Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Who's back? Who's not?

Locker Room Main Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-28-2006, 10:45 AM   #1
riggoraider
Special Teams
 
riggoraider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: D.C. area
Posts: 179
Re: Who's back? Who's not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyg12 View Post
I agree w/the article's assessment of Loyd, but ARE has played well. JC has missed him on a no. of occassions.
Whether they're playing well or not, the fact is we have too much $ & cap space tied up in wr's. Someone on here even said that we would take a sizable cap hit if we cut Patten. Patten could still contribute & James Thrash has outplayed Loyd when given the chance. Bottom line, I don't see any way that we sign another wr. Maybe Mike Espy can crack the roster though.
ARE has not played up to the level of a #2 receiver. The Steelers did not even have him as there #2. I think that we brought him in to be a 3 and a punt returner but with Lloyd playing the way that he has played we had to promote him to 2.

The way that the NFL wheels and deals I am sure that there is a way to get another WR and get rid of a couple.The article stated that there will probably be a change there and Mike Espy certainly is not the answer. Sometimes you just have to eat some losses and this is probably one of those times. The front office made a HUGE mistake in their thinking last year and ESPN was talking about from day one of that deal. ARE is not a pure receiver and neither him nor Lloyd never put up the numbers to warrant those contracts.
riggoraider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2006, 12:01 PM   #2
freddyg12
Playmaker
 
freddyg12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,540
Re: Who's back? Who's not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by riggoraider View Post
ARE has not played up to the level of a #2 receiver. The Steelers did not even have him as there #2. I think that we brought him in to be a 3 and a punt returner but with Lloyd playing the way that he has played we had to promote him to 2.

The way that the NFL wheels and deals I am sure that there is a way to get another WR and get rid of a couple.The article stated that there will probably be a change there and Mike Espy certainly is not the answer. Sometimes you just have to eat some losses and this is probably one of those times. The front office made a HUGE mistake in their thinking last year and ESPN was talking about from day one of that deal. ARE is not a pure receiver and neither him nor Lloyd never put up the numbers to warrant those contracts.
I believe they did have him as their #2 once Burress left. He's made plays here, whether he's a 2 or 3. He doesn't get a lot of separation, but he catches the ball in traffic & we know he can run. I think we'll see him catch a lot more as JC improves, their timing has been off at times. On the other hand, they have hooked up on some big plays.
I'll agree that the contracts for ARE & Loyd were too big, especially for Loyd. I just don't see us being able to address reciever given the other needs we have & that we have 4 guys counting a substantial amount on the cap whether we keep them or not.
freddyg12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2006, 03:37 PM   #3
riggoraider
Special Teams
 
riggoraider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: D.C. area
Posts: 179
Re: Who's back? Who's not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyg12 View Post
I believe they did have him as their #2 once Burress left. He's made plays here, whether he's a 2 or 3. He doesn't get a lot of separation, but he catches the ball in traffic & we know he can run. I think we'll see him catch a lot more as JC improves, their timing has been off at times. On the other hand, they have hooked up on some big plays.
I'll agree that the contracts for ARE & Loyd were too big, especially for Loyd. I just don't see us being able to address reciever given the other needs we have & that we have 4 guys counting a substantial amount on the cap whether we keep them or not.
He was never a #2 at Pittsburgh and I am sorry but whether you can see it or not I can gaurantee you that there will be a change in our receivers next year. There is no way that anyone in there right mind will keep something together that is just not working. I mean it is just too simple to not understand that you can not play winning NFL football when all of your receivers are too small and can't catch passes across the middle because they are in fear of getting killed if they did. At least one of your receivers has to be used for the short passing game....NOOOOO not Cooley....COOLEY IS NOT A RECEIVER!!!!
riggoraider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2006, 03:38 AM   #4
GTripp0012
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
Re: Who's back? Who's not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyg12 View Post
I believe they did have him as their #2 once Burress left. He's made plays here, whether he's a 2 or 3. He doesn't get a lot of separation, but he catches the ball in traffic & we know he can run. I think we'll see him catch a lot more as JC improves, their timing has been off at times. On the other hand, they have hooked up on some big plays.
I'll agree that the contracts for ARE & Loyd were too big, especially for Loyd. I just don't see us being able to address reciever given the other needs we have & that we have 4 guys counting a substantial amount on the cap whether we keep them or not.
Well, remember that in KC, Al Saunders' WR corps consisted of Eddie Kennison, Samie Parker, and Dante Hall. So we really don't need to touch our WRs this offseason. Didn't need to put as much attention as we did into them last year, but we can't look back now.

