Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    We were dumb letting Welkie get away.  That whole situation was mismanaged.  What a fiascal that was.  Bill got all but hurt and stuborn and once again hurt this team with his massive ego.  Welkie and Brady would be lighting the field on fire if Welkie was still here.  I think everyone knows by now that Brady was going to Welkie so much because welkie could get open.  These scrubs we have now can not get open.  They could carry around an open sign and still be closed, if you know what I mean.  They can not make decisions when to cut off a route and help Brady out. 

    Who are we trying to fool?  Even when healthy, which is rarely, Danny isn't even close to the receiver Welkie is.  What a bad move we made here.  I wan't here when this move was made so please, by a show of hands, who here spoke out saying this move was a good move when it happened?  And Edelman??? Wasn't he a QB?  Why is he playing receiver in the NFL?  Is he another Belichick project gone bad?  Let's face it, these receivers couldn't even start for the Jacksonville Jags. 

    Here we are dumping on a HOF QB, but when we really look at it he is the only reason this offense could score enough points to be 5-2 right now.  Any other QB playing for this team and we are maybe 1-6.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And if my grandmother had ba11s she'd be my grandfather.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well maybe she does, maybe she is really your grandfather expect you bought into Bill telling you all these years that she is your grandmother.  Shame on you.  Maybe you should check.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And if my grandmother had ba11s she'd be my grandfather.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well maybe she does, maybe she is really your grandfather expect you bought into Bill telling you all these years that she is your grandmother.  Shame on you.  Maybe you should check.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not entirely certain I can decypher that so I'll speak to your post immediately preceding this one.  

    Yes, well, I have to chuckle at those who view Welker's departure as a function of the Pats mismanagement of the situation.  As if, somehow, Welker (or his agent) had no role in his departure or the decisions that Wes made over the preceding couple of years.  

    But do carry on beating that dead horse.  All the handwringing and second guessing on the planet isn't going to change a thing.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brad34. Show Brad34's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to DontQuestionBB's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    After watching last night's Denver/Colts game, I was reminded just how good of a player Wes Welker was.  He had 7 rec catches for 96 yds, more than Thompkins and Dobson combined!  

    People can blame the bad calls by the refs, offensive line, and coaching.  But the fact is the Pats have the worst group of WR's than any other team.  Thompkins and Dobson aren't getting better and I expect the drops too continue.  

    Welker have better numbers than any of the Pats WR's by the end of the season, and too think he could have been on the Pats for chump change is disgraceful.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't know what they would be with him this year but the bloke they signed to replace him in DA is an absolute dud. Can't stay on the field. If they have given him anywhere near what the offered Welker then it is the height of stupidity and somebody needs to be sacked for it.  He had issues in St Louis staying on the field and it has gotten worse here this year. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

     

    We wont really know until the playoffs if letting Welker go was a good idea or not.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brad34. Show Brad34's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We were dumb letting Welkie get away.  That whole situation was mismanaged.  What a fiascal that was.  Bill got all but hurt and stuborn and once again hurt this team with his massive ego.  Welkie and Brady would be lighting the field on fire if Welkie was still here.  I think everyone knows by now that Brady was going to Welkie so much because welkie could get open.  These scrubs we have now can not get open.  They could carry around an open sign and still be closed, if you know what I mean.  They can not make decisions when to cut off a route and help Brady out. 

    Who are we trying to fool?  Even when healthy, which is rarely, Danny isn't even close to the receiver Welkie is.  What a bad move we made here.  I wan't here when this move was made so please, by a show of hands, who here spoke out saying this move was a good move when it happened?  And Edelman??? Wasn't he a QB?  Why is he playing receiver in the NFL?  Is he another Belichick project gone bad?  Let's face it, these receivers couldn't even start for the Jacksonville Jags. 

    Here we are dumping on a HOF QB, but when we really look at it he is the only reason this offense could score enough points to be 5-2 right now.  Any other QB playing for this team and we are maybe 1-6.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think they were dumb in not signing an adequate replacement for him. DA is a joke. He was in St Louis and is even worse here. 1 of the worst signings in the BB era considering who he was replacing.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to shenanigan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Yeah, we know you would personally rather complain about every player every day because they didn't pick the one of the 10 players that turned out good out of the 500 players you wanted to draft.  Lets just pretend Welker didn't choose to leave, and accept less money cause then what would we bich about.

