No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

Yesterday Joe Gibbs stated: "We'd like to solve everything we can through FA."
As far as in regaurds to Plax and Muhamad he stated; "do we have the money, do we have the cap room? I'd think it would be tough for us to go after one of those two guys"

So does this mean we won't try on these two guys? if so who will we try to target? So I ask u warpath, who would u go after outside of those two guys to sign as Wide reciever.

I still think Jerry Porter, David Patten, and Kevin Johnson are viable options for the team. As far as the draft, I really hope Mike Williams has a bad combine to make him avialable at #9 or past that. he will be a star in this league. I would love to see him at redskin park.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

I think that is exactly what he's saying, Gibbs doesn't want to pay an arm and a leg for a receiver. Muhammed is asking for a signing bonus over $10 million, and Plax would command a tidy sum as well. Trying to crunch them into our salary cap situation would create holes in other positions, it's just not worth it. Kevin Johnson seems alright to me, but I'm not sure how much of an upgrade he is on James Thrash or Taylor Jacobs. Jacobs, in my opinion, could do some damage if given a chance. I'd like him in the 3rd receiver role though. I'd love to see David Patten as a Redskin. He's hard working, humble, doesn't piss & moan, and he makes key plays when you need him to. He'd be a nice complement to Coles, and he'd be affordable under our salary cap.

I don't know what to think about Porter. He reminds me of Michael Westbrook to be honest, lots of ability and shows flashes of brilliance, but they don't come any more inconsistent.

I believe TJ Houshmandzedeh from the Bengals is available. I wouldn't mind seeing him in burgundy & gold either.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

I don't think Muhammad was ever a serious consideration, not when the first thing is agent says is basically show me the money.

Burress is an intersting option but he's going to be looking for some big bucks as well.

It's kinda refreshing to hear Gibbs acknowledge we can't go after a big name, high priced player. When was the last time we heard this from Redskins Park??

Maybe if we didn't go after Brunell last year it would be a different story, no sense in unearthing that conversation again though, LOL. I think we beat that horse in to submission.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

I wouldn't mind seeing TJ here either

What do we think of Travis Taylor?

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

[QUOTE=smootsmack]I wouldn't mind seeing TJ here either

What do we think of Travis Taylor?[/QUOTE]


Smootsmack, hasn't Taylor had injury problems throughout his career? If so, then no thanks.

Can someone find a list of the restricted or URFA's? Specifically a list of the available WR's?

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

WR UFAs:

Plaxico Burress
Jerry Porter
Travis Taylor
Tai Streets
Joey Galloway
Corey Bradford
Charles Lee
David Patten
Bobby Shaw
Alex Bannister
Cedrick Wilson
Troy Edwards
Tim Brown
Curtis Conway
Dedric Ward
Kevin Kasper
Andre King
Reggie Swinton
Troy Walters
Karl Hankton

WR RFAs:

Kelly Campbell
Jonathan Carter
Eddie Drummond
David Givens
David Haddad
Darrell Hill
Randy Hymes
Cedric James
Dane Looker
Lee Mays
Jason McAddley
Freddie Milons
Frank Murphy
Nathan Poole
Micah Ross

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

damn Matty was right. After Muhammed, Plaxico, and Porter theres pretty much no one left.

Maybe Kerry Campbell???

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

I'd explore the options of D. Patten or D Givens, but have great speed & good hands. Both would be an excellent #2.

Remember the Skins are looking for a good #2. Burress & Muhammed are #1's & they are looking #1 bucks.

I think Gibbs & company will find the perfect fit to compliment Coles & company.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

Smootsmack came up with a spreadsheet of all the UFA's and RFA's, once I get my lazy ass around to it I'll get it up on the site, hopefully tonight.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Smootsmack came up with a spreadsheet of all the UFA's and RFA's, once I get my lazy ass around to it I'll get it up on the site, hopefully tonight.[/QUOTE]

It was just the UFAs actually...once I get my lazy ass around to it I can add RFAs

Sorry, I just hadn't even thought of putting RFAs

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

Let's just make Jacobs our #2... and I'm not just saying that 'cause my last name is Jacobs.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

Heres some more info on the WR FA's.

