Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'New York Jets' started by Pereiro16, Feb 6, 2012.
let us steal someone from a rival for once
No thanks. We shouldn't pay a premium for the downside of Welker's career, and if we're getting a new receiver it should be someone who can stretch the field.
Lol at signing Wes Welker he won't be a good fit here and we already have two receivers that does what he does and both are better athletes (Holmes and Kerley)
Welker's good because of his yards after completion. To get good yards after completion you need a QB with awesome accuracy who can throw in such a manner that the WR catches in stride and doesn't have to slow down or break his route to get to the ball. Until Sanchez PROVES that he can do that consistently Welker will be a waste of money.
laughable at best. We already have group of midgets and adding another would not do us any good.
We can put him at RB and make believe he's Danny Woodhead. WE GOT HIM BACK!
He'd be awful for us
This is getting out of hand...are people really saying that Welker who has more receptions and more yards than any other receiver in the game over the last three years and is only 30 is going downhill? I guess that means every other receiver in the game is basically dead. Granted we don't have a QB who could ever find him downfield but that's a whole different story.
Welker wouldn't sign with us even if we were his only option he is to colse with Brady and Brady really legitamley hates us,and Welker and Branch are those kind of recivers that are only good in New England.Who was Welker before he went to the Pats?
Welker's injury history suggests that you should tread very carefully with him now that he's 31 years old. Welker's great now, but will he still be good in 3 years or will he be an anchor?
In any case, the real issue here is that Welker isn't the kind of player we need. We don't spread the field like the Pats, and we don't have deep threats or tight ends who can clear the middle of the field for him.
Welker is decent, but you also need to take in account who's throwing it to him. Brady can make almost anyone look amazing. It might be a good opportunity to get him for cheap, I certainly wouldn't be against it, but I think Edwards might be a bit more useful to us.
No. Just no. But I think we would go for it if we offered it to him -- I have a feeling he wont like what the Pats are offering him (since they have 20 free agents)
we should get drew brees too
I didn't say I wanted him, I really don't think Sanchez could distinguish between him and a blade of grass, but to infer he is in in his twilight is just crazy.
I don't think Rex wants him setting foot inside the jets facillity.
1) I heard he's had a pretty good QB throwing to him.
2) He's not really a vertical threat, so finding him downfield isn't really a problem.
3) He's basically the same type of receiver as Holmes. We need someone who CAN stretch the field.
4) Our QB had no problems throwing downfield when he had a legit vertical threat and a RT that didn't blow.
we wouldn't use him the same way NE does.
do the pats have a good right tackle who's a free agent?
the only guys they have i would want ( back )are woodhead and ihegibeo.
plus, maybe ryan mallet would do much better than sanchise. at least he has an arm that can throw the long pass and outs with authority. that lame out pass in the ravens game started the season off as a disaster.:sad:
He hates this team with a passion. So no.