Redskin News Per KFFL: June 19th, 2005

[CarMike]

Redskins | Noble may not be Fully Ready for Training Camp
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:27:19 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports Washington Redskins DT Brandon Noble (knee) may not be fully ready for the start of training camp as he continues to recover from a knee infection. He is finishing six weeks of treatment for the knee infection.


Redskins | Cooley does not Practice
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:25:48 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports Washington Redskins TE Chris Cooley (hamstring) did not practice the entire weekend at the team's minicamp due to a strained hamstring. He should be fine for training camp.


Redskins | Dyson Dinged
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:24:15 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports Washington Redskins WR Kevin Dyson (knee) suffered a bruised knee at the team's weekend minicamp. The injury does not appear to be serious.


Redskins | Lott does not Practice
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:23:40 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports Washington Redskins FS Andre Lott (knee) did not practice Sunday, June 19, because of a hyperextended knee. He has been scheduled for an MRI.


Redskins | Barrow about Two Weeks Away
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:21:26 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports Washington Redskins LB Mike Barrow (knee) is running full speed and should get a final clearance from a doctor in about two weeks, according to trainer Bubba Tyer.


Redskins | Arrington Injury Update
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:19:11 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports Washington Redskins LB LaVar Arrington (knee) may not be ready for the start of training camp due to his knee injury. Arrington began a running program last week and has no swelling on the knee, which required two surgeries. "He's got a lot of work to do in the next 41 days," trainer Bubba Tyer said. Arrington did not practice with the team at this weekend's minicamp.


Redskins | Return of the Speedy Smurfs
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:14:52 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports the Washington Redskins receiving corps has been creating quite a buzz at practice. Newcomer WRs Santana Moss, David Patten and Kevin Dyson join incumbent WRs James Thrash, Antonio Brown and Taylor Jacobs for a unit that could win quite a few relay races at the local track. "We've probably got the fastest receiver corps in the NFL," RB Clinton Portis said. Head coach Joe Gibbs hopes that speed will help generate the deep passing game that was missing last year. It is also a small in height corps, Dyson is the only one of the six over 6 feet tall. "We're pretty fast. But we don't feel like that. We feel like we're underdogs," Patten said, responding to talk the Redskins would once again miss the playoffs.


Redskins | Practice cut Short
Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:12:02 -0700

Joseph White, of the Associated Press, reports Washington Redskins head coach Joe Gibbs cut the team's final minicamp practice Sunday, June 19, to only 45 minutes. "I threw them a bone today," Gibbs said. "They've worked real hard up to this point."

[redwolf1218]

no wonder we brought in Dixon, sounds like Lott is done, and he was not all that great to begin with.

Last thing Dyson needs is a bruised knee.

On an interview with Elliot in the morning, Brandon Noble said he has lost 50 pounds. not encouraging to hear that he is still rehabilitating.

[BigPlayJay]

Interesting that no mention of McCants is made in the list of receivers. I seriously doubt Dyson will make this team.

While it's discouraging that Noble is not as far along as we would like as long as he gets healthy by September that would be fine. Griffin and Salevea(sp?) will hold things just fine at first. Noble will be a nice addition a little later.

[smoak]

Noble, Arrington, and Cooley are my biggest injury concerns. No, Cooley's injury isn't serious, but I expect him to be a primary contributor on 3rd down and in big spots.

Noble would really bolster the run D on short yardage if healthy. Otherwise we should part ways IMO.

Arrington needs to be 100%

[3644Skins]

Interesting that no mention of McCants is made in the list of receivers. I seriously doubt Dyson will make this team.

While it's discouraging that Noble is not as far along as we would like as long as he gets healthy by September that would be fine. Griffin and Salevea(sp?) will hold things just fine at first. Noble will be a nice addition a little later.


I noticed that too, like McCants is gone already or something. I'm with you, I don't think Dyson will make it.

[GWBlitzST]

I'm really excited about our receivers' speed. I feel like Antonio Brown might have one or two huge hook-ups with Patrick Ramsey, not to mention the other three burners we've got in front of him.

[BurgundyNGold]

Barrow about Two Weeks Away
LMAO! Again?

[3644Skins]

LMAO! Again?


