Drafting Mike Williams
 

[B]Drafting Mike Williams[/B]
I'd like to have Mike Williams, but does anyone realize the kind of money we'd have to pay him? Andre Johnson signed a six-year contract worth almost $39 million, including a $13.5 million signing bonus. That was two years ago. Larry Fitzgerald netted over $40 million for a six year deal after last year's draft.

So we'd likely have to sign Williams to a deal that cost $7 million per year. Even when you consider that all deals are backloaded, Williams would carry a cap figure of close to $4 million his rookie season and he'd count about $6.5 million by the third year of his deal.

[B]Forecast - Cap Storm Ahead[/B]
Given that Gibbs and Cerrato have both conceded that our cap woes will likely come to a head following next season, does anyone really think its a good idea to take sign a pick to a monstrous deal?

I know many people on this site think the salary cap doesn't really exist, that we can somehow evade it, that we need to sign an impact player at any cost, and we've gotten away with dangerous salary cap moves in the past. In response, I note: 1) there is a salary cap, 2) it is real, 3) you can't evade it (see Baltimore Ravens of 2001 and the 49ers of 2004), 4) and we haven't gotten away from our free-spending past.

We've taken huge hits because we signed guys like Bruce Smith, Dan Wilkinson, Jeremiah Trotter, and Mark Brunell who consistently bring cheers from the fans in the offseasons (that is until they are cut in the offseason), but their barks are much bigger than their bites.

[U]This year we had over $10 million of dead space on the cap. Next year those cap hits will likely cost us around $9 million of cap room. Just so you know, that's as much as it will cost us to keep Jon Jansen, Laveranues Coles, and Clinton Portis on our roster in 2005. [/U]

[B]Hasty Decisions[/B]
If we let people who want to cut Barrow, McCants, Morton, Samuels, Gardner and Brunell have their way, we'll be approaching $20 million of dead space. Umm, has anyone thought any of that through?

People want to cut guys at the drop of a hat and sign anyone who appeared on [I]Jacked Up[/I] or on [I]I, Max[/I]. I remember a lot of people calling for Spurrier to cut Antonio Pierce last season after he was flagged for faking the snap count in a Dallas game. That would've worked out well. A lot of people, if given the chance to play GM of the Chargers, would've cut Drew Brees last season. That would've been a great move. :biggthump

[B]Team Needs & The Draft[/B]
It's time to be patient, not call for the 'Skins front office to act like it's heading into an offseason on Madden 2005, and to make smart moves, not sexy, offseason-winning ones.

Trading down is the smartest thing to do. I know people love those highlight reels that Roy Williams produced in Detroit and want a guy like that in Mike Williams, but this ain't fantasy football. There is a salary cap, we have enough talent at our skill positions on offense, and we have serious holes on our lines. Trading down and drafting a center and a defensive lineman might not be sexy, but its the smart thing to do.

Trading down is the only way to go this season, thank's to contract's like Brunell, Portis, and Arrington, you will alway's have contracts that work and come that don't but those 3 contract's have a stranglehold on us, big mistakes, and hold on to your hat's because I think Arrington's is the worse of them all!

I trust that Snyder will run the cap. How many years in a row have we been in "cap trouble" Ramseyfan? I hear it every offseason by the press. I agree our spending is getting a bit too vicious, but i think we'll have a lot of people renegotiate their deals, especially on the defensive side of the ball.

Mike WIlliams may not be as expensive as you think. The club could certainly use the fact that he's been inactive from football for a year and drop the price a bit with that. Not to mention he had a horrible 40 time at the combine (I don't put much faith in 40 times, but it may be arguable.)

Gibbs will likely be ending his contract come the projected-hell for salary cap, but we need to figure out who we want to keep around now, and who we don't. Mold the team to them.

some of this stuff isnt making sense.

since we dont keep out top pick because of the money involved, does that mean we dont sign smoot either? you cant have it both ways. you can say lets not get involved in a monsterous deal and then sign smoot to top 10 CB money.

what about pierce(RFA)? do we offer a first round pick money and let another team take him for the pick in the 2006 draft or do we match the monsterous offer?

like it or not, we are either going to have to start dumping good players are have to pay large salaries to keep players and picks.

here is what i think the redskins need to do.
brunell: do anything to let the guy go, oven if they ahve to take a major cap hit. i hate looking at him on the sidelines.

