Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Absolutely Stunned.

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-09-2005, 03:46 PM   #31
Special Teams
 
Tahoe Skin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 100
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmanc711
This offseason sucks. We signed Rabach and Patten which were two good moves. After that this thing really sucks. I really feel like we took a step back this offseason.
Yeah, kinda sucks! I had better hopes. But performance-wise, losing Coles and gaining Moss is a wash. Coles dropped too many passes and didn't have the elusiveness that he used to have. Losing Pierce and Smoot hurts our defense, but I have great faith in GW. Gaining Rabach and Patten helps our offense, but it's the scheme that's hurts us.
Tahoe Skin is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 03-09-2005, 03:50 PM   #32
Special Teams
 
Tahoe Skin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 100
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinsRock
SC- Some very good points, but I have one question: Just how good did the Eagles do with Thrash as their lead pony? Oh yeah, the NFC runner-ups! I know, he most definitely was not the sole reason they got there, but it shows it can be done (success without a true #1 WR)....and I'm sure many Skins fans would love the Redskins to be in that position.
Let's not worry too much about who we have as a receiver. We have plenty of speed, talent and athleticism at that position. Once we benched Brunell and Ramsey got going, I think the real problem was our inability to give Patrick time to throw.
Tahoe Skin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 04:00 PM   #33
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,247
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinsRock
SC- Some very good points, but I have one question: Just how good did the Eagles do with Thrash as their lead pony? Oh yeah, the NFC runner-ups! I know, he most definitely was not the sole reason they got there, but it shows it can be done (success without a true #1 WR)....and I'm sure many Skins fans would love the Redskins to be in that position.
they have mcnabb though to make up for it.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 04:24 PM   #34
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,556
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahoe Skin
Let's not worry too much about who we have as a receiver. We have plenty of speed, talent and athleticism at that position. Once we benched Brunell and Ramsey got going, I think the real problem was our inability to give Patrick time to throw.
Very true.

The line and Ramsey's inexperience in the system and in general played a big part in the lack of an effective passing game. Hopefully both of those areas will improve this year along with a more aggressive downfield attack from Gibbs.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 04:31 PM   #35
The Starter
 
joecrisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Age: 38
Posts: 1,501
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
they have mcnabb though to make up for it.
True, but the Eagles didn't have a Clinton Portis, either. They had the three-headed monster of Staley, Westbrook and Buckhalter-- but none of those guys inspired defenses to put 8 men in the box with any regularity. Staley and Buckhalter had one or two good rushing games a year, and Westbrook has been more or less a wide receiver out of the backfield. It's not like the Eagles were loaded on offense prior to acquiring Terrell Owens last season. Pre-T.O., McNabb was the only player on that offense that really made defensive coordinators wake up in cold sweats.

The Skins may not have Coles and Gardner, but look at how splendid this offense was with those two players as the top wideouts. People have been crying for the Skins to get rid of Gardner for years-- with good reason, and Coles is certainly not the weapon he used to be. The fact is, this offense couldn't get much worse than it was last season. Patten, while unheralded, is a reliable receiver who will actually catch passes that hit him in the hands, and Moss, while not the tough-guy that Coles was, will provide the deep threat that Coles can no longer claim to be. This offense, believe it or not, tried to go deep last season. The reason there weren't many long completions is that the receivers struggled to get open deep, and the quarterbacks were forced to go to their shorter options.

With Moss and Patten, that may change. With Coles and Gardner, I doubt it would have improved.
joecrisp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 05:52 PM   #36
Playmaker
 
itvnetop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 37
Posts: 2,853
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

at first, i was as shocked as everyone about how our core guys were leaving, but after reading gibbs' reasoning in today's post article, i'd have to say i agree with him...

they didn't want to pay our RFAs more than guys who were playing similar positions at equal or better levels of performance. I know the market each year calls for higher salaries, but it's only a year removed from paying out Marcus Washington and Shawn Springs... in the cases of Pierce and Smoot, they didn't necessarily outperform Washington and Springs last year. if the FO pays the RFAs more just a year later than signing Marcus and Shawn, what message does that send to them?

I'd understand if Springs was in the last year of a 5 year contract and Smoot demanded a substantial amount more than him (market inflation)... but it's only been one year and Springs and Washington performed at least equally to Smoot and Pierce. I actually like this precedent, if the Skins are going this way.
itvnetop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 09:52 PM   #37
Special Teams
 
Tahoe Skin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 100
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

I understand your point, but I would still have spent the extra $800,000 to keep Smoot and chalked it up to inflation. I think Walt Harris played very well when he spelled Smoot, but still Smoot is quite a talent.
Tahoe Skin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 10:26 PM   #38
Special Teams
 
John Hasbrouck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 180
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

I hated to see Pierce go over a small amount of money.Synder should have paid. Smoots put himself above the team. We will be fine without him.My concern is the QB.
John Hasbrouck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 10:42 PM   #39
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 17,463
Re: Absolutely Stunned.

Yeah, money is DEFINITELY doing some talking this offseason. I've said it once and I'll say it again, Gibbs is setting a precedent for how he's going to handle signings in the offseason (with the exception of the Coles scenario.)
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection 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 11:59 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 0.20585 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