![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Fire Bruce NOW
![]() Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 11,434
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Last year Galloway had Tom Brady. And Welker was hurt. Still Galloway could not get on the field and produce. 'Nuff said.
__________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 62
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
So you pick one off yea and us that as the example. How about looking back at just about every year McNabb has played and look at the production he could get ot of WR's like Thrash. Then just look back at every other year Brady has played. If you don't think WR's need a good QB then your probably the only one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Fire Bruce NOW
![]() Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 11,434
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
The point I made was specifically about Galloway. Last year he had a good QB and still could not get it done. In fact, he hasn't gotten it done for several years. He'd be retired if we didn't offer him a home. That's pathetic.
__________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 62
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
We will just have to see. There are 32 other teams that have a Galloway on their team. He just happens to be a WR but on other teams its QB's, CB's, OL, DL, etc... that are older but the coaches believe they have another productive season or two left in them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness". Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten. The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is Don Juan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
^^^^^^^
Quote:
Galloway struggled with the offensive system and was inactive the last three games after catching just seven passes in the first three. "He's had a great career and this is one of those things that just didn't work out," Patriots coach Bill Belichick said. "I don't think it's anybody's fault or anything that you just pinpoint." Joey Galloway released by New England Patriots; team re-signs Tully Banta-Cain ESPNBoston.com's Mike Reiss says the Patriots admitted a mistake in cutting Joey Galloway on Tuesday. Story •Reiss' blog | Questions for mailbag •ESPNBoston.com Joey Galloway released by New England Patriots; team re-signs Tully Banta-Cain - ESPN Boston -Me: I'n not sure when he got to Pats training camp but from my research it seem like it was just a bad fit not a matter of lack of ability. It seemed like with Moss, Welker and the other weapons he was the odd man out after all there are only so many targets. But, although i'm a bit skeptical myself, i think he's here as more of a mentor then anything else, he'll certainly have more opportunities here then in New England. By all acccounts he's looked good in training camp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Naega jeil jal naga
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 41
Posts: 14,750
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
Anyway what are we looking for? Two 1,000+ yard guys. Moss will get at least 1,100 yards. Cooley will get 800. Armstrong or someone else will get as few as 500 and as much as 700. Fred Davis will get around 300 or 400 yards.
__________________
"It's nice to be important, but its more important to be nice." - Scooter "I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now." - FRPLG |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
But here's my prediction for the receivers based on McNabb throwing for 3,825 yards (i have it over in extremeskins but there cite is down so this is from memory so there might be errors) Moss-80+ catches 1250 yard Cooley+Davis-117 catches 1100 yards Armstrong-46 catches 725 Devin Thomas+Galloway+Roydell Williams-40 575 yards or Armstrong/Devin/Galloway/Williams-86 catches for 1300 yards The RBs-23-230 yards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Fire Bruce NOW
![]() Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 11,434
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
Also, if he were only a mentor, he would be there for emergencies and otherwise be talking up people on the sideline. Instead, in the preseason, he was on the field a good amount in first quarters of games. Maybe things will change during the regular season (Armstrong and/or Thomas step up), but the formula remains: the more time Galloway spends on the field, the more our WR crew looks like a train wreck. Thank goodness for Cooley and Davis.
__________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | ||
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
Just for the sake of accuracy Wes Welker was injured long after Galloway was released. And the reps would have and did go to their young developmental receivers Julian Edleman or Aiken anyway. Bellichik admitted that it was a mistake bringing Galloway in not because he couldn't play but because he wasn't needed (inactive for 3 games prior to his release). Look it, i have my doubts about Galloway as well, but to say that he didn't get the job done in New England after Welker went down simply isn't accurate. Quote:
I don't recall seeing Galloway on the field that much during preseason, in fact i would say he was on the field less then any other WR. (But when he was on the field he was getting open) I still don't see how this receiving corps can be considered a train wreck with or without Galloway. HTTR! |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Fire Bruce NOW
![]() Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 11,434
|
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!
Quote:
Your point about Galloway's being released before Welker was injured is a good one. Thank you for that. Still, the Galloway that I saw in the preseason was not getting open much. I remain skeptical. But we'll see soon enough. And, needless to say, I don't WANT us to have a train wreck for a WR corps. I want us to kick some ass. Maybe a light will come on for DT or Armstrong will be that receiver who comes out of nowhere to take the league by storm. HTTR!
__________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|