Yeah, how many times does that make it now? He's been about 2 weeks away for over a year now. :lol1:

[2Cooley]

wow your avatar is messin with my head

[The Skinsinator]

I like the comments about the receiving corps alot. The speed is there. Speed kills however they must be effective and have great hands. Mike Williams wouldnt be the answer Im becoming convinced. I really like the overall diversity of our receiving corps from Cooley to Moss. Should be interesting. Could very well be the surprise unit of the nfl in 2005.

[LATrueRedskin]

Good to hear about our receiving corps and it's also good to hear about Barrow. Hopefully he'll be ready to go come preseason.

[Minnesota Mike]

Rebuilt O-line + Ramsey's cannon + WR speed = lots of points!

[2Cooley]

Rebuilt O-line + Ramsey's cannon + WR speed = lots of points!
dont forget clinton portis

[AGibbsGirl]

"We've probably got the fastest receiver corps in the NFL," RB Clinton Portis said.
Is Portis our PR man now? He always has something to say (I like it!) he is really part of this team now isn't he?

[BurgundyNGold]

Is Portis our PR man now? He always has something to say (I like it!) he is really part of this team now isn't he?
He wears the thickest B&G glasses of anyone I think. That's how it should be. He's repainting a rusty bandwagon in bright B&G.

[Agrawog]

CarMike,

First of all, your avatar is one of the most disgusting, disturbing images I have ever seen. I can't get it out of my head, so thanks a lot.

Second, Joseph White of the Associated Press needs to get a life!

:lol1:

[koepke25]

I will take speed and quickness in a WR over size and height any day. You don't need to be tall when there is nobody close to you. It wouldn't be a shock if both Dyson and McCants were cut.

[redwolf1218]

I will take speed and quickness in a WR over size and height any day. You don't need to be tall when there is nobody close to you. It wouldn't be a shock if both Dyson and McCants were cut.
i get what you're saying about speed and separation, and it was sorely lacking, and i wont be too surprised if McCants and Dyson get cut, but on the other hand, there's something to be said for bigger and taller guys, who dont have to have separation (like in the conjested, shortened field of the red zone), which is why old has-beens like Keyshawn can toast Smoot for 3 or 4 1st down slants, and 6'-3 slow guys like Cooley can lead the team in TD's. plenty of guys like Herman Moore made a living catching jump balls, especially in the endzone.

Cooley and Royal will have to be the red zone targets, otherwise we better either score from way out or run it down their throats.

i get the feeling that Dyson was brought in to challenge McCants because Gibbs wants at least one guy with some height. Gibbs has said some good things about McCants so i think he'll make the team. maybe he just couldnt grasp the offense fast enough last year to get on the field.

I agree that Thrash may be the odd man out. He's probably the least talented pure receiver among the top 6, and Morton was probably cut in part due to the emergence of Brown as a returner, and the aquisition of Moss for those critical times when we need an extra weapon on returns.

[2Cooley]

I will take speed and quickness in a WR over size and height any day. You don't need to be tall when there is nobody close to you. It wouldn't be a shock if both Dyson and McCants were cut.
hard to outrun somebody when you are inside the 10 yardline

[koepke25]

hard to outrun somebody when you are inside the 10 yardline
Not that hard to get seperation if you are quicker out of the cuts

[2Cooley]

Not that hard to get seperation if you are quicker out of the cuts
It is if they are playing press coverage

[bwparker]

Not that hard to get seperation if you are quicker out of the cuts
I think the point is that having Height exclusively, or speed exclusively can burn you. Having varied weapons gives you the greatest advantage. We have little quick guys(Moss, Patten, Jacobs..etc.) and we have some bigger sure handed guys(Cooley, DMAC, Royal, Dyson), plus a superstar in the back field. Now its just up to Gibbs to use 'em well and the Team as a whole to execute.

[koepke25]

It is if they are playing press coverage
Marvin Harrison 6'0" 175lbs scored 7 times from 10yds or less, Stokley who is 5'11" 197lbs scored 3 from inside the 10yd line and Reggie Wayne who is 6'0" 198lbs scored 5 from 10yds or less. All three had numerous TD catches of 30+yds. This is proof that having all small, quick WR's can work in the NFL. Why not copy the most potent passing attack in the league.

Granted we don't have P. Manning tossing the ball, but if Ramsey can give us half the production we will win at least 10 games.

Speed wins over size no matter which way you spin it. :sfight:

[koepke25]

speed exclusively can burn you.
You have it all wrong. If you have speed exclusively, you can burn them!!!

