughout his career has shown he had better hands than Edelman. Edelman hands are inconsistent at times, but Edelman is more clutch.

Edelman > Welker

I don’t know if I can say Edelman is a NFL HOF, but I could honestly make an argument for him being the Pats GOAT WR. He’s been money for us when we absolutely needed someone to be. And it’s been like that for a long time. He shredded the Chiefs on third down last week...I’m trying to think of a time where he wasn’t clutch in the playoffs for us.

TinhWoodhead said:

Adam V will be a colts?

Click to expand...

As noted elsewhere, I meant post-2010 by "of this era" as the Patriots have had maybe three or four completely different teams (with tbe exception of Brady and Belichick)

upstater1 said:

A couple things caught my eye in this thread.

1. People would prefer Welker to Edelman. Really? I'd take Edelman 100 times out of 100 in that battle.

2. Curt Warner was a helluva running back, but probably doesn't deserve to be in the HOF.

Click to expand...

Did you start watching the Patriots in 2013? Welker had 5 seasons that were statistically more impressive than Edelman's best season. Welker was basically uncoverable for the time he was with the Patriots. His torn ACL basically killed their playoff chances one year. Welker is an all-time great and will get due HOF consideration. His issue is less brilliance at his height and more the lost years in Miami and the drop in the Super Bowl, plus the inevitable logjam at wide receiver. Welker was better than the likes of Art Monk, Cris Carter, and Andre Rees though and will hopefully get in eventually just like they did.

Without Edelman last season, the Patriots went 13-3 and made the Super Bowl, coming within a fourth down stop of winning.

They're going to let in too many WRs already IMO while ignoring other positions.

5 Isaac Bruce 15,208
6 Tony Gonzalez 15,127
8 Steve Smith 14,731
10 Reggie Wayne 14,345
11 Andre Johnson 14,185
14 Anquan Boldin 13,779
15 Henry Ellard 13,777
16 Torry Holt 13,382
19 Irving Fryar 12,785

Of the top 20 receivers all time who aren't in the HOF already. Bruce and Gonzalez are getting in and Gonzalez is a TE in name only. There's no way Wayne and Holt aren't getting in.

So how do you not let Smith, Johnson, Boldin in? Fryar isn't getting in but Ellard putting up those numbers when it was a running league deserves some consideration from the Veterans committee.

Then there are TDs. Fitzgerald is getting in as is Gates who like Gonzalez is a TE in name only. They're diluting the position letting so many of these bulk stat guys in and meanwhile defenders like Rodney can't get a sniff even through he's one of only two guys with over 30 sacks and interceptions and is near the top of every postseason defensive statistic and SB statistic. Zach Thomas can't get a sniff. Knowing what their careers would be if you could draft Thomas or Wayne who would you draft? I'd take Thomas.

I really don't think Wayne, Boldin, Smith or Johnson belong in the HOF. The hall of extremely good yes.

6 Larry Fitzgerald 116
Antonio Gates 116
8 Tony Gonzalez 111
12 Isaac Bruce 91
15 Hines Ward 85 1998-2011 pit
18 Mark Clayton 84 1983-1993 2TM
Irving Fryar 84 1984-2000 4TM
Tommy McDonald+ 84 1957-1968 5TM
Andre Rison 84 1989-2000 7TM

You want to be in the Hall of Fame? There's a very simple formula that gives you a good idea...

There are about 5 players elected in a year, plus or minus. Over a decade, that's 50 players. Divide that by position: QB, RB, WR/TE, OL, DL, LB, DB, and you're left with just over 6. I realize that division of positions is a bit subjective (should DE and DT be in separate categories? OT and OG?), but go with it. That means you can roughly start out with around 6 people per position to provision for the Hall of Fame per decade. To make matters a bit more complicated, the Hall of Fame elects every year, so it's a rolling release. 'Decades' are all in our heads, so it's not about 90s or 00s or 10s -- it's any 10 year continuous period, making comparisons more difficult.

Now, the question is: has Edelman ever been a top 5 WR for a decade?

To me, that's an obvious no, as much as I love the guy.

AzorianPats said:

Welker throughout his career has shown he had better hands than Edelman. Edelman hands are inconsistent at times, but Edelman is more clutch.

