Gibbs To Meet With Gardner Today

formerskinzfan · 04-27-2005, 04:23 PM

So now after passing up THE BEST WIDE RECEIVER IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT we will have to spend another year watching Rod Lardner drop balls and pout on the sidelines or watch him give us one decent year and then lose him to free agency with no compensation, leaving us with the EXTREMELY AVERAGE duo of David Patten and Santana Moss. Boy, that decision not to draft Mike Williams is already paying dividends.

Redskins_P · 04-27-2005, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by formerskinzfan

So now after passing up THE BEST WIDE RECEIVER IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT we will have to spend another year watching Rod Lardner drop balls and pout on the sidelines or watch him give us one decent year and then lose him to free agency with no compensation, leaving us with the EXTREMELY AVERAGE duo of David Patten and Santana Moss. Boy, that decision not to draft Mike Williams is already paying dividends.

Dude, don't be so optimistic.

Before you judge anything, why don't you wait until the games are played. Thats when we find out how good our WR's are.

Paying dividends?

RedskinsJunkie · 04-27-2005, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redskins_P

Dude, don't be so optimistic.

Before you judge anything, why don't you wait until the games are played. Thats when we find out how good our WR's are.

Paying dividends?

I understand you won't know until the play, but it would be good to be a little proactive instead of reactive. Don't get me wrong, I love Ramsey, but he ain't Brady whoever is comparing our WR corps to New England has to look at the entire ball of wax. They are playing a completely different offesive scheme then what Gibbs runs.

Redskins_P · 04-28-2005, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedskinsJunkie

I understand you won't know until the play, but it would be good to be a little proactive instead of reactive. Don't get me wrong, I love Ramsey, but he ain't Brady whoever is comparing our WR corps to New England has to look at the entire ball of wax. They are playing a completely different offesive scheme then what Gibbs runs.

I don't think anyone is comparing our WR's to New Englands. What I did was point out that New England doesn't have a true #1 receiver, and look how successful they've been.

skinsguy · 04-28-2005, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by formerskinzfan

So now after passing up THE BEST WIDE RECEIVER IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT we will have to spend another year watching Rod Lardner drop balls and pout on the sidelines or watch him give us one decent year and then lose him to free agency with no compensation, leaving us with the EXTREMELY AVERAGE duo of David Patten and Santana Moss. Boy, that decision not to draft Mike Williams is already paying dividends.

Really? How many catches did Williams make this year? Oh that's right...he didn't play!

How many catches has Williams made in the NFL? Oh that's right, he hasn't played in the NFL yet. So pointless to say some guy is the "best receiver" when they haven't proved a darn thing yet.

SmootSmack · 04-28-2005, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by formerskinzfan

So now after passing up THE BEST WIDE RECEIVER IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT we will have to spend another year watching Rod Lardner drop balls and pout on the sidelines or watch him give us one decent year and then lose him to free agency with no compensation, leaving us with the EXTREMELY AVERAGE duo of David Patten and Santana Moss. Boy, that decision not to draft Mike Williams is already paying dividends.

I think Patten gets a bad rap because it seems to be the popular thing to say that Tom Brady has done so much with no wide receivers. But Patten, as part of a committe of receivers, has put up some pretty decent numbers and maybe he and the other Patriots' receivers should get some more recognition for what NE has accomplished these past few years.

As for Mike Williams being the BEST WIDE RECEIVER IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT, it's possible but interesting to note that he apparently wasn't considered good enough to be the first (or even second) WR taken in the draft

RedskinsJunkie · 04-28-2005, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I think Patten gets a bad rap because it seems to be the popular thing to say that Tom Brady has done so much with no wide receivers. But Patten, as part of a committe of receivers, has put up some pretty decent numbers and maybe he and the other Patriots' receivers should get some more recognition for what NE has accomplished these past few years.

As for Mike Williams being the BEST WIDE RECEIVER IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT, it's possible but interesting to note that he apparently wasn't considered good enough to be the first (or even second) WR taken in the draft

M. Williams was by far more productive than either of the 2 receivers taken before him. No he didn't play last year, but the 2 years he played he had 30 TDs. 2 years. Braylon Edwards broke the Michigan record with 39 in 4 years. M. Williams dropped because of his combine times in the 40 and because he didn't play last year, but he will be better than both of those 2 wide outs. I am so glad that we did not move up to get Edwards. Also Williamson fit a need.

Also Kevin Dyson was chosen 5 slots ahead of Randy Moss... Is Dyson is WAY better than R. MOSS right???

TheMalcolmConnection · 04-27-2005, 04:26 PM

Plenty of teams have prospered without a true #1 receiver.

Redskins_P · 04-27-2005, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Plenty of teams have prospered without a true #1 receiver.

Exactly. New England Patriots anyone?

TheMalcolmConnection · 04-27-2005, 05:35 PM

Redskins_P, exactly what the HELL are you thinking talking about games that haven't even been played yet?

