T.J. Duckett Conspiracy

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This assumes that we will trade him before the deadline, which we won't.

I'm irked by the move to acquire him as well. It was a knee-jerk reaction to Portis's shoulder. Way too much to give up for insurance. I mean we already had Betts for crying out loud. Betts wouldn't set the world on fire as a starter, but then again neither would Duckett.

Retarded move if you ask me. Gibbs' nervous nelly nature got the best of him on that move.

Betts was also hurt at the time the move was made.

Given Portis's history of shoulder problems going back to last year, coupled with Betts' extensive injury history, was it really a knee-jerk reaction to acquire a proven back? With how heavily the offense is based on the running game, god forbid Portis and Betts were both out and we were down to Cartwright taking the full workload, I can only imagine the complaining that we didn't address the RB situation properly enough.

Maybe it was a move that has proved to be unnecessary with Portis appearing to be at or very close to 100% and Betts remaining healthy. But the logic at the time was sound in making the move, and it might prove to still be a good move depending on what happens the rest of the way.

[irish]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

I for one am extremely pissed at the cavalier attitude we have toward using draft choices to build good, cheap depth. Champ for Portis? Sure, and we'll throw in a 2nd round pick for good measure. Brunell about to get cut by the Jags? Wait, we'll give you a 3rd for him. Trade up to get Jason Campbell? Here Denver, take 3 more of our picks, including a #1, and we won't let the kid see the light of day. Same with Duckett, but we "only" gave up a 3rd so that he can ride the pine. Then there's Brandon Lloyd - let's give up a 3rd and a 4th, sign him to a long term contract, then throw him the ball about as often as we threw it to Taylor Jacobs.

Wonder why we have no depth? We keep trading picks for guys with limited roles. Is this any way to build a long-term winner? I love how New England and Philly stockpile draft picks, and build a team through the draft first and fill the few remaining holes with free agency. I call that the "anti-Danny" approach to running a football team. I hope that Gibbs and The Danny can win consistently with their approach, but I won't hold my breath on that.

This team gives away draft picks like Xmas presents, it amazing. If memory serves I think the skins only have something like 1 pick in next year's draft. How this builds the team for the future (as JG said he was going to do whe he was re-hired) I'm not really sure. I know of no perennially successful teams that abandon the draft like the redskins do. Maybe that's why the redskins have not been very successful since 1992.

[Southpaw]

On the John Riggins show yesterday, I heard that Duckett wants to stick around, even though he's been inactive the last few weeks. My theory is that the Washington front office thinks Betts will leave after this season, so they have pretty much assured Duckett that he'll be the #2 tailback next season. Like I said, it's just my theory, but why else would a potentially #1 running back be content with being inactive, week after week?

[GhettoDogAllStars]

yeah, I heard he was content also. but wasn't he getting frustrated in ATL, being #2? what makes washington any different? more money?

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

yeah, I heard he was content also. but wasn't he getting frustrated in ATL, being #2? what makes washington any different? more money?

Money would be my guess. Snyder has never had a problem throwing money around. Then again, Duckett could just be singing the company line, and being a team player. Maybe he's stewing under the surface.

[Hog1]

Maybe we are getting a little to worked up by everything the coaching staff does lately. MAYBE, we are not privy to all that goes on in Redskin park. Betts, while a reasonable back up, has not proven to be able to carry the load. This is especially true if Betts was banged up as already stated. I love the Rock, but he ain't first string, or a reasonable facimilie. I have no problem with the team taking Duckett as an insurance poilicy, as that is what insurance is for. Additionally, they can probably recoup their pick before the draft, if they so choose. I would really like to see him in the lineup so we don't throw on 3rd and 1. It's not time to stroke on everthing as Joe and company will right the ship

[EternalEnigma21]

I like the Duckett move, but I agree with Mr. Slab Hurta about not using him yet... Not sure if the blocking schemes are that much different here than in Atl, but if all you gotta do is see a hole and hit it full force, we should be using the guy. Just like Bettis last year for the Steelers, and he wound up getting alot more of the workload, as I think duckett would.

Can you imagine him running behind Dock and Thomas and Sellers... cutting to the edge and getting blocks on backers? Who in the secondary is going to bring this guy down one on one?

[BrunellMVP?]

not playing TJ on short yardage situations proves yet again that the Redskins are one of the worst run teams in the league...who but us gives away draft picks for people with no market value or that we don't plan to use? Gibbs needs to understand that the days of stockpiling talent on the roster are gone...moreover, we need TJ...the man gets the tough yards...Riggs anyone??

[Oakland Red]

It seems like everything is judged pretty much based on what happened last Sunday by a lot of people. Things go bad, you have to trash the quarterback. Or if he has some cache built up, trash the coaches, or the player acquistion strategy. Unless you win, then it's all cool. A roller coaster is fun once in awhile, but it's tough to live on one.

