PatriotReign37 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Moss should have a huge game against the rookie corners, provided Welker draws double coverage to free him up. We all know Moss is nothing without the Welk-man. Are you saying Moss draws double coverage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 2 games w/o Wes: 14 catches -140 yards 10 YPC; 0 TDS. 5 games with Wes: 29 catches - 425 yards 14.7 YPC 4 TDS Just sayin'. Randy Moss in nine seasons without Wes: 676 catches, 10,700 yards. 15.83 YPC, 101 TD. Wes Welker in three years without Moss: 96 catches, 1121 yards, 11.68 YPC, 1 TD. I WIN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Are you saying Moss draws double coverage? From every team but the Jets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 From every team but the Jets. The Jets double cover Moss too. Youre dreaming if you think Revis takes him on by himself. Revis is afraid to get burnt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakeG Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 The Jets double cover Moss too. Youre dreaming if you think Revis takes him on by himself. Revis is afraid to get burnt. quotes like this is why this place should be troll free Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Randy Moss in nine seasons without Wes: 676 catches, 10,700 yards. 15.83 YPC, 101 TD. Wes Welker in three years without Moss: 96 catches, 1121 yards, 11.68 YPC, 1 TD. I WIN. Are you seriously comparing what they did on seperate franchises? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Are you seriously comparing what they did on seperate franchises? I am comparing what they did without each other and those numbers clearly demonstrates who benefits more from the relationship. You seriously are embarrassing your uncle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I am comparing what they did without each other and those numbers clearly demonstrates who benefits more from the relationship. You seriously are embarrassing your uncle. What matters is what they do in New England. You can't compare what someone did on his own when the comparison is who is more important to the New England scheme. Embarrassment is on you, as always. BTW, how's Vernon doing this season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 What matters is what they do in New England. You can't compare what someone did on his own when the comparison is who is more important to the New England scheme. Embarrassment is on you, as always. BTW, how's Vernon doing this season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 And... win. I'd be ashamed of myself too. It's okay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 And... win. I'd be ashamed of myself too. It's okay. That you can't understand why bringing up their numbers prior to playing with each other is relevant just demonstrates how deep you are in over your head in this discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 That you can't understand why bringing up their numbers prior to playing with each other is relevant just demonstrates how deep you are in over your head in this discussion. Okay. Believe what you'd like. Their previous numbers have NOTHING to do with each other when you're comparing who is more important to the NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS. The only thing their previous numbers would mean ANYTHING is if you are comparing who is a better receiver and 100 out of 100 people will say Randy Moss, it's right there. But, when it comes to importance in New England... it isn't Randy who wins that one. There is the difference. How many times to people have to nail this one into your head? I don't know, maybe we should give up because you're lost in your stubborn, incorrect ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Okay. Believe what you'd like. Their previous numbers have NOTHING to do with each other when you're comparing who is more important to the NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS. The only thing their previous numbers would mean ANYTHING is if you are comparing who is a better receiver and 100 out of 100 people will say Randy Moss, it's right there. But, when it comes to importance in New England... it isn't Randy who wins that one. There is the difference. How many times to people have to nail this one into your head? I don't know, maybe we should give up because you're lost in your stubborn, incorrect ways. Again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Randy Moss in nine seasons without Wes: 676 catches, 10,700 yards. 15.83 YPC, 101 TD. Wes Welker in three years without Moss: 96 catches, 1121 yards, 11.68 YPC, 1 TD. I WIN. So having Cris Carter on the opposite side of the field and Robert Smith did not contribute to Randy's #s? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Why bother trying to make sense? As a Pats fan that has followed this team for more years than I care to mention, I say with great confidence that Welker plays a more significant role in this offense than Randy. This is especially true since the dink and dunk, slip screen, bubble screen, etc are crucial to the Pats offense since it is essentially an extension of the run game - to which the Pats have lacked a traditional run game for a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Why bother trying to make sense? As a Pats fan that has followed this team for more years than I care to mention, I say with great confidence that Welker plays a more significant role in this offense than Randy. This is especially true since the dink and dunk, slip screen, bubble screen, etc are crucial to the Pats offense since it is essentially an extension of the run game - to which the Pats have lacked a traditional run game for a long time. Tony Sparano agrees with you, me and everyone not named Klecko or madmike............ "I don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakeG Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Tony Sparano agrees with you, me and everyone not named Klecko or madmike............ http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/2009/11/dolphins-victory-against-the-patriots-unlikely.html Soprano gets it, these are basically handoffs...they should cut welkers receptions in half..100 is a joke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Soprano gets it, these are basically handoffs...they should cut welkers receptions in half..100 is a joke According to your logic they shouldn't count RB's receptions on swing passes or screen passes as they are basically handoffs. Wes Welkers job is to catch the ball and then pick up as many yards as possible. He is pretty damn good at both of those things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakeG Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 According to your logic they shouldn't count RB's receptions on swing passes or screen passes as they are basically handoffs. Wes Welkers job is to catch the ball and then pick up as many yards as possible. He is pretty damn good at both of those things. just saying his receptions are overstated...right? you must agree on that he is a nice little player like Chrebet was here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 just saying his receptions are overstated...right? you must agree on that he is a nice little player like Chrebet was here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 just saying his receptions are overstated...right? you must agree on that he is a nice little player like Chrebet was here Wes Welker has already had two seasons in which he had 20+ more receptions in each of those seasons than Chrebet had in his best season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 It is what it is. Boston likes guys like Pedroia and Welker more than Manny and Moss. Anyone with an unbiased opinion though will tell you its really not that close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Wes Welker has already had two seasons in which he had 20+ more receptions in each of those seasons than Chrebet had in his best season. Id say a good 85% of Welkers catches are within 6-7 yards of the LOS. That number is inflated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Id say a good 85% of Welkers catches are within 6-7 yards of the LOS. That number is inflated So what? The fact is you can't compare the two, they're two different types of players in two different types of schemes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 So what? The fact is you can't compare the two, they're two different types of players in two different types of schemes. Welker is good at his role. The role is replaceable though. The spread offense gives the slot WR a ton of opportunities that inflate their catch numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakeG Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Wes Welker has already had two seasons in which he had 20+ more receptions in each of those seasons than Chrebet had in his best season. you really are a pats fan OR did welker go to ann arbor too? Chrebet was not a bubble screen guru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) Welker is good at his role. The role is replaceable though. The spread offense gives the slot WR a ton of opportunities that inflate their catch numbers. If you don't think Wayne Chrebet was replaceable you're smoking the peace pipe a little too strongly. Welker is not as easily replaceable as Chrebet, it is harder to find a player of his caliber. Edited November 5, 2009 by 124 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 If you don't think Wayne Chrebet was replaceable you're smoking the peace pipe a little too strongly. Welker is not as easily replaceable as Chrebet, it is harder to find a player of his caliber. I never even mentioned Chrebet. But I could name guys across the league I think could fill Welkers roll just as good, Cotchery being one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I never even mentioned Chrebet. But I could name guys across the league I think could fill Welkers roll just as good, Cotchery being one. :rl: Cotchery does not have Welker's speed, he is not as effective in the slot in New England. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Wes Welker has already had two seasons in which he had 20+ more receptions in each of those seasons than Chrebet had in his best season. Stop right there! Three yard passes do not count - even if the yack gets you a first down and/or more! Short passes, dump offs, screens, quick sideline outs - nadda, nadda, nadda. Those are NOT catches. Nope. Yack does not count. Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 :rl: :rl: Cotchery does not have Welker's speed, he is not as effective in the slot in New England. Welker isnt fast. He's quick and strong after the catch. Simiar to Jericho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakeG Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Stop right there! Three yard passes do not count - even if the yack gets you a first down and/or more! Short passes, dump offs, screens, quick sideline outs - nadda, nadda, nadda. Those are NOT catches. Nope. Yack does not count. Nope. you are learning slowly but surely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 It is what it is. Boston likes guys like Pedroia and Welker more than Manny and Moss. Anyone with an unbiased opinion though will tell you its really not that close. You are clueless. Manny is a separate issue, but I loved watching Manny. I hated his antics, but when he brought his "A" game. He was great. Not on the issue at hand. I love Moss and Welker. I love how Moss stretches the field. Again, for about 1200x in this thread, we get what Randy adds to the Patriots offense. How in one post you can say, "Welker is good at his role", but totally dismiss that role in the grand scheme of game planning. It is in this thread or one of the other ones I brought up the top QB splits. Here are some of the game's best QBS: Brady 191 of 273 passes under 10 yards. Manning 168 of 263. Brees 136 of 230. Favre 191 of 256. Big Ben 159 of 233 See a pattern? The game is largely played behind the LOS out to 10 yards. This is the 'role" Welker excels at. Randy could do it, but I doubt he is as effective, just like I think you can split Wes outside. However, he is not going to outrun anyone. The irony in your post is all the unending Jeter man crushes that go on this board. You knock Bah-ston fans for loving an overachieving player and yet you guy probably have a Jeter tat on your butt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) It is what it is. Boston likes guys like Pedroia and Welker more than Manny and Moss. Anyone with an unbiased opinion though will tell you its really not that close. I thought you were better than that. Massachusetts is so racist/bigoted that we have a black Governor and an openly gay Congressman. The most beloved Pats player apart from Brady is Troy Brown (retired). The most beloved Celtics player is Paul Pierce or KG. The most beloved Sox player is David Ortiz. Boston fans cheer for their teams. Skin colour has nothing to do with it. Last time I looked it was 2009 not 1969. FU. Edited November 5, 2009 by Gainzo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 (edited) I thought you were better than that. Massachusetts is so racist/bigoted that we have a black Governor and an openly gay Congressman. The most beloved Pats player apart from Brady is Troy Brown (retired). The most beloved Celtics player is Paul Pierce or KG. The most beloved Sox player is David Ortiz. Boston fans cheer for their teams. Skin colour has nothing to do with it. Last time I looked it was 2009 not 1969. FU. Wow. The fact that you thought I was insinuating skin color is embarrassing. Just wow. Pedroia = small "gritty" gets his jersey dirty player. Ditto Welker. Itangibles and all that other stuff people overrate players by You guys let the feel good overachieving aspect blind you from judging talent. All four are great players. But only two are hall of famers. Edited November 6, 2009 by Matt39 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.