goldenster95 Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Cross Roy Williams on the WR draft list . . . e's staying at UT . . . http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/sports/1726656 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Is this like Vince Carter or Iverson's Mom talking? "A.I. never did nothing wrong and the police are just after him for no reason!" Who calls their kid A.I.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 This could be good news for the Skins. It leaves only two top WRs (Rogers, Johnson), and hopefully they will be gone by #13. That is, unless Spurrier gets a massive hard-on for Rogers or Johnson and trades up to get him, thereby further depleting our draft. :gus: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefhogskin48 Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 ASF, I think you'd like the WR from Oklahoma State by the name of Rashaun Woods. He is an outstanding football player who scores lots of touchdowns. I'm assuming he'll come out a year early, and he'd be a steal if we could trade down for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 I'm with you ASF. What would be great also is Price resigning with the Bills D Thompson staying here with a reasonable contract thus an unexpected show of loyalty to our own players and we are left addressing our true needs. The LINES!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luca Brasi Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by NavyDave I'm with you ASF. What would be great also is Price resigning with the Bills D Thompson staying here with a reasonable contract thus an unexpected show of loyalty to our own players and we are left addressing our true needs. The LINES!! I just don't understand this logic. Do you guys think we don't need anymore speed at the WR positions? I'm all for upgrading the lines, but speed has to be addressed on offense, either in FA or the draft. You have to give SS the tools he needs, and we haven't done that yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 I don't really think we need more speed at WR, but I'm pretty sure Spurrier and the Front Office do, since thats all they have talked about since the season ended. But I think our WRs are fast enough, I think good route running and a strong QB arm are all that are required in the NFL. Jerry Rice never wowed anybody with his 40 time. But if you think we do, than you should be happy since the team agrees with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Skins56 I just don't understand this logic. Do you guys think we don't need anymore speed at the WR positions? I'm all for upgrading the lines, but speed has to be addressed on offense, either in FA or the draft. You have to give SS the tools he needs, and we haven't done that yet. What, the tools he needs to send two receivers butt naked downfield 15 yards past the deep safety for a sure-handed TD catch every time we face 1st and 10? You guys are living in a dream world. This isn't Gatorball; in the NFL, they actually have fast, talented secondaries. In the actual NFL, boring things matter most. Things like, oh, protecting your QB so he can have time to make good decisions and throws. Having an inside short-yardage rushing game, so your team doesn't gallop down the field and stall every time it faces 4th-and-1 or the goal line. Having a FS who's not burned butt naked every time he's near the ball. Making sure you have a DL composed of four solid starters and a couple of strong backups. Having a PR who can catch all the punts. Having reliable kickers and punters. Now, you have a choice: blow the team's precious draft/cap resources on a dream, and get screwed for not doing the basics. Or fix the basics, and maybe add one reliable WR like Peerless Price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Fellas This is bad news for the Skins. I mean, it doesn't exactly ruin our draft but it still hurts the value of our position. 1) It's bad if you wanted him. At #13 or before or after. If he's not in the draft he can't be drafted. 2) He was more than likely a top 5 pick. Even if we didn't want him (any of us) what this does is cause someone to grab someone else instead of him. It very well may be someone we are interested in. Which is at least one less player we can get our hands on. We want as many top 10 caliber juniors as possible to declare. That not only makes them available to us in a possible trade up but also pushes top talent closer to the #13 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 personally, this isn't good or bad for the skins. I don't see us taking a WR in the 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Dirk- I agree with you, but at this point, its just more gasoline on the fire. Wilfork, Roy Williams, McGahee, Eli Manning, Lee Evans the top college talent is dropping out of this draft every time I turn around, doesn't looklike a good crop this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 then having 13 is fine. This isn't the Wizards having the #1 overall in a weak year. There will be talent at 13. We need to draft some line help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dchogs Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 i agree with dirk. this is bad. not because we should take a wr with our pick, but because another team might take that DT, DE, or (heaven forbid at 13) OG that we covet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 You guys are living in a dream world. This isn't Gatorball; in the NFL, they actually have fast, talented secondaries. Uhhh...Which is why you would need a fast wideout, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan This could be good news for the Skins. It leaves only two top WRs (Rogers, Johnson), and hopefully they will be gone by #13. That is, unless Spurrier gets a massive hard-on for Rogers or Johnson and trades up to get him, thereby further depleting our draft. :gus: Yeah, and we all know you are much smarter than that dumb ol ball coach. :doh: Honestly ASF, you astound me. One minute you make a smart observation such as the corelation between a good center