08-24-2016, 03:55 PM
(08-24-2016, 03:34 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Welker went from:
118/1,354/6 (Patriots)
to
73/778/10 (Broncos)
to
49/464/2 (Broncos)
to
13/102/0 (Rams)
They got out while the getting was good there.
You might be right that there might not be a huge pool of players that meet that criteria. Maybe if I just narrowed it down to cut for any reason?
- - - - - - - -
That said, Welker would actually be a good example of someone cut. Both the Chargers cut him before he went to New England, so he could be added to their list.
(I seriously might do a post on this somewhere now.. because it's actually kind of interesting to me.)
- - - - - - - - - -
But yeah, if the Bengals don't at least check him out, then they're not doing their job well. Not sure if there's something physically or mentally wrong with him, but they need to at least check because it'd be a cheap/simple way to improve a weakness on the team if he works out.
Despite the numbers drop, anyone who watched the Broncos in Welker's first year knows that he was a key player for them. Fwiw, he missed 3 games that year and his numbers would've averaged out to 90-958-12 over a full season.
That said, even though Welker was successful that first year, I don't think it was a bad decision to let him walk. He wanted a big deal, he was getting on in years, and he had the concussion issue.
Honestly I'm also interested in the Pats history with cuts/trades etc. I always hear about how the Pats never make mistakes, and while I do believe they almost always make sound decisions for the team, I don't think that means that every player they move on from is trash. Like any other team, they have other things that may factor into why they move on from a player.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
