Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;819358]Yes it would, although I would hope that in the land where everything goes right for us, Armstrong would get the first shot at the third receiver over Moss. It might even make sense then to do some 4 WR stuff with a tight end in the backfield instead of a RB.[/quote]

I think it would make sense. Lots of receiving options with some protection.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[url=http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tandlers-real-redsk/2011/08/watch-out-for-aldrick-robinson.html]Watch out for Aldrick Robinson - Rich Tandler's Real Redskins[/url]


Thought this was a good read & something to keep an eye on.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

A little disappointing that Gafney is #2. That to me is just awful.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

1. It's a preseason depth chart
2. What's the big scare about Gaffney being #2?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=SmootSmack;821385]1. It's a preseason depth chart
2. What's the big scare about Gaffney being #2?[/quote]

Not that there's a scare, but would be nice to see one of the young guys stepping up big time and grabbing some playing time. Gaffney's not bad, hey much much better than seeing Galloway.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=SmootSmack;821385]1. It's a preseason depth chart
2. What's the big scare about Gaffney being #2?[/quote]

Well they draft 50 wr's then play them with the first team and see what they can do. Why draft all these guys and hand a journeymen the #2 spot? Just makes me shake my head.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821376]A little disappointing that Gafney is #2. That to me is just awful.[/quote]

I would fully expect Gafney to be #2 when the season starts. He's a solid vet, nothing spectacular but can make the catches to move the chains. After he & Moss, Stallworth & Armstrong are the two guys that I think will push for the starting spot. REally don't know what kind of wr Stallworth is at this point. Used to be a burner, but he's older & w/a long history of injuries.

Would love to see Hankerson grab it right off but it sounds like his dropping habit will keep him back.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Well Kelly is hurt and unfortunately probably done. Hankerson is playing his very first NFL game on Friday and should get considerable playing time this year, yet it's too early to start him.

The rest of the young guys (Austin, Paul, Robinson) were late round picks who at this stage in their career are probably more likely to find their niche on teams and for depth. As much I'd love to see a guy like Austin be our #2 or #3, that's probably not too realistic right now.

Further, I'm not sure what defines Gaffney as a journeyman

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Gaffney had 65 catches as the Broncos #2 last year. I don't think it's a bad thing that he's the early favorite to be the #2, at least to start the season. The rooks have a lot to learn in a very condensed time period. Not sure it's reasonable to expect any of them to contribute a whole lot early on.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821376]A little disappointing that Gafney is #2. That to me is just awful.[/quote]

Disappointing? So you'd rather trade for a guy who can't contribute? Look at Gaffney's stats for the past 3 years, he's a solid contributor and has been the #2 for Denver with Royal and Marshall's regular absences from the field.

Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong, Hankerson

much better than

Moss, Armstrong, Galloway, Roydell Williams (2010)

and also better than

Moss, Randel El, Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly (2009)


Heck, I'd take it over Coles, Gardner, Thrash and Taylor Jacobs too.



This is the best WR group we've had since the Posse. Beyond those first four are solid depth possibilities with Austin, Banks, Paul, Robinson, Stallworth, Kelly...

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Monkeydad;821412]Disappointing? So you'd rather trade for a guy who can't contribute? Look at Gaffney's stats for the past 3 years, he's a solid contributor and has been the #2 for Denver with Royal and Marshall's regular absences from the field.

Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong, Hankerson

much better than

Moss, Armstrong, Galloway, Roydell Williams (2010)

and also better than

Moss, Randel El, Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly (2009)


Heck, I'd take it over Coles, Gardner, Thrash and Taylor Jacobs too.



