Quote:
Originally Posted by PatsFanTX
I think you and I would have done things differently. 
What I don't understand is fans (of any team) who think it it worthwhile to pay players based on what they have done in the past. Kinda like they "owe" them something.
That's totally ridiculous and that's exactly how teams get stuck with crappy contracts in the future.
The point you make in your last post is dead-on. Based on Welker's advancing age and lack of "big play" production, that should not lead to a contract extension. It would be a dumb move.
It is imperative the Pats get Brady 1, if not 2, legitimate downfield WR's this year. They haven't had that since Randy Moss.
With the improvement of a down-field passing game, it would totally minimize the loss of Welker. |
I agree with you, but with a caveat--the "owe" part rightfully comes into play with still productive, but older championship players. It fits into the notion of, "we won with this guy before, we can win again with him."
Of course, there can't be a precipitous drop in production or injury issues.
I wouldn't bring Welker back either because as said, even with the production, he's come up small in big spots and they're better off getting that production elsewhere from either a younger or more dynamic receiver.