Who's back? Who's not?
 

You guys should check this out it pretty much breaks down our team.Its a good read and a good article.


[URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-redskinsrundown&prov=ap&type=lgns"]Who's back? Who's not? Redskins have lots of offseason questions - NFL - Yahoo! Sports[/URL]

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

I think it does pretty much sum us up pretty well. I will say about Jason Campbell, I think he has played pretty good overall and at the point, he has looked more like the answer than anybody else we have had a QB --- that is coming from a hardcore Brunell supporter like myself.

I don't believe Ade Jimoh is someone you want to cut loose, but I think he is a career special teams guy! He's golden on Special teams, but sucks big time at corner. Maybe he might develop into a decent safety, but if Shawn Springs is healthy next season, then we either keep him at CB, or move HIM to safety. I don't believe Carlos Rogers is someone we need to get rid of, I still have some faith in him, but he's never going to be our #1 guy! I think we need to look at the draft for a CB.

We should DEFINITELY start Rocky next season at weakside LB, and add some depth to our defensive line.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

Very nice article and to the point, I especially hope that people read the comment about the receiver position. I have been stressing the same point and have been getting blasted and basically got thrown off of extremeskins for making the same comments. For some reason people think that we are loaded at that position when actually it is one of our weakest.

The comments about Campbell was also on point although he may improve over the off-season he is definitely in need of some work.The Portis/Betts combination is going to win us some games but a passing game to go along with the running game will get us to the playoffs even if the defense is not totally fixed over the off-season because sustained drives willl keep them off the field.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

Yeah i pretty much agree with the whole article.It just sucks knowing we still have so many holes.They should have been fixed last year.To bad our front office f**ked everything up again.I hope they do it right this time.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

I pray that we won't go out and spend shitloads of money in free agency again. I would like to see Nate Clements here, but not for a huge contract that gives him more than he's worth. I don't even know what we are gonna do with our defense, it has a lot of holes that we can't fix in one year.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=mooby;264124]I pray that we won't go out and spend shitloads of money in free agency again. I would like to see Nate Clements here, but not for a huge contract that gives him more than he's worth. I don't even know what we are gonna do with our defense, it has a lot of holes that we can't fix in one year.[/quote]

They fixed it in one year after 2003.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;264126]They fixed it in one year after 2003.[/quote]


And how did that work out for us? Is our defense amongst the elite this year? Hell, is our defense even amongst the good this year?

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;264126]They fixed it in one year after 2003.[/quote]
as much as it pains me, i agree. i think with some tinkering, this defense can be very good again. i think marshall is the key. can he go back to 2005 form, or was he just playing over his head? and bringing clements here is the move i would make in free agency

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

Clements, Rogers, Springs, and Taylor starts to look like a little more respectable secondary. Springs is very outspoken and a natural leader, so he should be comfortable captaining the secondary from the SS spot in a manner similar to Clark when he was here. LB's should be better, although we might look to upgrade Marshall. The D-Line could use another player, and we'll probably get one through the draft. The problem remains depth, however, which we'll never have without draft picks. Every year we put together a starting 11 that looks good on paper, but never have an answer when someone goes down. It was Springs abdominal injury that, in my opinion, started the defense's unraveling this year.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

It's a shame the 2 guys that were supposed to serve as #2s to compliment Moss (Patten, Lloyd) just aren't panning out.

If Springs moves to safety and Clements comes aboard, the Skins need to fill the holes on the line and at middle linebacker.

Seems to me that once again, the Skins are only a few pieces away from a complete puzzle. The defensive line hasn't been stellar, but has had a few guys step up. The offensive line has played quite well, and would like to see some depth added there as well.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=riggoraider;264054]Very nice article and to the point, I especially hope that people read the comment about the receiver position. I have been stressing the same point and have been getting blasted and basically got thrown off of extremeskins for making the same comments. For some reason people think that we are loaded at that position when actually it is one of our weakest.

