Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


gardner haters

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-04-2005, 11:43 AM   #16
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,969
Rod is gone if we can't trade him we'll probably cut him, I think the team has made the decision to move on. And if Rod himself is looking to get out as it's been reported, it's obvious it's time for both sides to move on. He will probably benefit from the change of scenery. Of course I'm sure some probably think he's being 'pushed out'.

I'm tired of the few that make excuses for the guy. I don't know how many more drops or dumb penalties he has to have before we all agree he's an underachiever. With Rod it's all about potential, he's had 4 full seasons with us now, he had one 'good' season with just over 1000 yards, other than that he's underachieved and been wildly inconsistent. I don't know how anyone can deny that. His supporters want to keep pointing to his one good season, well how about the other 3 that were mediocre??

As for Coles and his toe, I'll stick with my claim that we're not doctors so who are we to say he 'needs' to have the surgery. If his doctors aren't telling him he needs it, who are we to say he needs it?? It's well known the surgery could potentially end his career, so if he has it and he's forced to retire, where does that leave us? I'd rather have Coles at less than 100% than not at all. Coles knows his situation and his body a hell of a lot better than we do, so why can't we respect his decision and leave it alone?
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 02-04-2005, 11:45 AM   #17
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy
I agree that not everybody can come out on the field as a rookie and burn it up, but by your third or fourth season, you should have a higher percentage of completions.
I agree, my opinion is you have to give a WR 3-4 seasons to develop, well, Rod has had 4. Time to move on.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 11:46 AM   #18
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 17,548
Exactly. I think he'll still be able to burn people outwright in the coming year.

I'm not personally a Gardner "fan", but I would hate to see us get nothing for him. Then again, I DID forget that he asked to leave. And since that's the case, a 4th rounder would be welcomed I would think.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 12:57 PM   #19
Special Teams
 
jermus22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Martinsburg, WV
Age: 32
Posts: 334
I get the impression from Gibbs's brief statement about a potential trade, that RG might not want to be with the team. We certainly don't need a guy who can't produce on a consistent basis. By the way, "jamf", you mentioned that Gibbs should take the blame for disappointing seasons from Brunell, Portis, Coles, etc. In case you haven't paid attention, Gibbs is the first person to accept the blame and the last to point fingers. I do agree that the offense MUST improve, but accusing Gibbs of "not being able to admit his failures" is just plain stupid! I guess you're one of those fair weather fans who whines when things go bad and will end up praising Gibbs once we start winning. I suggest you eat your words!
__________________
Win it in the trenches.
jermus22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 01:06 PM   #20
Franchise Player
 
FRPLG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinRat
This is amusing to me. From this thread we can identify the poor sods who bought a Gardner authentic jersey.
my ass off!
FRPLG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 01:11 PM   #21
Franchise Player
 
FRPLG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 9,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
I agree, my opinion is you have to give a WR 3-4 seasons to develop, well, Rod has had 4. Time to move on.
I'm as big a voice about rookie receivers sucking as anyone around here ( I think I lead the charge). But if a guy hasn't matured and developed by his 4th year then something is wrong and the situation is clearly not right for him. So to reiterate "He's always dropping the pass so trade his ass"...or something like that.
FRPLG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 02:00 PM   #22
Impact Rookie
 
SkinsRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Crofton, MD
Age: 44
Posts: 907
We drafted two WR's in 2001...Gardner in the first, and McCants in the 5th. Ok, Gibbs obviously isn't crazy about McCants, and we agree that (unfortunately) he is most likely gone this year, but most would say (or have said) that McCants could fill Gardner's shoes in terms of his performance pretty easily. McCants has little to no trade value but Gardner could possibly get us as high as a 2nd (yeah right), but probably no lower than a 5th rounder. Plus he wants to leave!
You may ask why I'm comparing him to another WR that is practically gone...well it shows that as a former 1st round pick, he has underachieved, and a change is likely the best thing for both parties. I just hope the Skins are able to arrange a trade and don't end up having to just cut him.
As for Coles, at 80% he is still better than a lot of starting WR's IMO.
SkinsRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 03:06 PM   #23
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
I believe there needs to be improvement in our WR's...either the ones we have presently or upgrades from the draft or free agency. The biggest thing is this:

You can't become Super Bowl champions by putting in minimum effort.
You can't become Super Bowl champions by being good barely half of the time and inconsistant the rest of the time.

