Moss, not a factor

Anthony Chance · 12-10-2005, 06:47 PM

It's been a while since Santana Moss has had one of those jaw dropping performances. Teams have picked up on this and he often has to fight through double coverage. Some of the best recievers in the league (Steve Smith, Chad Johnson, etc.) routinely face double coverage but still manage to put up big numbers. Is Moss as good as his early season numbers?

I respect Santana and appreciate everything that he brings to Washington, but during our last 6 games he has only one touchdown and zero 100 yrd performances. During this spand our starting H-back (Chris Cooley) trails Moss by about 40 yds.

He is said to be one of the better route runners in the NFL, so why can't he get open?
What is to blame, Play calling, offensive line, quarterbacking, or Moss himself?

sniks · 12-10-2005, 06:52 PM

Is this another overrated thread?

Anthony Chance · 12-10-2005, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sniks

Is this another overrated thread?

No, just something to think about.

Gmanc711 · 12-10-2005, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony Chance

It's been a while since Santana Moss has had one of those jaw dropping performances. Teams have picked up on this and he often has to fight through double coverage. Some of the best recievers in the league (Steve Smith, Chad Johnson, etc.) routinely face double coverage but still manage to put up big numbers. Is Moss as good as his early season numbers?

I respect Santana and appreciate everything that he brings to Washington, but during our last 6 games he has only one touchdown and zero 100 yrd performances. During this spand our starting H-back (Chris Cooley) trails Moss by about 40 yds.

He is said to be one of the better route runners in the NFL, so why can't he get open.
What is to blame, Play calling, offensive line, quarterbacking, or Moss himself?

I would point to the fact that we have no #2 reciver to take pressure off of Moss. I'm actually suprised at the production he has gotten, especially being double and somtimes TRIPPLE teamed, latley. I think Cooley has been a great threat, but needs to be used as an even grater one if we hope to get Moss singled up again.

Anthony Chance · 12-10-2005, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

I would point to the fact that we have no #2 reciver to take pressure off of Moss. I'm actually suprised at the production he has gotten, especially being double and somtimes TRIPPLE teamed, latley. I think Cooley has been a great threat, but needs to be used as an even grater one if we hope to get Moss singled up again.

Thats a good point, we do lack a solid #2 reciever. This makes me wonder why Gibbs choose to go into the season with only 4 recievers, 2 of which are currently injured (Thrash and Patten) and the other couldn't catch a cold (Brown).

I think that Jimmy Farris can produce and should have been with the team in the beginning, it is a little late in the season to ask much of him

Oh yeah has anyone seen Taylor Jacobs

Redskins8588 · 12-10-2005, 08:28 PM

I agree that Moss has ben quite these past weeks, but teams do double and tripple cover him, I was still amazed at that catch that Moss had in the St.Louis game where he was like tripple coverd and he like out jumped everyone for the ball.

But his lack of offense is mainly and hugely due to the fact that other than our H-back, we have no real #2 WR.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 12-10-2005, 08:32 PM

Moss is a very good wideout; unquestionably a #1 wideout. But, in answer to your question, no he's not as good as his early season numbers suggested. NO ONE is as good as his early season numbers suggested; he was on pace for an 1,900 yard season halfway through the season. Great receivers regularly produce 1,200 yard seasons and Moss will do that for us.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 12-10-2005, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

I would point to the fact that we have no #2 reciver to take pressure off of Moss. I'm actually suprised at the production he has gotten, especially being double and somtimes TRIPPLE teamed, latley. I think Cooley has been a great threat, but needs to be used as an even grater one if we hope to get Moss singled up again.

I haven't seen Moss get triple teamed on a regular basis. He's always double-teamed, but I don't recall seeing him get triple-teamed. He's still a great wideout though.

illdefined · 12-10-2005, 08:55 PM

Rod Gardner and Trung Canidate. we've come a long, LONG way.

Redskins8588 · 12-10-2005, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

I haven't seen Moss get triple teamed on a regular basis. He's always double-teamed, but I don't recall seeing him get triple-teamed. He's still a great wideout though.

That catch he had in the St. Louis game he was trippled

BigSKINBauer · 12-10-2005, 10:21 PM

i say we beg the jets to do a trade back

MTK · 12-10-2005, 10:24 PM

Moss > Coles

End of story.

saskin · 12-10-2005, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigSKINBauer

i say we beg the jets to do a trade back

Lol, how about a Patten-Coles trade?

