Wes Welker signs with Denver Broncos / Amendola to Pats (Merged)

[Roy H.]

I have seen a lot of plays where receivers get their hands on a ball through some sort of amazing effort, but don't complete the catch.  Acrobatic plays, twisting plays, diving plays, plays where they're crunched by two defenders.

Is the suggestion that if those player don't complete what would be an otherwise amazing catch, that they're somehow doing something wrong?  Is a receiver who isn't talented enough to get his hands on a ball somehow better than the receiver who makes a play on a poor pass, but who ultimately doesn't make the completion?

As Snakehead said above, that binary argument lacks any sort of context or realism.

Well, for what it's worth, Welker lead the NFL in dropped passes last season, and the second guy wasn't even close. Make of this what you will.

I'm curious what constitutes a "drop".  If they count that incompletion in the Super Bowl as one, then it's a meaningless statistic.

Lol oh man, Sometimes I wonder if we're looking at the same play. There's no way that catch was anywhere near as tough as you're desperately trying to make it out to be. It would have been a good catch but a catch he SHOULD have made.

As someone else said, that's what makes great players great. They catch balls that are right in their hands with no defender near them in the superbowl. Not make excuses because the ball wasn't perfectly thrown..

Welker didn't make any excuses.  He's a great teammate, and teammates don't throw other teammates under the bus.

However, fans are allowed to be a little more objective, and don't have to miscast blame.  You've admitted that it was a poor throw, and required a good catch.  And yet, you put the majority of blame on Welker?  How does that make any sense?

If Brady makes an average throw, the Pats win the Super Bowl.  When Welker drops the ball on a good pass -- like he did against Baltimore -- then he deserves blame.  However, when his QB chokes in the clutch and throws it high and outside, that's on the QB.

[Lightskinsmurf]

I have seen a lot of plays where receivers get their hands on a ball through some sort of amazing effort, but don't complete the catch.  Acrobatic plays, twisting plays, diving plays, plays where they're crunched by two defenders.

Is the suggestion that if those player don't complete what would be an otherwise amazing catch, that they're somehow doing something wrong?  Is a receiver who isn't talented enough to get his hands on a ball somehow better than the receiver who makes a play on a poor pass, but who ultimately doesn't make the completion?

As Snakehead said above, that binary argument lacks any sort of context or realism.

Well, for what it's worth, Welker lead the NFL in dropped passes last season, and the second guy wasn't even close. Make of this what you will.

I'm curious what constitutes a "drop".  If they count that incompletion in the Super Bowl as one, then it's a meaningless statistic.

Lol oh man, Sometimes I wonder if we're looking at the same play. There's no way that catch was anywhere near as tough as you're desperately trying to make it out to be. It would have been a good catch but a catch he SHOULD have made.

As someone else said, that's what makes great players great. They catch balls that are right in their hands with no defender near them in the superbowl. Not make excuses because the ball wasn't perfectly thrown..

Welker didn't make any excuses.  He's a great teammate, and teammates don't throw other teammates under the bus.

However, fans are allowed to be a little more objective, and don't have to miscast blame.  You've admitted that it was a poor throw, and required a good catch.  And yet, you put the majority of blame on Welker?  How does that make any sense?

If Brady makes an average throw, the Pats win the Super Bowl.  When Welker drops the ball on a good pass -- like he did against Baltimore -- then he deserves blame.  However, when his QB chokes in the clutch and throws it high and outside, that's on the QB.

You're using words I never used. I said it wasn't the best throw but it was good enough for welker to catch the ball. This is the NFL, you make that catch in the NFL. Hell, you make that catch in your backyard playing with your friends.  I say it would have been a good catch because it wasn't "routine" but it was still VERY VERY VERY catchable.

[Donoghus]

I have seen a lot of plays where receivers get their hands on a ball through some sort of amazing effort, but don't complete the catch.  Acrobatic plays, twisting plays, diving plays, plays where they're crunched by two defenders.

Is the suggestion that if those player don't complete what would be an otherwise amazing catch, that they're somehow doing something wrong?  Is a receiver who isn't talented enough to get his hands on a ball somehow better than the receiver who makes a play on a poor pass, but who ultimately doesn't make the completion?

As Snakehead said above, that binary argument lacks any sort of context or realism.

Well, for what it's worth, Welker lead the NFL in dropped passes last season, and the second guy wasn't even close. Make of this what you will.

I'm curious what constitutes a "drop".  If they count that incompletion in the Super Bowl as one, then it's a meaningless statistic.

Lol oh man, Sometimes I wonder if we're looking at the same play. There's no way that catch was anywhere near as tough as you're desperately trying to make it out to be. It would have been a good catch but a catch he SHOULD have made.