gardner: let him finish out his final year of his contract, typically players like this have tremendous years and make huge money and go to another team. so its a bad idea to cut someone in the final year of the contract.

barrow/pierce: you can only keep one. there is no room in an nfl roster for a high price reserve except at QB. pierce is a Restricted free agent. we offer him the first round tender, let another team sign him to an offer sheet, we then either match or take a draft pick in 2006. if pierce is gone, we have to keep barrow. Keep in mind barrow has been hurt, so its a bad move to let pierce go if barrow cant play anymore, but its a great move if barrow plays like he did with the giants.

morton: if we had him last week, we wouldnt have lost :(.
its hard to play a special teamer a few million. if we are going to keep him, he has to be our 3rd down back.

Jansen: if he passes the physical, sign him.

McCants: Use him. he has good hands, good size and decent speed. use him in the slot, have him catch those short patterns over the middle. use him for jump balls(yes joe, please add the jumpball throws into the playbook). I'm upset that gibbs let gardner get away with all those dropped balls, mccants should have replaced him for atleast a half a game.

samuels: i cant tell you how much i hate the guy. but there isnt much we can do with the guy. he makes too much money to cut and i doubt that he would restructure. god i hate the guy.

the O LINE: rebuild that son of a bitch. get some bad mother fuckers with a mean streak so atleast we can get a push on 3rd and short. raymer is a backup, dockery is a back up, cant blame brown because he was at home a week before the season started. get some guys with heart and testicles not some bitch like samuels who doesnt fight when he plays against guys like KGB(i cant spell his name) or Alex brown.

we dont need mike williams if joe gibbs is going to keep his receivers running comeback routes(thats like using a bentley to deliver mail).

trade down and get two good picks for linemen, D or O line. in the 3rd round, draft a basketball player to play tightend.

pick up former junkie/prisoner bam morris for minimum salary. he is a big 3rd down back.


but most importanly, dont restructure S.taylors contract when he holds out. if you do, he will hold out every year.

[QUOTE=Daseal]I trust that Snyder will run the cap. How many years in a row have we been in "cap trouble" Ramseyfan? I hear it every offseason by the press. I agree our spending is getting a bit too vicious, but i think we'll have a lot of people renegotiate their deals, especially on the defensive side of the ball.

Mike WIlliams may not be as expensive as you think. The club could certainly use the fact that he's been inactive from football for a year and drop the price a bit with that. Not to mention he had a horrible 40 time at the combine (I don't put much faith in 40 times, but it may be arguable.)

Gibbs will likely be ending his contract come the projected-hell for salary cap, but we need to figure out who we want to keep around now, and who we don't. Mold the team to them.[/QUOTE]

First, $10 million in dead money isn't something to scoff at.

Second, even Gibbs and Cerrato have conceded that there will be a need for some rebuilding/restructuring of the roster after next season.

Third, you can't negotiate the salaries of top 10 picks - they're pretty much set at x percent above the salary for the last year's pick.

[QUOTE=jamf]some of this stuff isnt making sense.

since we dont keep out top pick because of the money involved, does that mean we dont sign smoot either? you cant have it both ways. you can say lets not get involved in a monsterous deal and then sign smoot to top 10 CB money.

what about pierce(RFA)? do we offer a first round pick money and let another team take him for the pick in the 2006 draft or do we match the monsterous offer?

like it or not, we are either going to have to start dumping good players are have to pay large salaries to keep players and picks.

here is what i think the redskins need to do.
brunell: do anything to let the guy go, oven if they ahve to take a major cap hit. i hate looking at him on the sidelines.

gardner: let him finish out his final year of his contract, typically players like this have tremendous years and make huge money and go to another team. so its a bad idea to cut someone in the final year of the contract.

barrow/pierce: you can only keep one. there is no room in an nfl roster for a high price reserve except at QB. pierce is a Restricted free agent. we offer him the first round tender, let another team sign him to an offer sheet, we then either match or take a draft pick in 2006. if pierce is gone, we have to keep barrow. Keep in mind barrow has been hurt, so its a bad move to let pierce go if barrow cant play anymore, but its a great move if barrow plays like he did with the giants.

morton: if we had him last week, we wouldnt have lost :(.
its hard to play a special teamer a few million. if we are going to keep him, he has to be our 3rd down back.

