pjfootballer Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Because:A) Santana knows the playbook He is a good mentor to the younger receivers...someone who talks with his play more than his mouth C) He can still be effective, especially if we put him in the slot BINGO!! I'd rather sign Moss and develop the others than to sign a 34 year old 2 years out of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Yeah, Sean was brandishing his weapon in defense of his property and maybe himself, at his home in the vehicle incident. Burress had no such excuse at a nightclub he voluntarily patronized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Very well said. Hankerson on one side, Burress on the other, and Moss in the slot. Wow, we have an offense. And teams won't stack the line. And if Burress isn't 100% back to speed yet? He beats the hell out of Joey Galloway coming off the bench. A box full of shoehorns beats having Joey Galloway coming off the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 BINGO!! I'd rather sign Moss and develop the others than to sign a 34 year old 2 years out of the league. No doubt, but with the culture that we've had here since Snyder took over is it really any surprise to hear the fans wanting the big name high priced guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I would think Redskins would understand this better than anyone given what happened to Sean Taylor. Had Sean grabbed a pistol rather than a baseball bat, we may not have signed Otagwe. Sean was on probation from what I understand from the ATV incident, so he could not have a gun when they came into his house. I think he had a machete, but I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Without dragging Taylor into this debate, I can understand why people are saying that what Plax did wasn't horrible. I acknowledge that he broke the law and, if the law says he should serve two years, then I'm fine with that too. However, to me a major distinction is that he never did anything threatening or with any harmful intent. What he did was illegal, dangerous, and dumb...but within the context of the 2011 professional sport and crime landscape, it seems pretty benign. I'm fine if they want to give him a look. He could be a good bridge to some of our promising young WRs. Since we have many more smallish WR prospects (Austin, Banks, Armstrong, etc.), I think Burress fills a need if Kelly can't be relied upon and Hankerson isn't quite ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossomo Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Malum prohibitum vs. malum in se Criminal offenses can be broken down into two general categories malum in se and malum prohibitum. The distinction between malum in se and malum prohibitum offenses is best characterized as follows: a malum in se offense is "naturally evil as adjudged by the sense of a civilized community," whereas a malum prohibitum offense is wrong only because a statute makes it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Levi Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Everyone keeps saying "look at Vick! This is another Vick right here! Vick. V-I-C-K. VIIIIICCCCKKK!!!!! Ok, here's a few very significant differences between those two. 1) Plax is much older than Vick, in a position where age takes its toll on a player's talents quicker. 2) Plax was ALWAYS a pain in the ass to his team even before he started shooting himself with sweatpants waistband pistols. His last season - except of course for the Super Bowl - was a mess. When Vick wasn't killing dogs he was generally not a media or locker room distraction for the Falcons. And by the way, who the hell wears sweatpants to a VIP nightclub? Seriously. I mean...I don't go out to too many NYC nightclubs but I don't think I'd be wearing sweatpants if I did. Did he just roll out of bed or something, grab the gun, and head to da club? 3) The first thing Plax did upon coming out of jail was talk **** about his old boss and his old team in the press. Seems a bit different than the "humbled" Vick who came out of prison eager to show that he had changed. Upon getting out of jail Vick embarked on a year-long apology tour, kissed Tony Dungy's ass, gave a bunch of money to the ASPCA, and basically took every opportunity to show he was now a boy scout. Whether or not it was for show at least he made an effort and was conscious of his image. Can you imagine if he'd just come out of jail and started talking to the press about what a prick Arthur Blank is? Another thing to note is it took Vick an entire season to get himself back into football shape. During his 2009 appearances he was nothing special. In another season Plax is 35. Burress to the Skins is another terrible idea that is predicatablly being embraced by about 50% of Redskins fans, who just can't resist that big name even though it always turns out to be a disaster. It won't happen, it shouldn't happen. And PLEASE stop saying this is just like Vick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins2victory Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I actually love all the new talent we have at wide out....... I say pass and let the younger guys play For one Kelly knows this is probably his last shot. Its not like he has wanted to be hurt these last years. My guess he is really hungry, and is going to strech alot. He could blow up this year if he dosent get hurt again. All these guys have great size. Kelly, Armstrong, Hank, and Austin...... I think we are all excited to see what Hank can do! Then we have the other 2 later round picks from this year. I have seen some good post on both of them. Acording to his college coach the Aldrick dude is the fastest guy he has ever coached, and is awsome at speacial teams. I think he could possible beat out Banks, that will be a good battle at camp if we ever get this lockout done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I actually love all the new talent we have at wide out....... I say pass and let the younger guys play If they outplay him, they can play over him. I don't think anyone would be paying Plax all that much money to the point where they couldn't bench him. For one Kelly knows this is probably his last shot. Its not like he has wanted to be hurt these last years. My guess he is really hungry, and is going to strech alot. He could blow up this year if he dosent get hurt again. He's had this type of motivation since 2008 and it hasn't kicked in yet. Signing Plax might be the type of move that jolts him in the arm? All these guys have great size.Kelly, Armstrong, Hank, and Austin...... I think we are all excited to see what Hank can