I'm all for conspiracy theories. 

I mean it, I can't get enough of them. You think the CIA killed JFK? LBJ was involved? The Mafia? Castro? Maybe you've got J. Edgar Hoover pulling the strings. If you've got a semi-plausible motive, a couple of decent twists and genuine enthusiasm I'm usually all in.

And this isn't just about what did or didn't happen at Dealey Plaza at 12:30 p.m. CST on November 22, 1963 (my two cents? It was Secret Service agent George Hickey, shooting and hitting JFK in a panic after hearing the first two shots. If you've read a book called "Mortal Error" by Bonar Menninger you are nodding in agreement). I'm up for and will to listen to just about anything. We've never landed on the moon. David Stern fixed the lottery for the Knicks in 1985, or for the Cavs to land LeBron. Paul McCartney did die in a car crash in 1966 and has been replaced by a lookalike, which would actually go a long way in explaining his hideous discography of the last 30 years. Obama's birth certificate. Elvis still kicking around somewhere in Tennessee. Deep Throat really wasn't Mark Felt (though he looked an awful lot like Hal Holbrook, which probably should have been a hint in retrospect) but Richard Nixon himself.

Point is, this piece of real estate is a friend to conspiracy theorists.

But it has to make some sense, be grounded in some reality. And that's why I'm instantly and swiftly rejecting the idea that Week 1 was the start of an elaborate plan by Bill Belichick and Josh McDaniel to screw Wes Welker because he has a chance to make $11.5 million next season.

Sorry, it doesn't work. I'm not surprised that the notion has been floated -- you've seen it on TV, heard it on the radio, even national guys have checked in (Albert Breer on Twitter Sunday -- "[Welker's] systematically been squeezed by the team. Pretty obvious.") to let us know that it has begun.

The End of Wes Welker. 

Look, I don't dispute that it was more than a little head-scratching to see Welker play in just 43 of 67 offensive snaps on Sunday. That's about 64 percent, significantly less than the 89.2 percent he played in last season (thanks to the great Mike Reiss for those numbers). 

Could be Welker had an injury that the Patriots haven't exactly been totally forthcoming about (I'll allow a pause for shock as we consider the claim from Logan Mankins that no one else but Mankins himself knew about his torn ACL last year) reporting to the league. Could be Welker got hurt during the game. Could simply be an attempt to work Julian Edleman into the mix a little more. Could be that Edelman has been impressive since the start of camp and Welker has been less than vintage. Who knows?

There must be a reason for it, and I have no idea what it is. And guess what? Neither do you and neither does anyone else in the media, including the folks who decided this has to be some retaliation for contract issues. 

If you watched the Patriots take the Titans apart on Sunday, there is precious little to nitpick. It's only one week, and the Titans could be awful. Very true and deserves to be mentioned when we hear and read about Stevan Ridley being compared to Emmitt Smith and Chandler Jones to Jason Pierre-Paul. 

But for actual on-field criticism, not much there. Sure, the offensive line was shaky at times and the secondary is still very much a concern, but nothing really stood out in the 34-13 win.

So once you get past praising Ridley and Jones and Hightower and Brady and the tight ends and Brandon Lloyd and the coaching staff and the run defense what happens next? Well, there has to be drama, we of course know this. Even if it's forced it'll have to do, because you can't get through a week of TV, radio and three million websites without it. 

And that's the only reason this Welker situation is even close to a story after one week -- one week -- of football. 

Can we look at this, for a moment, from Bill Belichick's perspective? Am I to believe he's so pissed that Welker hasn't agreed to a team-friendly, long-term deal that Belichick just completed Week 1 of what could be a fourth-month punishment to his wide receiver? Salary cap be damned, I guess, Belichick is going to teach Welker a lesson by paying him $9.5 million not to play as much as he did before, because he doesn't want to eventually pay Welker millions of dollars to play a lot. The Patriots are so incredibly cheap that they are willing to waste almost $10 million bucks on Welker to prove how cheap they are.  

That's the reasoning, right? Remember semi-plausible motive? This one doesn't work.

I don't believe Josh McDaniels and Belichick are conspiring against Wes Welker, if only because it doesn't benefit Josh McDaniels and Belichick professionally at all. Welker's a goner after this year, if he catches 22 or 122 passes. It seems clear to me that the Patriots have made that decision. And that's OK -- Welker has obviously been terrific but I can certainly understand why they would view him as a risk over the next three years. So, if he is in fact in his last year, why try and keep him down? If he leads the league in catches again someone else will have to pay him. Not Belichick's problem. 

I'm sure Belichick isn't thrilled to have to spend $9.5 million on Welker, but that's really not the best reason not to include him in the offense, is it? Now, maybe Welker has suffered a real decline in skill overnight that we will all witness this season. It's happened to players before and will happen again. But let's give Wes Welker -- who has caught more passes over the last five years than any player in any five-year stretch in history -- more than one week to figure it out. If his snap counts and production are still markedly down three weeks from now it's a story. Right now it's a non-starter. Time to move on to conspiracy theories with some real weight.

If you've got the real reason Bobby Valentine still has a job feel free to stop by and let me know.