Status of Westbrook

[bigdog]

With all this talk about receivers, is it a given that Westbrook will not be back. Is he even in minicamp?

And of the various free agents, I think I would take McCardle and Freeman over the rest. Depends on cap room as well.

[Die Hard]

Yes, it is a given Michael Westbrook won't be back. Spurrier has mentioned numerous times that he likes the receivers he presently has and doesn't believe the team will be looking to upgrade the position further. And Westbrook has gone on record as saying he doesn't believe the Redskins are interested in signing him either. That ship has sailed.

And frankly, given our holes at guard and d-line... the last thing anyone should be concerned about at this point is wide receiver.

[bulldog]

Spurrier indicated the Skins are no longer interested in Westbrook, which means he likely will be signed this week :laugh:

Seriously, I would consider McCardell among the big three that has been mentioned. Freeman and Alexander as I mentioned have lost a step and speed was their game. McCardell is I think a more disciplined, polished receiver and a better fit for this team.

Of course, Jackson and Hilliard are still out there on the horizon. Both are entering or in their primes and can be had perhaps more cheaply than we thought a few weeks ago.

Jackson had 81 catches last year and provided Brooks with a nice security blanket in the Saints offense. He also has shown to be a clutch player, having an outstanding game in the playoffs in 2000 to help defeat the Rams.

Hilliard has more injury problems and has been less productive than Jackson as of late. He does have talent, the question is whether he will ever recapture his top line speed. Beware of ex-Giants, the New Yorkers don't exactly have an imposing lineup at the skill positions on offense, if they are willing to let a guy go it is probably because he has lost some of his skills.

[Art]

I could see a run at Westbrook still, as I believe the team intends to add another receiver before training camp. Westbrook's statements about moving on were a simple ploy to try and get the Redskins to come to him with a bigger contract than he can get elsewhere. If Westbrook was ready to set sail he'd have set it already. If he's available after June 1, I wouldn't be surprised to see him added.

I think the Redskins would be wise to add a player at that spot and Westbrook certainly would be one of the players available who might be looked at.

[Wacky Ralph]

Because of Westbrook's size and lack of pure speed, I think he'd be better suited for the WCO than the Fun & Gun.

Question: Isn't is sort of weird that the Washington basketball team changed its name from the BULLETS because the name wasn't politically correct........yet, the Washington football team, which goes by the name THE REDSKINS now uses an offense called THE FUN AND GUN???? I don't know. Break down into discussion groups and tell me what you think.

[theposse]

I've stuck by Westbrook a long time, and think he got shafted last year by Marty or Raye or somebody to be so rarely thrown to, but I think it's probably one of those "need a new start" type situations. Granted, Spurrier is a new coach and all, but he's already gone on record saying he doesn't think they need Westbrook, and that he likes the smaller, quicker type WRs anyway. I still think Westbrook could do well somewhere else, but think it's too doubtful that he could for the Redskins at this point to make him worth keeping.

As far as the WRs out there, I think Willie Jackson or McCardell are good options, but as many people are saying, with our salary cap position, I'd rather be spending money to get a better DT or G. Then I think Safety and WR are the next slots where I'd be considering.

[fish]

I don't know about Westy. I like all of his stats (hgt, wt, speed etc., etc.) but his supposed route running deficiencies seem to spell trouble in SS's "system" ( ya gotta said the word "sysytem" like the voice of NFL films).

From what I understand - granted, not much - the WRs and QB have to re-act on the fly. I don't know. Maybe with his inability to run scripted routes, the "on the fly" method might work better for him.

All I'm looking for is a DT! Come on Sammy!! :cool:

[Henry]

I gotta tell you, I've always thought 'Fun n Gun' sounded awfully goofy. I still cringe every time someone associates it with the Redskins.

Of course, if it works, I don't care what it's called.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by fish

I don't know about Westy. I like all of his stats (hgt, wt, speed etc., etc.) but his supposed route running deficiencies seem to spell trouble in SS's "system" ( ya gotta said the word "sysytem" like the voice of NFL films).

From what I understand - granted, not much - the WRs and QB have to re-act on the fly. I don't know. Maybe with his inability to run scripted routes, the "on the fly" method might work better for him.

This is a good question. I'm tired of defending Westbrook's performance -- I think he is a very good receiver with superb hands. But there have been those mutterings about route precision, wrong routes, etc.

I don't know how much credence to put into this. As someone posted recently, the Rams apparently prefer rounded cuts to maintain the WRs speed. So if someone sees Westbrook making rounded cuts, are we sure that's a deficiency?