do! Do they? Armstrong and Austin are burners I thought? Hank and Kelly are bigger targets for sure. Then we have the other 2 later round picks from this year. I have seen some good post on both of them. Acording to his college coach the Aldrick dude is the fastest guy he has ever coached, and is awsome at speacial teams. I think he could possible beat out Banks, that will be a good battle at camp if we ever get this lockout done. Again, another example of how we have redundancy at the fast WR position. To me, that's further justification in letting Moss and Banks walk, more than justification in not signing a big guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins2victory Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 If they outplay him, they can play over him. I don't think anyone would be paying Plax all that much money to the point where they couldn't bench him. He's had this type of motivation since 2008 and it hasn't kicked in yet. Signing Plax might be the type of move that jolts him in the arm? Do they? Armstrong and Austin are burners I thought? Hank and Kelly are bigger targets for sure. Again, another example of how we have redundancy at the fast WR position. To me, that's further justification in letting Moss and Banks walk, more than justification in not signing a big guy. Your right just looked, Armstrong and Austin are both 5'11...... But we saw what Armstrong could do last year for one, I am excited about him. Its an I know..... I know......... about Kelly. But my gut feeling is he knows this is pretty much his last shot, and like I said earlier I bet he knows how to strech better than everyone on the team by now, at least I hope so. I just have a gut feeling it will actually work out for him this year, and we will all be happy about it. I dont think we need Moss, or Banks either, I really do hope that Aldrick is as fast as we hear and will be even better than Banks was last year at the speedy position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 If winning more games in 2011 is the objective, re-sign Santana, not Plax. If the long-term is more important, sign neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I dont think we need Moss, or Banks either, I really do hope that Aldrick is as fast as we hear and will be even better than Banks was last year at the speedy position I would prefer that Armstrong, Austin, Hankerson, and Aldrick make it so that we have the luxury of making some tough decisions this season. I love what Banks did and I love Moss for what he's done for us in the Gibbs+ eras, but we'd be better off if those other players forced our hands with those two. Having a corps of Armstrong, Hankerston, Austin, Aldrick, and one more bigger guy would be the best case scenario for our team (in my opinion). The reasons being a) Moss is getting old and Banks is one-dimensional and is hardly a WR at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpumd Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 If the long-term is more important, sign neither. I have to disagree with this portion of your post. I think having a productive, veteran receiver (Santana, not Plax) on the team is not bad for the long-term. We have a lot of rookie receivers trying to earn spots on the team this year. For those rookies that do make it on the team (or the practice squad), I think having a veteran receiver like Moss is beneficial to our rookie receivers--he can show these rookies how to practice, nuances to our scheme, etc.) I also don't think Moss' presence on the team would in any way slow or hamper the development of any of our rookie receivers. I think Hankerson is the only candidate for a starting spot (perhaps along with Malcomb, if he's healthy). If that's the case, you start Hankerson/Comb and Armstrong on the outside, and Moss in the slot. Aldrick Robinson could potentially develop into our future slot receiver. I see no reason that adding Moss is detrimental to the team's long-term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins2victory Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I would prefer that Armstrong, Austin, Hankerson, and Aldrick make it so that we have the luxury of making some tough decisions this season. I love what Banks did and I love Moss for what he's done for us in the Gibbs+ eras, but we'd be better off if those other players forced our hands with those two. Having a corps of Armstrong, Hankerston, Austin, Aldrick, and one more bigger guy would be the best case scenario for our team (in my opinion). The reasons being a) Moss is getting old and Banks is one-dimensional and is hardly a WR at all. I totally agree with you...... But the thing it looks that we are disagreeing on is the Kelly thing. He is the other big guy we need. No one can predict injuries, he could be the same story again, but I really think this is the year he gets to play. I really hope so at least. This is the roster I want to see........Armstrong, Hankerson, Kelly, Austin, Aldrick, Niels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I have to disagree with this portion of your post. I think having a productive, veteran receiver (Santana, not Plax) on the team is not bad for the long-term. We have a lot of rookie receivers trying to earn spots on the team this year. For those rookies that do make it on the team (or the practice squad), I think having a veteran receiver like Moss is beneficial to our rookie receivers--he can show these rookies how to practice, nuances to our scheme, etc.) I also don't think Moss' presence on the team would in any way slow or hamper the development of any of our rookie receivers. I think Hankerson is the only candidate for a starting spot (perhaps along with Malcomb, if he's healthy). If that's the case, you start Hankerson/Comb and Armstrong on the outside, and Moss in the slot. Aldrick Robinson could potentially develop into our future slot receiver. I see no reason that adding Moss is detrimental to the team's long-term. Oldfan's absolutely right, if we are concerned with wins and losses next year then we should re-sign Moss. My championing for him to be re-signed is that I feel it's a dead giveaway that if we let Moss go this year we gave up on the season before it ever starts. Moss on the team would mean more wins for us next year. And he's right in saying if we are thinking more long term then we should not sign either player. The basic problem I have with your argument here and the bolded part is that Moss would take away catches from those rookie receivers. There is no equal to expirence. Practice is swell and good for everyone but nothing equals game time expirence. If you carry Moss