and a succesfull QB (even if overstated). The next you say something stupid like this. Tell you what. go back and look at those QBs you matched to great centers. Who were they throwing to? I think you will find a great reciever or two. A great reciever in a pass oriented offense is a must in the NFL. Guys like TO or Marvin Harrison draw two defenders and free up other recievers or draw one and burn them. Fast recievers keep safetys on their heels for fear of getting burned. Guys like TO break tackles and take it to the house. And what is this obsession with Peerless Price? I think you guys just love the name. Sounds cool huh? To bad he hasn't proven he is anything more than a damn good 2nd reciever. Consider that his opposite is 2 time pro bowler Eric Moulds and the fact that Price often had the luxury of Moulds drawing most of the attention. What make you think he is going to come here (*IF* he is not re-signed in Buffalo) and be a great #1? Oh yeah, I forgot, he has that cool name. In the mean time, please exuse me if I trust Spurriers judgement over yours and thank the football gods that you are not our GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Mad Mike, We don't really want price to be the best number 1 reciever out there, we just want him to be the best #2 reciever out there. (which he was this year). -DB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by DrunkenBoxer Mad Mike, We don't really want price to be the best number 1 reciever out there, we just want him to be the best #2 reciever out there. (which he was this year). -DB Great, then we will have three #2 recievers with Price, Gardner and Thompson. Who draws the double coverage? Who scares the safetys into playing back so it opens up the short routs and draw plays? And what makes you so sure Price doesn't stink up the joint without a true #1 to draw coverage away from him? There will be some very good O guards and D ends in rounds 2 and 3. Since we already have the #5 defense in the NFL we draft a guard in 2 and a D end in 3. We could trade up using next years round 2 or 3 as bait to grab a playmaker at WR and use our #1 next year to get that killer DE eveyone wants then. In the mean time we have a stud wideout to groom for a year. Since Spurrier has said he wants three years, that sets us up for a real run at the Superbowl. It's called a long term plan. Something that has been lacking for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by Skins56 I just don't understand this logic. Do you guys think we don't need anymore speed at the WR positions? I'm all for upgrading the lines, but speed has to be addressed on offense, either in FA or the draft. You have to give SS the tools he needs, and we haven't done that yet. Spurrier would be getting the tools he needs to address this offense if he drafted for the offensive line. You can have the fastest recievers in the league, it don't mean squat if your quarterback is eating dirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by Gamebreaker Spurrier would be getting the tools he needs to address this offense if he drafted for the offensive line. You can have the fastest recievers in the league, it don't mean squat if your quarterback is eating dirt. We can get a great O guard in round 2 so your reasoning holds no water. What makes you think Spurrier does not understand the importance of line play? Do you think you just discovered this fact while Spurrier, who won a Hiesman, played QB in the NFL and was sacked about a million times, and has been an succesfull head coach, somehow missed it? But you think you know what he needs better than he does... Riiiiiiiiiiight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan Now, you have a choice: blow the team's precious draft/cap resources on a dream, and get screwed for not doing the basics. Or fix the basics, and maybe add one reliable WR like Peerless Price. ASF, I find myself always agreeing with you...until you bring up Peerless Price. Why is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by Mad Mike We can get a great O guard in round 2 so your reasoning holds no water. What makes you think Spurrier does not understand the importance of line play? Do you think you just discovered this fact while Spurrier, who won a Hiesman, played QB in the NFL and was sacked about a million times, and has been an succesfull head coach, somehow missed it? But you think you know what he needs better than he does... Riiiiiiiiiiight. There you go again, undermining everyone with the "you think you know what he needs better than he does" crap. No one here is more qualified than an front office employee, but that doesn't change that the fact they are wrong half the time and so are we. What exactly is your point? People said the same thing last season about picking up an OG in the second round, and all the good ones were gone by the time we picked. The point? Unless we trade down, we'll likely be out of position to draft a guard that could play immediately...again. Not that Snyder & co. were interested in getting one anyway, they had their eyes set on Clinton Portis and settled on Ladell Betts. Our line was in even worse shape then, what makes you think they've become any wiser? What makes you think Spurrier didn't think of this while he allowed the team to patch our line together with inexperienced players and mediocre talent not even playing their natural positions. Oh, right. He was too busy trying to relieve 1996 with his Gator buddies. The bottom line is the only way our offense plays any better without making the OL it's priority this off-season, is if the inexperienced guys like Wilbert Brown take the @$$-whipping they got this season as a learning experience and get better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 There you go again, undermining everyone with the "you think you know what he needs better than he does" crap. No one here is more qualified than an front office employee, but that doesn't change that the fact they are wrong half the time and so are we. What exactly is your point? Hehehe. Is that what I'm doing? "undermining everyone"? That's funny. Like you