Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


(Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-07-2010, 09:10 AM   #1
Special Teams
 
aceinthehouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Springfield,Missouri
Posts: 463
Thumbs up (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

I need to say something...

I keep hearing that "well,if the Redskins had any kind of Passing attack or WR's..they might win game" or phrases such as this really ticks me off.

I either think that some football fans are just stupid or being haters and here's why.

I wasn't looking at the addition of T.J. or someone else as finally being able to move the ball down the field situation,to me...it was making our Passing attack "deadly"!

1st,Santana Moss has not had a QB throw the ball down the field with regularity since he's been a Redskin. At least on Target...lol

2nd,We will finally see what Chris Cooley and Fred Davis can do,while on the field together at the same time. Unfortunately,we had a coach that was incapable of using both TE's at the same time. Sadly,we were able to find out how good Davis was with a Cooley injury.

3rd,This assumption that Joey Galloway is no good anymore is also stupid. This is a guy who has had afterburners his whole carer and has burned us on many occasions as well. Sure,I understand the guy is 38 years old and a 16 year vet,but I also know he's a former X4 time Pro Bowler with tons of experience and knowledge of the game. Did you not see the steps he had on that fade against Buffalo that Mcnabb missed too far out of bounds? Dude had like 3 or 4 steps on the "Young guys"..lol

4th,The hypocricy on Mcnabb from the Media and fans is truly overwhelming! He either is overrated or doesn't have receivers in Washington.
How many years were the eagles either favored to win the division or by default,expected to be in the playoff hunt just with having McNabb in Philly?
...And how many years did McNabb have players like James Thrash,Reggie Brown,Todd Pinkston and no name WR's make plays on the field during those Playoff runs.

The only wildcard in this whole debate is Brian Westbrook...OK..We have Clinton Portis and Larry Johnson instead. Nobody including myself have any idea how this will work out,but we do know one thing that's a fact. The Redskins have THE best Blocking RB in the NFL..there is no debate on that!

If a fan or a rival wants to make the case that we will not be good because of team continuity and them not playing togetehr for a long time and mcnabb getting used to the Play calling...then fine,I understand that!

If a fan or rival wants to make a case that our line is too weak to hold up for a season to protect Mcnabb...OK..I disagree,but at least that's decent argument that we will have to let play out! Although I think the additions of the 2 Bookend Tackles will be absolutely HUGE for Mcnabb and the team.

But to tell me, we will have to rely on our running game to be any good is absolutely ridiculous imo...

We have 2 former Pro Bowl WR's,who not only still have very good speed,but pretty darn good hands as well.

As a matter of fact,of the 5 WR's on the team,only 1 can't blow by someone in Roydell Williams. And he didn't look that slow on that nifty cut back after the catch in that 1st Bufflao game..remember?

By no means am I saying we are stacked or can start running the spread formation cause were deadly,but this notion that these 5 WR's can't catch the ball and move the chains is ridiculous imo...

Then there's Cooley...although a pro bowler,he just somehow gets forgotten when mentioning the Redskins Offense or passing game. He might just be the most underrated pro bowl TE in the NFL,if that can make any since..lol

He will easily be McNabbs best TE and target since being a QB for 11 years...
Not to mention Fred Davis who many believe is BETTER than Cooley...
2 stud TE's for McNabb....

Now I'm not saying we're going to blow up the NFL in an air attack like the Colts or Patriots or anything...

But I will say this....If Our O-line can give Mcnabb ANY time to get the ball to our "Sucky" wr's....lol...

The NFL is going to find out 2 things...

Either Mcnabb isn't as overrated as proclaimed? (And the Eagle are stupid)
Or the Redskins passing attack isn't as weak as proclaimed?

Hopefully,both will be true!
By the way...were dropping 40 on Dallas on Sunday night!


Thank you for listening to my rant,but this needed to be said. Even to my fellow Redskins fans unfortunately.

HTTR!
ace
__________________
The 1991 Redskins team,is the greatest team of all time. Their average margin of victory is the greatest of all Superbowl winning teams! HTTR!!
aceinthehouse is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 09-07-2010, 09:14 AM   #2
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 79,402
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Taking the TEs out of the equation I don't see how anyone can argue we look weak on paper.

I'm hopeful that Moss will be rejuvenated with McNabb, Armstrong will be the real deal, and Thomas can take a big step forward.

But right now our WR group looks very iffy.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:25 AM   #3
Special Teams
 
aceinthehouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Springfield,Missouri
Posts: 463
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk View Post
Taking the TEs out of the equation I don't see how anyone can argue we look weak on paper.

I'm hopeful that Moss will be rejuvenated with McNabb, Armstrong will be the real deal, and Thomas can take a big step forward.

But right now our WR group looks very iffy.
But Matt,that's the problem with all this speculation.

Everyone seems to take out the TE's on this debate,when it shouldn't be.

Unlless Shanahan is running a 4 or 5 Wide Spread offense in every base formation,than the world might be correct. We probably aren't going to scare anyone.

But how often will this happen?

That all changes as soon as you put the 2 TE formation on the field? (or even a package with Just cooley)
How many LB's can cover Cooley and Davis at the same time?
Cause they will force D-coord to use Safeties with their talent...
Which will leave Galloway Moss or even Armstrong in 1-on-1 coverage...