on the active game roster there goes a spot for one of the younger guys. Last year Armstrong was able to break through the starting lineup but Austin couldn't, there are only so many spots to go around. I am still wanting Moss to stay here. I think he can mentor these guys and I think he should end his career with us and he gives us a legitmate #1 WR. But in the end if we don't sign him it opens the door for the other guys to show up and show us what they got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I totally agree with you...... But the thing it looks that we are disagreeing on is the Kelly thing. He is the other big guy we need. No one can predict injuries, he could be the same story again, but I really think this is the year he gets to play. I really hope so at least. This is the roster I want to see........Armstrong, Hankerson, Kelly, Austin, Aldrick, Niels Well, we're not disagreeing as much as I rushed through my post! Kelly can be that other big guy we need and if he can serve that role with the other 4, we'd be set until they started becoming FAs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpumd Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Oldfan's absolutely right, if we are concerned with wins and losses next year then we should re-sign Moss. My championing for him to be re-signed is that I feel it's a dead giveaway that if we let Moss go this year we gave up on the season before it ever starts. Moss on the team would mean more wins for us next year. And he's right in saying if we are thinking more long term then we should not sign either player. The basic problem I have with your argument here and the bolded part is that Moss would take away catches from those rookie receivers. There is no equal to expirence. Practice is swell and good for everyone but nothing equals game time expirence. If you carry Moss on the active game roster there goes a spot for one of the younger guys. Last year Armstrong was able to break through the starting lineup but Austin couldn't, there are only so many spots to go around. I am still wanting Moss to stay here. I think he can mentor these guys and I think he should end his career with us and he gives us a legitmate #1 WR. But in the end if we don't sign him it opens the door for the other guys to show up and show us what they got. I simply disagree with the idea that Moss being on the team is bad for the team's long-term future. The Packers did well in the long-term by keeping Favre as their starter despite drafting Rodgers. Rodgers learned from Favre and it benefited the team greatly. I don't think Santana's potential role on the Skins' 2011 roster (and possibly beyond) is detrimental to the young group of receivers we drafted. I guess we can just agree to disagree on that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I simply disagree with the idea that Moss being on the team is bad for the team's long-term future. The Packers did well in the long-term by keeping Favre as their starter despite drafting Rodgers. Rodgers learned from Favre and it benefited the team greatly. I don't think Santana's potential role on the Skins' 2011 roster (and possibly beyond) is detrimental to the young group of receivers we drafted. I guess we can just agree to disagree on that point. Time to get in the way-back machine... Back to 1996, when the 49ers were still a threat in the NFC West. Steve Young, Jerry Rice, et al. Draft time rolls around, and who do they pick in the third round? Someone by the name of Terrell Owens. Rice was able to bring the young Owens into the league, under the umbrella of not having to jump into the flames as a number one receiver. Owens does rather nicely, in fact, in his time with the 49ers with Rice opposite him. In fact, I would argue that having Rice opposite Owens was beneficial to them both: Rice had someone else that defenses had to focus on, taking the pressure off him and probably extending his career. Owens didn't have to step into the number one role until 2000, when Rice went across the bay to the Raiders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Levi Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Time to get in the way-back machine... Back to 1996, when the 49ers were still a threat in the NFC West. Steve Young, Jerry Rice, et al. Draft time rolls around, and who do they pick in the third round? Someone by the name of Terrell Owens. Rice was able to bring the young Owens into the league, under the umbrella of not having to jump into the flames as a number one receiver. Owens does rather nicely, in fact, in his time with the 49ers with Rice opposite him. In fact, I would argue that having Rice opposite Owens was beneficial to them both: Rice had someone else that defenses had to focus on, taking the pressure off him and probably extending his career. Owens didn't have to step into the number one role until 2000, when Rice went across the bay to the Raiders. So, if I get you right, you are saying we should bring in Owens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 So, if I get you right, you are saying we should bring in Owens? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champskins Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I totally agree with you...... But the thing it looks that we are disagreeing on is the Kelly thing. He is the other big guy we need. No one can predict injuries, he could be the same story again, but I really think this is the year he gets to play. I really hope so at least. This is the roster I want to see........Armstrong, Hankerson, Kelly, Austin, Aldrick, Niels I agree with your 6... would love to let the youngsters develop, but we need at least (1) vet WR presence to help with these guys. Reading a few tweets, I would not rule out Chad Ochocinco. And Moss should be a priority for the slot. Banks could easily get the boot, he was a heartwarming story for little dudes, but i'd rather see Niles get the KR duties and put Brandyn Thompson on PR duties since they will be fighting for extra yardage with the shorter kickoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Levi Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 :doh: :laugh: :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 :laugh::cool: not quite sure how to read you on this...did you think I really wanted to bring T.O. in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedBeast Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I didn't read that headline carefully enough and thought Cooley was in prison too! Cooley did get caught with a bunch of pots in Leesburg VA recently. Any word on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.