#59
 

Although he is in the final year of a two year deal, will he play beyond 2013 for the Washington Redskins?

Re: #59
 

I love the guy but I just don't see it happening. He's definitely a special breed though.

Re: #59
 

NO.

I get it, Fletcher is amazing and defies age. Still pro-bowl caliber and a true leader for this defense.

But as good as he played, he rated rather poorly in PFF, esp in coverage. We need fresh legs on the other side of 30yrs. Hope to develop our existing young MLBs or draft new ones, but not rely on Fletcher past this year.

Re: #59
 

[quote=ethat001;1012346]NO.

I get it, Fletcher is amazing and defies age. Still pro-bowl caliber and a true leader for this defense.

But as good as he played, he rated rather poorly in PFF, esp in coverage. We need fresh legs on the other side of 30yrs. Hope to develop our existing young MLBs or draft new ones, but not rely on Fletcher past this year.[/quote]

He could not cover TE's last year, it was painful to watch.

Re: #59
 

Regardless, #59 was still all over the field. He was in the right place at the right times to get interceptions. He was still the tackling machine he's always been. I didn't pay too much to him struggling in coverage but he made a lot of key stops and sacked the QB a number of times too. I don't know how much longer #59 can keep going, but I have a feeling that if the Redskins sign him again, it will be a one-year deal.

Re: #59
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;1012348]He could not cover TE's last year, it was painful to watch.[/quote]

A lot of the TE's he had to cover last year are not being covered by any middle LB. Witten, Gonzalez, etc. Most of them get a safety assigned for coverage.

This is almost as funny as the people that complained that Doughty couldnt cover Calvin Johnson several years back. Nobody can cover Calvin Johnson if the throw is where it needs to be, least of all a backup safety that isnt very tall trying to win a jump ball against him.

Re: #59
 

He never could "cover" TEs. He's short and can't jump but so high. But he's always on his man and is rarely fooled by plays. Didn't be lead the team in INTs? He's not painful to watch as someone stated.

Re: #59
 

Fletch is a true leader. That said, last year he had plainly lost a step. Moreover, he uncharacteristically missed many tackles. While his mental skills are as good as ever, his physical skills clearly have declined. IMO he is on the team this year for his leadership more than his play and this year should be his last.

Re: #59
 

When he's healthy he can still ball. At his age that's tough though. Let's hope he has one more quality season in him.

Re: #59
 

I was as frustrated as anybody about TE's and London, but let's not forget that our safety combinations last year put a lot of pressure on the middle of the field coverage as is. Pretty sure improved play by the safety's will mean more ability for the defense to control the threat of TE's.

Re: #59
 

Fletcher is just a one year off version of Ray Lewis. Ray Lewis's play last year was average and he was getting beat in coverage by all players. London last year was getting beat by whichever TE's he was assigned to in coverage. I expect London to play to what Ray was playing like last year.

Still is my one of my all time favorite Redskins.

Re: #59
 

I'd rather we not get to the point-and I think we're close-where we're saying "damn, why didn't London just retire last year?"

Re: #59
 

I can't imagine this would be in his thoughts, but if he had retired this year, the HOF committee would have both Lewis and 59 the same year. By playing one more, there would not be another premier LB HOF candidate. I would like to see Fletch make it on his first ballot.

Re: #59
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1012393]I can't imagine this would be in his thoughts, but if he had retired this year, the HOF committee would have both Lewis and 59 the same year. By playing one more, there would not be another premier LB HOF candidate. I would like to see Fletch make it on his first ballot.[/quote]

Chris Hanburger had 9 Pro-Bowls and got elected like 30+ years later. They will probably screw Fletch

Re: #59
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1012385]I'd rather we not get to the point-and I think we're close-where we're saying "damn, why didn't London just retire last year?"[/quote]

I've had that question in mind. I think he's already past the point of retiring while he is at the top of his game, as many athletes desire.

Re: #59
 

Even though Fletcher got burned by TEs, he still is a player who is also a coach. I actually wonder sometimes why Rams and Bills decided to let Fletcher go. I'm not sure if Fletcher will continue to play after this season, it probably depends on the outcome of Redskins season. If Fletcher decides to retire, I could see Fletcher taking on some kind assistant coach or perhaps LB coach.

Re: #59
 

[quote=GridIron26;1012409]Even though Fletcher got burned by TEs, he still is a player who is also a coach. I actually wonder sometimes why Rams and Bills decided to let Fletcher go. I'm not sure if Fletcher will continue to play after this season, it probably depends on the outcome of Redskins season. If Fletcher decides to retire, I could see Fletcher taking on some kind assistant coach or perhaps LB coach.[/quote]

Yeah and hey, one of the TE's who burned Fletcher a lot last year (Jimmy Graham) didn't even make the top 100 players and Fletcher did! So clearly the players think Fletcher can still play.

Re: #59
 

The only reason Fletcher would stay after this season would be to mentor the younger LBs, a role he would do better as a coach. So, no, Redskins4ever, I don't think he'll be playing past this season.

