PDA

View Full Version : Do we still need another receiver?


PyroGenic
03-04-2005, 01:23 PM
I was just thinking, we have David Patten, Taylor Jacobs and maybe Santana Moss... do we really need to sign a FA or draft one in the first round? I dunno about you guys, but our potential (potential cuz of coles) receiving core doesn't look too shabby at all. Ofcourse that's all on paper but still, maybe we could trade down now and draft a DE or sign a FA. Last year springs led the team in sacks and I find that kind of sad. The guy who is supposed to be covering receivers gets more sacks then the guy's who job it is to get sacks... Just a thought.

whitskins
03-04-2005, 01:27 PM
I still think we need one more pass catcher, whether that be a WR like Williamson or a TE in Miller or Alex Smith. If we get Moss though I would take a look at trading down for Clayton.

DUCKIN_TACKLERS
03-04-2005, 01:28 PM
of course reciever is still the pressing need LC wants out.
OK Moss never caught alot of balls still unproven.
Patten serviceable reciever who is a great pickup but dont be surprised if he dosent light up the league.
Jacobs is connected with the dirtyest word in football "POTENTIAL".
Thrash proved he couldnt be a number one.
so while we now have serious depth at the WR position we still need to seriously look to upgrade.

The Skinsinator
03-04-2005, 01:28 PM
Hard question to answer at this point. I'm somewhat inclined to say no. I think Jacobs is the biggest variable. I also feel we may need more size at the position. However, Moss & Patten can create separation which we lacked last year. This, along with their good hands, will provide a substantial upgrade from last season. However, I really drool at this unit with getting a stud with that #9 pick.

akhhorus
03-04-2005, 01:29 PM
Yes, even if Coles stays, he'll be dealt with in a year. And who knows how hard he will play anyways? I would like options at Wideout.

CNYSkinFan
03-04-2005, 01:32 PM
If Coles is traded for Moss and Moss is signed to a long term deal I see us using #9 to go after either Heath Miller or perhaps Defensive End.

If not then I still say go after Mike Williams or Williamson at #9 because Coles most likely will be gone next year.

DUCKIN_TACKLERS
03-04-2005, 01:34 PM
can someone list possible FA recievers next year that we might need to look at if we dont get rid of Coles this year, or if our Young Talent dosent pan out.

MoeRedskins
03-04-2005, 01:34 PM
i say just trade coles and the #9 for Mike Williams, that way everybody on here will be happy, sure it could be used elsewhere and sure there probably won't be any WR worth the #9 pick available when we are on the clock, and we could use the pick for a pass rusher, or we could trade down and get more picks to add depth, but screw it. This takes care of everybodies needs. We might be able to get a seventh round pick on top of it too.

JoeJacksonTaylor28
03-04-2005, 01:36 PM
I would be fine with Moss, Patten, Jacobs and Thrash as our WR's.

Maybe a DE and a MLB via draft

Skins3
03-04-2005, 01:47 PM
to tell you the truth i am perfectly happy going into the season with the team we have now with the addition of Jansen and raybach portis may get 2000 yds next season I could careless who the recievers are Coles and Gardner are far better then any Ravens WR and Ramsey better then Boller may point is Lewis was able to run for 2000 with no passing attack

with no injuries and Buges coaching the "dirtbags" up we will have one hell of an O-line

there are a few positions I wouldnt mind suring up dont get me wrong like if we were to get rid of Coles and Gardner add Williams or Williamson through the draft and I would like to see some LB's drafted for special teams and depending on the smoot situation a cb

one other thing is I see alot of people mention they want TE well how about Pollard who was relesed by the colts I think he would fit perfect in this Offense

redwolf1218
03-04-2005, 01:53 PM
right now we have going into this season is (no receiver needed):
1. Gardner
2. Coles
3. Dmac
4. Thrash
5. Jacobs
6. Patten
but really it might end up soon being like this (1 or 2 receivers needed):
1. Dmac
2. Thrash
3. Jacobs
4. Patten
and possibly just these few (2 or 3 receivers needed):
1. Thrash
2. Jacobs
3. Patten
To be safe, I would say yes we could use another receiver.

