We HAVE to be going WR with our #9 pick [Archive]

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 07:09 PM

Period.

Assuming we get rid of Coles we have a bunch of guys who fill the #2-4 WR slots.

Moss (assuming the Coles trade goes through)
Jacobs
Thrash
Patten
McCants

That recieving core is a joke.

None of those guys have proven they can handle the role of being a #1 WR in the NFL, and none of them have consistantly put up big numbers.

None of those guys effect the defensive game plan of the other team, none of them bring guys out the box.

I know you will say Moss does, but he is small and was ineffective last season. Plus it's not even sure that we will have Moss.

If we do not pick up a big play #1 WR who can stretch the field and change defensive game plans on his own, then our passing offense will be nearly as inept as it was last season. Our line will look like crap against the same constant 8 even 9 man fronts we saw this season and everyone will be back here questioning Clinton Portis, Chris Samuels, Dockery, etc...

RyansRangers

March-3rd-2005, 07:11 PM

I think you mean recieving corps not core!!

dont think its a joke either... nice try though

skins0128

March-3rd-2005, 07:13 PM

So what would you suggest, that we draft a guy? He would be our number 1?

The explanation you just gave as to why our current receivers are not number 1's, would pertain to a guy we drafted as well.

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by RyansRangers
I think you mean recieving corps not core!!

dont think its a joke either... nice try though

It's not?

Then which WR do you fear if you are a defensive coordinator?

Which WR do you gameplan for?

Which WR brings guys out the box?

Why WR forces you to roll coverage, to double down...

RWJ

March-3rd-2005, 07:13 PM

If we do not pick up a big play #1 WR who can stretch the field and change defensive game plans on his own, then our passing offense will be nearly as inept as it was last season. Our line will look like crap against the same constant 8 even 9 man fronts we saw this season and everyone will be back here questioning Clinton Portis, Chris Samuels, Dockery, etc...

I agree. One of the three: Williams, Edwards or Williamson. We are set at WR if we have one of those three Coles/Moss, Patten and Jacobs, along with Thrash.

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 07:14 PM

Originally posted by skins0128
So what would you suggest, that we draft a guy? He would be our number 1?

The explanation you just gave as to why our current receivers are not number 1's, would pertain to a guy we drafted as well.

None of our guys have the physical talent to be a #1 WR or else they already would be in this league.

Oldskool

March-3rd-2005, 07:14 PM

We still need to go WR with our 1st round pick.

We need a gamebreaker at WR as well as RB. Thats just how this league is now.

portisizzle

March-3rd-2005, 07:17 PM

Well DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Double Damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Screw it, I not buying my season tickets this year.

To hell with going to watch a crappy recieving corp.

:shot:

I GIVE THE F**K UP!!

unsonny

March-3rd-2005, 07:18 PM

please.......Gibbs uses his WRs as decoys for his TEs

you did watch the games last year?

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 07:18 PM

Originally posted by portisizzle
Well DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Double Damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Screw it, I not buying my season tickets this year.

To hell with going to watch a crappy recieving corp.

:shot:

I GIVE THE F**K UP!!

No, but you will be complaining if our offense is inept again next season, and we can't run or throw the ball due to a lack of serious consistant vertical threats.

garg8050

March-3rd-2005, 07:19 PM

Even if we get either Edwards or Williams at #9, they may not be the 'impact' WR everybody seems to be clamoring for early in the year. Very few WR's have an immediate impact coming out of college.

If the O-line can protect, Gibbs opens up the playbook and Ramsey progresses, especially reading the field, I feel our current receiving "corps" will be fine. Patten adds much needed speed. I do hope McCants can get himself out of the doghouse. He provides much needed size, particularly in the red zone.

Let's be realistic, barring a trade, there are NO GUARANTEED #1 WR's available. I certainly don't consider Burress a #1...he played 2nd fiddle to Hines Ward for a reason. Aside from Muhammed, there were no #1 WR's available this year.

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 07:19 PM

Originally posted by unsonny
please.......Gibbs uses his WRs as decoys for his TEs

you did watch the games last year?

Yea and that was real successful.

The old "4 WR" package which consists of 3 TE's and 1 WR.

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by garg8050
Even if we get either Edwards or Williams at #9, they may not be the 'impact' WR everybody seems to be clamoring for early in the year. Very few WR's have an immediate impact coming out of college.

If the O-line can protect, Gibbs opens up the playbook and Ramsey progresses, especially reading the field, I feel our current receiving "corps" will be fine. Patten adds much needed speed. I do hope McCants can get himself out of the doghouse. He provides much needed size, particularly in the red zone.

