Are we not expecting our young safeties to work out ?

[Mickalino]

I got the impression that the release of Carrier, while mostly for cap reasons, signaled the confidence we had on one of several budding young stars at the position : Martavious Houston, David Terrell, Josh Symonnette, and Eric Whitfield. Is the fact that we're shopping for a veteran replacement, a sign that none of these guys are ready to step up, or are we just building more competition for camp by looking for a Darren Perry, etc.?

[ by Mick on June 09, 2001.]

[ADF]

I don't think it signals anything. It would be irresponsible for Marty to go into the season with only young safeties that never started a down in the NFL. He has to have a vetran that has played in this league just in case those other guys don't work out. It wouldn't matter if the guys are looking great right now. Things may change once camp starts in late July. I'm sure he wants at least one proven player to fall back on or play while the other guys develop more.

[Buddha]

My thought is that our budding young safeties are vying for a soon-to-be-open spot at strong safety. Symonette is the 2nd string SS but a bit on the smallish side at 5-10 180; Whitfield, Houston, and Terrell are all 6'0 or bigger. I'd feel a lot more comfortable with one of these guys playing in run support, blitzing, and covering backs and TEs than I would with any of them at the FS spot and calling coverages.

[bulldog]

The Redskins are looking for a veteran safety to start for one year at FS. There is some confidence that a couple of the youngsters may contribute some this year (and especially in 2002) but it is far from a certainty at this point and veteran safeties are available so Marty is not going to take the chance.

[Mickalino]

Tell me, if naming a starter before camp, that has no NFL is experience is such a taboo, then why is everyone so quick to annoint Winston October as the next punt returner ?

[NavyDave]

Our punt returners last year slimetime and J (muff) Thrash are more or less gone so the kid is penciled to be the primary returner but that doesn t mean someone else can wow marty in camp and preseason.

Going with unproven kids as starters at Safety would starting the rebuilding frenzied talk ie we are going to accept a losing season, this is our probation year don't expect much, junk I hear from some of our lame sportstalk hosts.

I want to see what is going to happen with our CBs if we keep slimetime which I want us to do. Will we keep 6 DBs? We should because darrell green and slimetime would leave next next and then we would have 4 young capable CBs

------------------

Yes I'm paid to think and I need a raise

[Fitz]

Well, CFL experience may not be the same as NFL experience, but it *is* professional football. In fact, since there's no fair catch, it can be argued that October's status as the leading CFL return man could be a very valuable asset indeed. Besides, there's not much a learning curve at the position, certainly not as much as a free safety.

[bulldog]

I think if you look around the league every year there are many more rookies returning kicks and punts than playing in the defensive backfield or elsewhere as starters.

Why? There is less of a learning curve. The transition is not as difficult. That's why players such as Desmond Howard were able to match their college output as returners but not as regular starters. You can go back and look at other rookies that have started and done quite well as returners including Deion Sanders in 1989.

It is difficult for a rookie to start at free safety. Playing off the line and being responsible for spacing and the defensive calls is really a job for a veteran. Occasionally, you see a rookie but usually it is at strong safety.