Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


(Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Locker Room Main Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-08-2010, 10:18 AM   #1
BDBohnzie
Playmaker
 
BDBohnzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Frederick, MD
Age: 47
Posts: 4,628
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

One of the things you'll see this season is 2 TE sets, where either Davis or Cooley end up in motion to the slot to create mismatches. There aren't too many LBs in the league that can cover those 2, and if you bring a safety up, that'll leave an area open for McNabb to pick apart.

That aside, the only proven entity that the Skins line up at WR is Moss, and he's a 2 or 3 at best on other squads. Guys like Armstrong and Thomas needs to step it up so Moss can see action out of the slot. If either one of those 2 struggle, it'll be a long season. I don't see Galloway lasting the season, and unless Shanny knows something about Roydell Williams that the rest of us don't, McNabb will be throwing a lot of dink and dunks to Portis and Johnson out of the backfield.
__________________
Bad Things man, I mean bad things...

“WE TOOK HIM IN THE SIXTH ROUND SO WE'RE NOT SMART EITHER.” - Shanny on what the Skins saw in Alfred Morris
BDBohnzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 11:02 AM   #2
BigHairedAristocrat
Playmaker
 
BigHairedAristocrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,712
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

All 6 of our receivers have one thing going for them that no one has touched on yet - they are not Albert Haynesworth. I think many of you completely underestimate the value of players not named Albert Haynesworth. In fact, I just had my fantasy draft this past weekend and in the later rounds, I drafted several players simply because they weren't named Haynesworth. I think that alone will help me win my league this year. If not, its good for atleast 10 points per game per player... I'm just assuming that at around 90 points a game I wouldnt have for each position where I did not draft Albert Haynesworth. Thats got to equal a win, right?
__________________
Dolphins get good press for saving drowning humans.But we only hear about the swimmers theyve pushed ashore.You know who we havent heard from: all the people theyve pushed out to sea.Dolphins dont know what theyre doing-they just like pushing things.
BigHairedAristocrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 01:11 PM   #3
firstdown
Living Legend
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
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:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
All 6 of our receivers have one thing going for them that no one has touched on yet - they are not Albert Haynesworth. I think many of you completely underestimate the value of players not named Albert Haynesworth. In fact, I just had my fantasy draft this past weekend and in the later rounds, I drafted several players simply because they weren't named Haynesworth. I think that alone will help me win my league this year. If not, its good for atleast 10 points per game per player... I'm just assuming that at around 90 points a game I wouldnt have for each position where I did not draft Albert Haynesworth. Thats got to equal a win, right?
That should have been pretty easy sense there are about 1,000 players to pick from not named AH.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 09:22 PM   #4
Pocket$ $traight
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 50
Posts: 4,261
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat View Post
All 6 of our receivers have one thing going for them that no one has touched on yet - they are not Albert Haynesworth. I think many of you completely underestimate the value of players not named Albert Haynesworth. In fact, I just had my fantasy draft this past weekend and in the later rounds, I drafted several players simply because they weren't named Haynesworth. I think that alone will help me win my league this year. If not, its good for atleast 10 points per game per player... I'm just assuming that at around 90 points a game I wouldnt have for each position where I did not draft Albert Haynesworth. Thats got to equal a win, right?
You will be dominant on 4th and 1
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 11:43 AM   #5
MTK
Hail Raiser
 
MTK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 53
Posts: 100,121
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Galloway has an impressive resume in this league. I wouldn't let the last 2 years tarnish that. He was simply a bad fit in NE's system. He could really surprise us this year.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
MTK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 02:42 PM   #6
saden1
MVP
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 47
Posts: 10,069
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk View Post
Galloway has an impressive resume in this league. I wouldn't let the last 2 years tarnish that. He was simply a bad fit in NE's system. He could really surprise us this year.

I'm killing it with him on Madden 11...that has to be taken into factor. Crowd the line and bam, audible to a Galloway streak ...TD.
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."

-Jenkins
saden1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 02:26 PM   #7
30gut
Playmaker
 
30gut's Avatar
 
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!