This is the best WR group we've had since the Posse. Beyond those first four are solid depth possibilities with Austin, Banks, Paul, Robinson, Stallworth, Kelly...[/quote]

I'd rather the young guys play, get experience and let them grow. We're not going anywhere this year so why slow the development of young players? Why draft Austin if you're not going to give the guy a chance? And this is not the best wr's since the Posse. No way.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Mattyk;821401]Gaffney had 65 catches as the Broncos #2 last year. I don't think it's a bad thing that he's the early favorite to be the #2, at least to start the season. The rooks have a lot to learn in a very condensed time period. Not sure it's reasonable to expect any of them to contribute a whole lot early on.[/quote]

But this is not a playoff team. Right? So let em learn and get experience. Let's see how it plays out Fri. Really looking forward to some of the young guys getting some game time to show what they can do.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/post/malcolm-kelly-gives-the-saddest-interview-of-training-camp/2011/08/09/gIQArWzY4I_blog.html]Malcolm Kelly gives the saddest interview of training camp - DC Sports Bog - The Washington Post[/url]

Time's up for Kelly. Even he knows he's about to get axed. Sad sad tale.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Mattyk;821401]Gaffney had 65 catches as the Broncos #2 last year. I don't think it's a bad thing that he's the early favorite to be the #2, at least to start the season. The rooks have a lot to learn in a very condensed time period. Not sure it's reasonable to expect any of them to contribute a whole lot early on.[/quote]

I liked Jarmon but he wasn't going to contribute. I think Gaffney was one of our better offseason pickups.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821443]But this is not a playoff team. Right? So let em learn and get experience. Let's see how it plays out Fri. Really looking forward to some of the young guys getting some game time to show what they can do.[/quote]

As the season goes on sure, ease them in. But to toss them out there with limited knowledge & experience with the playbook and route running at this level doesn't help anyone.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821392]Well they draft 50 wr's then play them with the first team and see what they can do. Why draft all these guys and hand a journeymen the #2 spot? Just makes me shake my head.[/quote]

Um...because he earned his spot?

That's what Shanny does. You have to earn your spot. I'm sure if a rookie was outplaying Jabar Gaffney then he'd be lower on the depth chart. They aren't. We all know that these guys have to EARN their way onto the football field. That's the tone Mike set last year, and that's the way it will be.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821435]I'd rather the young guys play, get experience and let them grow. We're not going anywhere this year so why slow the development of young players? Why draft Austin if you're not going to give the guy a chance? And this is not the best wr's since the Posse. No way.[/quote]

This is the worse logic ive ever heard. I'm sick of hearing about this.. "Letting the young guys develop"

They are going to develop by just being at the game, playing Special Teams, and earning the starting job. Shanahan has already proven that the hardest working, and best will play before the rest. So if Jabar is playing and looking better then the younger guys, then he should play. He's under contract as well. We are here to win football games, and if Jabar gives us the best chance of winning, then i'm all for him starting.

This is not a Madden video game where you think your going to draft 7 players in the draft and play them all in the top of the depth chart. The NFL is about putting the pieces together and winning, and to continue winning. Vets, Rookies, and Journeyman alike.. In all of football, how many teams ahve you seen in the NFL start more then 3-4 rookies? Yeah, there are teams with YOUNGER rosters, but since the Redskins took the FA team approach for so many years we have a ways to go, but why cant we just WIN NOW!? I'm tired of hearing this "Let's continue to build, and develop stuff"

If I was London Fletcher, or Santana Moss and heard you guys saying stuff like this, I would slap you in your cheek like those old duelers did.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

I want to say again how much I like the way this team is being built. for those complaining about the younger guys not being listed higher, or for those complaining about roydell and galloway last year, look at it a different way - Those two receivers were excellent practice guys, they gave the younger players challenges every day in practice, and gave the young guys a goal toward beating. They are gone now, their time is over, so MS and BA bring in fresher medium to good talent, again all with good work ethic, and now the young guys are training with another solid, but non-star guys. Guys that the younger players might think they can knock off, if they practice hard enough. Heck Banks knocked Roydell off last year somewhat, AA definitely did. Think of the message and attitude that is being developed. Hopefully some hunger and pride is being built up. FAR FAR BETTER than bringing in the latest big name, and letting the young pups figure what the heck, they aren't starting me in anyway shape or form.

This is the way training camp should be, competition at every spot, and motivated, spirited practice to weed out the worst, and let the best rise to the top.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821392]Well they draft 50 wr's then play them with the first team and see what they can do. Why draft all these guys and hand a journeymen the #2 spot? Just makes me shake my head.[/quote]


[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I meant to post this a while back in this thread. Last year Shanahan drafted Austin and added Banks and Armstrong as UDFA's and placed Kelly on IR instead of cutting him. Banks and Armstrong contributed, Austin didnt. This year we added Hankerson and Paul as rookie WR's, plus a whole bunch FA's and a couple UDFA's. I think Shanahan just likes to overload at a position of need for competition or to set a tone or precedence or whatever. For fans it can suck because its hard to fall in love with a guy like Banks or Armstrong and then see him knocked down the depth chart or cut but its probably whats best for the team. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[quote]
-Shanahan tends to draft in bulk:
It is known that the Redskins offensive line is in shambles at this point. Don't be surprised to see Shanahan draft in bulk along the line. Like serious bulk. A few years ago he drafted Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder in the first and second round respectively. A couple years prior we needed a cornerback opposite Champ. Starting in the second round Shanahan drafted Darrent Williams, Domonique Foxworth and Karl Paymah all in succession.

[/quote]

[URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/34635-thoughts-of-a-broncos-fan.html[/URL]

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821435]I'd rather the young guys play, get experience and let them grow. We're not going anywhere this year so why slow the development of young players? Why draft Austin if you're not going to give the guy a chance? [B]And this is not the best wr's since the Posse. No way.[/B][/quote]

OK, I posted some of the WR rotations above...which was better than the current situation?


3 teams in 9 years makes a journeyman? :D

Andre Carter, congratulations, you're now a journeyman like London Fletcher.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Like bust, another term that gets tossed around too easily around here... journeyman.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=NC_Skins;821448][URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/post/malcolm-kelly-gives-the-saddest-interview-of-training-camp/2011/08/09/gIQArWzY4I_blog.html"]Malcolm Kelly gives the saddest interview of training camp - DC Sports Bog - The Washington Post[/URL]

Time's up for Kelly. Even he knows he's about to get axed. Sad sad tale.[/quote]

seems like a good kid too. just don't think football is in the cards for him.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=NLC1054;821456]Um...because he earned his spot?

That's what Shanny does. You have to earn your spot. I'm sure if a rookie was outplaying Jabar Gaffney then he'd be lower on the depth chart. They aren't. We all know that these guys have to EARN their way onto the football field. That's the tone Mike set last year, and that's the way it will be.[/quote]

well i wouldn't expect any of the younger guys to beat out Gafney in the first few weeks of camp.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=mlmpetert;821463][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I meant to post this a while back in this thread. Last year Shanahan drafted Austin and added Banks and Armstrong as UDFA's and placed Kelly on IR instead of cutting him. Banks and Armstrong contributed, Austin didnt. This year we added Hankerson and Paul as rookie WR's, plus a whole bunch FA's and a couple UDFA's. I think Shanahan just likes to overload at a position of need for competition or to set a tone or precedence or whatever. For fans it can suck because its hard to fall in love with a guy like Banks or Armstrong and then see him knocked down the depth chart or cut but its probably whats best for the team. [/FONT][/COLOR]



[URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/34635-thoughts-of-a-broncos-fan.html[/URL][/quote]

well part of the reason austin didn't get on the field cause shanahan kept trotting out 50 year old joey galloway and roydell williams. that made 0 sense to me. and in a way he's doing it again with career underachiever stallworth and jouneymen gafney.

i think shanahan brings in these old guys cause he doesn't realize this is a rebuilding job. again, we're not going anywhere this year. what's the quickest way to get better? free agency? no, we tried that. draft and play young guys, let them play together? get some chemistry? correct, see pittsburgh.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

we could have done without picking up Stallworth. he'll end up making the team this year & be gone the next all the while causing us to lose either Banks, Paul, or Robinson. All of whom can have a much bigger impact on the organization in the long haul, than Stallworth who may do well this year, but will be retired within the next few seasons.

edit: i don't say the same for gaffney because we did need to pick up one vet receiver to help out and i think gaffney is better than stallworth

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Bucket;821458]This is the worse logic ive ever heard. I'm sick of hearing about this.. "Letting the young guys develop"

They are going to develop by just being at the game, playing Special Teams, and earning the starting job. Shanahan has already proven that the hardest working, and best will play before the rest. So if Jabar is playing and looking better then the younger guys, then he should play. He's under contract as well. We are here to win football games, and if Jabar gives us the best chance of winning, then i'm all for him starting.

This is not a Madden video game where you think your going to draft 7 players in the draft and play them all in the top of the depth chart. The NFL is about putting the pieces together and winning, and to continue winning. Vets, Rookies, and Journeyman alike.. In all of football, how many teams ahve you seen in the NFL start more then 3-4 rookies? Yeah, there are teams with YOUNGER rosters, but since the Redskins took the FA team approach for so many years we have a ways to go, but why cant we just WIN NOW!? I'm tired of hearing this "Let's continue to build, and develop stuff"

If I was London Fletcher, or Santana Moss and heard you guys saying stuff like this, I would slap you in your cheek like those old duelers did.[/quote]

And what have we won with Moss and Fletcher? They're great pros, I like them a lot, but it's just time to turn the page.

What did we win with all the free agents that have come and gone over the years. One freakin' playoff game where the defense had to win the game for us. That's a fact, not a opinion.

Shanahan really isn't even the right guy for this job but that's another thread.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

I can see this is going nowhere. The young guys will play... when they earn their spots.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=NLC1054;821456]Um...because he earned his spot?

That's what Shanny does. You have to earn your spot. I'm sure if a rookie was outplaying Jabar Gaffney then he'd be lower on the depth chart. They aren't. We all know that these guys have to EARN their way onto the football field. That's the tone Mike set last year, and that's the way it will be.[/quote]They already had competition between all the young receivers. Bringing in a guy like Gaffney doesn't create more competition, it ends all competition (for Gaffney's spot that is). It is counter to the NFLs established culture to bring in vets to compete for the spots held by first and second year players.

I agree with skinsfan69 about 75%. Gaffney is probably the third best receiver on the Redskins, at least until Hankerson has a few snaps under his belt. Maybe he's better than Moss, even. That's hard to say, but they're close in terms of numbers. So he "deserves" his spot if the be all end all is "winning games with the 2011 Redskins." You have a better shot of doing that with Jabar Gaffney than with Terrence Austin.

And for Mike Shanahan, this probably is the end game. But that's why you don't hire a head coach in his mid-fifties if you're trying to rebuild. And it's especially why you don't make that guy your personnel guy. Shanahan's not screwing up here: he knows exactly what he's doing. Problem is, we're all still going to be fans of this team in 2014, and Mike Shanahan couldn't care less about how successful that team will be.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Mattyk;821548]I can see this is going nowhere. The young guys will play... when they earn their spots.[/quote]So, never, essentially?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;821599]So, never, essentially?[/quote]

I wouldn't say that at all. Hankerson could easily step into the #2 role once he gets some experience. I think there's definitely room for the young guys to move up once they get their feet wet. Tough to expect them to be ready for prime time with no offseason. I think Gaffney was brought in to help bridge that gap.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Mattyk;821605]I wouldn't say that at all. Hankerson could easily step into the #2 role once he gets some experience. I think there's definitely room for the young guys to move up once they get their feet wet. Tough to expect them to be ready for prime time with no offseason. [B]I think Gaffney was brought in to help bridge that gap.[/B][/quote]

