OrangeSkin Posted December 16, 2001 Share Posted December 16, 2001 No disrespect to Gardner, but I can't believe he got caught from behind on that 57 yard reception. Anybody else would be gone. It appeared as though he was running about a 5.5 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GURU Posted December 16, 2001 Share Posted December 16, 2001 Well, Gardner got caught by one of the fastest safties in the league. Brian Dawkins would have caught a lot of receivers in that situation because of his speed, and because he had a decent angle, so saying anyone else would have scored isn't really fair or true. Dawkins might have posted a Defensive Player of the Week type of game. He was everywhere. He is probably the best free safety in the league, and he definately made a statement in this game. [ by GURU on December 16, 2001.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWDrexel Posted December 16, 2001 Share Posted December 16, 2001 Last year he didn't get a Pro-Bowl nod. He didn't have many interceptions and missed a few weeks due to appendicitis. I'm hopeful he will be recognized this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonjeff Posted December 16, 2001 Share Posted December 16, 2001 That was one of the Redskins concerns before they drafted Gardner. His speed, and his penchant to drop the easy ones. Both have showed at times this season. He'll still be a good one though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RySkins Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 That was a huge play in this game. If we had gone up 10-0, I can't help but think things could have been different. But after we failed to score from first in goal, we took only a 6-0 lead, which was probably kind of demoralizing for us and uplifting for the Eagles when you consider that up until that point we had really controlled the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitz Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 It would have been great if Gardner had scored, and it might have indeed affected the flow of momentum. But even so, he put us in a position where we should have been able to punch it into the endzone. The offensive gameplan was lousy overall, but it was horrendous in the red zone. Combine that with spotty execution and you have a recipe for disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 yesterday highlighted a long-term weakness in the skins strategy......gardner may turn out to be a smart pick once he learns to catch the ball and actually count for something in the clutch. in the meantime, he isn't fast enough to stretch the field. we need a speed receiver to keep defenses honest. gardner is a true number 2 kinda guy. will be interesting to see where we go during the off-season. i had thought our wr problems were answered, but apparently, we still don't have a guy who can exploit secondaries who either run blitz or creep into the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 Uh dont we have that guy already and isnt his name Westy? The difference is he isnt treated like a number one receiver ------------------ Take A Sip of the Marty KoolAid and Believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 first of all, the big possession receiver you count on to convert third downs and win battles for the ball in the end zone is your #1 receiver where I come from. the speed receiver you use to spread the defense and keep the safeties honest is the "complementary" receiver. so, Gardner once he gets his grounding in the NFL has a good chance to be that #1 receiver we need to jumpstart our pass offense. the truth of the matter is you won't see consistent production out of our receivers, no matter who we have, as long as you have the #10 rated qb in the NFC throwing him the ball. Receivers are dependent on the quarterback to get them the ball in good position to make plays. Banks often hits receivers low or to a point where they have to come to a stop to make the reception. That prevents RAC, which is what this offensive system is supposed to live on. Yesterday, it was my belief that Gardner relaxed after making the catch and assumed he was going to be able to go in and score untouched. It is a good lesson to learn that you are never home free until you are in the end zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 Yes, after the catch he looked like he was not running full-out. He should have known the Eagles have some fast DBs (good DBs should be faster than a WR anyway) so he should have run harder and changed his angle to the endzone (why do most guys go into the endzone with a more severe angle?). Hopefully he learned this painful leason yesterday. Still, we should have scored the TD anyway via our goal line offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 I don't know where you guys have gotten the impression that Gardner is a speedster. Is it because our offense seems to go deep to him more than it does to Westbrook who does (or at least did before his multiple knee injuries) have legit WR speed? Gardner is a posession WR, in the mold of Cris Carter, Herman Moore, and Michael Irvin. If he ever grows a pair of hands, he'll actually be pretty good. But big plays with him will arise out of YAC or jump balls on sideline fade routes more often than they will arise from fly or go routes down the field with him. His game is size and strength, not speed. ------------------ <IMG SRC="http://www.thelocker-room.com/images/RedskinLogo.jpg" border=0> "Loosen up, Sandy baby. You're just too damn tight!" - John Riggins to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 what redman says! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 no one questions that Gardner is a 4.5 guy not a 4.3 guy. however, what determines who is a #1 receiver are intangible things like how reliable a guy is in crunch time, on third downs and in the end zone. Also, how much leadership a guy delivers as well. you don't have to be a speed burner to be a top receiver in this league. The Raiders have two starting receivers that get open and rack up yardage yet neither is close to where they were 5-7 years ago in terms of flat speed. the trick is finding a speed receiver that can hang onto the football as a #2. The Bucs drafted two fast guys in Reidel Anthony and Jacquez Green, however, neither has NFL hands. So these guys are merely decoys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 bulldog......one or two doesn't matter....you are right that gardner is a possession guy. if you don't have a speedster to keep secondardies honest, that narrows the field impacting the rushing game. we need a burner to keep defenses honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GURU Posted December 17, 2001 Share Posted December 17, 2001 The real problem isn't that Gardner didn't score. Most every receiver gets caught sometimes. The problem is that the offense couldn't punch the ball in the endzone after that play. If you have to rely on receivers always getting behind defenses to score, you're in big trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indyskinsfan Posted December 18, 2001 Share Posted December 18, 2001 Make no mistake Brian Dawkins is my choice for Pro Bowl Safety and that is why -DESIRE and EXECUTION. He willed himself downfield and he had the proper side of the field to make the play. That's all to it. Gardner for a "brief" moment, didn't even see him, so there was a slight pull up, and Dawkins finished the job. GURU, that will be the problem until we can have a QB that can figure out HOW to use the components around him. Then He can make doable suggestions to the OC, who needs all the fu**in' help he can get. Somebody please help Jimmy Raye with those eyeballs he's got. [ by indyskinsfan on December 18, 2001.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish Posted December 18, 2001 Share Posted December 18, 2001 What NavyDave sez! We have the receivers. westy has said and done everything we could have asked from him. he has been blackballed by either Marty, Raye, Banks or some combination thereof. I wouldn't be suprised if it was Westy's harsh comments about Norv and Marty has just written him off. Kinda like he wrote of Darrell, cuz in their 1st conversations, DG spoke about his faith and his foundation rather than winning Super Bowls. Just a guess. The whole idea of leadership (a term I love to hear thrown around by sports personalities and civilians in general) is taking an habitual "problem" guy like Westy and make him better, make him live up to his potential. That is what we are supposed to be getting out of Marty. Norv was a great Xs and Os technitian kinda coach whereas Marty is supposed to be this tough, "been there, done that", old-hand. I think we will get just that out of him later when he has "his guys", but THAT is a luxury we didn't have this season and I think we missed some opportunities in that reagrd. ------------------ HAIL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpierce Posted December 18, 2001 Share Posted December 18, 2001 Gardner was a guy that I wanted to fall to #25 (Eagles' pick) on draft day. He's a big receiver with pretty good hands, and he had a McNabb-like QB at Clemson in Woody Danzler. When the Skins took him at 15, my heart sunk because I knew that Marty was running the draft and things would start looking up for Washington. ------------------ There will never be a perfect world as long as there are people on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted December 19, 2001 Share Posted December 19, 2001 Given all that we have seen offensively this year, wouldn't you just love to see champ out there for a couple of plays a game. At this point, we have nothing to lose. I know it's not Marty's style, but I'd rather see Champ get a shot on a deep ball on 3rd and 10 every once in a while, rather than seeing Westbrook/Gardener drop a 6 yard pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.