I think its either 1 of 2 things

1) the FO/coaching staff has no clue how to evaluate WRs and our receiving corps is in fact woefully inadequate
or
2) the WRs are good enough to effectively run our scheme

I'll go with 2
30gut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 07:46 PM   #8
jsarno
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 51
Posts: 9,534
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Honestly, I have faith in McNabb and Shanahan. Shanahan has orchestrated some great offenses in his day, and while we won't rival the Colts, he can make us respectable. McNabb is a top tier QB, and he will elevate the play of everyone around him with some time. Moss had an 84 catch, 1483 yard season with BRUNELL throwing him the ball. I think we can all safely agree McNabb is MUCH better than Brunell. Also, Moss has had 149 catches over the past two years, unfortunately they weren't for many yards since Campbell liked to throw the ball in the first row than down field. He liked his over the middle patterns. Of course, I know Moss accomplished his 84 catch feat 5 years ago, but he's a VERY talented wr. He just needs a good QB to pull it out of him.
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 07:52 PM   #9
wilsowilso
Registered User
 
wilsowilso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 53
Posts: 2,841
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

I think many Redskins fans are going to be shocked when they watch the offense function like a proper and dangerous unit this year.

There will be ups and downs, but it is going to be a sight many faithful fans are not familiar with.

Quite honestly the Redskins offense has been dangerous for maybe 1 1/2 seasons out of the last ten.

It has been just awful to watch and I think some people don't even remember what it's like to be able to make the opposing defense run around in circles looking like a bunch of idiots.
wilsowilso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2010, 09:58 PM   #10
Pocket$ $traight
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 50
Posts: 4,261
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilsowilso View Post
I think many Redskins fans are going to be shocked when they watch the offense function like a proper and dangerous unit this year.

There will be ups and downs, but it is going to be a sight many faithful fans are not familiar with.

Quite honestly the Redskins offense has been dangerous for maybe 1 1/2 seasons out of the last ten.

It has been just awful to watch and I think some people don't even remember what it's like to be able to make the opposing defense run around in circles looking like a bunch of idiots.
That is probalby accurate. 2005 was a good offense and 2007 when Collins ran it. Spurrier had a flash here and there but you are right, we haven't had a great offense since Norv.
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2010, 11:00 AM   #11
SBXVII
Franchise Player
 
SBXVII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,766
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

I'm late coming to this party. I will apologize right now especially if a lot of what I'm saying has been said, but skimming through the first few posts I felt I needed to comment.

I like everyone else knows we have two awsome TE's. However it remains to be seen how they will be used in MS's offense. I've heard people saying we need a two TE package. Some would argue that there has been two TE packages but usually one stays back to block and the other goes out on a passing route. It will be interesting to see how MS uses two pass catching TE's on the same play.... thats if he even utilizes it. But keep in mind OL protection will be an issue.

My next issue is in regards to the TE's as well ... sorta, when all we had was Moss as a decent WR opposing teams doubled up on him and stacked their DL. It made it dificult for us to run the ball, forced the QB to get rid of the ball early, and took Moss out of every play. ARE and Thomas were not getting the job done. In our present situation will Davis and Cooley see the field at the same time? Will Armstrong step up? Does Galloway still have gas in his tank? Will Banks survive the whole season? Basically there are a lot of questions.

On top of all this Moss, if I remember correctly, has not stayed healthy a whole season. He either has had a pulled hammy or groin muscle. Now we are down to, what some want to only see, an old man in Galloway and a never before started Armstrong. Then you have R.Williams whome the Skins cut last yr cause he was not good enough and Thomas who basically was not running good routes or getting seperation. So if all opposing teams have to do is put their best CB on Moss, stack the DL, and cover the TE's me might be in a world of trouble unless a WR steps up. Which is why some are worried. If we had a proven, young WR, then I think a lot of people would settle down.

But just as some say it's all speculation that we have bad WR's, it's also speculation that we have decent WR's. I think the key in my book and I'm praying I'm right was getting rid of Hixon. I said it enough to convince myself that Hixon was our problem and that he was not teaching/coaching the WR's up or helping them with their route running. I have heard the fan base that says these are professionals and they should already know that stuff but just because they have been to college does not mean that each player has gotten or been taught the techniques needed for each and every position.