Vonslydog
03-04-2005, 01:56 PM
Yes we still need another WR. I still want to draft a WR early. Patten is only a short term solution, and I don't want to get stuck in this situation again in 2 years. And it would be nice to grow a new #1 here instead of having to pick one up as a FA in a couple of years.

redwolf1218
03-04-2005, 02:02 PM
to tell you the truth i am perfectly happy going into the season with the team we have now with the addition of Jansen and raybach portis may get 2000 yds next season I could careless who the recievers are Coles and Gardner are far better then any Ravens WR and Ramsey better then Boller may point is Lewis was able to run for 2000 with no passing attack

with no injuries and Buges coaching the "dirtbags" up we will have one hell of an O-line

there are a few positions I wouldnt mind suring up dont get me wrong like if we were to get rid of Coles and Gardner add Williams or Williamson through the draft and I would like to see some LB's drafted for special teams and depending on the smoot situation a cb

one other thing is I see alot of people mention they want TE well how about Pollard who was relesed by the colts I think he would fit perfect in this Offense
for tight end we need either a blocker to replace Rasby or a pass catcher to upgrade over Robert Royal, or a guy who can do both. i'd be happy with a blocker to replace Rasby. a big guy who can block, but whom no one expects to be the next tony gonzales, would be cheap.

LadyNRedskinsfan
03-04-2005, 02:03 PM
i say yes.......if we do get moss, i wouldnt be surprised to see the skins trade down and grab a WR in the second, whoever that maybe.

gbalzac
03-04-2005, 02:17 PM
If we get Moss though I would take a look at trading down for Clayton.


another 5'10" wideout? I like whoever said package Coles and the #9 to assure ourselves of Mike Williams...try to get a 3rd back maybe

openallnight
03-04-2005, 02:31 PM
right now we have going into this season is (no receiver needed):
1. Gardner
2. Coles
3. Dmac
4. Thrash
5. Jacobs
6. Patten
but really it might end up soon being like this (1 or 2 receivers needed):
1. Dmac
2. Thrash
3. Jacobs
4. Patten
and possibly just these few (2 or 3 receivers needed):
1. Thrash
2. Jacobs
3. Patten
To be safe, I would say yes we could use another receiver.
What about:
Brown and Black . . .

skins111111
03-04-2005, 02:35 PM
it would be nice to get a posession reciever we have lots of speed Coles/Moss, Jacobs, Patten and even Thrash..........If the Vikings snag Burress we would have a chance of getting either him or Edwards at 9th.
but if Smoot is gone it will be hard to pass up on Pac Man or Rolle.
Williams would be so awsome :)

ConradCountry
03-04-2005, 02:36 PM
I think that is we get Moss we can officially live with the WR core that we will have, we can trade down and adress other needs.

Remember people we are a running team that needs servicable WRs.

redwolf1218
03-04-2005, 02:37 PM
What about:
Brown and Black . . .
we need dez white to go along with brown and black.

redcayman
03-04-2005, 03:00 PM
We need a true #1 reciever. Moss is not going to cut it. He was demoted to #3 on his own team why do we think he can be our #1. Coles is a much better reciever and we will probably trade him and not get the value that we need. We still need to address this position maybe in the draft or in the June cuts we will have to see.

redwolf1218
03-04-2005, 03:04 PM
Coles wants out, Gardner is seeking a trade...that means we only have 2 receivers who have started in the NFL...Thrash and Patten.

IowaSkinsFan
03-04-2005, 03:22 PM
I was just thinking, we have David Patten, Taylor Jacobs and maybe Santana Moss... do we really need to sign a FA or draft one in the first round? I dunno about you guys, but our potential (potential cuz of coles) receiving core doesn't look too shabby at all. Ofcourse that's all on paper but still, maybe we could trade down now and draft a DE or sign a FA. Last year springs led the team in sacks and I find that kind of sad. The guy who is supposed to be covering receivers gets more sacks then the guy's who job it is to get sacks... Just a thought.

We are either going into next season with Coles/Patten or Moss/Patten.

Then there is the draft.

I don't think we need another FA WR.

2Cooley
03-04-2005, 03:26 PM
we are a running team not a passing team our wide-out core is fine

COUNCILMAN
03-04-2005, 04:08 PM
I must not have the big picture yet. Just for the record, I do not see why the Redskins would spend a 3.5 million dollar bonus on an average receiver with little chance of being an impact player.

Isn't this what Taylor Jacobs is? Isn't this what James Thrash is? As well as McCants? Here is a team that was in about 14 games at the 2 minute warning. That should tell Gibbs something: we don't need another average player, we need only 1 or 2 exceptional players. Bring back everybody except get 2 exceptional players and this team would be in the playoffs.

We are losing Gardner. If its about production.....then Gardner will be gone and his 50 catches will be replaced by less than 50 catches from Patten. Coles is injured and we can either bring him back or replace him with Moss, who I like, but still, just based on production we're replacing 90 catches with 45 catches.