Can anyone *document* that the Redskins were unhappy with Westbrook over his route precision or for forgetting routes? I'm trying to figure out how much of this is fan grousing and how much is criticism by his actual coaches, who know better than we do what Westbrook is supposed to be doing.

Obviously every receiver blows an assignment from time to time. I'm asking for a documented pattern that the team has criticized.

Geoff

[CounterTre]

Agreed Henry, it needs a new name for it's use in Redskin land.

[Chief skin]

Westbrook is a stiff, when he was drafted we all expected big plays out of him and he has not lived up to the hype. The entire league knows it

[bulldog]

let's just hope that Spurrier and the fun'n'gun isn't described 5 years from now in the same light that Mouse Davis and the run and shoot were in the 1990's.

[Art]

Atlanta, what you're asking for is a difficult thing to document. Yes, media reports have indicated some question about Westbrook's route-running. Some have mentioned the coaching staff hasn't been thrilled with it and others just mention it as sloppy. But, you really aren't going to find a lot of documented quotes from coaches bad-mouthing many players so the issue is more observed by those who are there at the games and from reading between the lines when you see how something is offered up in the media.

I'm a Westbrook fan, but, I've seen a number of comments about his route running. Like......

http://fantasy.sportingnews.com/nfl/players/3131/popup.html

"Westbrook plans to catch a lot of passes next season, but chances seem good that he won't be doing it in Washington. Westbrook could've had the game of his career this week, and it probably would not have changed much. He is almost an afterthought in the offense. He is the second option on passing plays, doesn't get sent deep often and has not impressed the coaching staff with his route-running. Still, Westbrook is the one receiver on the team with speed to get open. He can be an intimidating receiver, but doesn't seem to figure too heavily in the team's future plans. (Paul Woody/TSN) "

or http://www.pilotonline.com/sports/sp0320red.html

"His arrival, and Kevin Lockett's agreement on a restructured contract last weekend, would appear to take free agent Michael Westbrook out of Washington's plans. The Redskins won't admit that, but it's highly unlikely Spurrier's offense could perform as expected with Gardner and Westbrook, two large players with average speed and sloppy route-running habits."

or http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/teams/redskins/20011101.html

"The biggest change in Michael Westbrook hasn't been in his route-running, which remains inconsistent. It hasn't been in his ability to make catches -- he's never had a problem with that. There has been a change in his attitude. In the past when things weren't going Westbrook's way, and they haven't gone his way at all this year, he would have disappeared."

Essentially the question about Westbrook's route running has been with him for some time. I recall some comments that Westbrook didn't really pay a lot of attention to detail in his routes and sometimes he'd run a 15-yard out when the QB was expecting him at 12-yards. Something to do with his strides. I recall Terry Robiske talking about Westbrook in a chat on the Post site that Westbrook seemed to finally be paying closer attention to detail and his route running was improving his performance.

I like Westbrook and have been a defender of his so I don't take negative critiques lightly. This one is "out" there. It's more observed than established fact and it may no longer be as far to Westbrook as it used to be. Take it for what it's worth, but, I think it's more than just fan whining here.

[bulldog]

Westbrook will never be as great as the sum of his parts. That is his fate.

Even if he has another 65 catch, 1,100 yard season someone will say with his size and speed and leaping ability he should have done more.

Westbrook was a VERY immature player when the Redskins selected him in 1995 and the absence of a discipline-oriented staff such as he would have had under Gibbs or Parcells only delayed his maturity.

Now at age 29, he has matured to some extent. Is he a guy that is going to mouth off? Not as much. Is he going to workout in the offseason? Yes, perhaps not as hard as some other players, but he will keep to a routine.

So, there has been movement. Not enough to make him an elite player, but certainly enough to make him productive in the right system.

to me the right system is one where Michael is the #2 receiver and gets to feast on #2 and #3 cornerbacks.

if he is the complementary receiver for a prime such as Marvin Harrison or Terrell Owens I think Michael could put up some VERY good numbers.

You just don't want to count on Michael as your bread and butter.

[Brave]

Westbrook is one of the top WRs in the league ...

... at signaling a first down after an eight-yard catch on your end of the field, down two scores with two and a half minutes to go. I really think he's made it an art form. He may have matured some ...

... alright, so that doesn't HURT the team, it just turns my stomach. If he was an All Pro I'd probably learn to live with it. If he was as good as his potential, if he didn't get injured, if he was used correctly, if he had good QBs throwing to him.

If, if, if.

Time to move on.

