Skins sign blocking TE Sean Ryan

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Davis has terrible blocking numbers--from both me and other sources--last year, but he's still a lot better at it that Yoder is.

Cooley is all over the place from year to year. Last year he was awful. He was awful when he came in to the league. In 2007 and 2008 he was one of the better blocking TEs in the league.

I don't know what #s you're talking about? This new guy isn't better than Yoder IMO.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

I think we should just get Big Mike Williams to lose another hundred pounds and move him to TE.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I think we should just get Big Mike Williams to lose another hundred pounds and move him to TE.

That's actually not a bad idea.

[Mechanix544]

This move doesn't make all that much sense to me. Ok, just because the guy cannot catch the ball well or isnt a good reciever does not automatically make him a "blocking" TE. The guy is mediocre, at best, at blocking, as many other teams have found out, and released him over his illustrious 7 season 7 team career. Another move, given our strength at the proposed position, that makes no sense. If you are gonna upgrade for a blocking TE that is athletic enough for the zone blocking scheme, then UPGRADE. Dont bring in a player that the TE coach or O.C. likes or is loyal to because he spent one year with him on a ridiculously bad team.

This move again, as well as most of the others with the exception of the roster cuts, baffles me.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

This move doesn't make all that much sense to me. Ok, just because the guy cannot catch the ball well or isnt a good reciever does not automatically make him a "blocking" TE. The guy is mediocre, at best, at blocking, as many other teams have found out, and released him over his illustrious 7 season 7 team career. Another move, given our strength at the proposed position, that makes no sense. If you are gonna upgrade for a blocking TE that is athletic enough for the zone blocking scheme, then UPGRADE. Dont bring in a player that the TE coach or O.C. likes or is loyal to because he spent one year with him on a ridiculously bad team.

This move again, as well as most of the others with the exception of the roster cuts, baffles me.

You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in

[Redskins_P]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in

I agree 100%!!

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in

Fuck yeah! That's what I'm talking about!

[Redskin Jim]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

You may be looking at it from a standpoint of bringing in named players who will start immediately. If so, then yes none of the moves make much sense. But, if you look at each of these signings individually, and together, what you see is a solid push by the FO to make several statements:

1) We are going to push at every position. Was TE a glaring need like OL, no, so this signing puts a value on bringing in competition at one of the most solid spots on the team.

2) We understand our needs. It's not surprising that we are bringing in(have brought in) several OL, ILB, and RB's to look at. The FO shows a basic understanding of our weakest links

3) We will not overpay/guarantee for anything or anyone at this point. This demonstrates that the FO understands we are not that 1 player/signing away from Championship.

4) Finally, all these moves - the cuts and signings - reflect a new culture of productivity based employment, not earnings based. Every person on this roster should see a willingness on the new FO to let anyone go, and bring competition to any spot, and if you are not performing, someone else will be here that will gladly push themselves to perform.

That's how I see these moves, and I think it's a change we all can believe in

Great point and post credskinsrule. Very well said.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

This move doesn't make all that much sense to me. Ok, just because the guy cannot catch the ball well or isnt a good reciever does not automatically make him a "blocking" TE. The guy is mediocre, at best, at blocking, as many other teams have found out, and released him over his illustrious 7 season 7 team career. Another move, given our strength at the proposed position, that makes no sense. If you are gonna upgrade for a blocking TE that is athletic enough for the zone blocking scheme, then UPGRADE. Dont bring in a player that the TE coach or O.C. likes or is loyal to because he spent one year with him on a ridiculously bad team.

This move again, as well as most of the others with the exception of the roster cuts, baffles me.

You could've said the same thing when we brought in Yoder.

Relax people.

[MTK]

I guess pickings really are slim when people are getting their panties in a bunch over a move like this. Can't wait for when we make a real news worthy move.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I guess pickings really are slim when people are getting their panties in a bunch over a move like this. Can't wait for when we make a real news worthy move.

How dare we didn't target Watson for the #3 TE spot

[CultBrennan59]

TE's one of our strengths so I don't really care about this guy, he won't be playing that much anyway

[diehard]

Yoder was more than effective in his role. And he caught every (few) balls that came his way, most of them for TDs.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by diehard

Yoder was more than effective in his role. And he caught every (few) balls that came his way, most of them for TDs.

He was alright in the spots we saw him catch that critical pass. Can anyone here say that they say/paid attention to him otherwise? I'd be surprised.

I like Yoder too but to act as if he's not replaceable is very... very... interesting to say the least.

Nobody expects that 3rd TE to come out and as long as someone can catch those floaters thrown towards him they're pretty much an equal replacement.

[MTK]

I'll be honest and say prior to today I've never really heard of Ryan and I don't know much about his game.

Just checking out some info online, his game seems very similar to Yoder's, so I'm not sure we'll be missing out on much. We're talking about a 3rd TE, mostly a blocking guy, and perhaps a teams guy.

So the guy has bounced around the league, big whoop. So has Yoder. I'll trust the new staff's opinion on this new guy.