MRMADD Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 With all the hand-wringing about Patten's fate (and joyful celebration about Jacobs'), I thought I'd take a look back at how Saunders used his receivers in KC. Is there room for a fourth receiver? In 2004, he had five receivers with significant yardage: Kennison 62/1086 Morton 55/795 Blaylock 25/245 Hall 25/230 and Gonzalez 102/1258 In 2005, it looked like this: Kennison 68/1102 Parker 36/533 Hall 34/436 Horn 18/187 and Gonzalez 78/905 Those number are skewed, of course, because Gonzalez is such a dominant pass-catching tight end. Has to make Cooley happy though. But it does show that Saunders likes to spread the ball around. I realize this is apples-and-oranges, because he had Green throwing the ball, but it's still interesting. If he uses Moss, Lloyd, ARE, and Cooley the way he used his receivers last year, you'd expect Moss, Lloyd, and ARE to get the lion's share of the balls thrown to receivers. ARE won't be a forgotten man -- 25-35 catches is nothing to sneeze at, although it's below the 35-45 he was getting in Pittsburgh. His 4th receiver seems to have hovered around 18-25 catches, so Patten won't get much more than a catch and a half per game. I imagine, however, that Saunders will adjust to the talent he has here -- Moss is clearly better than Kennison, so I'd expect Moss to catch more balls. And Cooley, while great, is not Gonzalez, so I'd expect fewer balls thrown his way. That probably doesn't change the number of balls left over for the other guys, though. Lloyd is probably looking at 40-50 catches if he emerges as the true #2, and ARE gets 25-35 -- and probably more when Saunders figures out how to exploit his multidimensional talent. Patten gets the scraps. So in the end I don't think there's a lot of hope for Patten. Yeah, the best guy plays, but the Skins have invested a lot in Lloyd and ARE for a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Wow, in 2004 two WRs with over 1,000 yards and almost a third with over 700 yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clevelanskins28 Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 My thinking is that even though our number 4 may only get a catch a game, Saunders will have it so the opposing defense cant sleep on anyone. In KC, anyone could tear you up any day of the week, even though they didnt have half the talent, besides Tony Gonzalez, that we do. I think this will be a top 5 offense, and will keep defenses on their toes, if not heels, at all times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoBob Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 The best part about this is - aside from Gonzales v. Cooley, I like our receivers over theirs in both years..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chronicdesi Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 We also have a more aggressive defense then they did. If we can manage to get more turnovers this year, and dominate the time of possession more, we will have more opportunity. The comparision to the wideouts can be made, but there are just so many different circumstances that tie into how well they are going to produce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timdaley73 Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 But, you guys gotta realize that it's not Saunders throwing the ball to these receivers... A lot is riding on Brunell and his ability to adopt Saunder's offense... Just a reality check! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 I like their QB better than ours... Of course, he really was our QB... even if he was Norv's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayl1985 Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 The only difference is we actually have good wideouts. There best actual wideout was eddie kennison who had 68 catches for just over 1000 yards. Its no way santana will have those few yards with 68 catches. Trent Green is better than our quarterbacks, but there wideouts have sucked for years now. You can't throw to four wideouts on a consistent basis when they are not starting caliber like we have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 We're gonna find out how badly Brunell wants a ring.....he should be reporting to camp in the best shape he's ever been in. Never have his prospects for winning the SB been so great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 But, you guys gotta realize that it's not Saunders throwing the ball to these receivers... A lot is riding on Brunell and his ability to adopt Saunder's offense... Just a reality check! :applause: :applause: Nailed it right on the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GURU Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Don't forget Saunders' experience with Mike Martz in St. Louis, if you want a hint about what he might do with 4 WRs. While Martz was the primary playcaller, Saunders was responsible for putting together the passing gameplan every week for the Greatest Show on Turf. If Patten simply plays too well in the preseason to ignore, you better believe Saunders will find a way to use him, just like they found plenty of packages to play both Az-zahir Hakim AND Ricky Proehl with the Rams in '99. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Patten will beatout ARE for the #3 spot, I guarantee it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 i dont think we need to run 4 WR sets to open the field up. we already have enough weapons to spread the field and everything will be wide open for CP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panel Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Blaylock is a RB though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 even if he was Norv's. You had to ruin a good thread by bringing up him. Don't write Patten off yet, you never know. Moss is #1 hands down. There is nothing definite beyond that. ARE, Lloyd, Patten, Jacobs, any could become #2, if there is an actual #2. Don't be surprised if Moss catches 75, Cooley catches 55 and the rest all catch 30-45. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celder Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Patten will beatout ARE for the #3 spot, I guarantee it! I hope that is a joke. Although I know Patten is a good receiver, I don't see how the Redskins would justify bringing Randle El to be a 4th receiver. Patten's value will be seen if we suffer injuries to any of our receivers throughout the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted June 29, 2006 Author Share Posted June 29, 2006 Patten over ARE? Unlikely. ARE brings that extra dimension that you have to defend, and I just didn't see anything in Patten last year that makes me think he can beat him out. Besides, when you invest that much in a player, you play him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 The 2004 Chiefs were 5th in total yards in NFL history. Our receivers are at least as good as theirs as a group. Not only that, but in 2004, Holmes, Johnson and Blaylock had 2012 rushing yards. In 2005, Portis, Betts and Cartwright had 2053 rushing yards - without the benefit of a top passing offense like the Chiefs. Plus their OL gave up 32 sacks in 2004 to our 31 in 2005. The potential is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfos81 Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 But, you guys gotta realize that it's not Saunders throwing the ball to these receivers... A lot is riding on Brunell and his ability to adopt Saunder's offense... Just a reality check! I don't know why guys are questioning Brunell? He struggled last season after we lost Patten, and it got even worse when we lost Randy T. Brunell is going to prove the critics wrong again this season and have his best season ever. I mean its inevitable, we have maybe the best O-line in the NFC, at least top 3 in wr's core, and a top 5 rb w/ another very good backup in Betts. Just look at the facts, Brunell was a top 5 qb when we were healthy on O and now that we're even deeper this season, he won't look as bad if we lose an O-lineman and a wideout. Our running game will always dictate how well we do overall at Qb, the better we run, the better Brunell and any qb gets in this league. So Brunell, if anything, should be 1 of our least worried about positions. I also belive Campbell could do well for the same reasons, top 5 O-line, top 5 Wrs, top 5 rbs. I don't know if numbers will tell the whole story b/c we will be a run 1st team, I mean Gibbs is still strategizing and is still the head coach, so we will be 1 of the few teams that can open it up w/ the passing game, or come out and pound you to the dirt. Brunell will be counted on to lead us b/c of what he did last season and I don't have any doubts about his leadership, and w/ a better core around him and other qbs (Campbell), I can't see the qb being as big a question Mark, get it? Mark. :laugh: as it has in the past. I remember alot guys doggin Brunell before last season and he only threw 23 tds w/ only 10 picks, if anything he will throw closer to 30 tds this season and maybe 10 picks. I guess we won't stop questioning him until he wins a superbowl, I could see it happening almost exactly like Elway and having him go out on top w/ a superbowl, at least 1 anyway. Then the only question is Campbell, can he be the leader that Brunell and other qbs were under Gibbs regime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COOLhandsCOOLEY Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 I don't know why guys are questioning Brunell? He struggled last season after we lost Patten, and it got even worse when we lost Randy T. Brunell is going to prove the critics wrong again this season and have his best season ever.... You my friend have made my night. You have summed up in words what I have been trying to say for weeks. Well done!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoudMouth12thMan Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Wow, in 2004 two WRs with over 1,000 yards and almost a third with over 700 yards. Top Rated Offense in the league in '04...if I'm not mistaken. HTTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodie987 Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 he has never worked with 4 star recievers, 4 includeing david patten who they say is looking as one of the sharpest in OTAs and mini camp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfchamp1 Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Patten is a good receiver but at his best I'll still take Randle El, who is magic with the ball in his hands. I think Coach Joe will play whoever gives the team the best chance to win. Big contracts only guarantee a roster spot (salary cap reasons) not playing time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterfan Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Some of you are playing fantasy football. Let me explain the way winning football works in the NFL. You just don't throw the football all over the place and expect to win. The Colts are a good example of a great passing team that never goes to the Superbowl. The Chiefs had a horrible defense over tha last few years. They were behind many times because their defense couldn't stop anyone. Other times they were ahead only to find the other team going up and down the field as fast as the chiefs. Because of the horrible defense the offense HAD to, and was FORCED TO, pass. But with the running game that they had, if their defense was a top 5 defense, they would have run, run and then run some more when they had the lead. When our Skins get the lead, regardless of our stellar talent at wide receiver, I wouldn't count on seeing the 4 wideout receiver set very often and never in the 2nd half if we have the lead. Look for the Skins to run, run, and run some more once they have the lead. Most passes will be to the backs out of the backfield when we have the lead. I really don't see Saunders breaking ranks with Gibbs and throwing all over the place in the 3rd quarter if we have a 2 TD lead. Look for the Skins defense, DEFENSE, to set the tone and determine how much this team will pass. However, we have the receivers for the first time in years. SO, when we throw we will probably be more effective and keep drives going in order to run out the clock. Just don't expect to see 4 wideout sets very often. Won't happen when we have the lead, and this team is going to have the lead in most every game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted June 29, 2006 Author Share Posted June 29, 2006 I don't know why guys are questioning Brunell? ...Just look at the facts, Brunell was a top 5 qb when we were healthy on O Brunell doesn't need to be a top 5 QB. He needs to be efficient. If he can manage the offense, avoid mistakes, and spread the ball around, he'll have all the weapons he needs around him to make it work. He doesn't need to carry the team on his back. He's got Portis and Moss and Cooley to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.