Is Welker a replacement for Brown?? And who is going to stretch the field..

[MDPATSFAN]

Terms like "stretch the field" and "shut down corner" are largely used by fans and fantasy players they are probably not used by the NFL gurus. If Jackson is healthy and Watson gets over his dropsies, these two guys can fill that role. Highlight reels are not what wins games, it is about moving the chains, possessing the ball and stopping the other team from scoring.

You forgot "Eight in the box".

 

[fair catch fryar]

he may be browns replacement but I still hope Brown comes back for one more I think there is room for him Caldwell Welker Gafney Brown hopeful of a day one WR and Chad jack despite the promising news could start on pup.

Imagine for a second if the Patriots had 4 Troy Brown clones lining up at the line of scrimmage. Is there really a need for one all-out speed demon when Brady is a master at finding the open reciever? If something is available in the draft BB will know what to do. Other than that, Welker is a good pickup. Ultimately, I think Troy Brown is irreplaceable. I'd love to see him come back for one more year...but he's given us everything he has at this point!

 

[cstjohn17]

Ask somebody who knows if running a 40 timed 2 hundredths of a second faster on turf as opposed to grass really makes you faster?

In the sake of full disclosure I think Branch ran one of the fatest shuttle times ever something crazy like 3.76 or over a quarter second faster than the best time this year.

I don't think he was a terrific deep threat but he was a mismatch in 1:1 situations. A true #1 WR is rarely left in 1:1 coverage and can get open against double coverage.

Putting the stop watch down and using the eyeball test, Branch was a very polished, reliable and effective receiver in our system. Teams had to gameplan against him, Gaffney and Caldwell are not in the same league.

If Welker is 70% of Branch as a WR and continues his contribution in the return game he will be a very effective addition to the team.

 

[Fumblerooski]

I don't think in this modern era of the NFL, you need a speed burner ala Bob Hayes to loosen up a D. Most of the long balls result from mistakes by the D leaving someone going deep open. The days of lining up and outrunning a DB to the ball are over. The DBs are faster than the WRs for the most part.

The Pats offense last year was more of a dink and dunk, move the chains type of offense with an occassional missed assignment on D resulting in a big gain.

And, we forget that Gaffney, Caldwell, Jackson and Watson run 4.4s. The Pats have enough WR speed, IMHO.

 

[Ghost of Ben Dreith]

Having a deep threat to keep safeties honest is important for any team.

Yes...Jackson was supposed to help provide that threat last year, maybe this year he will.

Branch is not faster than Caldwell/Gaffney but what Branch did have was good speed out of his breaks (see comment on shuttle time from previous poster) and, more important to Brady I think, he ran very precise routes.

Caldwell/Gaffney were working out better and better as the season went on and with the time already spent working with Brady, I think they will have very nice years this season. I base this on their route running and just time in the system. Heck, Brady was complimenting Caldwell all year long and Gaffney was turning into one of his go to guys in the playoffs. They will be better this year. I would still like a true, big time #1 though.

 

[holyredeemer]

I am so sick and tired of Deion Branch ball washing, and people talking about how we need to find a true number 1 to replace him. Branch was never a FIELD stretcher nor was he ever a true #1. Alot of people need to go back and look at his stats before making such absurd comments. Sure Branch was good in the clutch, but that wasnt all because of Branch.
In Branch's best yr. with us, which was 2005 he did the following in his fourth yr. in our system.

78 catches 998 yds. 5 Td's, 13 20+ yarders and 1 40+ yarder.

Reche Caldwell did the following in just one season with us.

61 catches 760 yds. 4 td's, 11 20+ yarders and 3 40+ yarders.
*keep in mind that caldwell missed one game to branch due to injury.

Caldwell is good, and he is only going to get better for us. I personally was very happy with the results we got from him and people bashed him all yr. Wait till he actually gets more time into our system. That was a great move by the pats FO.

Bring in Welker, and the results will probably be similar to caldwells. We just need to have a guy that can catch a 4 yarder and make it 20. Watch welker on tape, he does just that.

 

[RayClay]

Branch makes Caldwell look like an old lady in a walker compared to speed.

I will need you to submit your independent times, sir.

Again Caldwell 4.39 on grass. Branch 4.47 on turf.

You know the Irish have a saying, "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story!"

Of course Gil Brandt rated Gaffney and Caldwell 4 and 6 and Branch 15th because they always rate the slower players higher.

I have presented facts. No wonder they call it Phantasy Phootball!!!:bricks:

 

[BradyManny]

I guess the last few second round picks.. Marquies Hill, Chad Jackson, Bethal Johnson, Adrian Klemm... He is worth it , espically in the late second round..

You're labeling CJ a bust after one year...I know my opinion isn't going to sway people, so someone get BOR in here ASAP to give his logical, coherent and compelling defense of CJ.