Let's be realistic, barring a trade, there are NO GUARANTEED #1 WR's available. I certainly don't consider Burress a #1...he played 2nd fiddle to Hines Ward for a reason. Aside from Muhammed, there were no #1 WR's available this year.

Yes, but they would be an improvement to this group.

portisizzle

March-3rd-2005, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by mookie0720

No, but you will be complaining if our offense is inept again next season, and we can't run or throw the ball due to a lack of serious consistant vertical threats.

EXACTLY, you are right!!!

I GIVE THE HECK UP.:twitch:

unsonny

March-3rd-2005, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by mookie0720

Yea and that was real successful.

The old "4 WR" package which consists of 3 TE's and 1 WR.

maybe he can carry just 2 WR and 7 TEs this year....may as well

bobzmuda

March-3rd-2005, 07:22 PM

You forget Antonio Brown. With his performance last year he'll definitely be on the roster and active.

Also, why is everyone determined to make Williamson the 3rd WR drafted? Clayton has a good shot to be picked up before him.

SKINtil8tin

March-3rd-2005, 07:25 PM

Originally posted by Oldskool
We still need to go WR with our 1st round pick.

We need a gamebreaker at WR as well as RB. Thats just how this league is now.

Couldn't agree more.

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by bobzmuda
You forget Antonio Brown. With his performance last year he'll definitely be on the roster and active.

Also, why is everyone determined to make Williamson the 3rd WR drafted? Clayton has a good shot to be picked up before him.

Antonio Brown?

He's our big answer at WR?

He couldn't crack the offensive lineup with the Bills.

He's also about 5'8

soljaofjesus

March-3rd-2005, 07:31 PM

So what if we don't scare any defense. What does scaring a defense have to do with anything. none of the browns WR scared our defense and they still ended up beating us. Well force them to be scared thats all. Yea well put 8 in the box and think Jacobs Patten or Moss can' t fly right by you.. .especially in man coverage with all 8 in the box.

soljaofjesus

March-3rd-2005, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by soljaofjesus
So what if we don't scare any defense. What does scaring a defense have to do with anything. none of the browns WR scared our defense and they still ended up beating us. Well force them to be scared thats all. Yea well put 8 in the box and think Jacobs Patten or Moss can' t fly right by you.. .especially in man coverage with all 8 in the box.

o yea and DMAC he will be back. Let them think that. The more surpose we give them the better :point2sky

DieselPwr44

March-3rd-2005, 07:34 PM

In 1982 we went to the Super Bowl with Charlie Brown(a 7th round pick) and Alvin Garrett(a UFA).

I think I'll put a little more faith in Gibbs than what you do.

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by DieselPwr44
In 1982 we went to the Super Bowl with Charlie Brown(a 7th round pick) and Alvin Garrett(a UFA).

I think I'll put a little more faith in Gibbs than what you do.

1982 is 1982.

This is not even close to the same game as 1982.

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by soljaofjesus
So what if we don't scare any defense. What does scaring a defense have to do with anything. none of the browns WR scared our defense and they still ended up beating us. Well force them to be scared thats all. Yea well put 8 in the box and think Jacobs Patten or Moss can' t fly right by you.. .especially in man coverage with all 8 in the box.

So you're predicting tons of big plays from the recieving combo of Jacobs, Patten, and Moss?

Blondie

March-3rd-2005, 08:21 PM

All the negative thinking is getting to me.

http://www.souzek.com/dinka/archives/Andreas%20pouting.jpg

Blondie

Chris Worthy

March-3rd-2005, 08:24 PM

When I last looked at the calendar, It said March 3, 2005. I think Gibbs still got time to get the WR situation the way that he wants it to be before the season starts.

fpickering

March-3rd-2005, 08:25 PM

None of those guys effect the defensive game plan of the other team, none of them bring guys out the box.

I know you will say Moss does, but he is small and was ineffective last season. Plus it's not even sure that we will have Moss.
[/B]

I don't agree with you. I think a WR corps of Coles/Moss, Patton, Jacobs, and Thrash is just fine. Coles consistently puts up numbers. Patton has consistent hands and Jacobs is coming into his own.
Also, Jacobs, Patton and Coles/Moss can all stretch the field.

Not only that but our improved O line (Jansen back, Raubach, and G to push/replace Dockery) will
dramatically increase our chances of throwing deep and teams will be forced to respect that.

Your argument has been disproven by the Pats.

Dr Kenneth Noisewater

March-3rd-2005, 08:38 PM

Originally posted by mookie0720

So you're predicting tons of big plays from the recieving combo of Jacobs, Patten, and Moss?

