Jump to content

Wes Welker? Seriously?


Thor99

Recommended Posts

Did you even read his post troll ? He said they didn't win a ring. Did they ? NO :rl:

reminded me of this

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/corbin-ky/TQUO7GHB6AMQB8V7Q

A quick simple down to earth worded psychological break-down of an internet Troll.(Most of this is from internet sources, but I made two or three additions from watching how Trolls operate.) This is not complete but I think it’ll do the job:

The term derives from "trolling", a style of fishing which involves trailing bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The troll posts a message, often in response to an honest question, that is intended to upset, disrupt or simply insult the group.

Usually, it will fail, as the troll rarely bothers to match the tone or style of the group, and usually its ignorance shows.

I believe that most trolls are sad people, living their lonely lives vicariously through those they see as strong and successful.

Disrupting a stable newsgroup (or thread) gives the illusion of power, just as for a few, stalking a strong person allows them to think they are strong, too.

For trolls, any response is 'recognition'; they are unable to distinguish between irritation and admiration; their ego grows directly in proportion to the response, regardless of the form or content of that response.

Targeting. Trolls also often target a single individual who has an alternate view of a topic than others on the thread, hoping to attract others to its side in attacking that person. Drawing others to its assault gives a Troll a sense of power and self-worth. Quite often Trolls will target intelligent and strong-willed women, thinking them easier prey, for sexist reasons, or aberrant personal perversions. In the case of targeting women a Troll may go as far as following her from thread to thread in continuing its attacks upon her. This can easily germinate into Internet Stalking.

How can troll posts be recognized?

-- No Imagination - Most are obvious; sexist comments, using nonsensical arguments, cursing or use of vulgarisms toward a group or individual. Whether outward or more shaded, the Trolls intent is to incite rather than comment.

-- False Identity - Because they are cowards, trolls virtually never write under their own name, and often reveal their trolliness (and lack of imagination) in the chosen username. Most often using different usernames on each thread, including sometimes switching names two or three times on and during the same thread discussion.

-- Repetition of a question or prodding statement is either a troll - or a pedant; either way, treatment as a troll is warranted.

-- Missing The Point - Trolls rarely answer a direct question - they cannot, if asked to justify their twaddle - so they develop a fine line in missing the point.:Nuts:

-- Off-topic posting - Often genuine errors, but, if from an 'outsider' they deserve matter-of-fact response; if genuine, a brief apposite response is simply netiquette; if it's a troll post, you have denied it its reward.

-- Thick or Sad - Trolls are usually sad, lonely folk, with few social skills; they rarely make what most people would consider intelligent conversation.:P However, they frequently have an obsession with their IQ. This should not be confused with individuals who carry on an intelligent conversation and who name their education as a means to support their credibility on an issue.

When a troll become persistent and personal, you may need to consider the possibility that it has fermented into an Internet Stalker - equally pathetic, if not much more so - but sometimes requiring weedkiller.

Edited by Larz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

reminded me of this

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/corbin-ky/TQUO7GHB6AMQB8V7Q

A quick simple down to earth worded psychological break-down of an internet Troll.(Most of this is from internet sources, but I made two or three additions from watching how Trolls operate.) This is not complete but I think it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nerve of us Jets fans talking about the Jets on the Jets site. :rolleyes:

Here is the thing though.

Most of the Pats related content is started by Jets fans. What are we supposed to ignore it? I think not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2006 with Harrington, Culpepper & Lemon: 67 receptions for 687 yards.

2007 with Brady: 112 receptions for 1175 yards.

2008 with Cassel: 111 receptions for 1165 yards.

Hows that for annoying?

For what it's worth I promise not to bump this thread until training camp.

2006 without Randy Moss: 67 receptions for 687 yards.

2007 with Randy Moss: 112 receptions for 1175 yards.

2008 with Randy Moss: 111 receptions for 1165 yards.

Fixed that for you..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2006 without Randy Moss: 67 receptions for 687 yards.

2007 with Randy Moss: 112 receptions for 1175 yards.

2008 with Randy Moss: 111 receptions for 1165 yards.

Fixed that for you..

Why is everyone ignoring the simplest answers: The VAST majority or WRs make a big improvement in their 3rd year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2006 without Randy Moss: 67 receptions for 687 yards.

2007 with Randy Moss: 112 receptions for 1175 yards.

2008 with Randy Moss: 111 receptions for 1165 yards.

Fixed that for you..

:confused:

Yeah, your point is taken. Not. :rolleyes:

While Moss no doubt helps, let's be serious.

Wes Welker is dam good. He was undrafted and by his third year he lead the Phins in receiving. The Phins had talent (Chambers, McMichael and Booker, plus Brown and Sammie Morris in the backfield).

If you think he is a figment of Moss mere presence you are mistaken. Randy undoubtedly helps, but the guy can flat out play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:confused:

Yeah, your point is taken. Not. :rolleyes:

While Moss no doubt helps, let's be serious.

Wes Welker is dam good. He was undrafted and by his third year he lead the Phins in receiving. The Phins had talent (Chambers, McMichael and Booker, plus Brown and Sammie Morris in the backfield).

