SmootSmack
08-01-2008, 01:09 PM
ARE YOU SERIOUS!!!
First the guy is not washed up. Second he is a hard hitting Strong Safety. Third he would be a short term fix. Fourth He is a proven veteran (unlike Doughty) and he frees up Landry to make plays in the secondary. I would definitley sign him to a 1-2 year deal
John Lynch in 2007: 59 tackles (46 solo) 1 sack, 3 passes defended
Adam Archuleta in 2006: 60 tackles (49 solo) 1 sack, 1 pass defended
The general consensus (I believe) is that Archuleta was a colossal failure for us (both from a personnnel management decision, and from a performance aspect) and yet what you're basically saying is you want someone who just last year recreated the same year Archuleta suffered through with the Redskins two years ago...and Lynch is six years older than Archuleta.
vallin21
08-01-2008, 02:32 PM
Who would you rather have Doughty or a proven vet in John Lynch?
Ruhskins
08-01-2008, 02:49 PM
Who would you rather have Doughty or a proven vet in John Lynch?
John Lynch 3+ years ago, but not now. We have greater needs at the LB position, and it would not be wise to spend our money on someone like Lynch. Besides, Lynch is most likely not coming back to the NFL.
GridIron26
08-01-2008, 02:51 PM
Who would you rather have Doughty or a proven vet in John Lynch?
Didn't Doughty proved himself last season? And please look at SmootSmack's post above yours.. It says it all..
SmootSmack
08-01-2008, 02:57 PM
Who would you rather have Doughty or a proven vet in John Lynch?
Doughty
Proven vet in this case is simply a euphemism for "old guy with eroding skills who is past his prime"
Doughty on the other hand already has formed a bond with the rest of the secondary, he did what was asked of him last year, he knows his role on the team and he has upside.
wilsowilso
08-01-2008, 06:40 PM
Who would you rather have Doughty or a proven vet in John Lynch?
How about we let the next generation have a chance to develop. Or in John Lynch's case the next next generation.
RedskinRat
08-04-2008, 07:29 AM
Doughty, with Horton as a very competent back-up. We're set!
SeanTaylor21SKINS
08-04-2008, 01:46 PM
I don't think we should get him. If he was younger I might want him but we need to give
Doughty a chance. And with Horton's performance last night that gives us a little bit of depth. So from me it's a know.
EXoffender
08-04-2008, 02:21 PM
I say yes if for the vet minnimum. Doughty tackled well early on but missed horribly on the Clark move towards the sideline (IND FG) and afterwards. Schweigert looked slow to react in what looked like a IND-flooded cover-2 zone which he gave up a TD. Horton may be given a shot with the starting D if this continues.
vallin21
08-04-2008, 03:04 PM
I say yes if for the vet minnimum. Doughty tackled well early on but missed horribly on the Clark move towards the sideline (IND FG) and afterwards. Schweigert looked slow to react in what looked like a IND-flooded cover-2 zone which he gave up a TD. Horton may be given a shot with the starting D if this continues.
I agree. The more I see Horton the more I like him. Even though it is 1 game. He showed speed and hitting ability but I am worried about his coverage ability. With that I wouldn't be surprised if he started this year or next, but I will wait until preseason is over to say if he should start or not.