[The Skinsinator]

Marvin Harrison 6'0" 175lbs scored 7 times from 10yds or less, Stokley who is 5'11" 197lbs scored 3 from inside the 10yd line and Reggie Wayne who is 6'0" 198lbs scored 5 from 10yds or less. All three had numerous TD catches of 30+yds. This is proof that having all small, quick WR's can work in the NFL. Why not copy the most potent passing attack in the league.

Granted we don't have P. Manning tossing the ball, but if Ramsey can give us half the production we will win at least 10 games.

Speed wins over size no matter which way you spin it. :sfight:

Very good point. I had no idea that Harrison was that small. That makes his effectiveness even more valuable. That is awesome.

[redwolf1218]

Marvin Harrison 6'0" 175lbs scored 7 times from 10yds or less, Stokley who is 5'11" 197lbs scored 3 from inside the 10yd line and Reggie Wayne who is 6'0" 198lbs scored 5 from 10yds or less. All three had numerous TD catches of 30+yds. This is proof that having all small, quick WR's can work in the NFL. Why not copy the most potent passing attack in the league.

Granted we don't have P. Manning tossing the ball, but if Ramsey can give us half the production we will win at least 10 games.

Speed wins over size no matter which way you spin it. :sfight:
there are pros and cons to both. i think you have to have both. i really dont think you can emphatically exclude the benefits of either.

[bwparker]

Marvin Harrison 6'0" 175lbs scored 7 times from 10yds or less, Stokley who is 5'11" 197lbs scored 3 from inside the 10yd line and Reggie Wayne who is 6'0" 198lbs scored 5 from 10yds or less. All three had numerous TD catches of 30+yds. This is proof that having all small, quick WR's can work in the NFL. Why not copy the most potent passing attack in the league.

Granted we don't have P. Manning tossing the ball, but if Ramsey can give us half the production we will win at least 10 games.

Speed wins over size no matter which way you spin it. :sfight:

Then you look at guys like Randy Moss, TO, and Jerry Rice, Art Monk, Andre Reed(2nd all time reception leader), Chris Carter, Micheal Irvin, Chad Johnson, Drew Bennet, Jimmy Smith, Andre Johnson, Eddie Kennison, Ashlie Lelie....I could go on....HOFers, record holders, and most of the top ten recievers from last year. All big guys. So what do you think gives Indy its big advantage, that it has short guys or that it has one of the best regular season passers ever to play the game?

My point is either can win and both can win. Winners win. Speed doesn't win, Size doesn't win. Catching the ball and running with it wins and that characteristic is not determined by any easily measurable physical attribute.

And yes, having speed AND size gives you more option and is harder to defend. :twak:

[redwolf1218]

Then you look at guys like Randy Moss, TO, and Jerry Rice, Art Monk, Andre Reed(2nd all time reception leader), Chris Carter, Micheal Irvin, Chad Johnson, Drew Bennet, Jimmy Smith, Andre Johnson, Eddie Kennison, Ashlie Lelie....I could go on....HOFers, record holders, and most of the top ten recievers from last year. All big guys. So what do you think gives Indy its big advantage, that it has short guys or that it has one of the best regular season passers ever to play the game?

My point is either can win and both can win. Winners win. Speed doesn't win, Size doesn't win. Catching the ball and running with it wins and that characteristic is not determined by any easily measurable physical attribute.

And yes, having speed AND size gives you more option and is harder to defend. :twak:
how bout Herman Moore? and would Joe Montana have gone to the superbowl if he didnt complete "the pass" in the back of the end zone to Dwight Clark against Dallas? it looked like he was throwing it away. i dont care if that guy only caught one all day, that one went down in history because he was tall enough to go up and get it. if all your guys are little, you have to be incredibly accurate, which Manning is, and Elway was with the 3 amigos, (whom we whooped in the superbowl, by the way). they hit those guys in stride perfect, but "the pass" from Montana was a desperation play that only a big guy could have caught.

Dan Marino was also incredibly accurate to Clayton and Duper.

[koepke25]

Then you look at guys like Randy Moss, TO, and Jerry Rice, Art Monk, Andre Reed(2nd all time reception leader), Chris Carter, Micheal Irvin, Chad Johnson, Drew Bennet, Jimmy Smith, Andre Johnson, Eddie Kennison, Ashlie Lelie....I could go on....HOFers, record holders, and most of the top ten recievers from last year. All big guys. So what do you think gives Indy its big advantage, that it has short guys or that it has one of the best regular season passers ever to play the game?

