Al Saunders was successful without a #2 WR

[ImmortalDragon]

Maybe we do not need a #2 WR. Look at him while he was with the Chiefs, he had Kennison who is good in his own right but not close to Moss, and I bet half the people on this board can't correctly name their #2 WR. The way our cap situation looks I don't think we're going after another top class WR, although I hope we draft someone in the mid to late rounds for the future. I believe David Patten will be more than enough for Saunders to work with. I guess that leaves James Thrash to play #3 if we do not acquire another receiver or if Jacobs does not progress. That being said, I really missed Thrash on special teams.

[kevinklein]

He didn't need a #2 WR with a guy like Tony Gonzalez to lean back on.

[Bonef1de]

He didn't need a #2 WR with a guy like Tony Gonzalez to lean back on.

Tony is talented but the difference between him and Chris is minimal. I think the thing that Saunders will bring to our offense is the ability to make a defense have to guess.

[Sherlock Holmes]

did al saunders win a superbowl? if he didnt, then he obviously wasnt succesfull enough.....lets draft a WR and start him, he could be a bust like jacobs, but he could be a success.

[tr1]

I think Saunders was successful for one reason...he has a penchant to call a run when it is a passing down and passing when it is a running down...something we should have done a bit more of last year.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I think Saunders was successful for one reason...he has a penchant to call a run when it is a passing down and passing when it is a running down...something we should have done a bit more of last year.

i agree wholeheartedly. We seemed to be very predictable on offense. But very unpredictable on defense thankfully...which kept us in a lot of games...

[TheLongshot]

did al saunders win a superbowl? if he didnt, then he obviously wasnt succesfull enough.....lets draft a WR and start him, he could be a bust like jacobs, but he could be a success.

Well, it wasn't because of the offense that KC failed. KC failed because they were never able to do it on defense.

Now, it doesn't mean that Saunders can work the same sort of miracles here, but it could very well be that we don't need as much as some people think. It could very well be that Patton does step up with the new offense, and we don't need another guy (tho we will draft one anyways, and maybe sign someone cheap.)

Jason

[Goaldeje]

It could very well be that Patton does step up with the new offense, and we don't need another guy (tho we will draft one anyways, and maybe sign someone cheap.)

Jason


I agree. Patton may very well step up. It seemed last year that Brunell really locked into Moss and not near as much with Patten. If Brunell can break that and give Patten more of a chance, our offense has a chance to be dynamic.

However, I do sometimes drool when I think of a big strong receiver in the Monk mode who could get us the tough first downs, and be a complement to Moss and Cooley, allowing Patten to line up in the slot.

[GSF]

Umm...a few things here. First, Kennison was basically the Chiefs #2 wr, b/c Gonzalez was their top receiver with 78 receptions. Second, Cooley is good, but the difference between Gonzalez and Cooley is more than minimal. Third, drafting a wr to start b/c "he could be a bust, but could be a success" doesn't sound like a very wise stragety to me. And finally, yes Saunders is a very creative playcaller, but a big part of his success has to be credited to the fact that he had a probowl QB protected by a dominant oline.

Sauders is great, but he still needs the tools to be a success. The team will look for a solid, FA vet to line up accross from Moss.

[skinsman4u]

Maybe we do not need a #2 WR. Look at him while he was with the Chiefs, he had Kennison who is good in his own right but not close to Moss, and I bet half the people on this board can't correctly name their #2 WR. The way our cap situation looks I don't think we're going after another top class WR, although I hope we draft someone in the mid to late rounds for the future. I believe David Patten will be more than enough for Saunders to work with. I guess that leaves James Thrash to play #3 if we do not acquire another receiver or if Jacobs does not progress. That being said, I really missed Thrash on special teams.

:applause: :applause: I'll take a stab at it was it Morton, Chad's brother? But I agree it's those ankle biting routes (intermediate stuff) that sets and balances your running attack. We have high quality intermediate route runners who can consistently and effectively get in those lanes where "D" Cords worry the most....deep threats come up usually when a lot of intermediate stuff is expected.

