OVCChairman Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 IMO, Gibbs will wait till camp and preseason to figure this out. And I wouldnt be surprised if it was an overall race for starters, Moss included. Moss did great last year but Gibbs will put the players in that he thinks can help us win. I seriously could see Gibbs going into this presseason without having a set 1-2-3 lineup. Only time will tell Skins To Wins Baby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robotfire Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Don't be so sure about Patten not being a factor. A lot of players that Gibbs has brought in made huge strides in the second year when they didn't produce at all in the first year. Brunell was not impressive, Portis had an average first year (as far as yards per carry were concerned), Cooley was good but not amazing (although he did lead the team in touchdowns...), and the list goes on. The first-year offensive line was lacking as well. David Patten got injured, and he was doing a great job of allowing Moss to get open before that. He played an important role last year, and he may explode as a number 3 receiver this year. You never know. He's had a pretty good career up to this point. Clint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randythesofine Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 I think Lloyd will be the steal of this free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman1119446 Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 it's also important to remember that saunders is talking about running a lot of 3 wide out sets, so i don't think it's so much that people are going to be designated 1's and 2's as they are going to be matched up in situations to exploit the defenses. this isn't going to be a conventional offense that has a go to guy. it is going to be a "take what mismatches we can." personally, i wouldn't be surprised if cooley is considered the go-to-guy by the end of the season. Lets not forget, that Cooley is going to be wide-open with the attention going to Santana, ARE, and Lloyd. You cannot cover everyone, and Cooley (right now) is the odd man out in terms of who the d is going to cover. Cooley will be having a stellar year. We have set ourselves up so that a d cannot cover everyone on every play. Brunnel just has to find the open guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrod6002 Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 i say that lloyd is the #2 and Randel El #3 I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey T Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 I think the Redskins plan is for Lloyd to be the #2 and for Randle El to be a multi-dimensional player that catches passes out of the slot as a the #3, returns punts and runs the end arounds, etc. to keep defenses honest. Yep. Exactly what you said. With Els' multiple talents, he will play off the LOS for manuverability purposes. If he has just returned a punt or KO, he may not make it on the field during the first series..........this is where Patten can help from the slot as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XSean21TaylorX Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 may the best WR win. the #2 pos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critz1407 Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 I would say that Lloyd is the number 2. ARE will find his use in many other ways to compensate for being #3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishisthegreatstuff Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 patten is just as good as ARE i don't think we needed him. We would have been fine with moss lloyd and patten. Then maybe we could have used the ARE money to sign another impact player on the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 we could have used the ARE money to sign another impact player on the defense. i agree...say julian peterson??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBleedBurgundy&Gold1369225669 Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 i agree...say julian peterson??? I would like to have peterson too. We also should of signed E James as a back up to portis.LOL ..... Peterson cost almost three x's mre than ARE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.