[url]http://www.footballsfuture.com/2005/freeagentsWR.html[/url]

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

to be fair, gibbs also said he doesnt worry about the money and lets synder handle it. Which makes no price to much. mushin is looking for a final contract with big money though, hes on the way down

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

[QUOTE=dirtbag2112]Let's just make Jacobs our #2... and I'm not just saying that 'cause my last name is Jacobs.[/QUOTE]


Welcome to the board Taylor! :rofl:

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

Patriots recievers should be what we go after, they're good and don't draw that much attention. Plus they win. no RFAs this year, don't want to give up draft picks. we rather get them

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

[QUOTE=diehardskin2982]Patriots recievers should be what we go after, they're good and don't draw that much attention. Plus they win. no RFAs this year, don't want to give up draft picks. we rather get them[/QUOTE]


Given's is the reciever I would want from the Pat's.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]It's kinda refreshing to hear Gibbs acknowledge we can't go after a big name, high priced player. When was the last time we heard this from Redskins Park??[/QUOTE]

Great point. Couldn't agree more.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

I'm not sure why we even need a WR. Thrash was a #1 in Philly. I know that he wasn't the best number 1, but certainly could be a good #2 or #3. Jacobs needs a shot at becoming a #2. The emergance of Cooley is going to help in shoring up the passing game. Put the pressure on Gardner in the last year of his contract. Move him to #3, make him block more, and let Coles and Jacobs fly. Face it, there is not a T.O. caliber receiver out there on the market this year.
We don't have a ton of cash, we could really do more good spending on the o-line.
Coles, Thrash, Cooley, Jacobs, Portis. I think we have a few receiving threats we can put out there already.
Look for a good deal. Don't overspend.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

[QUOTE=GoSkins!]I'm not sure why we even need a WR. Thrash was a #1 in Philly. I know that he wasn't the best number 1, but certainly could be a good #2 or #3. Jacobs needs a shot at becoming a #2. The emergance of Cooley is going to help in shoring up the passing game. Put the pressure on Gardner in the last year of his contract. Move him to #3, make him block more, and let Coles and Jacobs fly. Face it, there is not a T.O. caliber receiver out there on the market this year.
We don't have a ton of cash, we could really do more good spending on the o-line.
Coles, Thrash, Cooley, Jacobs, Portis. I think we have a few receiving threats we can put out there already.
Look for a good deal. Don't overspend.[/QUOTE]

I too have some confidence in Taylor Jacobs. What little time he played last year seemed productive, and he came up with a clutch catch on a number of occasions. In a year when the Redskins seemed to be all about the 7-yard pass, Jacobs had several 15 yarders, which would certainly qualify for the "chunks" of yardage Gibbs is always talking about. Thrash is O.K., as a number one he's miserable. I think he'd make a pretty average #2, but he's good in the #3 role. I'd like to see someone brought in, in the David Patten or David Givens salary range, who will work hard and compete with Jacobs for the 2nd WR spot. There's something to be said for getting a couple guys of similar abilities and letting them fight it out for the spot. A couple things could happen in that situation: a fire could get lit under Taylor Jacobs to really develop into a prominent receiver in his 3rd year (the magic year for WRs), or a guy like Patten might want to prove that he was brought in for a reason and that reason isn't to sit behind Taylor Jacobs. It seems like if you haven't got the cash to go for a stud, make roster competition and players' pride work in your favor and let them fight it out. Somebody's bound to emerge.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

i think we can forget about guys like porter, muhammed and burress... they are all looking for break the bank contracts..

i think because of the tennessee connection, derrick mason might be the first option-- if he is released. he has been tremendously productive for a few years.

other guys who would be solid fits would be:

houshmanzadeh-- very clutch and productive. might want to much money

givens-- tough and very clutch. but is a RFA so he would cost a pick even if thepats do not match.

patten-- small and getting on in age. very quick and can still get deep. should be cheap.

johnson- productive in past but has some injury concerns, is a bit of a clubhouse problem (so was corey dillon...) and might be looking for a big payday.

taylor- was given chance to emerge in baltimore, but never could. high risk at this point and may be no better than what we already have.

streets- big and still fast. not a number 1 receiver when asked to be.

there will be other guys out there. the skins need to decide what it is they want...

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

from what I remember isn't corey bradford pretty decent in the speed category? and he'd come pretty cheap too. also, anyone know what type of compensation is required to sign Givens? and isn't Charles Lee the guy in Tampa that should some pretty decent flashes of talent this year and the end of last year when he replaced Meshawn?

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

Remember, when it comes to free agents, the skins are trying to build...
its about more than next season... we want to continue to get better each season,
a draft pick could grow with the team....

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

I thought Givens was a 7th round ick but I may be wrong on thins . I don't know if the Pats have tendered though.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

Kevin Johnson, Travis Taylor, or you guys serious, in this league, you need at least one big physical player who can out jump and out muscle a DB, I say pass on all the guy under 6-1, get Mark Brunnel to restructure his contract, instead of stealing, and get Burress, young and athletic, ass in here and lets get, the Deep Ball going, so everyone can see how great C. Portis really is......Kevin Johnson, Travis Taylor, I would never watch the Skins play if they picked up these losers......

