SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I must admit...i dont know what the hell Samuels was doing last Sunday against that no name DE the Giants had. He was getting burned constantly. He seems to have trouble against the quicker guys. Jevon Kearse is pretty fast...i hope they dont line across from each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 goldenstar, You are absolutely correct. I truly thought Peter Warrick was going to be amazing coming in...you just never know. The inconsistency of Lavar and Samuels has been because of the many coaching changes we have had. I believe that after time and playing under JG that these 2 players will prove they were worth the picks. Also i find it ridiculous that people think Lavar was a bust just because he wasn't the next LT. That ticks me off because he was one of the LB's that ever played and for someone to be a bust just because he wasn't the next LT is beyond me. Yep. Lavar came in with too much hype he didn't want or deserve. He's his own type of game-breaking LB. And that's the way we should view him. BTW, he did have a pretty nice season sack-wise under Marvin Lewis when he lined up as a DE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Ok, and so the point is that it is possible to acquire high caliber OTs for considerably less money. If there's a way to dump Samuels - perhaps through an offseason trade - then, it needs to be considered as an option. Continuing down this path with CS just seems to be nothing short of a gamble. Dump him for who? There are very few teams that will let a lineman at Samuels calibur or above into free agency. Now the trade...i dunno. Drafting anyone is a gamble...no one is a sure pick. That is what amazes me in the NFL...people can be absolutely amazing in college and can be chumps in the NFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I must admit...i dont know what the hell Samuels was doing last Sunday against that no name DE the Giants had. He was getting burned constantly. He seems to have trouble against the quicker guys. Jevon Kearse is pretty fast...i hope they dont line across from each other. That's not a "no name" guy the Giants had. His name is Osi Umenyiora, and he's probably one of the most underrated, never heard of d-lineman in the league. Remember also that just about everyone on the o-line had problems, including Jansen. That could very well be attributed to the fact that we continued to pass and the Giants just figured out that they didn't have to respect our run game, just as the Broncos did with the Iggles who also refuse to run the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I must admit...i dont know what the hell Samuels was doing last Sunday against that no name DE the Giants had. He was getting burned constantly. He seems to have trouble against the quicker guys. Jevon Kearse is pretty fast...i hope they dont line across from each other. Right. And a top 3 OT (in terms of compensation) is expected to consistently match up well with opposing top tier assignments. Sure, you lose some (plays) and you win some, but to be completely dominated by those very same assignments is just completely unacceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Yep. Lavar came in with too much hype he didn't want or deserve. He's his own type of game-breaking LB. And that's the way we should view him. BTW, he did have a pretty nice season sack-wise under Marvin Lewis when he lined up as a DE. Yeah...i think he had like 10 or something like that...i dont really remember. But i'd take him over Holdman in a heartbeat...Holdman has like 15 tackles for a linbacker...good grief i think Carlos Rogers has more tackles than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Dump him for who? There are very few teams that will let a lineman at Samuels calibur or above into free agency. Now the trade...i dunno. Drafting anyone is a gamble...no one is a sure pick. That is what amazes me in the NFL...people can be absolutely amazing in college and can be chumps in the NFF. Good point. If we trade Samuels, who'd we trade him for? Another LT. If we have to draft someone, we only have a second rounder. And, at least in the short run, we're gonna have a lot of problems with a green LT in the year that Jason Campbell might take over the reins as starting QB. In short, that ain't a good plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Right. And a top 3 OT (in terms of compensation) is expected to consistently match up well with opposing top tier assignments. Sure, you lose some (plays) and you win some, but to be completely dominated by those very same assignments is just completely unacceptable. Sometimes he looks great sometimes he's invisible...i just dont like his consistency...i see a ton of potential in him. If only he would show up to the games more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Yeah...i think he had like 10 or something like that...i dont really remember. But i'd take him over Holdman in a heartbeat...Holdman has like 15 tackles for a linbacker...good grief i think Carlos Rogers has more tackles than him. I think Lavar had 11 sacks. And yeah, I'd put in Ade Jimoh to replace Warrick Holdman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Dump him for who? There are very few teams that will let a lineman at Samuels calibur or above into free agency. Now the trade...i dunno. Drafting anyone is a gamble...no one is a sure pick. That is what amazes me in the NFL...people can be absolutely amazing in college and can be chumps in the NFF. Not sure. Let's see what the offseason holds. Using that same logic, should we have continued on with, say, Westbroken or Gardner? At some point, you always have to cut your losses, and maybe now (this offseason) is that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Good point. If we trade Samuels, who'd we trade him for? Another LT. If we have to draft someone, we only have a second rounder. And, at least in the short run, we're gonna have a lot of problems with a green LT in the year that Jason Campbell might take over the reins as starting QB. In short, that ain't a good plan. Yeah...i'm not worried about the second round pick though...as long as we dont draft 3 more FBs i'll be fine. I think we can find a few gems in the draft. I think the success of JC is gonna depend on our line. If we dont allow sacks his confidence will get sky high and the there wont be a limit to his potential. But if we screw him over like we did Ramsey...it would look really bad for our team and pretty good for Denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Not sure. Let's see what the offseason holds. Using that same logic, should we have continued on with, say, Westbroken or Gardner? At some point, you always have to cut your losses, and maybe now (this offseason) is that time. No...there is a huge difference in the impact that Samuels has compared the impact that Gardner had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Yeah...i'm