DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday

[Schneed10]

Just for a second on this debate about whether DJax will be good for us. He had 82 catches and 1339 yards for the Eagles, but you have to remember that line was DOMINANT. And I mean effing dominant. It made Nick Foles look like Tom Brady.

I know we've made some moves along the line but we will not enjoy the same success. Now I guess Griffin's escapability may help there. But we should not expect DJax to put up pro bowl numbers this season.

That said his impact on the team will still be huge and is a must sign. His numbers would only go up over time with us as our line gets better.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Just for a second on this debate about whether DJax will be good for us. He had 82 catches and 1339 yards for the Eagles, but you have to remember that line was DOMINANT. And I mean effing dominant. It made Nick Foles look like Tom Brady.

I know we've made some moves along the line but we will not enjoy the same success. Now I guess Griffin's escapability may help there. But we should not expect DJax to put up pro bowl numbers this season.

That said his impact on the team will still be huge and is a must sign. His numbers would only go up over time with us as our line gets better.

Foles is legit. And signing DJax will make the Skins 4th in the league in spending at the WR position, which is one of the least important positions on the field. With time to throw, anyone can get open. Without it no one can get open.. not even DJax.

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Foles is legit. And signing DJax will make the Skins 4th in the league in spending at the WR position, which is one of the least important positions on the field. With time to throw, anyone can get open. Without it no one can get open.. not even DJax.

Have to disagree on that one. If that is the case why are receivers so important to Peyton and Tom Brady?

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

Have to disagree on that one. If that is the case why are receivers so important to Peyton and Tom Brady?

They're not. Brady won 3 Super Bowls with low priced WRs. I'm all for having great Wide Receivers. Just not over-spending on them. And Manning makes his Receivers look better than they are. And how did his awesome Receivers help in the Super Bowl?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

They're not. Brady won 3 Super Bowls with low priced WRs. I'm all for having great Wide Receivers. Just not over-spending on them. And Manning makes his Receivers look better than they are. And how did his awesome Receivers help in the Super Bowl?

They lost that game at the line of scrimmage, not at the WR position.

When you get deep into the playoffs you have to have every unit clicking. You need a complete performance. The Broncos got dominated at the line of scrimmage and their WRs never had a chance.

I know what you're going to say - then take care of the line first. I can accept that. But you take the opportunity to improve your team when you can. Jason Peters wasn't just released, DeSean was. So we pounce.

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

They lost that game at the line of scrimmage, not at the WR position.

When you get deep into the playoffs you have to have every unit clicking. You need a complete performance. The Broncos got dominated at the line of scrimmage and their WRs never had a chance.

I know what you're going to say - then take care of the line first. I can accept that. But you take the opportunity to improve your team when you can. Jason Peters wasn't just released, DeSean was. So we pounce.

That was a very good comment. A+ grade.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

They lost that game at the line of scrimmage, not at the WR position.

When you get deep into the playoffs you have to have every unit clicking. You need a complete performance. The Broncos got dominated at the line of scrimmage and their WRs never had a chance.

I know what you're going to say - then take care of the line first. I can accept that. But you take the opportunity to improve your team when you can. Jason Peters wasn't just released, DeSean was. So we pounce.

I'm not against having good wide receivers, just over-spending on them. If you can get first round production for 6th round pay like the Skins do with Alfmo or the Giants did with Cruz, then great. Can't just pretend the salary cap doesn't exist.

[chrisl13]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

I'm not against having good wide receivers, just over-spending on them. If you can get first round production for 6th round pay like the Skins do with Alfmo or the Giants did with Cruz, then great. Can't just pretend the salary cap doesn't exist.

Who's to say that we can get 1st round production from a 6th rounder? That is extremely rare and we got lucky with Alf. We can't count on that happening again.

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

They're not. Brady won 3 Super Bowls with low priced WRs. I'm all for having great Wide Receivers. Just not over-spending on them. And Manning makes his Receivers look better than they are. And how did his awesome Receivers help in the Super Bowl?

