Why haven't we gotten a WR?

[Redskins Anonymous]

I agree with gutlead on people acting like cattle being led to slaughter by the media. Do we have the worst receivers in the league as Mosley said on ESPN? I don't think we do. From what I have seen as far as the matchups and how our offense looks, our receivers are adequate and some are even good (shocking right?).

Preseason stats do mean something. Guys lose their jobs because of those stats. However, preseason stats are significant in a different way than regular season stats. You're looking more for how guys handle it across the board (the 1's vs. the 1's the 2's vs. the 2's etc.) and if you have depth compared to other teams. Does it mean that our running game is going to suck because we sucked in the preseason? Not necessarily as Clinton looked good, but I am far more concerned about our lack of running than our receivers or the passing game as a whole. That would be because of the way we looked in the preseason.

Now if you are a douche coach in the preseason like Spurrier, you play your starters while the other team plays their threes and blow them out. In those situations then preseason is meaningless. But we didn't do that. We used the preseason appropriately. While it doesn't mean that we are a top five passing team, it does mean something and I don't think we should laugh off those stats. I know players and coaches didn't this week when they did cuts.

[gutlead74]

Holy crap! Someone gets it! I was losing faith.

[MrJL]

it may make some feel better, but pre season stats are TOTALLY meaningless......hopefully the regular season stats are as impressive.

technically, so are LAST seasons stats. We don't know. We have some young guys with potential. Hopefully that's enough.

And I'd like to add, that while our WRs are to young everybody is complaining about our RB's being to old. It's kind of funny.

[SkinsTillIDie]

It's not a coincidence that Andre Johnson, Owen Daniels, and Kevin Walter have all had their career years under the direction of Kyle Shanahan.

another note to point out:

Eddie Royal in 2008 with Mike Shanahan: 91 receptions for 980 yards and 5 tds

Eddie Royal in 2009 without Mike Shanahan: 37 receptions for 345 yards and 0 tds

Eddie Royal is virtually the same size as Anthony Armstrong - 5'10 and 180 lbs versus 5'11 and 185 lbs. Both seem to have the same attributes - speed as their best weapon, with good hands and a decent route running abilities. Armstrong is at the exact same point as Royal when he had his breakout year - both first year NFL players (not counting Armstrong's stints on various practice squads, in which he saw no actual playing time).

The Shanahans seem to be able to get the most out of every player they coach - namely, on offense. Elway, Plummer, Griese and Cutler all had their best years under Shanahan senior, and Johnson, Walter, Daniels and Schaub all had their best years under Shanahan junior. The key in this league is finding the best players to fit one's particular system, which is one of the major reasons why Cerrato was such an inept GM - I mean, seriously, drafting a 6'4 lengthy receiver best suited to stretch the field for Zorn's quick, short passing offense? Really? This is why you very rarely see star receivers move from one team to the other and find equal or even better success. You might be able to name me one or two, but I'll name you 10 WRs or more who failed to ever live up to their high profile success having switched teams.

As the ever-rationale dfbovey mentioned, we've already upgraded at quarterback, left tackle, right tackle and right guard, while adding depth to the running back and wide receiver positions. Given how our offense is still lacking in both talented skill position players and quality depth, it is even more obviously evident just how Cerrato failed to build any semblance of an offense. It's no coincidence that our offense ranks among Detroit's, Buffalo's and Cleveland's as the worst in the NFL over the last decade.

Be patient - Armstrong could very well surprise many and prove to be a productive #2 or #3 WR. Maybe Shanahan can get the best out of Thomas yet - maybe he will never be the reliable possession receiver, but one capable of making one or two big plays a game. And the fact that we have not only one of the premier pass-catching tight ends in the league in Chris Cooley, but another up-and-coming star in Fred Davis means that McNabb's bevy of pass-catchers are deeper than what appears on paper. Depending on who is active, Roydell Williams and Joey Galloway should be good for a catch or two each per game, and Keiland Williams should get a few out of the backfield as well. We will spread the ball around, and whoever doesn't produce will be out of a job in 2011, when we will likely target the WR and RB areas in a prospect-rich draft and the most abundant crop of free agents to hit the market in recent memory.

[ILoveMySkins]

technically, so are LAST seasons stats. We don't know. We have some young guys with potential. Hopefully that's enough.

And I'd like to add, that while our WRs are to young everybody is complaining about our RB's being to old. It's kind of funny.

That's not true at all. Would you give up a second round pick for Vincent Jackson or Victor Cruz? Would you trade a first for Peyton Manning or Rhett Bomar? Looking at a player's stats from last year are much more meaningful than anything the preseason will tell you.

[petedaddy]

I agree with gutlead on people acting like cattle being led to slaughter by the media. Do we have the worst receivers in the league as Mosley said on ESPN? I don't think we do. From what I have seen as far as the matchups and how our offense looks, our receivers are adequate and some are even good (shocking right?).

