Stew Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 The bolded line is something of great importance that seems to be overlooked by many here. Right now our WR corps looks like this:Moss...Thomas...Kelly Randle-El...Thrash...Hagans We are going to go with 5/6 WR's' date=' but only 4/5 will be active on gameday. My guess is we carry 5 and go with 4 active on gameday. That doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room, especially when it comes to ST depth. IMO, Thrash is the ideal 4th WR because of his veteran experience, knowledge of the WCO and ST ability.[/quote'] I dont see us using spread 4 WR's or anything remotely close to it on game day, and if we do, it would be in the form of 2 TE sets i would think. We run 3 reciever sets and occasionally you see Yoder and Cooley lined up. Our LB depth that we need to aquire can play ST. Thrash is great for playing ST, but he played more ST then he did reciever. How about we put a reciever on the roster that... ya know... plays reciever in the games, and we can leave ST to another role player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portis for 6 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 It's not a TOOMER!!!Couldn't resist... Seriously though he's old, lets move on. Seriously, when Moss or ARE go down I'd rather have Toomer than Thrash for the same money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 I dont see us using spread 4 WR's or anything remotely close to it on game day, and if we do, it would be in the form of 2 TE sets i would think. We run 3 reciever sets and occasionally you see Yoder and Cooley lined up. Our LB depth that we need to aquire can play ST. Thrash is great for playing ST, but he played more ST then he did reciever. How about we put a reciever on the roster that... ya know... plays reciever in the games, and we can leave ST to another role player.That's exactly my point. Our 4th WR won't be doing a lot of receiving but will be relied on to be a ST ace and depth in case of an in-game injury. Right now, the only player on our roster who can fill that role is Thrash and Toomer is not fit for that role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Good question by this poster....yes, Toomer would be an upgrade for the Skins and would probably help Campbell a lot more than Thomas or Kelly would. Toomer would bring a pro's attitude and knows how to play in the NFL. Neither can be said about Thomas or Kelly yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnb123 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Toomer would be an upgrade to our WR corps, but he would also take game time away from the rookies, stunting their growth. Meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd421 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Well hes too old to do anything significant and would want too much money.....sounds like he is a perfect fit here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishisthegreatstuff Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 what about marvin harrison?? has anyone picked him up yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Been thinking the same thing. Remember when we had Henry Eillard towards the end of his career? Toomer isn't in the same league but still I think its a MAJOR risk to just bank the whole season on either Kelly or Thomas to work out. What happens if Kelly or Thomas don't work out? Isn't the offense in the tank again? Santana is good but he is far from a one man show. Who is the possession WR guy on this team? Maybe Thomas or Kelly become one. But what does it hurt to have a veteran on the team in case Thomas and Kelly don't come through this year? If Thomas or Kelly play like studs, then Toomer sits on the bench, so what is there to lose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 That's exactly my point. Our 4th WR won't be doing a lot of receiving but will be relied on to be a ST ace and depth in case of an in-game injury. Right now' date=' the only player on our roster who can fill that role is Thrash and Toomer is not fit for that role.[/quote']The only player on our roster? I didnt know that the 4th WR on every team is designated as a special teams player. Just because Thrash played both, doesnt mean that our next 4th reciever will be forced to play ST. There are other second string players on game day that can suit up, its not set in stone that the 4th WR has to play ST. Why cant Kelly or Thomas do it in his stead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd421 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 what about marvin harrison?? has anyone picked him up yet? See my other post.....Come on seriosly no more OLD unefective players please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Toomer would be an upgrade to our WR corps, but he would also take game time away from the rookies, stunting their growth.Meh Oh yeah, lets put our eggs in the basket of the rookie WR's that didn t show anything last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 The few catches Toomer would have here if we brought him in is not worth the price of experience that our three second year players would gain by actually catching those same passes. If this was last year I'd be for a move like this because like the OP it does make sense. However I feel as if this season should rest on the rookies to produce which would be hampered by a move like this. The 2009 season should be used to answer the question of who belongs in the NFL, wether it be Jason Campbell, Devin Thomas, Malcom Kelly, Fred Davis, and any other young player. Those that belong here get to stay and those that don't are shown the door. We simply can not continue to