He [Welker] is a great all around player, but he is not a number 1 reciever, and it still does not solve the problem of stretching the defense...

Everyone throws around the term #1 receiver, but what do you mean in the context? Do you mean is he a #1, as in an elite receiver who can dominate the game (has Brady ever had one?? Nope), or do you mean is he #1 on the Patriots depth chart? I'm going to have to assume that for now, Caldwell stays #1 on that depth chart, Welker comes in and plays the slot, really, really well.

Again we do need 1 more Vet WR and a draft pick...

Completely disagree, we're all set at wideout (assuming Troy comes back). First, if the top of our wideout depth chart is Caldwell-Welker-Gaffney, then that is a very good group of receivers, all whom are very suited for what the Pats do. Second, Jackson is that guy that can stretch the field, and he will do just that once he gets the practice time with Brady and the reps. If CJ is healthy, I think we'll see some 4-wide, spreading them out like Brady likes. It'd be lethal.

 

[RayClay]

I don't think in this modern era of the NFL, you need a speed burner ala Bob Hayes to loosen up a D. Most of the long balls result from mistakes by the D leaving someone going deep open. The days of lining up and outrunning a DB to the ball are over. The DBs are faster than the WRs for the most part.

The Pats offense last year was more of a dink and dunk, move the chains type of offense with an occassional missed assignment on D resulting in a big gain.

And, we forget that Gaffney, Caldwell, Jackson and Watson run 4.4s. The Pats have enough WR speed, IMHO.

Forgetting I understand.

Seeing it in print and still denying it is a LOL!!!

 

[bradmahn]

I am so sick and tired of Deion Branch ball washing, and people talking about how we need to find a true number 1 to replace him. Branch was never a FIELD stretcher nor was he ever a true #1. Alot of people need to go back and look at his stats before making such absurd comments. Sure Branch was good in the clutch, but that wasnt all because of Branch.
In Branch's best yr. with us, which was 2005 he did the following in his fourth yr. in our system.

78 catches 998 yds. 5 Td's, 13 20+ yarders and 1 40+ yarder.

Reche Caldwell did the following in just one season with us.

61 catches 760 yds. 4 td's, 11 20+ yarders and 3 40+ yarders.
*keep in mind that caldwell missed one game to branch due to injury.

Caldwell is good, and he is only going to get better for us. I personally was very happy with the results we got from him and people bashed him all yr. Wait till he actually gets more time into our system. That was a great move by the pats FO.

Bring in Welker, and the results will probably be similar to caldwells. We just need to have a guy that can catch a 4 yarder and make it 20. Watch welker on tape, he does just that.

Spot on analysis, holy. Some media types and fans have jumped to this notion that Branch was a deep threat, but there are still a few mediots who tell it like it is (and as big a prick as he is, I think Andy Gresh has noted that Branch wasn't a burner).

At first, when I heard about the Welker contract, I thought it might be too much to give up for him, but after thinking about it and chewing it over I think it makes perfect sense. The offer sheet is misleading, and until I know exactly how much the Pats would be paying him I will reserve complete judgment, but I think Welker represents value. He isn't coming to the Pats (if he makes it here) to replace Troy Brown, although he can play in the slot, he is coming here to replace Deion (they have a very similar skill set, although Welker can kick fieldgoals), and that warrants the loss of the 2nd round pick.

 

[#56300ex]

In my opinion, I think a lot of people are underestimating Welker. I think he would be a great addition to our receiving corps and would really shine with a quality quarterback. I don't have any numbers or statistics to back me up,all I know is the few times I saw him play I kept thinking, "Where the hell did this guy come from, and why don't we have him?" I think you would be really hard pressed to find a "replacement" for Brown.

 

[spacecrime]

I understand that ,but we did not do a good job of strethcing the field this past yr..

So what. Donald Hayes was a burner who stretched the field. Bethel Johnosn was a burner who stretched the field.

If we want to stretch the field, we would have been better off with Bledsoe or Kerry Collins or someone whose forte is the long ball.

Far better than relying on a few bombs to win a game, are sustained drives with short passes.

Look what happened to the Colts when Manning past short instead on long this past offseason.

The Pats have been using quickness and crisp route running for a long time now. Doesn't mean they won't change and sign another burner like Moss or someone, they seem to do it every couple of years. But it isn;'t necessary either.

 

[RayClay]

In the sake of full disclosure I think Branch ran one of the fatest shuttle times ever something crazy like 3.76 or over a quarter second faster than the best time this year.

I don't think he was a terrific deep threat but he was a mismatch in 1:1 situations. A true #1 WR is rarely left in 1:1 coverage and can get open against double coverage.

Putting the stop watch down and using the eyeball test, Branch was a very polished, reliable and effective receiver in our system. Teams had to gameplan against him, Gaffney and Caldwell are not in the same league.

