HERE IS A FACT(no receiver).....(sorry)

[COUNCILMAN]

For those of you who are fantasizing about the Redskins drafting Mike Williams or somebody else and he will save the Redskins offense.....

The number of receivers who have been chosen in the first round in the last 5 years who made a major impact in the NFL in their FIRST year.....you could chop off a couple of your fingers if you wanted to count them with 1 hand.

People like Rod Gardner, Santana Moss, Winslow, Fitzgerald(last year), David Terrell, have very little impact in the first year. Anquan Boldin actually was NOT a first round pick. Many times the BEST first year receivers are taken in later rounds.

Your Randy Moss, Jeremy Shockey type players are rare and it is far more common to land a dud in the first round during that first year. Look at Bryant Johnson(WHO?). He was taken by the Cardinals, in the first round, AHEAD of Boldin. DUD!

This is perhaps why Gibbs has said they will first attempt to fill their needs via free agency and allow the draft to be a bonus/crapshoot. Because thats what it is, especially when it comes to receivers. And thats why I say draft a defensive end, or draft a huge offensive guard with that first pick. You won't be filling up a roster spot with a dud.

Remember, there will probably only be 5 wide receivers activated each game and Thrash will be one of them due to his special teams play. Jacobs and Coles are making the team. And ONE of those spots will be filled with a free agent. That only leaves 1 more spot and I doubt that Gibbs wants to fill it with somebody who ends up being a DUD. Far easier to put a defensive lineman in there or offensive lineman because you have more spots and they can be role players.

A number 1 receiver can't be a role player....so don't look for the Skins to draft a receiver unless I misread what Gibbs has said.

[akhhorus]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Sing us another one, this is getting old.

[akhhorus]

Rookie year stats:
Larry Fitzgerald: 780 yards 8 TD...but "no impact"(lol)
Andre Johnson: 976 yards 4 TD ....but no impact
Torry Holt: 788 yards 8 td...but no impact

[PA Skins Girl]

The entire draft is a crap shoot. Are you saying it more likely that a receiver taken in the first round will be a dud than another position taken in the first round? It's all a crap shoot. That's why I like the FA route. But good draft picks in the long run help build cohesiveness. Because those players, if they make it, are typically on the same team longer. You need to make solid choices in both avenues.

That's why I'd like to pick up a WR and a DE in Free Agency and also draft both positions.

[CarMike]

Hey akh, wasn't Charles Johnson drafted in the 1st round by the Bengals too? How a bout Chris Chambers from Miami?

Sure there have been busts in the first round. That goes for every position. Who's to judge Mike Williams or B. Edwards by the past 1st round duds?

Each player is different.

[akhhorus]

Hey akh, wasn't Charles Johnson drafted in the 1st round by the Bengals too? How a bout Chris Chambers from Miami?

Sure there have been busts in the first round. That goes for every position. Who's to judge Mike Williams or B. Edwards by the past 1st round duds?

Each player is different.

Chad Johnson, Chambers, Jerry Porter were all early second rounders.

[CarMike]

Well ***censor by spence***! There goes that thought....:D

[COUNCILMAN]

Rookie year stats:
Larry Fitzgerald: 780 yards 8 TD...but "no impact"(lol)
Andre Johnson: 976 yards 4 TD ....but no impact
Torry Holt: 788 yards 8 td...but no impact


Apparently you are having a problem with your monitor. It must be dirty because you couldn't read my post.

I specifically said in the last 5 years. Tory Holt has been in the league for 6. And you made my point anyway. Its a good thing you only cut off 2 fingers. Because you did indeed name 3....although I SAID you couldn't name more than 3 in the last 5 years. Thanks for making my point Akhhorus.

[akhhorus]

Apparently you are having a problem with your monitor. It must be dirty because you couldn't read my post.

I specifically said in the last 5 years. Tory Holt has been in the league for 6. And you made my point anyway. Its a good thing you only cut off 2 fingers. Because you did indeed name 3....although I SAID you couldn't name more than 3 in the last 5 years. Thanks for making my point Akhhorus.

You know: I can be arrogant person here; but you sir, make me look like a humble little monk.


And I have a third one for you:
Rod Gardner 741 yards 4 Td his rookie year.

And more:
Lee Evans: 843 yards 9 TDs
Michael Clayton: 1193 7 tds
Roy Williams: 817 yards 8 Tds

[ShaggySkins]

This is what I'll say on the sitituation without getting into all the name calling or smart remarks...........

I think regardless of the position there are RARELY any true impact rookies who are going to immediatly help turn a team around. That isn't just the reciever position but look at DL over the last several years again very few impact players as rookies. Every position is like that simply because it takes rookies time to adjust to the NFL.

I am one of those people who hope we grab Mike Williams my reasoning for this is not because I think he's going to be the savior of the franchise but who else would you grab instead??? DL has been just as bad as recievers over the last 5 years in regards to rookies not producing. Also how the offense performed that is where we need to focus our attention. I don't see an OL deserving of the #9 pick (I think Barron will be gone before then) and I don't see any position that we have a need to clearly upgrade other then reciever and OL. Williams gives us a young reciever who can go up and get the ball something that this team has struggled with. He has good hands and is a strong player. If we trade Gardner and release McCants which is rumored to occur we will need a big reciever as a red zone target as all of our other recievers are undersized.

[guinness4health]

Rookie year stats:
Larry Fitzgerald: 780 yards 8 TD...but "no impact"(lol)
Andre Johnson: 976 yards 4 TD ....but no impact
Torry Holt: 788 yards 8 td...but no impact

these guys are exceptions to the rule rather than the rule....and by the way larry struggled serverly until boldin got healthy,

at most if we draft a wideout in the first round the most that we can expect is a role player.... if somehow that player gives us more than that thank god, but you can't expect a star right out of the gate it simply is not fair

[akhhorus]

these guys are exceptions to the rule rather than the rule....and by the way larry struggled serverly until boldin got healthy,

at most if we draft a wideout in the first round the most that we can expect is a role player.... if somehow that player gives us more than that thank god, but you can't expect a star right out of the gate it simply is not fair

there's no such thing as an "exception to a rule". If there's an exception, then it invalidates the rule. Now for rookie Wideouts having an impact, its 50/50. But more 1st round wideouts end up being great players.

[dj_stouty]

The number of receivers who have been chosen in the first round in the last 5 years who made a major impact in the NFL in their FIRST year.....you could chop off a couple of your fingers if you wanted to count them with 1 hand.

It depends on how you define "major impact". No one has come close to what Randy Moss did in his rookie season. (1,300 Yards and 13 TDs) And I'll bet no one does for a long, long time.

I used to think rookie WRs took a long time to become contributors to their teams. I think last year's WR class has partially changed my mind.

4 of last year's 8 Wide Receivers had at least 800 yards and/or 8 TDs for their team. To me...that is a significant impact. (To put that into perspective...only TWO rookie 1st round WRs out of 15 drafted in the draft from 2000 - 2003 had 800 and/or 8 TDs)


2004 Class
Larry Fitzgerald - Cardinals - 780 Yards and 8 TDs
Roy Williams - Lions - 817 Yards and 8 TDs
Reggie Williams - Jaguars - 268 Yards and 1 TD
Lee Evans - Bills - 843 Yards and 9 TDs
Michael Clayton - Buccaneers - 1,193 Yards and 7 TDs
Michael Jenkins - Falcons - 119 Yards and 0 TDs
Rashaun Woods - 49ers - 160 Yards and 1 TD

2003 Class
Charles Rogers - Lions - 243 Yards and 3 TDs (Hurt for 11 games)
Andre Johnson - Texans - 976 Yards and 4 TDs
Bryant Johnson - Cardinals - 438 Yards and 1 TD

2002 Class
Donte Stallworth - Saints - 594 Yards and 8 TDs
Ashley Lelie - Broncos - 525 Yards and 2 TDs
Javon Walker - Packers - 319 Yards and 1 TD

2001 Class
David Terrell - Bears - 415 Yards and 4 TDs
Koren Robinson - Seahawks - 536 Yards and 1 TD
Rod Gardner - Redskins - 741 Yards and 4 TDs
Santana Moss - Jets - 40 Yards and 0 TDs (Injured for 12 Games)

2000 Class
Peter Warrick - Bengals - 592 Yards and 4 TDs
Plaxico Burress - Steelers - 273 Yards and 0 TDs
Travis Taylor - Ravens - 276 Yards and 3 TDs
Sylvester Morris - Chiefs - 678 Yards and 3 TDs
R. Jay Soward - Jaguars - 154 Yards and 1 TD

Either last year was an anomaly, or there is a new trend being set here.

The Redskins are not looking for a #1 receiver...and even if they were, they wouldn't look to the draft for one. Most likely, they are looking for someone to be a potential #2 who can give the team 800 and (hopefully) 6-8 TDs. The question is...can Williams, Clayton, Williamson or Braylon Edwards be that guy.

[guinness4health]

Apparently you are having a problem with your monitor. It must be dirty because you couldn't read my post.

I specifically said in the last 5 years. Tory Holt has been in the league for 6. And you made my point anyway. Its a good thing you only cut off 2 fingers. Because you did indeed name 3....although I SAID you couldn't name more than 3 in the last 5 years. Thanks for making my point Akhhorus.

yo
there is no reason for this vemon, we are all skins fans here...

councilman this seems to be a reoccuring theme with you, can i suggest going out and getting yourself a girlfriend or boyfriend if that is the way you swing (not that there is anything wrong with that)....overwise you are going to give yourself a coronary

[Sweepea436]

The entire draft is a crap shoot. Are you saying it more likely that a receiver taken in the first round will be a dud than another position taken in the first round? It's all a crap shoot. That's why I like the FA route. But good draft picks in the long run help build cohesiveness. Because those players, if they make it, are typically on the same team longer. You need to make solid choices in both avenues.

That's why I'd like to pick up a WR and a DE in Free Agency and also draft both positions.

Thank goodness we have great tools like the combine to assess talent! :lol1:

[guinness4health]

Plaxico Burress - Steelers - 273 Yards and 0 TDs


wow i forgot how crappy a rookie season that plaxico had....

hahaha..he was a real bone head that year

[smoak]

wow i forgot how crappy a rookie season that plaxico had....

hahaha..he was a real bone head that year

Remember when he fell down and then spiked the ball!!! What clown. No interest here.

[akhhorus]

Remember when he fell down and then spiked the ball!!! What clown. No interest here.

That was classic. I love the Jax player who just picked it up and ran.

[ShaggySkins]

COUNCILMAN just out of curiousity I finally looked and found that you wanted us to draft a DE. And how exactly are they so much more productive in their first seasons then WR??? Let me list the DL taken last season and you tell me if ANY of these guys had an impact year???

Tommie Harris 43 Tackles 3.5 Sacks
Will Smith 40 Tackles 7.5 Sacks
Kenechi Udeze 36 Tackles 5 Sacks
Marcus Tubbs 13 Tackles 1 Sack

Will Smith had some impact but other then that no one was all that impressive and the odds of grabbing an impact player at DL or WR is equal. The draft is a crapshoot and you just hope you get your guy and he isn't a bust.

[MoeRedskins]

You know council you can agrue that point with any position in the draft. Over the course of time defensive players have made an impact sooner, but that still means very little. As far as what happens, who the hell really knows right now. It is all speculator. You can come back in a month and say I told ya so, or you could be dead wrong. If the Skins don't get a FA WR, then why wouldn't they pick one up early in the draft.

[PA Skins Girl]

Each year brings strength at particular positions. This year, it is supposed to be running backs.

[akhhorus]

COUNCILMAN just out of curiousity I finally looked and found that you wanted us to draft a DE. And how exactly are they so much more productive in their first seasons then WR??? Let me list the DL taken last season and you tell me if ANY of these guys had an impact year???

Tommie Harris 43 Tackles 3.5 Sacks
Will Smith 40 Tackles 7.5 Sacks
Kenechi Udeze 36 Tackles 5 Sacks
Marcus Tubbs 13 Tackles 1 Sack

Will Smith had some impact but other then that no one was all that impressive and the odds of grabbing an impact player at DL or WR is equal. The draft is a crapshoot and you just hope you get your guy and he isn't a bust.

The simple fact is you have a 1 in 3 chance of getting a good player in the 1st round. Last year was an unusually deep draft, but there still were 15 players who barely contributed or were busts.

[MoeRedskins]

The simple fact is you have a 1 in 3 chance of getting a good player in the 1st round. Last year was an unusually deep draft, but there still were 15 players who barely contributed or were busts.


I wouldn't call them busts after one year. They can still turn into solid performers.

[akhhorus]

I wouldn't call them busts after one year. They can still turn into solid performers.

I can, these guys were bad first round picks:
Reggie Williams
Tommie Harris(a solid player, but not Top 15 material)
Vernon Carey
Marcus Tubbs
Ahmad Carroll
Chris Perry
Rashaun Woods
Michael Jenkins

[MoeRedskins]

i'll go with Ahmed Carrol and Rashuan Woods as being busts right now, but only time will tell for the rest.

[PennSkinsFan]

For those of you who are fantasizing about the Redskins drafting Mike Williams or somebody else and he will save the Redskins offense.....

The number of receivers who have been chosen in the first round in the last 5 years who made a major impact in the NFL in their FIRST year.....you could chop off a couple of your fingers if you wanted to count them with 1 hand.

People like Rod Gardner, Santana Moss, Winslow, Fitzgerald(last year), David Terrell, have very little impact in the first year. Anquan Boldin actually was NOT a first round pick. Many times the BEST first year receivers are taken in later rounds.

Your Randy Moss, Jeremy Shockey type players are rare and it is far more common to land a dud in the first round during that first year. Look at Bryant Johnson(WHO?). He was taken by the Cardinals, in the first round, AHEAD of Boldin. DUD!

This is perhaps why Gibbs has said they will first attempt to fill their needs via free agency and allow the draft to be a bonus/crapshoot. Because thats what it is, especially when it comes to receivers. And thats why I say draft a defensive end, or draft a huge offensive guard with that first pick. You won't be filling up a roster spot with a dud.

Remember, there will probably only be 5 wide receivers activated each game and Thrash will be one of them due to his special teams play. Jacobs and Coles are making the team. And ONE of those spots will be filled with a free agent. That only leaves 1 more spot and I doubt that Gibbs wants to fill it with somebody who ends up being a DUD. Far easier to put a defensive lineman in there or offensive lineman because you have more spots and they can be role players.

A number 1 receiver can't be a role player....so don't look for the Skins to draft a receiver unless I misread what Gibbs has said.

Rick---the Draft is a crap shoot at nearly evey position. Never will you see a Draft that every single player taken in Round 1 was a success. No matter what spot you select, what position you select, for the amount of money and signing bonuses you will pay out to first rounders, it is all risk based.

[smoak]

I couldn't agree more with PSF. I also think the success of a player is HEAVILY dependent on the coaching staff. If Sean Taylor is a bust, short of injury or some other factor I look no further than the coaching staff.

[Ohiofan]

Didn't Gibbs say that we would NOT be signing a big name UFA WR?

