I get his line of reasoning in how it might seem contradictory that the highest paid coach is so stingy about player contracts, but it really does not hold any credence here.
Especially when the highest paid coach is underpaid in terms of actual productions in relation to both current NFL standards, and all-time NFL standards.
Belichick is ripped when he loses - but that's only because he doesn't lose very often. He's finished 1st or tied for 1st in the division every single season for the last 11 seasons. He is 16-6 in the playoffs. There's not another coach in the entire league who can say anything even close to that.
And there's not another team that has finished 1st or tied for 1st in 11 straight 16-game seasons. That's "ever".
Welker wants a long-term contract paid as the best WR in the game. (5/50 is still my guess as to what he's looking for).
Contracts in the NFL - of any kind - are not...I repeat...NOT based on past performance. They're based on future expectations.
Welker has never been the best WR in the NFL, and he's 31 years old. It is absolutely reasonable to expect that his production will only go down over time; not up.
So, it's reasonable to not just cave to Welker's demands. It's how responsible teams win going forward. 5 more years of identical production by Welker might give him Hall of Fame credentials. Right now, he's not even close to the Hall of Fame.
Why would you pay someone who's not a Hall of Famer top money for their position - especially considering their age and injury history (not including you-know-what)?
Bill Belichick? Lock Hall-of-Famer.
The most ridiculous part of this comparison is that while Belichick is the highest-paid coach in the league; he's nowhere near the highest paid person in the organization, and moreover, Welker is looking to make more money than Belichick is. That whole analogy is asinine.