If Welker is 70% of Branch as a WR and continues his contribution in the return game he will be a very effective addition to the team.

Branch is very quick. So is Welker by the way. When you say "stretch the field" your not talking a quick route runner, you're talking a speed burner.

I said Branch is not faster than Caldwell and Gaffney.

I proved it with their 40 times all out of Gil Brandts NFL.com column.

Of course facts can't compare with "everybody knows Branch is faster".

BTW, Caldwell had 61 catches his first year in our system and Gaffney had 21 catches in 3 playoff games when he only had his first start a few games earlier.

Of course it's fair to compare Branch after four years with Gaffney after 5 starts.

 

[frankiesfly]

Sup guys, haven't posted in a while..Been a little busy and afterall it is the offseason so I try to tone down my fanaticism for a few months..Anyways, David Patten in '04 definitely stretched the field for us and that was our best offensive season so I think it is important if you have that threat of going over the top but I also think with Watson entiring year 3, Gaffney basically year 1 full, Reche year 2 and Maroney year 2 that with everyone being more experienced in the offense you'll see a nice improvement over '06 when the offense was solid to begin with...

did you not post for a while because your screen name has the words Doug Gabriel in it. LOL im joking with ya.

 

[Seneschal2]

Why do we need someone to stretch the field? I don't understand why that has become such a hot notion this off-season, but we dont need someone to stretch the field, just someone who is a threat to catch the ball and get open consistently. Welker will do that. Have we ever had a guy that stretches the field during our run? And no, Branch doesnt count.

Good point...."speed-burner" and "stretch- the-field",have become fantasy football cliches.

I think you guys may be missing the author's point -- or I am.

We don't NEED a stretch-the-field receiver to win games -- but it helps. And that's the ONLY point I'd like to make. The Pats as we know will not field a one-dimensionable team on either side of the ball. Belichick has proven that in order to win in this league, fielding a balanced team is the way to go.

As a former brilliant DC, I think he knew how to gameplan vs an offense. If the opponent had a passing offense which had the ability to stretch the field by successfully running deeper routes, I'm sure he had to gameplan for this. The more weapons in the arsenal -- the more difficult to defend. Now as a HC, doesn't anyone yet realize that BB's knowledge of defense has been factored into designing his own offense? An offense that would give fits to any defense? An offense that has so many capabilities and options (including deep routes), that the opponent won't know how to gameplan against?

So yes, having one receiver (or more), who are capable of successfully running deeper vertical patterns is just one important element of a well-balanced offense. We can certainly win without one with such ability, but why not have the potential to do so, from a defensive gameplanning perspective?

You stretch the field by catching the ball and by yards after catch.....like Wes Welker,by the way.

You mean by chance? You want to stretch the field by connecting on a short pattern and hope the WR outruns the defense -- thereby stretching the field? How about the simple version: One accurately thrown ball on a deep sideline route to someone with 4.3 speed like Bethel or Jackson. There is a reason they were drafted, defenses don't like deep speed threats, because POTENTIALLY they represent quick scores and quick field position. They'd much rather make an offense work for their points -- not make it easy.

We did manage to win 3 Superbowls while keeping the field the same size.

We must have stretched something to go up 18 points on the colts in the AFC Championship.

Oh please Ray, how many of our starters were missing from each SB victory? We obviously didn't need their talents either. But just maybe, their presence would have made the victories slightly easier. Although I must admit to liking those 3-pt wins.

Terms like "stretch the field" and "shut down corner" are largely used by fans and fantasy players they are probably not used by the NFL gurus. If Jackson is healthy and Watson gets over his dropsies, these two guys can fill that role. Highlight reels are not what wins games, it is about moving the chains, possessing the ball and stopping the other team from scoring.

I don't know what to say. NFL head coaches, OCs, DCs, and QBs, don't mention stretching the field? BB has mentioned STF many times, coordinators obviously gameplan for this, and some QBs wish they had the ability:

"We're not a team that, plain and simple, has somebody who can burn down the field, who can stretch the field," he said. "We just don't have those types of players, so we need to find within ourselves other ways to get them involved and create and make plays. It's difficult when you can't stretch the field because defenses start to really clamp down, they clamp down on our hook routes, crossing routes and it really makes for some tight (passing) windows."

---

The above quote really confirms my ONLY point. Stretching the field allows an offense to function better as a whole. It allows an OC to be more creative, and perhaps pick his spots to call for a deep route, to get the D to play back and be aware. We won't even talk about how this could benefit Maroney.

Finally, we have the personnel who can run deep routes -- but that's not their real strengths. Until CJ becomes healthy, we really don't have that speed threat. Can we win without it -- ABSOLUTELY. Would BB like to have it -- ABSOLUTELY.