The comments about Campbell was also on point although he may improve over the off-season he is definitely in need of some work.The Portis/Betts combination is going to win us some games but a passing game to go along with the running game will get us to the playoffs even if the defense is not totally fixed over the off-season because sustained drives willl keep them off the field.[/quote]

I agree w/the article's assessment of Loyd, but ARE has played well. JC has missed him on a no. of occassions.
Whether they're playing well or not, the fact is we have too much $ & cap space tied up in wr's. Someone on here even said that we would take a sizable cap hit if we cut Patten. Patten could still contribute & James Thrash has outplayed Loyd when given the chance. Bottom line, I don't see any way that we sign another wr. Maybe Mike Espy can crack the roster though.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

wide receiver is the least of the worries on this team

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=djnemo65;264146]Clements, Rogers, Springs, and Taylor starts to look like a little more respectable secondary...[/quote]

Couple that with Prioleou, Vincent, and Wright as the primary backups and I think we should have a good, interchangable secondary.

We need to upgrade MLB. I loved the way Lamar played at the end of last year, but he has dropped off. We need a vocal leader at MLB who plays smart, tackles well, and covers short crossing patterns.

Griffith has said he is playing at a weaker size because of injury problems in camp and it has hurt him. We also need to get a big, fearsome DT that can hold his ground on double teams so that Griffith can be more of an impact. If that happens, our DE's should magically get better because of blocking breakdowns.

In short, we need to re-sign Dockery, pick up Clements, upgrade MLB (through free agency), and draft a big DT with our first rounder.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=GoSkins!;264172]Couple that with Prioleou, Vincent, and Wright as the primary backups and I think we should have a good, interchangable secondary.

We need to upgrade MLB. I loved the way Lamar played at the end of last year, but he has dropped off. We need a vocal leader at MLB who plays smart, tackles well, and covers short crossing patterns.

Griffith has said he is playing at a weaker size because of injury problems in camp and it has hurt him. We also need to get a big, fearsome DT that can hold his ground on double teams so that Griffith can be more of an impact. If that happens, our DE's should magically get better because of blocking breakdowns.

In short, we need to re-sign Dockery, pick up Clements, upgrade MLB (through free agency), and draft a big DT with our first rounder.[/quote]
I agree with you for the most part, but I think we should try to get another middle line backer through the draft and not free agency. As you said before, Marshall had injury problems this season. I think he should get another chance to prove himself when he's healthy before we go spending money on another line backer, I think we owe it to him after the way he played for us last year.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=freddyg12;264164]I agree w/the article's assessment of Loyd, but ARE has played well. JC has missed him on a no. of occassions.
Whether they're playing well or not, the fact is we have too much $ & cap space tied up in wr's. Someone on here even said that we would take a sizable cap hit if we cut Patten. Patten could still contribute & James Thrash has outplayed Loyd when given the chance. Bottom line, I don't see any way that we sign another wr. Maybe Mike Espy can crack the roster though.[/quote]

ARE has not played up to the level of a #2 receiver. The Steelers did not even have him as there #2. I think that we brought him in to be a 3 and a punt returner but with Lloyd playing the way that he has played we had to promote him to 2.

The way that the NFL wheels and deals I am sure that there is a way to get another WR and get rid of a couple.The article stated that there will probably be a change there and Mike Espy certainly is not the answer. Sometimes you just have to eat some losses and this is probably one of those times. The front office made a HUGE mistake in their thinking last year and ESPN was talking about from day one of that deal. ARE is not a pure receiver and neither him nor Lloyd never put up the numbers to warrant those contracts.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

I agree w/ much of the article w/ the exception of B Lloyd. I guess I'm one of the one's defending him much of the time but I believe given the chance Lloyd could be a great #2. When thrown to, he makes the catch 99% of the time. When thrown to, good things happen like pass int. calls. How many times has he made some great downfield blocks? Alot.

Yea, he kind of blew up a little bit, but hey, he's pissed b/c we're losing and he can't do anything about it. We've barely threw the ball to him all year.

So to look at the #'s and say it's his fault is not looking at the full picture. Let's face it, right now and all season we haven't been able to spread the ball b/n the WR's. That's not bashing JC b/c he is learning, but it's the truth.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

I'm torn on Lloyd. He has playmaking abilities, but he seems to have run himself into the coaches' doghouse and that's not good. The question is how will he respond this offseason? Will he be motivated to bounce back or will he sulk his way outta D.C.? Or has a decision already been made on him?