[Ohiofan]

Yeah, I re-read the article in the Post where Gibbs said we would NOT BE
signing a big name UFA WR. In light of problems signing our own FA's, that article was far from encouraging.

[Patrick]

Rick---the Draft is a crap shoot at nearly evey position. Never will you see a Draft that every single player taken in Round 1 was a success. No matter what spot you select, what position you select, for the amount of money and signing bonuses you will pay out to first rounders, it is all risk based.



:doh: .............. Of COURSE - I get it!

[CNYSkinFan]

Rick---the Draft is a crap shoot at nearly evey position. Never will you see a Draft that every single player taken in Round 1 was a success. No matter what spot you select, what position you select, for the amount of money and signing bonuses you will pay out to first rounders, it is all risk based.

I second that opinion. Drafting is risky but relatively cheap too. I don't understand the Redskins Community absolute lust for a big name WR anyways. We have Thrash, Taylor and hopefully a healthy Coles. Those are our starters. McCants if he is still around, will provide depth. So that means if we draft a rookie wr (say Mike Williams who had a year off of college football) we can work him into the wr rotation and not have to depend oon him starting gmae 1. Come playoff time he will be good enough to help us out and aftert a good year in the system contribute more in 2006. He could also play special teams and try his hand at returning kicks.

Draft Mike Williams!!!!

[PA Skins Girl]

The problem with this thread is that it speaks in "absolutes". In essense, "we will not draft a WR in the first round because first-round-WRs are a crap shoot and Gibbs said we want to cover our needs through free agency". Yes, Gibbs wants to be covered so that if the two big WRs are gone at #9, we are covered. I dont think you can say that if they acquire a WR through free agency, that they wont take Mike Williams if he is there at #9 because, I think they will. I think the Skins will try to acquire a WR, DE, C, G, TE and whatever other need they perceive, through free agency. Anything we get during the draft is bonus.

[SkinsASchamps]

WR is a great idea. The new emphasis on the rule for DB has made the passing game a must have for an offense. We didnt have a good passing game. Its either the QB, WR/TE/RB (catch), OLINE, or the system. WE all trust Gibbs. Ramsey and Brunnel were well... not good. The OLINE needs help. WE need a WR and why not take one in the first round. I would love to have larry fitzgerald or roy williams. Would anyone here not want one of them?

[guinness4health]

Remember when he fell down and then spiked the ball!!! What clown. No interest here.

that had to be the funniest thing that i have ever seen in the nfl

[whistleandthumb]

I understand that you can use statistics and numbers and history and all that in an effort to hypothesize what will happen should we draft a WR, or if we get a WR through FA.

The fact is, though, that there is no such thing as a sure thing. Drafting a WR could be just as big of a bust as getting one through FA. I, for one, would prefer getting a WR through FA because we will know whether or not they can play in the NFL. However, if we got a Porter or Burress or whoever, they could get injured, not produce in our offense, be a bad influence in the locker room, etc. There are many factors that could keep someone who is perceived as a "sure thing" from being so sure.

[guinness4health]

there's no such thing as an "exception to a rule". If there's an exception, then it invalidates the rule. Now for rookie Wideouts having an impact, its 50/50. But more 1st round wideouts end up being great players.

first of all please don't misconstrue my point....no 'rule' is one hundred precent correct...there will always be individuals that won't fit into the 'rule', if you want to play the semantics game that is fine, let not call it a rule, call it an observation....backed by empirical evidence

my point is that its not the norm for a wideout to excell in his first year, that normally it isn't until the second and third year that you see these guys really emerge....now last year that was not really the case as a number of wideouts drafted in the first couple of rounds excelled right out of the gate, but i would argue that the new rule emphasis on defensive holding and illegal contact helped ease the transition for some of these guys....as breaking the press coverage against the superior athletes in the nfl was one of the more difficult adjustments that needed to be make by rookie wideouts....therefore the 'rule' or 'observation' that i have made may become more and more invalid over the next couple of years, but only time with tell.

[dj_stouty]

Rick

Get REAL~!

[BIGSEF3]

I understand that you can use statistics and numbers and history and all that in an effort to hypothesize what will happen should we draft a WR, or if we get a WR through FA.

The fact is, though, that there is no such thing as a sure thing. Drafting a WR could be just as big of a bust as getting one through FA. I, for one, would prefer getting a WR through FA because we will know whether or not they can play in the NFL. However, if we got a Porter or Burress or whoever, they could get injured, not produce in our offense, be a bad influence in the locker room, etc. There are many factors that could keep someone who is perceived as a "sure thing" from being so sure.

you are right, of course, about nothing in the draft being a sure thing. but i have seen more WR's be a bust than any other position. maybe its just me, but defensive players tend to make the transition from college to the NFL and make a more immediate impact for the teams they start.

maybe its easier for a defensive player to learn how to attack and cover an NFL offense, than it is for a new offensive player to learn to deal with the complicated defenses in the NFL. either way, all the really good 1st round picks we have gotten in recent years have been defensive players. i think we should stick with that.

[guinness4health]

WR is a great idea. The new emphasis on the rule for DB has made the passing game a must have for an offense. We didnt have a good passing game. Its either the QB, WR/TE/RB (catch), OLINE, or the system. WE all trust Gibbs. Ramsey and Brunnel were well... not good. The OLINE needs help. WE need a WR and why not take one in the first round. I would love to have larry fitzgerald or roy williams. Would anyone here not want one of them?

this is one of the things that pissed me off more than anything else last year....we didn't ever try to take advantage of this rule change all year....there we times when we could have forced the refs to make a call by throwing the ball in the area of a covered receiver to force the contact....teams did it to us numberous times...and this was one of the things that the eagles were great at last year....

when ever you get one of those long pass interference calls in your favor it forced the defense to play alittle more honest and it opened up the field for your long pass attempts....

i hope that gibbs catches on to this in the coming season , cause i think it could only help our guys downfield,

by the way i am not suggesting throwing into double coverage, just when you identify the single coverage downfield, sometimes for can force the defender to make contact, and at least pick up a flag

[smoak]

that had to be the funniest thing that i have ever seen in the nfl

I know. It took forever for me to stop laughing.

we should collect some favorite humor memories from the NFL, but the Saints miracle kick return and susequent missed PAT was great as well.

[chrisbcbu]

I said it in a previous post i think Councilman is just trying to start controversy. Get a rise out of everyone.

Everyone knows the draft is iffy. You cant really predict how a player can make the jump to the NFL. On whether he will be a star or bust. Its all a guessing game.

[whitskins]

Is drafting a WR in the first round and expecting immediate results a risk? Yes, obviously. But with the high price tags on many of the free agent WRs and our desperate need for someone to emerge in the wake of Rod Gardner, it may be a risk we need to take.

[IMALILTEAPOT]

i want us to try and get jerry porter and get erasmus james in the draft, but we need to get offense COUNCILMAN, and if that means getting a wide reciever in the draft then maybe we should. If williams is on the board at 9, then i say we get him but if he isnt, we should pick up erasmus and hopefully porter isn't gone yet or something

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

why dont we just completely trade down out of the first round. would that make you feel better councilman?

[Keino]

there's no such thing as an "exception to a rule". If there's an exception, then it invalidates the rule.

Am I the only one who sees the irony of this statement?

[Meatsnack]

why dont we just completely trade down out of the first round. would that make you feel better councilman?

I might make me feel better. The "All O-line, All the Time Redskins Day One Draft" sponsored by Mr. Piggy Pork Rinds! I'd watch that for seven hours. :)

[lakeskin]

So, if we have a chance to take an Art Monk, Jerry Rice, Michael Irvin, Marvin Harrison, Tory Holt, etc... in the first round, then we should pass becuz they will "not make an impact" in their first year?