    He's gone, he dropped critical game winning balls in the playoffs twice, and the Pats are 5-2 without him.

    [/QUOTE]

    If they signed Sanders I wouldn't complain because then at least they'd have a back up plan. But, if you can't complain about giving up a proven durable player for one that has missed more games in the last 2.5 years then he's played what can you complain about? I mean honestly Shenanigan the writing was on the wall for both of these guys and I said it way back in March, if you are going to move forward with either you'd better have good backup plans for 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And if my grandmother had ba11s she'd be my grandfather.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well maybe she does, maybe she is really your grandfather expect you bought into Bill telling you all these years that she is your grandmother.  Shame on you.  Maybe you should check.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not entirely certain I can decypher that so I'll speak to your post immediately preceding this one.  

    Yes, well, I have to chuckle at those who view Welker's departure as a function of the Pats mismanagement of the situation.  As if, somehow, Welker (or his agent) had no role in his departure or the decisions that Wes made over the preceding couple of years.  

    But do carry on beating that dead horse.  All the handwringing and second guessing on the planet isn't going to change a thing.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    handwringing and second guessing?  Did you not see what Welkie did here over the years?  Did you not see what Edelman and Danny have done over the years?  Why should there be any second guessing?  Many thought it was a horrible idea to begin with.  Sorry you couldnt see it like a lot of people could.  Welkie and his agent called the bluff.  Bill's massive ego trying to get one over on a player, what a shame.  Had Bill offered another million per season instead of the crazy incentives then we wouldn't be having this discussion.  Instead, Billy thinks he can plug in Edelman and sign a broken amendola trying to show how smart he is and it backfired again.  (look at the Arrington extension as mistake number 2, A. Wilson mistake number 3, Dropson and Thompkins mistake number 4 and 5)  Maybe you better start paying better attention to our players instead of taking everyone for granted.  Let me guess, you are one of the people who thinks Bill can do no wrong.  Okay, I get it now.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree, not because I think Welker is a genius who the Pats needed to break bank for like the OP, I just think that Brady's unhealthy relationship with Welker made him too Welker dependent.

    Brady probably hasn't worked on his deep ball since 2009 when Randy was still a threat since his deep ball looks like he's trying to emulate Sanchez anytime he goes deep. Brady has looked REALLY bad this season, like he checked out or something, and I think it's all because of Welker. 

    I think Manning would be 7-0 with these Patriots, you can blame Kenny and Dobson all you want, but Brady zeroed in on Gronk targeting him 17 times. Open, not open, Brady didn't care.

    [/QUOTE]
    Sorry, I've got to call more BS here. Brady had no unhealthy relationship with Welker.  Welker was by far his best receiver on a team that had very few receivers.  He threw to him a lot because that's what he was given to throw to.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pre-2009, our boy was a lethal surgeon capable of cutting teams open and devouring their hearts with Reche Caldwell as his best WR. Now? He can't control his passes and overcommits. What changed? His BFF left that he used to work out with in the offseason.

    If Brady rights himself and becomes Brady again we still have a chance, if not? Oh boy...

    [/QUOTE]


    ^^^^^^ Same guy, who said last night, that "it was the women's (Pats fans) fault that she got punched in the face by the Jets fan", at the game.

    Obviously, displaced reasoning ability.  Rusty # 2017?????

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    Here we go again with DA is a dud.  Yeah, sure, he's injury prone because of a concusion from a hit that would have knocked anyone into the twilight zone and the guy should have just gotten up and shaken it off.  

    DA may very well be a dud but labeling him one as a consequence of him being out now is a little extreme.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    We wont really know until the playoffs if letting Welker go was a good idea or not.

    [/QUOTE]


    What a joke of a statement.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And if my grandmother had ba11s she'd be my grandfather.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well maybe she does, maybe she is really your grandfather expect you bought into Bill telling you all these years that she is your grandmother.  Shame on you.  Maybe you should check.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not entirely certain I can decypher that so I'll speak to your post immediately preceding this one.  

