wshngtn1 Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 I can't stand all this talk among us fans scared to put a player in a different position than what that player was drafted/traded for. 'We should never have Moss return a punt' - "such a huge risk of injury". 'We should never hope that S. Taylor could ever help us any where else besides saftey' = "it will be such a huge risk of injury". We pay Moss and Taylor both MILLIONS to only play one position each and if we ever dared to do anything else with them, we are risking their/redskins lives - because they might get hurt....PLEASE. (thankfully Gibbs has the giggleberries to throw Moss a punt return every now and again). Injuries happen. The ONLY argument anyone has is that they risk an injury more because they are on the field more, that is it. You can't predict an injury..you can't avoid an injury..you can't prevent an injury. ONE play or ONE HUNDRED plays..it can happen anytime. If I'm a coach, I put the best talent on the field and take the chance - especially at this point in the season. Put Sean Taylor in on 4th and goal at the 1 yard line - ANY DAY - because his "over the top" will be 2 feet higher than any defending llinebacker. Because we pay them MILLIONS, they need to be wrapped up like a baby and nursed...BS...players (and teams) used to win by playing both sides of the ball (or all three) and a day job during the week!!!!. Think about if Portis was a db...could we ever imagine putting him in as a running back and giving him the ball 25+ times a game...HECK NO - WE"D BE RISKING HIM TO INJURY.... BOTTOM LINE = we need to win. At this point in the season, don't tell me Moss shouldn't return punts or S. Taylor shouldn't be a WR or even a RB because of an injury risk. If you believe that, you must be a relative and collecting some cash of these guys. WIN FIRST. I love Maker's Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altair4 Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Sure, why not? As long as they know the assignments and so on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIDETHEWALRUS Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Hell lets do it...in fact why designate positions at all. There is apparently no need for a guy to study one position all week long just to make sure he has his sh!+ together, when we can have all 52 guys on the roster playing wherever they feel like at the time. I have a new offenseive set we ought to try. Griffin at center (he is big strong and physical), Salvae at LG (he is quick enough to pull well) Lets try Phillip Daniels at LT (he has to be better there than he is at pass rushing) We will keep the right side of the line stable. At running back we will use ST (because he is apparently the best back we have in the minds of numerous redskins fans). I want Robert McCune at FB (it doesn't matter that he has never played the position before he is strong as hell and pretty darn fast). At WR I'd like to stick in Carlos Rogers (have you seen him jump and lay out for passes) and of course Santana stays out there. At TE I like the idea of playing Marcus Washington (the man is just a pure monster). And at QB you have to go with Clinton Portis (he has a career QB rating of 90.3, highest on the team). Lets make a run of it. Jack Daniels is a beautiful thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Moss was never intended to be a return man here being AB was slated for that spot. The only way I would use Moss on returns is the same way Gibbs used Darrell Green. When it was a special moment............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Injuries are EXACTLY why I think it's a mistake to have Sean Taylor be the waterboy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trez Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 I just don't see the point of having players playing several positions. Granted, some athletes are better than others. But it makes sense to have players study, practice and perform at only one position...each player is an expert at his position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onedrop Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 I can't stand all this talk among us fans scared to put a player in a different position than what that player was drafted/traded for. 'We should never have Moss return a punt' - "such a huge risk of injury". 'We should never hope that S. Taylor could ever help us any where else besides saftey' = "it will be such a huge risk of injury". We pay Moss and Taylor both MILLIONS to only play one position each and if we ever dared to do anything else with them, we are risking their/redskins lives - because they might get hurt....PLEASE. (thankfully Gibbs has the giggleberries to throw Moss a punt return every now and again). Injuries happen. The ONLY argument anyone has is that they risk an injury more because they are on the field more, that is it. You can't predict an injury..you can't avoid an injury..you can't prevent an injury. ONE play or ONE HUNDRED plays..it can happen anytime. If I'm a coach, I put the best talent on the field and take the chance - especially at this point in the season. Put Sean Taylor in on 4th and goal at the 1 yard line - ANY DAY - because his "over the top" will be 2 feet higher than any defending llinebacker. Because we pay them MILLIONS, they need to be wrapped up like a baby and nursed...BS...players (and teams) used to win by playing both sides of the ball (or all three) and a day job during the week!!!!. Think about if Portis was a db...could we ever imagine putting him in as a running back and giving him the ball 25+ times a game...HECK NO - WE"D BE RISKING HIM TO INJURY.... BOTTOM LINE = we need to win. At this point in the season, don't tell me Moss shouldn't return punts or S. Taylor shouldn't be a WR or even a RB because of an injury risk. If you believe that, you must be a relative and collecting some cash of these guys. WIN FIRST. I love Maker's Mark. i think that you are missing the point a bit. they do not want ST to play receiver and get injured true. but that is not because of his winning personality, it is because he is our starting safety. if he cathces a TD but gets knocked out for the season we gain 7 points but how many will we give up if ST does not play? God forbid we use Moss on every punt return. lets say he breaks one but tears a hammy doing so. well great we have a TD or great field position but know our #1 reciever is out indefinitely. it is all about risk vs. payoff. and in most cases it just isnt worth the risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 i do like him as a reciever... bring him in on 3rd down. we could use him to block or just try to throw one up and hope he comes down with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 You make some good points, but I think you're oversimplifying a bit. Not ALL on-the-field playing scenarios are equally dangerous. Specifically, allowing a star player, say a WR to return kicks (for example) is much more dangerous than the risks inherent in playing his regular position. He's not able to see the coverage coming, he's highly vulnerable, and he may be outsized by the man he's about to be hit by (vs. your typically average-sized cornerback). You also have to take into account how thin you are at that players position. The risk vs reward equation may not justify the added risk. And you have to look at whether that particular player you're placing at increased risk is durable enough to handle the additional wear and tear, and whether or not they are already dinged up or not. I think you're going to see Joe Gibbs open things up and take some chances in the coming weeks, especially if we win tomorrow. You saw the first glimpses against the Rams, and I expect to see some new wrinkles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Moss came into this league in part to return punts. That's his mentality. As far as playing players at an un-natural position, well I agree with you. I made a comment about about playing him at OLB, because I know he can naturally rush the passer and he could cover any tightend or backfield passing threat. That is a position he could do, now wheterh it would be effective or not who knows. But I've seen people wanting him at short yardage back and wide receiver and I don't understand why. Only time Joe Gibbs has put him at WR it was to draw attention. Gibbs might be setting teams up for later on and actually throw to him but for the most part it's to get the attention of the defense period. If ST could spark our offense, you would have seen it by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 10, 2005 Share Posted December 10, 2005 Moss and Taylor are already nursing injuries which reduce their effectiveness. How far do you want to go with this BS? Until both players are placed on the inactive list in a critical game? Portis and Cartwright just ran for 257 yards last week and somebody is suggesting we need Taylor to line up in the backfield? The truth is the backs, especially with Betts back this week, are fine. If the offensive line blocks the way it is supposed to, the Redskins aren't going to have any problems in short. It has been the inability of the line to prevent penetration at the point where our backs receive the ball in the backfield that has lead to a number of key failures to convert third and short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.