PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Wes Welker says he has nine and a half million reasons to play


Status
Not open for further replies.
So now Welker's a Running Back?? :bricks:

Try not to think, Dero.

You'll only hurt yourself.

Maybe you should try to think once in a while, before you write garbage like Welker is only a passing threat. But then again, I noticed that you're not really good at thinking.

Welker did ran the ball in the SB, and he was very successful doing it. Right before that Welker-Brady missconnection, instead of forcing BJGE up the middle for 2-3 yards, they should have hit the Giants with another Welker reverse, and then another, for good measure.
 
Last edited:
You can dish it, but you can't take it. What a surprise.
 
Maybe you should try to think once in a while, before you write garbage like Welker is only a passing threat.

Welker did ran the ball in the SB, and he was very successful doing it. Right before that Welker-Brady missconnection, instead of forcing BJGE up the middle for 2-3 yards, they should have hit the Giants with another Welker reverse, and then another, for good measure. Why stop what works so well?

You should really stop before you hurt yourself, my friend.

These concepts are pretty simple.

But if you want to go on imagining that Welker is a viable Running Back, you go right ahead. ;)
 
You and Grid are prime examples what happens when fans get caught up in amateur over analysis.

Try to act like an adult for once in your life.

And keep my name out of your posts.
 
You see them "letting" him sign his tender? This is less blasphemy than delusion - as is the trade scenario... You and Grid are prime examples what happens when fans get caught up in amateur over analysis.

I'm really not quite sure why you're being so trollish, Mo, or why you seem compelled to turn this into a personal attack. That doesn't seem necessary, and it doesn't contribute anything constructive. But to clarify:

1. As I said in the post above, I think Welker's a great player and a perfect Patriot's-type player. He's not selfish, he has none of the issues that were clearly factors with Moss and with Seymour. I have no doubt that he would accept whatever role he thought was best for the team. Based on past productivity he certainly deserves to get paid. Based on what lesser players have gotten in FA he certainly deserves to get paid. But based on his age, system fit and the fact that the Pats don't get carried away by market fervor, it's doubtful that he'll get paid the way he wants.

2. As I said above, I don't really believe that the team will be better off - at least in the short run - without Welker. But I do think that his role has to change if the offense is to become more diversified. I agree absolutely that that requires other players stepping up, and if they don't, the Pats would be worse off. That happens all the time in football - teams let a known quantity go with the expectation that someone else is going to step up. Sometimes it works out great, sometimes it doesn't. The Pats seem to have brought in some known quantities - Jabar Gaffney, Donte Stallworth, and to a lesser degree Brandon Lloyd - in part to increase the odds that these players will be able to step up. You call these moves a "short term stopgap"; I think it's more a case of the Pats being cautious about bringing in external players who don't adapt to their system and preferring more known quantities.

3. You say that the Pats "letting Welker sign his tender" is delusional. I'm not sure what delusion you're referring to. The Pats have placed the franchise tender on Welker and from all reports there has been no progress towards a long term contract, so it seems that the team is content to "let" Welker sign his franchise tender. Not all teams are. Some teams use the tender merely as a stop-gap to buy some time to work out a long term deal - the Pats did that 2 years ago with Vince Wilfork. Some teams can't afford the cap hit of letting a player actually play out a season under the tender. The Pats appear prepared to absorb that hit, and seem to find that option preferable to giving Welker a long term deal, based on the lack of progress reported. We don't know what Welker is looking for, but the FA contracts of Pierre Garcon, Marques Colston and Vincent Jackson should give some idea of what the WR market has been recently.