Interesting fact about the duo of Moss and Patten:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=rec&sort=avg&league=afc&season=2&year=2004

It has 2 of the top 4 receivers in yards per catch.

P.S. I agree we need to go WR at #9.

DieselPwr44

March-3rd-2005, 08:41 PM

Mookie, who was the Pats #1 receiver??? I mean you look at their whole corp and do you think any of them gave opposing Def. Co. nightmares???

I don't think we're done with shoring up our WR corp but if Gibbs goes into the season with what we have now, I don't think we'll be as bad as what you think.
Heck, our passing game has only one way to go...up. Cause it sure as heck can't get any lower. :2cents:

RDSKNfaithfull

March-3rd-2005, 08:42 PM

The patriots passing game sure did struggle :rolleyes:

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 08:57 PM

All of you under estimate Branch and Givens as well as the TE's that the Patriots had.

They also had Tom Brady, Patrick Ramsey is a far cry from Tom Brady.

DieselPwr44

March-3rd-2005, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by mookie0720
All of you under estimate Branch and Givens as well as the TE's that the Patriots had.

They also had Tom Brady, Patrick Ramsey is a far cry from Tom Brady.

What TE's?? Heck they had to use their linebackers as TE's in the redzone. What does that tell you???

You're right, Ramsey is no where near Brady. But this franchise hasn't had a franchise QB since Sonny Jurgensen was under center and never had one in Gibbs first go round.

I think what it boils down to is that you seriously under estimate Joe Gibbs and his coaching ability. :2cents:

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by fpickering

I don't agree with you. I think a WR corps of Coles/Moss, Patton, Jacobs, and Thrash is just fine. Coles consistently puts up numbers. Patton has consistent hands and Jacobs is coming into his own.
Also, Jacobs, Patton and Coles/Moss can all stretch the field.

Not only that but our improved O line (Jansen back, Raubach, and G to push/replace Dockery) will
dramatically increase our chances of throwing deep and teams will be forced to respect that.

Your argument has been disproven by the Pats.

Nobody fears Coles anymore. He's no longer a deep threat.

Patten has good hands? So does Thrash, that doesn't make him a good WR? Thrash is practically useless at WR at this point.

How is Jacobs coming along? He hasn't proven anything, if he was coming along he would've gotten more run in our pathetic offense last season.

You're making all these predictions under the assumption that everything on our team will automatically be better next year.

The Patriots have one of the best QB's of all time and one of the best coaching staffs. You can't seriously think that Gibbs and staff are remotely near Bellichek, Weiss, and Crennell at this point.

We are not the Patriots, thus we can't have a productive offense without a productive WR.

VaSkinsNut

March-3rd-2005, 09:03 PM

I don't agree with you. I think a WR corps of Coles/Moss, Patton, Jacobs, and Thrash is just fine. Coles consistently puts up numbers. Patton has consistent hands and Jacobs is coming into his own.
Also, Jacobs, Patton and Coles/Moss can all stretch the field.

Not only that but our improved O line (Jansen back, Raubach, and G to push/replace Dockery) will
dramatically increase our chances of throwing deep and teams will be forced to respect that.

Your argument has been disproven by the Pats.

I agree 100% I actually like this WR corps much better than our one from last year.

If we do draft a WR then that means its the end of DMac as a redskin. We'll only dress 4 and keep 5 on the roster.

Our WR corps is really starting to look simiar to the Patriots btw. All small. fast, and can stretch the field with the exception of McCants (who just happens to still be on the roster).

mookie0720

March-3rd-2005, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by VaSkinsNut

I agree 100% I actually like this WR corps much better than our one from last year.

If we do draft a WR then that means its the end of DMac as a redskin. We'll only dress 4 and keep 5 on the roster.

Our WR corps is really starting to look simiar to the Patriots btw. All small. fast, and can stretch the field with the exception of McCants (who just happens to still be on the roster).

Yea, only we don't have nearly the QB the Patriots have, nor anything close to the type of passing system they have.

The Patriots threw the ball wide open last year. Look at how often Brady was in the shotgun and had 4-5 WR's out there.

When you run offense like that having 4 DECENT WR's you get good matchups. For instance a guy with speed on a LB, or on a 4th or 5th CB.

You seriously think with our at MAX 3 WR sets that these current guys can get open against the top CB's in the NFL?

Especially when arguably our BIGGEST rival now in terms of supremacy in the NFC East has the best secondary in football.

VaSkinsNut

March-3rd-2005, 09:12 PM

Brady is a game manager...and a fine one but he's not a "i'll win games for you" qb like Marino was and Manning is. But managing games is what Gibbs wants out of his Qb's. Same as NE.

