Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Let's go all freaky friday and say we could transport Welker back 35 years. What sort of yearly numbers do you think he puts up playing back in that era?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
What sort of production would Wes Welker have (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Chase Stuart
- Start date
scrumptrulescent
Footballguy
Great numbers, until he gets clothes-lined or facemasked until his neck is broken......or worse.
Today is Thursday.
The "underneath game," or whatever you want to call it...the evolution of the WCO, essentially, just didn't really exist. To be a part of a pass-happy O, you almost had to be a downfielder. See Air Coryell, et al. Yeah, you could be a Charlie Joiner in that system, but he wasn't really big in any department except receptions, and got a much smaller share of those, too, even though he got a bunch of them relative to his contemporaries. Welker still fills the move-the-chains, third-down-guy roles, but there was no use of the short passing game on running downs back then.
Very rarely did you see a guy fill both downfield and short guy roles on a team. I can think of only a couple who excelled in both.
Would it be too racist to give Steve Largent as a possible ceiling case?
Very rarely did you see a guy fill both downfield and short guy roles on a team. I can think of only a couple who excelled in both.
Would it be too racist to give Steve Largent as a possible ceiling case?
treat88
Footballguy
The LB's and S of that era would not let him operate in the middle of the field without punishing him mercilessly.
Add in the more physical CB play that was allowed and I think he'd have trouble getting off the line routinely.
Minimal production and a 2-3 year career is my guess.
Add in the more physical CB play that was allowed and I think he'd have trouble getting off the line routinely.
Minimal production and a 2-3 year career is my guess.
Kool-Aid Larry
Footballguy
probably less -- brady wasn't born 'til '77.
speaking of welker, where are all these people who said randy moss was responsible for all his success?
speaking of welker, where are all these people who said randy moss was responsible for all his success?
Fat Nick
Footballguy
While I think this is a valid point, I think it's more about Belichek than Brady. Welker still had a very good year under Cassel
LargeMouthBass
Footballguy
35 years ago, teams actually ran the rock. His typical output would be 5 catches 45 yards.
SlevinKelevra
Footballguy
You don't need a time machineJust put Welker in a crappy team with a crappy QB
Hoss_Cartwright
Footballguy
He would have lined up opposite Darryl Stingley. Steve Grogan liked to throw to his TE Russ Francis (26 receptions) and his RBs (68 receptions) in 1976, but Grogan only had 302 attempts and 145 completions that year. Stingley (17 recp) was 2nd for WRs for the Pats, so I would imagine that Welker would fit in the mix and he wouldn't have received nearly as many targets as he does today. Grogan also had Marlin Briscoe (10 recp) toward the end of his career, but Welker would steal all his targets. I believe the pecking order would have been Francis, RBs (Cunningham and Johnson), Welker, Stingley, and Briscoe. I wonder if Welker would have supplanted Francis as Grogan's favorite target. Francis was a stud TE in his day and Stingley was their deep threat.
Last edited by a moderator:
Doug B
Footballguy
Cliff Branch and Sammy White were pretty close to Welker, physically. Neither was a straight-line burner, but both were quick in short space and able to beat jams and get behind defenders.
Oh Yes!
Footballguy
freaky
Jewell
Footballguy
Lance Dwight Alworth Position: FL-WR
Height: 6-0 Weight: 184 lbs.
Alworth played before '76 but he was still routinely playing and fluorishing against an awesome linebacking crew in Kansas City amongst others in the AFL. Alworth was more of a long ball guy, and Welker more of a middle of the field guy, but they're comparable in size. Welker's tough. Aside from returning from a severe knee injury so quickly, Welker is a very good blocker for a guy his size and he's survived devastating hits before.
treat88
Footballguy
First, Welker is not Alworth talent wise.Second, my opinion is based far more on the type of routes Welker is used on than his size. Welker and Alworth are/were used in fundamentally different ways, as you said yourself.
