Not Sure Of What's Happening

Gambler7

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2003
3,417
The life span of a player is just unbelievable. I didn't even remember he was a free agent. 
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
2,486
NYC
Somone needs to sit him down and tell him he needs to stop. He may be able to still play at a high level but the next big hit he takes may be his last.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
I have a hard time seeing Belichick wanting Welker back.  There seemed to be a rift between him and Bill.  I know, Spikes is back so anything can happen.
 
But with Edelman and Amendola on the roster, how many slot types (and I know those two both function in a greater role than just the slot) do they need?  When you consider the middle of the field balls that Gronk and Chandler are going to command, it's hard to see where Welker fits in. 
 
I also don't remember anyone lobbying himself through the media onto the Pats roster and I'm not sure they want to see Welker's brains turn to jello on their watch. 
 
All of that said, Welker probably has more to offer than any WR currently on the roster besides Edelman, Amendola or LaFell.  Tyms might be in the conversation, too.  Maybe.  But Welker would seem to be nice insurance for one of the other guys going down.  And I'm a sucker for a returning hero.  Make no mistake, I am not deluded into thinking Welker is walking through that door.  It just wouldn't suck if he did. 
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,682
02130
He looked really cooked at the end of the year, whether concussions or just age. Just not able to get separation anymore.
 
He's of the age when WRs outside of a select few tend to disappear. Any time or money spent on him is likely to be a waste.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
14,354
TheoShmeo said:
 
All of that said, Welker probably has more to offer than any WR currently on the roster besides Edelman, Amendola or LaFell.  Tyms might be in the conversation, too.  Maybe.  But Welker would seem to be nice insurance for one of the other guys going down.  And I'm a sucker for a returning hero.  Make no mistake, I am not deluded into thinking Welker is walking through that door.  It just wouldn't suck if he did. 
 
I agree with most of what you said, but Tyms has 7 career catches on 18 targets in 2 years. I think Welker is pretty cooked at this point and he's not a fit here but Tyms is quite a stretch (get it, stretch the field??)
 
It's crazy how far we are from this:
 
http://nesn.com/2011/10/wes-welker-has-played-it-smart-by-extending-contract-negotiations-driving-up-own-value/
 


But both Welker and the Patriots have yet to reach an agreement. It makes sense for both sides to wait, though Welker has still looked like the big winner in the race for the upper hand during the 2012 offseason negotiations.
 
http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/gasper/2012/07/patriots_decisi.html


The Patriots have "won," avoiding paying Welker for past performance, but in the process they might find that they've made future negotiations more contentious and costly.
 
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1313604-why-new-england-patriots-were-smart-to-extend-aaron-hernandez-before-wes-welker
 


If the Patriots cannot re-sign Welker, it will certainly be a major loss for their offense, but they should be able to find another player, potentially even drawing from in house with Julian Edelman, to become successful in a similar role in their system. Hernandez, on the other hand, has a unique role that makes him a very difficult player to emulate.
Hernandez is now signed through 2018, while Gronkowski is signed through 2019. Considering Gronkowski is also only 23, that means the Patriots should have the NFL’s best tight end duo, assuming both players remain healthy and productive, for at least seven more seasons, a time through which neither player will have reached the age of 30.
 
Good call on Edelman, but the rest just makes me sad of what could have been. 
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,757
Mansfield MA
There's a decent chance Welker is better, even at 34, than Danny Amendola, who lest we forget had just 200 receiving yards in 16 regular-season games last year. I think the ideal fit for Welker would be the Austin Collie shadow roster role from a few years ago (formerly the Deion Branch role) - a veteran who can step in right away as a third WR if needed and who they can cut if / when he gets hurt.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,683
TheoShmeo said:
I have a hard time seeing Belichick wanting Welker back.  There seemed to be a rift between him and Bill.  I know, Spikes is back so anything can happen.
 
 
The "rift" was the difference in opinion  between BB, who didn't think Welker had much left, and Welker, who thought he did. Welker was good in year 1 with Denver and clearly slipping in Year 2. That's par for the course with BB.
 
There's a decent chance Welker is better, even at 34, than Danny Amendola, who lest we forget had just 200 receiving yards in 16 regular-season games last year.
 
Amendola also had another 600 yards in kick returns. Assuming there's a "decent" chance that Welker is better (and I think the chances are considerably less than decent), there is a much higher chance that he isn't better.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Thanks Wes.  But no thanks.  Get out of the game while you're still (relatively) healthy.  At this point I'm perfectly fine with a receiving corps led by Edelman, LaFell, and Amendola.  Plus Gronk, of course.  He's the real game-changer.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,991
Gosh it must burn Welker to have missed winning a SB three times and then have the Pats win one last year.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,757
Mansfield MA
slamminsammya said:
Amendola was great in the postseason. 
Kind of. He was better. He made some nice YAC plays. His playoff stats are inflated by his catch on the flea flicker, which is a play 99% of NFL WR would make.
 
joe dokes said:
Amendola also had another 600 yards in kick returns. Assuming there's a "decent" chance that Welker is better (and I think the chances are considerably less than decent), there is a much higher chance that he isn't better.
Yeah, there's a good argument that even if Welker is still a better receiver at this point of their careers, Amendola is more useful because of his special teams contributions. Then again, maybe they'll have someone else return kicks this year. The last time the Pats had the same primary kick returner in back-to-back years was Ellis Hobbs in 2007 and '08.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,682
02130
Super Nomario said:
There's a decent chance Welker is better, even at 34, than Danny Amendola, who lest we forget had just 200 receiving yards in 16 regular-season games last year. I think the ideal fit for Welker would be the Austin Collie shadow roster role from a few years ago (formerly the Deion Branch role) - a veteran who can step in right away as a third WR if needed and who they can cut if / when he gets hurt.
You really don't like Amendola, which is fine, he doesn't seem to be anything special, but you're overstating things. Amendola was only targeted 42 times while being on the field for 456 snaps (40.3% of NE's offensive snaps). So he was targeted 9.2% of the plays he was on the field for, and caught 27 balls.
 
Welker was on the field for 743 snaps or 65.9% of Denver's offensive snaps, and was targeted 64 times (8.6%). He caught 49 balls.
 
Both were the 3rd option on their teams for most of the season, but NE went with just 2 WRs a lot more often than Den, who usually had 3 WRs on the field.
 
I think by usage they were comparable last year and given Welker's age and injuries he's a really good bet to completely crater.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,757
Mansfield MA
Toe Nash said:
You really don't like Amendola, which is fine, he doesn't seem to be anything special, but you're overstating things. Amendola was only targeted 42 times while being on the field for 456 snaps (40.3% of NE's offensive snaps). So he was targeted 9.2% of the plays he was on the field for, and caught 27 balls.
 
Welker was on the field for 743 snaps or 65.9% of Denver's offensive snaps, and was targeted 64 times (8.6%). He caught 49 balls.
 
Both were the 3rd option on their teams for most of the season, but NE went with just 2 WRs a lot more often than Den, who usually had 3 WRs on the field.
 
I think by usage they were comparable last year and given Welker's age and injuries he's a really good bet to completely crater.
That still makes Welker better - catching 77% of passes his way (versus 64% for Amendola), for 9.5 yards per catch (versus 7.4 for Amendola) for an average of 7.25 yards per target (4.76 for Amendola) and 0.62 yards per route run (0.44 for Amendola).
 
Frankly, they're both around replacement level as far as I can tell. As for the bolded, it's nothing personal. I defended him last offseason because I thought he'd bounce back in year two of his contract with better health; instead, he was much worse.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
Amendola should be provisionally credited with three more catches; LaFell's inability to set a pick legally outright killed three plays and who knows what the plan was, but it changed after Kansas City anyway and Amendola became extraneous for most of the year. 
 
It'll be interesting to see how closely pick plays are called in the early season and whether Amendola & LaFell are again involved; skill sets are good for it, but it'll depend on the refs.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,757
Mansfield MA
soxfan121 said:
Amendola should be provisionally credited with three more catches; LaFell's inability to set a pick legally outright killed three plays and who knows what the plan was, but it changed after Kansas City anyway and Amendola became extraneous for most of the year. 
 
It'll be interesting to see how closely pick plays are called in the early season and whether Amendola & LaFell are again involved; skill sets are good for it, but it'll depend on the refs.
Amendola was open on those plays because of the illegal picks. I think they're pretty telling anyway; he can execute rub routes and other combinations effectively enough so McDaniels can scheme him open, but he can't beat one-on-one man coverage. A lot of his playoff catches were of this ilk, too - a rub route or high / low combination where he got open due to scheme, not skill.