That Guy · 12-11-2005, 06:06 AM

moss can beat double coverages and even triples, but brunell is VERY hesitant to throw him the ball with other jerseys around him and that's part of the problem (as well as the lack of ANY threats outside cooley, who's slow).

Dana87 · 12-11-2005, 07:27 AM

If you want Sanata to make the kind of plays he made in the begining of the season you have to call the plays he made. The deep ball to him has not been pursued for awhile. That deep hook he ran against Seatle that set up the game winning Kick in OT has not been called often enough. Some teams take chances with their star players and throw to them even though they are doubled. I will stack Santana Moss against anyone in the league at getting open, catching the ball, or making someting happen after the catch. But for a fair comparison they have to be running the same plays against the same coverages. Since that comparison can't be made you need to look at the plays he makes when we do go to him, and let that be what you judge him by.

12-10-2005, 08:28 PM	#6
Redskins8588 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ridgway, PA Age: 46 Posts: 2,519	Re: Moss, not a factor I agree that Moss has ben quite these past weeks, but teams do double and tripple cover him, I was still amazed at that catch that Moss had in the St.Louis game where he was like tripple coverd and he like out jumped everyone for the ball. But his lack of offense is mainly and hugely due to the fact that other than our H-back, we have no real #2 WR. __________________ "I am the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice" - Sean Taylor

12-10-2005, 08:32 PM	#7
Sheriff Gonna Getcha Franchise Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 8,317	Re: Moss, not a factor Moss is a very good wideout; unquestionably a #1 wideout. But, in answer to your question, no he's not as good as his early season numbers suggested. NO ONE is as good as his early season numbers suggested; he was on pace for an 1,900 yard season halfway through the season. Great receivers regularly produce 1,200 yard seasons and Moss will do that for us.

12-10-2005, 08:55 PM	#9
illdefined Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: nyc Age: 48 Posts: 2,631	Re: Moss, not a factor Rod Gardner and Trung Canidate. we've come a long, LONG way. __________________ a fan. not a cheerleader.

12-10-2005, 10:21 PM	#11
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 36 Posts: 5,688	Re: Moss, not a factor i say we beg the jets to do a trade back

12-10-2005, 10:24 PM	#12
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,569	Re: Moss, not a factor Moss > Coles End of story.

12-10-2005, 06:47 PM	#1
Anthony Chance Camp Scrub Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 26	Moss, not a factor It's been a while since Santana Moss has had one of those jaw dropping performances. Teams have picked up on this and he often has to fight through double coverage. Some of the best recievers in the league (Steve Smith, Chad Johnson, etc.) routinely face double coverage but still manage to put up big numbers. Is Moss as good as his early season numbers? I respect Santana and appreciate everything that he brings to Washington, but during our last 6 games he has only one touchdown and zero 100 yrd performances. During this spand our starting H-back (Chris Cooley) trails Moss by about 40 yds. He is said to be one of the better route runners in the NFL, so why can't he get open? What is to blame, Play calling, offensive line, quarterbacking, or Moss himself? Last edited by Anthony Chance; 12-10-2005 at 07:09 PM.

12-10-2005, 06:52 PM	#2
sniks Camp Scrub Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: CT. Age: 64 Posts: 97	Re: Moss, not a factor Is this another overrated thread?

12-11-2005, 06:06 AM	#14
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,553	Re: Moss, not a factor moss can beat double coverages and even triples, but brunell is VERY hesitant to throw him the ball with other jerseys around him and that's part of the problem (as well as the lack of ANY threats outside cooley, who's slow).

12-11-2005, 07:27 AM	#15
Dana87 Special Teams Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Saint Augustine, Florida Age: 63 Posts: 130	Re: Moss, not a factor If you want Sanata to make the kind of plays he made in the begining of the season you have to call the plays he made. The deep ball to him has not been pursued for awhile. That deep hook he ran against Seatle that set up the game winning Kick in OT has not been called often enough. Some teams take chances with their star players and throw to them even though they are doubled. I will stack Santana Moss against anyone in the league at getting open, catching the ball, or making someting happen after the catch. But for a fair comparison they have to be running the same plays against the same coverages. Since that comparison can't be made you need to look at the plays he makes when we do go to him, and let that be what you judge him by.

Moss, not a factor

Locker Room Main Forum