And Ramsey blows.

BIGREDSKINFAN63 · 04-28-2005, 07:22 PM

personall,i would have taken mark clayton and braylon edwards before williams.the more you looked at them,the less impressive williams looked.

RedskinsJunkie · 04-29-2005, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGREDSKINFAN63

personall,i would have taken mark clayton and braylon edwards before williams.the more you looked at them,the less impressive williams looked.

Holy cow, give me some of what you are smoking... The Skins could not have taken Clayton because he is the same as every other WR we have on the roster (Especially Patten and Moss) and Edwards will be one of the biggest busts ever in the NFL. No Michigan WR has ever panned out. Only one to have a decent career has been Toomer. By the time it is over Edwards won't even have Toomer numbers.

BrudLee · 04-29-2005, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedskinsJunkie

Holy cow, give me some of what you are smoking... The Skins could not have taken Clayton because he is the same as every other WR we have on the roster (Especially Patten and Moss) and Edwards will be one of the biggest busts ever in the NFL. No Michigan WR has ever panned out. Only one to have a decent career has been Toomer. By the time it is over Edwards won't even have Toomer numbers.

I don't know what kind of pro Edwards will be, but I don't think he's an automatic bust because he came from Michigan. By the same logic, we shouldn't have played Doug Williams in the Super Bowl because no black quarterback had ever won it. Each player has his own strengths, and when they are catered to, the player has a chance of success.

RedskinsJunkie · 04-29-2005, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrudLee

I don't know what kind of pro Edwards will be, but I don't think he's an automatic bust because he came from Michigan. By the same logic, we shouldn't have played Doug Williams in the Super Bowl because no black quarterback had ever won it. Each player has his own strengths, and when they are catered to, the player has a chance of success.

You can't compare different types of receivers and their sizes or where they played school to them being black or white. They are men... equal men. What I am saying is that The guy before me was saying that both of those players listed would be better than Mike Williams, and everyone seems to forget that just because M. Williams was out of school for a year he isn't that good. He would have crushed Edwards stats if he played just 3 years....

Phinehas · 04-29-2005, 04:41 PM

Personally, I don't see what Michael Williams could bring that Darnarien McCants cannot. We need to get away from the big splashy players, not go out and spend millions for a name that will end up costing us in the sort of role players that really count. Take a cue from the Pats. It's about the team, not individual talent.

Beyond that, Williams isn't the right kind of receiver for us anyway. You want speed to stretch out the defense. The long threat opens up the running game and vice versa. If we were going to spend big money on a marquee reciever, we'd be better off going for blazing speed--something which Williams has in short supply. Santana Moss is the right sort of reciever in that regard, and McCants is a perfectly acceptable possession and red zone specialist. Let's build a solid, consistent team around the talent we have instead of sacrificing everything for the big name player.

--Phinehas

04-27-2005, 04:26 PM	#8
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: Gibbs To Meet With Gardner Today Plenty of teams have prospered without a true #1 receiver. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

04-27-2005, 05:35 PM	#10
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 19,264	Re: Gibbs To Meet With Gardner Today Redskins_P, exactly what the HELL are you thinking talking about games that haven't even been played yet? And Ramsey blows. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

04-28-2005, 07:22 PM	#11
BIGREDSKINFAN63 Special Teams Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: bassett-va Age: 62 Posts: 289	Re: Gibbs To Meet With Gardner Today personall,i would have taken mark clayton and braylon edwards before williams.the more you looked at them,the less impressive williams looked. __________________ "7 days without the redskins, makes one weak!!!"

04-29-2005, 04:41 PM	#15
Phinehas Special Teams Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 106	Re: Gibbs To Meet With Gardner Today Personally, I don't see what Michael Williams could bring that Darnarien McCants cannot. We need to get away from the big splashy players, not go out and spend millions for a name that will end up costing us in the sort of role players that really count. Take a cue from the Pats. It's about the team, not individual talent. Beyond that, Williams isn't the right kind of receiver for us anyway. You want speed to stretch out the defense. The long threat opens up the running game and vice versa. If we were going to spend big money on a marquee reciever, we'd be better off going for blazing speed--something which Williams has in short supply. Santana Moss is the right sort of reciever in that regard, and McCants is a perfectly acceptable possession and red zone specialist. Let's build a solid, consistent team around the talent we have instead of sacrificing everything for the big name player. --Phinehas

04-27-2005, 04:23 PM	#1
formerskinzfan Camp Scrub Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 11	Re: Gibbs To Meet With Gardner Today So now after passing up THE BEST WIDE RECEIVER IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT we will have to spend another year watching Rod Lardner drop balls and pout on the sidelines or watch him give us one decent year and then lose him to free agency with no compensation, leaving us with the EXTREMELY AVERAGE duo of David Patten and Santana Moss. Boy, that decision not to draft Mike Williams is already paying dividends.

Gibbs To Meet With Gardner Today

Locker Room Main Forum