Jansen: if he passes the physical, sign him.

McCants: Use him. he has good hands, good size and decent speed. use him in the slot, have him catch those short patterns over the middle. use him for jump balls(yes joe, please add the jumpball throws into the playbook). I'm upset that gibbs let gardner get away with all those dropped balls, mccants should have replaced him for atleast a half a game.

samuels: i cant tell you how much i hate the guy. but there isnt much we can do with the guy. he makes too much money to cut and i doubt that he would restructure. god i hate the guy.

the O LINE: rebuild that son of a bitch. get some bad mother fuckers with a mean streak so atleast we can get a push on 3rd and short. raymer is a backup, dockery is a back up, cant blame brown because he was at home a week before the season started. get some guys with heart and testicles not some bitch like samuels who doesnt fight when he plays against guys like KGB(i cant spell his name) or Alex brown.

we dont need mike williams if joe gibbs is going to keep his receivers running comeback routes(thats like using a bentley to deliver mail).

trade down and get two good picks for linemen, D or O line. in the 3rd round, draft a basketball player to play tightend.

pick up former junkie/prisoner bam morris for minimum salary. he is a big 3rd down back.


but most importanly, dont restructure S.taylors contract when he holds out. if you do, he will hold out every year.[/QUOTE]

First, Smoot is not going to get $14 million SB on a $40+ million deal.

Second, Barrow doesn't have a high figure (about $2 million) so your contention that we can't have a highly paid reserve MLB is wrong.

Third, we don't need to resign Jansen so I'm not sure how that's even an issue.

Fourth, if we cut Barrow and Brunell, we're going to have about $15 million in dead cap space next season. Unlike Madden, you don't get to wipe out the dead cap space with the click of a button.

We don't need a Mike Willams. Coles will do as #1. and he is only 26. If you want to draft a #2, I can understand.

I like the point someone said about Gardner being in the final year of his contract. I dont know what the cap number is on him for 2005, but if its not big, I do think we should hang onto him for the very reason that guys tend to have huge years in the final year of their contract. Its pure speculation, and it cant be a sure thing, but It's somthing to think about.

See, this is my problem. The main guys in contention: Barrow, Gardner, Brunell and McCants almost certainly have their roster spots dictated by their cap effect.

Can't cut Brunnell or McCants b/c of the cap hit (Brunnell's would be huge, McCants just big).

Barrow costs as much to keep as to cut; He is undoubtedly better than any back-up we could sign for Pierce, so why cut and pay for (by way of cap hit) Barrow and the new back-up.

Gardner - last year of his contract, Westbrookian in his contribution. A wash for the money paid him.

The players we have are basically the players we are stuck with. Do what it takes to resign Smoot, Pierce. Extend/Restructure Samuels. Hope Brunell restructures (but with the signing bonus given him - not sure any restructuring will help). Trade down and draft well. Of course, the early word on the draft is that there really aren't any players worth the money given the top 5 slots and that the best place to be in this draft is in the 12-20 slots, so finding someone who will want a top ten pick is going to be difficult.

Don't know. Feeling very pessimistic about next year. Hope I am wrong.

Let's not forget the cap will be going up quite a bit with the new TV money.

i think we should cut brunell take the hit, if pierce wants to become an unrestricted fa let him go. I love pierce to death but we can't used up the money on the mlb position. we desperately need to make our o-line the best in the league to let cp take us to the promiseland along with protecting ramsey. In the draft we need a pass rusher on the line with griffin and our blitz packages. Mr. James would be a nice fit out of wisconsin (he even looks like a redskin) in the second round look at the og from miami, michigan(baas i think). i love mike williams but we are a smash mouth team who would rather run than throw so i think that kind of money should not be wasted on a wr but rather a de or the awful o-line. Also, samuels isn't the bad he has made the pro bowl for like two years in a row.
CP is the best back in the game. Sean T is the best safety in the game(E.Reed)

I agree. Trade down, get a center and a d-lineman. Maybe another TE to compliment Cooley. Draft or steal a big third down back. Keep our receivers, if they are allowed to open up, they have plenty of talent.

There is not much of a need to make big changes to either side of the ball. If we can generate 1 more TD a game, we win most of our games. 21 points a game (minimum) needs to be an offesive goal. If you look back at our games this year, a big nasty center and a big nasty back that can power through for a yard would have made the difference between field goals and touchdowns way to many times.

