Moss WANTS to be a Redskin

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by NLC1054

And what about staying quiet and not causing any drama and speaking out?

Darth Hoody can actually work with character players and gets production out of them. And if they don't work out, then he just gets rid of them.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I can think of at least four guys who deserve the opportunity. And if they fail, they fail. But I think it's a better process than holding on dearly to whatever Moss can continue to give us in the next two years.

I agree with you that he'll be a hot commodity on the FA market. I can see both Portis and Moss in New England next year. They are very much the Belichick kind of player.

Even if we're rebuilding (which I doubt) it makes sense for an offense to have a foundation.

Our best offensive unit was our passing game.
Moss was the focal point of a passing attack that only had 1 other viable WR threat yet was still able to produce like a top WR.
If you take Moss out of the equation you're asking an unproven group of WRs to become the focal point of the best unit (arguably the only good unit) on this team.

And even if Moss is re-signed all those wasted targets that went to Joey Galloway and Roydel Williams would be enough to for at least 1 other WR threat to emerge.

And 1 other target would help an already good passing attack be even better.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Even if we're rebuilding (which I doubt) it makes sense for an offense to have a foundation.

Our best offensive unit was our passing game.
Moss was the focal point of a passing attack that only had 1 other viable WR threat yet was still able to produce like a top WR.
If you take Moss out of the equation you're asking an unproven group of WRs to become the focal point of the best unit (arguably the only good unit) on this team.

And even if Moss is re-signed all those wasted targets that went to Joey Galloway and Roydel Williams would be enough to for at least 1 other WR threat to emerge.

And 1 other target would help an already good passing attack be even better.

Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.

But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.

[NLC1054]

Ugh, I hate the term number one receiver sometimes...

A lot of what you're saying is, essentially, that it'd be worth it to have guys struggle if the young guys get time on the field. But having a super young receiving core and an inexperienced/less-than-ideal quarterback doesn't always work the way it did for Josh Freeman.

I mean, if Moss wants to be here, and he's willing to sign a fair deal to stay here and retire as a Redskin, I don't see the harm. You can still position Leonard Hankerson as the number one receiver of the future (if he develops into that), but you don't put the pressure on him to bear the brunt of the offensive load on day one. And who knows when the lockout really ends. He might have the playbook but Hank still doesn't have the coaching and hasn't seen live action. What if Hank gets hurt in training camp?

I think in a situation like the Redskins are in, even in rebuild mode, they need to have a veteran guy who can be counted on every game at most positions, so the rookies don't feel as though the world is always on their shoulders.

If he comes cheap and wants to be here I don't see the problem.

[Kindoy]

i want him back no question. he had a solid year last year and we need a vet at WR, someone to mentor all the young guys. he's still a threat and with the lockout looming it's safer to have sure things like Santana.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.

But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.

Why'd you choose Antonio Bryant for comparison?

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.

But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.

Just because Santana could resign does not mean he would stay as the "number 1 receiver". He could easily move to the slot, a position that he would be very good at, while leaving the outside routes to Hankerson, AA and the like. Shanny is about putting the best players on the field no matter what the age or tenure on the team. This isn't old Redskins football anymore IMO. If Hankerson and AA play better than Santana, if he resigns, then they will play more than Santana. I would like to see Santana in the slot regardless.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by NLC1054

And what about staying quiet and not causing any drama and speaking out?

Portis is one of those "soft" drama-causers that unleashes that side of him when there isn't anyone in the family punishing him harshly enough or threatening such punishment clearly enough. He shut up under Shanahan, but he was given "star" favoritism under Gibbs. That's the difference.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.

But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.

The re-signing Moss discussion or the wether to start a rookie WR/young WRs question is kinda similar to the wether or not start a rookie QB.

And I understand your point about the young receivers needing playing time i.e targets.

But with Moss as the focal point of the passing game, where Kyle moves him around a lot: flanker, slot and some split end it creates a good environment for a WR to break in.
Moss is still a respected player that draws attention from opposing defenses.
And there are still available targets (Joey's and Roydell's) that would give the young receivers a chance to get on the field in favorable situations where they have a better opportunity for success because Moss is on the field.

It may only be a limited role (at first) but their production, however limited, would be a boon to the passing game that could develop into a bigger part if they're up to the task.

Damn,we need a QB.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

Just because Santana could resign does not mean he would stay as the "number 1 receiver". He could easily move to the slot, a position that he would be very good at, while leaving the outside routes to Hankerson, AA and the like. Shanny is about putting the best players on the field no matter what the age or tenure on the team. This isn't old Redskins football anymore IMO. If Hankerson and AA play better than Santana, if he resigns, then they will play more than Santana. I would like to see Santana in the slot regardless.

The utility Moss will provide this team post-33 years of age will likely be a big goose-egg. It might seem unjust, but I care about the team's welfare more than I care about one player. The team needs assets that will provide more than just one more good year for us. We need players who have provide at least 5 years of service.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

The utility Moss will provide this team post-33 years of age will likely be a big goose-egg. It might seem unjust, but I care about the team's welfare more than I care about one player. The team needs assets that will provide more than just one more good year for us. We need players who have provide at least 5 years of service.

I disagree, he is definitely not the Santana of old, but he did have a good year last year and even if he is not the best receiver on the team anymore, which I am not yet convinced is the case, he can still contribute off the bench, in the slot, and especially as a mentor to the young WR corp we now have that needs a guiding hand. If you are saying he has shown that he will not be able to provide for this team 5 years down the road, I agree with you. But to say not to resign someone that can help us next exclusively because they will not contribute 5 years down the road is ludicrous. He can help us now and why would we not want someone who can help this team next year?

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

The utility Moss will provide this team post-33 years of age will likely be a big goose-egg. It might seem unjust, but I care about the team's welfare more than I care about one player. The team needs assets that will provide more than just one more good year for us. We need players who have provide at least 5 years of service.

So you think Santana will move from first on the stat chart (by a wide margin) to......last in the space of one off-season?
THAT should be interesting indeed.

BTW, your beliefs are idiotic!

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Hog1

So you think Santana will move from first on the stat chart (by a wide margin) to......last in the space of one off-season?
THAT should be interesting indeed.

BTW, your beliefs are idiotic!

Not sure if you read him correctly. He said "post 33 years of age". He's currently 32, so I'm assuming he's saying he's got one more year of productivity until he's pretty much done. His belief isn't that idiotic.

[Hog1]

Perhaps I was premature.
BTW, the "idiotic" thing was from another thread. I was just trying it out to see if I liked it but I thank you for your input!

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

I disagree, he is definitely not the Santana of old, but he did have a good year last year and even if he is not the best receiver on the team anymore, which I am not yet convinced is the case, he can still contribute off the bench, in the slot, and especially as a mentor to the young WR corp we now have that needs a guiding hand. If you are saying he has shown that he will not be able to provide for this team 5 years down the road, I agree with you. But to say not to resign someone that can help us next exclusively because they will not contribute 5 years down the road is ludicrous. He can help us now and why would we not want someone who can help this team next year?

Will Moss improve the returns on Hankerson, Armstrong, etc to be worth the risk of letting a Antonio Dixon of WRs to slip away? Moss isn't going to transplant his younger legs to the other receivers. If we're to keep Moss for one more year, he better be a hell of a "wise teacher" to improve the games of Hank, Armstrong, etc.