jimster Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 As much as everbody here likes to say the word "cut", I'm pretty sure we could get something for a few of these guys. There is also the possibility of re-structuring some of these guys as well, like Wynn, Samuels and maybe even Morton, with Samuels being probably the most difficult. Rock lost 20 lbs, yes, but he could put it back on the right way with a 6 month off-season and comeback as that goal line guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cool Hand Loki Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 I like McCants as much as the next fan, especially considering that he played a major role in a near-victory over the Eagles last year. But this being week 17, I think it's fair to say that the coaching staff just doesn't see it, or that McCants hasn't "gotten with the program." I just don't think he'll be around, though I'm loath to say it. Taylor Jacobs, on the other hand, seems to be a player who's made the most of his opportunities, fought to get on the field, and then performed when his number is called. I love his speed, and he has a nice set of hands too. He's not the goal-line threat that McCants is, as someone mentioned. However, if the team is serious about getting rid of Gardner, wouldn't it make sense to have Gardner's replacement be able to play both roles? That is to say, a big No. 2 receiver who can go deep and climb the ladder for jump balls, and be a goal-line threat? I like the players we have, but this article makes it sound like there will be plenty of changes, and I think we can fill several holes/roles with fewer players than people realize. This glut of receivers is a holdover from Spurrier; I don't think Gibbs would have made this particular position so deep, if he was designing a roster from scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 I bet that carolina would give something for gardner if mushin departs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by Ignatius J. I bet that carolina would give something for gardner if mushin departs. I'd also add Kansas City, San Diego and possibly Oakland to this list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNut73 Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 No need for change...we'll just "coach 'em up a bit".... . . . . . . .. . just kidding. Gibbs will get this turned around. I have faith that any adjustments he makes in the offseason will result in a much improved offense next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Are they selling tickets to sit in on this coaches meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF4L Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 A little scrunity during the freaking season would have been nice. No, let's suck all year long and then take a hard look when it's over. This would be funny if it wasn't so sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway66 Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by Resurrection Let the overhauling begin. Aside form Portis and Ramsey, the offense we see on the field next season, especially the offensive line, will probably be very different. I think Gardner, McCants, Jacobs, Samuels, Thomas, Raymer, and Dockery will all be out of here. Aside from Jansen, the entire line will be different, and we will have a new #2, and #3 receiver on this team. Why Randy THOMAS??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtyler42 Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by garg8050 From a strategic standpoint, I don't know if that's a good thing. Jacobs is still a smallish receiver who has trouble getting off the line of scrimmage. I don't know if he's the ideal goalline WR. That's the good thing about McCants, he's bigger and stronger. Originally posted by SkinsFan03 I like McCants as much as the next fan, especially considering that he played a major role in a near-victory over the Eagles last year. But this being week 17, I think it's fair to say that the coaching staff just doesn't see it, or that McCants hasn't "gotten with the program." I just don't think he'll be around, though I'm loath to say it. Taylor Jacobs, on the other hand, seems to be a player who's made the most of his opportunities, fought to get on the field, and then performed when his number is called. I love his speed, and he has a nice set of hands too. He's not the goal-line threat that McCants is, as someone mentioned. However, if the team is serious about getting rid of Gardner, wouldn't it make sense to have Gardner's replacement be able to play both roles? That is to say, a big No. 2 receiver who can go deep and climb the ladder for jump balls, and be a goal-line threat? I like the players we have, but this article makes it sound like there will be plenty of changes, and I think we can fill several holes/roles with fewer players than people realize. This glut of receivers is a holdover from Spurrier; I don't think Gibbs would have made this particular position so deep, if he was designing a roster from scratch. Never said Jacobs was a better option than McCants in the red-zone, I just asked had anybody noticed that he has taken McCants spot in that goal-line package....Truthfully I think it is b/c Jacobs is working harder in practice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by fansince62 questions: can Ramsey throw a touch pass deep? Started thinking about this after watching MNF graphics on McNuggets deep passes. are some of our problems traceable to PR not being able to throw a deep pass that angles in over the defense? or is all abut poor