[schmackledackle]

So, if we have a chance to take an Art Monk, Jerry Rice, Michael Irvin, Marvin Harrison, Tory Holt, etc... in the first round, then we should pass becuz they will "not make an impact" in their first year?

Right....

The point that is being overlooked is that next year is not the ONLY year that matters. Whether we win the Super Bowl or finish out of the playoffs, we'll all be looking forward to the 2006 season a year from now.

My point is that we should not draft based on whether we can get a player who will come in with a blaze in his first year. If that's our agenda then our draft is likely doomed.

The draft is an opportunity to build for next year and the years to come. If we get Mike Williams and he has has an adequate season, it does not mean he is a bust. I remember watching Darrell Green get beat plenty his first year in the league; I also remember seeing Jerry Rice drop plenty of passes his rookie campaign.

You cannot make definitive judgments on players based on their rookie seasons. Otherwise, Ickey Woods would be in the Hall of Fame and Troy Aikman would be about as well known as Babe Laufenberg.

The skins (and our fans) need to chill with this immediate gratification mentality. Let's build something here!

Our squads used to be be greater than the sum of its parts. One player does not make or break the team.

[RedskinsVision]

Gibbs might love FA but he loves high character guys even more. whoever he brings in will be highly studied and the make up of their personalities are more key then talent. there will be some bumps along the way but for the most part, like our rookies and most of our FA's from last year, will not just be good players, but good overall guys that the team can build around.

in years past we were known to have tons of talented individual players but couldn't come together as a team. Gibbs is changing that into good, solid players who's character engineers a blueprint of teamwork and a sense of team before individuals.

[akhhorus]

first of all please don't misconstrue my point....no 'rule' is one hundred precent correct...there will always be individuals that won't fit into the 'rule', if you want to play the semantics game that is fine, let not call it a rule, call it an observation....backed by empirical evidence

my point is that its not the norm for a wideout to excell in his first year, that normally it isn't until the second and third year that you see these guys really emerge....now last year that was not really the case as a number of wideouts drafted in the first couple of rounds excelled right out of the gate, but i would argue that the new rule emphasis on defensive holding and illegal contact helped ease the transition for some of these guys....as breaking the press coverage against the superior athletes in the nfl was one of the more difficult adjustments that needed to be make by rookie wideouts....therefore the 'rule' or 'observation' that i have made may become more and more invalid over the next couple of years, but only time with tell.


Sorry, just that statement: "The exception to the rule" is one of my bugaboos.

[akhhorus]

Am I the only one who sees the irony of this statement?

Why I wrote it like so.

[LATrueRedskin]

Yeah, I can count the number of top recievers on one hand as well. So what? What does that mean? Does that mean there will never, ever be another great WR in the league that comes through the draft? And isn't Coles our #1 reciever? I didn't know we were looking for another top reciever. There hasn't been a real stud WR in some time, so that could be the reason why we haven't seen big first years from these guys. All that means is that the league is due for another Moss statistical outburst.

[guinness4health]

Hey akh, wasn't Charles Johnson drafted in the 1st round by the Bengals too? How a bout Chris Chambers from Miami?

Sure there have been busts in the first round. That goes for every position. Who's to judge Mike Williams or B. Edwards by the past 1st round duds?

Each player is different.

both were second round picks, chad johnson took a year or two to come on and chris chambers excelled from the start...

i personally don't think that mike williams or b edwards are going to be busts, but i do think that at best they could be a decent number 2 their first year in the league, but have the potential to be numbers 1's in their second and third year

[2Cooley]

For those of you who are fantasizing about the Redskins drafting Mike Williams or somebody else and he will save the Redskins offense.....

The number of receivers who have been chosen in the first round in the last 5 years who made a major impact in the NFL in their FIRST year.....you could chop off a couple of your fingers if you wanted to count them with 1 hand.

People like Rod Gardner, Santana Moss, Winslow, Fitzgerald(last year), David Terrell, have very little impact in the first year. Anquan Boldin actually was NOT a first round pick. Many times the BEST first year receivers are taken in later rounds.

Your Randy Moss, Jeremy Shockey type players are rare and it is far more common to land a dud in the first round during that first year. Look at Bryant Johnson(WHO?). He was taken by the Cardinals, in the first round, AHEAD of Boldin. DUD!

This is perhaps why Gibbs has said they will first attempt to fill their needs via free agency and allow the draft to be a bonus/crapshoot. Because thats what it is, especially when it comes to receivers. And thats why I say draft a defensive end, or draft a huge offensive guard with that first pick. You won't be filling up a roster spot with a dud.

Remember, there will probably only be 5 wide receivers activated each game and Thrash will be one of them due to his special teams play. Jacobs and Coles are making the team. And ONE of those spots will be filled with a free agent. That only leaves 1 more spot and I doubt that Gibbs wants to fill it with somebody who ends up being a DUD. Far easier to put a defensive lineman in there or offensive lineman because you have more spots and they can be role players.

A number 1 receiver can't be a role player....so don't look for the Skins to draft a receiver unless I misread what Gibbs has said.


D-line is the biggest crap shot in any draft and very few o-linemen are worth a first round pick. No d-linemen will make a big impact this year but it is possible that a wideout can when was the last time the D rookie of the year was a D-linemen

[guinness4health]

D-line is the biggest crap shot in any draft and very few o-linemen are worth a first round pick. No d-linemen will make a big impact this year but it is possible that a wideout can when was the last time the D rookie of the year was a D-linemen

i think that peppers was the last one (but he was a no-brainer) and before that it had to be kearse (who was a linebacker in college)....

in my mind your are right d-linemen experience a ton of growing pains there first year in the league (very few guys have multiple moves, countermoves, and/or the strength to compete against the level of competition in the nfl.

i think overall the most difficult transititional position is probably quarterback, followed by defensive end, then wide receiver....

[IowaSkinsFan]

You know: I can be arrogant person here; but you sir, make me look like a humble little monk.

That, my friend, is no small task!

[akhhorus]

That, my friend, is no small task!

Amen.

[Keino]

Right....

The point that is being overlooked is that next year is not the ONLY year that matters. Whether we win the Super Bowl or finish out of the playoffs, we'll all be looking forward to the 2006 season a year from now.

My point is that we should not draft based on whether we can get a player who will come in with a blaze in his first year. If that's our agenda then our draft is likely doomed.

The draft is an opportunity to build for next year and the years to come. If we get Mike Williams and he has has an adequate season, it does not mean he is a bust. I remember watching Darrell Green get beat plenty his first year in the league; I also remember seeing Jerry Rice drop plenty of passes his rookie campaign.

You cannot make definitive judgments on players based on their rookie seasons. Otherwise, Ickey Woods would be in the Hall of Fame and Troy Aikman would be about as well known as Babe Laufenberg.

The skins (and our fans) need to chill with this immediate gratification mentality. Let's build something here!

Our squads used to be be greater than the sum of its parts. One player does not make or break the team.

You Post as well as you QB....thats a compliment.

I couldn't agree more..........

[BurgundyNGold]

Like PASkinsGirl stated at the top of the thread, the whole draft is a crapshoot. so you're taking your chances no matter who you pick.

But... WR is one of those positions that are more of a crapshoot than others. The reason? Because so much of what a WR can do is predicated upon success at other positions. For example:

1) If your OL doesn't give the QB time, the QB can't get the ball to the WR, the WR doesn't even get a chance to touch the ball.
2) If your QB can't hit the receivers (see games 1 - 8 of last season), the WR doesn't even get a chance to touch the ball.
3) If your running game is crap, the opposing D will not respect the run and will double your wideouts making that much harder to get the ball into your WR's hands.

