You're raising a strawman's argument. He did not state that (at least that's what I've understood from your post). He's stating that the company Welker has had is impressive to show that at the least he's quite good.
Oh, I know. I wasn't meaning to imply that he would take Welker over those players, I was just trying to illustrate that I don't think the players compare simply because of their stats
Not anymore than I adjusted Bess' stats even further for stats that Welker didn't put up. I made the adjustment based only on the number of targets that Welker did receive. If you want me to adjust them counting the number of targets that Edelman got on top of what Welker got, it's only going to make Bess look better.
Difference is, I think Edleman's body is built for the hits. Pat White isn't. I cringed every single time anyone got close to hitting Pat White this year and the last hit accomplished what I thought all the others would. I am just not confident that Pat White has an NFL body at this point and the experiment is over at QB.
Welker is in a great system to rack up catches. 99 of his catches have come out of the shotgun and a whopping 111 of his catches have come with 3 or more wide receivers. It's perfect for a quick slot receiver like Welker.
Bottom line is, Welker's average per catch hasn't really significantly increased since he was in Miami, which is why I can't bring myself to say that he is a product of a system. Branch was a product of their system, but I think Welker would do what he does for any team.
Noone said they would rather have Welker than Rice or Harrison, it's just the fact that he shares the same company with them in the record books and yet folks have the gall to say he's overrated is a bit annoying. The guy is finally getting the credit he deserves if you can't appreciate it then just let it be, folks calling him overrated are only making themselves look ignorant. Exactly, he's always done what he's doing, how quick we forget how important Welker was to us while he was here he was the go to guy for every QB we had on 3rd downs. You get the ball anywhere near the guy and he catches it. He was the only player on our team able to consistently move the chains and we all see what happened once he was gone. I've never seen a more stagnant offense than the one we fielded in that 1-15 season. We probably set a record for most 3 and outs in the history of the franchise
I think you might have misremembered a little bit. 1 - Marty Booker had more catches, yards, and TDs on 3rd down than Welker in 2006. 2- Chambers, Booker, and McMichael all had more 1st downs than Welker despite having less receptions in 2006. 3- We had more 1st downs in 2007 than 2006. I don't know about 3 and outs, but we only changed from 37.6% conversion in 2006 to 37.2% in 2007. Despite getting less yards per game in 2007 (22.5 less yards), we actually averaged more points per game. 4- You must've not seen SF's offense in 2007 if you've never seen a more stangant one than ours.
That would show that Welker was less of a go to guy than Chambers. That also doesn't change what Chambers did when he caught the ball (more FDs than Welker, again, on less catches which is the pertinent part).
My point was that Chambers was worse at his job than Welker. I'm too lazy to look...how many fd's did Chambers, McMichael, and Booker have, and how many did Welker have? Was it a vast difference?
lmao....you know you're lazy when you ask the guy you're arguing with to search for the info you need to keep your argument going.
Well, I post from my iphone, and navigating to four different players to check theor stats is a huge PITA.
And? No one said Chambers was better at his job than Welker was at his. Just disputing how much of a "go to guy" Welker was when he was here, or how he was "the only player able to consistently move the chains." And vast difference or not (I can't recall the exact #'s but I'm sure not what anyone would call vast), doesn't change that more players got more 1st downs on less catches.
Well, when you consider that Chambers and Booker were running deeper routes, it's no surprise to me that they had more fd's. I do recall Booker being THE go-to guy for us, though. Luckily that wasn't my argument. LOL
How am I misremembering? I never said he had more 1st downs, I said our QB's always looked to Welker on 3rd downs to move the chains. I think 2006 we actually spread the ball around alot more and Booker, McMichael and Welker all had pretty decent catch percentages. Although i'm sure Chambers still had close to double the passes thrown his way in order to come out with similiar stats as the rest. Where are you getting the 3rd down stats from? How many conversions are attributed to Welker vs. the rest of our recievers?
Ok...you made me do it!! Booker - 28 first downs Chambers - 20 first downs, but a half season. Year before he had 36. McMichael - 35 first downs Welker - 33 first downs
ESPN.com And I disputed that our QB's always looked to Welker on 3rd downs (as I said Booker had more catches, more yards, more TDs). And you never mentioned "clutch" 3rd downs in the other post, just 3rd downs, but good luck proving that clutch one is indeed the case.
Uh, yea he did. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=1831 8 rows down, 9 columns over.
Where are you getting this from? http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=1831&sYear=2006 Booker on 3rd down: 21 for 345 and 4 TDs. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=5941&sYear=2006 Welker on 3rd down: 20 for 239 and 1 TD.
Where did I say clutch? I'll look through the stats later, sick as a dog right now. I am just going from memory I remember all the interviews with Harrington and Culpepper talking about Welker, Saban as well. I don't know the stats though. What about 2005?
LOL No, I edited that right after I posted it, not sure how you saw it though because it wasn't even in your quote. Just thought it was pretty funny