The rules pre 76 allowed defenders to protect the middle of the field with a degree of brutality that is illegal in todays game.
I'm not taking anything away from Welker...it was just a different game at that time.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
There are 92 wide receivers who have caught at least 500 passes. Among them, Lance Alworth ranks 2nd in yards per reception. Wes Welker ranks 92nd. I don't see how they're comparable.
L
Luke Skywalker
Guest
Joe Gibbs' early Redskins teams maybe but that would be early 80s. Charles Brown maybe? I think he had a couple of monster seasons.
Last edited:
Jewell
Footballguy
Size. That's why I listed Alworth's height and weight and not his statistics or 40 time. The other commenter was suggesting that Welker's size would be a major detriment in that era, and while I agree that it would be a greater detriment during that era than it is today, the point is that guys Welker's size were able to survive and some even prosper.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
treat88
Footballguy
????I never even mentioned size. In fact, in my very next post I specifically said my take had nothing to do with size but rather type of routes run.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Along those same lines, is there any other WR with 500 or more catches with such a poor TD/catch ratio. Welker catches a TD pass every 20 catches over his career.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
My first thought of a comparable type of receiver wasn't Alworth either, but I've only seen highlights so I naturally have only seen his deep plays.My first thought was Steve Largeant, a guy that you think would get killed in the secondary. A guy that wasn't fast, but was quick. Very sure hands. Reliable. Etc.
You could point to Largeant also having considerably more yards/catch but I'd argue that Welker would be running different routes in the '70s as well.
Jewell
Footballguy
Sorry. I interpreted this line you wrote to suggest that Welker's size would be an impediment, "Add in the more physical CB play that was allowed and I think he'd have trouble getting off the line routinely." Namely, Welker wouldn't be able to power through jams (more common during that era) like a larger receiver like a T.O.
Last edited by a moderator:
Doug B
Footballguy
Very important point. Welker's YPC go up in a mid-70s offense, provided he can beat jams at the line....
Re: Alworth's physical comparison with Welker -- Alworth was three inches taller and had a bigger frame. Alworth, with modern nutrition, PEDs, and training, would play at about 200-210 lbs today.
Welker, at 5'9" & 190 lbs, was a little over Alworth's 1960s weight, but has a smaller (though more muscular) frame.
Disc Shark
Footballguy
Welker in the mid-70s is Danny Abramowitz, but quicker and faster. Not in Alworth's class.
L
Luke Skywalker
Guest
Abramowicz was quite a bit bigger than Welker and in his day was considered a "big" receiver at 6-1 and around 200 pounds. Not sure you can make that comparison, although I guess their playing styles were a little similar.
Last edited:
Adebisi
Footballguy
They're still tied up deleting their old posts from when they said that Brady isn't as good as Manning, Maroney would be a stud if only Belichick would give him a chance, the Patriots' run of success is over, etc.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Oh, Pat Tilley 1978-81? He did pretty good:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TillPa00.htm
I don't think the comparisons to Danny A or (especially) Lance Alworth are apt at all.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TillPa00.htm
I don't think the comparisons to Danny A or (especially) Lance Alworth are apt at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
according to pro-footballreference he would be similar to Roger Carr in 1976 = 1100 yards and 11 tds. This would be a phenomenal year for this time period. In this career year, Welker would have been thrown to by Bert Jones, 1976 MVP.Welker would average closer to 500 yards and 4 touchdowns the other years of his career.Now if you could take Bert Jones of 76 and have him play today you would have something.
Area51Inhabitant
Footballguy
I've always thought of Welker being a modern day Bob Chandler.
Jewell
Footballguy
LOL. Once again, the Alworth reference wasn't to say Welker would match his production, and I even acknowledged they played the game diffently. The point was that less than ideal size doesn't necessarily relegate talent to the dregs of the league regardless of the era. Guys that weren't physical specimens have succeeded throughout league history.
