Da_Truth Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 I say this once and I say this again. You are making a mistake if you don't get Winslow! You guys keep talking about Taylor and how we need him but guess what? Ravens have Ed Reed and they lost! Cowgirls have Roy Williams and they lost! What im trying to say is a Safety would not make a huge impact as would a TE. People keep judging Winslow calling him a headcase and judging him by his remarks. Get Real. You don't know the guy so how can you make such assumptions. This guy is a true playmaker and he shows it everytime he plays. A TE can keep drives alive and a Safety can't. Our safetys are'nt even that bad. Some of you guys just want Taylor because hes an above average safety. Anyone can be a safety if they can hit , have decent speed, and have D-LINE HELP. But it takes more qualities to be a EFFECTIVE TE. You must have atleast some speed (fast enough to get open from a LB), be able to catch, AND BLOCK. But let me tell what this guy Winslow do. He affects BOTH DEFENSE AND OFFENSE. Now thats special! He will give your WR'S less coverage, and actually could make your RB have more room to run on offense because the defense would more than likely go in nickel or dime win Winslow is on the line. Now on defense he forces double coverage. He forces the way a defense must play. And you guys are telling me we should draft Taylor instead of a guy that can affect both offense and defense?? Imagine having two people who can bring double coverage on our offense. It would be wonderful! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mania Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Yes this is true, but I'd much rather have KJ. However I wouldn't mind having Winslow or Taylor either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 You need to break up your thoughts more. Try hitting the Enter key now and again. Now, explain again, how does this "settle" anything? There doesn't seem to be any new information contained in this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_good_brotha Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Originally posted by skins1_us I say this once and I say this again. You are making a mistake if you don't get Winslow! You guys keep talking about Taylor and how we need him but guess what? Ravens have Ed Reed and they lost! Cowgirls have Roy Williams and they lost! Yeah they lost in the playoffs. Where are the Redskins (5-11)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuels Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Agree 100% Winslow2 is the way to go just look what Shockey done and Winslow is better. I would'nt fuss over Taylor or KJ either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins26 Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 The Ravens also have Todd Heap, and they still lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da_Truth Posted January 4, 2004 Author Share Posted January 4, 2004 Originally posted by Skins26 The Ravens also have Todd Heap, and they still lost. Whats you point? Hes no Winslow nor Shockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Made Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Yea the cowboys also have a stronger TE core than the Panthers and they still lost. Winslow2 is going to be great, but using Ed Reed and Roy Williams argument because both their respective teams lost is nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 I think the decision will not be up to us. we will grab the one that is left. If both somehow fall, we can't go wrong with either pick, and I would feel comfortable with letting the coach decide, because if we get fassel, we need winslow, if we get a D-coord who needs excellent safety play, we need taylor. Both are excellent and we would be lucky to have either play in the burgandy in gold next year. -DB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnydertheHun Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Taylor Smith Harris Jones Winslow Udeze We can't lose at 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da_Truth Posted January 4, 2004 Author Share Posted January 4, 2004 Originally posted by johnyquest Yea the cowboys also have a stronger TE core than the Panthers and they still lost. Winslow2 is going to be great, but using Ed Reed and Roy Williams argument because both their respective teams lost is nonsense. You say that the cowgirls have a stronger TE core, what good is that if your TE has a QB that totally sucks!! Give me a better example. And you say the reed and williams arugument is nonsense well the comments on Winslow calling him a headcase because he was angry after a loss is dumb! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins26 Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Whats you point? Hes no Winslow nor Shockey. Neither Reed nor Williams are as good as Taylor though. While Shockey and Winslow are better than Heap, Taylor is much better than Williams and Reed. Taylor is a monster, so it Winslow, i'd take either. My rankings would look like this: Taylor Winslow KJ Jackson but if Tommy Harris comes out slip him in behind Winslow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 how much of a difference did TE make tonight? ZERO yup thats right. Zero. Defense wins championships. Our greatest needs are on the D line and in the secondary. Last time I checked TE doesnt play on the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 skins1_us, that's a ridiculous generalization. So you're saying because two weak teams who happen to have outstanding safeties lost that means we shouldn't draft potentially the best