guys will be doing the actual drafting. But the fact is this time it is'nt the front office that wants the breakaway wide reciever, it's Spurrier. “We need one real fast wide receiver,” he said. “And some other things here and there." People said the same thing last season about picking up an OG in the second round, and all the good ones were gone by the time we picked. The point? Unless we trade down, we'll likely be out of position to draft a guard that could play immediately...again. Not that Snyder & co. were interested in getting one anyway, they had their eyes set on Clinton Portis and settled on Ladell Betts. Our line was in even worse shape then, what makes you think they've become any wiser? Actually 2 guards went in the second last year, 1 within the thirteenth pick of the round. Good one drop to the second all the time. And this I have no doubt Spurrier will have more pull and target one. What makes you think Spurrier didn't think of this while he allowed the team to patch our line together with inexperienced players and mediocre talent not even playing their natural positions. Oh, right. He was too busy trying to relieve 1996 with his Gator buddies. He didn't have the pull last year and let the FO do what they wanted, he had no experience. This year he has said he would be more involved and I doubt he would say that without aproval from the boss. The bottom line is the only way our offense plays any better without making the OL it's priority this off-season, is if the inexperienced guys like Wilbert Brown take the @$$-whipping they got this season as a learning experience and get better. The bottom line is that our O line DID improve and finished up well enough to help us get us a couple of wins to end the season. One FA and one 2nd rounder will go a long way in building a good solid line. Add a gamebreaking wide reciever and we can be a realy good team. But to bring in a brilliant pass oriented head coach and not give him the WR he says he needs is just stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by Mad Mike Hehehe. Is that what I'm doing? "undermining everyone"? That's funny. Like you guys will be doing the actual drafting. Please... Since NONE of us are doing the actual drafting, why are we even discussing the draft? LOL! That's great logic. I guess no one is allowed to have an *gasp* opinion different than the Coach's. Actually 2 guards went in the second last year, 1 within the thirteenth pick of the round. Good one drop to the second all the time. And this I have no doubt Spurrier will have more pull and target one. Gurode and Fonoti were two top guards in the draft, and the only two I know the Skins were interested in. They both were drafted no more than 2-3 picks from each other, and no where near our pick in the second round. He didn't have the pull last year and let the FO do what they wanted, he had no experience. This year he has said he would be more involved and I doubt he would say that without aproval from the boss. I'm actually glad Spurrier is more involved in personnel decisions, I think he's the better qualified than Mendes, Snyder, and definitely Cerrato. Yet he hasn't said much about getting help for the lines, and all I've heard him talk about is getting more speed on the outside. Which has me hoping he finds what he wants in free agency so he could focus on what we really need in the draft. The bottom line is that our O line DID improve and finished up well enough to help us get us a couple of wins to end the season. One FA and one 2nd rounder will go a long way in building a good solid line. Add a gamebreaking wide reciever and we can be a realy good team. But to bring in a brilliant pass oriented head coach and not give him the WR he says he needs is just stupid. The only reason our OL LOOKED improved at the end of the season, is because they played aganist defenses with little to no pass rush or talent for the last two games. If we had played the Eagles as our last game nobody would be claiming that. We don't need two new recievers, that is just ridiculous. Our most common formation is with 3 recievers. Gardner and Thompson are keepers and McCants has talent. We could sign a free agent who could stretch the defense and get exactly what we need. The only that would be stupid about this off-season is thinking our biggest need is a speed reciever when our QBs were running and getting drilled all season long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Originally posted by Mad Mike Yeah, and we all know you are much smarter than that dumb ol ball coach. :doh: Honestly ASF, you astound me. One minute you make a smart observation such as the corelation between a good center and a succesfull QB (even if overstated). The next you say something stupid like this. Tell you what. go back and look at those QBs you matched to great centers. Who were they throwing to? I think you will find a great reciever or two. A great reciever in a pass oriented offense is a must in the NFL. Guys like TO or Marvin Harrison draw two defenders and free up other recievers or draw one and burn them. Fast recievers keep safetys on their heels for fear of getting burned. Guys like TO break tackles and take it to the house. And what is this obsession with Peerless Price? I think you guys just love the name. Sounds cool huh? To bad he hasn't proven he is anything more than a damn good 2nd reciever. Consider that his opposite is 2 time pro bowler Eric Moulds and the fact that Price often had the luxury of Moulds drawing most of the attention. What make you think he is going to come here (*IF* he is not re-signed in Buffalo) and be a great #1? Oh yeah, I forgot, he has that cool name. OK, Mad Mike: you opened the door for this. First of all, there's no one "like" TO or Marvin Harrison. One of them, Owens, is arguably the second best receiver (to Rice) in the last two decades. Harrison just broke the all-time season catches record this year. You don't go and find guys "like" Owens and TO, because they are exceptionally rare and most important, *are not recognized for who they are* before they emerge. If anyone had any idea how good Owens