Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smoot was all over Burress...I mean who can check Burress like Smoot did last night? He was shut out.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smoot played an awesome game last night. Shut down corner last night, we needed that. Great job skins.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;394012][B]Liability [/B]as a #1 corner

[B]Neither/Push[/B] as a #2 - i mean to say he is strictly average, nothing more nothing less as a #2

[B]Asset[/B] as a #3/Nickel and Dime Db

The only caveat to all of that is when he decides to have a breakout game every now and then. This is usually instigated by trash talking/friendlly banter with a specific wideout and he plays like he has a chip on his shoulders. Then he looks like a legit #1 guy. He also does possess good open field tackling skills to help out in the run game (a vital skill in a GW system). My final thought on Fred Smoot is that he is neither the problem nor the solution when it comes to our secondary or our defense as a whole. He is the essential filler meat to our squad and is a great locker room presence, so i'd like to see him stay a redskin unless we get someone who is a [I]significant[/I] upgrade.[/quote]

Nicely put. I agree with #1 and #3. I'm on the fence with #2, and I sway with the winds.

Winds which apparently nobody else saw in their version of last night's game.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Of course the wind was a factor but Smoot still did a nice job.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=onlydarksets;393926]Is Smoot helping or hurting us in the secondary?

It seems he is constantly getting burned either by speed or by a move. He had a nice deflection in the end zone yesterday, but he was playing catchup on the play. When the ball is in the air, he is usually trying to find his man, not the ball.

That said, has he cost us that much? How many times has he given up a TD, or the big play that leads to a score? (I don't know the answer to this - just asking). He also is probably the best option (especially with Rogers injured).

I like Smoot - I think that, since his return, he has been a positive influence on the Skins. However, I'm just not sure about his skills out there.

So, what do you think? Where are the polls?[/quote]Ok, he was playing catch up and deflected the ball. Isn't that what coeners do? Corners have to react to a play so they are always kind of playing catch up to make plays.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

I'm always here, just don't post much...

Couldn't help myself here, though. I did read onlydarksets entire post (again) and it doesn't get any better with re-reading. The post is ridiculous and, in light of Smoot's performance last night, your timing is awful. Both Smoot and Springs did a great job under the circumstances, and to come up with this post the morning after shows serious lack of judgment, to say the least.

Dude, don't post for a little while, you've embarrassed yourself enough.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

The only knock on Smoot has been his tackling and frequent injuries. This season he's been playing hard and at a high level ... he's one of the emotional leaders on that D from what I can see

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=SCRedskinsFan;394035]I'm always here, just don't post much...

Couldn't help myself here, though. I did read onlydarksets entire post (again) and it doesn't get any better with re-reading. The post is ridiculous and, in light of Smoot's performance last night, your timing is awful. Both Smoot and Springs did a great job under the circumstances, and to come up with this post the morning after shows serious lack of judgment, to say the least.

Dude, don't post for a little while, you've embarrassed yourself enough.[/quote]


Timing - yes, got it:
[URL]http://www.redskinswarpath.com/locker-room/21445-fred-smoot-asset-liability-or-neither.html#post393955[/URL]

Please continue lurking.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smoot is our number 1 corner, he covered Plax most of the night and Plax had 3 rec for 35 yards. I'll take that from Smoot every time. It seems like he has elevated his game ever since Taylor passed!!

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;394043]Timing - yes, got it:
[URL]http://www.redskinswarpath.com/locker-room/21445-fred-smoot-asset-liability-or-neither.html#post393955[/URL]

Please continue lurking.[/QUOTE]

Will do. Nice response.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

I'd say that, since the coaching staff saw fit to stick him on Burress rather than Toomer, they think he's a tremendous asset.

He's put himself in harm's way too many times - when he tackled Jacobs last night by driving his shoulder into him I nearly flipped out - but he's playing inspired ball these past few weeks.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;393926]Is Smoot helping or hurting us in the secondary?

It seems he is constantly getting burned either by speed or by a move. He had a nice deflection in the end zone yesterday, but he was playing catchup on the play. When the ball is in the air, he is usually trying to find his man, not the ball.

That said, has he cost us that much? How many times has he given up a TD, or the big play that leads to a score? (I don't know the answer to this - just asking). He also is probably the best option (especially with Rogers injured).

I like Smoot - I think that, since his return, he has been a positive influence on the Skins. However, I'm just not sure about his skills out there.

So, what do you think? Where are the polls?[/QUOTE]

Well...I know someone who's not getting any Smack Energy Bars for Christmas this year.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

He was an asset, becoming a liability.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smoot has far exceeded my expectations. I had a sneaking suspicion that he was a little broken down coming here, but he makes up for whatever he lacks in speed and health with heart and intensity. You know he was running his mouth the whole game at Burress. I don't know how we would have played defense this year without him. Football is [I]fun[/I] for him which is a quality this team needs. So, he's an absolute asset.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

if your gonna bitch about anything last night, it should be how the front 7 did against the run..

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;393942]I never said he didn't play well in last night's game. Please read the whole post before starting with the ad hominem attacks. I'm putting the question out there now that we've had Smoot back for (almost) an entire season.[/QUOTE]

Remember Smoot missed several key games this year including the game with the Giants. Smoot has done a superb job with feeling in for Carlos Rodgers. Burress had his way with Rodgers in the first game. Smoot has been my favorite corner outside of Darrell Green and Vernon Dean. The man plays with a passion. Remember the loss to the Bills and you will see the heart of a wounded lion who has played valiantly for his fallen comrade.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;393928]I thought he played great last night.

I don't know why anyone would even ask if he's a liability to tell you the truth.[/quote]

He may not be Champ Bailey, but he's way better than Walt Harris (while in WAS), Kenny Wright, Mike Rumph and so on...

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=Campbell17;394190]He was an asset, becoming a liability.[/quote]

How so??

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;393928]I thought he played great last night.

I don't know why anyone would even ask if he's a liability to tell you the truth.[/quote]
Beats me .... I think he has played as good or better than anyone on the team ...lately ..I mean the last 3 games......:rolleyes:

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smooty is OK. I predict he will be better next season. Not sure what happened at Minnesota that really caused him to go down a notch, but I predict he will be back to his old self next season.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

He's doing a great job. It took a little while for him to regain his stride, but I think he's doing great now. (He has to remember he's not Mike Sellers.) I think Springs has also been playing with a lot of passion, especially with what's been going on in his life.

But Smoot is the one who has revived his career coming here. Of course the difference between Minnesota and Washington is night and day:
On this board we bring the "love boat" to Smoot, not like in Minn.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=Campbell17;394190]He was an asset, becoming a liability.[/QUOTE]

Care to elaborate?

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

are you cereal?

asset in washington, liability in minnesota. he's played well for us.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

The man has been playing lights out since Sean's passing. If Fred Smoot keeps playing like he has I may have to rename him Super Smoot.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smoot has been playing the best football I have ever seen him play these past few weeks. He is really wrapping and making solid tackles on the short passes near the line. That said he is not a pro-bowler but has been a definite asset to the team. And that cruise party on the potomac last weekend was a blast too! Now if this was a torrence thread its another story

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Total asset. Anyone who thinks otherwise is foolish. Would you prefer Mike Rumph?

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

smoot is an asset and a great value. we havent had a third string corner that could play for shit in years, even though walt harris leaves us and turns into deion sanders...

Can't imagine anyone would question anything if he'd been lining up against sinorice or just playing zone last night...


I understand asking, though... I think its okay to find out if someone else sees performance evaluation through the same set of eyes. I made a comment about chris samuels and have been receiving magazine-letter-cut-out death threat letters since....

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smoot has become a core redskin....he was the only one who played a complete game in the Bills debacle. He is the best at adjusting to the ball once it's in the air. If you wanna watch bad CB's watch another team.....the redskins corners have been lights out since Taylor's death. The only thing is that Smoot plays too hard and tries to make big tackles that he cannot make with his small frame, so he keeps getting stingers and missing series. He's a better cover corner than rogers

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=canthetuna;394560]I understand asking, though... I think its okay to find out if someone else sees performance evaluation through the same set of eyes. I made a comment about chris samuels and have been receiving magazine-letter-cut-out death threat letters since....[/QUOTE]

I'm glad to see you've been receiving my letters.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=canthetuna;394560]I understand asking, though... I think its okay to find out if someone else sees performance evaluation through the same set of eyes. I made a comment about chris samuels and have been receiving magazine-letter-cut-out death threat letters since....[/quote]

Word.

(stupid software won't just let me type "word")

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=SouperMeister;394512]Total asset. Anyone who thinks otherwise is foolish. Would you prefer Mike Rumph?[/quote]

I would prefer reasoned discussion.

I disagree that it's a closed book. I think Smoot has been getting better through the season. I also think he's a 7th year player in a system he should be familiar with. I think that no corner should receive 100% credit for shutting down any receiver in that game against the Giants, given the winds. Anyone who watched the game has to acknowledge that a [U]lot[/U] of those throws hung in the air or went off target. Do do otherwise is intellectually dishonest. I would bring up the fact that Burress is too injured to practice, except that he's like Iverson and it doesn't really seem to impact his ability to make big plays.

Not that anyone has probably read this far in this post, but I like Smoot as a Redskin and in the #3/nickle spot. I'm on the fence about him in the #2, but I'm being converted (by his play - not by any of you knuckleheads). I'd be scared silly if he was our #1. Regardless, I realize that he is our best option right now, and if Springs goes down, Smoot would be our best option at #1.

If anyone has anything [U]new[/U] to add, I'd love to hear it.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=onlydarksets;394583]I would prefer reasoned discussion.

I disagree that it's a closed book. I think Smoot has been getting better through the season. I also think he's a 7th year player in a system he should be familiar with. I think that no corner should receive 100% credit for shutting down any receiver in that game against the Giants, given the winds. Anyone who watched the game has to acknowledge that a [U]lot[/U] of those throws hung in the air or went off target. Do do otherwise is intellectually dishonest. I would bring up the fact that Burress is too injured to practice, except that he's like Iverson and it doesn't really seem to impact his ability to make big plays.

Not that anyone has probably read this far in this post, but I like Smoot as a Redskin and in the #3/nickle spot. I'm on the fence about him in the #2, but I'm being converted (by his play - not by any of you knuckleheads). I'd be scared silly if he was our #1. Regardless, I realize that he is our best option right now, and if Springs goes down, Smoot would be our best option at #1.

If anyone has anything [U]new[/U] to add, I'd love to hear it.[/quote]

I can respect that.

now about calling me a knucklehead...

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;394583]I would prefer reasoned discussion.

I disagree that it's a closed book. I think Smoot has been getting better through the season. I also think he's a 7th year player in a system he should be familiar with. I think that no corner should receive 100% credit for shutting down any receiver in that game against the Giants, given the winds. Anyone who watched the game has to acknowledge that a [U]lot[/U] of those throws hung in the air or went off target. Do do otherwise is intellectually dishonest. I would bring up the fact that Burress is too injured to practice, except that he's like Iverson and it doesn't really seem to impact his ability to make big plays.

Not that anyone has probably read this far in this post, but I like Smoot as a Redskin and in the #3/nickle spot. I'm on the fence about him in the #2, but I'm being converted (by his play - not by any of you knuckleheads). I'd be scared silly if he was our #1. Regardless, I realize that he is our best option right now, and if Springs goes down, Smoot would be our best option at #1.

If anyone has anything [U]new[/U] to add, I'd love to hear it.[/QUOTE]

I've read the whole post. Going back to the OP, the question was asked, "Is Fred Smoot and asset or a liability in the secondary" and NOT specifically a certain player position in the secondary. With that said, the answer is that Smoot is an asset, and it appears by this post that you also now agree.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[quote=skinsguy;394587]I've read the whole post. Going back to the OP, the question was asked, "Is Fred Smoot and asset or a liability in the secondary" and NOT specifically a certain player position in the secondary. With that said, the answer is that Smoot is an asset, and it appears by this post that you also now agree.[/quote]

You are absolutely right. I thought it was implied in my original post (but obviously it wasn't) that I was talking about his current role as the #2. That is the context in which most people discussed this. I am still on the fence about that question.

When expanded to talk about being a #1 or a #3, I feel very solid in my opinion of those.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;394590]You are absolutely right. I thought it was implied in my original post (but obviously it wasn't) that I was talking about his current role as the #2. That is the context in which most people discussed this. I am still on the fence about that question.

When expanded to talk about being a #1 or a #3, I feel very solid in my opinion of those.[/QUOTE]

Solid #3? definitely. Solid #2? In my opinion, definitely. Solid #1? Probably not on a consistent basis, but Smoot definitely has what it takes to step into the role if need be on a short term basis.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

[QUOTE=DGreene28;394042]The only knock on Smoot has been his tackling and frequent injuries. This season he's been playing hard and at a high level ... he's one of the emotional leaders on that D from what I can see[/QUOTE]

I think his tackling and run support has been a definate plus. He puts his nose up in there. He is one of the real tough guys on the team

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

I think Smoot has been great for us. He is a MAN coverage corner. the times you seem him behind the receiver is when they are playing the zone coverage, when he is suppose to have help over top. Smoot is a hard nosed, gritty corner who has no problem coming up and hitting the RB. He plays hurt, he is a leader in the locker room. NO WAY he is a liability. I wish he had never gone to Minnesota, I thought it was a huge mistake letting him sign there, but a huge addition when bringing him back.

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

huge addition no question, the way he has been since the loss of ST he has left it on the field! played like every game is his last!

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

This sounds more like an offseason thread...

Smoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooot is for real. He might not be the best but he'll play as hard as he can. I'd trust Smoot over Rogers. Think we could get Champ back? He's had a rough season in Denver... I think you'll see FA CB in the offseason. I think we'll look at FS Kennedy, but pass on him. Don't count out the Redskins trying to get Dorsey. Sorry to digress... Smoot was a great signing. He either loves playing in DC or he's full of SMACK bars!

Re: Fred Smoot - asset, liability, or neither?
 

Smoot is a decent cover corner. and probably one of the best tacklers on the team. im not sure what the people are watching that say he cant tackle. he might get burned every now and again. but rarely misses any tackles