Sure, being a team game, every position has a dependency on the performance of at least one other. But WR has to have at least 2 such conditions to come together consistently for them to reach their potential. The same can't be said for a OL, DL, CB or S.

That being said, however, if there was a Roy Williams sitting at 01.09 this year, I would be elated to get him. In Roy Williams you get size, speed, hands and a demonstrated ability to be an elite WR in college for 4 years straight. To a lesser degree, you could say the same about Fitzgerald for his 2 years. But that was last year and there are no Fitzgeralds or Roy Williams in this draft. While I like Braylon Edwards and Mike Williams, IMO they are not on the same level. Williams hasn't played since 2003, has not shown that we can run a sub 4.6 40 and is a risk to get too big for the position, ala David Boston. And, not to knock Edwards, but can anybody show me a Michigan WR selected anywhere in the 1st round who has not been a major bust?

As for the assertion that L.C. is a #1 WR, I only have one thing to say: He wasn't last year and doesn't even have a chance to be a #1 WR until his bum toe heals. And with Coles electing to bypass surgery again this offseason, expect to throw good money after bad in his direction in 2005. If I was the FO, I'd be pretty upset about that.

At least with Jerry Porter you know what you're getting -- a guy with good size and deep speed who could be a #1 if we needed him to be.

[IowaSkinsFan]

If Mike Williams is the best available player on the board when the Skins choose, according to their player rankings, then they have two choices.

1. Pick him
2. Trade down

Trading down would only happen if the perceived value of the best available player at that point is not equivalent to the spot they are to be taken. That is when a team must trust all the work they have put together into assembling their board, otherwise it makes months of work a waste.

Drafting for need is a bad philosophy and forces you to reach and you wind up with players like Heath Shuler. Trying to fit a player in a pick and match that to your need is a recipe for disaster.

Trust your board and draft the best available player if you are going to make a selection.

[LATrueRedskin]

If Mike Williams is the best available player on the board when the Skins choose, according to their player rankings, then they have two choices.

1. Pick him
2. Trade down

Trading down would only happen if the perceived value of the best available player at that point is not equivalent to the spot they are to be taken. That is when a team must trust all the work they have put together into assembling their board, otherwise it makes months of work a waste.

Drafting for need is a bad philosophy and forces you to reach and you wind up with players like Heath Shuler. Trying to fit a player in a pick and match that to your need is a recipe for disaster.

Trust your board and draft the best available player if you are going to make a selection.

I agree. And Gibbs said just that pretty much. He wants to solve their needs via FA so they can go into the draft and just pick a great player, and the best player available. Even if that means trading down, he'll still pick the best player at that time, regardless of the position.

[IowaSkinsFan]

I agree. And Gibbs said just that pretty much. He wants to solve their needs via FA so they can go into the draft and just pick a great player, and the best player available. Even if that means trading down, he'll still pick the best player at that time, regardless of the position.

I do think we have greater needs on the offensive line, particularly at center, but I don't think anyone here feels there is a center worthy of the #9 pick, or ever a 1st round pick at that. That would be considered a reach. So that's why I threw Mike Williams name out there in that last post. Whoever the team has ranked as the best available at #9, if he matches the value they assigned to him, then go get him.

[LATrueRedskin]

I do think we have greater needs on the offensive line, particularly at center, but I don't think anyone here feels there is a center worthy of the #9 pick, or ever a 1st round pick at that. That would be considered a reach. So that's why I threw Mike Williams name out there in that last post. Whoever the team has ranked as the best available at #9, if he matches the value they assigned to him, then go get him.

Preaching to the choir, ISF.

[garedskin]

For those of you who are fantasizing about the Redskins drafting Mike Williams or somebody else and he will save the Redskins offense.....

The number of receivers who have been chosen in the first round in the last 5 years who made a major impact in the NFL in their FIRST year.....you could chop off a couple of your fingers if you wanted to count them with 1 hand.

People like Rod Gardner, Santana Moss, Winslow, Fitzgerald(last year), David Terrell, have very little impact in the first year. Anquan Boldin actually was NOT a first round pick. Many times the BEST first year receivers are taken in later rounds.

Your Randy Moss, Jeremy Shockey type players are rare and it is far more common to land a dud in the first round during that first year. Look at Bryant Johnson(WHO?). He was taken by the Cardinals, in the first round, AHEAD of Boldin. DUD!

This is perhaps why Gibbs has said they will first attempt to fill their needs via free agency and allow the draft to be a bonus/crapshoot. Because thats what it is, especially when it comes to receivers. And thats why I say draft a defensive end, or draft a huge offensive guard with that first pick. You won't be filling up a roster spot with a dud.

Remember, there will probably only be 5 wide receivers activated each game and Thrash will be one of them due to his special teams play. Jacobs and Coles are making the team. And ONE of those spots will be filled with a free agent. That only leaves 1 more spot and I doubt that Gibbs wants to fill it with somebody who ends up being a DUD. Far easier to put a defensive lineman in there or offensive lineman because you have more spots and they can be role players.

A number 1 receiver can't be a role player....so don't look for the Skins to draft a receiver unless I misread what Gibbs has said.

That is why I would like them to trade it for Moss.
Give them Gardner,McCants, A Franchised Smoot, and this years 1st RD pick and toss in Barrow for good measure and that would have been my ideal trade offer.I know it would have never happened but a man can dream cant he? :Peace:

[Axegrinder]

Apparently you are having a problem with your monitor. It must be dirty because you couldn't read my post.

I specifically said in the last 5 years. Tory Holt has been in the league for 6. And you made my point anyway. Its a good thing you only cut off 2 fingers. Because you did indeed name 3....although I SAID you couldn't name more than 3 in the last 5 years. Thanks for making my point Akhhorus.
I have to ask a few questions of COUNCILMAN.
Why is there so much venom in your posts?
Are you a Redskins fan?If so,why treat the other Skins fans with such
negativity?If that's your style,there's another message board that fits the bill a lot better than this site does.
As a regular poster,I request that you try and adapt to our site and not take disagreeing opinions with yours as a personal affront.

[akhhorus]

That is why I would like them to trade it for Moss.
Give them Gardner,McCants, A Franchised Smoot, and this years 1st RD pick and toss in Barrow for good measure and that would have been my ideal trade offer.I know it would have never happened but a man can dream cant he? :Peace:

I am not(repeat: NOT) trying to make this into a Randy Moss thread, but let me ask you one question here:
Why the BLUE HELL would the Skins make that deal for Moss?

You're giving up two players(three if you count Barrow), a top ten pick and a franchised player who can net you another first rounder(at least) for one player. It the Hershel Walker trade all over again.

[garedskin]

I am not(repeat: NOT) trying to make this into a Randy Moss thread, but let me ask you one question here:
Why the BLUE HELL would the Skins make that deal for Moss?

You're giving up two players(three if you count Barrow), a top ten pick and a franchised player who can net you another first rounder(at least) for one player. It the Hershel Walker trade all over again.

Simple.Checks and Balances.
Not sure what Moss's cap impacts are each year.Got to dump some of our own.Also It would take a lot to get Moss out of Minnesota.
If you read carefully it is actually 4+ a draft pick.Smoot feels disrespected by the teams offer (just like Bailey did last year)He will sign some where else so might as well get a BLUE CHIP need player for him(just like we got for Bailey last year).Pierce is a better fit than Barrow,so we no longer need him.Gardner and McCants cant catch or start here so throw them and there salaries to them and what we would have to pay for the #9 pick would even out taking Moss and his huge contract and there is no doubts about Moss's ability.


