View Single Post
Old 06-13-2009, 05:06 PM   #35
tryfuhl
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 42
Posts: 12,514
Re: Redskins signing rookie class of 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
My perception of Williams is not much different than yours. But, I think the 4 WR stuff that Zorn wants to run, to an extent, will require a player like Williams to run. Right now, the predominant theory is that our 4 WR sets will include 1) Moss, 2) Randle El, 3) Thomas, 4) Kelly, and 5) Cooley. But, I have to wonder if that's the best use of our personnel. These are pretty much all third or fourth down and 6+ yard situations, so maybe in this case, ARE should come off the field for a more reliable hands guy like Williams who has made a career of moving the chains.

Additionally, what if someone is injured, and/or our young guys still can't lineup in the right place? There's nothing wrong with the four aforementioned players making our 4 WR set, but perhaps we should have a contingency plan in case one of them becomes injured or a weak link. Williams, could catch 20-25 balls for us as a *4th WR.

Plus, since there are 10-12 in-season roster transactions for any team, he could be a guy who gets released if the guys in front of him all exceed expectations. No harm there.

Again, I don't think we'd be rostering him instead of a special teams player. Last year, we went with 4 RB most of the season, with Shaun Alexander. This year, I think we'll go with 6 WRs instead.

Of course, San Diego might be willing to trade Kassim Osgood for a late round pick. We've thrown picks at lesser needs before, so I'd only be moderately surprised if we did that.
Good call, I could definitely see some switching up of roles and having someone else come in in certain situations (such as the ones that you mentioned). And while it looks like Thomas SHOULD be the number 2, that's not set in stone by any means, nor Kelly at 4.
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.60424 seconds with 10 queries