One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09

MTK · 07-15-2009, 09:26 AM

Who's the one guy that would cause major problems if he goes down with injury for an extended period of time in '09?

I'm going with Samuels, and until we see one of the young guys step up, Moss a close 2nd.

djnemo65 · 07-15-2009, 09:29 AM

I agree with Samuels on offense, although I don't think we are in a great position to sustain injury anywhere on the line. On defense I'm going with AH.

Skins4Eva · 07-15-2009, 09:32 AM

Without question...the one player that we absolutely could not win consistently without is...London Fletcher. I know there are some more obvious picks, but this guy makes everything happen on the defensive side of the ball and with so many questions on offense, I think we will be depending a lot on our potentially elite defense to pull out some wins.

cpayne5 · 07-15-2009, 09:38 AM

Fletcher for me too. He's the glue on the defensive side of the ball. Plus, if he goes down, it stretches an already thin LB corps even thinner.

skinsfan69 · 07-15-2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cpayne5

Fletcher for me too. He's the glue on the defensive side of the ball. Plus, if he goes down, it stretches an already thin LB corps even thinner.

I don't think there would be a big drop off if Blades is needed. I think he's more than ready

hugeskinsfan182 · 07-16-2009, 01:27 AM

portis would be a big hit obviously to the productivity of the offense.. but he would hurt the entire team as well. Him easily being one of the top players on our team 'the heartbeat' im sure losing him would make our less than spectacular offense worse... making field position just awful. our D would be backed up on its heels all the time.. and it just wouldnt be pretty. these last few seasons hes been leading the NFL in rushing overall or yardage (basically hes been in the elite group with 2 other backs) and then injuries take their toll around week 10.. and its downhill from there just missing the playoffs or something else thats detrimental to our team.

For our defense... were thin all over the place it seems. after losing sean taylor it seems if our safties take a hit then were putting in a lack of experience.. our D line has been an issue for awhile not generating pressure so losing andre carter or god forbid albert haynesworth would be devastating.. and london fletcher being the heartbeat of our defense would crush us as well. we really cant afford to lose anyone.. our biggest weakpoints have to be linebackers for defense.. and offensive line for offense. i want to add running backs as i said for Portis.. but Ladell Betts has proven he can be a great runner.

hes also had a couple hiccups before though..

Schneed10 · 07-15-2009, 09:39 AM

I'm going to cheat. Tie between Laron Landry and Chris Samuels.

I would say Moss is in there, but I really think the other WRs (Thomas, Kelly, Roydell) are going to step up to at least make our WR corps adequate.

On Samuels, he consistently protects Campbell from the pass rush, without him Campbell will be under constant pressure and Zorn, like last year, will make the offense much more conservative. We'd be hog-tied.

Landry should not be forgotten, he is the most important player on the defense. Fletcher is very important as the QB of the D, but Landry's range is what allows us to free up Horton/Moore. Without Landry we're left to play a cover 2 with both safeties back, and our LBs don't have the speed to cover the middle of the field. We'd be very vulnerable. Furthermore, if we're to have success this year, we need Hall and Rogers to come up with picks. If they don't have their angel (Landry's nickname, per Blache) behind them, they will have to be more conservative.

CRedskinsRule · 07-15-2009, 09:40 AM

It has to be Chris Samuels. I think the rest of the line will be effective and all the players are fairly interchangeable. But Samuels has no equal, or even close to equal replacement.

If you break it down by team units:
Offense - Samuels

Defense - Tough call, because everyone is used depending on the situation, but I think I would go with Carlos, I know he doesn't get picks, but he does come as close to a shutdown corner as we have now, and can pretty effectively stop a passing attack. (Remember the Dallas game where after SS went out, he was a mad man and just shut down TO - awesome)

ST- a big limb here, since he's not even the starter yet, but Aldridge/Dorsey. I think one of these guys will be our PR and we will be anticipating actual forward progress on every punt. A close second is Hunter, cuz who knows where the next punter would come from.

Lotus · 07-15-2009, 09:48 AM

Overall: Samuels

Offense: Samuels
Defense: Fletcher
Special teams: Hunter Smith

SmootSmack · 07-15-2009, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lotus

Overall: Samuels

Offense: Samuels
Defense: Fletcher
Special teams: Hunter Smith

Hunter Smith is actually a really good choice. If he gets hurt, we're screwed. I mean I know we didn't have him last year like we didn't have AH. But if Haynesworth gets hurt we still have Griff, Golston, and Montgomery.

Lotus · 07-15-2009, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Hunter Smith is actually a really good choice. If he gets hurt, we're screwed. I mean I know we didn't have him last year like we didn't have AH. But if Haynesworth gets hurt we still have Griff, Golston, and Montgomery.