He's one of my all time favorite Redskins, and I believe he'll be a first ballot HOFer. Maybe someone should start a thread remembering the playing career of London Fletcher.

Re: #59
 

Threads/comments about Fletcher drive me batty. Ignorance abounds.

- He played through a grueling injury last season. Compare that to Garcon (who's become the little darling of many a fan) and others who sit out, and then take your criticisms of Fletcher and shove them right up your asses. He missed a few tackles, but still is one of the best tacklers in all of pro football. He struggled to cover the best TEs in the league, just like every other defensive player who tries to cover Witten and Gonzales. I remember Fletcher defending some passes too, again fighting through a painful injury.

- When scheme and mid-game adjustments were reportedly turned over to Fletcher for the 2nd half of the season the defense improved markedly, for several reasons. One is that he took himself out of coverage more which is exactly what should happen. You don't take your premier tackler, who also has elite intuition for finding the ball on passes over the middle, and ask him to chase a TE to the outside of the field. That's just stupid scheming. Fletcher place is in the middle of the field on running and passing downs, period. Riley and the outside LBs need to cover the outside.

- Finally, it drives me up a ****ing wall when we pretend there's a replacement for Fletcher just waiting in the wings. Even if you could find a guy to PLAY at Fletcher's level right now, he won't have the mastery of the defense anytime soon. We don't have a 1st round pick in next year's draft either, so realistically the guy taking over for Fletcher next season will have to be our biggest and most expensive FA signing. Fortunately we'll have the cap room so it seems. But don't pretend like it's going to be easy.

He's arguably the most under appreciated player I've seen in my lifetime.

End rant.

Re: #59
 

Good for Fletcher for being able to play through injury, with some injuries you can do that, some you can't. No doubt he's tough. Facts are facts though, he's shown some signs of slowing down but he's still very capable and he's definitely very valuable as the QB of the D. As a LB you're going to have to cover at some point regardless of whether you're inside or out, again just a fact.

I think the vast majority of fans love the guy. Not sure what the hostility is about.

Re: #59
 

He didn't just miss a few tackles. He missed more than any other inside linebacker in the league last year

What did we draft guys like Riley and Robinson for if not to give them the opportunity to take Fletcher's role. It's crazy to think we have no one waiting in the wings

He's close to 40 years old. Injuries and close to 40. No matter what kind of stud Fletcher is, Father Time is undefeated

No one hates Fletcher

Re: #59
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;1012412]Yeah and hey, one of the TE's who burned Fletcher a lot last year (Jimmy Graham) didn't even make the top 100 players and Fletcher did! So clearly the players think Fletcher can still play.[/quote]

Well, Jimmy Graham is no Niles Paul...

Re: #59
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1012449]He didn't just miss a few tackles. He missed more than any other inside linebacker in the league last year

What did we draft guys like Riley and Robinson for if not to give them the opportunity to take Fletcher's role. It's crazy to think we have no one waiting in the wings

He's close to 40 years old. Injuries and close to 40. No matter what kind of stud Fletcher is, Father Time is undefeated

No one hates Fletcher[/quote]

Some fans pick and choose who they praise and who they throw under the bus for example ( Henderson versus Hankerson.

Re: #59
 

well just dont throw James Thrash under the bus...

Re: #59
 

[quote=Chico23231;1012453]well just dont throw James Thrash under the bus...[/quote]

Heh. Heh-heh. Heh-heh-heh...Muuuuuuhahahahahahaha. :laughing- Aint' that the truth...

Re: #59
 

Love #59, and I want him on the payroll somehow. I would like to see him transition into a position coach, and continue to mentor the young players.

Re: #59
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1012449]He didn't just miss a few tackles. He missed more than any other inside linebacker in the league last year

What did we draft guys like Riley and Robinson for if not to give them the opportunity to take Fletcher's role. It's crazy to think we have no one waiting in the wings

He's close to 40 years old. Injuries and close to 40. No matter what kind of stud Fletcher is, Father Time is undefeated

No one hates Fletcher[/quote]

He missed very few tackles over the 2nd half of the season, and his foot/ankle still wasn't 100%.

Again, just unbelievable how there's a double standard for new toys/players vs. old. Garcon misses half the season with foot pain and is the darling. Fletcher plays through and gets shit on for it. Dumb-founding.

Fletch will have another good season but I believe he retires after 2013

Re: #59
 

[quote=The Goat;1012470]He missed very few tackles over the 2nd half of the season, and his foot/ankle still wasn't 100%.

Again, just unbelievable how there's a double standard for new toys/players vs. old. Garcon misses half the season with foot pain and is the darling. Fletcher plays through and gets shit on for it. Dumb-founding.[/quote]

No one's s***ing on him. I have nothing but praise for Fletcher. The consensus, though, is that while he has had a very good career, and while he played well last year, he's getting older and won't be able to keep it up much longer. Like Matty said, the vast majority of fans love him.