My point is either can win and both can win. Winners win. Speed doesn't win, Size doesn't win. Catching the ball and running with it wins and that characteristic is not determined by any easily measurable physical attribute.

And yes, having speed AND size gives you more option and is harder to defend. :twak:
Over half of the players you mentioned are both big and fast, so I'm not sure what your point is. Chad Johnson is NOT a big receiver, OK, maybe in pop-warner.
My point was not to say big receivers aren't good to have, I'm just saying it isn't neccessary to have one on the roster. If the best receivers on the team are 6' and shorter, than I don't want a tall receiver. :banghead:
Here is something else to think about. The great offense that the Rams put on the field not to long ago included a receiving corp of Holt 6'0" 190lbs, Bruce 6'0" 188lbs, Hakim 5'10" 189lbs.
I would be extremely happy with Jacobs, Moss, & Patten on the field 90% of the time, including the redzone.

[aprius]

Dont be surprised if Dyson makes the team... and McWonts(Wont play ST) and Thrashed dont.
Dyson is a great ST player and a good 3rd reciever on any team....He could supplant Thrashed. Thrashed is very good at ST. Dyson is better.
:banger:

[HanburgerBum]

Marvin Harrison 6'0" 175lbs scored 7 times from 10yds or less, Stokley who is 5'11" 197lbs scored 3 from inside the 10yd line and Reggie Wayne who is 6'0" 198lbs scored 5 from 10yds or less. All three had numerous TD catches of 30+yds. This is proof that having all small, quick WR's can work in the NFL. Why not copy the most potent passing attack in the league.

Granted we don't have P. Manning tossing the ball, but if Ramsey can give us half the production we will win at least 10 games.

Speed wins over size no matter which way you spin it. :sfight:


But DMac and Dyson are not competing against Harrison, Stokey and Wayne for roster spots, are they? Yeah, the Skins would presumably keep any of the last three over DMac and Dyson. The Skins would probably choose Payton Manning over Ramsey too, you think?

What we are talking about here is choosing DMac or Dyson over someone like Thrash. It should be a no-brainer that the Skins keep DMac or Dyson in that scenario, because their size will make them better red zone threats. DMac had 6 TDs in a season the last time he was given significant playing time. How long do you think it would take Thrash to score 6 TDs? Six years?

[koepke25]

But DMac and Dyson are not competing against Harrison, Stokey and Wayne for roster spots, are they? Yeah, the Skins would presumably keep any of the last three over DMac and Dyson. The Skins would probably choose Payton Manning over Ramsey too, you think?

What we are talking about here is choosing DMac or Dyson over someone like Thrash. It should be a no-brainer that the Skins keep DMac or Dyson in that scenario, because their size will make them better red zone threats. DMac had 6 TDs in a season the last time he was given significant playing time. How long do you think it would take Thrash to score 6 TDs? Six years?
I'm not saying that having a big WR would be bad, just not necessary to have a good offense that can score a lot of points.
I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a fan of Thrash as anything other than a ST player.
Regardless whether we keep Thrash, McCants, Dyson, or any combination of the three; our top 3 receivers will be Moss, Jacobs, and Patten.
If the recent past is any indication, we will be just fine with an undersized yet speedy WR corp.
Lastly, using the word no-brainer would suggest that there is no way Thrash could out play Dyson or McCants. Once again I am not a huge Thrash fan, but this just doesn't seem like a no-brainer. Maybe you ment to say.....without using my brain I would not give Thrash a second look because I am obsessed with size.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

Hanburger, Thrash is, in my opinion, one of the most valuable members on our team. He was easily our best special teams player last year, and, despite the mockery he often faces because of his years in Philly, he actually is a good receiver. Think about it for a minute. He spent something like four years as an Eagle, usually catching for about 800 yards and 3-5 TDs while oging up against #1 corners. Here, he wouldn't be lining up against anything better than the nickel back. Don't you think, after four years of experience against the likes of Champ Bailey, Chirs McAllister, and Ty Law, Thrash would be able to school any nickel corner he encountered?

Do you struggle to lift 100 pounds after lifting 200 for four years?