If you think he is a figment of Moss mere presence you are mistaken. Randy undoubtedly helps, but the guy can flat out play.

Welker would fall flat on his face if he left NE.

It would be Deion Branch V2.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welker would fall flat on his face if he left NE.

It would be Deion Branch V2.0

I know you are a blind homer, but posts like that truly show cluless and blind you are.

With Joey Harrington throwing to him, he caught 67 passes. That is 4 less then the Jets leading receiver had with Favre. Again because you seem to be a bit slow, he was good without Brady. Probably why the Patriots gave a receiver no one ever heard of 19 million.

As far as Deoin, he is what we thought he was. He was always a 45-55 catch guy until his contract year. Which coincidentally coincided with Dillon slowing down, the D sucking and passing game having to compensate for those two things. Result, Deoin caught 78 passes that year. Since, he is back to his norm, 45-55 catches and missing games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:confused:

Yeah, your point is taken. Not. :rolleyes:

While Moss no doubt helps, let's be serious.

Wes Welker is dam good. He was undrafted and by his third year he lead the Phins in receiving. The Phins had talent (Chambers, McMichael and Booker, plus Brown and Sammie Morris in the backfield).

If you think he is a figment of Moss mere presence you are mistaken. Randy undoubtedly helps, but the guy can flat out play.

Put him on the Jets next year and lets see him catch 112 passes :rolleyes:

I never said he wasn't good, he's simply in the best possible situation as opposing DC's are preoccupied with the leagues most dangerous offensive weapon. He's similar to Steve Breaston in that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put him on the Jets next year and lets see him catch 112 passes :rolleyes:

I never said he wasn't good, he's simply in the best possible situation as opposing DC's are preoccupied with the leagues most dangerous offensive weapon. He's similar to Steve Breaston in that way.

Deion Branch would have the same or better #'s if he was on the current Pats.. he actually had almost the same #'s without Moss..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deion Branch would have the same or better #'s if he was on the current Pats.. he actually had almost the same #'s without Moss..

:rl:

Yeah, keep digging your hole.

Put him on the Jets next year and lets see him catch 112 passes :rolleyes:

I never said he wasn't good, he's simply in the best possible situation as opposing DC's are preoccupied with the leagues most dangerous offensive weapon. He's similar to Steve Breaston in that way.

Unlike Breaston, the Patriots do not have Boldin/Fitzgerald caliber receiver opposite Moss.

I understand your point, but let's be honest. While Moss does make things easier, irregardless of who is throwing the ball, Welker will quickly become that QBs favorite target. He gets open. He makes people miss. It is not like there are 8 guys surrounding Moss and 3 for the other 10 guys.

Welker is a player. While he might not catch 112 passes with Clemens/Ratliff, he will catch passes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rl:

Yeah, keep digging your hole.

Unlike Breaston, the Patriots do not have Boldin/Fitzgerald caliber receiver opposite Moss.

I understand your point, but let's be honest. While Moss does make things easier, irregardless of who is throwing the ball, Welker will quickly become that QBs favorite target. He gets open. He makes people miss. It is not like there are 8 guys surrounding Moss and 3 for the other 10 guys.

Welker is a player. While he might not catch 112 passes with Clemens/Ratliff, he will catch passes.

Tom Brady and Randy Moss have turned a good player into a great player. That is the only point people are trying to make. Not that he is bad, just that playing with Moss and Brady has inflated his stats. Him on any other team in the league has a drop-off in production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unlike Breaston, the Patriots do not have Boldin/Fitzgerald caliber receiver opposite Moss.

I understand your point, but let's be honest. While Moss does make things easier, irregardless of who is throwing the ball, Welker will quickly become that QBs favorite target. He gets open. He makes people miss. It is not like there are 8 guys surrounding Moss and 3 for the other 10 guys.

Welker is a player. While he might not catch 112 passes with Clemens/Ratliff, he will catch passes.

My point is only that he is what he is. A real nice complimentary receiver. I don't know the length of his deal, but if he left ala Branch as a FA next year to go be some teams #1, his production would fall off a cliff...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Brady and Randy Moss have turned a good player into a great player. That is the only point people are trying to make. Not that he is bad, just that playing with Moss and Brady has inflated his stats. Him on any other team in the league has a drop-off in production.

True, but he it is probably more attributable to his work ethic.

Walk-on at Texas Tech earned a scholarship.

Undrafted and cut by Chargers, made his mark at Special Teams. Earned time at receiver. In his second year in the receiver role, he led his team in receptions.

Then he has 223 catches as a Patriot with two different QBs.

Again, for the 50th odd time in this thread, yes it has helped to be with Tom for a season and Moss. However, he showed that he could play with the Phins. Then when Cassell took over. Moss was minimalized because Cassell is as effective over 10 yards as Chad. Then he went out and had at least 6 catches in 15 straight games. Then mother nature held him to two.

The guy is not solely a by product of Tom Brady and Moss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is only that he is what he is. A real nice complimentary receiver. I don't know the length of his deal, but if he left ala Branch as a FA next year to go be some teams #1, his production would fall off a cliff...

I think he has two more seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...