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

If Burress and Muhammad are out of the picture, which it seems like they are, that obviously makes the draft that much more important, along with the development of Jacobs. Jacobs is the wild card in all of this.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

I would be interested in Joe Crisp's take on the Jacobs situation.

I remember he gave glowing accounts of him in training camp, yet once the season rolled around Jacobs couldn't seem to crack the starting line up. Given Gardner's inconsistency, I was surprised by this. I am wondering why Gibbs would start Gardner over Jacobs if Jacobs was the more impressive practice player.

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

wohoo, finally made first round pick status - and with a legitimate post yet. :)

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

wewhite3:

You said to get Brunell to restructure his contract instead of stealing the money. Just a guess here, but I don't think that kind of approach is going to motivate him to do anything helpful. He might tell Danny Boy or Vinny or whomever brought him that message to go take a crap in a flat hat...

Now let's try to be rational for just a moment. Crazy Canuck gan get the numbers exactly right here but I recall that Brunell signed a six year deal with an $8M signing bonus. Let's assume I got that close enough for an estimate. If you release or trade Brunell, five-sixths of that signing bonus goes onto the cap now. That would be $6.7M on the cap in dead money if you release him. So the Skins are not going to cut him or trade him and he probably knows that.

So, what are you going to say to him to make it worth Mark Brunell's time to consider your request - not your demand! - that he restructure? Remember, if he says he won't do it, your only "punishment" is to cut him and eat the dead money. So, pretend you're Vinny or Danny Boy for a moment and tell me what you're going to do...

Re: No go Plaxico, or Muhammad?
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin]I would be interested in Joe Crisp's take on the Jacobs situation.

I remember he gave glowing accounts of him in training camp, yet once the season rolled around Jacobs couldn't seem to crack the starting line up. Given Gardner's inconsistency, I was surprised by this. I am wondering why Gibbs would start Gardner over Jacobs if Jacobs was the more impressive practice player.[/QUOTE]

Jacobs certainly is an impressive practice player, catching virtually anything that's thrown in his general direction. He moves with excellent agility and acceleration, and runs very crisp routes. To put it simply, he looks great in practice. Based on his performance in the offseason camps, I would've started him over Gardner. But I'd say the same thing about James Thrash. Both Jacobs and Thrash are excellent practice players. They give 100% on every snap, they make very few mistakes, and you hardly ever see them drop or even bobble a pass.

The thing about Gardner, and the reason why I believe he continued as the starter in 2004, is he really did put forth a lot of effort to improve his game all year. He spent a lot of extra time before and after practice working on his hands, catching ball after ball after ball out of that football pitching machine. I think he responded very well to the competition between himself, Thrash and Jacobs for the #2 spot, and did everything he could to hold onto his role as the incumbent starter. You can say all you want about his off-the-field behavior, but when he was at Redskins Park, Rod Gardner was all business. I think the coaches recognized that, took into account his experience as a starter, his potential as a former first round draft pick, not to mention his formidable size and athleticism, and figured, "hey, we've got to give this guy every opportunity to make plays for us."

When you see him have games like the first game against Dallas, when he made some big plays that nearly won the game for the Skins, you say, "well, maybe Rod's finally coming around; maybe this is his year." Of course, you wind up spending the rest of the season waiting for another spectacular outburst like that one, and it never happens. But I think the Redskins' coaches felt like they had to give Rod a full season as a starter in their system to find out if he's the guy they want to move forward with.

I think with Thrash, they saw a guy that had his opportunity as a starter in this league and it didn't pan out, so they used him as a situational player and a primarily as a special teamer.

With Jacobs, they see a kid that has all the tools, and is on the cusp of becoming a solid NFL receiver. But they know they have time to work with him, and with Gardner and Coles as incumbent starters, there was no reason to thrust him out there and put the pressure on him to perform as a starter in a new system that was clearly going to suffer a difficult adjustment period anyway.

With Gardner moving on, I fully expect that Gibbs and the offensive coaches are going to give Jacobs ample opportunities to prove himself next year. It may not be as a starter-- what they do in free agency and the draft could alter that-- but he will certainly be used more frequently than he was this past season. If they get priced out of the free agent race for one of the top 3 wideouts-- which is looking very likely-- then I expect Jacobs has a very good shot at starting next season, regardless of who they pick up in the draft.