4. As for trading Welker, I don't really expect the Pats to do it, as should have been clear. But if you believe that Wes Welker is "untouchable" then I think you are the one who is delusional. No player is above the team, and the Pats would listen to offers for just about anyone. BB has spoken about the Seymour trade in the past, and he suggested that it was more a question of Oakland calling and making an offer the team thought was too good to refuse than a case of actually looking to shop Seymour. I don't think the Pats are looking to trade Welker, but I do think they're prepared for different contingencies, including the possibility that a long term deal isn't in the works, and the possibility that Welker holds out. If they felt that a long term deal wasn't going to happen and they weren't willing to pay Welker 120% of his $9.5M tender for 2013, then they would be silly not to listen if some team made a significant offer. I think it's unlikely that such an event would happen, but I also never would have predicted the Seymour trade.

Anyway, there's more "amateur over analysis" for you to deride and subject to your professional scrutiny.
 
You and Grid are prime examples what happens when fans get caught up in amateur over analysis.

:confused:

This entire board is dedicated to the concept of fans getting caught up in amateur over analysis. We're fans. We're amateurs. And we discuss and analyze. What's the big deal?
 
At the risk of being tarred and feathered, I'm going to go even further and enter into the realm of blasphemy ... Would the Pats' offense be better off WITHOUT Wes Welker at this point?

Now I fully grant that Welker is the greatest slot receiver of all time, and is in many respects a "perfect" Patriot. But against that consider the following:

- As Grid acknowledges, Welker's strength is to a large extent redundant with the strength of Gronk and Hernandez in the middle of the field.

- To get over the hump requires expanding our defense horizontally and vertically, which means taking some of the focus AWAY from the center of the field.

- There is no way to accomplish this without reducing Welker's role. He was targeted 172 times out of 611 pass attempts in 2011, or over 28% of the time. That's got to change.

- It makes no sense to pay $9.5M to a 31 year old slot receiver whose role is going to be reduced, no matter how great he is or how much he has contributed over the past 5 years. And paying him for a long term deal may get in the way of signing Gronk and/or Hernandez long term.

Or, to put it differently, my goals for the Pats' offense are:

1. The offense needs to become more diversified.

2. The offense needs more run/pass balance, and needs to integrate the RBs more into the passing attack.

3. The offense needs to spread out the passing game more both horizontally and vertically in order to make it harder for defenses to take away the middle of the field.

4. The offense needs to continue to be built around the TEs. They are the "compound multipliers" which make the offense so difficult for opposing defenses to scheme against.

I see no way to achieve these 4 goals that does not involve reducing the degree to which the slot receiver is an integral part of the offense. If Welker is going to be targeted 28% of the time and account for almost 30% of the receiving yards and over 23% of the receiving TDs, then it will be impossible to achieve all 4 of those goals. Something has to give. And for me, it's the role of the slot receiver. And if that decreases, then there is no reason to spend $10M/year on a 31 year old slot receiver.

We saw with the Randy Moss trade that the offense actually got BETTER by dumping one of the greatest receivers of all time, because it allowed BB to channel the offense through the TEs. Now we're at the point where Welker plus Gronk/Hernandez is causing the offense to become too focused in the middle of the field.

Continuing my blasphemous argument, reducing the role of the slot receiver is necessary IMHO in order to diversify and improve the overall offense. So we are looking at a scenario in which we drastically reduce Welker's workload but drastically increase his compensation. Not a good business move, regardless of his past contributions to the team.

Do I really want to get rid of Welker? Of course not. But (1) Brady focuses on him way too much and needs to spread the ball around more, and (2) his age and cost are reaching the point where they outweigh his value. That's usually the time when the Pats dump a player - the way they did Richard Seymour.

I'd be fine with Welker in a reduced role for an acceptable cost. But I'm not sure how to make that happen. And the Pats have made Welker expendable by getting enough weapons to have an effective "WR by committee" approach. Lloyd, Gaffney, Stallworth, Ochocinco, Branch, Gonzalez and Edelman are more than capable of giving Brady enough targets and options. Heck, we won't be able to keep them all as it is.

Emotionally, I don't want to see Welker leave. But the Pats never let emotions drive their decision making. I can see them letting Welker sign his tender. If he's willing to accept a 2-3 year deal with a reasonable cap number, fine. Otherwise, IF someone wants to give us a 1st round or high 2nd round pick for him, I could see a scenario where they seriously consider trading him and moving on.