Besides I thought this form was to express opinions.It seems to me over the last 5 months there is alot of dictating going on. On who,what ,where ,when ,and how people should start topics.
If people want to talk about things related to the skins let them.I dont care how many times a topic comes up if it is worth responding to then let them respond,if it pisses you off then dont respond.I was not in here much during the season but It sure has changed alot since September.I like coming in here if I dont like a topic or have already posted on it I simply move on to the next one .Appearantly people still want to talk about Moss.I say let them.As the motto was when I joined"talk about anything redskins related but dont attack anyone",well it seems to have been forgotten.I have seen several times where the Mods,and Adds chastise people bringing up topics.For me that is getting old.
Like I have said earlier in this post I like to come here and talk about OUR Redskins.Please dont let this become too over bearingly structured or it will turn people away.This is not an attack just my observation/opinion over the past month and a half. :Peace:

[akhhorus]

Simple.Checks and Balances.
Not sure what Moss's cap impacts are each year.Got to dump some of our own.Also It would take a lot to get Moss out of Minnesota.
If you read carefully it is actually 4+ a draft pick.Smoot feels disrespected by the teams offer (just like Bailey did last year)He will sign some where else so might as well get a BLUE CHIP need player for him(just like we got for Bailey last year).Pierce is a better fit than Barrow,so we no longer need him.Gardner and McCants cant catch or start here so throw them and there salaries to them and what we would have to pay for the #9 pick would even out taking Moss and his huge contract and there is no doubts about Moss's ability.


Besides I thought this form was to express opinions.It seems to me over the last 5 months there is alot of dictating going on. On who,what ,where ,when ,and how people should start topics.
If people want to talk about things related to the skins let them.I dont care how many times a topic comes up if it is worth responding to then let them respond,if it pisses you off then dont respond.I was not in here much during the season but It sure has changed alot since September.I like coming in here if I dont like a topic or have already posted on it I simply move on to the next one .Appearantly people still want to talk about Moss.I say let them.As the motto was when I joined"talk about anything redskins related but dont attack anyone",well it seems to have been forgotten.I have seen several times where the Mods,and Adds chastise people bringing up topics.For me that is getting old.
Like I have said earlier in this post I like to come here and talk about OUR Redskins.Please dont let this become to over bearingly structured or it will turn people away.This is not an attack just my observation/opinion over the past month and a half. :Peace:

First off: Minnesota wouldnt stop laughing at the Skins(nor would the league) if they offered that deal. A franchised Smoot(which will never happen) and the #9 pick would get Moss. They want a good young player and a first rounder for him. No-one will offer four good players and a high draft pick for him.
Second: You weren't here for the fun involving the Randy Moss threads. There would be 7-10 new threads on the subject every day and it just pissed everyone(especially the owners) off to no end. I'm sorry if this appears to be the thought police, but the sheparding of the Randy Moss threads had to be done. It was getting out of hand. People are more testy than usually because the skins are coming off of a bad season and there's nothing going on. It was testy here last offseason, but it goes away after the draft.

[garedskin]

First off: Minnesota wouldnt stop laughing at the Skins(nor would the league) if they offered that deal. A franchised Smoot(which will never happen) and the #9 pick would get Moss. They want a good young player and a first rounder for him. No-one will offer four good players and a high draft pick for him.
Second: You weren't here for the fun involving the Randy Moss threads. There would be 7-10 new threads on the subject every day and it just pissed everyone(especially the owners) off to no end. I'm sorry if this appears to be the thought police, but the sheparding of the Randy Moss threads had to be done. It was getting out of hand. People are more testy than usually because the skins are coming off of a bad season and there's nothing going on. It was testy here last offseason, but it goes away after the draft.

I missed all that but it seemed that people had alot to say about that one player/topic.
Now my response to the trade.
I did state that it was just an Ideal dream trade,which I also stated knew would never happen.Besides 4 of those 4 good players have been replaced or are going to be replaced this off season.McCants did not start/play almost all season,Gardner play is why they are looking for another starting WR (ie Moss)this off season,Pierce replaced Barrow from day one of training camp,and Smoot does not like the money on the table so he is going to leave and Harris was brought in as insurance just for this senerio.Like the guy who posted this thread No WR since Moss came into the league has had a huge impact.7-8 tds from a rookie is good,but we need an impact scoring machine at that position.I believe the WRs had 1 td(correcting myself it was a total of 6) amongst them and Portis chucked it to Coles.That is not good at all.We need a "NO DOUBT ABOUT HIS SKILLS" impact WR.
I dont mind trading picks for known good players.Moss would make our offense improve 10 fold just because how defences would have account for him every play.Besides minnesota is having trouble finding a suitable owner(issues have come up over the potential new owners past accomplishments ).Trading Moss is low on the agenda right now for all involved there.:Peace:

[Skinz4lyfe]

Garedskin, there are a few topics that will ruffle some feathers on these boards. They are (not in any particular order):

Trading for Randy Moss
Trading away Lavar under any circumstances
Trading away an "under-achieving" Portis
Laveranues Coles is not our #1 receiver


I'm sure I missed a couple of topics but those are the ones that come to mind.

[akhhorus]

Garedskin, there are a few topics that will ruffle some feathers on these boards. They are (not in any particular order):

Trading for Randy Moss
Trading away Lavar under any circumstances
Trading away an "under-achieving" Portis
Laveranues Coles is not our #1 receiver


I'm sure I missed a couple of topics but those are the ones that come to mind.

Dont forget:
Trade Portis so the skins can start Betts
Trade/Cut Brunell
Ramsey's first 3 season are like Peyton Manning's rookie year
I think we can get a very high pick for....

[garedskin]

I am all for agreeing to disagreeing.That is what keeps it interesting.
For what it is worth my blood boils when people doubt Gibbs (like I once did along time ago). :Peace:

[rskinsfan10]

I have seen several times where the Mods,and Adds chastise people bringing up topics.For me that is getting old.

So, exactly where did a Mod or Owner chastise you within this thread? Also, if it's something that's getting old to you, then why exactly are you bringing it up, especially when not one of us did it to you?

If you have a problem with us wanting to keep OUR board clean, then maybe this isn't the board for you.

[War Hogg]

Wow

[garedskin]

So, exactly where did a Mod or Owner chastise you within this thread? Also, if it's something that's getting old to you, then why exactly are you bringing it up, especially when no one did it to you?

If you have a problem with us wanting to keep OUR board clean, then maybe this isn't the board for you.

Never said they did it to me until now.I have seen some things in the past few months that I did not care for, the message I pick up from you seems to be getting very constricting to everyone in here.I replied that to akhorase(sorry if i spelled it wrong) and now I am dealing with you.Is this going to get Personal?
You singled out a part of my statement on a reply and it seems to me you want to twist this into an attack by me on this site.When I was giving my own honest opinion on what I have observed.I enjoy coming in here but it is becoming less with this tactic you seemingly want to pull,.Since we are twisting here Do you want to kick me out now because I observed and then opinioned my thoughts about this?
For keeping your site clean that is fine.What seems to me is that there is alot of people wanting to talk about a certain subject and it is getting a no"dont talk about that again because we have already talked about it" message sent out anytime the subject is brought up.Appearantly people want to talk about certain subjects more than others.I had better stop.
:Peace:

[rskinsfan10]

Never said they did it to me until now.I have seen some things in the past few months that I did not care for, the message I pick up from you seems to be getting very constricting to everyone in here.I replied that to akhorase(sorry if i spelled it wrong) and now I am dealing with you.Is this going to get Personal?
You singled out a part of my statement on a reply and it seems to me you want to twist this into an attack by me on this site.When I was giving my own honest opinion on what I have observed.I enjoy coming in here but it is becoming less with this tactic you seemingly want to pull,.Since we are twisting here Do you want to kick me out now because I observed and then opinioned my thoughts about this?
For keeping your site clean that is fine.What seems to me is that there is alot of people wanting to talk about a certain subject and it is getting a no"dont talk about that again because we have already talked about it" message sent out anytime the subject is brought up.Appearantly people want to talk about certain subjects more than others.I had better stop.
:Peace:

It will get personal if you want it to. I responded to the part of your post that directly pertained to me. I didn't edit your post, so to say that I'm twisting your words is weak. You offered your opinion publically, about my partners, myself and our Mods, so you got a public reponse from me. Who mentioned banning you, other then yourself? If this is something that you want, then why don't you simply leave and not come back? Before you bemoan what I'm saying to you, just try to remember that YOU are the one that brought it up.

