Why do you not think it's pathetic? I'm confused by your logic on this entirely.My point is it's not pathetic, which was the original statement.
When the entire range tops out at about 17-18 as approaching all timer numbers, 3 yards per catch is a huge difference.Antonio Brown (considered by many to be top 5 in the league) only hits at 13 per catch. Damn close to pathetic.
When something is near the league's worst WR's I'd call it pathetic.Pathetic is not the word you want.
10 for a WR is pretty bad.My point is it's not pathetic, which was the original statement.
No, I don't think so. Elite TE range would be 12-13 I'd say. Witten has always been on the low end at 11.And, 10 is sub elite TE range. Not standard TE range. So, let's not get silly.
Or try to take him out at the LOS.Steelers might want to start bracketing Gronk in the red zone. Just a suggestion.
Edelman is a product of Brady and the offense. Which is fine but he isn't a talent anyone in the NFL fears.No, I don't think so. Elite TE range would be 12-13 I'd say. Witten has always been on the low end at 11.
10 is on the low end for starting TE's, I'd wager.
Edelman is a product of Brady and the offense. Which is fine but he isn't a talent anyone in the NFL fears.
And yet none of them averaged 10. So, if you have one of the worst statistics of NFL WRs, how would you define that in any other way then pathetic.Andre Johnson averaged 11 last year. F'ing pathetic.
Cole Beasley... obviously a pathetic year he had.
The difference between top 5 WR in the league and "pathetic" is 3 yards a catch.
Percy Harvin approaching pathetic territory with 12 yards per.
Good lord.
I named receivers (some elite) with numbers pretty comparable, and compared them to this "pathetic" receiver. Edelman is not pathetic. Again, to suggest he is, is stupid.And yet none of them averaged 10. So, if you have one of the worst statistics of NFL WRs, how would you define that in any other way then pathetic.
You keep naming guys and numbers and all of them were still better. Doesn't that tell you something? Maybe you should claim hyperbole, or just use those 3 PBRs as your excuse.
No one said Edelman is a pathetic WR. Are you drunk or something? The only thing that was said was that 10 ypc is pathetic for a WR. Which it is, because it is near the league worst for WRs. It's like a RB who averages 3.2 ypc.I'm not saying Edelman is some elite WR. But, he damn sure has to be gameplanned for, and is not "pathetic", and to even suggest he is, is moronic.
You are the one that tried to use the stat 10 yards per to debate that Edelman isn't a stud on this offense, and in turn called his stats pathetic.No one said Edelman is a pathetic WR. Are you drunk or something? The only thing that was said was that 10 ypc is pathetic for a WR. Which it is, because it is near the league worst for WRs. It's like a RB who averages 3.2 ypc.
Do you not know what this word means? By your logic 9 ypc is comparable. You know how many WRs averaged 9 ypc or less last year? Like 2 WRs. Total... (Of guys who had more then just a few catches)I named receivers (some elite) with numbers pretty comparable, and compared them to this "pathetic" receiver.