Blasphemy.

No.

Just no.
 
No.

Just no.

I would certainly agree with Deus' thoughts here.

I certainly respect the fact that we have incredibly thoughtful posters such as MayoClinic and OTG who are able to think outside the box and look at every possible angle, and the thought of letting Welker go has been brought up in many situations before, so it's nothing that should be considered too controversial at this point. Whenever two guys with such great defensive minds (specifically, not necessarily being limited to strictly defense) suggest something, people will surely take notice. However, I do not see the benefit of using that money in a way that will necessarily make our offense any better; actually quite the contrary.

I think that Welker is going to continue to be the 'go-to' guy for Brady and this offense. He has not shown any signs of slowing down to this point, and until he does in a significant enough way, I am going to continue to assume that he has the athletic ability to run 5-10 yard patterns off the line, make a move or two, and make (most of) the important catches with the same ability for another 2-3 yrs with no problem. In other words, I think Welker's potential 'downfall' due to his age is extremely overhyped. It's not like we're asking him to run 25 yd routes on every play and run wind sprints in between plays on the sidelines. There's absolutely no reason why he cannot continue to do what's asked of him at a pretty high level. The problem is that Belichick and the front office have a price and length of yr thought on that level, and the 2 sides have yet to reach an agreement.

It could even be argued that Welker may benefit MORE with the additions of some stretch the field/downfield targets, + the emergence of the TE's. The underneath stuff may be even more of a successful option for the slot machine.

I understand the thinking that goes with "changing up the predictibility," and respect the fact that we did it with Moss successfully; however, that was a totally different situation entirely. We all saw the bulk of Brady's INT's being forced to Moss, and we all saw him practically getting killed at times waiting for those medium to deeper routes to develop.

THIS current offense has allowed Brady to flourish in every way, not to mention the most important aspect...which is to potentially prolong his career. The ability to have multiple instant options, multiple mis-matches, shorter step drops, and other factors (potentially a quicker release overall) has enabled Brady's career to be extended by a couple/few yrs in my opinion....but none of that offers as much as Wes Welker does right now.

I found it extremely interesting in the "Izzo dropped a douce" interview on ESPN Deportes that Welker said that BOTH he and Brady think they are right when they mis-connect. When you think about that, it puts everything about the read/react route tree into perspective, and shows the importance of having a guy who will be on the exact same page with the QB the majority of the time.

Our offense is all about timing routes and reading + reacting to what the defense initally shows and how they respond. There has not been a better player than Wes Welker who is able to do this with Brady in the BB/TFB era, and that includes the great rapport that Brady and Branch had in the SB winning yrs.

If Belichick allows Welker to walk after this year, it will be one of his worst mistakes (as much as I tend to stay away from critiquing the incredibly successful HC). Welker's ability is measured with a lot of brains and timing, and less about pure athletic skills. In my opinion, there's not much reason to believe that we could get the better end of a 3 yr deal at this point. If Welker were playing the outside WR position that Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson play, then I could understand the thinking that losing a step or two would really hurt him, but I believe that he will still have enough athletic ability to make the one or two juke moves that have allowed him to become one of the better WR's in the entire game to this point.

I for one, would not want to see any changes in the current system. I can respect the thought, but I don't think you should try and fix what isn't broken.
 
Last edited:
"... but a **** ain't one. Oh wait..."
3b7dea_ltpseen20111220.jpg
 
Wanna really piss off Brady? Find a way to get rid of Welker. IF there ever was a guy on the Patriots worth 8 mil. a year for 3-4 years, with 20 guaranteed, it's number 83. I've been confident that Wes, because of his love for the game, and his dog like loyalty to the team, would not engage in any protracted holdout for a contract. 9.5 million isn't too shabby, either. Looking forward to Wes showing up for mini camp, and hopefully getting his long term deal done before July. He's been nothing but the absolute epitome of the Patriot Way throughout his tenure here. He may as well attend mini camp, I got to believe he's working out and not taking the time off, anyway. He prefers one speed concerning his approach to the game, and that's full speed ahead.
 