We shall see.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

I pretty much give the team a pass on this year. Just as has been stated numerous times, this just wasn't the year. Injuries, new system, moves that should have been made earlier at QB and LB just weren't done. The defense just doesn't go to hell that quick after being top ten for two years. Let's look at who is producing and who isn't after about four games into next year, then we'll talk about who belongs.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

The problem is that we now have a D unit that's getting up their in age and only have 4 picks in the draft. As much as i like Daniels & Wynn, i think they are backups at best. So we need at least 2 lineman (starters), lb help (imo), at least 1 starter DB and a qualified nickelback all while losing a couple and restructuring a couple. That's alot to do in one offseason.

Can they do it? I guess. It would just be alot easier if we didn't throw around...waste draft picks. We only have 1 top pick, so that means one starter, you would think.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

Guess it depends on who's available, but a trade down for more picks could be a nice way to go.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;264226]I pretty much give the team a pass on this year. Just as has been stated numerous times, this just wasn't the year. Injuries, new system, moves that should have been made earlier at QB and LB just weren't done. The defense just doesn't go to hell that quick after being top ten for two years. Let's look at who is producing and who isn't after about four games into next year, then we'll talk about who belongs.[/quote]

I would like to chalk this up as an off year as well, but I still have my doubts about the staff.

The thing with this team is that no one doubts the talent level, it just seems we're always one injury or one this or one that from imploding.

You almost get the feeling almost everything has to be 'perfect' for this team to be a legit threat.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=riggoraider;264203]ARE has not played up to the level of a #2 receiver. The Steelers did not even have him as there #2. I think that we brought him in to be a 3 and a punt returner but with Lloyd playing the way that he has played we had to promote him to 2.

The way that the NFL wheels and deals I am sure that there is a way to get another WR and get rid of a couple.The article stated that there will probably be a change there and Mike Espy certainly is not the answer. Sometimes you just have to eat some losses and this is probably one of those times. The front office made a HUGE mistake in their thinking last year and ESPN was talking about from day one of that deal. ARE is not a pure receiver and neither him nor Lloyd never put up the numbers to warrant those contracts.[/quote]

I believe they did have him as their #2 once Burress left. He's made plays here, whether he's a 2 or 3. He doesn't get a lot of separation, but he catches the ball in traffic & we know he can run. I think we'll see him catch a lot more as JC improves, their timing has been off at times. On the other hand, they have hooked up on some big plays.
I'll agree that the contracts for ARE & Loyd were too big, especially for Loyd. I just don't see us being able to address reciever given the other needs we have & that we have 4 guys counting a substantial amount on the cap whether we keep them or not.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;264225]I'm torn on Lloyd. He has playmaking abilities, but he seems to have run himself into the coaches' doghouse and that's not good. The question is how will he respond this offseason? Will he be motivated to bounce back or will he sulk his way outta D.C.? Or has a decision already been made on him?

We shall see.[/quote]

I still hope he can turn it around, but whenever they show his routes in slow mo he either looks like he gives up on plays quickly or doesn't know where he's supposed to go & when he's supposed to look for the ball. I remember Brunell looking pissed at him once when he overthrew him & Loyd didn't seem to adjust at all. He doesn't look like a tough reciever to me, whereas I think the other guys we have are not afraid of contact & will go across the middle w/confidence. Loyd just looks too timid on some plays.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=redsk1;264224]I agree w/ much of the article w/ the exception of B Lloyd. I guess I'm one of the one's defending him much of the time but I believe given the chance Lloyd could be a great #2. When thrown to, he makes the catch 99% of the time. When thrown to, good things happen like pass int. calls. How many times has he made some great downfield blocks? Alot.

Yea, he kind of blew up a little bit, but hey, he's pissed b/c we're losing and he can't do anything about it. We've barely threw the ball to him all year.

So to look at the #'s and say it's his fault is not looking at the full picture. Let's face it, right now and all season we haven't been able to spread the ball b/n the WR's. That's not bashing JC b/c he is learning, but it's the truth.[/quote]

Lloyd will probably be a good #2 to someone like Roy Williams of the Detroit Lions or Andre Johnson of the Houston Texans but to Santana Moss he is not a good #2 to because they are both doing the same things only on different sides of the field. They both just fly down the field and look up for the ball we need someone who can compliment our deep passes with a crossing pattern every now and then (and I am not talking about Cooley who is NOT a WR!!!!).

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

archuletta could'nt cover me,so it's a tragedy if when he leaves,the door at redskin park does'nt hit him on his rear end when he leaves!