To really assess what we need, we need to evaluate exactly what stopped our drives and what kept points off the board in our current system. Don't forget, even though we don't open it up a lot, our system keeps our defense off the field by using methodical long drives that eat up and control the clock. Thats part of why the defense is ranked where they are.

Keep the system, tweek it to exploit the defensive pass interference, and add power to the o-line and backfield.

You never trade down for cap reasosn. As soon as you start letting the cap dictate who you draft you are in trouble. In any given draft there are 4 or 5 major impact players who can come in and play at a high level early in their careers. There may be another 20-25 guys who will develop into quality players. The rest range anywhere from one or two year decent starters to quality backups to not even making the team. If you have a chance to get a guy who is an imediate impact guy like Williams you DO NOT pass it up. You do what it takes to make it work. That being said...WR are generally never impact players thye usually take a couple seaons to become impact guys.

[QUOTE=FRPLG]You never trade down for cap reasosn. As soon as you start letting the cap dictate who you draft you are in trouble. In any given draft there are 4 or 5 major impact players who can come in and play at a high level early in their careers. There may be another 20-25 guys who will develop into quality players. The rest range anywhere from one or two year decent starters to quality backups to not even making the team. If you have a chance to get a guy who is an imediate impact guy like Williams you DO NOT pass it up. You do what it takes to make it work. That being said...WR are generally never impact players thye usually take a couple seaons to become impact guys.[/QUOTE]
I tend to agree with you on not letting the cap dictate your draft strategy.

What other receivers are out there. Larry Fitzgerald and Roy Williams were the top two taken but look at the other guys in that list. Clayton had an amazing year. Lee Evans is becoming a threat. That guy for Carolina filled in with all their injury. I think Woods, the 49ers pick, was one of the only ones that didnt do well and most of them have very small contracts. Mike Williams is probably a waste of money, expecially since he didnt play last year.

We should trade down, draft the end from Wisconsin, pick up an extra pick and go from there.

As always, we have to wait and see how many of our picks we trade away.

Not one of the receivers drafted in the last draft would have made an impact on this team...plaina nd simple. Not one of them was so scary good that they would transcend the crapiness of our offense. An impact receiver like Moss, Harrison, Owens, C Johnson they are not...yet. The only guy to come into the league in fact and have a truely psoitive affect in the last few years was Moss. Even Boldin didn't make his team much better. He just caught EVERY BALL they threw. No one else did squat. An impact receiver makes the second receiver look like a number one. Alvin harper anyone? They guy was worthless but having a true impact receiver like Irvin made him look like the next coming of Lynn Swan or something. he sucked and it showed up when he was the man. Peerless Price comes to mind also. Mike Williams may be an impact guy down the road but I don't like him for us NOW. He is going to go in the top 5 either way so we most likely wont have a shot at him but if we do then we should trade down SLIGHTLY...like two or three spots and get a tackle or DE. Cap consierations are irrelevant.

I just think it doesn't make much sense to go after Mike Williams especially with our needs elsewhere.

We need an Alvin Harper type deep threat.

I think that if Mike Williams is there for the taking when it's our turn to pick, we will get some very interesting trade offers. Too bad Ditka isn't coaching anywhere this go around.

My school of thought is you don't trade down if someone of top 5 caliber is there for your pick (unless it's a qb that you can't use)... there was no way we were trading down from nabbing either sean taylor or kwII last year for a lower pick because both players had way too much potential to pass on.

Sure the skins can trade down and nab a decent DE and O-lineman... But I was reading the Clinton Portis article in the Post today and it says despite the switch to zone blocking, CP can't run on 8 and 9 man fronts. I don't care if you put Orlando Pace on our line, Portis still ain't gonna have success against those numbers.

Basically meaning, if our only perceived threat is Portis, we need to find another threat. I love Coles to death, but even if he's healthy would anyone argue that having Mike opposite him is detrimental to the overall scheme of the offense? We've mentioned Roy Williams, Michael Clayton, Lee Evans, and Anquan Boldin all having first year impacts. You look at their respective offenses, and they are not much different that the Skins: Detroit with Harrington/Jones, TB with Johnson/Pittman, Bills with Bledsoe/McGahee, AZ with whoever. How would Williams not be able to contribute immediately?