safety prospect in years? The 49ers had Ronnie Lott at safety and won five Super Bowls. If memory serves me, they had Bubba freakin' Paris at tight end. Your theory in action. The Ravens are also a lot stronger at TE than the Titans. I'd take one Todd Heap, an all-pro who is just entering his prime, over two washed up Frank Wychecks. He is the second (sometimes first) option on a team with no recieving corps and is probably a better player than Shockey. He just doesn't have the mouth. And as of right now, Winslow is no better than Heap, considering he hasn't played one down in the NFL as of yet. Your argument that Winslow benefits the offense is a pretty substantial reach. Taylor will DIRECTLY AFFECT SCORING with all those interceptions he'll be running back for TDs. He's a ballhawk, something we're sorely lacking on defense. Any safety that leads the nation in picks, can cover like a top-shelf CB, and hit like a LB is somebody I want on my team. He's not merely an "above-average" safety. He's a great safety and a great defensive player. He's Roy Williams with bigger hands. You're kidding yourself if you think we should take an immature Kellen Winslow over this kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J33Edwards Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 a tight end....blech I'm with OldSkool on this one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Heap is at least equal to Shockey anyway you say it. If he played in New York or called people homos, people would talk about him like they talk about Shockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinker Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 I think we have enough stars on both sides of the ball to succeed if we had more solid but not necessarily spectacular talent at dt, de, te, s, rb, lb, p, cb. We have pretty poor depth except at wr. (Jimoh is now our 4th cb; Franz is our 3rd s; we have NO te; - scary). That said, we only have four picks (1,2,3, and 5) and not a huge pot of cap room if we franchise Champ for $6 million. Probably only enough to sign a couple of good fa's. We'd be better off trading down our #1 for a mid round #1 and maybe a #2 and a #6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibrahim Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 whats with this whole XX has XX and still lost...ayt lemme continue the trend... Minnesota has Randy Moss and they didnt make the playoffs, WRs dont matter in this game, lets trade away Coles for two 7th rounders and a bag of frit-o-lay chips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 The only two players I would consider taking with the #5 pick are Taylor and Winslow. To me if neither is available or wanted than we should be looking to trade down. Will Smith, Stephen Jackson, Jones and the kid from USC are not worth the #5 pick IMO. At least not for this team. The only one that might be worth the #5 of those 5 players is Jackson and I prefer not to take a RB in the 1st round this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 I'm leaning towards Talylor. Do you see the Dallas safety run blitzes ran last night? Man I was we could have done that this year. Our Safetys are below average IMO and so are our TE's. So we might be able to get either one of these guys with a small trade down and pick up some sorely needed draft picks. By the how many points has Winslow scored this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 So you did actually settle anything with this post? Was your intention to use a poorly worded generalization to sway our minds on who to draft? Or was it to woo us with the awesome pieces of information you strategically placed in this thread? Either way, your strategy failed, and horribly. Your theory has so many holes in it it needs more surgery than 50 Cent after all those bullet wounds. Yes, Roy Williams and Ed Reed both lost. But what weight does that actually hold in the who to draft debate? Todd Heap, who in my opinion is equal to Shockey, if not better than him, also lost. Plus, your theory is based on two playoff games, not a very good way to win an argument. Had you based it on history and found that the real good safeties lose more Super Bowls than they get to, it still wouldn't hold any weight. Yes, our tight ends are bad, I'm not arguing that point. But what I am arguing is the fact that Matt Bowen is horrible. He takes awful angles and can't catch a pass that hits him square in the chest. Do you know how many more tackles/turnovers we may have had with someone halfway competent at that position this year? It MAY have been game making. But then again, the way the Redskins work, they probably would have found a way to screw up even then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNorth Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Give me Udeze, he has the potential to upgrade the biggest team weakness, the DL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgraw238 Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Todd Heap is a better TE than Winslow or Shockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 You'll get to see a team with the best TE in football exit the playoffs next weekend skins1_us. Kansas City will lose next weekend. Why?? Because they play horrible defense and that's what wins championships in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlinginSammy HOF '63 Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 The last thing I'd want is Winslow on TV every Monday morning ****ing because Ramsey didn't throw him the ball 10 times the day before. He'll be Keyshawn II, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.