Tight Ends
-
I'm still trying to figure out why anyone is labeling Watson as anything special. Seriously.
I don't know about "special", but what he was was the most productive TE in the division. You denigrate this by saying that he was a rookie QBs best option. So what? Maybe he was the best option because he was the best at what he does.
-
The question came up as to why Watson was not still with the Patriots. I think the reason may be in these stats:
2005 25 NWE TE 15 9 29 441 15.2 4 35 1.9 29.4
2006 26 NWE TE 13 13 49 643 13.1 3 40 3.8 49.5
2007 27 NWE te 12 8 36 389 10.8 6 35 3.0 32.4
2008 28 NWE TE 14 9 22 209 9.5 2 29 1.6 14.9
2009 29 NWE TE 16 7 29 404 13.9 5 36 1.8 25.3
2010 30 CLE TE 16 16 68 763 11.2 3 44 4
The answer seems simple: he was being under utilized by the Pats and he left. He had by far his best career numbers with the Browns.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Something that is bound to happen when you draft two recieving tight ends on a team that has Tom Brady as a QB and lost their #1 receiver (Moss due to age/stupidness) and were never able to replace him (Branch isn't the answer). If you put Watson on that team and make him a legit starting TE that doesn't line up in the slot he does as good if not better.Wow. Just wow.
Wow. Just wow.
Why wow. When you emphasize most of your passing offense around two rookie TE's then they are going to make catches when one of the best QB's in football is throwing to them. They tried to utilize these guys so much that when they were in 1 TE sets they would line the other one up in the slot to keep him in the game. In the past when Watson still played there they had a legit #1 speed option for deep plays (A good Branch, and then Moss before this season) and then a good underneath option in Welker who did as good as he did because of most of the focus being on those speed WR's. This year more focus was able to be put on Welker so the offense was focused more on the TE, and when you have your to TE in at the same time on 75% of the plays, and they are being thrown to by a top 3 QB, the will combine for more yards than other TE's.
I stick by my statement that Watson is at the VERY LEAST just as good as these two TE's and that he would have more than likely done better than those two if he had still been in NE. The only guy in our division that is close to Watson is Heap and it's close.
-
The problem with ranking TE's by just receiving numbers is obvious. In some offenses, the TE is an integral blocker. In some systems, the TE is just a bigger slot receiver. Dallas Clark is a good example. BTW, he is no better than JacobTamme or anyone else the Colts want to put in that position for Peyton to throw it to. For my money, Heath Miller, Brent Celek, and Jason Witten are the best block/catch TE's in the league
-
I'm still trying to figure out why anyone is labeling Watson as anything special. Seriously.
I don't know about "special", but what he was was the most productive TE in the division. You denigrate this by saying that he was a rookie QBs best option. So what? Maybe he was the best option because he was the best at what he does.
I'm still trying to figure out why anyone is labeling Watson as anything special. Seriously.
I don't know about "special", but what he was was the most productive TE in the division. You denigrate this by saying that he was a rookie QBs best option. So what? Maybe he was the best option because he was the best at what he does.
Best option on the Browns and unfortunately for you guys that isn't saying much. Ben Watson is certainly a athletic TE but he's no where close to the best in the division and saw the numbers he saw this season because A. Colt McCoy being a rookie. B. Best option in a very poor passing attack. Please don't try and argue otherwise because you'd only end up dancing a dance you have no business dancing. (As far as the poor core is concerned) He was let go by the Patriots for a reason and signed with the Browns because there wasn't much interest elsewhere.
-
I'm still trying to figure out why anyone is labeling Watson as anything special. Seriously.
I don't know about "special", but what he was was the most productive TE in the division. You denigrate this by saying that he was a rookie QBs best option. So what? Maybe he was the best option because he was the best at what he does.
Best option on the Browns and unfortunately for you guys that isn't saying much. Ben Watson is certainly a athletic TE but he's no where close to the best in the division and saw the numbers he saw this season because A. Colt McCoy being a rookie. B. Best option in a very poor passing attack. Please don't try and argue otherwise because you'd only end up dancing a dance you have no business dancing. (As far as the poor core is concerned) He was let go by the Patriots for a reason and signed with the Browns because there wasn't much interest elsewhere.
Homotron said:
Best option on the Browns and unfortunately for you guys that isn't saying much. Ben Watson is certainly a athletic TE but he's no where close to the best in the division and saw the numbers he saw this season because A. Colt McCoy being a rookie. B. Best option in a very poor passing attack. Please don't try and argue otherwise because you'd only end up dancing a dance you have no business dancing. (As far as the poor core is concerned) He was let go by the Patriots for a reason and signed with the Browns because there wasn't much interest elsewhere.You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
-
Homotron said:
Best option on the Browns and unfortunately for you guys that isn't saying much. Ben Watson is certainly a athletic TE but he's no where close to the best in the division and saw the numbers he saw this season because A. Colt McCoy being a rookie. B. Best option in a very poor passing attack. Please don't try and argue otherwise because you'd only end up dancing a dance you have no business dancing. (As far as the poor core is concerned) He was let go by the Patriots for a reason and signed with the Browns because there wasn't much interest elsewhere.You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
I don't agree with a lot of what you posted but still wanted to thank you for a well thought out, intelligent post that lacked the usual insults that bring this board down.