The first game will tell us all what we have. Hopefully with the better scheme, better coaching, better QB, our WR's will look awsome and we will be just another team playing together with no names. Even though the big name proven vet would have settled my nerves a bit more.
SBXVII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2010, 01:25 PM   #12
30gut
Playmaker
 
30gut's Avatar
 
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:
Originally Posted by SBXVII View Post
My next issue is in regards to the TE's as well ... sorta, when all we had was Moss as a decent WR opposing teams doubled up on him and stacked their DL. It made it dificult for us to run the ball, forced the QB to get rid of the ball early, and took Moss out of every play. ARE and Thomas were not getting the job done. In our present situation will Davis and Cooley see the field at the same time? Will Armstrong step up? Does Galloway still have gas in his tank? Will Banks survive the whole season? Basically there are a lot of questions.
You make a lot of broad generalizations here and theres too much i don't agree with to address them.

But Davis and Cooley will be on the field at the same time quite often.

Quote:
On top of all this Moss, if I remember correctly, has not stayed healthy a whole season. He either has had a pulled hammy or groin muscle.
Not every season and he's not out for long.
Also muscle/tendon issues are common place for WRs, its not unique to Moss.

Quote:
Now we are down to, what some want to only see, an old man in Galloway and a never before started Armstrong. Then you have R.Williams whome the Skins cut last yr cause he was not good enough and Thomas who basically was not running good routes or getting seperation.
Yes, Joey Galloway is an old man, no argument there.
At some point every WR has never started a game.
Roydell Williams was cut because of injury.
Plenty of team have a less accomplished and less talented 3rd WR then Devin Thomas.

Quote:
So if all opposing teams have to do is put their best CB on Moss, stack the DL, and cover the TE's me might be in a world of trouble unless a WR steps up. Which is why some are worried. If we had a proven, young WR, then I think a lot of people would settle down.
Moss will eat most CB alive if they play him straight man-to-man especially since he'll be playing the Z (off the line) which makes it much more difficult to press him. And Kyle Shanahan is well known for being able to get WRs open through different formations, motions and shifts.

Cover Cooley and Davis with who? LBs? Safeties?
-Bring it on

The 2nd WR or 3rd receiving option just needs to be competent ala David Anderson, Jacoby Jones and Kevin Walter anything else is a bonus.

Quote:
The first game will tell us all what we have.
The 1st game will tell us a little, but the NFL is a game of match-ups and adjustments. What's true in week 1 may not be true in week 5 what's true in week 5 may not be true in week 9.
30gut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2010, 03:50 AM   #13
Dirtbag59
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
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!

I've started to notice that lately theres a trend towards what I would describe as running backs playing Wide Receiver. Now it's not that the players are built like running backs but the way they're used (ie moving the chains with safe plays) is reminscint of how teams have frequently employed running backs. Collinsworth actually touched on it tonight with Miles Austin.

Others in this category include Wes Welker, Brandon Marshall, and Dallas Clark
__________________
"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
Dirtbag59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2010, 07:33 AM   #14
GusFrerotte
Registered User
 
GusFrerotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 4,153
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtbag359 View Post
I've started to notice that lately theres a trend towards what I would describe as running backs playing Wide Receiver. Now it's not that the players are built like running backs but the way they're used (ie moving the chains with safe plays) is reminscint of how teams have frequently employed running backs. Collinsworth actually touched on it tonight with Miles Austin.

Others in this category include Wes Welker, Brandon Marshall, and Dallas Clark
Look at Forte and his monster game for the Bears receiving. I think you are definitely on to something. We need to see K Williams do that for us. We need guys that can catch!!!!!!
GusFrerotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2010, 04:10 AM   #15
tryfuhl
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 43
Posts: 12,514
Re: (Vent thread) I'm sorry,but the notion,that the Redskins have "no" receivers is just stupid!

so stacked at WR tonight
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.49813 seconds with 10 queries