Wayne "Won't Be opposite Moss"
 

[color=black]All of us that were hoping Reggie Wayne would be wearing the burgundy and gold next season will be highly disappointed...It appears that he indeed won't become a Redskin. The Colts made it clear Friday that Reggie would not be going anywhere. [/color]
[color=black][url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020302680.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020302680.html[/url] [/color]


[color=black]No T.O., no Reggie, what’s our next move.[/color]

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Senorice.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[color=black][font=Verdana]That's possible...He'll probably be a late 2nd round/early 3rd round pick, but I think the Redskins will be looking at a big physical receiver in the draft.

It would be great to have the Moss brothers running fly routes on each side of the field...something would have to give...lol[/font][/color]

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

santonio holmes is a slightly better santana clone, but senorice is more likely to have immediate impact due to being at miami and having a pro bowl brother... of course, unless we move up I doubt we'll be able to get him now. If we can settle the WR/DE thing in FA (very possible) I'd be much happier cause then the skins can use picks on needs that FA wont fix (OL depth, cheap DL depth/DT #2, cheap CB, possible upgrade on royal or clark, torp the moonshot punter). I'm really hoping for a boring draft full of real upgrades instead of chances (will stovall/nance be ready to help this year? will tapp develop enough to displace wynn, or is he just a slightly better backup than evans (an a short term waste)? We're just not picking high enough to upgrade certain spots with significant immediate impact).

people really seem to get hung up on the size thing... stovall and nance are big, but i think football ability and hands are much more important personally. Schotty picked gardner over moss because of the size thing and right now moss would get at least a 1st and 2nd in a trade (good contract, pro bowl 1500 yards etc) and gardner isn't worth a 7th.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

i say keep david patton as #2,AND REALLY GO AFTER A PASS RUSHING END

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=dmek25]i say keep david patton as #2,AND REALLY GO AFTER A PASS RUSHING END[/QUOTE]
we can easily do both..

go after someone like kampman or brock and then givens in free agency.. then use our 2nd round pick for the best college DE still on the board. used the 3rd rounder for the best o lineman still on the board.. we would have a stellar off season

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=shallyshal]we can easily do both..

go after someone like kampman or brock and then givens in free agency.. then use our 2nd round pick for the best college DE still on the board. used the 3rd rounder for the best o lineman still on the board.. we would have a stellar off season[/QUOTE]

I love David Givens. Other than Wayne, who appears to be off the market, I think he's the best WR available in free agency.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]I love David Givens. Other than Wayne, who appears to be off the market, I think he's the best WR available in free agency.[/QUOTE]

I'll bet the Patriots do to David Givens what the Colts are doing with Wayne. Givens is the best wideout New England has, plus there's great chemistry between he and Brady. They'd be stupid to break up that tandem.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Kiper has Senorice moving into the bottom of the first round now. We won't get a shot at him. I'm not so sure it would be a great idea anyway. I think, if the Skins are really gonna pursue a number 2 wide out, they need to look at a big, physical possession receiver.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

we knew we werent getting wayne, it was clear that indy was always going to take him back

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

d branch is the pats best WR, not givens.

I still don't think everyone should get hung up on size... production is more important (s smith at 5'8" still got 12+ tds). We can get size in a 6'6" TE which will have a couple shots at (maybe byrd, but probably klop (6'7" or tim day).

If spencer is there at 52 i'd really lobby for him though... mcclover will probably be around in the 3rd and he's MUCH faster than tapp etc.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

I hope the Skins make a run at either Kevin Curtis or Antwaan Randle-El. Both would be great additions. If Patten returns as the legitimate #2, then go hard after Randle-El as a slot man with the potential to be "Joe Gibbs creative".