THE Grid Man hit on an important point this O could be record setting (Pts scored) in the next couple of years. Welker will have a lot of gaps to exploit horizontally as well as in the middle with Lloyd and Gaffney to go with G&H inc.

The other huge factor is the ability to match up to any defensive scheme with the combo of WR & TE available, and we know how Billy Boy love to play situational football and change the game plan week to week. Now the tools are in place to do so.

The fact that they franchised him means he isn't going anywhere this year.

As to the running game, who many players will the D dare put in the box with the passing weapons they will be facing????????

The running game will thrive running against 6 or 7 in the box.
 
The other huge factor is the ability to match up to any defensive scheme with the combo of WR & TE available, and we know how Billy Boy love to play situational football and change the game plan week to week. Now the tools are in place to do so.

As to the running game, who many players will the D dare put in the box with the passing weapons they will be facing????????

The running game will thrive running against 6 or 7 in the box.

These are very good points, and strong reasons why the team should be more than willing to pay Welker $9.5M this year.

The fact that they franchised him means he isn't going anywhere this year.

You lost me there. The fact that a team franchises a player merely means that they aren't willing to let them hit unrestricted free agency without a guarantee of getting considerable compensation in return. There's nothing about the franchise tag tag precludes trading a player, either in form or in intent. The Chiefs franchised Jared Allen in February 2008 and traded him to Minnesota 2 months later.

I'm not saying the Pats would trade Welker. But the fact that they franchised him means nothing in that regard. It is just an indication of how they value him.
 
IF there ever was a guy on the Patriots worth 8 mil. a year for 3-4 years, with 20 guaranteed, it's number 83.

But it were a matter of that, don't you think Welker would already be signed long term?

The Pats reportedly offered Welker $8M/year for 2 years all guaranteed during the 2011 season. If they were to franchise him for 2 years they would be paying him well over $20M for 2 years. It's not a huge step from where they were and where the market is to guarantee him $20M.

I don't know what Welker is looking for in a long term deal. But I suspect that if $8M/year for 3 years with $20M guaranteed were adequate, he would have his deal by now. It's just a guess.
 
:confused:

This entire board is dedicated to the concept of fans getting caught up in amateur over analysis. We're fans. We're amateurs. And we discuss and analyze. What's the big deal?

No, it isn't. It becomes that for some. And disagreeing with tortured over analysis isn't trolling except to those who become so invested in their own over wrought analysis they can't comprehend the validity of those who debunk it.

Brady's job here is to get the ball to his playmakers. When there is a problem doing that Bill generally adjusts to the issue by replacing the problem guys who aren't contributing significantly to the effort as opposed to mandating Brady waste time forcibly targeting those who don't consistently make plays. He's actually been asked about this imaginary phenomenon (Brady stubbornly targeting certain guys at the expense of others perceived by the questioner as viable options) and debunked that theory on numerous occasions. He's not looking for formulaic, statistical balance. He's looking for ways to win games. When they don't win them all fans tend to over react and over analyze. Some demand wholesale changes on the theory that had they just approached the situation differently (ran instead of passing or passed instead of running) the result would have been success. When the truth is had they just done enough (executed and made plays that were there or fielded a team that was healthy/deep enough to consistently make plays) the liklihood is they would have succeeded regardless of the play called.

Bill has addressed what he saw as shortcomings of the 2011 team this offseason. He's added 2 fullbacks and allowed his primary back to walk and replaced him with another veteran presence who could even be an upgrade if healthy (as could either of the sophomores be provided they can get or stay on the field) because his analysis revealed we were not able to run the ball efficiently enough to win. We don't need to run it more, just run it better. He's added no nonsense, veteran competition at the outside WR position, not because he sees a need to become more vertical but because we were unable to consistently stretch the field sufficiently horizontally to counter elite defenses capable of bringing pressure without sacrificing coverage. He's added 2 more TE's to the mix because he learned the hard way that you can't run a 2 TE offense with 2 TE's on the roster because no matter how talented they may be because **** happens...