Preseason stats do mean something. Guys lose their jobs because of those stats. However, preseason stats are significant in a different way than regular season stats. You're looking more for how guys handle it across the board (the 1's vs. the 1's the 2's vs. the 2's etc.) and if you have depth compared to other teams. Does it mean that our running game is going to suck because we sucked in the preseason? Not necessarily as Clinton looked good, but I am far more concerned about our lack of running than our receivers or the passing game as a whole. That would be because of the way we looked in the preseason.

Now if you are a douche coach in the preseason like Spurrier, you play your starters while the other team plays their threes and blow them out. In those situations then preseason is meaningless. But we didn't do that. We used the preseason appropriately. While it doesn't mean that we are a top five passing team, it does mean something and I don't think we should laugh off those stats. I know players and coaches didn't this week when they did cuts.

I disagree that players lose their jobs based on these stats. I highly doubt Coach Shanahan is reading the box score the next day. If the stats mattered to the staff so much, Austin would be on the team. What the coaches are looking for in preseason is that players are where they are supposed to be.

I agree partially with your thinking. While I don't agree that preseason stats are meaningful in any shape or form, I do agree that it does matter how players play against other players. If one of our 2's is performing well against another team's 1, then that can be significant.

Preseason offenses vary drastically from regular season offenses. No offensive wrinkles are going to be revealed in preseason, and base defenses are going to be used.

[MWCREDSKINS]

I would've taken a flyer on Mark Clayton. He's a solid receiver who could've been a good compliment to Santana. I really hope Devin Thomas finally lives up to that high draft grade

[darrelgreenie]

This might be why

http://www.nfl.com/stats/team

Compound this with having a very strong wr class coming out in next years draft.

In other words chill folks chill.

I agree with youm and its not just because the passing game has been effective in the preseason.

Its because our young WRs Armstrong, Devin Thomas and Roydell Williams have looked good against 1st string defenses.

Between Moss+Cooley+Davis we have imo as talented a core group around which to build a passing game.

Kyle built a passing game around Andre Johnson+Owen Daniels and a bunch of guys.

I look for Moss to be the focal point of our passing game at the WR position and i think he'll be a heavily targeted WR; not as much as Andre Johnson staggering 171 targets because Moss isn't that dominant but i could see Moss being targeted as heavily as he was in 2005 134 targets for 84 catches 1,488 yards and 9 TDs.

Imo our bunch of guys: Anthony Armstrong, Devin Thomas and Roydell Williams are every bit as talented (if not more) then Jacoby Jones, Kevin Walter and David Anderson.

I left old man Joey off the list b/c i view anything he provides as a bonus, i think he's here to be a good shepherd for our younger receivers.

[Oldskool]

Preseason stats are used as a barometer of the POTENTIAL of a player who may or may not be on the team, not to gauge the overall health and vitality of starters on your WR corps.

Case in point is Terrance Austin who lit it up against 2nd and 3rd stringers but failed to make the team.

Using preseason stats to make blanket justifications is beyond silliness and borders on outright deception.

[Redskins Anonymous]

I disagree that players lose their jobs based on these stats. I highly doubt Coach Shanahan is reading the box score the next day. If the stats mattered to the staff so much, Austin would be on the team. What the coaches are looking for in preseason is that players are where they are supposed to be.

I agree partially with your thinking. While I don't agree that preseason stats are meaningful in any shape or form, I do agree that it does matter how players play against other players. If one of our 2's is performing well against another team's 1, then that can be significant.

Preseason offenses vary drastically from regular season offenses. No offensive wrinkles are going to be revealed in preseason, and base defenses are going to be used.

Preseason stats are one factor in a decision to cut a player. But they do count. Viewing Austin's stats versus 3rd stringers and putting them in proper context to the other players' stats going against different competition is what they did as well as watching the film and trying players in different spots. Maybe he wasn't as good at ST's as another player.

I am not saying we are a top five offense; I am saying that preseason games are a huge part of the decision making. The only preseason stat that is completely irrelevant is the scoreboard. You can't say we're better than the Jets because we beat them in the preseason. But I can say that some guys looked good in that game and put up decent numbers against a pretty tough team on both sides of the ball.

So we're clear here what I am saying is that a TD vs ones is more valuable than a TD against threes. But it doesn't mean that TD against threes is not of some value when evaluating the scheme as a whole especially when on two occasions we faced teams ones with ours twos and their twos with our threes. I don't think our WR's are as much of a liability as the lack of a running game. Again I feel that way because of the preseason.

As far as the vanilla defense / offense and lack of gameplanning (unless you're the Ravens...), it's just one factor. I have noticed that teams tend to show more of their offense with the scrubs than they do with the starters.

I think we are arguing a point that can't really be won by either side. In the end preseason football is not the same as the regular season. You can't say we are top 5 in passing because of the preseason. But the games tell you more than Matt Mosley does. In the end, I guess that's why I agree with gutlead that this stat is of interest - as much interest as anyone can have for the preseason. Maybe our staff feels good enough to just let it play out with what we have. Fortunately preseason is over and we can finally see what is real.

[RansomthePasserby]

Could you please say what song that is for those of us who can't read music?