This of course goes for players and coaches alike. Now, I can't say for sure that people like Gardner or McCants don't put forth enough effort to improve themselves during practice...because I haven't seem them practice. However, I believe what you do in practice translates, at least eventually, what you do on the field on Sunday. If we take a look at the greats from the league...past and present..they had unbelievable work ethics...such as Jerry Rice! It takes hard work from everybody to be the best...and even if us Redskins fans have gotten attached to certain players, we must ask ourselves...according to what these players have done on the field...are they players that we can rely on to take us all the way?
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 03:55 PM   #24
Karma Chameleon (I come and go)
 
jdlea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 3,087
I would like to see Rod Gardner go to a system like the Patriots. They don't put much emphasis on statistics. They have basically 5 wide outs who are legit threats. I think this would suit him well. All he has to do is consistently hang on to the football. He got around that problem the past couple of years, but got back to dropping it this season. I don't think that switching from Brunell to Ramsey in the middle of the season helped anyone hang on to balls. The passes were getting there quicker and harder and that is a problem for receivers.

I am of the school of thinking that if it hits a pro wide out in the hands they should hang on. I've made the comment that "catchable" translates to "interceptable" from a defensive standpoint. I don't really like QBs who throw "catchable" balls. If the pass is on the money, it's catchable. A WRs job is to catch the damn ball and that's all they have to do.

Anyway, if Gardner went somewhere like New England where he was only expected to make one or two grabs a game he would be great. I think that Givens, Patten, Brown, Johnson, Branch, Fauria and Graham have all looked so good because they're not carrying a load. Brady throws to the open man and it works great. Same with Indy. He could go somewhere where there were more de facto #1's. Where the ball was spread around. I think that system would fit him best.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack
Albert Connell is perhaps the worst Redskin I ever had the misfortune of meeting. He's the kind of guy that makes media people covering their favorite team growing up no longer like that team
jdlea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 04:03 PM   #25
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdlea
Anyway, if Gardner went somewhere like New England where he was only expected to make one or two grabs a game he would be great.
How would he be great making only one or two catches a game?

Going somewhere to be expected to do that would mean he's going some place to sit on the bench!
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 04:11 PM   #26
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,969
He would be great if he was only expected to catch a couple balls a game, after all, that's pretty much what he did for us this year. Maybe we just need to lower our expectation level.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpag.../gamelogs/2004
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 04:12 PM   #27
Fight for old DC!
 
Redskins_P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Falls Church, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 4,086
Heres a good question: Who would you rather have on your team right now? Rod Gardner? or Freddie Mitchell?


I'd have to go w/ Gardner I guess. But if I was given a third choice, I'd take it.
Redskins_P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 04:13 PM   #28
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
He would be great if he was only expected to catch a couple balls a game, after all, that's pretty much what he did for us this year. Maybe we just need to lower our expectation level.
Hahaha....that might still be asking for too much!
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 04:21 PM   #29
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redskins_P
Heres a good question: Who would you rather have on your team right now? Rod Gardner? or Freddie Mitchell?
That's a tough question to answer!

If I had to choose either one....I would still pick neither!
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2005, 04:24 PM   #30
Playmaker
 
BrudLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE
Posts: 3,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redskins_P
Heres a good question: Who would you rather have on your team right now? Rod Gardner? or Freddie Mitchell?


I'd have to go w/ Gardner I guess. But if I was given a third choice, I'd take it.
I'd call Chris Doering up. I'm sure someone has his number.

It's a tricky question. Gardner will need to have realistic expectations for a new contract, and he needs a clean break from this team. He can't play his way into the #1 receiver role here - the guy opposite him has a messed-up toe and caught nearly twice the balls he did.
__________________
There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.
BrudLee 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 10:10 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 0.31525 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