Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Redskins Locker Room (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/)
-   -   More Peter King Madness (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/11493-more-peter-king-madness.html)

JoeRedskin 03-13-2006 04:10 PM

More Peter King Madness
 
From his Monday Morning QB:

"I think the Redskins are officially out of their minds. Washington dealt a third-round pick this year and a fourth next year to San Francisco for wideout Brandon Lloyd. This is Lloyd's NFL résumé: three seasons, 105 catches, 14.4 yards per catch, 13 touchdowns. He is a nice deep threat with good hands. But didn't the Redskins already have one of those guys in Santana Moss? In fact, by signing Antwaan Randle El on Sunday (what?!!!!!), the Redskins now have four of the same receiver at spots one through four on the wideout depth chart. Check this out:

Player Height Weight Age
Brandon Lloyd 6-0 192 24
Santana Moss 5-10 185 26
David Patten 5-10 190 31
Antwaan Randle El 5-10 192 26

I'm not saying you have to have receivers of different sizes and shapes, but with the exception of speed, the Redskins, over the last 12 months, have dealt for two receivers (Moss, Lloyd) and signed two others who all fit the same profile. Wouldn't someone on the staff there say, Hey, maybe it's a good idea to get a taller, more physical receiver to play against some of the moose we have at safety in this division, like Dallas' Roy Williams?"

As to the big receiver - I know their is a lot of sentiment for that, but you know what? If you can get open, size don't matter.

As for worrying about Roy Wiliams - Not to worry Peter, we'll just run past him. Twice. In the last 2 minutes of the game.

PWNED 03-13-2006 04:15 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
if i remember correctly we had NO problem with roy williams last year ;)

Schneed10 03-13-2006 04:16 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
[QUOTE=PWNED]if i remember correctly we had NO problem with roy williams last year ;)[/QUOTE]

I said something to that effect in his mailbag today. I'd like to see him address it.

drew54 03-13-2006 04:17 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
Yeah Peter King is right. The Colts just suck with their sub 6' guys.

We are so stupid.

PWNED 03-13-2006 04:18 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
excellent sig schneed. excellent.

and yes, id really would love to see some kind of answer. i mean we've already discussed this ad nauseum and it's pretty obvious that if you have enough threats, you dont need people to be physical with eVERYONE.

hooskins 03-13-2006 04:20 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
[QUOTE=drew54]Yeah Peter King is right. The Colts just suck with their sub 6' guys.

We are so stupid.[/QUOTE]

Haha

skin4Life28 03-13-2006 04:21 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
i hate this fool. he obviously has no sense in football. you take a 6 ft lloyd then add his vertical jump which is damn good and you have yourself a red zone threat and just a threat in general. can't wait till we make him eat his words just like we did with everyone last year.

Hog1 03-13-2006 04:23 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
Yo' Pete (and the rest of the anti-Joe/Danny crowd) how many Rings and Billions you got???????????? That's what I thought!

SouperMeister 03-13-2006 04:28 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
[QUOTE=skin4Life28]i hate this fool. he obviously has no sense in football. you take a 6 ft lloyd then add his vertical jump which is damn good and you have yourself a red zone threat and just a threat in general. can't wait till we make him eat his words just like we did with everyone last year.[/QUOTE]
King was critical of the Moss for Coles trade also. Lotta good drafting big, physical receivers has done for Detroit. I'll take small and quick WRs over possession guys any day. Somebody should clue King in that Cooley is our possession receiver, and he'll roam much more freely in the middle with our speed at WR.

SouperMeister 03-13-2006 04:32 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
[QUOTE=drew54]Yeah Peter King is right. The Colts just suck with their sub 6' guys.

We are so stupid.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention King is the first to fawn all over the Patriots success with 3 receivers 6' or under. If our O-line stays healthy, Saunders will have this machine putting up 30 points per game. Let's see teams try stacking the box against Portis now!

Hog1 03-13-2006 04:34 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
Toooooo much attention given to "typical attributes", by so-called experts who produce nothing, and are never held accountable for their redicularium. Not enough given to ability of a player to deliver the goods. Our guys live by jungle law "eat or be eaten". Media types live by the the cafeteria law. $5.95, ALL THE SHIT YOU CAN EAT!

steveo395 03-13-2006 04:44 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
holy crap...save this article

peter king is retarded

scowan 03-13-2006 04:45 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
Hey Peter King, I remember some small receivers on the St. Rams back in 2000 and how did they do? Bruce, Holt and Hakim. If you can get separation, who cares how big you are. The rules are set up for speed at the receiver position. You don't have to always be physical to be sucessful. Let's face it, Peter King hates the Skins! What more needs to be said.

Mattyk 03-13-2006 04:45 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
Apparantely King is on the big WR bandwagon too. Kinda surprised since he has no love for Monk, one of the best big WRs ever.

Hypocrite.

RiggoRules 03-13-2006 04:50 PM

Re: More Peter King Madness
 
We do have a big, physical receiver: Chris Cooley.

Keeping in mind the role of Al Saunders in this, how do you think the Chiefs would have done with Moss, R-El & Lloyd (I'm not saying that Cooley is Gonzo, but the kid has some chops)? My guess is that they would have been pretty amazing.

The question I have for all the haters: Is it jealousy or envy?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.11434 seconds with 8 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25