not worried about the second round pick though...as long as we dont draft 3 more FBs i'll be fine. I think we can find a few gems in the draft. I think the success of JC is gonna depend on our line. If we dont allow sacks his confidence will get sky high and the there wont be a limit to his potential. But if we screw him over like we did Ramsey...it would look really bad for our team and pretty good for Denver. I'm hoping for one more of year Brunell before throwing Campbell into the fray. Pennington watched for a longer period of time and was ready from the get-go when he got the starting call. Campbell has better physical tools than Pennington and if he's ready like Chad was, he'll be that much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 No...there is a huge difference in the impact that Samuels has compared the impact that Gardner had. When? 4 seasons ago? Remember that Gardner also had a decent first and second year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 No...there is a huge difference in the impact that Samuels has compared the impact that Gardner had. Just about to make that point. Also, Gardner was in the last year of his contract, thus making his cap hit de minimis. With Westbrook, we simply didn't re-sign him after his rookie contract expired. BTW, in mentioning Westy, that reminded me of Brad Johnson, someone we'll see in the coming weeks when the Vikes come to town. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I'm hoping for one more of year Brunell before throwing Campbell into the fray. Pennington watched for a longer period of time and was ready from the get-go when he got the starting call. Campbell has better physical tools than Pennington and if he's ready like Chad was, he'll be that much better. Yeah...i think you are right. Brunell is doing fine...i'll take him over Ramsey any day. I wasn't one of those Ramsey or Brunell bashers...i was more of a wait and see. Ramsey never really looked good to me. But i think JC can be pretty good. The future of this team is in his palm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 When? 4 seasons ago? Remember that Gardner also had a decent first and second year. Ohh yeah...he's the guy that showed up in that Dallas game right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Just about to make that point. Also, Gardner was in the last year of his contract, thus making his cap hit de minimis. With Westbrook, we simply didn't re-sign him after his rookie contract expired.BTW, in mentioning Westy, that reminded me of Brad Johnson, someone we'll see in the coming weeks when the Vikes come to town. :laugh: I dont think we play Minny do we? We picked this chump instead of Santana... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Ohh yeah...he's the guy that showed up in that Dallas game right? RECEIVING Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FD 2001 Washington Redskins 16 16 46 741 16.1 85 4 8 5 28 2002 Washington Redskins 16 15 71 1006 14.2 43 8 13 2 51 2003 Washington Redskins 16 16 59 600 10.2 35 5 7 0 30 2004 Washington Redskins 16 14 51 650 12.7 51 5 7 3 30 In 2001/2002 he was decent. He dropped off considerably thereafter, and was shown the door. With CS, it's the same trend just with a lot more money on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 RECEIVING Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FD 2001 Washington Redskins 16 16 46 741 16.1 85 4 8 5 28 2002 Washington Redskins 16 15 71 1006 14.2 43 8 13 2 51 2003 Washington Redskins 16 16 59 600 10.2 35 5 7 0 30 2004 Washington Redskins 16 14 51 650 12.7 51 5 7 3 30 In 2001/2002 he was decent. He dropped off considerably thereafter, and was shown the door. With CS, it's the same trend just with a lot more money on the line. Which is the big reason why we are keeping him. We may be gambling but the outcome may be big...and the worst case scenario...what you have right now, and above average lineman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Which is the big reason why we are keeping him. We may be gambling but the outcome may be big...and the worst case scenario...what you have right now, and above average lineman. Yes, and there's a huge difference between Samuels and Gardner. Unlike Samuels, Gardner never made one, much less two Pro-Bowls. And, as noted by the SI excerpt referred to at the beginning of this thread, Samuels, as noted by others, had a Pro-Bowl like year last year. That's hardly a trend downwards and not anything like the precipitous fall from grace that Gardner witnessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I dont think we play Minny do we? We picked this chump instead of Santana... Whoops! We don't play Minny. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Which is the big reason why we are keeping him. We may be gambling but the outcome may be big...and the worst case scenario...what you have right now, and above average lineman. Above average? I would beg to differ. Above average OTs are not consistenly dominated by opposing assignments, which has been the case too many times this season (and the last few). Besides, you pay top 3 money for more than just merely "above average". The issue is not, and cannot be right now; it's what can be done in the offseason? The fact that CS' play is not commensurate with his paycheck (and cap consumption) demands the earnest attempt (in the offseason) to examine other options - i.e. a possible trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Yes, and there's a huge difference between Samuels and Gardner. Unlike Samuels, Gardner never made one, much less two Pro-Bowls. And, as noted by the SI excerpt referred to at the beginning of this thread, Samuels, as noted by others, had a Pro-Bowl like year last year. That's hardly a trend downwards and not anything like the precipitous fall from grace that Gardner witnessed. I dont see where all this negativity about our players is coming from...if you wanna call a player a bum please by all means call Holdman a bum...lol. Still got me on that one GW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Above average? I would beg to differ. Above average OTs are not consistenly dominated by opposing assignments, which has been the case too many times this season (and the last few). Besides, you pay top 3 money for more than just merely "above average". The issue is not, and cannot be right now; it's what can be done in the offseason? The fact that CS' play is not commensurate with his paycheck (and cap consumption) demands the earnest attempt (in the offseason) to examine other options - i.e. a possible trade. Oh come on...theres no way he's anything below above average. He plays pretty well, and does his blocking assignments pretty well. If it wasn't for him getting blown away by that Giants DE, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion right now. He has been doing pretty well up until then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.