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=freddyg12;264234]I believe they did have him as their #2 once Burress left. He's made plays here, whether he's a 2 or 3. He doesn't get a lot of separation, but he catches the ball in traffic & we know he can run. I think we'll see him catch a lot more as JC improves, their timing has been off at times. On the other hand, they have hooked up on some big plays.
I'll agree that the contracts for ARE & Loyd were too big, especially for Loyd. I just don't see us being able to address reciever given the other needs we have & that we have 4 guys counting a substantial amount on the cap whether we keep them or not.[/quote]

He was never a #2 at Pittsburgh and I am sorry but whether you can see it or not I can gaurantee you that there will be a change in our receivers next year. There is no way that anyone in there right mind will keep something together that is just not working. I mean it is just too simple to not understand that you can not play winning NFL football when all of your receivers are too small and can't catch passes across the middle because they are in fear of getting killed if they did. At least one of your receivers has to be used for the short passing game....NOOOOO not Cooley....COOLEY IS NOT A RECEIVER!!!!

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=riggoraider;264239]Lloyd will probably be a good #2 to someone like Roy Williams of the Detroit Lions or Andre Johnson of the Houston Texans but to Santana Moss he is not a good #2 to because they are both doing the same things only on different sides of the field. They both just fly down the field and look up for the ball we need someone who can compliment our deep passes with a crossing pattern every now and then (and I am not talking about Cooley who is NOT a WR!!!!).[/quote]
Do we need a big receiver, I think so. But I do not think that is a top priority next year, and I don't think the receivers we have now will change. There are too many other problems in the defense to worry about receivers right now, plus we just spent too much money on them to not give them another chance with a year of experience under their belt in the new offense. In addition, Moss is not just a deep threat, he is very dangerous after he catches the ball short, we've all seen him make plays like that. In addition, he is surprisingly strong for his size. Remember this year in the Jaguars game when he scored the TD in OT, he had two Jaguars hit him before he broke free and scored. Also, last year in the 2nd giants game he had a big TD after breaking two tackles, the man is pretty versatile. I just think you're discounting Moss's skills a little bit.
Are you sure ARE was never a number 2 at Pittsburgh, who was it last year if it wasn't him? I'm pretty sure it was him, they drafted that guy Santonio Holmes from Ohio State to take his place, and I'm pretty sure he starts now.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=gabe1984;264369]Do we need a big receiver, I think so. But I do not think that is a top priority next year, and I don't think the receivers we have now will change. There are too many other problems in the defense to worry about receivers right now, plus we just spent too much money on them to not give them another chance with a year of experience under their belt in the new offense. In addition, Moss is not just a deep threat, he is very dangerous after he catches the ball short, we've all seen him make plays like that. In addition, he is surprisingly strong for his size. Remember this year in the Jaguars game when he scored the TD in OT, he had two Jaguars hit him before he broke free and scored. Also, last year in the 2nd giants game he had a big TD after breaking two tackles, the man is pretty versatile. I just think you're discounting Moss's skills a little bit.
Are you sure ARE was never a number 2 at Pittsburgh, who was it last year if it wasn't him? I'm pretty sure it was him, they drafted that guy Santonio Holmes from Ohio State to take his place, and I'm pretty sure he starts now.[/quote]

You are correct ARE was a starter for the Steelers last year he and Cedric Wilson split time. He is just not very productive and can not move the chains. We have too many deep receivers. I would like for our receivers NOT to have a good game every 3 to 4 games we need for someone to show up every game and we are just not getting that.

As far as the great catch that Santana made against the Jags he never broke any tackles the 2 guys basically ran into each other. I am not taking anything away from Moss, in fact,I am one of his biggest fans but it is a MUST that we get some size at that position THIS year by hook or by crook however we can get it it has to be done. The 3 and outs are killing us. I do not care what kind of defense we put together if they are on the field the majority of the game they are going to be worn out by the end of the end of the third quarter

Most fans love to see the deep passes but those passes are not high percentage ones and while they do have their places in games they should not be tried everytime a team passes. Defenses will pick up on that and we will start having games like the Rams game were our receivers were put totally on lock down.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=riggoraider;264372]You are correct ARE was a starter for the Steelers last year he and Cedric Wilson split time. He is just not very productive and can not move the chains. We have too many deep receivers. I would like for our receivers NOT to have a good game every 3 to 4 games we need for someone to show up every game and we are just not getting that.