The skins would at least have to take a look at the physical freak that Mike is... he's a healthy 6-5 and weighs 228 pounds. You can't teach that size. He came to USC b/c the florida schools tried to recruit him as a TE, thinking he couldn't play the wideout position.

He's not just big, he was the strongest receiver in the land his sophmore year. He runs routes and he never drops the ball. He's not just potential either... in just two years in school:

frosh year: 81 catches/1265 yards/14 TDs
soph year: 95 catches/1314 yards/16 TDs

His first year, Carson Palmer won the Heisman after four years of ineptitude as SC's quarterback... part of the reason lies with Norm Chow's schemes... BMW was responsible for the other half.

His soph year, Matt Leinart became a Heisman finalist his first year starting as QB- you can attribute most of that Williams as well.

That said, the guy is just plain bigger than anyone who covers him (make that two or three guys that tried to cover him on any given play in college). When the Skins offense has been clicking the past month, we're still having problems in the red zone. You don't think Ramsey would love to have Mike back there for a fade route? People are also looking for a deep threat right? Who do you think was on the receiving end of Carson/Matt's fly routes for TDs? How good would Lavernues be with the secondary flowing towards Mike's side? Well, just ask Keary Colbert, who went on to set Trojan wide receiving records as D-coordinators spent sleepless nights devising ways to stop Mike.

Sure, he could bust like many high drafted wideouts- but then again his pure physical nature combined with his two years of college stats predict a high probability of success in the NFL. Once this guy learns how to play in the big league, no cover corner will be able to stop him one on one. Defenses will have to honor that and things will open up for Portis- he won't have to see 9 stacking the box on first and second down. As the 1b receiver, Coles is gonna have a field day. There's gonna be a lot more room in the flat for Cooley as well. Williams isn't just another receiver, he's a weapon that changes the entire dynamic of the offense.

[QUOTE=saden1]We don't need a Mike Willams. Coles will do as #1. and he is only 26. If you want to draft a #2, I can understand.[/QUOTE]

Just because we gave Coles a #1 WR contract it does not mean that he is one. No seperation and sometimes suspect hands. He's a good #2 but a trainwreck as a #1...

[QUOTE=itvnetop]My school of thought is you don't trade down if someone of top 5 caliber is there for your pick (unless it's a qb that you can't use)... there was no way we were trading down from nabbing either sean taylor or kwII last year for a lower pick because both players had way too much potential to pass on.

Sure the skins can trade down and nab a decent DE and O-lineman... But I was reading the Clinton Portis article in the Post today and it says despite the switch to zone blocking, CP can't run on 8 and 9 man fronts. I don't care if you put Orlando Pace on our line, Portis still ain't gonna have success against those numbers.

Basically meaning, if our only perceived threat is Portis, we need to find another threat. I love Coles to death, but even if he's healthy would anyone argue that having Mike opposite him is detrimental to the overall scheme of the offense? We've mentioned Roy Williams, Michael Clayton, Lee Evans, and Anquan Boldin all having first year impacts. You look at their respective offenses, and they are not much different that the Skins: Detroit with Harrington/Jones, TB with Johnson/Pittman, Bills with Bledsoe/McGahee, AZ with whoever. How would Williams not be able to contribute immediately?

The skins would at least have to take a look at the physical freak that Mike is... he's a healthy 6-5 and weighs 228 pounds. You can't teach that size. He came to USC b/c the florida schools tried to recruit him as a TE, thinking he couldn't play the wideout position.

He's not just big, he was the strongest receiver in the land his sophmore year. He runs routes and he never drops the ball. He's not just potential either... in just two years in school:

frosh year: 81 catches/1265 yards/14 TDs
soph year: 95 catches/1314 yards/16 TDs

His first year, Carson Palmer won the Heisman after four years of ineptitude as SC's quarterback... part of the reason lies with Norm Chow's schemes... BMW was responsible for the other half.

His soph year, Matt Leinart became a Heisman finalist his first year starting as QB- you can attribute most of that Williams as well.

That said, the guy is just plain bigger than anyone who covers him (make that two or three guys that tried to cover him on any given play in college). When the Skins offense has been clicking the past month, we're still having problems in the red zone. You don't think Ramsey would love to have Mike back there for a fade route? People are also looking for a deep threat right? Who do you think was on the receiving end of Carson/Matt's fly routes for TDs? How good would Lavernues be with the secondary flowing towards Mike's side? Well, just ask Keary Colbert, who went on to set Trojan wide receiving records as D-coordinators spent sleepless nights devising ways to stop Mike.

