bulldog Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 okay, we have all tooted our own horns over individual players or teams we thought would bite it in 2002, here is an opportunity to own up to some mistakes/mistaken judgments to balance that out: 1. Thought the Giants woud be 6-10 this season and underestimated the ability of Fassel once again to motivate his team at the right time, just as he did in 2000. 2. Thought there was a major possibility that Ladell Betts of the Skins would end up being a bust pick as a runner in the NFL, based on some of the scouting reports I had read. Betts appears to be one of those players that is greater than the individual sum of his parts when on the field When talking about rookies that might have an impact in 2002, I think you have to look at Betts' 116 and 98 yards in the last two games as an augur of good things to come. 3. Bruce Smith. A lot of us thought Smith was done when he had one sack by the midpoint of the season. Bruce had perhaps the best second half of a season since he was in Buffalo back in '96 or '97. A 39 year old man finishing with 9 sacks is quite an accomplishment. I don't know if Smith is going to have a role in 2003 with the Skins, but a role as a 20 or so snap a game rushman seems like something that would allow Bruce to reach his own goals and help the team get back to the postseason. 4. Andy Reid. I already thought Reid was a very good coach entering 2002, but he may be at the top of the list in the NFC. What he has done with the Eagles without McNabb, going 4-1, and earning homefield is the kind of thing you expected of a Walsh, Gibbs or Parcells coached team in the past. That's pretty good company. 5. Danny Wuerffel. Wuerffel looked dreadful in early action in 2002 and I was of a mind that he was just not an NFL caliber player. Despite issues remaining regarding his durability, I think what we have seen from him in his second go around is enough to conclude that he IS a capable backup quarterback and can win some games for you if he has a good cast around him. He played very well against the Rams at FedEx and had a nice first half against the Cowboys on Thanksgiving before the game got beyond the Skins in the second half. The interception that turned the game for the Williams TD was not Wuerffel's fault, although his inability to bring us back from a reasonable deficit of 7 points in the fourth quarter was frustrating. That is what comes with even a solid backup. Your backup is going to be lacking at least one element of a starter: arm strength, experience, mobility, leadership, etc........in Danny's case he just lacks the arm strength to produce the big plays. That's the MO of probably 20-25 backups in the NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 Bulldog, You were not wrong about Betts since you only indicate a chance of a bust (say 85-90%) which of course is saying there was a 10-15% chance he wouldn't be Got to agree about the Giants. I really thought they'd have problems this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 Originally posted by bulldog 3. Bruce Smith. A lot of us thought Smith was done when he had one sack by the midpoint of the season. Bruce had perhaps the best second half of a season since he was in Buffalo back in '96 or '97. A 39 year old man finishing with 9 sacks is quite an accomplishment. I don't know if Smith is going to have a role in 2003 with the Skins, but a role as a 20 or so snap a game rushman seems like something that would allow Bruce to reach his own goals and help the team get back to the postseason. I can't figure out Bruce Smith anymore. I agree with you that he had a bizarre season, getting stronger as the year progressed, which is not what you expect from a 39-year-old. He finished the year just three sacks shy of the record, and thanks to renegotiating his contract earlier in the year, he's actually very affordable in 2003. Now with LaDairis Jackson's injury, Smith is more valuable than ever as a pass rusher, and everyone seems to agree it would be great to have Smith back as a pass-rushing specialist on selected downs in 2003. Everyone but Bruce Smith. He claims that he had to be arm-wrestled by Snyder not to retire at the end of the season, and that he's still not committed to returning in 2003. At least one article mentioned that wasn't happy that he wasn't a full-time player in 2002. And he commented on the record that the sack record isn't very important to him. Excuse me? I'm not saying Smith needs to hang on for the record, but all the evidence says that's exactly what he's been doing by extending his career this long with the Redskins. Why the ambivalence and change of heart? I suppose the easy answer is that he hates Marvin Lewis, but I haven't seen evidence for this. I seem to recall his being quoted in recent weeks praising Lewis, but maybe that's a false memory implanted during my alien abduction last week. :alcoholic Maybe Smith really does hate Lewis, and Snyder had to whisper in his ear that Lewis was leaving, and Smith responded, "Well, OK . . . but I'm not promising I'm coming back until I see Marvin's U-Haul truck dragging his sorry-a$$ gameplans out of town." So the hate-Lewis theory has some logic, but little recent evidence. As to not wanting to be a role player (pass-rushing specialist), why the hell not? He'd get his record and save some wear and tear on his body. Because we're so thin at DE, I definitely support Smith's returning at this point. But I do wonder what kind of production we'll get from him once he finally gets his record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 I dont make mistakes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 31, 2002 Author Share Posted December 31, 2002 Smith missed most of camp with those knee scopes, and that may account for his being out of game shape early on in 2002. Ditto for Chris Samuels who was battling a high ankle sprain that caused him to miss 4 games in August. People were criticizing Samuels in that game in SF against Andre Carter when he gave up 2 sacks. But if you watched him he was basically playing on one leg. If Sulfsted had shown as well at OT as he did later on in the season, Samuels might not have been out there that day. Andre Carter? When Samuels is healthy, Carter ends up with ZERO on the scoresheet folks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeCarl Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 I had predicted we'd make it through the year 2002 without anyone using the word 'augur' in a post. Missed by hours... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 31, 2002 Author Share Posted December 31, 2002 really? I had to look the word up this morning to complete my thought on my post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeCarl Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 Sir, I bow before your command of the language. :cool: I love your posts, Dog...you know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 I think the most negative thought I had that turned out more positive than I envisioned was in thinking Gardener was a great pickup as a part-time, half the snaps player, and as long as we didn't think we could count on him as an every down guy we made an exceptional move. And then, low and behold, he plays the most snaps of his career and plays incredibly well. Who knew? Neither I nor Lenny the Hutt . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 31, 2002 Author Share Posted December 31, 2002 Is anyone more embarrassed than Peter King who said that it was a given that Danny Wuerffel would throw for 3,500 yards in 2002 with 25 touchdowns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 LOL, 'dog, I'd forgotten that one. (I haven't forgotten his promise that we'd "regret drafting Fred Smoot".) :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.