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Our best shot may be to go for a "project" WR in the late rounds of the draft. While i think WR is a priority I dont think we should just settle for whoever is left in FA.If Wayne was our guy and he is indeed staying in Indy, then we should concentrate on the draft now.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Give me Martin Nance, Hank Basket, or Maurice Stovall in the second and a good TE in FA and we are money. ONe of them has to be there

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]Give me Martin Nance, Hank Basket, or Maurice Stovall in the second and a good TE in FA and we are money. ONe of them has to be there[/QUOTE]i really like stovall, nice choice

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

wow that was a pretty hefty penalty for reckless driving, i mean damn you dont get half that for your first offense of driving intoxicated

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=redskinsskickazz]wow that was a pretty hefty penalty for reckless driving, i mean damn you dont get half that for your first offense of driving intoxicated[/QUOTE]:confused- ....:Smoker: .

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=redskinsskickazz]wow that was a pretty hefty penalty for reckless driving, i mean damn you dont get half that for your first offense of driving intoxicated[/QUOTE]

I'm going to go waaaaaay out on a limb here and think that you meant to post in this [URL=http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=10956]thread[/URL]

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Why is it that there is very little discussion on considering Antwaan Randle-El? I could really see that guy opening up the field, not only for himself, but also Santana.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=ParkerGibbs]Why is it that there is very little discussion on considering Antwaan Randle-El? I could really see that guy opening up the field, not only for himself, but also Santana.[/QUOTE]

very little discussion among whom?

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=ParkerGibbs]Why is it that there is very little discussion on considering Antwaan Randle-El? I could really see that guy opening up the field, not only for himself, but also Santana.[/QUOTE]there isn't, a lot of people want antwaan. I would be thrilled with him

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

not really too high on kevin curtis...product of the system if u ask me

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

I would like to reiterate that Santana Moss DOES NOT WANT HIS BROTHER ON HIS TEAM. He wants him to establish himself in the league, not be in his big bro's shadow. Maybe it is worthy of a sticky thread, because people don't seem to get it.
It would be nice, I guess, but it AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

As far as the question goes--Eric Moulds would fit in really well here. Or Keenan McCardell. And please, no crap about Moulds not being a team player, because all that shit was blown way out of proportion.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Maybe I am just annoyed over Monk getting f-cked again when I read this article, but what the f-ck does Bill Polian need to specifically call out the Redskins for when he says "wayne is not going to be a Redskin"? Why can't he just say that Wayne is not going anywhere? What the f-ck does he need to mention the redskins for as if the skins would be the only team interested in Wayne. F-ck you Polian...worry about your own playoff choking team and not what the redskins are doing. I am just not happy today...

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=celts32]Maybe I am just annoyed over Monk getting f-cked again when I read this article, but what the f-ck does Bill Polian need to specifically call out the Redskins for when he says "wayne is not going to be a Redskin"? Why can't he just say that Wayne is not going anywhere? What the f-ck does he need to mention the redskins for as if the skins would be the only team interested in Wayne. F-ck you Polian...worry about your own playoff choking team and not what the redskins are doing. I am just not happy today...[/QUOTE]




because he knows dan snyder will swoop into indy in redskins 1 and pony up the dough to get wayne.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=dmek25]i say keep david patton as #2,AND REALLY GO AFTER A PASS RUSHING END[/QUOTE]

We learned a lot about Patten and Thrash this year. Injuries were their worst enemy which means we have to get younger healthier receivers in the mold of Brandon Llyod. I don't think James Thrash, Jimmy Farris, or Taylor Jacobs will return so we need a 4# receiver as well. In addition, we have to pick up a legitimate Tight End with the hands of Heath Miller and a better blocker than Cooley. Those two positions are the reason the Pittsburgh Steelers offense is so effective.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=skindogger47]I would like to reiterate that Santana Moss DOES NOT WANT HIS BROTHER ON HIS TEAM. He wants him to establish himself in the league, not be in his big bro's shadow. Maybe it is worthy of a sticky thread, because people don't seem to get it.
It would be nice, I guess, but it AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

As far as the question goes--Eric Moulds would fit in really well here. Or Keenan McCardell. And please, no crap about Moulds not being a team player, because all that shit was blown way out of proportion.[/QUOTE]