Monday night intro, I'm guessing.

[TeddyKGB]

As a "fantasy nut", I tend to disagree with most the haters in this thread--here's why:

If you actually watch a lot of preseason games to get a feel on fantasy players(which I do), you'll notice trends. For Instance during Desean Jackson's rookie year I noticed that McNabb was favoring him heavily in the Eagles preseason when their FIRST UNIT was on the field. That year Mr. Jackson explodes on the scene and becomes D. Mac's #1.

The relevance or "trend" to our preseason rankings is that our passing YPG was almost completely done with our first unit or first unit players mingled with Rex. So I do not think our rankings are just a fluke. Now should you think that all the preseason rankings overall are worth a damn? No, but at the same time you have to look at the relevance of those stats when the starters were in vs. other teams starters.

So do I believe Victor Cruz and Matt Flynn are going to Rock the NFL this year--absolutely not.

But I do believe in trends such as our Passing Offense being good with 1 good receiver and good tight ends ala the Colts? Yes I do. In fact a negative trend I see forming is our rushing defense. Our defense is meant to gamble now--not to bend and break anymore.

[Oldskool]

As a "fantasy nut", I tend to disagree with most the haters in this thread--here's why:

If you actually watch a lot of preseason games to get a feel on fantasy players(which I do), you'll notice trends. For Instance during Desean Jackson's rookie year I noticed that McNabb was favoring him heavily in the Eagles preseason when their FIRST UNIT was on the field. That year Mr. Jackson explodes on the scene and becomes D. Mac's #1.

You do realize the reason that they targeted him so often in the preseason was to verify what they had in him as a rookie receiver as well as develop continuity between him and McNabb. This is a specific case of knowing you spent a high 2nd rounder on a WR, that he was going to start (due to inherently weak WR corps) and not case to prove a trend.

The OP's assertion is that the Skins many yards, therefore the WR corps are secure is a false one. They spent nearly every quarter of the 4 preseason games throwing to all the WR's in order to sort the wheat from the shaft. The majority of these yards being racked up late in meaningless games against guys that were cut this weekend.

[DeaconBlue]

Wow. Just wow.

Guess theres no pleasin you.......

[bedlamVR]

That's not true at all. Would you give up a second round pick for Vincent Jackson or Victor Cruz? Would you trade a first for Peyton Manning or Rhett Bomar? Looking at a player's stats from last year are much more meaningful than anything the preseason will tell you.

You have got to be kidding . We have 2 WRs from last season, we have an all new coaching staff, different plays and philosophy and a new QB . I am not sure how looking at stats from last year would be comparable .

Each new season is a new page .

[downbeat87]

Could you please say what song that is for those of us who can't read music?

Mcdonalds jingle (c-d-e A G! e-d-cc)

[Rufus T Firefly]

Guess theres no pleasin you.......

When someone starts a thread based on an extremely shaky premise, is refuted with facts, and then responds with a logic-less temper tantrum.....no, I guess that doesn't "please" me.

Maybe I just have high standards.

[Bubble Screen]

Am I the only one that thinks Armstrong is our future?

If Armstrong is our future then we're ****ed!!

[CM916]

Last time I checked, we have six WRs four of which are new. You guys didn't think we were going to head into the season without receivers did you? I mean that would be ridiculous! We'd have to play nothing but 3TE sets.

[Rob Mexico]

I am willing to trust the coaches. I am going to take a wait and see approach. I have a good feeling.

[36HAMMER]

maybe just maybe they are waiting for the Chargers to come down in their asking price.They didn't say who but Jackson found a team and got a contract done but the team and the Chargers couldn't agree on compensation so the trade is dead.MAy or may not have been the Skins don't know.The packers were also tryin to trade a guard named Spitz who if i remember is pretty good, better than what we have.At least montgomery anyway, but it seems the Skins are done moven unless a need raises up during this game and they are forced to trade for something.

[MartinC]

I think we know we are not great at receiver but McNabb has done well with less in the past and you have to factor in we have very good receiving TEs who can take some of the touches a 3rd receiver would get in most offenses. Our depth is a concern but lets wait and see what happens.

We think we were in the running for TJ Housh but he was a free agent. Despite a lot of speculation - mainly on ES - I have seen nothing linking us with offering to trade draft picks for Jackson or anybody else. What I hope that means is we are valuing draft picks more highly than in the past and no panicking like we also have in the past.

I think I'm right in saying we had 2 draft picks from this year make the 53 man roster. We need more youth on this roster to build for the long term and that means keeping draft picks and drafting better especially later in the draft.

[wilburmarshall]

Can't belive we let Housh slip away! Any word on Michael Clayton or James Hardy???

[J-bomb]

^^Clayton was traded to the rams for a undisclosed conditional pick.

[KDawg]

Our receivers aren't great, and its a spot we could use an upgrade at next offseason (I'm assuming we have football next year)... However, we aren't as bad as people believe we are at receiver. We're not a top 15 receiving corps by any means, but we'll be okay.

Let's not hit the panic button just yet.