    Yes, well, I have to chuckle at those who view Welker's departure as a function of the Pats mismanagement of the situation.  As if, somehow, Welker (or his agent) had no role in his departure or the decisions that Wes made over the preceding couple of years.  

    But do carry on beating that dead horse.  All the handwringing and second guessing on the planet isn't going to change a thing.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    handwringing and second guessing?  Did you not see what Welkie did here over the years?  Did you not see what Edelman and Danny have done over the years?  Why should there be any second guessing?  Many thought it was a horrible idea to begin with.  Sorry you couldnt see it like a lot of people could.  Welkie and his agent called the bluff.  Bill's massive ego trying to get one over on a player, what a shame.  Had Bill offered another million per season instead of the crazy incentives then we wouldn't be having this discussion.  Instead, Billy thinks he can plug in Edelman and sign a broken amendola trying to show how smart he is and it backfired again.  (look at the Arrington extension as mistake number 2, A. Wilson mistake number 3, Dropson and Thompkins mistake number 4 and 5)  Maybe you better start paying better attention to our players instead of taking everyone for granted.  Let me guess, you are one of the people who thinks Bill can do no wrong.  Okay, I get it now.

    [/QUOTE]

    My apologies - didn't realize that you had first hand knowledge of the entire process.  So do you work in the Pats front office?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from darwk. Show darwk's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    Wes is an amazing talent. And I believe that part of TB's funk this season is due to the loss of Welker. It was clearly a mistake to let him go to the Broncos.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tg19pats. Show tg19pats's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    Lets give Dobson and thompkins more time. They are going to be fine. I liked welker and would have loved to see a health amendola so we could compare the two players. When DA is on the field he makes things happen. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree, not because I think Welker is a genius who the Pats needed to break bank for like the OP, I just think that Brady's unhealthy relationship with Welker made him too Welker dependent.

    Brady probably hasn't worked on his deep ball since 2009 when Randy was still a threat since his deep ball looks like he's trying to emulate Sanchez anytime he goes deep. Brady has looked REALLY bad this season, like he checked out or something, and I think it's all because of Welker. 

    I think Manning would be 7-0 with these Patriots, you can blame Kenny and Dobson all you want, but Brady zeroed in on Gronk targeting him 17 times. Open, not open, Brady didn't care.

    [/QUOTE]
    Sorry, I've got to call more BS here. Brady had no unhealthy relationship with Welker.  Welker was by far his best receiver on a team that had very few receivers.  He threw to him a lot because that's what he was given to throw to.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pre-2009, our boy was a lethal surgeon capable of cutting teams open and devouring their hearts with Reche Caldwell as his best WR. Now? He can't control his passes and overcommits. What changed? His BFF left that he used to work out with in the offseason.

    If Brady rights himself and becomes Brady again we still have a chance, if not? Oh boy...

    [/QUOTE]


    ^^^^^^ Same guy, who said last night, that "it was the women's (Pats fans) fault that she got punched in the face by the Jets fan", at the game.

    Obviously, displaced reasoning ability.  Rusty # 2017?????

    [/QUOTE]

    You're silly if you think that lady had no fault in getting hit, would you jump into a fight shoving some and striking them? No you wouldn't because you expect the person might punch you, no? Why did she think she was in any danger? Because boys aren't suppose to hit girls? Welcome to the real world, mister. Not everyone is a White Knight who lives by a code of honor, there are bad people in the world. 

    I'm a realist, you're an idealist. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here we go again with DA is a dud.  Yeah, sure, he's injury prone because of a concusion from a hit that would have knocked anyone into the twilight zone and the guy should have just gotten up and shaken it off.  

    DA may very well be a dud but labeling him one as a consequence of him being out now is a little extreme.

    [/QUOTE]

    He has a list of injuries that has kept him out of most of the games during his career.  Does not matter what the injury is, hence the word injury and injury prone.  Please tell me what type of injuries a player would have to have to be considered injury prone.  Excuses, excuses.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here we go again with DA is a dud.  Yeah, sure, he's injury prone because of a concusion from a hit that would have knocked anyone into the twilight zone and the guy should have just gotten up and shaken it off.  