How do these moves make us better? If it were me, Moss would be fine if we were replacing Gardner with Moss and keeping Coles. At least Moss has the deep threat possibility on every play. He is that fast....and he is young enough to improve every year for the next 4 years. Patton is 31 years old and doesn't appear to be getting "better". He has peaked...and thats with Tom Brady as QB and being in the same system for multiple years.

Now Patten will have Patrick Ramsey who can't throw the deep ball and he's in a new system that will take a while to grasp. Why did we sign an average receiver who will be 32 years old sometime this year?

This signing is profoundly confusing to me and I fail to see where the team has improved enough to even win 1 more game. All we have done is lock up 3.5 million dollars in cap money for a receiver who could catch 35-50 passes per season. Couldn't Thrash or Jacobs do that?

gbalzac
03-04-2005, 04:24 PM
I must not have the big picture yet. Just for the record, I do not see why the Redskins would spend a 3.5 million dollar bonus on an average receiver with little chance of being an impact player.

Isn't this what Taylor Jacobs is? Isn't this what James Thrash is? As well as McCants? Here is a team that was in about 14 games at the 2 minute warning. That should tell Gibbs something: we don't need another average player, we need only 1 or 2 exceptional players. Bring back everybody except get 2 exceptional players and this team would be in the playoffs.

We are losing Gardner. If its about production.....then Gardner will be gone and his 50 catches will be replaced by less than 50 catches from Patten. Coles is injured and we can either bring him back or replace him with Moss, who I like, but still, just based on production we're replacing 90 catches with 45 catches.

How do these moves make us better? If it were me, Moss would be fine if we were replacing Gardner with Moss and keeping Coles. At least Moss has the deep threat possibility on every play. He is that fast....and he is young enough to improve every year for the next 4 years. Patton is 31 years old and doesn't appear to be getting "better". He has peaked...and thats with Tom Brady as QB and being in the same system for multiple years.

Now Patten will have Patrick Ramsey who can't throw the deep ball and he's in a new system that will take a while to grasp. Why did we sign an average receiver who will be 32 years old sometime this year?

This signing is profoundly confusing to me and I fail to see where the team has improved enough to even win 1 more game. All we have done is lock up 3.5 million dollars in cap money for a receiver who could catch 35-50 passes per season. Couldn't Thrash or Jacobs do that?



AMEN!!!

bgforever
03-04-2005, 04:27 PM
i say yes.......if we do get moss, i wouldnt be surprised to see the skins trade down and grab a WR in the second, whoever that maybe.


ding,ding, ding, ding! TKO!

Its the second from a trade most likely, as we are leaning more to NOT taking a WR after all, if the Moss deal goes down. If the Moss deal is off the table, we take another WR, but the pulse move will be all Gibbs and he aint telling (which means it won't be in the first round).

Redskinfan28
03-04-2005, 04:28 PM
Trade down, pick up a 2nd and draft Chris Henry.

bgforever
03-04-2005, 04:33 PM
Trade down, pick up a 2nd and draft Chris Henry.

Now that is HIGHLY likely. Henry also is in the Coles/Patten/Thrash mold, but like Patten, Jacobs, can get upfield quickly and efficiently. Remember the idea is not to have focus on one player, that way your passing game doesn't flop when "joe blow" is out.

skins111111
03-04-2005, 04:33 PM
We have the speed and that wil be great with Rams big arm (so you want to see deep balls) with our new O-Line we should be awsome. Screw Moss and keep Coles (this is very important) we need a posession reciever and we can use Coles (he will go over the middle) or Thrash in a pinch. But I repeat Williams Williams Williams..............if we keep Smoot and Barrow is healthy than we will have a shot

LadyNRedskinsfan
03-04-2005, 04:49 PM
I must not have the big picture yet. Just for the record, I do not see why the Redskins would spend a 3.5 million dollar bonus on an average receiver with little chance of being an impact player.

Isn't this what Taylor Jacobs is? Isn't this what James Thrash is? As well as McCants? Here is a team that was in about 14 games at the 2 minute warning. That should tell Gibbs something: we don't need another average player, we need only 1 or 2 exceptional players. Bring back everybody except get 2 exceptional players and this team would be in the playoffs.

We are losing Gardner. If its about production.....then Gardner will be gone and his 50 catches will be replaced by less than 50 catches from Patten. Coles is injured and we can either bring him back or replace him with Moss, who I like, but still, just based on production we're replacing 90 catches with 45 catches.

How do these moves make us better? If it were me, Moss would be fine if we were replacing Gardner with Moss and keeping Coles. At least Moss has the deep threat possibility on every play. He is that fast....and he is young enough to improve every year for the next 4 years. Patton is 31 years old and doesn't appear to be getting "better". He has peaked...and thats with Tom Brady as QB and being in the same system for multiple years.