Teams can be at different stages in my view - stages in their readiness to make a Super Bowl run. The Redskins have a lot of the ingredients ready and almost baked to make a Super Bowl run. So the focus has not been on the draft but on adding the veterans we need to finish the puzzle.

The confusion I think exists about all this is conflating the years Snyder was running the team without Gibbs with the years since Gibbs has arrived. These are two different eras in my view. Snyder of course wanted to get all the flashy names like Deion Sanders and Bruce Smith and LaVar Arrington. He wanted to release players without the head coach knowing, so that the head coach would find out from players in team meetings that someone was cut. He wanted to come into the locker room after games, close the door and give the head coach a humiliating tongue lashing.

All those terrible years are gone, and Gibbs arrived, and he has been making the best of the situation, bringing order, developing the team that he inherited, taking the best of who was already here, and figuring on the best strategy to go from that point.

To my mind, we have been getting better overall every year since he arrived. Things are moving along well in the big picture. Mistakes have been made, and right now releasing Walt Harris could be one of the biggest ones. It seems like this year is not the year for us to make the Super Bowl run, but hopefully we will get the engines running very well before the season is out.

And the fact is that even in this much maligned season, we have already had some special moments, particularly against the Jaguars.

"Patience is the only strength that a man needs."

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I made sure I didn't read a lot after our loss. It's the same thing each time.

[JWsleep]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I made sure I didn't read a lot after our loss. It's the same thing each time.

lol..Good point, but...

Portis was hurt (and still may not last the season). Betts had shots in the Minn and Dallas games and didn't show much (though the o-line wasn't doing much, so it's hard to say). But Betts has been hurt a lot. He doesn't look to be durable enough to be an every down, 16 game back. The skins were facing the prospect of losing their run attack, so they made a move. So I think the move was sound. Duckett is a good player.

As for not using him, that's another story. He can't be WORSE than the other backs at thrid and short. If he's active, put him in! (Bet we'll see him soon--probably this week, IMO.)

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Oakland Red

It seems like everything is judged pretty much based on what happened last Sunday by a lot of people. Things go bad, you have to trash the quarterback. Or if he has some cache built up, trash the coaches, or the player acquistion strategy. Unless you win, then it's all cool. A roller coaster is fun once in awhile, but it's tough to live on one.

Teams can be at different stages in my view - stages in their readiness to make a Super Bowl run. The Redskins have a lot of the ingredients ready and almost baked to make a Super Bowl run. So the focus has not been on the draft but on adding the veterans we need to finish the puzzle.

The confusion I think exists about all this is conflating the years Snyder was running the team without Gibbs with the years since Gibbs has arrived. These are two different eras in my view. Snyder of course wanted to get all the flashy names like Deion Sanders and Bruce Smith and LaVar Arrington. He wanted to release players without the head coach knowing, so that the head coach would find out from players in team meetings that someone was cut. He wanted to come into the locker room after games, close the door and give the head coach a humiliating tongue lashing.

All those terrible years are gone, and Gibbs arrived, and he has been making the best of the situation, bringing order, developing the team that he inherited, taking the best of who was already here, and figuring on the best strategy to go from that point.

To my mind, we have been getting better overall every year since he arrived. Things are moving along well in the big picture. Mistakes have been made, and right now releasing Walt Harris could be one of the biggest ones. It seems like this year is not the year for us to make the Super Bowl run, but hopefully we will get the engines running very well before the season is out.

And the fact is that even in this much maligned season, we have already had some special moments, particularly against the Jaguars.

"Patience is the only strength that a man needs."

Nice post. I think what people tend to forget is that Gibbs didn't win the Super Bowl every year. We tend to look back on his first tenure and think only of the 3 rings. But I mean he was the coach for 12 years so there were "lean years" (relatively speaking). He built winners over time. I understand the expectations are deservedly high this year, but not every game is going to be a resounding victory. It wasn't even like that the first time around.

[RiggoRules]

I think TJ for a 3rd rounder was a steal. We have needed a bruising, between the tackles and short yardage back for a while. But I don't get why we aren't using him.

As far as the 4th and 1 against the Giants, where we should have used him was on the 3rd and 1.

[BrunellMVP?]

i can respect your theory that we are living in a "what have you done for me recently" type world...but couldn't the same be said for you guys, and your support of brunell? i mean, sure he did well (tossing the short balls) against houston and jacksonville but the overall trend is that he can't beat you down field...his receivers may be able to, but he can't. when was the last time we had several sucessful LONG BOMBS? not 10 yard slants or screens that went for big plays...(not dimishing the value of these plays)??? the fact is he hasn't tossed big bombs, when it counts, in a LONG LONG time...
i wouldn't argue that long throws make the QB, but i woudl argue that you can't enjoy sustained sucess without it...what is mcnabb doing these days? manning? any of the other elite qbs?

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Oakland Red

To my mind, we have been getting better overall every year since he arrived.

I agree. However, this season we are not as good as we were the 2nd half of last season ... we could be moving backwards a tad.