We might not have the Best receiving core in the world,but I bet anyone we can create more mismatches than many NFL teams buy having 2 GREAT TE's on the field at the same time...
__________________
The 1991 Redskins team,is the greatest team of all time. Their average margin of victory is the greatest of all Superbowl winning teams! HTTR!!
aceinthehouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:27 AM   #4
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,878
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

I don't think our WR are as bad as many in the media say they are (Mosely said yesterday the Redskins have the worst WR in the NFL) but also not as good as many of us think they can be. As a unit (TE not included) we are in the lower third of the WR corp in the league. If we include the TE, then it's middle of the pack.

As I posted in another thread, all but 2 playoff teams last year featured the TE as one of their top 3 options, 5 of them had the TE in the top 2. We don't need a fantasy team of WR to be effective and productive in the passing game.

The biggest difference maker in the passing game this year will be the running game. If we can run, McNabb will make teams pay with the pass.
__________________
FREE RG3!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:31 AM   #5
MVP
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 10,578
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Our receivers are easily in the bottom quarter of the league and have been a constant weakness on this team over the last decade. We do have a top 5 TE duo in the league which really helps, but they are TE and not WR, so dont group them in when making your arguement.

Moss and Galloway are on the downside of their career. Williams has shown absolutely nothing in his career. Armstrong and Banks are both projects that hopefully will break out. Thomas is a bust at this point in his career and barely made the team even amoung this already poor group of recievers.

Moss is by far and away our most talented reciever and could be a good contributor (no 2 or slot reciever) on any other team. The rest of the group would be very iffy even to make the team.

Not being negative and want the guys to break out...but Im calling it like I see it at this point.
__________________
@RSherman_25 just make sure you stay in Seattle cause without that pass rush you are who we thought you were. 5th rd PK no speed good hands

DeAngelo Hall (@DeAngeloHall23) March 14, 2014
Chico23231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:31 AM   #6
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,654
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

I don't think our WRs are garbage, but they are not the best either.
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:35 AM   #7
Living Legend
 
skinsfaninok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oklahoma City (Originally from Biloxi, Ms)
Age: 27
Posts: 16,002
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

I think we have a group of Pass Catchers that we can get by with. Cooley is our 2 reciever , heck maybe our 1. So obviously someone needs to step up, maybe it's AA or DT. Who knows. We will find out soon
__________________
THUNDER UP

"if you're good at something, never do it for free"- The Joker

skinsfaninok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:40 AM   #8
Mann Up HOF!
 
Lotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 10,288
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

The thread title is a little misleading.

If the claim is that we have "no receivers at all," that claim fails because of Cooley and Davis.

If the claim is that we have "no wide receivers," unfortunately there is some truth to that. Galloway has 20 catches over the last 2 years combined yet we are counting on him to contribute. That's pretty pathetic.

Like Matty said, let's hope that at some point the light comes on for Devin Thomas.
__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.
Lotus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:44 AM   #9
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 49
Posts: 15,818
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

How the hell can you rank WR's who have had a piss poor QB's? Last time I checked it took both to have a passing attack,
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:47 AM   #10
Special Teams
 
aceinthehouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Springfield,Missouri
Posts: 463
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

All this changes if we get Vincent Jackson...

Which might be what's going on with this Hayesworth to Titans trade and the Chargers working with a Mystery team.

Jackson is a freak..
__________________
The 1991 Redskins team,is the greatest team of all time. Their average margin of victory is the greatest of all Superbowl winning teams! HTTR!!
aceinthehouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:48 AM   #11
Special Teams
 
aceinthehouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Springfield,Missouri
Posts: 463
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstdown View Post
How the hell can you rank WR's who have had a piss poor QB's? Last time I checked it took both to have a passing attack,
Absolutely,plus when your former QB would overthrow fades and seems by 10 yards also makes them look bad...
__________________
The 1991 Redskins team,is the greatest team of all time. Their average margin of victory is the greatest of all Superbowl winning teams! HTTR!!
aceinthehouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:49 AM   #12
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 79,402
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by aceinthehouse View Post
But Matt,that's the problem with all this speculation.

Everyone seems to take out the TE's on this debate,when it shouldn't be.

Unlless Shanahan is running a 4 or 5 Wide Spread offense in every base formation,than the world might be correct. We probably aren't going to scare anyone.

But how often will this happen?

That all changes as soon as you put the 2 TE formation on the field? (or even a package with Just cooley)
How many LB's can cover Cooley and Davis at the same time?
Cause they will force D-coord to use Safeties with their talent...
Which will leave Galloway Moss or even Armstrong in 1-on-1 coverage...

We might not have the Best receiving core in the world,but I bet anyone we can create more mismatches than many NFL teams buy having 2 GREAT TE's on the field at the same time...
I think it's fair to evaluate the WRs and the TEs on their own. Yes when you add them together you get a much more formidable group, but the fact is our WRs do kinda stink, at least on paper right now.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:51 AM   #13
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,654
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Anyone interested in Randy Moss?

Frustrated Randy Moss feeling 'not wanted' by New England Patriots - ESPN Boston
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 09:59 AM   #14
The Starter
 
scowan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: KY
Age: 45
Posts: 1,492
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

If we can just hit some deep balls once or twice a game, of which McNabb is very good at and Moss is very good at, it should open up a lot for this team. Brunell was able to do that with Moss several times in 2005 and that took us to the playoffs. I don't think Moss has lost anything from that and Galloway can do that as well off playaction.
scowan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2010, 10:09 AM   #15
Mann Up HOF!
 
Lotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 10,288
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstdown View Post
How the hell can you rank WR's who have had a piss poor QB's? Last time I checked it took both to have a passing attack,
Last year Galloway had Tom Brady. And Welker was hurt. Still Galloway could not get on the field and produce. 'Nuff said.
__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.
Lotus is online now   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 08:18 AM.


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 0.39063 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