[HanburgerBum]

I'm not saying that having a big WR would be bad, just not necessary to have a good offense that can score a lot of points.
I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a fan of Thrash as anything other than a ST player.
Regardless whether we keep Thrash, McCants, Dyson, or any combination of the three; our top 3 receivers will be Moss, Jacobs, and Patten.
If the recent past is any indication, we will be just fine with an undersized yet speedy WR corp.
Lastly, using the word no-brainer would suggest that there is no way Thrash could out play Dyson or McCants. Once again I am not a huge Thrash fan, but this just doesn't seem like a no-brainer. Maybe you ment to say.....without using my brain I would not give Thrash a second look because I am obsessed with size.


No, actually I meant it should be a slam-dunk to keep DMac or Dyson over Thrash. I have seen Thrash, both here and Philly. In his prime, he was mediocre. Now, he is basically "nothing" as a receiver. If we are talking about being a receiver only, I don't see any way Thrash can out play DMac or Dyson.

[HanburgerBum]

Hanburger, Thrash is, in my opinion, one of the most valuable members on our team. He was easily our best special teams player last year, and, despite the mockery he often faces because of his years in Philly, he actually is a good receiver. Think about it for a minute. He spent something like four years as an Eagle, usually catching for about 800 yards and 3-5 TDs while oging up against #1 corners. Here, he wouldn't be lining up against anything better than the nickel back. Don't you think, after four years of experience against the likes of Champ Bailey, Chirs McAllister, and Ty Law, Thrash would be able to school any nickel corner he encountered?

Do you struggle to lift 100 pounds after lifting 200 for four years?


Well, what we have here is a big disagreement about Thrash. I not only do not think he is one of the most valuable members of the team, I think his continued presence prevents the Redskins from keeping a more valuable player (be it McCants, Dyson or Antonio Brown).

I definitely do not consider Thrash to be a good receiver. The Skins nurtured him into a fair-to-middling (mediocre) wideout, and he immediately repaid them by signing with the Eagles. When he was nominally Philly's No. 1 receiver, it was widely acknowledged that the Eagles had the worst receiving corp in the League (maybe of all time). When the Eagles acquired TO, they kept Pinkston and Mitchell over him (Pinkston and Mitchell!). That right there speaks volumes about Thrash. Yeah, he caught more balls than anybody in Philly during those 4 years, but who else could the Eagles have thrown to? Pinston and Mitchell?

Not only does Thrash not thrive against No. 1 corners, I serously doubt that he would thrive against nickel backs either. If Thrash has the ability to eat up nickel backs, why did Gibbs not use him more extensively last year? It's not as if the Skins had a powerhouse offense in 2004 without him. And, if Thrash is a good receiver, why is he not starting? None of the receivers ahead of him (Moss, Patten, Jacobs) has proven to be a No. 1 receiver.

The truth is that Thrash is not even as good as Gardner, whom the Skins are pushing out the door. The only function Thrash can serve now is special teams. You say he is the Skins best player there. I don't know if that's so, but I will defer to your judgment on this (although I don't remember any big returns or game-turning plays on his part). A whole slew of new players (Prioleu, White, Broughton, McCune, Newberry, etc) appear to be adept at special teams and should be able to replace Thrash easily.

When you have never lifted more than 50 lbs, asking you to lift 100 lbs at this late stage of your career seems a bit too much.

[The Iceman]

i'll say this much... james thrash was our ST MVP last year... and he is the best special teams player on our entire roster.. that guy made a living last year pinning ppl inside the five... i think he had 3 in one game where he pinned em inside thier own five on punts.. the guy is super smart.. he's a ST god with his heads up plays..

Another thing, i'm not sure how many of you remember this, but it was james thrash that was smart enough last year to field a kickoff return w/ his foot out of bounds.. noone knows this, but league rules say that if a player fields a ball on a kickoff w/ any body part out of bounds that it is an illegal procedure penalty on the kicking team, thus giving us field position on our 40 yard line... i'm not sure how many ppl knew that, but good ol' thrash sure as hell did.

[chrisbcbu]

Another thing, i'm not sure how many of you remember this, but it was james thrash that was smart enough last year to field a kickoff return w/ his foot out of bounds.. noone knows this, but league rules say that if a player fields a ball on a kickoff w/ any body part out of bounds that it is an illegal procedure penalty on the kicking team, thus giving us field position on our 40 yard line... i'm not sure how many ppl knew that, but good ol' thrash sure as hell did.

