Greg Jennings...

[Palo20]

The Jennings vs. Welker debate is interesting. I think it depends on what your team needs. If you already have Randy Moss on the team, you have the choice between Welker as a complement or another #1 WR in a guy like Jennings, I think you could go either way. If you really need a move-the-chains kind of guy, Welker is the best at what he does.

If your team has no #1 WR, I'd say Jennings would be the pick.

[beastsofboston]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

I don't think there's anyone here who doesn't get how the offense works. And as mentioned, Jennings isn't a deep threat. He's a good WR who can go deep successfully. Welker's a one trick pony.

Im not talking about a basic offence im talking about the patriots spread attack offence.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by patriotsk1d

Im not talking about a basic offence im talking about the patriots spread attack offence.

It really doesn't matter what you're talking about. I was the first one to say Welker would make a huge impact on the Pats when they picked him up. The position is perfect for his skills, but the point is ONLY this position makes his skills shine, and it's not the other way around. Palo explained it pretty well. Jennings talents would be wasted in a role like Welker has. He's simply a better player. It's not like the Pats offense is rocket science or the addition of Welker has added to their ring total. Honestly, suggesting that a slot WR (which you've even acknowledged) is better than a clear #1 makes no sense. Welker would never succeed as a #1 WR and would be average at best in any other role than what he has now.

[beastsofboston]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

It really doesn't matter what you're talking about. I was the first one to say Welker would make a huge impact on the Pats when they picked him up. The position is perfect for his skills, but the point is ONLY this position makes his skills shine, and it's not the other way around. Palo explained it pretty well. Jennings talents would be wasted in a role like Welker has. He's simply a better player. It's not like the Pats offense is rocket science or the addition of Welker has added to their ring total. Honestly, suggesting that a slot WR (which you've even acknowledged) is better than a clear #1 makes no sense. Welker would never succeed as a #1 WR and would be average at best in any other role than what he has now.

Im trying to make this exact point. Welker would is better at the position he does and neither guy could switch shoes. I mean welker couldnt play the outside and jennings couldnt play the slot.

Now by meaning of a basic slot reciever hes not. General offences dont run 4-5 Slot screens per game.

[GatorChomp2345]

Quote: Originally Posted by patriotsk1d

Well no Question Welker couldnt be a number 1 reciever, but c'mon jennings over welker. Welker had 110 catches, then 111 catches, and then 128 catches and he missed 3 games this year and still 128. Jennings just doesnt make tons of big plays.

Your kidding with that comment right? He is one the most explosive receivers in the NFL and he doesn't play in a "spread" offense like Welker does. Don't get me wrong I'm not hating on Welker, I used to live on the east coast and I really like most east coast teams. The Pats and Pack are my favorite teams so I'm not saying anything negative about the Patriots offense either.

Im saying that Jennings makes a lot of big plays and if he was in the Patriots system, could compete with Welker as the number 2.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by patriotsk1d

Im trying to make this exact point. Welker would is better at the position he does and neither guy could switch shoes. I mean welker couldnt play the outside and jennings couldnt play the slot. Now by meaning of a basic slot reciever hes not. General offences dont run 4-5 Slot screens per game.

You don't know what you're talking about, which is why it's funny that you tried to say everyone else doesn't understand the Pats offense. Jennings could play in the slot as well as many other players. I'm not calling Welker an overrated bum like some have around here, but there are plenty of players that could play that position. The reason they wouldn't is because it'd be a waste of their talent to limit them in that way.

The reason Welker is perfect is because he lacks the talent of these other players... his talent is reached in this role and he plays it to the best of his ability, and gets all the props in the world for that. But that doesn't make him a top 5 WR in the NFL or anywhere close to it.

Lets say you have a 6'9 WR who comes in only when the team is in the red zone. Lets say this guy catches 15 tds on a season but finishes with something like 35 total catches. We'd say he's very valuable and may even be worthy of a pro bowl but nobody would argue that he's a top 5 or even 10 WR in the league. This is Welker... but he doesn't even put the points on the board that my hypothetical WR would.

The games that Welker missed, Edelman put up almost the same numbers. The role inflates his stats. He's important. He's good. He's far from great.