Examples TB, Oak, regular season. There some more ex out there too. I would go hard on a DE some one to shore up that rotation with Wynn and we all know what Daniels can do! Thrash is extremely consistent. And Jacobs? I wouldn't exactly give up on him. But all our WRs compliment our primary targets.

The biggest thing is having a offensive mind set that doesn't allow anyone threat to be shut down--and Al gives us that. Like what happened to Carolina. But we have a high margin of error at the RB position, and QB position, albeit Ramsey maybe departing. But if he decides to stay our margin of error goes up 10 fold.

Unfortunatley, high profile QBs can be the impetus behind the NFL free agent process of aquiring players that can help. I would say DE/K/ OL should be immediate focus. Come back next year and see if you can come up with another CB. But yeah, Thomas and Brown went down and Raymer wasn't able to add that stability where one would need it (Raymers okay). But we're a lot closer to another SB than a lot of people think unless you're a real Redskin fan! But good analyses and GOSKINSWIN (My new salutation)!

[FedExFielder]

Kansas City didn't even have a number one receiver. How Trent Green throws for 4,000 year in and year out with those guys is beyond me.

[RedskinzOwnU]

While explosive, KC's offense also was somewhat inconsistant. They had some pretty poor showings this season, including, I believe, three points? against buffalo. I don't want to be seeing anything like that with the skins this season. I want our offense to be better than KC's, or at least more consistent. I think the lack of true dominant recievers on that team may have been part of the reason.

[Warhead36]

The difference between Moss and Kennison is much greater than the difference between Cooley and Gonzalez.

#2 WR will be around equal, lets assume.

Only question is the Offensive Line. We're good, but can we be great?

[FootballGuy2677]

did al saunders win a superbowl? if he didnt, then he obviously wasnt succesfull enough.....lets draft a WR and start him, he could be a bust like jacobs, but he could be a success.

Exactly, We need to DRAFT a wide reciever.

Chad Jackson, Jason Avant, Greg Lee, Sinorice Moss, Martin Nance, Hank Baskett, Mike Hass, and Devin Aromashodu would all be nice.

[FootballGuy2677]

The difference between Moss and Kennison is much greater than the difference between Cooley and Gonzalez.

#2 WR will be around equal, lets assume.

Only question is the Offensive Line. We're good, but can we be great?

Mark Setterstrom
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/og/marksetterstrom.html

Hopfully we can trade up to the 4th round and get this guy, he is perfect if we really are trying to adapt our system to portis.Though, Derrick Dockery did do a pretty good job this season let alone basically win the Eagles game for us back early in the year, I wouldnt be terribly mad if we didnt draft him. Though hed be great depth, let alone starter. 4th round.

[cphil006]

Tony is talented but the difference between him and Chris is minimal. I think the thing that Saunders will bring to our offense is the ability to make a defense have to guess.

Let's be serious, Tony vs. Chris. Chris has been in the league two years and has been really productive, but Tony Gonzalez is a larger threat and plays TE not H-back...Our TE is Robert Royal.

I think adding Jimmy Smith would be great. He is VERY productive and a great WR in the last year or two of his career so he could be had for an affordable contract....


Get Jimmy Smith

[RDSKNfaithfull]

Saunders didn't have a #1 receiver

[skinsman4u]

The difference between Moss and Kennison is much greater than the difference between Cooley and Gonzalez.

#2 WR will be around equal, lets assume.

Only question is the Offensive Line. We're good, but can we be great?

WRs come a dime a dozen; there out there just need to peel back the onion and find them....one may be hiding at the D2 level. I think Charlie Brown came from SC State. Right now we have someone bythe name of Atavious Cash on the roster out of Hampton.

I would go with an OL or DE, but unless there exceptional OL don't usually start there first year but could add some depth. But as I think a little more don't need to draft someone this year unless there gonna start or have immediate effects in a rotation so go with a DL.

I know if we have another miss hap like the injury Thomas (Randy) suffered we could be in trouble. A high profile WR should be gone early, so if we're gonna dibble and dablle at the WR pos. then we could probably bring in UFA. I don't know, I wouldn't give up on TJ and we still have Patten, Thrash, Brown and don't laugh but the Motor City miracle is still out there too--Dyson, Kevin I think.