Sure, he could bust like many high drafted wideouts- but then again his pure physical nature combined with his two years of college stats predict a high probability of success in the NFL. Once this guy learns how to play in the big league, no cover corner will be able to stop him one on one. Defenses will have to honor that and things will open up for Portis- he won't have to see 9 stacking the box on first and second down. As the 1b receiver, Coles is gonna have a field day. There's gonna be a lot more room in the flat for Cooley as well. Williams isn't just another receiver, he's a weapon that changes the entire dynamic of the offense.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree...

coles IS a #1 reciever, he has blazing speed and good hands...back to back 1200 yard seasons prove that, and back to back to back 80 catch seasons prove that. just because he has had to deal with QB inconsitency doesnt mean he isnt a #1...

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I tend to agree with you on not letting the cap dictate your draft strategy.[/QUOTE]

So would Daniel Snyder.

[QUOTE=celts32]Just because we gave Coles a #1 WR contract it does not mean that he is one. No seperation and sometimes suspect hands. He's a good #2 but a trainwreck as a #1...[/QUOTE]

WOW! So the "experts" who said we overpaid Coles were right? There is maybe 1 number 2 WR in the league paid like Coles (Issac Bruce). No separation? What film have you been watching? I've seen him get tons of separation (when we had Brunell in, but Brunell couldn't get him the ball). You don't get tons of separation on 5 yard curls (which is what he's been running 50% of the time with Ramsey under center). Suspect hand? Again, what are you watching?

I haven't heard someone this critical of Coles since, we'll the scouts who put him as a 3rd rounder coming out of the draft. The same scouts who said Peter Warrick was the best WR to come out of the draft in years.

If people think our wideouts are the reasons we aren't getting big gain completions, it's about time to get new glasses. Could someone please tell me how you are supposed to get 25+ yard gains when 90% of the passes are thrown to receivers running 5 yard curls and flanker screens?

So many people on this site were so high on Coles last season. Now, those voices are silent. Any fairweather fans in the house?

Did someone say Coles has been a trainwreck as a #1 WR??

The guy is on pace to set his career high with catches and be only the 2nd WR in team history with over 90 catches, all while playing through injuries that a lot of guys wouldn't, and an ultra conservative scheme to boot.

Coles is far from a bad receiver. His hands have been somewhat suspect this year around the finger injury (go figure) but besides that I can't think of a single dropped ball. That being said, Coles needs to do whatever is necessary to get healthy in order to be a #1 receiver.

I agree, I saw him open a bunch with Brunell in, but now that we have a guy with an arm we don't let them run long enough to get open!

Mike Williams is a big guy, but he's also slow as a tank. Im very curious to see his combine numbers. If he's able to post a decent 40 time I'd think about it. He's a good receiver (even though I hate SC and Miami) they are respected programs that can build good players. I still don't consider SC a football farm like Miami, especially since they lost their athletic director, but they are on their way.

I'm not against Mike Williams at all, right now he's #1 on my board, but he has been out of football for some time. Either way, we should draft offense this year!

[QUOTE=celts32]Just because we gave Coles a #1 WR contract it does not mean that he is one. No seperation and sometimes suspect hands. He's a good #2 but a trainwreck as a #1...[/QUOTE]
You have got to be kidding.

True, he hasn't put up the numbers that he did last fall, but he's been hurt. I bet half the league would love to have Coles as their #1. He's gonna have 90+ receptions this year. Not bad for a guy who has a bad foot, dislocated finger, and probably some other stuff he hasn't told anybody. On top of that, he played 9 games with Mark Brunell (the same Brunell that had several 58 yd games).

Give me a break.

I said it. The guy drops a lot of passes. And I don't care about his injuries to his hands and legs and whatever else he has. I would be happy if it were possible to go through every pass thrown to Coles this season and count the drops. And everyone wants to talk about his stats. He has amassed the most meaningless stats of any Redskin WR in the history of the team. Where are the TD's? Where are the big catches when we have to have one? List me 5 huge game changing plays that Coles has made in the past 2 years and I will retract the comment. Other #1 WR's make these types of plays weekly. I am sorry i just don't see it from him. Gardner has made more big plays as a Redskin and we all agree that his Redskin days are numbered. The QB play is part of the problem, I don't deny that. I just have a higher expectation of a #1 WR. A #1 WR should be capable of dominating a CB and taking over a game. I don't see that from Coles. #1 WR's score TD's and Coles has 1 this year and 7 overall as a Redskin. Gardner has 10 over the same 2 years. I think coles is good #2 WR. Feel free to disagree, but it won't change my mind.

