Is Wes Welker not starting being overblown?

[ctpatsfan77]

Trivia question:

How many times, since 2007, has Welker played a regular-season game but not started?

I'll give you a hint: the answer isn't "1."

It's 12.

And the highest number of those was in 2010, with 4.

 

[BradyManny]

If we define it as "starting", then yes. But if we define it as not being with the 1's in their 12 personnel, then no.

And to me, it's not necessarily just Welker vs. Edelman, and I'll widen this so as not to overlap too much with the other thread. Edelman makes a good slot receiver. But, at least for the past two years, he's crappy and unproductive outside wide receiver, and shouldn't be playing there. When we go to that 12 personnel and have two wideouts, I don't know if you define Edelman as a slot or outside, I'm not sure all the routes he's running. But I suspect that Deion Branch, Wes Welker & Jabar Gaffney could all do a better job at running those routes and getting open.

If the coaching staff didn't think we had room for a couple of those guys a few weeks ago, I think the coaching staff should reconsider. The need to carry a FB needs to be rethought. Julian Edelman played 73 snaps yesterday, and plenty of them are on the outside, and I don't think he'll be effective there.

 

[JJDChE]

Overblown?

That's an understatement.

 

[JMarr]

Until we know anything more, then yes. Could be a lot of things like an injury, or, as Welker said, him simply being a bit behind.

Could be that Edelman simply outworked him in practice and BB does what he always does in such situations. Knowing how Welker is, I doubt that's the case, but if it is I don't have a problem with it.

 

[brdmaverick]

When Edelman is on the field and Welker is not, that IS a story!!!!

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

I am so sick of hearing about this..so to me..it is

 

[BradyFTW!]

Is there a word for "mega-overblown"? Because if so, this is it. I had to chuckle a bit when I was reading the ESPN article on it, because after about 10 paragraphs of speculation, this paragraph found its way into the article:

Brady said the fact Welker didn't start Sunday was just a product of him not being a part of the formation with which the Patriots opened the game. He also suggested the Patriots were trying to lighten the load on Welker, who played just over 89 percent of his team's snaps last season (he is at 71.1 percent this season).

Well... there's your answer, ESPN. Maybe you should lead with it.

 

[DarrylS]

This is amusing, we whine and bytch off season about about trivial, nonsensical threads, anticipating the regular season and "real" football threads. But in the past two weeks we are inundated with more trivial and nonsensical threads about Welker, that continue the whining and bytching..

This could be anything, but I like his explanation that he gave this morning.. that prior to the new CBA there would be 24-25 practices before the first exhibition game, with the new CBA there are 24-25 practices before the first regular season game.. he said he missed a week because of his time off for bereavement.. so in many ways the whole offense is behind, and he is even further behind because of the time he missed..

Brady said it was due to different personnel groupings.....

Either way it is much ado about nothing..

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

Are the local sports media die-hard Patriot fans?

You'd think they could be charged with cuasing a riot on a class-action level scale (with a few notable exceptions) if "knowledgeable" people took them seriously

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Starting or non-starting is not an issue. Edelman getting more offensive snaps than Welker in a close contested game we ended up losing, that's an area of concern. Your best guys should be getting the most snaps at each position. If it's a workload issue, not sure I buy that either because Wilfork was discussed as taking too many snaps last year, but he's still getting the vast majority of work at DT.