But to draft a WR that's not a high profile uh, uh I wouldn't do that. There some diamonds in the rough out there we just need to find them--and they all can run 4.4s/4.5. Yeah I know running is not all there is to the wide out pos. That's why TJ (Jacobs ) is not a bust yet he just needs some mentoring.
And I wouldn't let Jacobs go...situation doesn't present itself to let him go just yet.

I have never set in the war room, but I would imagine when you let a skill pos. go, you normally have a contingency(some return) to bring a skill pos. of equal or more so higher quality. So uh, uh, don't let Jacobs go, right now I don't see the return. I wouldn't let Jacobs go for a 2d round. But Cerato (Vinny) and Coach Gibbs and company will get it figured out. Oh Coach Joe Gibbs knows!

[chimster7]

did al saunders win a superbowl? if he didnt, then he obviously wasnt succesfull enough.....lets draft a WR and start him, he could be a bust like jacobs, but he could be a success.

Wasn't Saunders the offensive coordinatoor undere Vermeil when the 1999 Rams won the Super Bowl? I'm pretty sure he was.

[SMOSS89]

He definetly was the offensive coordinator
so the answer is YES, he HAS won a superbowl

interestingly enough al saunders was the rams offensive coordinator in that SB, and greg williams was the titans defensive coordinator

[Prosperity]

His O line and QB were better than ours

[feeshta]

Wasn't Saunders the offensive coordinatoor undere Vermeil when the 1999 Rams won the Super Bowl? I'm pretty sure he was.

Nope, that was Mike Martz.

[SMOSS89]

Thats not to say that Saunders didnt have anything to do with the offense of that Rams team, i dont know the "Title" Saunders had with the team but he did help run the offense

[Oldskool]

Saunders had Gonzalez, Priest Holmes and the best O line since the mid 90's Cowboys.

That made average WR's like Kennison and Parker look like Harrison and Wayne.

Do not give yourself any illusions that he will have the same success here as he had in KC.

Our O line is getting to the level where KC's is, but we are at an average 3 year experience difference.

Cooley is a good H-back/TE but he isnt in the top 5 of his position, Gonzalez is.

To make up the difference in what Saunders had in KC and what he has to work here, we need a #2/possession receiver alongside Moss.

[Basileus777]

KC has a #2 wr, Eddie Kennison. What they lack is a true #1 wr.

[Bonef1de]

Let's be serious, Tony vs. Chris. Chris has been in the league two years and has been really productive, but Tony Gonzalez is a larger threat and plays TE not H-back...Our TE is Robert Royal.



I don't care what they call Cooley he fills the role of a receiving TE on our offense. H-back/TE is just arguing semantics. Tony G. is a great player that has been in the league 9 years. And he has racked up some incredible stats. But Chris is a wrecking ball that always fights for the extra yard and normally takes at least three defenders to tackle him.

[skinsman4u]

I don't care what they call Cooley he fills the role of a receiving TE on our offense. H-back/TE is just arguing semantics. Tony G. is a great player that has been in the league 9 years. And he has racked up some incredible stats. But Chris is a wrecking ball that always fights for the extra yard and normally takes at least three defenders to tackle him.

I'll take Chris over Tony G. anyday and twice on Sundays...I think Chris is a lot tougher, and Chris never played basketball either! Cooley ! Cooley! Yes sir Cooley, Cooley yes sir! And oh btw Cooley could pin him, too. Cooley was only a D1 wrestling Champ at Utah State. Tony wouldn't even fit in our offense for one thing he can't block, where did all of Priest Holmes TDs come from ? Beats me?

[Goaldeje]

I'll take Chris over Tony G. anyday and twice on Sundays...I think Chris is a lot tougher, and Chris never played basketball either! Cooley ! Cooley! Yes sir Cooley, Cooley yes sir! And oh btw Cooley could pin him, too. Cooley was only a D1 wrestling Champ at Utah State. Tony wouldn't even fit in our offense for one thing he can't block, where did all of Priest Holmes TDs come from ? Beats me?


