Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

How nice was it to read this in the Post today:
[QUOTE]One receiver, David Patten, enters minicamp highly motivated. Patten was limited to 22 catches last season and was put on injured reserve a week before Thanksgiving following knee surgery. He has been saying for weeks that he is healthy and ready to compete. During optional workouts over the past couple of weeks, Patten said he relished the idea of competition.

"If I'm the fourth receiver, then that tells you how good we're going to be," Patten said.
[/QUOTE]

That doesn't sound at all like a guy trying to get out of town, does it?

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

[quote=BrudLee]How nice was it to read this in the Post today:


That doesn't sound at all like a guy trying to get out of town, does it?[/quote]

I agree, that sounds like a man willing to work his ass off and to push the younger guys as hard as possible. I LOVE that competition because I feel like (at least I really hope) we have the type of players who understand that it's not about the politics; the coaches are going to play the best people no matter what.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

Loved that quote.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

Sounds like a guy with his head in the right place. Keep him there and he'll be bring great depth and competition to this team. Lets hope this doesn't sour if he isn't getting enough PT or balls in his direction. Right now he sounds an aweful lot like a Gibbs kind of guy.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

[quote]"If I'm the fourth receiver, then that tells you how good we're going to be," Patten said.[/quote]

If he ends up any higher on the depth chart and it's not due to injury, I'd have to say whoever he beats out I'd be pretty damn disappointed in.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

We have a proven #1 WR in Moss, but the rest are all giant question marks if you ask me.

Lloyd seems to have incredible athleticism and great potential, but hasn't ever really produced (though we could blame alot of that on the San Francisco "system" or lack thereof, simple fact is he doesn't have a great track record.)

Patten strikes me as a questionable #2 WR, and much more along the lines of competing for the #3 job in terms of talent. In a 10 year career he has no more than 824 yards in a season, and no more than 7 TDs. In itself not a bad season, but that majority of his seasons look alot more like 200-300 yards and 0-1 TDs - not real impressive.

Randle El, like Lloyd, seems to have great athletic talent but hasn't proved himself as a solid, consistent WR.

We've also got Thrash who seems like a consistent contributor, though certainly he's not going to light up the field as a #1 or #2 WR any time soon.

From an athletic standpoint we're stacked, but you can look at someone like Antonio Brown from last season and see athleticism or speed doesn't make a great WR. Basically we still have one good WR that we can count on (Moss) - the #2, #3 and depth positions are all full of great potential and no track record or consistency.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

I'm going to call them "people who can catch the ball" because we also have Cooley and Sellers and Portis, but we are going to be great at this position all year. All I can say is that Brunell should get dizzy this year looking at all of the receiving options he will have. No more of this " just look at Cooley and Moss. Somebody should be open every passing play IMO. Brunell or Collins or Campbell, are just going to have to learn were they are and how to get the ball to them.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

patton has been around the block and knows what it takes to be sucessful. we now have 4 solid, legitimate nfl receivers. what a difference one off season makes

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

[QUOTE=mheisig]We have a proven #1 WR in Moss, but the rest are all giant question marks if you ask me.

Lloyd seems to have incredible athleticism and great potential, but hasn't ever really produced (though we could blame alot of that on the San Francisco "system" or lack thereof, simple fact is he doesn't have a great track record.)

Patten strikes me as a questionable #2 WR, and much more along the lines of competing for the #3 job in terms of talent. In a 10 year career he has no more than 824 yards in a season, and no more than 7 TDs. In itself not a bad season, but that majority of his seasons look alot more like 200-300 yards and 0-1 TDs - not real impressive.

Randle El, like Lloyd, seems to have great athletic talent but hasn't proved himself as a solid, consistent WR.

We've also got Thrash who seems like a consistent contributor, though certainly he's not going to light up the field as a #1 or #2 WR any time soon.

From an athletic standpoint we're stacked, but you can look at someone like Antonio Brown from last season and see athleticism or speed doesn't make a great WR. Basically we still have one good WR that we can count on (Moss) - the #2, #3 and depth positions are all full of great potential and no track record or consistency.[/QUOTE]
I think maybe you're being a bit hard on the WRs.

In 2005 Randle-El had 3 drops. Lloyd had 4 drops. Patten had two (in half a season). And Moss, he had eight. (Statisics courtesy of [URL="http://biz.stats.com/index.html"]Stats.com[/URL]) What's all this mean? Nothing - I just like stats. Lloyd got his balls as the only viable receiver from such luminaries as Cody Pickett. I say, Cody Pickett. Patten and Randle-El have never been primary targets in their respective offenses.

I think it's important to determine what the expectations are for the 2nd 3rd and 4th WRs before we decide they aren't going to be met.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

I think we also have to consider who will be covering these guys in certain situations. In the past a D probably had their best CB's covering Llyod, but now he could find himself being covered by a nickle or even a linebacker if he's lined up in the slot. This should create great matchups for us, especially if Cooley is involved in the play.
With the speed we have at WR opposing CBs should wear out rather quickly.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

If our WRs behind Moss this year are giant question marks, what were the WRs behind Moss last year?? Yikes.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

[quote=mheisig]Basically we still have one good WR that we can count on (Moss) - the #2, #3 and depth positions are all full of great potential and no track record or consistency.[/quote]

Of course there are always questions about how new players (fa and draftees) will do on a new team. I would just give them some time before I judge them. You have to remember that, last season, moss was a big question mark even in preseason and arguably up to the 2nd game of the season (great redskins comeback).

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

I'm not saying because they are question marks they won't perform, I'm just saying we don't know enough to make any kind of judgement yet. Hence the "Question Mark" status.

I'm hoping they'll all be fantastic and they'll all be viable WR threats that will spread the field. Basically we have two receivers (Lloyd and Randel-El) who have short and unestablished careers. Thrash is good but no superstar, and Patten has been around the block, but go ahead and look at his career stats - pretty inconsistent. I'm not saying any of these guys CAN'T be great - I think they have fantastic potential given the athletecism and the system, but just coming out here and claiming they're all going to be amazing super stars and we'll have the best offense ever is the exact same damn thing we've done with Michael Westbrook, Taylor Jacobs, Albert Connell and all these other worthless receivers.

I will say that even if there is no standout #2 WR in this bunch, we do have good depth - there should be plenty of targets for Brunell and hopefully things will open up. My best bet is that Lloyd becomes our real #2 threat. Patten, Thrash and ARE are kind of a toss-up for #3 in my opinion. Lloyd was able to put up semi-respectable numbers in the worst offense in the league. Doesn't make him the next Jerry Rice, but I think he's got the best potential of the group.

I'm just saying wait until we have some actual evidence first. So far the only person worth bragging about is Moss.

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

At the VB golf classic I made a comment to Greg Williams about how I was excited about next season with the continuity we have had (basically refering to defense). The first thing out of his mouth was that "you know what... I think you are really going to be impressed with these new receivers and the way Al Saunders is using them". That was all I needed to hear. He wasn't giving me a speech, just shooting the sh*t. Very sincere, very believable, and I'm very excited!

Re: Comments on our Receiver Corps (6/15/06)
 

[quote=mheisig]I'm not saying because they are question marks they won't perform, I'm just saying we don't know enough to make any kind of judgement yet. Hence the "Question Mark" status.[/quote]

I agree, but at least I can take satisfaction in expecting a better wide receiving performance with others not named moss. In other words, the redskins wr corps has [U][B]obviously[/B][/U] been greatly upgraded.