And look where our punting game was last year without him...does anyone really want to bring back the likes of Frost, Brooks, etc.?

sandtrapjack · 07-15-2009, 09:46 AM

Portis. Was third in total touches in the NFL last season. During the first half of the 2008 season, Portis failed to touch the ball 20+ times in a game only once, Pittsburgh (Loss). And the team was 6-3 at the bye. Averaged over 4 ypc and was a solid contributor to Campbell's impressive first half of 2008 (243 atts with only 2 INT's through week 9).

It was after the bye when Portis was a little dinged up that there was some fluttering in the offense and Campbells INT's increased.

Guy is a proven leader on the field, can put a team on his back when called upon, and is a great asset for Campbell.

JoeRedskin · 07-15-2009, 09:50 AM

The top three we cannot afford to lose are Samuels, Samuels followed by Samuels.

To me, there isn't even a close second. The next group I could see would be Fletcher as a wayy distant second with Moss,Portis, Rogers as the next most important group.

Paintrain · 07-15-2009, 09:51 AM

I've got a busy day and won't be able to spend much time on Warpath today so I'll light the fuse. Jason Campbell is the one player we cannot afford to lose in '09.

Zorn has spent most of his time and focus this offseason towards getting the offense to be more productive and a majority of that time was spent with Campbell. Campbell is far and away our best option at QB for the '09 season. If we had to go an extended period of time with either Collins, who is a career backup who has played in less than 10 games over the past 10 years for a reason or Brennan who, despite the hopes and dreams of some fans dazzled by 3 preseason games is no better than a backup that is far from ready for primetime, then we're in for a very long and difficult season.

We have depth, although not Pro Bowlers, at virtually every other position, but other than Philly with Kevin Kolb, we probably have the weakest, least experienced backup QB in the division and would be in serious trouble if we had to go an extended period of time with one of them playing.

Chico23231 · 07-15-2009, 09:55 AM

I usually catch NFL guru Chris Landry on sports radio coming home from work and being in a Redskins area people always calling in askings Skins questions. The one constant issue Landry always has is the Redskins is overall depth on both lines and linebacker, especially O-line. It doesnt take a guru to see that, but it validates the Skins biggest concern, age and injury along the o-line. I would say any injury along the o-line would be horrible especially Sameuls. Thomas or Raubach would be bad as well. I really am amazed the FO didnt make the the O-line more of a priority this off season. Dockery is big replacing Kendall. But Kendall was not the biggest issue last year at line, the RT position was bad and inconsistent play at center were bigger issues.

07-15-2009, 09:26 AM	#1
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,563	One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 Who's the one guy that would cause major problems if he goes down with injury for an extended period of time in '09? I'm going with Samuels, and until we see one of the young guys step up, Moss a close 2nd. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

07-15-2009, 09:29 AM	#2
djnemo65 Playmaker Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,836	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 I agree with Samuels on offense, although I don't think we are in a great position to sustain injury anywhere on the line. On defense I'm going with AH.

07-15-2009, 09:32 AM	#3
Skins4Eva Camp Scrub Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 80	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 Without question...the one player that we absolutely could not win consistently without is...London Fletcher. I know there are some more obvious picks, but this guy makes everything happen on the defensive side of the ball and with so many questions on offense, I think we will be depending a lot on our potentially elite defense to pull out some wins. __________________ Bow down and recognize the skills of the Gibbs

07-15-2009, 09:38 AM	#4
cpayne5 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,807	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 Fletcher for me too. He's the glue on the defensive side of the ball. Plus, if he goes down, it stretches an already thin LB corps even thinner. __________________ "It's not about what you've done, but what's been done for you."

07-16-2009, 01:27 AM	#6
hugeskinsfan182 Camp Scrub Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Florida Age: 35 Posts: 14	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 portis would be a big hit obviously to the productivity of the offense.. but he would hurt the entire team as well. Him easily being one of the top players on our team 'the heartbeat' im sure losing him would make our less than spectacular offense worse... making field position just awful. our D would be backed up on its heels all the time.. and it just wouldnt be pretty. these last few seasons hes been leading the NFL in rushing overall or yardage (basically hes been in the elite group with 2 other backs) and then injuries take their toll around week 10.. and its downhill from there just missing the playoffs or something else thats detrimental to our team. For our defense... were thin all over the place it seems. after losing sean taylor it seems if our safties take a hit then were putting in a lack of experience.. our D line has been an issue for awhile not generating pressure so losing andre carter or god forbid albert haynesworth would be devastating.. and london fletcher being the heartbeat of our defense would crush us as well. we really cant afford to lose anyone.. our biggest weakpoints have to be linebackers for defense.. and offensive line for offense. i want to add running backs as i said for Portis.. but Ladell Betts has proven he can be a great runner. hes also had a couple hiccups before though.. __________________ R.I.P Sean Taylor. you will be forever missed but never forgotten.

07-15-2009, 09:39 AM	#7
Schneed10 A Dude Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 45 Posts: 12,426	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 I'm going to cheat. Tie between Laron Landry and Chris Samuels. I would say Moss is in there, but I really think the other WRs (Thomas, Kelly, Roydell) are going to step up to at least make our WR corps adequate. On Samuels, he consistently protects Campbell from the pass rush, without him Campbell will be under constant pressure and Zorn, like last year, will make the offense much more conservative. We'd be hog-tied. Landry should not be forgotten, he is the most important player on the defense. Fletcher is very important as the QB of the D, but Landry's range is what allows us to free up Horton/Moore. Without Landry we're left to play a cover 2 with both safeties back, and our LBs don't have the speed to cover the middle of the field. We'd be very vulnerable. Furthermore, if we're to have success this year, we need Hall and Rogers to come up with picks. If they don't have their angel (Landry's nickname, per Blache) behind them, they will have to be more conservative. __________________ God made certain people to play football. He was one of them.

07-15-2009, 09:40 AM	#8
CRedskinsRule Living Legend Join Date: Aug 2008 Age: 57 Posts: 21,451	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 It has to be Chris Samuels. I think the rest of the line will be effective and all the players are fairly interchangeable. But Samuels has no equal, or even close to equal replacement. If you break it down by team units: Offense - Samuels Defense - Tough call, because everyone is used depending on the situation, but I think I would go with Carlos, I know he doesn't get picks, but he does come as close to a shutdown corner as we have now, and can pretty effectively stop a passing attack. (Remember the Dallas game where after SS went out, he was a mad man and just shut down TO - awesome) ST- a big limb here, since he's not even the starter yet, but Aldridge/Dorsey. I think one of these guys will be our PR and we will be anticipating actual forward progress on every punt. A close second is Hunter, cuz who knows where the next punter would come from.

07-15-2009, 09:48 AM	#9
Lotus Fire Bruce NOW Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Hattiesburg, MS Posts: 11,434	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 Overall: Samuels Offense: Samuels Defense: Fletcher Special teams: Hunter Smith __________________ Bruce Allen when in charge alone: 4-12 (.250) Bruce Allen's overall Redskins record : 28-52 (.350) Vinny Cerrato's record when in charge alone: 52-65 (.444) Vinny's overall Redskins record: 62-82 (.430) We won more with Vinny

07-15-2009, 09:46 AM	#12
sandtrapjack The Starter Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,994	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 Portis. Was third in total touches in the NFL last season. During the first half of the 2008 season, Portis failed to touch the ball 20+ times in a game only once, Pittsburgh (Loss). And the team was 6-3 at the bye. Averaged over 4 ypc and was a solid contributor to Campbell's impressive first half of 2008 (243 atts with only 2 INT's through week 9). It was after the bye when Portis was a little dinged up that there was some fluttering in the offense and Campbells INT's increased. Guy is a proven leader on the field, can put a team on his back when called upon, and is a great asset for Campbell.

07-15-2009, 09:50 AM	#13
JoeRedskin Contains football related knowledge Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Second Star On The Right Age: 62 Posts: 10,401	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 The top three we cannot afford to lose are Samuels, Samuels followed by Samuels. To me, there isn't even a close second. The next group I could see would be Fletcher as a wayy distant second with Moss,Portis, Rogers as the next most important group. __________________ Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go.

07-15-2009, 09:51 AM	#14
Paintrain Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL Age: 54 Posts: 5,006	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 I've got a busy day and won't be able to spend much time on Warpath today so I'll light the fuse. Jason Campbell is the one player we cannot afford to lose in '09. Zorn has spent most of his time and focus this offseason towards getting the offense to be more productive and a majority of that time was spent with Campbell. Campbell is far and away our best option at QB for the '09 season. If we had to go an extended period of time with either Collins, who is a career backup who has played in less than 10 games over the past 10 years for a reason or Brennan who, despite the hopes and dreams of some fans dazzled by 3 preseason games is no better than a backup that is far from ready for primetime, then we're in for a very long and difficult season. We have depth, although not Pro Bowlers, at virtually every other position, but other than Philly with Kevin Kolb, we probably have the weakest, least experienced backup QB in the division and would be in serious trouble if we had to go an extended period of time with one of them playing. __________________ Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman

07-15-2009, 09:55 AM	#15
Chico23231 Warpath Hall of Fame Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 34,603	Re: One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09 I usually catch NFL guru Chris Landry on sports radio coming home from work and being in a Redskins area people always calling in askings Skins questions. The one constant issue Landry always has is the Redskins is overall depth on both lines and linebacker, especially O-line. It doesnt take a guru to see that, but it validates the Skins biggest concern, age and injury along the o-line. I would say any injury along the o-line would be horrible especially Sameuls. Thomas or Raubach would be bad as well. I really am amazed the FO didnt make the the O-line more of a priority this off season. Dockery is big replacing Kendall. But Kendall was not the biggest issue last year at line, the RT position was bad and inconsistent play at center were bigger issues.

One player the Skins cannot afford to lose to injury in '09

Locker Room Main Forum