You people are nuts. I love Cooley as much as the next man, but Cooley over TG? The only arguement you could rationally make is age. But at similar points in their careers, to say you would take Chris over TG is insane, no disrespect to Cooley at all. Cooley may develop into a receiving threat like TG, but he aint there yet, sorry.

[wahoos911]

IMO.....they didnt have a #1 receiver
just a #2

and tony of course

[s0crates]

did al saunders win a superbowl? if he didnt, then he obviously wasnt succesfull enough.....It was never Al Saunder's offense that held them back. The defense is what kept the Chiefs from being successful enough.

[skinsman4u]

You people are nuts. I love Cooley as much as the next man, but Cooley over TG? The only arguement you could rationally make is age. But at similar points in their careers, to say you would take Chris over TG is insane, no disrespect to Cooley at all. Cooley may develop into a receiving threat like TG, but he aint there yet, sorry.

Thanks for the insight those are good points and here's some more:05 receiving stats for TG was 78 catches for 905 yds and just 2 TDs, no post season, oh LJ had 21 TDs okay...but CCs 05 stats were 71/ 774/ 7TDs post season 6 catches for 121 0 TDs second leading receiver...yeah, yeah, I know all about the #2 stuff but sorry facts are facts and Cooley wins....Cooley, Cooley! Yes sir Cooley ! Cooley yes Sir!

[Basileus777]

I'll take Chris over Tony G. anyday and twice on Sundays...I think Chris is a lot tougher, and Chris never played basketball either! Cooley ! Cooley! Yes sir Cooley, Cooley yes sir! And oh btw Cooley could pin him, too. Cooley was only a D1 wrestling Champ at Utah State. Tony wouldn't even fit in our offense for one thing he can't block, where did all of Priest Holmes TDs come from ? Beats me?

Don't be silly, Tony G can block. He has improved drastically in that area and is now a pretty good blocking TE. Gates is the one that can't block for his life.

[s0crates]

After what Chris Cooley did against Dallas, I'll take him over Tony Gonzalez or any TE in the league.

[ImmortalDragon]

You guys don't give Kennison enough credit
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/3519/career;_ylt=Akd8TBCrYYJOcEXLwFJ1qcj.uLYF

Had over 1000 yards each of the last 2 season while averaging over 16 yards per catch. He had 8 TDs 2 years ago and 5 TDs this past season.

[Mister Happy]

did al saunders win a superbowl? if he didnt, then he obviously wasnt succesfull enough.....lets draft a WR and start him, he could be a bust like jacobs, but he could be a success.

You're right. The #1 offense from last year is worthless. Let's try to emulate the 2002 Bucs offense or the 2000 Ravens offense.

[skinsman4u]

You guys don't give Kennison enough credit
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/3519/career;_ylt=Akd8TBCrYYJOcEXLwFJ1qcj.uLYF

Had over 1000 yards each of the last 2 season while averaging over 16 yards per catch. He had 8 TDs 2 years ago and 5 TDs this past season.

Great info and thanks, so should we get rid of Patten for Kennison or Thrash, or Jacobs? Personally, I don't think Coach Gibbs will want him or at least not give up what they would want but good info..

[jbooma]

Maybe we do not need a #2 WR. Look at him while he was with the Chiefs, he had Kennison who is good in his own right but not close to Moss, and I bet half the people on this board can't correctly name their #2 WR. The way our cap situation looks I don't think we're going after another top class WR, although I hope we draft someone in the mid to late rounds for the future. I believe David Patten will be more than enough for Saunders to work with. I guess that leaves James Thrash to play #3 if we do not acquire another receiver or if Jacobs does not progress. That being said, I really missed Thrash on special teams.

He didn't even have a #1 all he had was TG :)

[roadkill]

Umm...a few things here. First, Kennison was basically the Chiefs #2 wr, b/c Gonzalez was their top receiver with 78 receptions. Second, Cooley is good, but the difference between Gonzalez and Cooley is more than minimal. Third, drafting a wr to start b/c "he could be a bust, but could be a success" doesn't sound like a very wise stragety to me. And finally, yes Saunders is a very creative playcaller, but a big part of his success has to be credited to the fact that he had a probowl QB protected by a dominant oline.