He basically plugged nagging gaps on offense via FA while turning 6 draft picks in the first three rounds into just 7 and investing all but one of them in upgrading/infusing talent on defense. He's retooled the defense and in the process rendered debating of 3-4 vs. 4-3 a fools game in persuit of the ability to field a morphing, multiple front nightmare defense for opposing QB's and OC's to grapple with for a change.

Now, feel free to disagree and maintain that he is totally missing the mark or the rest of us are misinterpreting all of this when he is actually doing what you have deduced is what he must - shifting focus onto the running game and the vertical passing game and opening up the middle of the field to his young TE's who have flourished by abandoning a matchup dictated offense that has carried the offense for much of the last 5 seasons due in large measiure to the presence of the best slot WR in the game. Even though he failed to add the feature back or prototypical, tall speed burner #1 WR.

Bill has assessed all the deficits that have bitten him in the ass over the last 3 seasons on both sides of the ball. An aging defense that was woefully short on talent and impact. A RB committee that couldn't consistently get either the tough short yards or chunks of yards. A 2 TE offense that spent more time blocking than receiving behind an athletic but undersized however cerebral OL. A WR core that couldn't get open outside the numbers or even capitalize on single coverage anymore not to mention lacked the capacity to learn to perform reliably in a read and react precision driven offense.

He didn't approach the task he saw at hand by signing the big ticket FA DE or trading for the blazing vertical threat WR or disgruntled 1600 yard back nor did he draft them. Instead he signed a bunch of complimentary pieces including a couple of fullbacks to front a younger RB by committee and adding solid when healthy RB to replace a consistent but unspectacular veteran back, and a handful of 30 something receivers including 3 (and not a true #1 among them other than occasionally by default) with system experience outside the numbers and a potential upgrade backup slot receiver if healthy, and a veteran safety.

And then on draft day he traded up incrementally twice and drafted 2 first rounders for the front 7 and a versatile db in the second and another DE in the third after trading back before reeling in 2 more developmental secondary players and ending the draft with a developmental...slot receiver.

This sounds like a guy intent on reinventing the wheel...on defense. Not overhauling the offense. He's spent sufficient time and effort on that between 2007 to 2010. All it now requires is tweeking to insure you have players with requisite capacity and sufficient depth behind them. I learn a lot just observing Bill and figuring out what he's doing and why. And less reading about what fans want him to do. I have little interest in trying to second guess him or pontificate about what he should be doing. I'm a fan, I grasp my limitations. He's a pro headed to Canton. And I accept that no team wins it all all the time and that harsh reality doesn't automatically mandate wholesale changes on the side of the ball that consistently gets you there.

This team (and not the offense) did need to be re-balanced, but it was the defense that had lost it's here over the last 5 years. Balance wins championships, and Bill is focused on elevating his defense by infusing versitile talent that can take advantage of superior coaching instead of relying on it like duct tape to just hold the fort and hope to god that Brady can keep bailing them out.

So knock yourself out reconfiguring a top tier offense. I'm gonna watch what Bill is doing on defense.
 
I would certainly agree with Deus' thoughts here.

I certainly respect the fact that we have incredibly thoughtful posters such as MayoClinic and OTG who are able to think outside the box and look at every possible angle, and the thought of letting Welker go has been brought up in many situations before, so it's nothing that should be considered too controversial at this point. Whenever two guys with such great defensive minds (specifically, not necessarily being limited to strictly defense) suggest something, people will surely take notice. However, I do not see the benefit of using that money in a way that will necessarily make our offense any better; actually quite the contrary.