Actually this was chad morton. One of the very few smart things he did for the Skins.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

Well, what we have here is a big disagreement about Thrash. I not only do not think he is one of the most valuable members of the team, I think his continued presence prevents the Redskins from keeping a more valuable player (be it McCants, Dyson or Antonio Brown).

I definitely do not consider Thrash to be a good receiver. The Skins nurtured him into a fair-to-middling (mediocre) wideout, and he immediately repaid them by signing with the Eagles. When he was nominally Philly's No. 1 receiver, it was widely acknowledged that the Eagles had the worst receiving corp in the League (maybe of all time). When the Eagles acquired TO, they kept Pinkston and Mitchell over him (Pinkston and Mitchell!). That right there speaks volumes about Thrash. Yeah, he caught more balls than anybody in Philly during those 4 years, but who else could the Eagles have thrown to? Pinston and Mitchell?

They didn't keep Mitchell. He's a Chief now. As for Pinkston, well, they had two mediocre receivers, one older and closer to the end of his contract (Thrash) than the other.

Not only does Thrash not thrive against No. 1 corners, I serously doubt that he would thrive against nickel backs either. If Thrash has the ability to eat up nickel backs, why did Gibbs not use him more extensively last year?

Why didn't Gibbs run more zone blocking? Why did he keep Brunell in so long? Why didn't he stop calling the counter so much? Why didn't he get someone to watch out for clock management? Why did he limit his passing attack to 10-yard throws?

It's not as if the Skins had a powerhouse offense in 2004 without him. And, if Thrash is a good receiver, why is he not starting? None of the receivers ahead of him (Moss, Patten, Jacobs) has proven to be a No. 1 receiver.

I don't recall claiming that Thrash would make any offense a powerhouse.

He's not starting because he's already shown that he's not a very good starting receiver. Thought we were takling about him going up against nickel backs.

The truth is that Thrash is not even as good as Gardner, whom the Skins are pushing out the door. The only function Thrash can serve now is special teams. You say he is the Skins best player there. I don't know if that's so, but I will defer to your judgment on this (although I don't remember any big returns or game-turning plays on his part). A whole slew of new players (Prioleu, White, Broughton, McCune, Newberry, etc) appear to be adept at special teams and should be able to replace Thrash easily.

When you have never lifted more than 50 lbs, asking you to lift 100 lbs at this late stage of your career seems a bit too much.

He's not as talented as Gardner, but he hardly ever drops balls, and always gives effort, which I think, at this point, is clearly more valuable.

As for special teams, apparently you missed a lot last year. Thrash probably made more great plays on special teams than the rest of the team combined. All those rookies will take a while to get to his level. He absolutely needs to stay.

[redwolf1218]

Actually this was chad morton. One of the very few smart things he did for the Skins.
yes i remember that. that's the best thing Chad Morton ever did.

[NCskinsfanatic]

I'm not trying to take sides in the Thrash debate here but I will say Thrash is more reliable than Gardner, more dedicated than DMAC and less injury prone than Dyson.

Thrash excells on ST's, made a couple of big catches last year all while seeing little time on the field. And I dont think you can just sum up his lack of time to lack of ability either.Thrash saw the field as much or more than Jacobs and a lot more than the inactive McCants.

McCants impressed me in SS's Offense but he seem to be too small to be a TE and too slow to be a threat anywhere other than the goaline. Obviously Gibbs sees him a lot more than we do and they had things to iron out this offseason....hmmmm.

The question in my mind is not if we keep Thrash but will Dyson stay healthy enough to replace DMAC. For me it comes down to this, Dyson is more balanced than DMAC and Thrash is far more versatile...DMAC is expendable.

[redwolf1218]

Dyson is the wild card to me. He's a 1st rounder as a receiver. McCants was a 5th rounder as a college TE converted to NFL receiver. Thrash was an undrafted walk-on. Thrash probably learned the offense faster to get on the field last year. i noticed he ran a lot of the motion back and forth across the backfield, which told me the coaches could count on him and he knew what he was doing...but Dyson is probably the best pure receiver if he's healthy, but that's a big "IF".

[HanburgerBum]

They didn't keep Mitchell. He's a Chief now. As for Pinkston, well, they had two mediocre receivers, one older and closer to the end of his contract (Thrash) than the other.



Why didn't Gibbs run more zone blocking? Why did he keep Brunell in so long? Why didn't he stop calling the counter so much? Why didn't he get someone to watch out for clock management? Why did he limit his passing attack to 10-yard throws?



