Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?

[PhxRedSkin]

Sorry didn't get your quote in there, but it was "NO, NO & NO"

Absolutely! He would ruin the unity that we are starting to develop. No doubt he is an incredible athlete. However, he is not of the mold of a "REDSKIN" I hope Vinny does not get his hands in this----please say NO thanks Mr. Gibbs.

[SKINSnCANES]

Originally Posted by diehardskin2982

YES

I would take TO. I think this year will humble him in my opinion. His mouth got him in trouble, and jepordized his career, you think that doesn't play in his mind. The next team that gets him is gonna have a steal because he will be smarter in what he says.

He wants to be payed like a top ten reciever, I can't see why he shouldn't. HE IS A TOP TEN WIDEOUT. Can we give him the money, I don't know. I know we can pay him what he wants, but can we fit him under the cap?

If you look at what he would bring to the team. ~Moss would no longer be double or triple teamed. He would free up the run for portis, and with weapons like that Rogers has no option but to succed and become better.

If we can keep Greg Williams here for next year, we would become a instant superbowl contender, can't deny the potiential

I would take TO no in a heart beat. Who cares if he runs his mouth. We would have the fastest receiver on one side, the most dominant possession receiver on the other, cooley always finding somewhere underneath and portis in the backfield...That would be amazing.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

I would take TO no in a heart beat. Who cares if he runs his mouth. We would have the fastest receiver on one side, the most dominant possession receiver on the other, cooley always finding somewhere underneath and portis in the backfield...That would be amazing.

Completely off topic, and pardon the ignorance, but what exactly does "possession receiver" mean? I hear the term all the time, but I don't know what it means.

Thanks!

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

Completely off topic, and pardon the ignorance, but what exactly does "possession receiver" mean? I hear the term all the time, but I don't know what it means.

Thanks!

It's a guy that can catch the ball in traffic and keep the chains moving. Traditionally, a "possession receiver" isn't a big-play guy. Examples of possession guys would be Keyshawn Johnson, Wayne Chrebet circa 2000, and the ultimate would be Art Monk.

I wouldn't call TO a possession receiver because he really is dominant at catching balls in traffic and at catching balls on deep routes.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

I would take TO no in a heart beat. Who cares if he runs his mouth. We would have the fastest receiver on one side, the most dominant possession receiver on the other, cooley always finding somewhere underneath and portis in the backfield...That would be amazing.

Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb definitely seem to care when TO runs his mouth. I think fans would be willing to listen to TO talk all he wanted if his talk didn't cause rifts in the locker room. That's the issue, and it shouldn't be ignored just because TO can bring big plays.

[Master4Caster]

A "possession receiver" describes a receiver who reliably catches short and mid-range passes designed to make first downs so that the offense may keep possession of the ball. Art Monk was considered a possession receiver. You could always go to him and he would always catch the ball no matter what. Gary Clarke was a big play receiver. You would go deep to him to get the score. (Of course, Monk would also go deep and Clarke could also catch the short ball.)

Among current Redskins, I would call Chris Cooley and James Thrash possession receivers.

Possession receivers don't seem to get elected to the Football Hall of Fame.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb definitely seem to care when TO runs his mouth. I think fans would be willing to listen to TO talk all he wanted if his talk didn't cause rifts in the locker room. That's the issue, and it shouldn't be ignored just because TO can bring big plays.

It appears to be the thought process of " some" youngsters today when it comes to troubled athletes. Somehow it dosen't seem to matter what type charachter the individual player is, as long as he can make plays on the field that's all that seems to matter. Well there is some of us who do not beleive that that is the most important thing when you have to have two sets of rules, one set for TO and one set for everybody else.

Check out Michael Wilbon's colum in today's Wash Post on Ron Artest.

[Dogtag]

Short answer -- NO.

I think we learned that buying big name talent is often just a waste of money if the talent is a prima dona.

[SkinsFan3000]

don't make me :vomit:

next question.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

One of the things I have seen concerning his SB heroics last year was that, when he went down and his teammates bucked up and said "we don't need TO to win it all", TO took that as a slight to him. His follow-up actions seem to support that theory. From that moment on, the relationship soured. He had to take steps to show that, in fact, he was the most important guy on the team. The money demands started, the bad-mouthing McNabb started.

From ESPN, Quoting Owens:

"'A lot of people, they doubted me,' Owens said in the January issue of GQ. 'Some of my teammates didn't want to see me come back, but I came back. ... That's why I felt so ultimately disrespected, because I knew how hard I worked to get back on that field to help them. Had I not played, who knows, we probably would've gotten beat worse. ... One of the main reasons they brought me to Philadelphia was to get to the Super Bowl, so it's just like, I feel used all of a sudden,' he said. 'You all used me to win a lot of games, and then once I got hurt last year before the playoffs, it was, ''Yeah, we really don't need T.O.''"

The team "used him" to win games??

First: For what other possible reason would the team employ him??

Second: What were they supposed to say after he got hurt - "We are doomed, lets all go home, we're calling off the season b/c Owens is out of it."

Yeah we need this guy.

Here is the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2260956

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

From ESPN, Quoting Owens:

"One of the main reasons they brought me to Philadelphia was to get to the Super Bowl, so it's just like, I feel used all of a sudden," he said. "You all used me to win a lot of games, and then once I got hurt last year before the playoffs, it was, 'Yeah, we really don't need T.O.'"

The team "used him" to win games??

First: For what other possible reason would the team employ him??

Second: What were they supposed to say after he got hurt - "We are doomed, lets all go home, we're calling off the season b/c Owens is out of it."

Yeah we need this guy.

Here is the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2260956

That's just amazing. I swear this guy has gone from a talented football player to a walking, talking circus. Between his unbelievable rants and his agent he is nothing but a joke - I don't know how people can even interview him with a straight face.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

From ESPN, Quoting Owens:

"'A lot of people, they doubted me,' Owens said in the January issue of GQ. 'Some of my teammates didn't want to see me come back, but I came back. ... That's why I felt so ultimately disrespected, because I knew how hard I worked to get back on that field to help them. Had I not played, who knows, we probably would've gotten beat worse. ... One of the main reasons they brought me to Philadelphia was to get to the Super Bowl, so it's just like, I feel used all of a sudden,' he said. 'You all used me to win a lot of games, and then once I got hurt last year before the playoffs, it was, ''Yeah, we really don't need T.O.''"

The team "used him" to win games??

First: For what other possible reason would the team employ him??

Second: What were they supposed to say after he got hurt - "We are doomed, lets all go home, we're calling off the season b/c Owens is out of it."

Yeah we need this guy.

Here is the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2260956

Funny how TO seems to understand or embrace the concept that he's being disrespected but on the other hand he dosen't quite understand what it means to respect others.

Quote "It has been brought to my attention that I "may" have offended members of this organization as well as my team-mates". If what he said and did had to be brought to his attention,then he truly has no grip on what respect is all about.

[Sammy Baugh Fan]

No 2 To!

[hailvictory384]

Much as I cannot stand TO as a human being, as a player its undeniable the effect he would have on the Redskins offense. As I see it, the Skins have two major threats on offense--CP and Santana. Since we've got no real 2nd receiver, whenever Joe calls in the max protect, stack the line against Portis, double cover Santana, and the offense gets stalled. Throw TO into that mix, it would ease up the pressure on CP, as well as assure that either moss or owens gets open a decent amount of the time. We'd go from an offense that drives and doesnt score to one that scores at will. worth the risk, i'd say, but then again, i'm sick and tired of losing.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

If we sign T.O. I will become a baseball fan.