I was thinking that too. And if Hankerson takes awhile to develop then Gaffney's not all that bad and can be very productive in the meantime at #2.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Mattyk;821605]I wouldn't say that at all. Hankerson could easily step into the #2 role once he gets some experience. I think there's definitely room for the young guys to move up once they get their feet wet. Tough to expect them to be ready for prime time with no offseason. I think Gaffney was brought in to help bridge that gap.[/quote]I can buy Gaffney as the guy who will gradually give reps to Hankerson as he earns them over the next two years, setting up a breakout (in receiving yards) 2013 for Hankerson when Gaffney is out of his way. But I also think the best thing that you can do for Hankerson if they really like him is just play him. Instead of playing Gaffney until Hankerson knows everything about everything, just throw him out there and let him fail a few times.

We screwed up a lot about the Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly draft, but one thing they didn't do is acquire a vet to block them. Either Chad Johnsoncinco was going to be the acquisition that offseason, or it was going to be Thomas. And even then, Devin Thomas' lack of grasp of an NFL offense was probably the single biggest reason the 2008 team failed to make the playoffs. But that was justifiable because the idea was that the 2009 team would benefit from that.

I firmly believe that having Jabar Gaffney or Donte Stallworth in 2008 would have put that team in the playoffs, but I think it's a different animal entirely when talking about the difference between 4 wins (receiver position is total crap) and 6 wins (receiver position performs better than expected).

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

With a normal offseason I might agree with tossing Hankerson to the wolves. Given the circumstances of the lockout though I would look to ease him in there and maybe have him starting by week 4, assuming he's got the basic grasp of things.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Mattyk;821548]I can see this is going nowhere. The young guys will play... when they earn their spots.[/quote]

Ok so why not let all the young guys compete against each other??? Makes no sense to bring in middle age and old guys on a team that's rebuilding, especially at the wr position. He even tried to bring in Brandon Stockley. The Eagles put in DeShawn Jackson and Jeremy Maclin right away. I didn't see them signing older guys.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=warriorzpath;821607]I was thinking that too. And if Hankerson takes awhile to develop then Gaffney's not all that bad and can be very productive in the meantime at #2.[/quote]

I think the young guys can remember 30 pass plays. We don't need the Al Saunders playbook.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=GTripp0012;821609] And even then, Devin Thomas' lack of grasp of an NFL offense was probably the single biggest reason the 2008 team failed to make the playoffs. [/quote]

I think it had more to do with his work ethic and inability to run proper routes. He was one of those club guys that Willie Parker was referencing on this way out of town.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=NC_Skins;821614]I think it had more to do with his work ethic and inability to run proper routes. He was one of those club guys that Willie Parker was referencing on this way out of town.[/quote]He was also pretty much responsible for every illegal formation we took as a team that year. Ridiculous.

Luckily, we were able to replace his contribution in 2009 by having Heyer line up off the line of scrimmage.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821612]Ok so why not let all the young guys compete against each other??? Makes no sense to bring in middle age and old guys on a team that's rebuilding, especially at the wr position. He even tried to bring in Brandon Stockley. The Eagles put in DeShawn Jackson and Jeremy Maclin right away. I didn't see them signing older guys.[/quote]

Well, as I've said repeatedly this wasn't a normal offseason. Trying to get these guys ready to play day 1 with just a month of training camp is expecting a lot.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=skinsfan69;821613]I think the young guys can remember [B]30 pass plays[/B]. We don't need the Al Saunders playbook.[/quote]

You think that's all they've got?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Mattyk;821620]Well, as I've said repeatedly this wasn't a normal offseason. Trying to get these guys ready to play day 1 with just a month of training camp is expecting a lot.[/quote]But the alternative is cutting some of the more high upside guys. If in fact they have less time to determine the relative learning curve of the young players, is the answer really to say "screw it" and just go find some purdy veterans who will screw up less in Weeks 1-6?

Is a 3-3 start to the 2011 season really the end game? Is this how we will remember Mike Shanahan as Redskins coach: did everything in his power to stay in the hunt into early November?