People can pretend that they're not considering Welker's size, but this question is, in part, whether consciously or subconsciously, driven by Welker's size. We wouldn't ask this same question of a large elite receiver like Megatron or Fitzgerald. We'd just assume they'd dominate. Likewise, we wouldn't have as difficult a time picturing a larger over-the-middle receiver like Anquan Boldin succeeding in a more physical era. Welker's size is what has us questioning whether he could play a more physical game with longer routes.
As far as durability, I think size is overated and good ol' fashion toughness is underrated. Smaller backs like Darren Sproles, Ray Rice, and MJD seem to stay on the field, and bigger backs like Brandon Jacobs, Steven Jackson, and Marshawn Lynch seem dinged a lot.
If Alworth's skill level is throwing off the size comparison, think of a guy like Buddy Young who was practically a garden gnome succeeding in a more physical era.
I'll hang up now and await the person who misses the point by noting that Young was a running back and Welker was a receiver.
People can pretend that they're not considering Welker's size, but this question is, in part, whether consciously or subconsciously, driven by Welker's size. We wouldn't ask this same question of a large elite receiver like Megatron or Fitzgerald. We'd just assume they'd dominate. Likewise, we wouldn't have as difficult a time picturing a larger over-the-middle receiver like Anquan Boldin succeeding in a more physical era. Welker's size is what has us questioning whether he could play a more physical game with longer routes.
As far as durability, I think size is overated and good ol' fashion toughness is underrated. Smaller backs like Darren Sproles, Ray Rice, and MJD seem to stay on the field, and bigger backs like Brandon Jacobs, Steven Jackson, and Marshawn Lynch seem dinged a lot.
If Alworth's skill level is throwing off the size comparison, think of a guy like Buddy Young who was practically a garden gnome succeeding in a more physical era.
I'll hang up now and await the person who misses the point by noting that Young was a running back and Welker was a receiver.
Bermuda_Chub
Footballguy
In the last days of Mao Zedong, Wes Welker would have been a special teamer.
Uruk-Hai
Footballguy
Roger Carr could fly (in fact, he was more similar to Alworth than Welker is to either). Glen Doughty - the other WR on those Colts teams - was the possession receiver; Carr the deep threat.
Hoss_Cartwright
Footballguy
As a Colts fan I will give this post a thumbs up. You're dead on with your description of Carr and Doughty.
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
Approximately 13 times the production of Wayne Chrebet in the same period.
Uruk-Hai
Footballguy
I was a Colts fan too, until that drunken slob moved them.
treat88
Footballguy
There are two ways to look at it
1) Would Welker's game, as he plays it within the Pats offense today, translate to that era?
2) Would Welker, as an athlete, translate to that era and be able to run the patterns required within those offenses?
I guess my initial reaction was based off the 1st of these two scenarios. I don't believe that he would physically survive that era trying to work the middle of the field as he does today. Also, with the CB's ability to chuck him over the entire course of his sub 10 yard route tree I don't think his quicks would let him separate as they do with the tighter coverage rules of today.
That said, I think he's a plenty tough enough athlete to have found a role on a team in that era. In no way do I think he would be a focal point of an offense, but he could make a team. Then again minus today's training techniques he'd probably weigh in at about 165, so maybe I'm being optimistic.
1) Would Welker's game, as he plays it within the Pats offense today, translate to that era?
2) Would Welker, as an athlete, translate to that era and be able to run the patterns required within those offenses?
I guess my initial reaction was based off the 1st of these two scenarios. I don't believe that he would physically survive that era trying to work the middle of the field as he does today. Also, with the CB's ability to chuck him over the entire course of his sub 10 yard route tree I don't think his quicks would let him separate as they do with the tighter coverage rules of today.
That said, I think he's a plenty tough enough athlete to have found a role on a team in that era. In no way do I think he would be a focal point of an offense, but he could make a team. Then again minus today's training techniques he'd probably weigh in at about 165, so maybe I'm being optimistic.
Similar threads