We have too many members compalin about the difficulty of navigating this board because members want to make threads talking about the subjects that are well within discussion. We have you and maybe two others complaining about the fact that we want to keep the board clean. Who do you think we are going to side with, 5 members or the majority? I don't see anywhere where you or anyone else was told that they couldn't talk about a subject by an Owner or a Mod. Since you are here lobbying complaints, I'm sure that you can however, so please show me. I know for a fact that everyone was told to not create MULTIPLE threads about the same subject, which is basically what akhhorus was explaining to you, since "you haven't been around much since September." If you want to talk about trading for Randy Moss, talk about it in the Randy Moss thread that was created for that purpose. Again, if you have a problem or an issue with that, then may I suggest another Skins board for you, as this will not be the place for you. It's really not that hard to figure out IMO.

[garedskin]

It will get personal if you want it to. I responded to the part of your post that directly pertained to me. I didn't edit your post, so to say that I'm twisting your words is weak. You offered your opinion publically, about my partners, myself and our Mods, so you got a public reponse from me. Who mentioned banning you, other then yourself? If this is something that you want, then why don't you simply leave and not come back? Before you bemoan what I'm saying to you, just try to remember that YOU are the one that brought it up.

We have too many members compalin about the difficulty of navigating this board because members want to make threads talking about the subjects that are well within discussion. We have you and maybe two others complaining about the fact that we want to keep the board clean. Who do you think we are going to side with, 5 members or the majority? I don't see anywhere where you or anyone else was told that they couldn't talk about a subject by an Owner or a Mod. Since you are here lobbying complaints, I'm sure that you can however, so please show me. I know for a fact that everyone was told to not create MULTIPLE threads about the same subject, which is basically what akhhorus was explaining to you, since "you haven't been around much since September." If you want to talk about trading for Randy Moss, talk about it in the Randy Moss thread that was created for that purpose. Again, if you have a problem or an issue with that, then may I suggest another Skins board for you, as this will not be the place for you. It's really not that hard to figure out IMO.

May I suggest:
Remember your motto.LOL
Dont want to be banned/kicked out/excluded etc....from your board.You should have figured out that by my other posts in this thread.My fault I guess it was to hard to figure that out. :Peace:

[rskinsfan10]

May I suggest:
Remember your motto.LOL
Dont want to be banned/kicked out/excluded etc....from your board.You should have figured out that by my other posts in this thread.My fault I guess it was to hard to figure that out. :Peace:

What exactly is my motto? And again, why the mention of exclusion if it wasn't said to you prior to you bringing it up?

[chrisbcbu]

I thought Gibbs ended all the talks about trading for Randy Moss when he said he didnt want him.

I dont think he made it any clearer. Gibbs does not want Moss. Why bring him back up. Bring up a receiver that Gibbs may want like Porter, Givens, Patten, but not someone who Gibbs already publicly said he wasnt interested in having.

[garedskin]

What exactly is my motto? And again, why the mention of exclusion if it wasn't said to you prior to you bringing it up?

When I joined I was told I could talk about anything Redskin related and not to attack any of our fellow members on there opinions.Good Motto.
The exlusion issue was brought up by You not I when you so kindly suggested that there are other redskin boards I could join. Just back up the thread and look for yourself.
How am I or anyone else supposed to take that statement.
I joined this one because I liked what I saw an year ago.You want to keep needling this thing.I did not come to my opinion lightly and this exchange with you only re-enforces my opinions.You dont like that and that is fine.Like I have said before lets just agree to disagree.It keeps it interesting. :Peace:

[garedskin]

I thought Gibbs ended all the talks about trading for Randy Moss when he said he didnt want him.

I dont think he made it any clearer. Gibbs does not want Moss. Why bring him back up. Bring up a receiver that Gibbs may want like Porter, Givens, Patten, but not someone who Gibbs already publicly said he wasnt interested in having.

It did.I just stated "my ideal trade"for an starting WR and it has snowballed into this.Bottom line I dont have much hope in this years FA pool and the draft class.They need a good WR badly to play along side a 100% healthy Coles:Peace:

[rskinsfan10]

When I joined I was told I could talk about anything Redskin related and not to attack any of our fellow members on there opinions.Good Motto.
The exlusion issue was brought up by You not I when you so kindly suggested that there are other redskin boards I could join. Just back up the thread and look for yourself.
How am I or anyone else supposed to take that statement.
I joined this one because I liked what I saw an year ago.You want to keep needling this thing.I did not come to my opinion lightly and this exchange with you only re-enforces my opinions.You dont like that and that is fine.Like I have said before lets just agree to disagree.It keeps it interesting. :Peace:

And again, I ask you to show me where I or any other person in a position of authority ON THIS WEBSITE told you that you couldn't talk about anything Redskins related? If you are going to keep making that a talking point, then please show what you are basing that off of. PLEASE!

Suggesting to you that you look for another message board isn't excluding you. It was attempt to HELP you, since you seem to be so unhappy here with the policies that have been enacted. There is one out there that boast "of being the biggest, so they must be the best". There is another one that "doesn't like our colors", so maybe they will be a better fit for you. You should have taken it as if I am so disappointed in the way hR is being ran, then there other options for me to discuss the Redskins amongst other fans. Again, you brought up the banning/exclusion, not me

Lastly, I'm not needling anything. I'm defending criticisms that you lobbied against this site, one that you admittedly haven't visited much in the past few months. Surely you don't think that you will say something critical about myself and the others and expect to not receive a rebuttal, do you? Things have changed around here from a year ago. This forum is alot bigger and alot more active, and with that we have had to slightly change our policy and procedures to reflect those changes. The masses/majority have said they are happy and satisfied with what we have done. They win.

[dj_stouty]

Dont forget:
Ramsey's first 3 season are like Peyton Manning's rookie year


*Cha~Ching!*

(See Signature) ;)

[Axegrinder]

If I may interrupt[already have],let's not make a mountain out of a molehill.
I have a couple of thoughts on this subject.

1]Keep the board clean.
If a subject has already been discussed,put it in the proper thread.[note:you can always refer to a previous thread and post a link.]
2]It's unnecessary to challenge authority.
it's common knowledge that doing so isn't the smartest thing to do.
3]People make mistakes!

My suggestion is that we leave this here,learn from it,and move on.

[garedskin]

And again, I ask you to show me where I or any other person in a position of authority ON THIS WEBSITE told you that you couldn't talk about anything Redskins related? If you are going to keep making that a talking point, then please show what you are basing that off of. PLEASE!