Our schemes may be different but formulas tend to work regardless. Lets also not forget we have Musgrave now giving offensive input.

We may see some things mixed in that we're not used to seeing...anyway back to managing games.

Thoughout the games that Ramsey started that is what Gibbs was having Ramsey do...manage games. Not force the ball around like Spurrier had him do in his Chuck 'N Duck offense.

Look what we've done so far...improved our OLine by retaining Samules and signing Rabach, added speed to our WR position with the addition of Patten.

We won't be running shotgun spread formations like the Pats do but I think you'll be surprised when the preseason starts.

I like where things are going so far.

Craig

March-3rd-2005, 09:20 PM

The receiving corp does suck. But you can get a decent receiver later in the draft. I am tired of wasting 1st round picks on receivers...

Hauss

March-3rd-2005, 09:30 PM

Who moved people out of the box last year? You are putting a lot of hope into a #1 pick as a WR coming in here and being the #1 receiver. Just doesn't happen. Also, what happens if he holds out? What's his impact then? If we draft Mike Willams, it will be over 1 1/2 years since he has any game contact.

GOSKN5

March-3rd-2005, 09:43 PM

I actually think that these receivers could be a good package....everyone wanted us to go out and get a big name... in the draft or the free agency....we may or may not get one in the draft.... but i still think that this group will surprise some people..... as said before our offensive line has been improved which will allow Portis to have a huge year... also this will get Ramsey some time in the pocket.... I know we still do not have a legitmate #1 receiver but we do have some guys that I think are experienced and willing to work hard and they will get first downs.... Gibbs will get the best out of what we have...and I personally think we will are moving in the right direction....

VAsBeachBoy

March-3rd-2005, 09:46 PM

You all suck... Tis is not a redskins FAN site this is a redskins B@$#! forum... (SORRY BUBBA, but this is ridiculous) Yall are never satisfied. Gibbs runs an offense where he says this is what were gonna do, we don't care if you know that, b/c we are better, we execute, and we succeed. You have only given one year to amastermind of the game. You act like he just showed up at redskins park and got a job. This man knows what he is doing. Stop saying we are an abismal team, watch, observe, and be entertained let them do the work...

GSF

March-3rd-2005, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by mookie0720
Period.

Assuming we get rid of Coles we have a bunch of guys who fill the #2-4 WR slots.

Moss (assuming the Coles trade goes through)
Jacobs
Thrash
Patten
McCants

That recieving core is a joke.

None of those guys have proven they can handle the role of being a #1 WR in the NFL, and none of them have consistantly put up big numbers.

None of those guys effect the defensive game plan of the other team, none of them bring guys out the box.

I know you will say Moss does, but he is small and was ineffective last season. Plus it's not even sure that we will have Moss.

If we do not pick up a big play #1 WR who can stretch the field and change defensive game plans on his own, then our passing offense will be nearly as inept as it was last season. Our line will look like crap against the same constant 8 even 9 man fronts we saw this season and everyone will be back here questioning Clinton Portis, Chris Samuels, Dockery, etc... :cry:

TheDane

March-3rd-2005, 10:09 PM

:laugh:

Did any of you actually watch the Patriots last year? Their offense changed based on the opponents they played. It's called gameplanning, and they are the masters at it.

I seem to recall Gibbs being a master of it his first go-around. I'm sure he'll bring it back.

This #1 stuff is nonsense. Tell me, who was the Patriots fear-inspiring #1 in 2001, 2003, and 2004? Deion Branch? Wrong. He had big Super Bowls in '03 and '04, but was not the undisputed #1 in EITHER year. David Givens? Wrong. He started out '03 as the NUMBER THREE receiver. Troy Brown? Yes, that is correct, in 2001. However he was anything but a fearsome, gameplan changing threat.

What the Pats receivers all have in common is they run good routes, they've got good - but not A+ - talent, they are smart, and they EXCECUTE and CONCENTRATE.

Even Tom Brady. The guy is a winner, no doubt. But when you look at his physical tools, it's anything but awe inspiring. He's a smart football player.

That's what you need. Smart football players who CAN EXECUTE. Smart players who run the system and run good routes. That is what Brady is excellent at. That's what Brown, Patten, Branch, and Givens are good at. On the Redskins, Hot Rod wasn't that guy. Apparently, neither was McCants. And as much as it kills me to say, maybe Laveranues isn't that guy either.

Patten, Moss, and Jacobs all have top talent. Thrash hustles his ASS off. Those are four guys that I'm happy to have on my team. Could we use a big time WR to fill a spot? Yes. Do we need one? I don't think so.

edit: err, not that Moss is on our team, but you know what I mean. Jumping the gun, so to speak. Whoops.