Keenan is old. Besides, Joe already drafted and cut him once.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=skindogger47]I would like to reiterate that Santana Moss DOES NOT WANT HIS BROTHER ON HIS TEAM. He wants him to establish himself in the league, not be in his big bro's shadow. Maybe it is worthy of a sticky thread, because people don't seem to get it.
It would be nice, I guess, but it AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

As far as the question goes--Eric Moulds would fit in really well here. Or Keenan McCardell. And please, no crap about Moulds not being a team player, because all that shit was blown way out of proportion.[/QUOTE]

you should really read that article more careful, he said he'd prefer it not to happen, but if it did he'd be cool with it.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

the TEs in thi draft are better than the WRs, and we'll be able to get an immediate starter with our pick at 52 at TE, but only a guess at WR. byrd or klop could both serve as our our #2 TE or possibly tim day (good frame, but has underachieved a bit).

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]the TEs in thi draft are better than the WRs, and we'll be able to get an immediate starter with our pick at 52 at TE, but only a guess at WR. byrd or klop could both serve as our our #2 TE or possibly tim day (good frame, but has underachieved a bit).[/QUOTE]



do you favor drafting a TE or would you think it would be better to move cooley to a permanent TE ?

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]do you favor drafting a TE or would you think it would be better to move cooley to a permanent TE ?[/QUOTE]

cooley already is a TE, regardless of what gibbs is calling him that day. However we run a LOT of two TE sets and royal is average at best and we have a chance to get a good upgrade that'd be cheap enough to keep around forever.

sellers is closer to the actual hback role where he serves as the blocking fullback and sometimes acts like a TE.

Its just that everyone seems so caught up on size, and TEs are generally taller than WRs and bigger targets/better blockers to boot, and we run lots of two TE, so why not go that route and really solidify an extra red zone target instead of getting a big slow WR who doen't really stand out just because he's big.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Is it just me or is Bill Polian getting his little panties in a bunch. He didn't just say that they are going to make sure Reggie Wayne stays a Colt, he went out of his way to say that he won't be a Redskin. Sounds like some GM's might be getting a little nervous about the Redskins. Don't worry little Billy us Bad Ol Redkins will leave your Wayneeee alone. FOR NOW!!! But don't go and start feeling safe now, cuz we will get another WR and be back in the Super Bowl while you and your precious Colts watch. :spank:

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

Maybe he will be worrying when we meet in exactly one year

also EXACTLY 1 year from now 2/4/06 10:35 we will have just finished up our season with a win in the super bowl

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]cooley already is a TE, regardless of what gibbs is calling him that day. However we run a LOT of two TE sets and royal is average at best and we have a chance to get a good upgrade that'd be cheap enough to keep around forever.

sellers is closer to the actual hback role where he serves as the blocking fullback and sometimes acts like a TE.

Its just that everyone seems so caught up on size, and TEs are generally taller than WRs and bigger targets/better blockers to boot, and we run lots of two TE, so why not go that route and really solidify an extra red zone target instead of getting a big slow WR who doen't really stand out just because he's big.[/QUOTE]



yea, i tend to agree with you. what i was trying to get at when i asked about drafting a TE or using cooley as a full time TE was now that saunders has control of the offense do you think cooley could be used the way gonzalas was used in KC ? and if so , do you think the skins would be wise to draft a TE with their 2nd or 3rd round picks.my thinking is if they try to use cooley like gonzalas then the skins need to focus on a different position (like wr or de)
i've heard alot of people mention TE as a possible top prioity for the skins but the cooley factor makes me question that.
i hope i explained my questioning a little bit better.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

I can't believe the Colts are going to pay Wayne as a franchise wr. That means something like the average of the top 5 WR's. Wayne is a great #2, but is completely unproven as a #1 WR yet they are going to pay him like one of the top players in the league. You have no idea what kind of player he would be without Harrison on the other side. He is all yours Bill Polian...

