Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-11-2010, 03:21 PM   #31
The Starter
 
Mechanix544's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fort Bliss, TX
Posts: 2,277
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

This move doesn't make all that much sense to me. Ok, just because the guy cannot catch the ball well or isnt a good reciever does not automatically make him a "blocking" TE. The guy is mediocre, at best, at blocking, as many other teams have found out, and released him over his illustrious 7 season 7 team career. Another move, given our strength at the proposed position, that makes no sense. If you are gonna upgrade for a blocking TE that is athletic enough for the zone blocking scheme, then UPGRADE. Dont bring in a player that the TE coach or O.C. likes or is loyal to because he spent one year with him on a ridiculously bad team.

This move again, as well as most of the others with the exception of the roster cuts, baffles me.
Mechanix544 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 03-11-2010, 03:27 PM   #32
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,520
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

I guess pickings really are slim when people are getting their panties in a bunch over a move like this. Can't wait for when we make a real news worthy move.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 03:54 PM   #33
Playmaker
 
Trample the Elderly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Three Chopt Virginia
Age: 37
Posts: 2,906
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Davis has terrible blocking numbers--from both me and other sources--last year, but he's still a lot better at it that Yoder is.

Cooley is all over the place from year to year. Last year he was awful. He was awful when he came in to the league. In 2007 and 2008 he was one of the better blocking TEs in the league.
I don't know what #s you're talking about? This new guy isn't better than Yoder IMO.
__________________
A funny thing happened on the way to the temple. The moneychangers bought the priesthood.
Trample the Elderly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 03:56 PM   #34
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,881
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanix544 View Post
This move doesn't make all that much sense to me. Ok, just because the guy cannot catch the ball well or isnt a good reciever does not automatically make him a "blocking" TE. The guy is mediocre, at best, at blocking, as many other teams have found out, and released him over his illustrious 7 season 7 team career. Another move, given our strength at the proposed position, that makes no sense. If you are gonna upgrade for a blocking TE that is athletic enough for the zone blocking scheme, then UPGRADE. Dont bring in a player that the TE coach or O.C. likes or is loyal to because he spent one year with him on a ridiculously bad team.

This move again, as well as most of the others with the exception of the roster cuts, baffles me.
You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in
__________________
Dirtbag59, sending songs to oblivion 1 writer at a time.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 03:57 PM   #35
Registered User
 
CultBrennan59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,527
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

TE's one of our strengths so I don't really care about this guy, he won't be playing that much anyway
CultBrennan59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 03:59 PM   #36
Fight for old DC!
 
Redskins_P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Falls Church, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 4,086
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in

I agree 100%!!
Redskins_P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 04:38 PM   #37
Playmaker
 
Trample the Elderly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Three Chopt Virginia
Age: 37
Posts: 2,906
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in
Fuck yeah! That's what I'm talking about!
__________________
A funny thing happened on the way to the temple. The moneychangers bought the priesthood.
Trample the Elderly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 04:41 PM   #38
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 31
Posts: 12,514
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan View Post
I think this move may be an expression of Mike Shanahan's philosophy of having competition at every position. It looks like he's split the TE's into two positions and Ryan is apparently Yoder's competition at Blocking TE. Shanahan said that he likes to have a Blocking TE and a Receiving TE.
I'm not sure we're bringing Yoder back.
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 04:42 PM   #39
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 31
Posts: 12,514
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
Cooley and Davis are both pass-catching tight ends. Ryan is a blocking tight end. Signing Ryan has nothing to do with Cooley or Davis.
Unless we go after another TE as well...

Too early to say it's one way or another
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 04:46 PM   #40
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 31
Posts: 12,514
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanix544 View Post
This move doesn't make all that much sense to me. Ok, just because the guy cannot catch the ball well or isnt a good reciever does not automatically make him a "blocking" TE. The guy is mediocre, at best, at blocking, as many other teams have found out, and released him over his illustrious 7 season 7 team career. Another move, given our strength at the proposed position, that makes no sense. If you are gonna upgrade for a blocking TE that is athletic enough for the zone blocking scheme, then UPGRADE. Dont bring in a player that the TE coach or O.C. likes or is loyal to because he spent one year with him on a ridiculously bad team.

This move again, as well as most of the others with the exception of the roster cuts, baffles me.
You could've said the same thing when we brought in Yoder.

Relax people.
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 07:28 PM   #41
The Starter
 
diehard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Norfolk, Va (OV)
Posts: 1,566
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Yoder was more than effective in his role. And he caught every (few) balls that came his way, most of them for TDs.
diehard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 07:53 PM   #42
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,520
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

I'll be honest and say prior to today I've never really heard of Ryan and I don't know much about his game.

Just checking out some info online, his game seems very similar to Yoder's, so I'm not sure we'll be missing out on much. We're talking about a 3rd TE, mostly a blocking guy, and perhaps a teams guy.

So the guy has bounced around the league, big whoop. So has Yoder. I'll trust the new staff's opinion on this new guy.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 07:59 PM   #43
Impact Rookie
 
Redskin Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Orleans, LA- via VA
Age: 36
Posts: 635
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in
Great point and post credskinsrule. Very well said.
__________________
Hail to The REDSKINS
Redskin Jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 08:07 PM   #44
Impact Rookie
 
IrMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 636
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Guys Guys, it doesn't have to make any sense. Let's just accept the fact that more competition is better. I'm all for this signing
IrMitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2010, 08:43 PM   #45
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 31
Posts: 12,514
Re: Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk View Post
I guess pickings really are slim when people are getting their panties in a bunch over a move like this. Can't wait for when we make a real news worthy move.
How dare we didn't target Watson for the #3 TE spot
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:13 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 1.15563 seconds with 9 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