not know what they will bring to the table and must find out even if we learn they all suck. We need to commit to them and rely less on our established stars. Pass on Toomer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Oh yeah, lets put our eggs in the basket of the rookie WR's that didn t show anything last year. Who can show us anything riding the bench? Without chances what do we really know about these players? What would we gain long term watching an old player like this catch passes? We need to commit to the notion this is the year we find out who can play, and who can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santana_4_prez Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 I agree here ... but also was wondering about Bobby Engram, is he still available? He already knows the system, and we don't have time to wait on a 34 year old Toomer WR to learn our WCO, Engram could immediately step in and help the other WR's grasp the offense. He went to the Chefs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoBoCTiberius Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Does he still have his old playbook? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booballen Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Ask fred smoot if we could use toomer...he abused him in the second game last year. I wouldnt mind having him depth wise. who knows when moss' hammys or randle el's anything flares up and we have two unprovens and thrash lining up everydown. Last years offense would look unstoppable. as far as hampering the young boys, i pray to God at least one of them steps up and toomer cant get on the field barring an injury. Otherwise we're in deeeeeeep stuff. Thrash needs to go i dont care if hes a special teams "ace". His contributions as a receiver are minimal Toomer would be an upgrade over him regaurdless whether he plays st or not. Almost 50 catches and 4 tds..thrash hasnt had that since he was with the eagles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Who can show us anything riding the bench? Without chances what do we really know about these players? What would we gain long term watching an old player like this catch passes? We need to commit to the notion this is the year we find out who can play, and who can't. Kelly should have never been drafted in the first place, he has shown me how brittle his knees are, and that he is a bad rapper. Thomas has shown me through his first season that he disappears totally in games. They can show us anythign they want by rotating at the third or fourth WR spot with Toomer, and when they are actually worthy of the position, they can take it from him. Until then, we need someone like Toomer in the worst way. Thomas and Kelly are crap in my eyes and I think we need to bolster the position and at least give the crappy duo some pressure to actually earn their spot. No one said anything about Toomer being a long term solution, no one is looking to gain anything long term out of it. You want to know what it does immediately (this season)? It gives sorry ass Kelly and Thomas an actual threat to their jobs. It would help determine how good Kelly and Thomas are going to be. If they cant take a 34 year old aging recievers spot, then they dont deserve to be in the line up... so in a round about way, that is what it does for us long term, signing Toomer helps us judge what we have in the crappy duo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 The only player on our roster? I didnt know that the 4th WR on every team is designated as a special teams player. Just because Thrash played both, doesnt mean that our next 4th reciever will be forced to play ST. There are other second string players on game day that can suit up, its not set in stone that the 4th WR has to play ST. Why cant Kelly or Thomas do it in his stead?Yes, Thrash is the only player on our roster that can provide excellent ST play AND can play WR. Expecting Kelly to do it is ridiculous based on his size and knee injuries. Thomas COULD develop into an excellent STer, but has not shown anything that would make us expect that. You are going from KNOWING what Thrash can bring to HOPING Thomas can do the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 . Expecting Kelly to do it is ridiculous based on his size and knee injuries. I am sure Kelly's inability to play ST's caused him to be inactive later in the season. Fred Davis was getting the go ahead of him. Kelly is going to have to contribute solely as a WR, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardSkins88 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 I'm soooo glad that none of you guys are gm's for the redskins. Because if you were, we'd be in a rebuilding mode every year. Everytime a player doesn't give you people instant results, it's always "get rid of his sorry ass, he can't show us what he can do in one year? Then we don't need him." I can't wait when our wr's step up and everyone in here will go YESS I KNEW HE COULD DO ITTT!!!! Even though more than 50% of the people dont want to give ROOKIES more than one year to get their **** together. Get real people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 I'm soooo glad that none of you guys are gm's for the redskins. Because if you were, we'd be in a rebuilding mode every year. Everytime a player doesn't give you people instant results, it's always "get rid of his sorry ass, he can't show us what he can do in one year? Then we don't need him." ... Get real people! The Get Real comment comes off like you are a GM, and have the definitive opinion of how things should be done. Unless someone here has been working in the NFL IMO, anybody's opinion is equally valid here. I don't