As far as the great catch that Santana made against the Jags he never broke any tackles the 2 guys basically ran into each other. I am not taking anything away from Moss, in fact,I am one of his biggest fans but it is a MUST that we get some size at that position THIS year by hook or by crook however we can get it it has to be done. The 3 and outs are killing us. I do not care what kind of defense we put together if they are on the field the majority of the game they are going to be worn out by the end of the end of the third quarter

Most fans love to see the deep passes but those passes are not high percentage ones and while they do have their places in games they should not be tried everytime a team passes. Defenses will pick up on that and we will start having games like the Rams game were our receivers were put totally on lock down.[/quote]

I think you may be the only person on this site with such dersire to get another wide receiver, I understand where you're coming from, I'm not sure if I agree totally, but DAMNIT I respect your opinion! Rank the following from most important to least important for next year, everyone else please feel free to do this as well. Big receiver, CB, MLB, DL, and another over payed bench buddy for AA.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=gabe1984;264376]I think you may be the only person on this site with such dersire to get another wide receiver, I understand where you're coming from, I'm not sure if I agree totally, but DAMNIT I respect your opinion! Rank the following from most important to least important for next year, everyone else please feel free to do this as well. Big receiver, CB, MLB, DL, and another over payed bench buddy for AA.[/quote]

Ok here goes IMO:

I think that because the offense does not need much work we should sure it up/ make it complete by getting what it needs first because we are not going to have the draft picks nor cap space to completly fix the defense and too we are going to be working with a young QB and getting him better targets will only make HIM better

Secondly,by being on this forum, reading it's posts and looking at ESPN it is almost a given that Clements is probably coming to DC so him and Springs should make a good CB tandem. I think that Rogers should be used in nickle and dime packages (he was a draft day bust). With Clements and Springs at CB we can blitz one or both of our safties more aggresively while using Rogers as an extra coverage guy he would serve better than a safety in our coverage defense therfore our safties will not be getting burned like they were this year on the deep pass and can help the run defense . AA can stay, learn the defense and use his God gifted skills and actuallly be an asset to team next year (well I thought that he could until reading his article so I guess that it will have to be Prioleau) but a good corner game will help free up the safties for other things.

Carter, Golston, Salave'a and another defensive end that we will have to aquire from somewhere should make the D-line OK.

Washington and McCintosh will be our outside LB's and as with the CB and the DE we are going to have to aquire a middle LB but Marshall will suffice if we are running out of cap space next year.

As you can see, this is NOT a lot of personel changes but ones that can make an offense more formidable,help JC out while helping out the defense as well.

Again we are not going to be able to complete the defensive moves this year with what we have to work but a possession receiver will, at least, keep the unit off the field more by sustaining drives and we can complete there moves the following year but we would, at least, make the playoffs next year .

Don't forget that we are going to be getting rid of players also(hopefully some dead weight at the receiver position) to make other moves work

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

o snap

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=dmek25;264144]as much as it pains me, i agree. i think with some tinkering, this defense can be very good again. i think marshall is the key. can he go back to 2005 form, or was he just playing over his head? and bringing clements here is the move i would make in free agency[/quote]Marshall did an admirable job in the middle in 05, but he's a smaller outside linebacker playing out of position. No reason we shouldn't address the middle through free agency and let Lemar start the season on the weakside until Rocky is outplaying him. Worst case scenario, we get solid depth at 3 positions with just one signing.

To fix the defense in one season, we must maximize our existing versitility, something we have struggled to do in the past.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=freddyg12;264234]I believe they did have him as their #2 once Burress left. He's made plays here, whether he's a 2 or 3. He doesn't get a lot of separation, but he catches the ball in traffic & we know he can run. I think we'll see him catch a lot more as JC improves, their timing has been off at times. On the other hand, they have hooked up on some big plays.
I'll agree that the contracts for ARE & Loyd were too big, especially for Loyd. I just don't see us being able to address reciever given the other needs we have & that we have 4 guys counting a substantial amount on the cap whether we keep them or not.[/quote]Well, remember that in KC, Al Saunders' WR corps consisted of Eddie Kennison, Samie Parker, and Dante Hall. So we really don't need to touch our WRs this offseason. Didn't need to put as much attention as we did into them last year, but we can't look back now.