I have no doubts we'll have a successful offense even without that deep threat, just like having Welker as a punt return threat -- we can win w/o them. But it's a valuable weapon to have (when we do). Ultimately, our receivers will have to execute each play that's called. That entails running correct routes, gaining separation, and catching the ball. We can win w/o a true #1 WR -- this has been proven. The spread-the-ball-around philosophy will continue, and this season Brady will have even more receiving options. I'm not concerned...

 

[AzPatsFan]

Why do we need someone to stretch the field? I don't understand why that has become such a hot notion this off-season, but we dont need someone to stretch the field, just someone who is a threat to catch the ball and get open consistently. Welker will do that. Have we ever had a guy that stretches the field during our run? And no, Branch doesnt count.

Yes Patten was our stretch the field receiver.

That just goes to show that you don't need a sooper-dooper star to be a field stretcher.

If Moss wanted to revise a contract more in line with his present value, I wouldn't mind spending a pair of second day picks for him. Otherwise, not on your life.

Travis Taylor might be a nice vet pickup by the way...

 

[CT_Pats_Fan]

If the only measure of a great deep threat was his time in the 40, Bethel would still be on the team. Unfortunately, he couldn't run a route that was other than straight.

Branch's gift was playing faster than his 40 time. The man is a great receiver because he is capable of running precise routes, accelerating out of cuts which gets him open (and isn't measurable in a 40 yard dash. Oh, and he ws pretty good at catching the ball, which is something that Mr. Caldwell could have done a little better in the AFCC game.

Don't get me wrong - I think letting Branch go was the right thing to do. We are sitting on another #1 pick, have the cap money to do some things that we wouldn't have been able to do. Getting caught up in who is going to stretch the field, who's the #1 guy, etc. is garbage. Whoever gets open, gets the ball. And from what I could tell, whenver we played Miami, Welker got open and made things happen when he got the ball.

I like it.

 

[holyredeemer]

Yes Patten was our stretch the field receiver.

That just goes to show that you don't need a sooper-dooper star to be a field stretcher.

If Moss wanted to revise a contract more in line with his present value, I wouldn't mind spending a pair of second day picks for him. Otherwise, not on your life.

Travis Taylor might be a nice vet pickup by the way...

I must be in the minority for thinking this, but Gaffney can stretch the field, Caldwell can stretch the field and Welker will be able to stretch the field.
I just feel that the saying STF is over played. So many things factor into STF, and most people like to blame it on the receivers capabilities.
One is offensive playcalling, alot of people just think the guy just runs down the field and has to get past his guy and catch the ball. How many times has brady had guys open and not hit them with the ball? And, if you look at 2004, the only time Patten was more of a deep threat statistically then the guys we had last yr. It was also the yr. that Dillon had over 1,600 yds rushing. The playaction pass was huge for us, and those stats are not coincidence.
However, nobody was keeping their DB's back to prevent from David Pattens all-pro burner skill. Dillon kept teams trying to stop the run, and that opened things downfield. We have never had a TRUE STF receiver.
If anyone thinks we have then present the stats to win me over.

The guys we have can get open, and they will even more if we can get the running game going. Everyone needs to remember that last yr. was a serious transition period for our offense. Year number 2 for the newcomers and another yr. under Mcdaniels belt, we are guaranteed results.

Opposing defenses....BRING IT ON!!:rocker:

 

[holyredeemer]

Don't get me wrong - I think letting Branch go was the right thing to do. We are sitting on another #1 pick, have the cap money to do some things that we wouldn't have been able to do. Getting caught up in who is going to stretch the field, who's the #1 guy, etc. is garbage. Whoever gets open, gets the ball. And from what I could tell, whenver we played Miami, Welker got open and made things happen when he got the ball.

I like it.

Couldn't agree with you any more. Great post.

 

[DaBruinz]

I will be very shocked if Miami matches the offer.. So Im assuming Welker is a Pat.. With that said, would you think he is more of a replacement for Brown, who might be done now.. Or is he signed to be a .. gulp ... number 1 reciever... He is a great all around player, but he is not a number 1 reciever, and it still does not solve the problem of stretching the defense... Still I guess the last few second round picks.. Marquies Hill, Chad Jackson, Bethal Johnson, Adrian Klemm... He is worth it , espically in the late second round..

Again we do need 1 more Vet WR and a draft pick...

Why do people insist on being ignorant and putting Jackson in the same category as Marquise Hill and Bethel Johnson? The guy hasn't even played a full season yet and you are comparing him to Johnson? Un'friggin' believable. Talk about totally unrealistic expectations.

Adriam Klemm? Are you frigging serious? You are going to hold Adrian Klemm against Belichick? Are you such a bandwagon fan that you don't know that when BB took the job, he had little, if any time to properly go through the draft information and had to use Booby Grier's garbage information to do that draft.