There is no excuse for dealing picks for relatively inferior talent such as Duckett and Lloyd. Just sign guys on the waiver wire after they get cut by their teams. These moves, IMO, were way moer inexcusable than Archuleta because everybody in the league knows that Duckett can't run through a hole unless it huge, and recievers like Lloyd are a dime a dozen and im sure anyone would have signed for the money we gave Brandon. Archuleta at least was signed following a great 2005 campaign, so we had reason to believe that he maight be able to continue his success. He couldn't, but that signing even in hindsight wasn't inexcusable.

I think if we were to cut Arch post June 1, we would really be creating a horrible cap situation for 2008. Cutting Lloyd as this article suggests would make that situation far worse, so I don't think thats an option.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2006, 08:49 AM   #5
gabe1984
Special Teams
 
gabe1984's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 372
Re: Who's back? Who's not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Well, remember that in KC, Al Saunders' WR corps consisted of Eddie Kennison, Samie Parker, and Dante Hall. So we really don't need to touch our WRs this offseason. Didn't need to put as much attention as we did into them last year, but we can't look back now.

There is no excuse for dealing picks for relatively inferior talent such as Duckett and Lloyd. Just sign guys on the waiver wire after they get cut by their teams. These moves, IMO, were way moer inexcusable than Archuleta because everybody in the league knows that Duckett can't run through a hole unless it huge, and recievers like Lloyd are a dime a dozen and im sure anyone would have signed for the money we gave Brandon. Archuleta at least was signed following a great 2005 campaign, so we had reason to believe that he maight be able to continue his success. He couldn't, but that signing even in hindsight wasn't inexcusable.

I think if we were to cut Arch post June 1, we would really be creating a horrible cap situation for 2008. Cutting Lloyd as this article suggests would make that situation far worse, so I don't think thats an option.
Riggoraider has been making this point for a while, and I'm starting to agree with him that we do need a big wide out. Kennison, Parker, and Hall are not standout wide receivers, however Kennison is 6'1 201 lbs. An on average their receivers are bigger than ours, can we trade Lloyd, ARE, and Archuletta for Andre Johnson, that man is huge, 6'3 219lbs. Maybe in Redksins fantasy world.
gabe1984 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2006, 11:58 AM   #6
riggoraider
Special Teams
 
riggoraider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: D.C. area
Posts: 179
Re: Who's back? Who's not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gabe1984 View Post
Riggoraider has been making this point for a while, and I'm starting to agree with him that we do need a big wide out. Kennison, Parker, and Hall are not standout wide receivers, however Kennison is 6'1 201 lbs. An on average their receivers are bigger than ours, can we trade Lloyd, ARE, and Archuletta for Andre Johnson, that man is huge, 6'3 219lbs. Maybe in Redksins fantasy world.
OOOOHHHH you're finally coming around huh? I would love to have a Andre Johnson or a Roy Williams-like receiver in DC with Santana Moss at the other receiver position, Cooley at tight end, and Portis/ Betts at RB. With the line blocking the way that it is Campbell would not have to be an instant success because he would have major weapons surrounding him.

I know that it is virtually impossible to get the 2 receivers that I named but Johnson out of Georgia Tech or Jarret out of USC could be just as good as they are and would help us sustain drives. ONE move just ONE could put us back in the playoffs next year.
riggoraider is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 1.30497 seconds with 11 queries