-
You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
I don't agree with a lot of what you posted but still wanted to thank you for a well thought out, intelligent post that lacked the usual insults that bring this board down.
I don't agree with a lot of what you posted but still wanted to thank you for a well thought out, intelligent post that lacked the usual insults that bring this board down.
What do you disagree with precisely?
-
I don't agree with a lot of what you posted but still wanted to thank you for a well thought out, intelligent post that lacked the usual insults that bring this board down.
What do you disagree with precisely?
What do you disagree with precisely?
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
-
What do you disagree with precisely?
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.
I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
-
Homotron said:
Best option on the Browns and unfortunately for you guys that isn't saying much. Ben Watson is certainly a athletic TE but he's no where close to the best in the division and saw the numbers he saw this season because A. Colt McCoy being a rookie. B. Best option in a very poor passing attack. Please don't try and argue otherwise because you'd only end up dancing a dance you have no business dancing. (As far as the poor core is concerned) He was let go by the Patriots for a reason and signed with the Browns because there wasn't much interest elsewhere.You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
good post, gipper. the belief that watson had a good year simply because colt had no other options is purely insane. to suggest being on a team with a lack of a receiving corp makes one better makes you question a person's sanity or it's just further proof as to what some people's real agendas on this board really are (steeler fan trolling perhaps? lol).
yes, watson may have been the only reliable target colt had, but i'm sure you'll agree with me when i say that watson still had to get open, run his routes correctly and catch the ball consistently. in order for watson to be able to do that, he would have to be a good te.
there's nothing to really argue with on that point. people can argue who was the best overall te, best blocking te, etc. all day, but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
-
For starters, I think the lack of a WR corp inflated his numbers, not the opposite. Also, I disagree with implying that Belichek made a mistake by letting him go considering the production NE got from the TE position this year.
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.
I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
-
You are the one trying to dance the twist with yourself. The fact is, the proof is in the pudding.
The numbers support the fact that Ben Watson had the best year of any AFCN Tight End. On the field.....not in the hypothetical dream world.
Ben Watson made the Browns passing attack better by his presence and by his production. The fact that he did so well despite the poor performance of the WR corps to me speaks of his quality, not the other way around as you are so unsuccessfully trying to contort.
And because a guy is let go by another team doesn't necessarily mean anything other than he may not have fit that system.
The Steelers let go of Johnny Unitas because he apparently didn't fit that system. So, history is replete with that sort of thing. the Browns let go of Willie Davis and Henry Jordan because they didn't fit their system. I am sure we could find hundreds of other more recent examples. People make mistakes...even Belichoke.
Or maybe it wasn't a mistake for him. Watson may not have been the right fit for him. Maybe Watson fits another system better. He certainly has proven capable in the system the Browns used last year. Of course now the Browns will be going to a different system. I don't know why Watson shouldn't fit right into the North Coast Offense that Shurmur is going to run. Previous successful WCOs have always used a good TE, like Brent Jones of the 49ers etc.
good post, gipper. the belief that watson had a good year simply because colt had no other options is purely insane. to suggest being on a team with a lack of a receiving corp makes one better makes you question a person's sanity or it's just further proof as to what some people's real agendas on this board really are (steeler fan trolling perhaps? lol).
yes, watson may have been the only reliable target colt had, but i'm sure you'll agree with me when i say that watson still had to get open, run his routes correctly and catch the ball consistently. in order for watson to be able to do that, he would have to be a good te.
there's nothing to really argue with on that point. people can argue who was the best overall te, best blocking te, etc. all day, but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
-
but the bottom line is that watson's abilities aren't magically produced or inflated by the fact that other people on his team can't get open, run their routes correctly or catch the ball consistently.
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Think about it like this, if the WR were bad then wouldn't that mean that they would focus more on Watson in coverage. You could cover each WR on our roster with one guy and easily put two on Watson since he was our only reciving option. I can understand why you feel that no WR production means that Watson was focused on more by our QB's, but that does also mean he was focused on more by opposing defenses. I also credit Watson for his production becuase he got production evenly over the course of the season even though we had 3 different starters.I will agree that Belichek didn't make a mistake by letting Watson go. I can go over all day why Watson didn't produce well in NE but the bottom line is that he didn't produce well there. For the price that they would have had to pay Watson to stay they were able to draft and pay 2 rookie TE the same price who by all accounts fit in their system a little better and did do well this year.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).
-
What is more logical?
Player A finally "gets it" at the age of 30 and produces good numbers for the first time in his career.
or
Player A Gets targeted a ton because he is the only above average (slightly) option receiving wise on his new team.
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
I can agree with that although it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
-
edit: i guess you didn't comprehend my post. your response has nothing to do with my point. when watson "gets it" or how much he got targeted last season is irrelevant to my point. you ever think why watson was targeted so much last season? watson was targeted over the other receivers on his team because he was reliable and more consistent. that's all i'm saying. it's as simple as that.
