I think it was more Josh McDaniels who was out to prove that, but he quickly found out that his assumption was wrong, at least last season. If BB was in on it, I would think it was more of a, "let's see if we can win without Welker" scenario, with Josh responding, "Of course we can! I'll show you in the home opener." Look how that worked out.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Pats made a big mistake by not resigning Welker last season, even if they had to overpay him somewhat (and I've never seen it said that Welker is/was looking for outrageous numbers), and they will be making a big mistake if they don't resign him now. He makes the offense go and he's the most reliable guy out there next to Brady. They were dumb because they paid him top dollar under the franchise tag last year, he went out and had another great year and proved how valuable he is, and now they are right back where they started from. If they had given him a 3 year deal last year they would have gotten their money's worth (and more) in year one, and wouldn't be on eggshells now. You can't buy the kind of chemistry he has with Brady, I don't care what anyone says.
When I saw Brady restructured I hoped (and am still hoping) that part of that was they had reached a deal with Welker as well. A little part of me believes that Brady, after going through the Branch and Givens debacle five years ago, went to the Pats and said I am willing to re-up, but only if Welker stays. I can't go through that !@#@ again.
But of course, I have no idea what really goes on, so most of this is my own wishful thinking. Today I will think a little less of the Pats, not to mention their chances next year, if they let Welker walk. I am sure a few wins to start the season, if that happens will cure me, but this is why I hate the business side of the NFL and the off-season. During the season it is an escape from the drudgery and uncertainty of life. During the off-season, it's part of it.