Now Patten will have Patrick Ramsey who can't throw the deep ball and he's in a new system that will take a while to grasp. Why did we sign an average receiver who will be 32 years old sometime this year?

This signing is profoundly confusing to me and I fail to see where the team has improved enough to even win 1 more game. All we have done is lock up 3.5 million dollars in cap money for a receiver who could catch 35-50 passes per season. Couldn't Thrash or Jacobs do that?
i want to make a little comparison really quickly....

coles- 10.6
gardner- 12.7

moss-18.6
patten- 18.2

those numbers represent the number of yards per catch fpr each receiver last season. that tells me that moss and patten have speed to get open and make plays down the field. gibbs offense relies on execution. if moss and patten can get open, catch and block, gibbs will be happy. im sure he has done his homework on these guys....

guinness4health
03-04-2005, 06:08 PM
i don't think that we NEED to another receiver.....at this point the draft philosophy must be the top ranked player on the board (with the except of running back that is)

if that is a wideout, fine

Ramsey2Moss
03-04-2005, 06:49 PM
Add Moss and I think we'd be alright...trade down, draft Heath Miller or a CB (OR CHANNING CROWDER!!!!), or maybe a DE, and then take a WR with whatever our next pick is...be it a 2nd or 3rd roudner.

colkurtz
03-04-2005, 07:31 PM
Right now, we have a bunch of decent to good WRs. Coles has a toe injury which cuts his speed some, and also doesn't want to play here. Gardner will not be on this team next season. DMC was on the practice squad last season - will he suddenly play for us this year? Jacobs, Thrash and Patten are steady, decent and fast guys who will catch 30-60 passes.

WHO FROM THIS GROUP SCARES A DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR? Who gets a defense out of an 'eight-in-the box' stance'?

The argument that "New England won without a true #1 WR (lot of good #2s)" misses a critical point. Tom Brady is one of the best QBs in the NFL - perhaps in NFL history. Patrick Ramsey is not Tom Bradey. Last year he was fifth from the bottom of NFL QB's. This is his fourth season in 2005 and he's never lead this team past .500. Ramsey needs to have a very, very good WR group to succeed.

We need all the help we can get at WR. Draft our #9 for the best WR in the draft.

akhhorus
03-04-2005, 07:36 PM
Right, now I see our WR corps as such:
X-Coles
Y-Patten
Z-Thrash/Jacobs
V-Thrash/Jacobs

However, I could see this in the end:
X-Moss
Y-Williamson
Z-Patten
V-Thrash
U-Jacobs(who should ask for a trade)
or this:
X-Moss
Y-Patten
Z-Jacobs
V-Thrash

colkurtz
03-04-2005, 08:00 PM
Right, now I see our WR corps as such:
X-Coles
Y-Patten
Z-Thrash/Jacobs
V-Thrash/Jacobs

However, I could see this in the end:
X-Moss
Y-Williamson
Z-Patten
V-Thrash
U-Jacobs(who should ask for a trade)
or this:
X-Moss
Y-Patten
Z-Jacobs
V-Thrash

you're not going to start doing X + Y x Z / V algebra are you? I like your middle formula best ,a lthough in my perfect universe, I'd take Mike Williams over either Moss or Williamson

akhhorus
03-04-2005, 08:02 PM
you're not going to start doing X + Y x Z / V algebra are you? I like your middle formula best ,a lthough in my perfect universe, I'd take Mike Williams over either Moss or Williamson

X WR: a Wideout who is more of a speed guy also known as a split end
Y WR: a wideout who is more of a possession guy, but more speed guys are playing here since it's harder to bump and run them.
Z WR: quick 3rd WR or a very tall 3rd down guy. Also a good place to play a Fast TE to cause a mismatch.

COUNCILMAN
03-04-2005, 08:06 PM
i want to make a little comparison really quickly....

coles- 10.6
gardner- 12.7

moss-18.6
patten- 18.2

those numbers represent the number of yards per catch fpr each receiver last season. that tells me that moss and patten have speed to get open and make plays down the field. gibbs offense relies on execution. if moss and patten can get open, catch and block, gibbs will be happy. im sure he has done his homework on these guys....


LadyNRedskinfan....good of you to point out that point. I mentioned the fact several times on several threads that Moss was 2nd in the NFL in average yards per catch with 18.6....and since you bring up Patten with 18.2...it becomes obvious that there is a pattern here. However, what most of us can see is that we STILL are missing that one receiver that can be called the go to guy on 3rd down. I'm talking about Mr. SURE-HANDS who can outmuscle the 5-9 cornerback and get 8 tough yards.

