Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.
posted at 10/21/2013 7:42 AM EDT
In response to Pats-bilbo's comment:
Sorry but I disagree.
I think they miss Welker and they are adjusting to life without him. I think they may have had more offense with Welker here but that does not mean that they win the games.
They are not converting 3rd downs. The last few years they have led or been near the top of the league in 3rd down conversion percentages. Now they are in the lower third of the NFL. This is a big swing.
It is not all due to losing Welker. It is due to
1. Loss of Welker, Woodhead, AH and Gronk's Injuries....
2. Brady seems off. Either it is confidence or coaching and I don't think there is enough consideration or discussion about the fact that he lost his personal QB coach, Tom Martinez. Combined with number 1 above and the loss of his mentor and you have a recipe for poor play. We are seeing this. Welker cannot fix this.
3. Poor play by Oline. They have allowed TB to be hit, hurried and uncomfortable. Welker being here can help this a bit but does not address the issue as can be seen by recent Playoff games.
4. Poor execution and results on screen plays. It is amazing how bad we have done on these type plays. Either due to timing or execution or telegraphing, I am not sure, but we use to lead in this but we don't anymore.
5. Edelman has done a good job picking up some of Welker's work and he has done more. DA when playing is better than Welker.
What we miss with Welker is him being on the same page as TFB and being there to bail him out.
No doubt Welker is a player and we miss him, but not sure we win every game because he is here. Without other threats and other options, Welker would not have the same opportunities he has in Denver right now, so difficult to compare.
We should not have lost him, but in the long run the Pats may be better off if the other rookies can develop and become key weapons quickly. Thinking we would be 18-0 just because of Welker is a mistake. This is a team game and injuries play an important role.
I agree and disagree Bilbo. I mean they part I highlighted happened to be both Woodheads and Welkers specialty. Either one I think would have helped to win yesterday as a couple more conversions would have lead to the extra score. I still have no clue why they didn't bother to resign Woodhead either. It makes no sense as they barely save anything by going after Washington instead.
Yeah, I wonder if they could go back right now if they would b-slap themselves in the past and say don't be idiots, take the knowns that work with our system and don't sign injury prone players as ways to replace them.