Suggesting to you that you look for another message board isn't excluding you. It was attempt to HELP you, since you seem to be so unhappy here with the policies that have been enacted. There is one out there that boast "of being the biggest, so they must be the best". There is another one that "doesn't like our colors", so maybe they will be a better fit for you. You should have taken it as if I am so disappointed in the way hR is being ran, then there other options for me to discuss the Redskins amongst other fans. Again, you brought up the banning/exclusion, not me

Lastly, I'm not needling anything. I'm defending criticisms that you lobbied against this site, one that you adnittedly haven't visited much in the past few months. Surely you don't think that you will say something critical about myself and the others and expect to not receive a rebuttal, do you? Things have changed around here from a year ago. This forum is alot bigger and alot more active, and with that we have had to slightly change our policy and procedures to reflect those changes. The masses/majority have said they are happy and satisfied with what we have done. They win.

Well now that I know things have changed since September.Thats fine.Since you are being so helpful to me let me return the jest. May I suggest that you need to pull your head out of your *** because the vapors are clouding your better judgement.
Proof
I have seen where threads have been started and then later merged together with other threads that are about a subject but a different topic about that subject.It might be about the same subject but it was a different topic on the subject.When they are merged there is chastising from whom ever merges them.Thats fine When it is the same exact topic on the subject but not when it is a different topic on the same subject.It gets lost in a jumbled thread.When it should stand on its own. :Peace:

[akhhorus]

Well now that I know things have changed since September.Thats fine.Since you are being so helpful to me let me return the jest. May I suggest that you need to pull your head out of your *** because the vapors are clouding your better judgement.
Proof
I have seen where threads have been started and then later merged together with other threads that are about a subject but a different topic about that subject.It might be about the same subject but it was a different topic on the subject.When they are merged there is chastising from whom ever merges them.Thats fine When it is the same exact topic on the subject but not when it is a different topic on the same subject.It gets lost in a jumbled thread.When it should stand on its own. :Peace:

You dont get it, do you? Move on.

[dj_stouty]

Well now that I know things have changed since September.Thats fine.Since you are being so helpful to me let me return the jest. May I suggest that you need to pull your head out of your *** because the vapors are clouding your better judgement.
Proof
I have seen where threads have been started and then later merged together with other threads that are about a subject but a different topic about that subject.It might be about the same subject but it was a different topic on the subject.When they are merged there is chastising from whom ever merges them.Thats fine When it is the same exact topic on the subject but not when it is a different topic on the same subject.It gets lost in a jumbled thread.When it should stand on its own. :Peace:

You obviously havent' been around in a while, have you?

I guess you forgot how cluttered the 1st page of this forum used to be...and how quickly valuable topics got pushed back to the 2nd page simply because people created too many threads on the same subject. The admins/mods have done a great job policing threads and making sure today's hottest topics are being talked about.

If you want a site where you have to click on 6 different threads talking about Wynn restructuring his contract, look elsewhere. Plenty of other options exist for you...

[rskinsfan10]

Well now that I know things have changed since September.Thats fine.Since you are being so helpful to me let me return the jest. May I suggest that you need to pull your head out of your *** because the vapors are clouding your better judgement.
Proof
I have seen where threads have been started and then later merged together with other threads that are about a subject but a different topic about that subject.It might be about the same subject but it was a different topic on the subject.When they are merged there is chastising from whom ever merges them.Thats fine When it is the same exact topic on the subject but not when it is a different topic on the same subject.It gets lost in a jumbled thread.When it should stand on its own. :Peace:

Maybe if you got your head out of YOUR ASS (yeah, I said it since you chose to take this tone with me) you would see that you essentially just shot your own argument down. Merging a thread isn't telling you or anyone else that they can't talk about a subject. It says don't clutter the board with different threads about the same topic. It says that members here enjoy being able to navigate this forum without being subject to being bombarded with threads/topics that are simply repeats of things that are already deep within discussion. Quite frankly, I'm at the point where I have no qualms with telling you that I could care less what you think or feel about this subject, me, our Mods and our forum. It seems obvious to me that you yourself aren't even sure what exactly you are crying/whining about.

Now, please, after you take your head out of YOUR ASS, please stop by a web host and register your own domain name so that you can have your own forum to run as you please. It's pretty obvious that this isn't the place for you, and I'm rather tired of attempting to make you see that as it is.

[IowaSkinsFan]

When they are merged there is chastising from whom ever merges them.

That is not true. Whenever I merge a thread, I simply post "threads merged". I do not believe in 'chastising' anyone in public when I merge a thread. I think the most radical thing I have done is post a public service announcment, informing members to check the board for subjects that already exist, after merging four separate threads on the same topic. Often I just PM them and ask them to examine the board before starting a thread to ensure one has not already been started and to provide direction to their thread for the next time they go to look for it.

These chastisings you refer to are often just reminders about the policies in place here. I don't think any of the admins or mods seek to openly ridicule any member. If they have an issue with them, they handle it the appropriate way, via the use of PM's.

[colkurtz]

Back to the original subject of this thread:

1. All round one and round two draft picks are risky. Studies have shown only 33% make any significant contribution to the team over a couple year period.

2. Our WR group needs help. Gardner is essentially gone, DMC has lost favor with the coaches (probably gone), Coles toes situation may continue to bother him (90% player) or improve to get him to a legitimate, healthy #1 status.

3. Gibbs just said we probably wouldn't be able to go after any top-price FAs. That tells me that people like Jerry Porter won't be here next year. We used too much money last year on Brunnell and Portis and Daniels, etc. etc. Now we have to live with them.

4. Draft picks are risky, but cheap. If you get a winner from the draft lottery, you've got them for years vs. FA who are really only hired for a couple year stint, before their salaries go too high.

5. Gibbs and his staff did very well in last years draft. Let them analyze the heck out of the players they want and see if they can do as well this season. The WR we choose may not be a Randy Moss, but if he becomes a legitimate #2 WR, who stretches the field with Coles, all the other aspects of the 'skins game will improve.

[chrisbcbu]

Back to the original subject of this thread:

1. All round one and round two draft picks are risky. Studies have shown only 33% make any significant contribution to the team over a couple year period.

2. Our WR group needs help. Gardner is essentially gone, DMC has lost favor with the coaches (probably gone), Coles toes situation may continue to bother him (90% player) or improve to get him to a legitimate, healthy #1 status.

3. Gibbs just said we probably wouldn't be able to go after any top-price FAs. That tells me that people like Jerry Porter won't be here next year. We used too much money last year on Brunnell and Portis and Daniels, etc. etc. Now we have to live with them.

4. Draft picks are risky, but cheap. If you get a winner from the draft lottery, you've got them for years vs. FA who are really only hired for a couple year stint, before their salaries go too high.

5. Gibbs and his staff did very well in last years draft. Let them analyze the heck out of the players they want and see if they can do as well this season. The WR we choose may not be a Randy Moss, but if he becomes a legitimate #2 WR, who stretches the field with Coles, all the other aspects of the 'skins game will improve.

Cant really argue with this.

Gibbs did find a gem last year when he got Cooley. Im sure he can find a gem in a WR. Go Coach Gibbs.

[schmackledackle]

You Post as well as you QB....thats a compliment.

I couldn't agree more..........


Hey man, I had talent to throw the ball to.....

Good to hear from you.

[Redskinmayhem]

7 pages!!!??!??! I can't remember if I posted in this thread already. :sleeping:

[deviljets7]

Maybe part of it was the fact that last year's WR group was one of the best in recent memory, but with the new contact rules, I think it is a lot easier for a wide receiver to make more of an instant impact in the league. Over the last 2 years Roy Williams, Fitzgerald, Clayton, Evans, Colber, Boldin, Andre Johnson, and Rogers (when you prorate the stats over 16 games) all made huge impacts in year 1.