I can agree with that although it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
I can agree with that although it isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
edit: my op was directed at the steeler troll's responses to the gipper. i never said watson was elite or a hof'er. the troll was basically making it seem as if a bad receiving corps was the only reason watson had the stats he had. ofcourse he was targeted more than his teamamtes, but that's only because he was more reliable/consistent than they were.
-
Hate to over simplify it but.........Bad WR corp = more TE targets = inflated statistics.
I honestly like Watson and he is passable for now but he is no where near the TE that you guys are making him out to be. I would gladly trade him for Heap or Miller.
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Bad WR corps = defense paying more attention to the TE. It is a two way street. He gets looked at more by the QB and gets double covered by the defense. both should cancel each other out. the only difference between when he played in NE and when he played here is that when he played in NE he didn't get attention in the passing game and here he did. You are passing his ability on the years where he wasn't in a system that actually threw to the TE often (they changed more to a TE after he left and they got two rookies they wanted to get production out of).If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
You are completely ignoring the fact that THEY HAD LEGITIMATE OPTIONS OTHER THAN HIM. When you have a players like Branch/Welker and Moss/Welker at the top of there game then you don't drop down to your TE read that often. The ONLY reason that the two new TE in NE did as good as they did this year stat wise was because Moss was over and they brought Branch back way past his prime. when your new #1 option is Welker who is now getting the main focus with now one behind him to take his spot you throw more to the TE.
The situation isn't just as simple as you claim. To say that the passing offense in NE was exactly the same when Watson was there is ridiculous and to think that bad WR make a better TE without taking into account that the same TE is now being double covered alot more is stupid. Plus like alot of people who watch the NFL you have forgotten that the TE is also a blocker and that is also playing into my decision and Watson is one of the best run blocking TE in the NFL, he is a COMPLETE TE something that can not be said for either TE in NE and when you put his receiving ability with his run blocking ability he is a top 10-15 TE in the NFL and far better than anything Cinci has, better than Miller by a long shot, and in a good neck and neck race with Heap for the #1 TE in the AFCN.
If bad WR make a good TE wouldn't it make sense that Good WR make a bad TE. Wouldn't that be a good way to explain his numbers in NE? Think about it.
-
If he were any where near as good as you are trying to make him out to be, you don't think that NE would have found a way to get him the ball? I give up. It is obvious that Ben Watson all of a sudden has emerged as a great TE at the age of 30. Logic be damned.
You are completely ignoring the fact that THEY HAD LEGITIMATE OPTIONS OTHER THAN HIM. When you have a players like Branch/Welker and Moss/Welker at the top of there game then you don't drop down to your TE read that often. The ONLY reason that the two new TE in NE did as good as they did this year stat wise was because Moss was over and they brought Branch back way past his prime. when your new #1 option is Welker who is now getting the main focus with now one behind him to take his spot you throw more to the TE.
The situation isn't just as simple as you claim. To say that the passing offense in NE was exactly the same when Watson was there is ridiculous and to think that bad WR make a better TE without taking into account that the same TE is now being double covered alot more is stupid. Plus like alot of people who watch the NFL you have forgotten that the TE is also a blocker and that is also playing into my decision and Watson is one of the best run blocking TE in the NFL, he is a COMPLETE TE something that can not be said for either TE in NE and when you put his receiving ability with his run blocking ability he is a top 10-15 TE in the NFL and far better than anything Cinci has, better than Miller by a long shot, and in a good neck and neck race with Heap for the #1 TE in the AFCN.
If bad WR make a good TE wouldn't it make sense that Good WR make a bad TE. Wouldn't that be a good way to explain his numbers in NE? Think about it.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
You are completely ignoring the fact that THEY HAD LEGITIMATE OPTIONS OTHER THAN HIM. When you have a players like Branch/Welker and Moss/Welker at the top of there game then you don't drop down to your TE read that often. The ONLY reason that the two new TE in NE did as good as they did this year stat wise was because Moss was over and they brought Branch back way past his prime. when your new #1 option is Welker who is now getting the main focus with now one behind him to take his spot you throw more to the TE.The situation isn't just as simple as you claim. To say that the passing offense in NE was exactly the same when Watson was there is ridiculous and to think that bad WR make a better TE without taking into account that the same TE is now being double covered alot more is stupid. Plus like alot of people who watch the NFL you have forgotten that the TE is also a blocker and that is also playing into my decision and Watson is one of the best run blocking TE in the NFL, he is a COMPLETE TE something that can not be said for either TE in NE and when you put his receiving ability with his run blocking ability he is a top 10-15 TE in the NFL and far better than anything Cinci has, better than Miller by a long shot, and in a good neck and neck race with Heap for the #1 TE in the AFCN.
If bad WR make a good TE wouldn't it make sense that Good WR make a bad TE. Wouldn't that be a good way to explain his numbers in NE? Think about it.
There is so much flawed in that post that my brain actually started smoking. I'm done with this. If you think Watson is really that good then I am glad for you. Homerism is alive and well.
God Bless.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login