I don't recall claiming that Thrash would make any offense a powerhouse.

He's not starting because he's already shown that he's not a very good starting receiver. Thought we were takling about him going up against nickel backs.



He's not as talented as Gardner, but he hardly ever drops balls, and always gives effort, which I think, at this point, is clearly more valuable.

As for special teams, apparently you missed a lot last year. Thrash probably made more great plays on special teams than the rest of the team combined. All those rookies will take a while to get to his level. He absolutely needs to stay.


I know the Eagles released Mitchell this off-season. But, my point was that the Eagles kept Pinkston and Mitchell over Thrash a year ago when they wanted to get rid of a receiver.

I never said that you said Thrash would turn any offense into a powerhouse. My point was that Thrash saw little action as a WR, despite the fact that the Skins offense stunk and Gardner struggled. If Gibbs had thought Thrash could provide a spark on offense, I think Thrash would have played wideout a lot more.

You want Thrash around because of his ST skills. That's fair enough. I don't. I think there are plenty of new players that can replace whatever ST contributions Thrash provides. I want to keep a red zone weapon like DMac, because the Skins offense needs every weapon they can get their hands on. Do you realize that the Skins scored 24 (24!) offense TDs in 2004? That's pathetic.

Another thing, what did all this great ST team play by Thrash get the Skins? 6-10? They need to shake things up and make some changes. I would start the changes by cutting Thrash and Rock Cartwright.

[dj_stouty]

If Gibbs had thought Thrash could provide a spark on offense, I think Thrash would have played wideout a lot more.

In Gibbs' final press conference of the regular season, he said that one of his biggest mistakes of the season was not getting the ball to Thrash more often.

That's all I have to hear to make me believe he can be an impact in '05.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

I know the Eagles released Mitchell this off-season. But, my point was that the Eagles kept Pinkston and Mitchell over Thrash a year ago when they wanted to get rid of a receiver.

I never said that you said Thrash would turn any offense into a powerhouse. My point was that Thrash saw little action as a WR, despite the fact that the Skins offense stunk and Gardner struggled. If Gibbs had thought Thrash could provide a spark on offense, I think Thrash would have played wideout a lot more.

You want Thrash around because of his ST skills. That's fair enough. I don't. I think there are plenty of new players that can replace whatever ST contributions Thrash provides. I want to keep a red zone weapon like DMac, because the Skins offense needs every weapon they can get their hands on. Do you realize that the Skins scored 24 (24!) offense TDs in 2004? That's pathetic.

Another thing, what did all this great ST team play by Thrash get the Skins? 6-10? They need to shake things up and make some changes. I would start the changes by cutting Thrash and Rock Cartwright.

Again, Gibbs made about a dozen inexplicable decisions when it came to last year's offense. Possibly the biggest reason Thrash wasn't on the field more was this: Gibbs hardly ever had more than two receivers on the field at a time. It was either two or (*shudder*) one, in the godawful three-TE set. And Thrash wasn't gonna be playing ahead of Coles or Gardner.

As for ST, again, you really think that any rookies we have can become special teams MVP their first year? I guess there's no way to factually prove that they won't, but when a guy makes more great special teams plays than I've ever seen anyone else make in one season, that's not gonna be duplicated very often.

And that last part is one of my least favorite arguments in all of professional sports. You're right, we were 6-10 last year. Clearly, Cornelius Griffin's Pro Bowl didn't get us to the playoffs. Let's cut him. Clinton Portis? Overpaid five game-winner. Gone. Jon Jansen? He had the gall to get hurt! He's definitely out of here. Gregg Williams? What did his great defensive schemes get us last year? 6-10? Let's find someone new, shall we?

[HanburgerBum]

In Gibbs' final press conference of the regular season, he said that one of his biggest mistakes of the season was not getting the ball to Thrash more often.

That's all I have to hear to make me believe he can be an impact in '05.


Gibbs also acknowledged that he spoke with DMac's agent after the season and said that he felt DMac was a talent and that the Skins need to figure out ways to get him on the field. The point is Gibbs isn't going to bad-mouth any of his players in public. He is just being diplomatic.

As for getting the ball to Thrash more often, I see that as, if not an impossible task, at best questionable strategy. Why would the Skins want to feature their least talented, least productive WR?

