Should we have gone after Givens?
 

Hey, I was thinking that David Givens might have been a better fit than the recievers we just got. Ok, I understand that they are "big play" guys, but I think I would rather have a guy who is more consistent. Am I the only one who thinks this?

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

We chose to got after Randel-El so hard because he is a proven special teamer.

Lloyd was a target due to his leaping abilities.

I'm sure Givens was # 3 on our list though.

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

Actually, I said a few days ago I'd rather get Givens off of Free Agency than have to spend picks on Lloyd......so I'm with you.
However, now that we have Lloyd and R.El., I've embraced them both as new Skins. After proving they have an eye for WRs (see Moss last year), I'm not about to question the coaching staff now. I guess there was either something about Givens they didn't like or something about Lloyd they loved.

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

Not that it matters now, but I would have preferred Givens if it didn't mean we had to part with draft picks to get him.

Can we please have a draft with all of our picks intact?

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

no we also still have patten, furia, and cooley who are more than willing to do the dirty work. This offense is gonna give opposing defensive minds migraines trying to stop them.

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven]Not that it matters now, but I would have preferred Givens if it didn't mean we had to part with draft picks to get him.

Can we please have a draft with all of our picks intact?[/QUOTE]

Hah a draft in which the Skins have all their picks...you must be silly

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven]Not that it matters now, but I would have preferred Givens if it didn't mean we had to part with draft picks to get him.

Can we please have a draft with all of our picks intact?[/QUOTE]

Why?

This current front office seems to do much better in evaluating free agents than they do rookies.

At least we're getting proven talent.

Yeah I know, this way of doing things costs alot more, but Snyder and company seem to have the cap massage down to a science, so I say stick with what they do best.

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

I liked Givens too. I think part of it might being Gibbs being snake bitten by Pat's recievers after signing Patten. Maybe they are products of a great system that wont work out elsewhere.

Also Randle El and Lloyd would seem to have much bigger upsides that Givens who is solid but might be as good right now as he is ever going to be.

We went that route last season with Moss, great upside, limited porduction in the NFL and with other questions about him(size toughness, can he be a #1)...How did that work out?

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

Lloyd would be alot cheaper than Givens, and I think another important factor is Lloyd's potential. We all know he can jump and catch, but I guess the coaches see the potential of him hitting the next level, and it would be a bit cheaper. It is basically like gambling. We could spend more money for a good expected turnout(Givens), or we could spend a little less and have the chance for an amazing outcome(Lloyd).

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

I like the WR pickups. We should be a lot better late in the season, if the QB situation is stable.

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Why?

This current front office seems to do much better in evaluating free agents than they do rookies.

At least we're getting proven talent.

Yeah I know, this way of doing things costs alot more, but Snyder and company seem to have the cap massage down to a science, so I say stick with what they do best.[/QUOTE]

I to would love to keep our draft picks but I have to tell you we haven't been that great at getting draft picks to turn in to NFL players! Also you spend a lot of money waiting for a player to take over a spot on your team and in most cases it takes a few years. Many times rookies hold out missing camp time and you never know if a great college player can deal with the NFL demands! Just look at the four free agents we picked up Monday. All seem to be of good character and sound NFL players! A college kid you just never know if what he did in college can be done on a NFL field. Just look at the top two rounds of a draft and see just how many do become great NFL player and how many are goen in four or less years! I think you can build a team with free agents,trades and the draft. The up coming draft we need to hit on a few of the pick and not just the 2nd rounder. But we are in a spot now we can pick the best player not pick for need!!! :headbange

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

[QUOTE=skinsttw]I like the WR pickups. We should be a lot better late in the season, if the QB situation is stable.[/QUOTE]

I would have liked David Givens just as much as Lloyd, so I'd probably take back the trade too. But I'm with PSU, I am willing to give the Skins the benefit of the doubt after hitting it so big with Santana Moss. I'll wait and see before I criticize the move.

Anyway, the reason I quoted this post is because I think it touches upon the key for the Skins in 2006: QB. The moves are great and gives us the ammo we need to take the next step. To me, the next step is getting to the Championship game, and these acquisitions might be enough to do it. But if we're going to the Superbowl, we need Brunell or Campbell to step up. Brunell was good last year, I'd take a QB rating of 86 any day of the week. But to make the Super Bowl I think we need a 90 or 95. Hopefully these WRs give the QBs all they need to get to that level. And hopefully they come through.

As with any offense, you can look at last year's performance in Tampa and wonder how much of it was Brunell's fault and how much of it was the lack of threat at WR, and how much of it was the injury to Randy Thomas. But one things for sure, the WR problem is taken care of now. We should find out real quick if our QBs are good enough.

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

should we have gone after givens? no. im fine with the recievers we brought in

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Why?

This current front office seems to do much better in evaluating free agents than they do rookies.

At least we're getting proven talent.

Yeah I know, this way of doing things costs alot more, but Snyder and company seem to have the cap massage down to a science, so I say stick with what they do best.[/QUOTE]

agreed. it's worked well for us. trade picks for guys that have proven themselves for a few years. at least allow other teams deal with the adjustment to the NFL.

seems like it's getting rarer and rarer for a guy to stick with one team for an entire career anyhow...

Re: Should we have gone after Givens?
 

definitely, Givens is a proven reciever & team player by all accounts. Despite what Gibbs said about 'checking' sources on Loyd, he has had attitude problems. Maybe Loyd has an upside that the staff saw & didn't see in Givens. I think Givens is a solid blocker though, something that the posse all did well & is often the difference in a play going 20 yds. or to the house.
Plus, Givens just signed w/an $8 mil bonus, less than our guys.
Nonetheless, if Loyd can keep his cool here & make big plays, he's only 24 & may prove to be a relative bargain w/time.