I guess I don't know where you're coming from.

Re: #59
 

[quote=SirLK26;1012476]No one's s***ing on him. I have nothing but praise for Fletcher. The consensus, though, is that while he has had a very good career, and while he played well last year, he's getting older and won't be able to keep it up much longer. Like Matty said, the vast majority of fans love him.

[B]I guess I don't know where you're coming from.[/B][/quote]

You are not alone

Re: #59
 

[quote=The Goat;1012470]He missed very few tackles over the 2nd half of the season, and his foot/ankle still wasn't 100%.

Again, just unbelievable how there's a double standard for new toys/players vs. old. [B] Garcon misses half the season with foot pain and is the darling. Fletcher plays through and gets shit on for it. Dumb-founding.[/quote][/B]

It's a testament to Fletcher's tenacity and love for the game that he was able to play through injury, but you shouldn't compare him to Garcon. Fletcher had a sprained ankle; Garcon had a torn ligament in his foot. It's a testament to Garcon that he was able to play as well and as much as he did. To lead the team in receiving while playing with a torn ligament? Impressive.

Re: #59
 

I guess Fletcher is off limits when it comes to critiquing his game.

:doh:

Re: #59
 

[quote=Mattyk;1012485]I guess Fletcher is off limits when it comes to critiquing his game.

:doh:[/quote]

True, true. Garcon, though? No hate is sufficient enough for him. :pffff:

Re: #59
 

[quote=The Goat;1012470]He missed very few tackles over the 2nd half of the season, and his foot/ankle still wasn't 100%.

Again, just unbelievable how there's a double standard for new toys/players vs. old. [B]Garcon misses half the season with foot pain and is the darling[/B]. Fletcher plays through and gets shit on for it. Dumb-founding.[/quote]

sigh...did you see the offense when he played? come on man

Re: #59
 

[quote=Mattyk;1012370]When he's healthy he can still ball. At his age that's tough though. Let's hope he has one more quality season in him.[/quote]

Any chance we move him out of the middle LB position to one that requires a little less speed?

Swap him and Riley maybe? I'd like to see Kerrigan or Orakpo play DE (if Carriker can't go). Move London to OLB?



We want his defensive play-calling and leadership, no one is better, but he has lost a step.

STILL a force, just not the same he was.

Re: #59
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1012722]Any chance we move him out of the middle LB position to one that requires a little less speed?

Swap him and Riley maybe? I'd like to see Kerrigan or Orakpo play DE (if Carriker can't go). Move London to OLB?



We want his defensive play-calling and leadership, no one is better, but he has lost a step.

STILL a force, just not the same he was.[/quote]

Swapping Fletcher with Riley means we moved him from MLB to MLB. Doesnt seem like much of a switch to me.

As for Kerrigan and Orakpo. I doubt either one is suited for a 3-4 DE. If we transfer back to a 4-3 then I see it, but a 3-4 DE is more of a run stopper and the 3-4 OLB are the pash rushers. I doubt London can be the main pass rusher all that effectively.

Re: #59
 

[quote=Chico23231;1012502]sigh...did you see the offense when he played? come on man[/quote]

I believe the offense scored approximately one more point per game on average with Garcon playing vs. not playing. That's nice, but not exactly the overwhelming story of awesomeness about Garcon some try to conjure up.

As a comparison, when Fletcher took a larger role in scheming/adjustments and looked better on the bad ankle for the 2nd half of the season, the defense improved a ton. Someone threw out avg points given up by the defense between 1st and 2nd half of the season??

If you're trying to say Garcon is as important to the offense as Fletcher is the defense...no, just no. Not then. Not now. Not anytime soon.

Re: #59
 

I do not recall the stat......but we won like every game with him and lost most of the games without him. THAT I would call....Overwhelming
BTW....Keep London in!

Re: #59
 

[quote=The Goat;1012793][B]I believe the offense scored approximately one more point per game on average with Garcon playing vs. not playing. That's nice, but not exactly the overwhelming story of awesomeness about Garcon some try to conjure up.[/B]

As a comparison, when Fletcher took a larger role in scheming/adjustments and looked better on the bad ankle for the 2nd half of the season, the defense improved a ton. Someone threw out avg points given up by the defense between 1st and 2nd half of the season??

If you're trying to say Garcon is as important to the offense as Fletcher is the defense...no, just no. Not then. Not now. Not anytime soon.[/quote]

1 more point per game or 1 more TD per game? Pretty big difference between the two. I get that you hate Garcon for the only reason that you didnt like the signing in the first place. I believe you called him a #3 WR at best at the time of the signing. But to say he doesnt make a difference is laughable. When you are a Redskins fan, its actually ok to like all of them.

Re: #59
 

Some of are doubting whether or not Fletcher will return after this season. The only way he'll retire is if the Redskins win the Super Bowl. If there is no signs of under performance in Fletcher's game I don't see why the wouldn't offer him at least a 1-year deal heading into 2014......