[QUOTE=celts32] Where are the TD's? Where are the big catches when we have to have one? List me 5 huge game changing plays that Coles has made in the past 2 years and I will retract the comment. Other #1 WR's make these types of plays weekly.[/QUOTE]


You need a good QB for all of those things.

Celts makes some decent points. I wouldn't call him a trainwreck by any means, but he has had quite a few dropped balls this year, Im guessing about on par with Gardner. He also doesn't make a game-changing play very often, however none of our receivers do. I attribute that to the schemes.

I like Coles, but I also think an Edwards/Williams type to be our #1 would be best. Maybe not #1 eventually, but either way a mean duo!

I would estimate that Coles has dropped 10-15 balls this year. 95% of those were in 4-5 games following his dislocated finger that he re-set himself. Have you watched all of the games this year? Have you noticed how his production has escalated since Ramsey has been playing? If you saw last year's first few games, do you remember the kind of production he was having before the toe injury?

Before this, before that. He has the toe injury and it doesn't seem to be getting much better. A healthy Coles is explosive with very solid hands, this year has been a down year. For everyone on the offensive side of the ball. It's hard to judge.

[QUOTE=Daseal]Before this, before that. He has the toe injury and it doesn't seem to be getting much better. A healthy Coles is explosive with very solid hands, this year has been a down year. For everyone on the offensive side of the ball. It's hard to judge.[/QUOTE]

Would you say that his is a trainwreck and not worthy of being called a #1 receiver in this league? That's what I take exception too.

Coles regaurdless showed more heart than anyone else on that feild offensively and he needs a good reciever to complement him. there will not be a number 1 it would be threats. similar to the colts

We have a very nice WR corps. There is no need to draft another one with a high pick. Coles will be back to his early 2003 form next year after his toe surgery this off-season. Gardner is a good complimentary receiver, and has won over Gibbs with his work ethic, so I would be very surprised if they trade or release him....unless Gibbs likes McCants more than he has shown, and they use Rod as trade bait.
Basically, in my opinion, WR is the last position we should pick for in the draft....at least in the first few rounds.

Nobody knows if coles is going to have the surgery, Gibbs says he is optimistic about it. If Mike Williams is available at our draft spot, there is absoluetly no way you can pass on that talent. I mean you cannot name me another 6-5 reciever in the league that has as much upside as Williams. And don't say Moss he is 6-4 and we all know what he can do. This is a very weak draft this year and we are really in the driver's seat due to our record. Mike Williams is the best overall rated player in this year's draft in many people's minds, especially Mel Kiper who is the draft god. That man's hair is incredible by the way. Let's say we draft Williams. He immeidatly becomes a starter you now have Coles and Williams, Gardner is traded. Williams will draw double teams right away, so we have 9 people left on defense. Coles will get a lot of single coverage and we use a lot of 3 wide. So we would be looking at 7 in the box. Making it a little easier to run. Another thing that people tend to forget about Williams is his ability to block. Now we can run to the outside since our recievers will be able to hold a block long enough for Portis.

why not keep gardner, and coles draft williams and lose McCants

Coles is a gamer no what what anyone may say. I think the majority of us realize that.

Gardner on the other hand is very replaceable. He's proven to be a decent #2 and that's about it. Who knows though, it might be worth bringing him back in his contract year to play his tail off for the big money. Gibbs has praised him for his work ethic, so who knows what exactly our plans will be for him.

I don't feel Mike Williams will draw double teams right away. They'll make him establish himself. His speed doesn't cause a huge problem for DBs so I think if they have a big type corner, a Springs prototype would lock him down fairly well.

I like him, and he has potential for sure, but he won't command respect in an instant.

We need something on offense, I feel receiver. Get Williams, keep Gardner/McCants, once Gardners contract is up get rid of him, you still have Jacobs for the slot speed and McCants for a big lineup.