I think that Welker is going to continue to be the 'go-to' guy for Brady and this offense. He has not shown any signs of slowing down to this point, and until he does in a significant enough way, I am going to continue to assume that he has the athletic ability to run 5-10 yard patterns off the line, make a move or two, and make (most of) the important catches with the same ability for another 2-3 yrs with no problem. In other words, I think Welker's potential 'downfall' due to his age is extremely overhyped. It's not like we're asking him to run 25 yd routes on every play and run wind sprints in between plays on the sidelines. There's absolutely no reason why he cannot continue to do what's asked of him at a pretty high level. The problem is that Belichick and the front office have a price and length of yr thought on that level, and the 2 sides have yet to reach an agreement.

It could even be argued that Welker may benefit MORE with the additions of some stretch the field/downfield targets, + the emergence of the TE's. The underneath stuff may be even more of a successful option for the slot machine.

I understand the thinking that goes with "changing up the predictibility," and respect the fact that we did it with Moss successfully; however, that was a totally different situation entirely. We all saw the bulk of Brady's INT's being forced to Moss, and we all saw him practically getting killed at times waiting for those medium to deeper routes to develop.

THIS current offense has allowed Brady to flourish in every way, not to mention the most important aspect...which is to potentially prolong his career. The ability to have multiple instant options, multiple mis-matches, shorter step drops, and other factors (potentially a quicker release overall) has enabled Brady's career to be extended by a couple/few yrs in my opinion....but none of that offers as much as Wes Welker does right now.

I found it extremely interesting in the "Izzo dropped a douce" interview on ESPN Deportes that Welker said that BOTH he and Brady think they are right when they mis-connect. When you think about that, it puts everything about the read/react route tree into perspective, and shows the importance of having a guy who will be on the exact same page with the QB the majority of the time.

Our offense is all about timing routes and reading + reacting to what the defense initally shows and how they respond. There has not been a better player than Wes Welker who is able to do this with Brady in the BB/TFB era, and that includes the great rapport that Brady and Branch had in the SB winning yrs.

If Belichick allows Welker to walk after this year, it will be one of his worst mistakes (as much as I tend to stay away from critiquing the incredibly successful HC). Welker's ability is measured with a lot of brains and timing, and less about pure athletic skills. In my opinion, there's not much reason to believe that we could get the better end of a 3 yr deal at this point. If Welker were playing the outside WR position that Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson play, then I could understand the thinking that losing a step or two would really hurt him, but I believe that he will still have enough athletic ability to make the one or two juke moves that have allowed him to become one of the better WR's in the entire game to this point.

I for one, would not want to see any changes in the current system. I can respect the thought, but I don't think you should try and fix what isn't broken.
There's really only one proposition that needs to be explored when discussing Wes Welker; why would he be moved on when he's playing to a high level and is a large contributor to the team's (that's right team) strength?

The question is, if you remove Wes Welker from the Patriots line up does it weaken the 11? It has to be a resounding yes. It simply has to be.
 
No, it isn't. It becomes that for some. And disagreeing with tortured over analysis isn't trolling except to those who become so invested in their own over wrought analysis they can't comprehend the validity of those who debunk it.

Brady's job here is to get the ball to his playmakers. When there is a problem doing that Bill generally adjusts to the issue by replacing the problem guys who aren't contributing significantly to the effort as opposed to mandating Brady waste time forcibly targeting those who don't consistently make plays. He's actually been asked about this imaginary phenomenon (Brady........<SNIP>.

LOL.......superfan!!!!

more words do not imply a more in-depth realization of the situation.......your opinion is no different from any other
 
But it were a matter of that, don't you think Welker would already be signed long term?

The Pats reportedly offered Welker $8M/year for 2 years all guaranteed during the 2011 season. If they were to franchise him for 2 years they would be paying him well over $20M for 2 years. It's not a huge step from where they were and where the market is to guarantee him $20M.

I don't know what Welker is looking for in a long term deal. But I suspect that if $8M/year for 3 years with $20M guaranteed were adequate, he would have his deal by now. It's just a guess.