There is no excuse for dealing picks for relatively inferior talent such as Duckett and Lloyd. Just sign guys on the waiver wire after they get cut by their teams. These moves, IMO, were way moer inexcusable than Archuleta because everybody in the league knows that Duckett can't run through a hole unless it huge, and recievers like Lloyd are a dime a dozen and im sure [I]anyone[/I] would have signed for the money we gave Brandon. Archuleta at least was signed following a great 2005 campaign, so we had reason to believe that he maight be able to continue his success. He couldn't, but that signing even in hindsight wasn't inexcusable.

I think if we were to cut Arch post June 1, we would really be creating a horrible cap situation for 2008. Cutting Lloyd as this article suggests would make that situation far worse, so I don't think thats an option.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=dmek25;264144]as much as it pains me, i agree. i think with some tinkering, this defense can be very good again. i think marshall is the key. can he go back to 2005 form, or was he just playing over his head? and bringing clements here is the move i would make in free agency[/quote]

reality check time...marshall was playing over his head. i am a little apprehensive about free agency...everytime we go that route this damn thing seems to blow up in our face. see 2000 season and 2006 season if you have any questions about that.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;264458]Well, remember that in KC, Al Saunders' WR corps consisted of Eddie Kennison, Samie Parker, and Dante Hall. So we really don't need to touch our WRs this offseason. Didn't need to put as much attention as we did into them last year, but we can't look back now.

There is no excuse for dealing picks for relatively inferior talent such as Duckett and Lloyd. Just sign guys on the waiver wire after they get cut by their teams. These moves, IMO, were way moer inexcusable than Archuleta because everybody in the league knows that Duckett can't run through a hole unless it huge, and recievers like Lloyd are a dime a dozen and im sure [I]anyone[/I] would have signed for the money we gave Brandon. Archuleta at least was signed following a great 2005 campaign, so we had reason to believe that he maight be able to continue his success. He couldn't, but that signing even in hindsight wasn't inexcusable.

I think if we were to cut Arch post June 1, we would really be creating a horrible cap situation for 2008. Cutting Lloyd as this article suggests would make that situation far worse, so I don't think thats an option.[/quote]

Riggoraider has been making this point for a while, and I'm starting to agree with him that we do need a big wide out. Kennison, Parker, and Hall are not standout wide receivers, however Kennison is 6'1 201 lbs. An on average their receivers are bigger than ours, can we trade Lloyd, ARE, and Archuletta for Andre Johnson, that man is huge, 6'3 219lbs. Maybe in Redksins fantasy world.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=gabe1984;264482]Riggoraider has been making this point for a while, and I'm starting to agree with him that we do need a big wide out. Kennison, Parker, and Hall are not standout wide receivers, however Kennison is 6'1 201 lbs. An on average their receivers are bigger than ours, can we trade Lloyd, ARE, and Archuletta for Andre Johnson, that man is huge, 6'3 219lbs. Maybe in Redksins fantasy world.[/quote]

OOOOHHHH you're finally coming around huh? I would love to have a Andre Johnson or a Roy Williams-like receiver in DC with Santana Moss at the other receiver position, Cooley at tight end, and Portis/ Betts at RB. With the line blocking the way that it is Campbell would not have to be an instant success because he would have major weapons surrounding him.

I know that it is virtually impossible to get the 2 receivers that I named but Johnson out of Georgia Tech or Jarret out of USC could be just as good as they are and would help us sustain drives. ONE move just [SIZE=3][B]ONE[/B][/SIZE] could put us back in the playoffs next year.

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

Whose Gone? i'll make it easy.
Portis
Holdman
Salva'i
Marshall
Archuleta

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=jdockser;264666]Whose Gone? i'll make it easy.
Portis
Holdman
Salva'i
Marshall
Archuleta[/quote]
i hope the skins dont get rid of portis unless they get a quality starter. and betts needs to hang onto the ball if he is going to carry the ball 300+ times a season

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

[quote=jdockser;264666]Whose Gone? i'll make it easy.
Portis
Holdman
Salva'i
Marshall
Archuleta[/quote]

Who is Salva'i?

Re: Who's back? Who's not?
 

cartwright
Holdman
Archuleta
givens
john hall
daniels
__________________