Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Something new to talk about

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-04-2005, 02:08 AM   #1
Special Teams
 
aehs77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: silver spring
Age: 29
Posts: 486
Something new to talk about

I realize gardner's tenure with the redskins my not be over but i'm gonna ask anyway. Who was the bigger first round bust for the redskins. Rod gardner or michael westbrook.
aehs77 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 02-04-2005, 02:18 AM   #2
Camp Scrub
 
madisonwm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NoVa
Age: 32
Posts: 29
Heath Shular!!
madisonwm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 02:18 AM   #3
Playmaker
 
Redskins8588's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ridgway, PA
Age: 36
Posts: 2,519
I would have to go with Gardner. Westbrook usually cought what was thrown to him, more so than Gardner has recently.
__________________
"I am the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice" - Sean Taylor
Redskins8588 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 02:28 AM   #4
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,962
Definitely Westbrook. Gardner has been frustrating but he's played in every game and his worst year of his first four was better than the best of Westbrook's first four

Gardner isn't all that bad really
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 02:33 AM   #5
Playmaker
 
gibbsisgod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 129 W 81st street
Age: 35
Posts: 3,503
Westbrook. I Believe He Was Billed As The Next Irvin. Ha
gibbsisgod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 02:48 AM   #6
Registered User
 
offiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 50
Posts: 3,097
Defiently Westbrook his expectation's were much higher than Gardner, nobody was real sure what to expect from Gardner.
offiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 04:12 AM   #7
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,236
Westbrook hands down. Gardner wasn't THAT bad. He made mistakes, stupid mistakes, but he made some huge plays. How many 1K yard seasons did Westbrook have?
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 06:46 AM   #8
Playmaker
 
Redskins8588's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ridgway, PA
Age: 36
Posts: 2,519
Westbrook had exactly the same 1k seasons as Gardner had. 1, Westbrook had his in 1999 and Gardner had his in 2002 or sometime around there.
__________________
"I am the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice" - Sean Taylor
Redskins8588 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 09:28 AM   #9
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,401
They're both disappointments, I wouldn't call the busts, just disappointing.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 09:47 AM   #10
Franchise Player
 
FRPLG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 36
Posts: 9,984
I'd call Westbrook a bust and Gardner a typical first roudn receiver. Westbrook had basically no career after the Skins. He never lived up to the top ten pick we waste on him and the only notable thing he ever did was go Judo on the Redskins single season rushing leader. Gardner is a decent receiver for sure. He probably has a good 6 or 7 year career ahead of him and could end up in the 500-600 catch range if he finds the right situation. What he isn't is a game changing type receiver that we need. He is a good number two on a balanced offensive team. Most first round receivers end up in this mold. Only a few go on to be great players. First round WRs are the bigest crap shoot but also carry the least risk since basically you know you're at least going to get a decent ball player. It is such a skill position that if they show any acumen in college you'll know whether they are good enough or not. Whether they become great or not depends on system and intangibles. Gardners doesn't seem to have much in the intangibles category.
FRPLG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 10:13 AM   #11
Playmaker
 
sportscurmudgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,159
Matty:

It's OK to be nasty. You can call them "busts" instead of "disappointing" and we won't think you've gone totally over to the dark side.

Expectations for Westbrook were higher than for Gardner and neither came close to living up to whatever expecation level was set for them. I think Westbrook was the bigger problem for the Skins because he was involved in some "internal team issues" that were less than wonderful and Gardner seems not to have had that dimension to his game.

I have to conclude that Gardner is not anywhere near a MENSA candidate though. Remember, he's the guy who had his car stolen when he gave the keys to some guy posing as a valet parking attendant. As they say in the Guinness commercials: BRILLIANT!!
__________________
The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
sportscurmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 10:29 AM   #12
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,401
Yeah the more I think about it I think it's safe to call Westbrook a bust because of how high of a pick he was, the expectation level was definitely a lot higher for Westbrook compared to Gardner.

Westbrook = bust
Gardner = disappointment
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 10:38 AM   #13
Thank You, Sean.
 
Gmanc711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Age: 29
Posts: 7,505
Westbrook. He was a top five pick? right? Westbrook just was a total and complete bust, I wouldnt really call Gardner a bust. He is still an overall decent wide reciver, he's just inconsistant. I know thats huge for a wide out, but I think you see what I'm saying; If I had a team right now and I had to pick the two guys, I'd take Gardner easily.
__________________
#21
Gmanc711 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 10:52 AM   #14
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Hold on there, guys. Westbrook and Gardner are closer than you might think.

We have to remember that Westbrook never had much of a quarterback to work with -- Gardner was slightly more fortunate in that regard.

Michael Westbrook was simply one cog in the wheel of really bad teams that were constantly overhauling under a bad coach. In '99, when things finally started to come together, and there was an equally imposing threat from Albert Connell, Westbrook had a good year. The main problem with him was his injury bug.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 11:06 AM   #15
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,401
True, injuries did plague Westbrook. The guy looked like he was carved from stone but he was constantly nicked up and then he ripped up his knee in '00.
Mattyk 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 09:40 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 0.26195 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