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=celts32]I can't believe the Colts are going to pay Wayne as a franchise wr. That means something like the average of the top 5 WR's. Wayne is a great #2, but is completely unproven as a #1 WR yet they are going to pay him like one of the top players in the league. You have no idea what kind of player he would be without Harrison on the other side. He is all yours Bill Polian...[/QUOTE]

I believe he'll get around $7.7 mil. For that money, keep him.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]yea, i tend to agree with you. what i was trying to get at when i asked about drafting a TE or using cooley as a full time TE was now that saunders has control of the offense do you think cooley could be used the way gonzalas was used in KC ? and if so , do you think the skins would be wise to draft a TE with their 2nd or 3rd round picks.my thinking is if they try to use cooley like gonzalas then the skins need to focus on a different position (like wr or de)
i've heard alot of people mention TE as a possible top prioity for the skins but the cooley factor makes me question that.
i hope i explained my questioning a little bit better.[/QUOTE]

well, in the 3rd or 4th we could get tim day who's one of those rare blocking TEs that can also catch (better than royal, and slightly faster i believe). but if you have a 2 TE offense, than getting a better #2 TE woulddn't hurt and there's good 6'6" and 6'7" TEs this year. I'd agree if you're saying WR #2 is a bigger priority, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't also upgrade over royal if possible. I was also justs mentioning that if you really want a big WR, then get the 6'7" 260lb versions ;)

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=celts32]I can't believe the Colts are going to pay Wayne as a franchise wr. That means something like the average of the top 5 WR's. Wayne is a great #2, but is completely unproven as a #1 WR yet they are going to pay him like one of the top players in the league. You have no idea what kind of player he would be without Harrison on the other side. He is all yours Bill Polian...[/QUOTE]

If this is true James is goen!!! What do they do with the running games and the D is still light!

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=12thMan]I believe he'll get around $7.7 mil. For that money, keep him.[/QUOTE]

The numbers were announced on Sunday:

Quarterbacks will carry a franchise tag of $8,789,000 and a transition tag of $8,327,000. [b]Wide receivers will carry a franchise tag of $6,172,000 and a transition tag of $5,160,000.[/b] Offensive lineman will carry a franchise tag of $6,983,000 and a transition tag of $6,391,000. Running backs will carry a franchise tag of $6,085,000 and a transition tag of $5,153,000. Tight ends will carry a franchise tag of $3,327,000 and a transition tag of $2,718,000.

Defensive ends will carry a franchise tag of $8,332,000 and a transition tag of $7,075,000. Linebackers will carry a franchise tag of $7,169,000 and a transition tag of $6,144,000. Cornerbacks will carry a franchise tag of $5,893,000 and a transition tag of $4,744,000. Defensive tackles will carry a franchise tag of $5,656,000 and a transition tag of $4,463,000. Safeties will carry a franchise tag of $4,109,000 and a transition tag of $3,592,000.

Re: Wayne "Won't Be a Redskin"
 

[QUOTE=amorentz]The numbers were announced on Sunday:

Quarterbacks will carry a franchise tag of $8,789,000 and a transition tag of $8,327,000. [b]Wide receivers will carry a franchise tag of $6,172,000 and a transition tag of $5,160,000.[/b] Offensive lineman will carry a franchise tag of $6,983,000 and a transition tag of $6,391,000. Running backs will carry a franchise tag of $6,085,000 and a transition tag of $5,153,000. Tight ends will carry a franchise tag of $3,327,000 and a transition tag of $2,718,000.

Defensive ends will carry a franchise tag of $8,332,000 and a transition tag of $7,075,000. Linebackers will carry a franchise tag of $7,169,000 and a transition tag of $6,144,000. Cornerbacks will carry a franchise tag of $5,893,000 and a transition tag of $4,744,000. Defensive tackles will carry a franchise tag of $5,656,000 and a transition tag of $4,463,000. Safeties will carry a franchise tag of $4,109,000 and a transition tag of $3,592,000.[/QUOTE]


The WP reported that figure at $7.76, I would imagine he could still fetch close to $7 mil even at that revised figure.

That number makes Santana look more and more like a steal!