Edelman > Welker

I don’t know if I can say Edelman is a NFL HOF, but I could honestly make an argument for him being the Pats GOAT WR. He’s been money for us when we absolutely needed someone to be. And it’s been like that for a long time. He shredded the Chiefs on third down last week...I’m trying to think of a time where he wasn’t clutch in the playoffs for us.

Click to expand...

Look I love Edelman but a lot of this is just the randomness of the game. When you say clutch I have to remind you that Edelman Harper'd a punt about halfway into the fourth quarter, got bailed out and then a play later tipped a pass for an INT. But because Ford lines up offside all of this is pushed to the side.

Welker's reputation for not being clutch is mostly centered around that infamous SB play. Will we keep talking about that one as much if Manningham doesn't catch the ball and our defense gets the ball back instead of giving up the lead ? Or if Brady doesn't turn the ball over the Giants on another deep pass ? Safety ? Saying Welker is not clutch is the same narrative ******** as saying Ghost is not clutch because of the XP he missed in Denver. There are dozens other reasons why we lost both games but people hang with those for whatever narrative reason.

I think you can make an argument for either of the two player if you had to select one. Recency bias aside people should really check out some of the games Welker played from 2010-2012.

Anyway my point was that someone saying they'd take Edelman 100 out of 100 times over Welker is just silly. Welker was way too good to be thrown to the side like that.

Welker's Patriots career took a big hit by never winning the Super Bowl. His 6 year stretch was HOF worthy and his numbers were spectacular. Just not quite long enough to get him in. He generally played well in the post season and would have received Super Bowl MVP consideration if they had hung on to win in 2007. Due to a couple of memorable drops in big losses, signing with the rival Broncos and Edelman coming up huge in subsequent big moments his place in Patriots lore seems to have been tarnished a bit.

Maybe they can make a little quarter sized bust of JE and put it in the case next to Tom Brady's bust.

I don’t think so though from certain angles I see why the conversation is worth having

luuked said:

Look I love Edelman but a lot of this is just the randomness of the game. When you say clutch I have to remind you that Edelman Harper'd a punt about halfway into the fourth quarter, got bailed out and then a play later tipped a pass for an INT. But because Ford lines up offside all of this is pushed to the side.

Welker's reputation for not being clutch is mostly centered around that infamous SB play. Will we keep talking about that one as much if Manningham doesn't catch the ball and our defense gets the ball back instead of giving up the lead ? Or if Brady doesn't throw the ball to the Giants on that deep pass ?

I think you can make an argument for either of the two player if you had to select one. Recency bias aside people should really check out some of the games Welker played from 2010-2012.

Anyway my point was that someone saying they'd take Edelman 100 out of 100 times over Welker is just silly. Welker was way too good to be thrown to the side like that.

Click to expand...

I love WW too and I think his volume of work is more impressive but if I need to win a SB and the choice us Tom/WW v Tom/Jules.....I'll take Tom and Jules.

Maybe in the regular season I'd take WW. I dunnna know.

Won’t happen, he’ll be in the Pats Hall of Fame for sure. Zero pro bowl selections and all pros.

But, I guess if Hines Ward is under consideration..

robertweathers said:

I love WW too and I think his volume of work is more impressive but if I need to win a SB and the choice us Tom/WW v Tom/Jules.....I'll take Tom and Jules.

Maybe in the regular season I'd take WW. I dunnna know.

Click to expand...

My gut says I would also take Tom and Jules, but it's also worth bringing up that the Welker era was probably the least clutch stretch of Brady's career (he led plenty of regular season game winning drives but even in 2011 when we won a close playoff game it was luck), and that might be on Brady more than anyone else.

So I might rephrase the question as this: would you rather the 2007-2012 version of Brady + Welker, or the 2014-present version of Brady + Edelman? The choice to take the latter becomes more obvious imo.

Elijah said:

My gut says I would also take Tom and Jules, but it's also worth bringing up that the Welker era was probably the least clutch stretch of Brady's career (he led plenty of regular season game winning drives but even in 2011 when we won a close playoff game it was luck), and that might be on Brady more than anyone else.

So I might rephrase the question as this: would you rather the 2007-2012 version of Brady + Welker, or the 2014-present version of Brady + Edelman? The choice to take the latter becomes more obvious imo.

Click to expand...

Jules.