In the Super Bowl Manning failed his team. You can't figure out the defense like a calculus problem if the defense gets QB pressure. Peyton = "not rocket scientist", football = "not rocket science".

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

Have to disagree on that one. If that is the case why are receivers so important to Peyton and Tom Brady?

Yeah good question. Why did Peyton have his best season last year? Could Demarius Thomas, Wes Welker, Eric Decker, and Julius Thomas have had anything to do with that?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Foles is legit. And signing DJax will make the Skins 4th in the league in spending at the WR position, which is one of the least important positions on the field. With time to throw, anyone can get open. Without it no one can get open.. not even DJax.

Foles is absolutely not legit. You could not be more wrong. When you have that much time to throw, any QB in the league can carve up the defense. Hell we've seen Rex Grossman have great games when he gets protection. If you're an NFL QB and you can't throw with a clean pocket, you got troubs.

Foles is a sound decision maker, I'll say that for him. But he was not getting rid of the ball crisply last season, he just had that much time behind that line.

And least important positions on the field? Absolutely not. WR is one of the more important positions on the field. Ask the 49ers or Cowboys dynasties what Jerry Rice and Michael Irvin meant to them. Ask the Greatest Show on Turf what Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt meant. Ask Eli how he felt about having Plaxico vs not having Plaxico. And ask Matt Ryan how last season went without Julio Jones.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Foles is absolutely not legit. You could not be more wrong. When you have that much time to throw, any QB in the league can carve up the defense. Hell we've seen Rex Grossman have great games when he gets protection. If you're an NFL QB and you can't throw with a clean pocket, you got troubs.

Foles is a sound decision maker, I'll say that for him. But he was not getting rid of the ball crisply last season, he just had that much time behind that line.

And least important positions on the field? Absolutely not. WR is one of the more important positions on the field. Ask the 49ers or Cowboys dynasties what Jerry Rice and Michael Irvin meant to them. Ask the Greatest Show on Turf what Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt meant. Ask Eli how he felt about having Plaxico vs not having Plaxico. And ask Matt Ryan how last season went without Julio Jones.

Different era. Teams win Super Bowls year in and year out now without over-spending on Wide Receivers. The Seahawks had Harvin for the Super Bowl, but won all year without him.

If being top 5 in WR spending was a common characteristic of Super Bowl winning teams over the last 10-15 years, I'd be all for it. It's a copycat league for a reason.

The Skins had a top 5 Offense just 2 years ago with the guys they already have on the roster. Unless he wants to sign on the cheap, I don't think it makes sense strictly from a business standpoint.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Different era. Teams win Super Bowls year in and year out now without over-spending on Wide Receivers. The Seahawks had Harvin for the Super Bowl, but won all year without him.

If being top 5 in WR spending was a common characteristic of Super Bowl winning teams over the last 10-15 years, I'd be all for it. It's a copycat league for a reason.

The Skins had a top 5 Offense just 2 years ago with the guys they already have on the roster. Unless he wants to sign on the cheap, I don't think it makes sense strictly from a business standpoint.

To think there is one formula to winning a Super Bowl is terrible, and frankly uncreative thinking.

The Seahawks won with a dominating defense, run game, and a mobile QB. The Rams won with a wide open offense. The Giants won with clutch pocket passing and dominating defensive lines. The Steelers won with dominating defense and an improvising QB. The 2000 Ravens won with one of the best defenses of all time and a QB who simply didn't screw things up.

There's lots of ways to win. Why can't the team spend at WR, but get production on the cheap in the secondary? You can't spend everywhere, but what if David Amerson and Phillip Thomas turn into something? Just because it hasn't been the formula doesn't mean it can't be. Nobody thought mobile QBs could win until Russell Wilson did this year.

And you keep citing Tom Brady. Do you want to count on RG3 becoming as legendary as Brady? I love RG3 but damn that's a high bar you're setting.