So that proves it? b/c he beat a zone undreneath eric smith that means he can get down field? if he can then why doesn't he do it often? any player can get deep once in a while, the great ones can do it w/ a little more consistency. Yep, he led them to 10 wins w/ him as a starter a year after Brady led them to SIXTEEN wins against a MUCH tougher sched. I get it, I am not saying Collie is better b/c he was drafted higher. I am disputing your notion of talent. Some guys outwork others, Welker isn't the most talented guy in the world, if he was he wouldn't have fallen through the cracks. Collie is better than Welker this year w/o Moss to take all the pressure away from him.
You have made some of the worst arguments (specifically the top 3 listed below) I've ever seen from someone with credibility. Anthony Gonzalez Donald Brown when Collie and Welker were drafted Welker is an "overrated" slot receiver Garcon and Collie are "very good NFL receivers"
I said Ginzalaez was talented, that's crazy I said Brown was talented, also crazy I said welker was an overrated player, that's crazy too I said Garcon and Collie were talented guys, also crazy. I brought up draft position based on your asinine assessment that Collie didn't have half the talent of Welker. Try reading instead of interpreting what I actually post.
Collie is averaging the same amount of YPC as Welker has in his career with NE. Collie is not a down the field target either. The Pats offense has always been short passes. Only when they got Moss did they start stretching the field vertically. Welker fits there underneath passing scheme very well. His YPC are down because defenses aren't worried about Brady beating them deep anymore. Meanwhile, Collie gets a ton of underneath catches and YAC because defenses ARE worried about Manning beating them deep. Cassel didn't start a game since H.S. and goes in and wins 10 games. What's my notion of talent? I have never used draft status to signify if one player is better than another. So what do you think my notion of talent is? Brady has not been the same without Moss either. His completion % is less and his YPA are down. His TD% is down as well...Almost by half.
Gonzalez and Brown haven't been on the field. Gonzalez has only played 2 games in the last season and a half. And who cares if they're "talented" if they don't do the job on the field. You say that Manning is "loaded" with talent, yet they don't play like they are loaded with taletn. You overrate Garcon and Collie. Yes, Welker is not overrated. What does draft position have to do with talent level? If that's your argument then you have no arguement. That's as weak as it gets. I did read what your posted and it was weak. You've resorted to using when they were drafted to try to prove that one player is more talented than another.
Welker has averaged 10.4 yards per for NE, Collie is averaging almost a yard more. Not great but alot better than Welker and in 1 1/2 years he has 13 TD recs, Welker has 19 in his entire career. Cassell was in that NE system for years and obviously the man has proven he can play in this league. He faced a much weaker sched than Brady faced the year before and won 6 fewer games. Yet Brady is 3-1 w/ Moss, right? he finds a way to get the job done. W/ Moss 2010: 85-122, 70%, 911 yds, 9 TDs, 2 INTs, 3-1, led O to 24 PPG w/o Moss 2010: 81-139, 58%, 915 yds, 5 TDs, 2 INTs, 3-1, led O to 22 PPG He's slightly less productive which is understandable when you lsoe a guy like Moss who commands so much attention. The discussion was about talent to work w/ and Gonzalez is talent. Yep, it was about talent. If Welker was twice as talented as Collie he would have been drafted. Collie is pretty damn talented and if someone is twice as talented as him they are not slipping through the cracks.
You're right I wasn't paying attention (trying to post @ work) When you say there's no difference in Harrison's 98-99 stats you are holding Peyton Manning to the standard he formulated 3 years later. There's a learning curved obviously involved in transitioning from college to the NFL and you are using Harrison's stats to essentially penalize and OVERLOOK Manning's learning curve in that 98-99 time frame.. Also in conjunction with learning curve you don't factor in chemistry, something which clearly was lacking in that rookie season. Nevertheless, once Manning got his shit together (specifically in the 1999-2001 time period) he elevated Harrison's stats. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MannPe00.htm http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HarrMa00.htm
I didn't say there wasn't a differnce btw '98 and '99. I said there was not a difference btw his first 2 years w/o him and his first year w/ him, his first year w/ him was 1998. He exploded in 1999 along w/ Peyton. They both amde each other better, I find it comical that people act like Harrison was nothing before Manning. he was an emerging top WR, I could have been the QB and he would have had a great career. I remember watching Sterling Sharpe dissect the WRs in the 1996 draft and he said Harrison was the best WR in that draft, I thought he was crazy at the time as everyone had Key #1 but as it turned out he was correct.
