Disappointed with Gardner

Moss is definitely the more dynamic playmaker. He was hampered by injuries and less than stellar QB play this year. I would take him over RG in a second.

Santana Moss's Best Year: In 2003, 73 Receptions, 1105 Yards, 10 TDs.
Rod Gardner's Best Year: In 2002, 71 Receptions, 1006 Yards, 8 TDs.

Looks pretty equal on the surface, until you consider that Santana Moss averaged 10 Yards per punt return in 2003, and 8 Yards per punt return in 2004.

Gardner's 2003 and 2004 seasons were dismal, 59 catches for 600 yards, and 51 catches for 650 yards respectively. Santana Moss in 2004 had 45 catches for 838 yards, which on the surface again looks unspectacular, except he was among the league leaders in Yards Per Catch with 18.9. Which of course attests to his big-play ability. Plus, he managed to do all of that with Pennington dealing with a torn rotator cuff, inhibiting his ability to go deep.

Beyond the stats, Moss is just much more consistent. Gardner drops balls, as we've all seen and yelled at our TVs about. Those drops are what kill drives and cause you to punt.

I'd much rather have Moss.

Name one Redskin who had a good year during the 2002-2003 season. Even Coles' numbers were down.

Name one Redskin who had a good year during the 2002-2003 season. Even Coles' numbers were down.

That's not an excuse, Gardner was a reason why the passing game couldn't attack downfield. There's a reason the coaching staff didn't throw deep very often, and it's not because they suddenly forgot how to call deep passing plays. It's because:
1) Coles' toe was enough of a hinderance that he couldn't go deep, he could only serve as a possession type guy. And he got much better once he got that cortisone shot in the toe.
2) Brunell didn't show enough arm strength to throw deep while he was playing.
3) Gardner was so inconsistent that Gibbs didn't feel comfortable relying on him for big plays. He dropped so many passes that he just couldn't be trusted. We all know Gibbs is big on dependability and not making mistakes. Gardner is clearly not his guy.

Santana Moss doesn't drop passes, and he's a much faster deep threat. You can't seriously tell me you'd rather have Gardner than Moss?

Coles was in NY for the '02-'03 season

Coles was in NY for the '02-'03 season
i meant 2003-2004.

i meant 2003-2004.

do you mean this past year? In '03 Coles had over 1000

I wanted Moss at the time of the draft as well, but I really knew nothing about Gardner to make an assesment when we drafted him, I thought Moss was the good's a year before he came out, no doubt he would have been a much better pick than Gardner.

I wanted Gardner over Moss simply for the fact that I thought a big receiver like Gardner was a much better fit for Schottenheimer's offense than Moss. I thought Rod could be like a WR/TE under Marty for years to come

Gardner is good and we will be bitting our tounges mark my words. if we had a system that didn't just send 2 recievers on routes and a stable qb who would throw good passes and not make stupid mistakes we'd have the best wr core in the NFL. Early he had a good system around him and he posted good numbers, now our recievers are treated like tightends they are always double covered (corner and safeties over top), but still are expected to make great plays. If we trully want to upgrade the recievers we need to upgrade the playbook. In today's NLF u have to pass just as a well as u run, and this year we could do neither.

I still don't understand how Coles has 90 catches in the same offense while Gardner only snags 50. And the season before in a pass happy scheme Coles had over 80 catches and Gardner was still in the 50's. I guess we're just missing the boat on this guy. I'm sure he'll go somewhere and become a Pro Bowl player.