OK Salva. If you ever want to have a discussion let me know. Fair enough if you don't want to engage, but don't call me a blind homer, I've posted plenty of thought out content here.

Jbrochu, fair points. 5 and 20 might be OK because the back end will be phony (think it was in Welker's first deal)

Yes. I'm just tired. That's exactly what I'm doing.

Did I ever once call you a blind homer? Is 4/24 so crazy off 5/20?

You called me a homer like ten minutes ago.

4/24 is 50 percent more AAV so yeah, it's different, although guess it depends on structure and guaranteed money. Seems like there is a point you'd walk away though, so not sure how we can tell yet if its a good move to sign Edelman.

I was going to laugh at this post about a half hour ago but now it's even funnier than it was then. I don't think "bow out" means what you think it means.

Give it a rest dude. Clearly Gambool is more knowledgable and has a better argument than you do.

Find me the post where I called you a homer. Question for you: is there a value above the average for a receiver who has chemistry with Brady? Does Brady represent a unique circumstance that could make these calculations less relevant?

Stop trying to be the last person to jump on the sack. That's what she said, har har.

Ha ha...


Gambol what do you mean by the back end being phony?

If you mean that Welker didn't play through that contract without it being modified in some way then I think you're wrong. Pretty sure he played out all 5 years (2007-2011) per the original extension then in 2012 he played under the tag.

Hmm maybe he did I thought for some reason it got restructured at some point first.

I mean having it be like 5/20 but year 5 is like an $8mm salary number that he'll almost never see.

I just looked it up. It was 5/18.1 including a 9m signing bonus and I'm nearly certain it didn't get restructured. It was pretty much considered that for the last several years of that deal he was getting underpaid.

I think he actually turned down a 3/24 extension at some point in the year before he became a free agent, but I can't be sure if that was true or just something I heard/read.

Edit: sorry the offer for an extension I mentioned just above was 2/16.

"It ties into Monday's Boston Globe report about the Patriots offering Welker a two-year deal worth an average of $8 million per season during the 2011 season."

You said you didn't want to answer me and said you were tired of homers, sort of an easy inference there no? But fine, dropping that.

Yes, familiarity should be factored in as part the contract offer. Obviously.

I don't really understand your second question. If you are asking if the. Pats can just sign guys off the street to play wideout because Brady is good, no, definitely not.

As I said, I thought it was pretty risky not to sign Welker while cutting Lloyd and letting Woodhead go (Gronk and Hernandez stuff came later iirc) and I was fine with "overpaying" him on the franchise tag las year.

That premium doesn't mean you always end up signing the player.

Take Branch in 2006. Very good receiver. Great chemistry with Brady. Hugely valuable. Would have put up better numbers here than in Seattle. Pats were very correct not to pay him the 6/36 deal he got from Seattle. Not doing so helped them have the flexibility to ink Moss and Welker.

Given the Pats already have less flexibility than normal this offseason, I think its very possible Edelman goes elsewhere. He wouldn't be my number one priority. I'd prioritize extending McCourty and Solder and getting help at DT and C over signing Edelman.

If the price is reasonable and they can get him back and address the rest of their needs, awesome, I think he's a very good player and contributed a lot this season.

Yeah for some reason i thought it got ripped up after year 1, but I was probably confusing it with the original poison pill RFA offer before they did the trade. I think that contract still was actually backloaded to some extent, it just turned out Welker was really good so it was still an underpay.

Given his cap number next year and the concussions, he might end up available
and cheaper than Edelman lol.

Really hope the Pats get Solder and Vereen back for the Bills game this week. Not loving the matchup with their front seven against our current O-line. I expect the Pats will win, but doubt this is a walkover.

My hope is that the Pats get a score or 2 early and the Bills just pack it up and plan their vacation.

If the Bengals and Colts lost the 1pm games and Broncos are up big at the half it would allow them to rest some players after the half, although i would much prefer the chance of the #1 seed being a possibility

True, Colts arent losing to the Jags very often though.

Sounds like Vereen is back at practice and moving OK, which is a good sign. The downgrade from Vereen to Bolden was noticeable, I think Vereen gets first downs on at least two and maybe three more plays last Sunday.

Well I never talked about Welker and his worth...I'm not a contracts guy but maintain the simple point that Brady has found chemistry with Edelman and that has value.

That part you quoted was in response to jbrochu, so not sure why you are quoting that.

OK, you arent a contracts guy, that's fine. The Pats front office has to be contracts guys. Its the very core of what they do, and they're good at it. Its a huge part of the reason why the team has been so successful for the last 13 years. They are going to have to put a price on how much Edelman is worth factoring in his skill set and production and chemistry with Brady and all of that.

IMO, its pretty silly to say you will lose patience with the front office if they dont lock Edelman up or argue that not locking him up shows they dont value Brady enough without knowing what the heck the market for Edelman looks like. Everyone agrees with you that Edelman is a good player. Everyone agrees with you that his chemistry with Brady has value.

The Pats will have to put that together, put it into the context of team needs (including needs outside of WR and the fact that Amendola is already under contract here for next year), and make a contract offer.

When we see how the market develops and what the Pats are offering, we can assess whether signing Edelman makes sense or not. We dont have enough information to do so now, and I can certainly envision scenarios where he walks and I am fine with it.

EDIT: Another point: Im not going to spaz out and declare Ive lost patience with the front office if they sign Edelman for 4 and 24 or w/e you suggested even though I personally think thats an overpay. Assessing a front office over any individual move is generally not a smart thing to do (unless you trade your draft for Ricky Williams or something equally lulz).

Unsurprising response. BB is the GOAT and never makes bad decisions. Brady does not represent a unique historical window. Let him walk. It makes sense on the face of it, don't pretend that BB hasn't put this in his personal calculations already. After all, BB is the unquestioned GM of the Pats and can overrule any scout.

Salva, would you give Edelman 5 years, 50 million?

Also, do you read my posts or just pick things to spaz out about? I literally just yesterday listed two bad decisions I thought BB made, I never said Brady wasnt a unique historical window, I never said I was hoping Edelman would walk, I have no idea what your last two sentences even mean.

I can certainly see one team offering something stupid and the Pats deciding not to pay that much for Edelman. In that case, I would rather they let him walk if it would effect other priorities (extending McCourty, extending Solder, shoring up the interior D-line, shoring up the interior O-line).

I know with 100% certainty I dont have enough information yet to call not signing Edelman a good move or a bad move.

I love all this talk about Edelman itt. It wasnt that long ago this thread wasnt very high on him.

Yes, when people spazzed out about letting Welker go because there was no replacement or how cutting Deion Branch didnt make sense because Edelman had to play full time and the Pats didnt have enough receivers.

Also let's not forget when Edelman played CB lol

Now that's versatility!

well, we have to talk about 'Something.'

Steve Wynn is waving you over.

fyp. I hate all of you, no matter how you feel about Edelman.

I dont get what you are arguing wrt Edelman. Everyone ITT wants him back, but we just dont want the pats to extend themselves for him. If Edelman walks this year and signs a reasonable contract elsewhere then we will be mad and likely blast the team here. If he leaves because some team got stupid and offered him silly money then we will be fine with letting him walk.