^ In all honesty I agree with you about Harrison. He's really not a good example of Murrell's point. My point about 1998 was that of course there wouldnt be any difference between '97 and '98 because the '97 QB (Harbaugh?) was essentially the same as the young talented '98 Manning. But '99 Manning, with the system under his belt and a full year's experience, was over the learning curve and formulating chemitsry and they blew up. So you sort of throw '98 out because it was Manning's rookie year and Harrison only played 12 games. I think Murrell and I were thinking more along the lines of the Brandon Stokleys of the world.
Stokley had one good year and played w/ Peyton for 4 yars. he had similar success in denver too, his #s weren't quite as good but they didn't throw as much in Denver. Peyton is a great regular season QB, he obviously helps make players around him better as do all great QBs BUT he has also always had the luxury of top nothc talent around him. He's never been asked to win w/ what Brady is working w/ this year.
No, I was talking about Harrison. With a rookie QB in 1998 he would have had his best season in the NFL, then with the second year they exploded. But had the Colts drafted Ryan Leaf instead of Manning; Harrison would have never sniffed the HOF.
Sure he would have, it may have taken longer to really explode but SD replaced Leaf w/ Brees a few years later so if Indy could have done something similar he still would have been in a good spot to put up huge #s.
I really like Bradford, I haven't really paid much attention to the top rookies since we don't have any but from what I have seen he is more than a worthy candidate.
You can ask the same thing of Brady. w/o Moss he hasn't thrown nearly as many TDs. Almost half as much. TD passes are only one play of the drive any way. Welker helped them get into scoring position many times with his play in the middle of the field. Yes, he has. I guess he’s really not surrounding by tremendous talent like you claim. Clearly a talented guy? He took over Marvin Harrison’s (well really Reggie Wayne’s spot) and only caught 60 passes? The guy can’t stay healthy to even be on the field to consider him as being talented at all. No, I’m not twisting your point around. First your argument is stupid. There are plenty of undrafted guys who are more talented than others who were drafted. Bart Scott is one of best inside LBs in the game and he went undrafted. Are you going to tell me that Anthony Schlegel is more talented than Scott? It’s a horseshit argument that you are trying to spin. Welker has proven to be a highly talented receiver or Brady wouldn’t look for him on 3rd downs as much as he does nor would he catch 100+ passes (which he did w/ two different QBs). He’s nearly impossible to cover because of his quickness and speed (at least before the injury he was). You don’t have to only be a deep threat to be considered a good receiver.
yeah, they replaced Leaf with Brees (actually it was Flutie) but Brees wasn't a good QB until 2004 (his 4th season in the league). If Indy did the same thing Harrison would have already been in the league 9 years and would never have developed into the HOF receiver he ultimately did.
Brady's #s are very close and the team has the same record w/ and w/o Moss. Poor Peyton is stuck w/ non-talented guys like reggie Wayne, Gracon, and co. Harrison's last year he caught 60 balls w/ a 10.6 avg., Gonzalez caught 57 and averaged 11.6 2 years ago before the injuries. You made the outragous, false claim that Welker was twice as talented as Collie. The only stupid point was that one. Schlegel was regarded as a reach in the 2nd but talent wise there is not much seperating Schlegel from Scott. There's alot more to success than just talent. Welker was nearly impossible to ceover b/c they always had LBs on him and created mismatches b/c D's were so scared of Moss. Now they don't have Moss to worry about and they can focus on welker and take him away. Welker is a GOOD player, nothing more. Some of us could see through it when he was putting up those rec #s w/ Moss and others were blinded by the rec totals.