blocking, receeivers who cannot get open and predictable playcalling? If PR can't make the touch passes....then everything else is moot..... There is no way to tell at this point. You have to actually call and try to throw deep before you can find out. If Ramsey doesn't currently have touch deep then he'll need practice (reps) throwing the long ball (and not just in practice but during games). This will require a change in the play calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs4Life Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 dockery, raymer, koslowski, gardner, daniels, and barrow should all be gone. Dockery is the only one with a chance of staying but only as a backup. He is not a good gaurd and he will never be anything but a backup. Bye guys i wish you well in your future of soaking up teams salary caps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by jtyler42 Never said Jacobs was a better option than McCants in the red-zone, I just asked had anybody noticed that he has taken McCants spot in that goal-line package....Truthfully I think it is b/c Jacobs is working harder in practice... I think the reason that you see Jacobs taking McCants place in the goal line pack is because either one or the other is activated. McCants looked good enough on film for Gibbs to want to re-sign, but has apparently looked disappointing in practice, When he finally managed to start getting activated, he had that costly holding call in the Eagles game that cost us a 1st down. - It's looking like he may not have the concentration Gibbs likes, but we could trade him instead of cutting him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlsbadd Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by RF4L A little scrunity during the freaking season would have been nice. No, let's suck all year long and then take a hard look when it's over. This would be funny if it wasn't so sad. I agree, the longest touchdown pass this season was 18 yards,WTF. If anything should be looked at it's not being so paranoid about turnovers, and chuck the ball deep sometimes. I fail to understand when our Goal line package is in and Jacobs is flanked out as the lone WR . Everybody knows the ball is not going his way, and yet McCants is inactive who was a former high jump champion. There is just no suprises in out offense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by bubba9497 there will not be a lot of personell changes, but a few key ones Agreed. The biggest question is will Coles return to the form he had in the beggining of 2003 which would take care of any problems with the deep threat. We can also get a big boost by reducing our stupid penalties (false starts and such), would this take major personnel changes or can we use our current base? Finally, would it take major changes to fix the drop problems we had this year? Much of our drop problems seemed to have cleared up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Originally posted by jimster As much as everbody here likes to say the word "cut", I'm pretty sure we could get something for a few of these guys. There is also the possibility of re-structuring some of these guys as well, like Wynn, Samuels and maybe even Morton, with Samuels being probably the most difficult. Rock lost 20 lbs, yes, but he could put it back on the right way with a 6 month off-season and comeback as that goal line guy. Take a look at Morton's contract, ain't nothing to restructure but Samuels contract was designed from the get-go for him to restructure and extend after this year. We'll probably be looking to keep a minimum of 4 RB next year so we'll want at least 5 or 6 quality guys in camp (plus 2-3 more for fodder), so Rock's pretty safe (he's an EFA this year, isn't he?) until last cuts (unless someone needs a RB real bad and is willing to pay dearly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mania Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Last year Peerless Price had a bad year because they had no other legitimate #2 receiver. He had a better year this year because they went out and got Vick another toy to play with. I feel if we get another toy for Ramsey, the offense will do much better. I still feel Jacobs hasn't proved that he could be a legitimate #2 in this league because he hasn't gotten many chances. I'm not sure about Dmac, because he had more drops in 2003 than Gardner did. I know that is hard to believe, but I found out before the season in a stat thread on ES. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 Thought Buges said Dockery had the right stuff to be a great guard. Wouldn't mind giving him a chance to win a job during next years camp. Big men with pro football moves are not a dime a dozen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyGator Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 As an insurance policy for Coles, I bet they sign a solid veteran WR as a free agent. The Skins have too many decent WR's though and not enough good TE's, OL and RB's. I think McCants, Gardner and Raymer are gone. Has Thrash done much? He never impressed me much with the Eagles. Jacobs needs to be given a shot as at least an active #3. It's a shame he was hurt last year under Spurrier. Spurrier knew how to use him in his system. My biggest suprise regarding the Skins this year, aside from the record, was how little Jacobs was used on offense. You can't beat what you can't catch. He can be used as an out option in red zone packages. Didn't he score a key 2-pt conversion against the Cowboys on MNF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.