Sauders is great, but he still needs the tools to be a success. The team will look for a solid, FA vet to line up accross from Moss.

exactly:applause:

[ImmortalDragon]

Great info and thanks, so should we get rid of Patten for Kennison or Thrash, or Jacobs? Personally, I don't think Coach Gibbs will want him or at least not give up what they would want but good info..
I'm not saying we should get Kennison, I'm saying that if Saunders can do so much with so little, he should be able to do a lot with Moss, Patten, Cooley, and Portis.

[jrockster21]

Umm...a few things here. First, Kennison was basically the Chiefs #2 wr, b/c Gonzalez was their top receiver with 78 receptions. Second, Cooley is good, but the difference between Gonzalez and Cooley is more than minimal. Third, drafting a wr to start b/c "he could be a bust, but could be a success" doesn't sound like a very wise stragety to me. And finally, yes Saunders is a very creative playcaller, but a big part of his success has to be credited to the fact that he had a probowl QB protected by a dominant oline.

Sauders is great, but he still needs the tools to be a success. The team will look for a solid, FA vet to line up accross from Moss.


Moss, Cooley and Portis are plenty of weapons. Not to mention a healthy Patten and Thrash...those weapons will be plenty for Saunders to work his magic.

And Cooley's numbers aren't as good as Gonzo's, but give him a break; its his second year in the league. But just for ****s and giggles I decided to pull up Gonzo's #s from his first two season and compare them with Cooley's:

TG:
year 1 -- 33 catches for 368 yards, 21 first downs and 2TDs
year 2 -- 59 catches for 621 yards, 33 first downs and 2TDs

CC:
year 1 -- 37 catches for 314 yards, 23 first downs and 6TDs
year 2 -- 71 catches for 774 yards, 44 first downs and 7TDs

I'd say they compare favorably. And for the record, Gonzo had his best seasons with garbage on the roster; Cooley had to share touches with Sellers, Portis and Moss, and still put up big numbers. Not to mention how absolutely clutch Cooley was...I don't know about you, but whenever it was third down and anything, I was hoping the ball would go to Chris. The man is a monster...

[jrockster21]

Let's be serious, Tony vs. Chris. Chris has been in the league two years and has been really productive, but Tony Gonzalez is a larger threat and plays TE not H-back...Our TE is Robert Royal.

I think adding Jimmy Smith would be great. He is VERY productive and a great WR in the last year or two of his career so he could be had for an affordable contract....


Get Jimmy Smith


Actually...Gonzo is the closest thing (other than Cooley) to an H-Back in the NFL. He lines up everywhere and is constantly shifting around to exploit matchups. Keep in mind that Saunders and Gibbs' systems are very similar (from the same coaching tree).

[clevelanskins28]

What people forget about a passing offense doesnt seem to be the coordinator, or the running threat, or the receivers, or the blocking, but its the quarterback that seems to be left out of the conversation. He had Trent Green, a pro bowl quarterback, we have Brunell? Campbell? Ramsey maybe? Im not trying to be a hater, i think saunders can turn this offense around and into super bowl form, but its not about the TE or the receivers or the running back we have, its about the quarterback we dont have. I think things will work out and we will be a contender next year, but we ought stop taliing about the lack of weapons KC had, compared to us, because as far as I'm concerned, weapons aint sh*t without a QB. He had a pro bowler, we dont have one here. I hope you see my point, HAIL TO THE REDSKINS!!!

[jrockster21]

What people forget about a passing offense doesnt seem to be the coordinator, or the running threat, or the receivers, or the blocking, but its the quarterback that seems to be left out of the conversation. He had Trent Green, a pro bowl quarterback, we have Brunell? Campbell? Ramsey maybe? Im not trying to be a hater, i think saunders can turn this offense around and into super bowl form, but its not about the TE or the receivers or the running back we have, its about the quarterback we dont have. I think things will work out and we will be a contender next year, but we ought stop taliing about the lack of weapons KC had, compared to us, because as far as I'm concerned, weapons aint sh*t without a QB. He had a pro bowler, we dont have one here. I hope you see my point, HAIL TO THE REDSKINS!!!


To be fair, Brunell's stats were much better than Vick's, a probowl QB. :silly: