Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

What is going on with Wes Welker?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  

What's happening?
Punishment for something that's going on behind the scenes
13%
 13%  [ 3 ]
Trying to keep him fresh for later on the season
4%
 4%  [ 1 ]
Secret injury that we don't know about
40%
 40%  [ 9 ]
Giving a professional favor, keeping him healthy since he doesn't have a longterm contract
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Belichick wants to see how we'd fare if we let him walk
40%
 40%  [ 9 ]
Total Votes : 22

Author Message
Sciz


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 15860
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Reiss suggests that Edelman is playing over Welker because he's a better run blocker?

Am I the only person who thinks that's absurd?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25296
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sciz wrote:
Reiss suggests that Edelman is playing over Welker because he's a better run blocker?

Am I the only person who thinks that's absurd?


Absurd that Reiss would suggest it? Or absurd if that was the reason Edelman has been taking Welker's snaps?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pats#1


Joined: 19 Aug 2011
Posts: 5720
Location: Plymouth, MA
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
jsnydes wrote:


I vote nothing. When he's on the field he looks good.

The problem is the Coach in this case.


More likely:

Something behind the scenes is wrong with Welker (or otherwise affecting his playing time)

Bill Belichick is taking one of his top players off the field in favor of a fringe NFL WR for no reason.

Right. The problem is most certainly not "the Coach in this case."


If anyone can honestly sit there and say nothing is wrong when our most used receiver over the past few seasons is now not even getting starting WR playing time, then they definitely can't be thinking straight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sciz


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 15860
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Sciz wrote:
Reiss suggests that Edelman is playing over Welker because he's a better run blocker?

Am I the only person who thinks that's absurd?


Absurd that Reiss would suggest it? Or absurd if that was the reason Edelman has been taking Welker's snaps?

The latter. I can't see how the receiving ability would be close enough for blocking to the the difference, and I like Edelman.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25296
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sciz wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Sciz wrote:
Reiss suggests that Edelman is playing over Welker because he's a better run blocker?

Am I the only person who thinks that's absurd?


Absurd that Reiss would suggest it? Or absurd if that was the reason Edelman has been taking Welker's snaps?

The latter. I can't see how the receiving ability would be close enough for blocking to the the difference, and I like Edelman.


Other than "heavy" packages, they've never taken Welker off the field for blocking purposes as far as I can remember. I don't think they'd start now unless they are really, really impressed with Edelman as a WR and really do think they are comparable receivers.

So yeah, it would be beyond absurd. Then again, Josh McDaniels is prone to doing some really stupid and absurd things so.....
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jsnydes


Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 1649
Location: Bethlehem PA
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Pats#1"]
mcmurtry86 wrote:
jsnydes wrote:


I vote nothing. When he's on the field he looks good.

The problem is the Coach in this case.


More likely:

Something behind the scenes is wrong with Welker (or otherwise affecting his playing time)

Bill Belichick is taking one of his top players off the field in favor of a fringe NFL WR for no reason.

Right. The problem is most certainly not "the Coach in this case."


You said it. Bill takes one of his top players off the field in favor of a fringe NFL player. Then the team loses. Welker probably hurt his feelings by threatening to hold out and wanting to get paid what he deserves. The key to the entire thing is the team lost. So it's the coach's fault. In my opinion, they score more points with him on the field in the first half and win.
_________________


TommyC376^^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Nihc


Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Posts: 3371
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, in no world should Edelman be seeing more snaps than Welker.
_________________


2014 Adopt-a-Patriot - Dominique Easley
Tackles: 0 | Sacks: 0 | QB Hits: 0 | TFL: 0 | Fumble Recoveries: 0
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25296
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jsnydes wrote:
Welker probably hurt his feelings by threatening to hold out and wanting to get paid what he deserves. The key to the entire thing is the team lost. So it's the coach's fault. In my opinion, they score more points with him on the field in the first half and win.


Either you just started watching football recently or you're trolling.

Nobody could possibly think Belichick would sacrifice the good of the team because his "feelings were hurt".

Bill Belichick has never buried a guy on the depth chart for personal or money (contract) reasons. In fact, the only times I remember Belichick taking snaps from a guy is for the first series or two of a game for a conduct violation.

This is despite the team having numerous acrimonious contract squabbles with players. Did he bench Asante Samuel? No. Did he cut down Adam Vinatieri's opportunities? Nope.

Your suggestion that he is being benched because of Welker's desire for a long term contract is flat out stupid and fails every possible logic test. The Patriots would almost certainly prefer Welker to play on a franchise tag year to year provided he is in camp and practicing (which he did). There is no motivation for them to punish Welker for wanting money and while Belichick might be "cold" (in terms of business dealings) he has never let contract issues carry over to way he coaches.

Long term winning is #1 to Bill Belichick. There is no long term advantage to cutting the snaps of one of your best receivers. You think it will make Welker want to come back next year when he is a UFA? Or make him willing to sign the franchise tender and show up in camp next year? No way. There is literally no business sense in benching Welker.

So, does it make sense with Belichick's personality? No.

Does it make sense in the context of 12+ years of his coaching/personnel moves? No.

Does it benefit the team this year? No.

Does it benefit the team in the long run? No.

Is it a really dumb and illogical suggestion? Yes.

If Belichick was unhappy with Welker's contract status, Welker would be gone right now. That Welker was not traded (a la Seymour) tells me (and any normal person who pays attention) that Belichick
feels Welker has more value to the team than a possible trade return. Logic dictates that in order for that to be true, Welker needs to be on the field and producing. Otherwise, the team would have traded him.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jsnydes


Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 1649
Location: Bethlehem PA
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 7:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wes Welker confirmed that health is not the reason for his reduced role.
Welker's demotion behind Julian Edelman is simply a coach's decision. "Coach felt like what­ever was best for the team and I'm for that and I totally understand that and I'm just there to help out however I can," said Welker, who played on just 2-of-15 snaps when the Pats were in a two-wideout formation. Regardless, the artist formerly known as the slot machine is set to resume a big role thanks to Aaron Hernandez's ankle injury. The Patriots will be forced to go three-wide often, just as they did in the second half of Sunday's loss to the Cardinals.
Source: Boston Globe Sep 17 - 8:49 AM
_________________


TommyC376^^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Billy Spikes


Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Posts: 41344
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To me it seems they like Edelman in certain personal grouping [2 TE, 2 WR, 1 RB] as an outside receiver over Welker, maybe they feel he has some type of advantage over him... if its blocking or something else.

I do think that going forward Welker will probably see more playing time than the two first game.
_________________
#JDI
Official Roster Cutdowns Thread
All Time Top Ten Safeties Ranking
Tom Brady Tribute
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jsnydes


Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 1649
Location: Bethlehem PA
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen A. Smith on ESPN first take just said, We all consider this organization a first class organization. Wes Welker went for his contract extension. The New England Patriots slapped him with the franchise tag. This is what we call "weeding out". Trying to prove to the team that they can survive without their all time leading receiver. If he was in the game, they could have adjusted better to what the Cardinals were doing.

Saying they would have won the game in a round about way. I'm not trolling and I'm not the only one that feels this way.
_________________


TommyC376^^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
NinjaZX6R


Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Posts: 9308
Location: Columbus, Ohio
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen A Smith is an idiot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pats#1


Joined: 19 Aug 2011
Posts: 5720
Location: Plymouth, MA
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jsnydes wrote:
Stephen A. Smith on ESPN first take just said, We all consider this organization a first class organization. Wes Welker went for his contract extension. The New England Patriots slapped him with the franchise tag. This is what we call "weeding out". Trying to prove to the team that they can survive without their all time leading receiver. If he was in the game, they could have adjusted better to what the Cardinals were doing.

Saying they would have won the game in a round about way. I'm not trolling and I'm not the only one that feels this way.


You just used Stephen A. Smith to back up your argument....

it has lost all weight.
_________________


Sig credit: Deadpulse
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
finn54


Moderator
Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 12458
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would guess its because Welker has been poor in TC. He's missed time with injury/holdout/bereavement, and factoring that in with the fact that he's 31, he might just be not putting in good practices. I mean, he had 5 catches on sunday, but on 11 targets. That's hardly vintage Welker.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25296
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jsnydes wrote:
Wes Welker confirmed that health is not the reason for his reduced role.
Welker's demotion behind Julian Edelman is simply a coach's decision. "Coach felt like what­ever was best for the team and I'm for that and I totally understand that and I'm just there to help out however I can," said Welker, who played on just 2-of-15 snaps when the Pats were in a two-wideout formation. Regardless, the artist formerly known as the slot machine is set to resume a big role thanks to Aaron Hernandez's ankle injury. The Patriots will be forced to go three-wide often, just as they did in the second half of Sunday's loss to the Cardinals.
Source: Boston Globe Sep 17 - 8:49 AM


You must not follow the Patriots if you actually are citing their sound bites in the press and think that players would disclose injuries to the media.

You're wrong. It's just that simple.

Bill Belichick is very straight forward - if you're on the roster, you play as many snaps as your practice time dictates. In 12 years he has never buried a guy on the depth chart in the manner you are suggesting and Welker isn't going to be the first. If he had an issue with Welker, Welker wouldn't be on the roster. See: Moss, Randy or Seymour, Richard
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group