    DA may very well be a dud but labeling him one as a consequence of him being out now is a little extreme.

    [/QUOTE]

    He has a list of injuries that has kept him out of most of the games during his career.  Does not matter what the injury is, hence the word injury and injury prone.  Please tell me what type of injuries a player would have to have to be considered injury prone.  Excuses, excuses.

    [/QUOTE]

    One of the things that I try to do when responding to a post is read the entire post to which I'm responding.  Wondering if you'd actually read the section of my post that I've bold-ed.  

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoNotSleepOnThePats. Show DoNotSleepOnThePats's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    No, they would not be 7-0 with Welker.  Brady would still be a very inaccurate passer.  Stop blaming the new guys for everything.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And if my grandmother had ba11s she'd be my grandfather.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well maybe she does, maybe she is really your grandfather expect you bought into Bill telling you all these years that she is your grandmother.  Shame on you.  Maybe you should check.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not entirely certain I can decypher that so I'll speak to your post immediately preceding this one.  

    Yes, well, I have to chuckle at those who view Welker's departure as a function of the Pats mismanagement of the situation.  As if, somehow, Welker (or his agent) had no role in his departure or the decisions that Wes made over the preceding couple of years.  

    But do carry on beating that dead horse.  All the handwringing and second guessing on the planet isn't going to change a thing.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    handwringing and second guessing?  Did you not see what Welkie did here over the years?  Did you not see what Edelman and Danny have done over the years?  Why should there be any second guessing?  Many thought it was a horrible idea to begin with.  Sorry you couldnt see it like a lot of people could.  Welkie and his agent called the bluff.  Bill's massive ego trying to get one over on a player, what a shame.  Had Bill offered another million per season instead of the crazy incentives then we wouldn't be having this discussion.  Instead, Billy thinks he can plug in Edelman and sign a broken amendola trying to show how smart he is and it backfired again.  (look at the Arrington extension as mistake number 2, A. Wilson mistake number 3, Dropson and Thompkins mistake number 4 and 5)  Maybe you better start paying better attention to our players instead of taking everyone for granted.  Let me guess, you are one of the people who thinks Bill can do no wrong.  Okay, I get it now.

    [/QUOTE]

    My apologies - didn't realize that you had first hand knowledge of the entire process.  So do you work in the Pats front office?

    [/QUOTE]

    Apology accepted.  Thank you!

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to DoNotSleepOnThePats's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No, they would not be 7-0 with Welker.  Brady would still be a very inaccurate passer.  Stop blaming the new guys for everything.

    [/QUOTE]

    Hello denial, meet DoNotSleepOnThePats.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    Here we go again with DA is a dud.  Yeah, sure, he's injury prone because of a concusion from a hit that would have knocked anyone into the twilight zone and the guy should have just gotten up and shaken it off.  

    DA may very well be a dud but labeling him one as a consequence of him being out now is a little extreme.



    How about labeling him one because he's played in 1.5 games out of a possible 7? That one hit didn't cause him to miss the other 4 games nor did it have him miss all the other games over his career. The guy can't string more than a handful of games together at a time and he can't stay healthy whether it's his head, elbow, wrist, collarbone,  groin, hamstring. If he misses a couple more games he would have effectivly missed (be effectively I mean played on the field as a starter that he's being paid for) half the season for the 3rd year in a row. At what point can we start to call him injury prone? And if you can't be on the field and be an effective starter you get paid to do, doesn't that make you a dud?

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And if my grandmother had ba11s she'd be my grandfather.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well maybe she does, maybe she is really your grandfather expect you bought into Bill telling you all these years that she is your grandmother.  Shame on you.  Maybe you should check.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not entirely certain I can decypher that so I'll speak to your post immediately preceding this one.  

    Yes, well, I have to chuckle at those who view Welker's departure as a function of the Pats mismanagement of the situation.  As if, somehow, Welker (or his agent) had no role in his departure or the decisions that Wes made over the preceding couple of years.  