[ADF]

Westbrook is not slow. He's just kind of awkward and that may be a reason why he runs poor routes at times. He’s fast enough to play for Spurrier but he’s not very fluid. Spurrier wants guys who are smooth in their movements and are quick in and out of breaks. That is different than 40 speed. They don’t have to be the fastest guys on the field. A lot of Westy’s problems seem to be on the mental side of the game too.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Art

Atlanta, what you're asking for is a difficult thing to document. Yes, media reports have indicated some question about Westbrook's route-running. Some have mentioned the coaching staff hasn't been thrilled with it and others just mention it as sloppy. But, you really aren't going to find a lot of documented quotes from coaches bad-mouthing many players so the issue is more observed by those who are there at the games and from reading between the lines when you see how something is offered up in the media.

I'm a Westbrook fan, but, I've seen a number of comments about his route running. Like...... [citations]

I recall Terry Robiske talking about Westbrook in a chat on the Post site that Westbrook seemed to finally be paying closer attention to detail and his route running was improving his performance.

I like Westbrook and have been a defender of his so I don't take negative critiques lightly.

Art, thanks for the citations, much appreciated. I don't put any credence in the Marty staff opinions -- they didn't have the slightest idea how to make a passing offense work. I was more curious about Norv's staff and Spurrier and his staff. (Obviously Spurrier & Co. don't have any direct experience with Westbrook.)

I'd love a candid conversation with Terry Robiskie on this. Terry always seemed to tell it like it was -- I was really stunned, amazed and pleased by his WP chat sessions. Too bad he never really had a shot as a head coach -- based on his candor alone, it would have been interesting to watch. (I don't question Snyder's decision -- he didn't have enough positive evidence to endorse Terry's permanent selection.)

I really think Westbrook could do well if given a chance by Spurrier. Ironically, what he needs is a short contract -- say, two years. This should put some urgency into his learning Spurrier's system and producing immediately.

If I were Spurrier, I'd offer Westbrook a two-year deal, vet minimum base salary, with incentives to bring it to $1M per year or so.

Geoff

[NavyDave]

He may be best served moving on and the skins should go ahead and see what they have among their youngins instead of bringing in so many WRS and use that money on DT and OG.

Lets see how well we can develop these 2nd yr receivers on the roster

[bulldog]

how many times do you allow the prodigal son to come home? :laugh:

we could spend the next 5 years giving Westbrook chances until he is 34 and too old to play.

this guy's numbers averaged over 7 years are quite pedestrian. There are #3 receivers out there that have averaged more catches and td's per season.

I just don't get the fascination with Westbrook. Other players such as Lang and Gardner, also #1 picks, got no slack at all in their first year(s) with the team and before last season there were many who thought Lang should be traded because he was a disappointment.

There have been threads here recently implying the same thing about Rod Gardner.

Imagine going another FIVE years with Gardner showing flashes but little consistency.

Would there be so many people in favor of giving him another year to make good? No.

Why? Because he isn't a slick athlete like Westbrook that walks around like he is Adonis. Westbrook exudes the confidence and struts around like Michael Irvin in the offseason and training camp talking about what he can do.

Unfortunately, he can't back up anything he says. On the field he is an on again, off again performer. Sometimes hot, sometimes cold.

And for 40 catches per year who needs all the grief?

Didn't David Boston catch 115 last year alone?

That is 3 years of productivity for Mr. Westbrook.

Jerry Rice your records are safe, my friend. :laugh:

[shamaran]

Art - I doubt, very much, if Westbrook will return.

I doubt it so much that I'd be willing to make a friendly wager that you are wrong. So, if you're serious about him being back and want to give me a crack at getting my $25 pop tops back, we'll call it a bet. :cool:

[Art]

Sham,

I'd be willing to bet you any amount you'd like that I can't be wrong with what I said. So, let's set the parameters on the bet.

I said, "If he's available after June 1, I wouldn't be surprised to see him added," so let's bet $25 on whether I'm wrong about not being surprised to see him added if he's available after June 1.

Now, I really hope you take this bet, because, it'd be darn difficult for you to prove me wrong based on what I said, don't you think? I've got no feel for what this front office and team ultimately will do to improve the team. But, if my belief that the team will add a wide receiver is correct, my thought that I wouldn't be surprised if Westbrook was added back to the roster if he's available after June 1 simply could never be wrong. So, please, take the bet.

[MarkPSkins]

Fearless, bold prediction:

Westbrook will be a Redskin in 2002.