As someone else said, that's what makes great players great. They catch balls that are right in their hands with no defender near them in the superbowl. Not make excuses because the ball wasn't perfectly thrown..

Welker didn't make any excuses.  He's a great teammate, and teammates don't throw other teammates under the bus.

However, fans are allowed to be a little more objective, and don't have to miscast blame.  You've admitted that it was a poor throw, and required a good catch.  And yet, you put the majority of blame on Welker?  How does that make any sense?

If Brady makes an average throw, the Pats win the Super Bowl.  When Welker drops the ball on a good pass -- like he did against Baltimore -- then he deserves blame.  However, when his QB chokes in the clutch and throws it high and outside, that's on the QB.

So is this anaylysis supposed to be objective?

[Roy H.]

^ To me, a "routine catch" and a "good catch" are two separate things.  Just like an "average throw" and a "bad throw" are separate and distinct.

[kozlodoev]

Welker didn't make any excuses.  He's a great teammate, and teammates don't throw other teammates under the bus.

However, fans are allowed to be a little more objective, and don't have to miscast blame.  You've admitted that it was a poor throw, and required a good catch.  And yet, you put the majority of blame on Welker?  How does that make any sense?

If Brady makes an average throw, the Pats win the Super Bowl.  When Welker drops the ball on a good pass -- like he did against Baltimore -- then he deserves blame.  However, when his QB chokes in the clutch and throws it high and outside, that's on the QB.

Even if all of this is true -- what exactly is the problem with replacing Welker with someone who is younger, and by all objective accounts appears to have better hands?

We're in this to win -- and the teams has IMMENSELY bigger problems right now than replacing Welker with Amendola. How about we count the starting-caliber corners we have under contract right now? (hint: the list is short)

[Roy H.]

I have seen a lot of plays where receivers get their hands on a ball through some sort of amazing effort, but don't complete the catch.  Acrobatic plays, twisting plays, diving plays, plays where they're crunched by two defenders.

Is the suggestion that if those player don't complete what would be an otherwise amazing catch, that they're somehow doing something wrong?  Is a receiver who isn't talented enough to get his hands on a ball somehow better than the receiver who makes a play on a poor pass, but who ultimately doesn't make the completion?

As Snakehead said above, that binary argument lacks any sort of context or realism.

Well, for what it's worth, Welker lead the NFL in dropped passes last season, and the second guy wasn't even close. Make of this what you will.

I'm curious what constitutes a "drop".  If they count that incompletion in the Super Bowl as one, then it's a meaningless statistic.

Lol oh man, Sometimes I wonder if we're looking at the same play. There's no way that catch was anywhere near as tough as you're desperately trying to make it out to be. It would have been a good catch but a catch he SHOULD have made.

As someone else said, that's what makes great players great. They catch balls that are right in their hands with no defender near them in the superbowl. Not make excuses because the ball wasn't perfectly thrown..

Welker didn't make any excuses.  He's a great teammate, and teammates don't throw other teammates under the bus.

However, fans are allowed to be a little more objective, and don't have to miscast blame.  You've admitted that it was a poor throw, and required a good catch.  And yet, you put the majority of blame on Welker?  How does that make any sense?

If Brady makes an average throw, the Pats win the Super Bowl.  When Welker drops the ball on a good pass -- like he did against Baltimore -- then he deserves blame.  However, when his QB chokes in the clutch and throws it high and outside, that's on the QB.

So is this anaylysis supposed to be objective?

I think it's objective, sure.  What's my agenda?  Arguing that wide receivers shouldn't be blamed when their QB misses them badly on a throw? 

Like I said, blame Welker when he drops a good pass, like he did against Baltimore.  Don't hang him out to dry when his QB messes up, though.

[Roy H.]

Welker didn't make any excuses.  He's a great teammate, and teammates don't throw other teammates under the bus.

However, fans are allowed to be a little more objective, and don't have to miscast blame.  You've admitted that it was a poor throw, and required a good catch.  And yet, you put the majority of blame on Welker?  How does that make any sense?

If Brady makes an average throw, the Pats win the Super Bowl.  When Welker drops the ball on a good pass -- like he did against Baltimore -- then he deserves blame.  However, when his QB chokes in the clutch and throws it high and outside, that's on the QB.

Even if all of this is true -- what exactly is the problem with replacing Welker with someone who is younger, and by all objective accounts appears to have better hands?

We're in this to win -- and the teams has IMMENSELY bigger problems right now than replacing Welker with Amendola. How about we count the starting-caliber corners we have under contract right now? (hint: the list is short)

I think it's going to be nearly impossible for Amendola to replicate Welker's production or impact in the short term.  Messing with the chemistry of the top QB/WR tandem in the league seems like a negative for a "win now" team.