take the point here as get rid of Kelly and Thomas. I took it as what if again those guys don't show anything -- instead of being stuck, we'd have someone else to go to. Kelly has had chronic injuries so if he gets hurt again -- one opinion is why do we have to suck it up and live the whole season with it with no recourse and watch our receiving corp have another mediocre season? What if those guys again come to camp out of shape and don't pan out? If Kelly and Thomas come in and look good. Toomer sits on the bench. If Kelly gets hurt again. Toomer plays. If Thomas isn't up to speed with his routes and Campbell doesn't trust throwing his way like last season, maybe in a big game we'd need more than the 2nd receiver being basically a decoy, and Toomer gets some reps. I see it as insurance. And it having zero to do with giving up on either receiver or killing any youth movement. If we were killing a youth movement, IMO it would be signing or trading for a legitmate late 20s, early 30s receiver ala Chad Johnson. But if you are signing Toomer, I don't see him as an immediate starter but more of an insurance policy. I don't see Thomas and Kelly as sure fire studs. Could they become studs, sure -- should we gave them first shot at the starting position, IMO yeah. But banking on it as a given, I don't agree. So why not some insurance. If these guys aren't ready this year, and we have no back up plan -- I don't see how this season isn't a repeat of last one. Decent defense but an offense that can't score. If Kelly and Thomas again aren't ready, and we have no back up plan -- arguably that risk in itself will ensure they don't make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yes' date=' Thrash is the only player on our roster that can provide excellent ST play AND can play WR. Expecting Kelly to do it is ridiculous based on his size and knee injuries. Thomas COULD develop into an excellent STer, but has not shown anything that would make us expect that. You are going from KNOWING what Thrash can bring to HOPING Thomas can do the same thing.[/quote']Id rather have a WR then a ST stand out. Id trade excellent WR play from Toomer and take a hit on the quality of oneST player, then take a hit in the quality of the WR position (a more important position) and have an above average ST player. Thats what this boils down to. Maybe not Thomas at St, but another depth player. LB, DB, anyone can fill in and play ST. The same cant be said about WR, and the depth we have at WR is trash, not Thrash, trash. SO why not upgrade the WR position and let some other depth player from maybe another position fill out the Special teams roster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnb123 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Oh yeah, lets put our eggs in the basket of the rookie WR's that didn t show anything last year. Our whole offense didn't show anything last year, anyways. Minus well keep the young guys in so they can get better. Getting Toomer will put is back exactly where we started in 1/2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yes' date=' Thrash is the only player on our roster that can provide excellent ST play AND can play WR. Expecting Kelly to do it is ridiculous based on his size and knee injuries. Thomas COULD develop into an excellent STer, but has not shown anything that would make us expect that. You are going from KNOWING what Thrash can bring to HOPING Thomas can do the same thing.[/quote']Id rather have a WR then a ST stand out. Id trade DECENT/RELIABLE WR play from Toomer and take a hit on the quality of oneST player, then take a hit in the quality of the WR position (a more important position) and have ONE above average player on special teams. Thats what this boils down to. Maybe not Thomas at ST, but another depth player. LB, DB, anyone can fill in and play ST. The same cant be said about WR, and the depth we have at WR is trash, not Thrash, trash. So why not upgrade the WR position and let some other depth player from maybe another position fill out the Special teams roster? They may impress, the level in special teams play may not drop off, but we would still have an upgrade at WR. Im not HOPING Thomas does anything, I hope we cut him in all honesty. So why cant another depth player take the role of special teams? Why cant a back up at another position take Thrash's place on ST so that Toomer doesnt have to play it? B/c that is your only arguement as to why to keep Thrash right? B/c he is special teams god and a sub par WR? Id rather have a capable WR and let some young guy fill a special teams roster spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Our whole offense didn't show anything last year, anyways. Minus well keep the young guys in so they can get better. Getting Toomer will put is back exactly where we started in 1/2 years. our whole offense didnt show anything? and thats the defense of two crappy ass reach picks at WR? Campbell had a great first half of the season, he didnt have a supporting cast. He had 1 reciever in Moss, one TE and a RB. Campbell didnt throw a pick until the halfway mark of the season, he showed me something. CP almost hit 1500 yards again, that showed me something. To be more specific to your quote, our recievers did absolutely nothing and the over hyped draft picks were a big part of that. Toomer can do nothing but help us see what we have in Thomas and Kelly by challenging them for a roster spot. Ill say it again until someone can pose a reason why not. If Kelly and Thomas cant beat out a 34 year old aging reciever for the #3 or #4 reciever spot, they dont deserve to be a WR, and they dont deserve the roster spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.