Face it, come June 1st there is going to be a plethora of WRs for teams to choose from. Contracts are not going to be for huge dollars and signing bonuses.

Although everyone is still expecting Westbrook to acheive greatness, we all know in our hearts that he will not. BUT, and I'm getting sick of this statement, Michael Westbrook is the best WR the Redskins have or has had over the past 5 years. Now granted we don't technically have him now. But I expect all this smoke and mirrors about "not in the plans" and the "Redskins don't seem interested" are just haggling points from GMs, coaches and Player reps. No additional QBs were in the plans only three days ago.

Westbrook may not be all-world, but he does command respect from every team he faces. Westbrook has never been in an offense that suits him. Even in his best days, he was never used the way most of us would like to have seen.

Westbrook will sign a one or two year contract from the Skins and put up the same type of production. And the only thing it will cost is a bunch of whiners still dwelling on the fact that Westbrook hasn't lived up to his draft status of a freakin decade ago.

Teams will prepare for him, respect him, put good cover guys on him. If they don't Westbrook could put up some lofty numbers. This will make Gardner and the rest better WRs. I am not comfortable with the WRs we currently have. McCants and Thomson or any 5th round draft picks are not going step in a play as well or command the respect that Westbrook does. Route running my azz, try inept QBs and bad play calling. Maybe the route running in the Fun and Gun will suit Westbrook.

All of these names being dropped for availabel WRs are not going to do any better than Westbrook and IMO are going to cost much more. Why is everyone so enamoured with some of these FAs. If any of the names mentioned signed with the Dallas Cowboys, you all would be claiming they are bums anyway.

Westbrook is never going to be the Redskins' "Randy Moss" but you know what he will do and other teams are still worried about what he could do.

I've said it before and will say it again, Westbrook wont be missed until he is gone.

[shamaran]

It is my feeling that Westbrook is ancient history. Gone. No semantics--simply gone. Perhaps I'm giving SS too much credit, but I doubt it. I don't believe he wants him on his team.

Now, if after June 1 all the NFL starting receivers fall off the earth except Westbrook, for some strange reason, I guess he would be resigned. Personally, I hope that doesn't happen.

:laugh:

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Does anyone have any idea of what kind of contract Westbrook is asking for these days? I say *these days* because I assume he has lowered his contract target after a notable lack on interest in him so far as a FA.

It could be that Westbrook is a bargain, because so many people are so vocal in disliking him that he has depressed his market value well below his performance value.

As evidence for this, objections to Westbrook seem to be based mainly on emotion (people don't like the man), a handful of stale stories (Stephen Davis fight, misplaced helmet, Westbrook's mouthing off after Turner left, etc.), injury risk, and some nuances about his route running technique. Even if these points have weight, they should simply depress his market value, not eliminate him from consideration.

I would respect an argument about Westbrook's *worth* in terms of dollars more than this kind of emotional argument.

Does anyone seriously believe Westbrook is not worth the veteran minimum salary? I find that hard to believe, and I'd like to know who believes this, so I can add you to my short list of morons. (We already have receivers set to make the minimum, so signing Westbrook at the minimum and cutting one of the others seems an obvious advantage. In my opinion, there's not a receiver on the roster who's better than Westbrook.)

A better argument is something like, "Given our cap situation and needs at DT, we can't afford to give Westbrook more than the vet minimum."

So, what's Westbrook worth? I certainly would offer him vet minimum for two years with performance and playing time incentives to escalate to $1 million/year. He might be worth more, but I find it hard to believe he's worth less.

Let's hear people's opening offers for Westbrook and maximum offers.

Geoff

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

One more thing on Westbrook. Schottenheimer screwed him last year, and Westbrook took it without a lot of complaining. Westbrook was set to make $1.8M last year, plus $300K incentives. Schottenheimer got him to reduce to $477K base with incentives that could have taken the deal to $3M.

Having gotten this deal, Schottenheimer from *Game 1* ignored Westbrook in the game plan, proving he never intended to let Westbrook make his incentives. Only Kent Graham's reassertion of Westbrook as the #1 receiver in the Broncos game gave Westbrook a chance, but by the next week it was back to Banks and the ignoring of Westbrook.

Yes, Westbrook caught more balls than Gardner. But if you watched the games, it was clear that Gardner was the #1 receiver most of the time, and sometimes Westbrook was just there for blocking. The fact that Westbrook caught more balls is due to the simple statistical fact that Westbrook's reception percentage was reportedly #2 in the league, and Gardner's was close to the bottom.

Yeah, Westbrook sure is a selfish player.

Geoff