I actually like Amendola.  However, I don't think he's on Welker's level at this point, and I think that chemistry is being wildly underrated by the organization.  Brady hasn't seemed to "click" with other WRs the team has brought in; I think the team is messing with something that has worked tremendously well for them.

[kozlodoev]

Interesting piece of news from the tweetfeed today:

@tomecurran: Amendola signed with the Patriots on Tuesday. NE did not react to Denver, they made choice when Welker went to market

[Lightskinsmurf]

^ To me, a "routine catch" and a "good catch" are two separate things.  Just like an "average throw" and a "bad throw" are separate and distinct.

Yes, I agree. You must of read what I said wrong. I said I would have called it a good catch because it WASN'T routine. That catch would have been a notch above routine but still very very catchable.

Especially with no defender near you. Just because it wasn't routine doesn't mean its not a catch you should have made. This is the NFL. Just because its not right inbetween the numbers doesn't mean you get a pass for dropping the ball.

[KGs Knee]

I guess the best way to settle the debate about the dropped pass in the SB, and who's fault it was, is to say this; it was what was supposed to happen.

"Supposed to happen", in that, by the pass going incomplete, and the Giants winning the Super Bowl, all was right in the world.  The good guys won, the bad guys lost.  It was meant to happen.  So, blame it on the "football gods".   

Oh god really man? Who do you root for?

Isn't it obvious, the good guys. 

[kozlodoev]

I think it's going to be nearly impossible for Amendola to replicate Welker's production or impact in the short term.  Messing with the chemistry of the top QB/WR tandem in the league seems like a negative for a "win now" team.

We'll see. People claim Lloyd had "no chemistry" with Brady, but he still caught 70+ balls for 900+ yards. And Branch, for all his supposed chemistry, was firmly rooted in the 50/700 range before we got Lloyd.

[Roy H.]

^ To me, a "routine catch" and a "good catch" are two separate things.  Just like an "average throw" and a "bad throw" are separate and distinct.

Yes, I agree. You must of read what I said wrong. I said I would have called it a good catch because it WASN'T routine. That catch would have been a notch above routine but still very very catchable.

Especially with no defender near you. Just because it wasn't routine doesn't mean its not a catch you should have made. This is the NFL. Just because its not right inbetween the numbers doesn't mean you get a pass for dropping the ball.

To be clear, I don't expect perfection in a pass.

However, there are different types of off-target throws.  Throws that lead a WR a little too much, or that are slightly too high or too low, are definitely catchable.  They require the WR to make an adjustment, but it's basically within the area where a ball is reachable.

What happened on the Brady incompletion to Welker is different.  His throw required his WR to contort and to totally break stride.  When guys are required to rapidly change direction, that makes a catch very, very difficult.  Balls that are behind a guy are among the most uncatchable balls throw.

I'm surprised that Welker's critics are so vehement on this one.  Maybe we should all pay closer attention to how often WRs catch those "high and outside" balls this coming season.  One group of us is going to be pretty surprised.

[Roy H.]

I think it's going to be nearly impossible for Amendola to replicate Welker's production or impact in the short term.  Messing with the chemistry of the top QB/WR tandem in the league seems like a negative for a "win now" team.

We'll see. People claim Lloyd had "no chemistry" with Brady, but he still caught 70+ balls for 900+ yards.

I think that it's because Lloyd never seemed to have Brady's trust.  When he needed a first down, Brady went to pre-injury Gronk, Hernandez, or Welker.

[kozlodoev]

I'm surprised that Welker's critics are so vehement on this one.  Maybe we should all pay closer attention to how often WRs catch those "high and outside" balls this coming season.  One group of us is going to be pretty surprised.

This is not about this one catch. Maybe we should pay closer attention to the bigger picture, and the bigger picture says Welker dropped a lot of balls last season, and Amendola was clearly better in this department. Unless, of course, you believe that passes thrown by Sam Bradford are inherently "more catchable" than those thrown by Brady.

[Lightskinsmurf]

I guess the best way to settle the debate about the dropped pass in the SB, and who's fault it was, is to say this; it was what was supposed to happen.

"Supposed to happen", in that, by the pass going incomplete, and the Giants winning the Super Bowl, all was right in the world.  The good guys won, the bad guys lost.  It was meant to happen.  So, blame it on the "football gods".   

Oh god really man? Who do you root for?

Isn't it obvious, the good guys. 

Ugh, giants a and dolphins fans everywhere!! I don't want to live in a world like this. *Puts gun in mouth*