Nothing gets done here, as in most businesses, until it has to. Mankins was tagged for 4 1/2 months. He got signed when the lockout ended and camp opened. The normal deadline for signing franchise tagged players to a long term deal is July 15th, about ten days before camp opens. And that's only an issue if they're going to hold out, and Welker won't and they know it.

They had the pieces in place to trade him because they were fazing him out had they had any intention to prior to the draft. Didn't happen. They have expressed their desire and intention to get a long term deal done. Go figure. So it's not a matter of they've moved on. It's just business and they haven't bridged the gap yet. They may not, but it won't be because they are intent on breaking the bond (apparently Cassel had it too...) that has served them well for 5 seasons. Brady doesn't trust and target these guys because their his buddies. He trusts and targets them because they perform consistently.

Three times eight is likely not sufficient. The way these things work you get more for less or less for more. You don't get less for less. Four times 8 would likely work with $20M guaranteed and in hand in the first two years and rolling guarantees on a portion of his remaining deal that wasn't obviously backloaded. Guys want protection in case their career ends abruptly as a result of doing what they were hired to do and some security that if they continue to perform they won't he tossed on the cap cut heap at a point or under circumstances where it becomes difficult to recoup what they've lost due to timing or age or opportunity.

If he wants 5 x $10M he's delusional on multiple levels because this team won't overcommit top tier money to guys on the wrong side of 30 however durable and the cap is flat thru 2014. If he wants 5 years period he's probably delusional. 4 at $10M is a stretch but depending on structure it's no skin off their nose if he'd take a backloaded deal. I don't think he wants that or is delusional. I think he wants something fair and in the 4 times $8M+ range would be, and that can be structured in a way that he remains affordable to retain or move on from in 3 years.

And it won't preclude extending the TE's although the odds are they won't retain both anyway (see Branch/Givens). They aren't going to budget $15M+ for the 3 TE component regardless of what they are paying Welker. They can field a high functioning 5-6 man WR unit for less even with Welker onboard. But absent that productive slot receiver a year from now, all the leverage would shift to the TE's... and then we could start analyzing why we don't need them.
 
LOL.......superfan!!!!

more words do not imply a more in-depth realization of the situation.......your opinion is no different from any other

Now that's a prime example of thread trolling at it's ADHD best. While I countered in depth realization with alternate in depth realization, you can add nothing but childish contempt and dismiss alternate opinion as baseless absent even an attempt to make a case for your POV beyond the thinly veiled I don't like you, you make me feel inferior because I post purely opinionated drivel...and you call me on it. I believe the message board term for that posting approach is a ***********, a tactic often used by inferior or off the wall posters to support anyone who tangles with a poster they don't like or one who posts actual rational counter arguments to a kneejerk position they've adopted and opt to dig their heels in irrationally on forever more.
 
you call it in depth, but there's nothing really verifiable or that can be substantiated.

just like everyone elses, its just talk....but in your case, there's simply more of it


Now that's a prime example of thread trolling at it's ADHD best. While I countered in depth realization with alternate in depth realization, you can add nothing but childish contempt and dismiss alternate opinion as baseless absent even an attempt to make a case for your POV beyond the thinly veiled I don't like you, you make me feel inferior because I post purely opinionated drivel...and you call me on it. I believe the message board term for that posting approach is a ***********, a tactic often used by inferior or off the wall posters to support anyone who tangles with a poster they don't like or one who posts actual rational counter arguments to a kneejerk position they've adopted and opt to dig their heels in irrationally on forever more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


MORSE: Rookie Camp Invitees and Draft Notes
Patriots Get Extension Done with Barmore
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/29: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-28, Draft Notes On Every Draft Pick
MORSE: A Closer Look at the Patriots Undrafted Free Agents
Five Thoughts on the Patriots Draft Picks: Overall, Wolf Played it Safe
2024 Patriots Undrafted Free Agents – FULL LIST
MORSE: Thoughts on Patriots Day 3 Draft Results
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots Head Coach Jerod Mayo Post-Draft Press Conference
2024 Patriots Draft Picks – FULL LIST
Back
Top