DCMONEY Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Ryan Clark is saying what I've been saying for a long time. The Skins seem to pay outside players, yet they don't want to reward those that have produced for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louie 14 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Any expression of this nature will not be good with the team Coaches. Its not Danny. He is Gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cphil006 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Other teams showd interest in Ryan Clark, so if Ryan Clark were to leave, we need a replacement and Archulete might be good. I think we should keep Clark, though. Him and Sean have a good report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmorina69 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 im with him keep are core, i love clark hes a great skin, i dont relly want achelta ( or however u spell it) much rather have clark . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Ryan Clark is saying what I've been saying for a long time. The Skins seem to pay outside players, yet they don't want to reward those that have produced for them. Clark himself came in as an "outside player" from the Gints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Ryan Clark is not very good. That is why we do not care. That one interception he had vs the Eagles was right to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Clark is a "coverage" strong safety. He's a good player, but he's limited in what we can do with him there. Archuleta brings an element we haven't had since Bowen got hurt two years ago. That as a force at the line of scrimmage teams have to account for. He changes the dynamic of the defense. Taylor is the best safety in the league in coverage. Archuleta will be used in some very aggressive ways because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCMONEY Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Clark himself came in as an "outside player" from the Gints. He wasn't signed for a huge amount though. Bottom line is that he(Clark) plays with heart. People on this thread are knocking Clark but he brings it despite not being big. He looks for contact. I'll say it again. There are some guys built like Tarzan and playing like Jane. People on this thread are talking like Archeluta is a beast. I'd take Clark who's been here and proven he can step up and play rather than over pay for Adam Archeluta. Hell Clark hasn't even been a starter for most his career and has the same amount of INT's as Archeluta. I know INT's don't tell the whole story but I just feel Clark has been here and he looks to come up and hit. I like that in him. Now the only thing Archeluta has on Clark to me is size. Ability wise there's not that much difference. I can remember the Skins signing Matt Bowen mainly because he had a big game against the Atlanta Falcons. He had like 15 tackles. I was like thats good but can he cover. Now Matt Bowen came on early and had some sacks but he was suspect covering. The Skins brass need to evaluate the whole picture. A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I can understand Clark's position. It does seem that being called a "Core Redskin" is a kiss of death on this team. He's seen a couple of his teammates called that that didn't return. Also, he sees a guy who could likely take his job. After scratching for a starting job, it is frustrating to see someone being brought in to take his job. At the same time, you can see where the skins are comming from. Archeletta isn't just about Ryan Clark, but also an insurance policy if Sean Taylor goes to jail. There is also the fact that Clark isn't the world's greatest safety. Yes, he's a good hitter, but I saw him burned more often than not in coverage. Course, Archeletta isn't much of an upgrade there. Course, there is an assumption here that the defense doesn't need work. This isn't looking at the fact that a couple of starters are going to change, and that will affect the defense. The Redskins better not fall asleep on this, and know that they do need to work on their depth. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Clark is a "coverage" strong safety. He's a good player, but he's limited in what we can do with him there. Archuleta brings an element we haven't had since Bowen got hurt two years ago. That as a force at the line of scrimmage teams have to account for. He changes the dynamic of the defense. Taylor is the best safety in the league in coverage. Archuleta will be used in some very aggressive ways because of it. If Clark is a "coverage" strong safety, he wasn't very good at it. I saw him burned more often than not. I don't know if Archuleta is much of an upgrade, really, since he has less coverage ability than Clark, and I don't know if he hits any harder. I understand why we go after Archuleta, but if everyone comes back, I don't know if he really improves things. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonoman Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Clark sucked.No loss to the Skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 If Clark is a "coverage" strong safety, he wasn't very good at it. I saw him burned more often than not. I don't know if Archuleta is much of an upgrade, really, since he has less coverage ability than Clark, and I don't know if he hits any harder.I understand why we go after Archuleta, but if everyone comes back, I don't know if he really improves things. Jason Actually, Clark was very good in coverage. Yes, he was also beaten, but, everyone in the league is beaten from time to time. Clark gave us the David Terrell element when Terrell was used correctly. He could match up on weaker receivers or tight ends alone in man coverage being a converted corner. But, the force he brought and versatility he brought was less than you'd like in a typical strong safety. Archuleta adds elements to the defense we haven't SEEN for two years for the most part. He's not as good in coverage, but, in a zone he's fine. He is far superior around the line, blitzing and flying to the ball as a bit bigger player in that role. If Taylor was so good in coverage we'd just move Clark to free safety and call it a day . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triple6mafia Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 It is too bad to hear that. He is a core guy and has been around and really wants to stay. If we do sign archuletta, we better not over pay cause I would like to see clark back in B&G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I can remember the Skins signing Matt Bowen mainly because he had a big game against the Atlanta Falcons. He had like 15 tackles. I was like thats good but can he cover. Now Matt Bowen came on early and had some sacks but he was suspect covering. The Skins brass need to evaluate the whole picture. A I think that's what they're trying to do. The Coaches loved Matt Bowen, but they obviously saw he wasn't the same player after his injury. If there's a chance to improve at a position, then they have to at least explore it. God bless him and his heart, but Clark isn't really the best we can do at starting SS. The 'Skins do want to keep him, but aren't going to guarantee a starting spot for him. It's not about money to him and I appreciate that, but he also has to understand that the team has to do what they feel is best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Actually, Clark was very good in coverage. Yes, he was also beaten, but, everyone in the league is beaten from time to time. Clark gave us the David Terrell element when Terrell was used correctly. He could match up on weaker receivers or tight ends alone in man coverage being a converted corner. But, the force he brought and versatility he brought was less than you'd like in a typical strong safety. Sorry, but I think you are thinking about Prioleau. He was more like David Terrell than Clark was. I rarely saw Clark giving good one-on-one coverage on a receiver. He was better in zone, perhaps, but I saw him consistantly getting beat one-on-one. Archeleta is probably a better hitter, but he's probably even weaker in coverage. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McMetal Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I don't think a guy should be making comments about players we haven't even signed. That's pretty weak. Not only does it make him look insecure and ungrateful (he wouldn't be in the position he is in today without the Skins and GW believing in him), it doesn't do anything to help his chances of staying. This is irritating to me. Let him go if he wants to keep crying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
demarc007 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 If we sign AA, as soon as GW starts drawing up funky blitzes and AA is flying all over the field creating havoc you guys will forget all about Ryan Clark, seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gortiz Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Didn't really seem like a rip to me Yeah, but those words hurt man. It kind of makes me feel like we dont take care of our own man . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Ryan Clark is saying what I've been saying for a long time. The Skins seem to pay outside players, yet they don't want to reward those that have produced for them. The Skins offered Smoot and Pierce basically the same money they offered Springs and Washington. No one on these boards has any idea what they have offered Clark. Either way Joe Gibbs, Gregg Williams, Al Saunders, Dan Snyder and Vinnie Cerrato sat in a room before free agency started and decided what positions the Skins needed to upgrade and clearly SS came up in the discussion. Do you really think that as they pored over the listed of available free agents that they just decided the guys they wanted regardless of who they had at the position? No, they asked Gregg Williams the positions he thought could be upgraded and clearly he thought SS was one of them. I like Ryan Clark for what he stands for in hard work and overcoming the odds but he is not a core Redskin. He is a player that gives his all but is physically limited because of his size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseGoForTheWin Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I think Archuleta has some play making ability but I think all of Gibbs' talk of core players will seem hollow going forward if we don't bring a player like Ryan back.... yep :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCBnG21 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Well, with Archuletta signed, I for one hope that we still bring Clark back. Williams believes in rotating people through constantly, so I'd imagine that there is still room for him... I doubt that Gibbs would sacrifice his core player mentality to bring in some free agents, he's a mster of chemistry and building teams. I doubt that he forgot it all at the start of free agency.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonBurgundy&Gold Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Why should anything come easy to Ryan Clark? Like those have said before me, he's not that good. I've been wondering why everyone was so worried about getting him signed this whole time. Personally I think it was his whole "why wouldn't you want to play for a coach like Gibbs" speech at the end of last season and not what he did on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Yeah, definitely doesn't seem like criticism though his disappointment is obvious. Just goes to show how much he loves this team and it'd be a pity to let him go. Honestly though, for depth, I'd rather keep Prioleau for his all-around ability. PP might've been our most underrated acquisition last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasRoane Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Love Ryan Clark as a player and person. But objectively, he's trying to play safety with a DB's body. Hope he decides to hang around anyways. Cause I don't think he'll find a market looking for under-sized safety's with average speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What player isn't a Core Redskin on this team? What player is fair game for an upgrade if a better option is available? Some people get too worked up over the Core Redskin thing. The fact is the coaching staff is going to identify upgrade needs and some players are going to go away. Clark may yet stay, but I suspect, as Art indidcated, he's more interested in his role than the money. He probably sees himself moving to a backup role if AA is signed, and doesn't want that. Understandable, but his feelings aren't important to making the right personnell decision. It's funny that that he says the team isn't committed to keeping it's core players, when the team tried to do that with Smoot and Pierce and now him. It's the players who decided to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.