For my money that is Dar McCants....unfortunately...Gibbs doesn't feel that way. But if we get Moss....then at least we will have 2 receivers who can pick up about 20 yards with every catch, and then....THEN...if they don't do the same thing here, then we know we have been blaming the wrong people. Either it will be the QB or the coach who is calling the plays.

With all that said....if we trade Coles and end up with Patten and Moss...maybe the Skins should keep Gardner as the 3rd receiver. He might be MUCH better in a contract year, especially when he is covered by the nickle back.

2Cooley
03-04-2005, 09:25 PM
i want to make a little comparison really quickly....

coles- 10.6
gardner- 12.7

moss-18.6
patten- 18.2

those numbers represent the number of yards per catch fpr each receiver last season. that tells me that moss and patten have speed to get open and make plays down the field. gibbs offense relies on execution. if moss and patten can get open, catch and block, gibbs will be happy. im sure he has done his homework on these guys....


But combined this past season they only caught 89 passes(moss45andpatten44) coles did that this season they were also on WAYYYYYYYYYYY better offenses.

NCskinfan
03-05-2005, 07:57 AM
i don't think that we NEED to another receiver.....at this point the draft philosophy must be the top ranked player on the board (with the except of running back that is)

if that is a wideout, fine

That is what Gibbs said the goal was for FA - to set up so we can "free-wheel" come draft day. I didn't think it was possible to do this without a big WR signing, but I (and a lot of us here on the board) are starting to see his plan.

Right now, 6 solid recievers are signed to play with Redskins (1.Coles 2.Gardner 3.Patten 4.Jacobs 5.Thrash 6.D-Mac). If we stick with these guys, (which is highly unlikely, but dare I say possible ) WR goes from a potential concern to a strength.

It seems that the likely draft day Redksins WR corps is: 1.Coles (or Moss) 2.Patten 3.Jacobs 4.Thrash 5.D-Mac. That isn't an ideal group, but it isn't unacceptable.

NCskinfan
03-05-2005, 08:09 AM
another 5'10" wideout? I like whoever said package Coles and the #9 to assure ourselves of Mike Williams...try to get a 3rd back maybe

I agree, we have 4 guys who are 5' 10"ish, and it would be great to get a bigger guy. Actually the exact type of guy we need is on our roster (Gardner) and will be traded. We have all suffered through 50/50 and endured the frustration. Has it taught us anything?

We need a reciever. Other than what I hear about his great work ethic and character, the word I hear in the same sentence with Clayton that makes me want the skins to draft him is polished. What does polished mean for a WR? It means good routes and good hands. Isn't that, along with some speed, what it takes to be a reciever? We all saw Clayton's 40 time (4.43), so he has enough speed. I haven't even mentioned how Kiper says he's "the best reciever after the catch to come out in years."

This is long, so I'll wrap it up. I agree with you, we need a bigger guy. But arguably the best reciever in this draft, and maybe the best value WR in this draft, is Clayton.

redskin_rich
03-05-2005, 08:18 AM
I agree, we have 4 guys who are 5' 10"ish
Actually, both Thrash and Jacobs are 6'0".

akhhorus
03-05-2005, 08:41 AM
I dont care if the skins wideouts are 4'2", as long as they dont drop the ball, they can play.

redwolf1218
03-05-2005, 09:43 AM
i like the x, y, z thing...it should stop all the arguments about the definition of a #1 receiver.

ConradCountry
03-05-2005, 11:40 AM
I can live with the recieving core of

1. Moss
2. Patten
3. Jacobs
4. Thrash

That isn't bad in that case I could live with going DE or CB in the 1st depending on what Smoot does. If Mike Williams is there at 9 we take him though.

bwparker
03-05-2005, 11:50 AM
I can live with the recieving core of

1. Moss
2. Patten
3. Jacobs
4. Thrash

That isn't bad in that case I could live with going DE or CB in the 1st depending on what Smoot does. If Mike Williams is there at 9 we take him though.
I think if we had this recieving core we may use Cooley as a reciever alot more. I could see us stickin with this(for the most part) and Cooley and Royal having 50+ between the two of them.

SkinsKY
03-05-2005, 12:31 PM
another 5'10" wideout? I like whoever said package Coles and the #9 to assure ourselves of Mike Williams...try to get a 3rd back maybe

Coles will play hard and for the one year he may be with us, will play at a higher level than Williams. There are plenty of 2nd round WRs who turn into stars in this league. I'm not willing to trade up to get Williams. If he falls and we take him, that's fine. Don't give up anything to get him though.

redwolf1218
03-05-2005, 12:41 PM
well we just got Moss. check out all the new threads on it.