    But do carry on beating that dead horse.  All the handwringing and second guessing on the planet isn't going to change a thing.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    handwringing and second guessing?  Did you not see what Welkie did here over the years?  Did you not see what Edelman and Danny have done over the years?  Why should there be any second guessing?  Many thought it was a horrible idea to begin with.  Sorry you couldnt see it like a lot of people could.  Welkie and his agent called the bluff.  Bill's massive ego trying to get one over on a player, what a shame.  Had Bill offered another million per season instead of the crazy incentives then we wouldn't be having this discussion.  Instead, Billy thinks he can plug in Edelman and sign a broken amendola trying to show how smart he is and it backfired again.  (look at the Arrington extension as mistake number 2, A. Wilson mistake number 3, Dropson and Thompkins mistake number 4 and 5)  Maybe you better start paying better attention to our players instead of taking everyone for granted.  Let me guess, you are one of the people who thinks Bill can do no wrong.  Okay, I get it now.

    [/QUOTE]

    My apologies - didn't realize that you had first hand knowledge of the entire process.  So do you work in the Pats front office?

    [/QUOTE]

    Apology accepted.  Thank you!

    [/QUOTE]

    Since you accepted my apology, what position in the Pats front office do you hold?

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    Not sure I want to even touch this thread.  I know most everyone knows my feelings on this matter.  I also know there were some people here bashing me over how strongly I felt about not bringing Welker back.  Where is RallyC now.  That dude made this issue personal between us.  What a fraud he was.  I know he still pops in from time to time to view the forum, so hey RallyC, you were wrong, how do you like that!  Please tell me more about how Amendola was going to come here and be more productive then Welker and how Welker wasn't going to be productive as a Bronco.  Look at his numbers!!!  Hahahaha, LOL at you RallyC.  Oh and you too Rusty.

    Just too bad Welker isn't still here helping this team.  OP is correct, this team would be 7-0 with Welker still here.  And it would be a strong 7-0.

    Sorry folks, that rant had to be done.  RallyC and Rusty had to be called out on this.

    RallyC also said Tebow would remain a Patriot through the season too.  Oh, and that he would have some action at TE and catch some passes.  RallyC also said he plaid the game before!  Hahahaha!  What a fraud he was.  So glad he is gone, or at least hiding under a new screen name and keeping a low profile.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree, not because I think Welker is a genius who the Pats needed to break bank for like the OP, I just think that Brady's unhealthy relationship with Welker made him too Welker dependent.

    Brady probably hasn't worked on his deep ball since 2009 when Randy was still a threat since his deep ball looks like he's trying to emulate Sanchez anytime he goes deep. Brady has looked REALLY bad this season, like he checked out or something, and I think it's all because of Welker. 

    I think Manning would be 7-0 with these Patriots, you can blame Kenny and Dobson all you want, but Brady zeroed in on Gronk targeting him 17 times. Open, not open, Brady didn't care.

    [/QUOTE]
    Sorry, I've got to call more BS here. Brady had no unhealthy relationship with Welker.  Welker was by far his best receiver on a team that had very few receivers.  He threw to him a lot because that's what he was given to throw to.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pre-2009, our boy was a lethal surgeon capable of cutting teams open and devouring their hearts with Reche Caldwell as his best WR. Now? He can't control his passes and overcommits. What changed? His BFF left that he used to work out with in the offseason.

    If Brady rights himself and becomes Brady again we still have a chance, if not? Oh boy...

    [/QUOTE]


    Brady is definitely struggling this year.  Some of it's him and some of it is his receivers.  But let's not exaggerate what Brady did in 2006.  That team was no offensive juggernaut, 12th in passing yards, 12 th in rushing yards, and 7th in points, averaging 24.1 per game.  It was a nicely balanced team, however, with decent pass and run offense and a fairly stingy defense. 

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoNotSleepOnThePats. Show DoNotSleepOnThePats's posts

    Re: Pats would be 7-0 with Welker.

    Uncle Rico, I'm not in denial.  I'm a realistic football fan.  This team has deeper issues than missing a slot receiver.  Those of you who can't ever blame Brady are in denial.  Not me.  Sorry.

     

Share