and Harrison would be, they would have been drafted #1 in the entire draft. Second, if a team is stupid enough to think they *can* draft someone "like" Owens or Harrison, they will end up trading up in the draft, spending enormous resources for a player who *at best* will almost certainly be about 70-80% as good as Owen/Harrison -- and won't even reach that peak for at least three or four years. Third, the team has a ready alternative either to do nothing at WR or to acquire an impact WR. There is probably only one impact WR available (Price). You think you know Price isn't a strong enough receiver. In fact, his overall catch/yards numbers were almost identical to Moulds -- but his reception percentage and YAC were markedly higher. Price is a quality receiver, almost certainly better than anyone on the Redskins roster at this moment in their development. Why do I advocate acquiring Price? I actually don't have a burning need to acquire *any* WR. I'm comfortable going to war with Gardner, Thompson, McCants, Russell and Doering, so long as that decision means massive attention is being paid to the interior OL, safety, DL and the kicking game. However, we know that the team seems intent to acquire at least one or perhaps two impact WRs. *If* the team decides to acquire an impact receiver via free agency or the draft, *then* I advocate getting Price as the strategy -- and skipping WR in the draft altogether. The rationale is getting immediate, reliable productivity from Price, instead of spending critical draft resources on a WR who won't peak for several years. In the mean time, please exuse me if I trust Spurriers judgement over yours and thank the football gods that you are not our GM. Really? That's interesting, because I've been right about many critical personnel issues, especially in areas of disagreement I had with the front office and the coaching staff. Not to say I was always right, but consider: On June 16th, I advocated specifically that the team acquire free-agent LG Ray Brown. I argued for this acquisition all summer long. On August 22, I vehemently opposed the acqusition of Stai ("Brenden Stai file: be afraid") prior to the trade, and also uncovered Stai's existing knee injury at the time of the trade. Ray Brown, meanwhile, went on to help the Lions go from worst to first in sacks allowed, while we had a year-long revolving door at LG, combined with mediocre play at RG by Stai -- followed by his quick exit from the active roster due to lingering injury. On July 23rd, the first morning of Ramsey's holdout, I advocated giving Ramsey the starting incentives he requested , believing them to be a win/win option. The team in its wisdom played hardball, causing a 16-day holdout so damaging that Spurrier didn't bother to train Ramsey much when Ramsey finally did report to camp, instead making Ramsey the scout QB. On July 28th, I began my season-long attack on Kim Helton, prior even to the Osaka game and again on August 12. I was correct to recognize so early that our interior OL could not do the job and that Helton wasn't doing his, despite constant attacks by other forum members about my heat on Helton. On August 5th, I advocated making Wuerffel the starter instead of Matthews, and maintained this position throughout preseason, even when Wuerffel was overwhelmed by the pass rush. Matthews had more support in this forum, and Spurrier himself picked Matthews (incorrectly) in the end. On August 8th, with 10 WRs in camp and McCants never having caught a regular-season pass, I projected McCants as being better than Gardner in five years. But it took until the final few games of this year for McCants to get any significant playing time. He's now either our #2 or #3 WR, depending on whether you count Thompson on the roster. At the time of my prediction, he was no higher than 8th on Spurrier's depth chart. He was inactive most of the 2002 season. What took so long to identify his talent? On August 15, I suggested that the Redskins extend the contracts of their WRs and QBs prior to declaring the final roster and depth chart, while the team still had maximum leverage and while many of the players (Thompson, Wuerffel, Matthews, etc.) were unheralded. Instead, the team ridiculously has turned Thompson into a valuable free agent whom we may not even be able to afford to re-sign -- and even if we do, the cost will be excessive. On August 30, I was the first to challenge Marvin Lewis for underachieving ("The surprise wasn't the crap OL, but the crap D"). On September 7, I documented how Betts had preseason stats exceeding both Watson and Davis, opposing the widely held view that Betts was a bust. Yet, Betts rarely saw the field in 2002 and was third on the depth chart behind Davis and Watson. When Betts finally got his chance in the final two games, he ran for a 5.8 average over 37 carries. On January 5th, I posited a surprising correlation between great centers and great QBs, indicating that great centers often *enable* great QBs to become great. This theory drew broad initial ridicule by this forum. After nearly 49 posts that included further research, I think the supporting evidence was overwhelmingly obvious in my favor. Yet the Skins have chosen for their center an extremely mediocre player, and don't recognize the critical nature of that weakness heading into 2003. So, yes: I've been right a few times this year on some of the biggest issues facing the team. At the time, most people think that what I write sounds ridiculous to them. But a lot of it has proved true. So let's not assume that just because I'm not the coach or the GM that I'm necessarily wrong and they are right. It's clearly been the other way around on some major issues this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 I would say that since predominantly most, if not all of the listed points can be, and still are being debated, then I wouldn't go as far as saying you were correct ASF. That may work both ways, but that still doesn't mean you were or are correct. and several still have to be played out before taking any credit one way or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.