[HanburgerBum]

Again, Gibbs made about a dozen inexplicable decisions when it came to last year's offense. Possibly the biggest reason Thrash wasn't on the field more was this: Gibbs hardly ever had more than two receivers on the field at a time. It was either two or (*shudder*) one, in the godawful three-TE set. And Thrash wasn't gonna be playing ahead of Coles or Gardner.

As for ST, again, you really think that any rookies we have can become special teams MVP their first year? I guess there's no way to factually prove that they won't, but when a guy makes more great special teams plays than I've ever seen anyone else make in one season, that's not gonna be duplicated very often.

And that last part is one of my least favorite arguments in all of professional sports. You're right, we were 6-10 last year. Clearly, Cornelius Griffin's Pro Bowl didn't get us to the playoffs. Let's cut him. Clinton Portis? Overpaid five game-winner. Gone. Jon Jansen? He had the gall to get hurt! He's definitely out of here. Gregg Williams? What did his great defensive schemes get us last year? 6-10? Let's find someone new, shall we?


You are right, the 6-10 argument was perhaps unfair. But, surely you can't compare Thrash to people like Griffin, Portis and Jansen (all proven star players). The point I was trying to make was that I don't believe Thrash, even assuming that he is a leading ST player, is a DIFFERENCE MAKER there. This is so, because the ST overall last year with Thrash was average to poor (as evidenced by Gibbs making ST upgrade a priority in the off-season).

You are also right that last year's offense did not fully utilize WRs. But, I think changes are coming this season with respect to that. Ask yourself, in 3, or even 4, wideout sets, would you rather have Thrash or DMac on the field, especially in the red zone?

[GWBlitzST]

Ask yourself, in 3, or even 4, wideout sets, would you rather have Thrash or DMac on the field, especially in the red zone?
Who would you rather have playing special teams? It doesn't matter anyway, they'll both be on the team. I'd rather have either one over Newberry or Jimoh.

[bgforever]

Who would you rather have playing special teams? It doesn't matter anyway, they'll both be on the team. I'd rather have either one over Newberry or Jimoh.

That's the bottom line on that topic. Another point not noted is Thrash's ability to make BIG plays when needed. He's not a fantasy numbers pick, he's a football player, period. He gets the job done and he won't be counted on to shoulder the load he has in the past (Eagles) True he will be supplanted by a younger receiver, but until that person outright sits him down, look for MORE BIG plays from Thrash (aint' that right JT?)

[JoeDaSchmoe]

You are right, the 6-10 argument was perhaps unfair. But, surely you can't compare Thrash to people like Griffin, Portis and Jansen (all proven star players). The point I was trying to make was that I don't believe Thrash, even assuming that he is a leading ST player, is a DIFFERENCE MAKER there. This is so, because the ST overall last year with Thrash was average to poor (as evidenced by Gibbs making ST upgrade a priority in the off-season).

You are also right that last year's offense did not fully utilize WRs. But, I think changes are coming this season with respect to that. Ask yourself, in 3, or even 4, wideout sets, would you rather have Thrash or DMac on the field, especially in the red zone?

Hey, I'm a big DMC fan. I think he should be our third receiver. But apparently Gibbs doesn't think so, and until I see evidence that DMC will be on the field for more than 5 or 6 snaps this season, I'm gonna leave him out of the equation.

I think you and I are looking at this in different ways. You're thinking about Thrash in a very prominent, almost starting receiver light. I'm looking at him as our version of a very good utility infielder. He makes big plays during the sparse moments he's in the game (ST), and if someone higher on the depth chart goes down, he can fill in very well. He's got very good hands, decent speed, and won't make any rookie mistakes. And, when facing a nickel (or, with Moss/Patten/Jacobs, probably dime) back, I think his experience against starting corners will make him very good at getting open.

As for making a difference, the reason that special teams wasn't an area of strength is that he was pretty much the only difference maker there. He made a couple spectacular saves on punts that were about to roll into the end zone, nailed punt and kick returners when no other would-be tacklers were within 10 yards, and even, if I remember this right, blocked a punt. He was crucial when no one else was.

[colkurtz]

Thrash is a solid, dependable, veteran who is a ST monster, workout rat and a great locker room guy. He is versatile and does a decent job in anything he's asked to do. He is an excellent journeyman player in his last year or two with the Redskins. He has very good hands and will give it 100%.

DMC had one good season with SS. He's wouldn't join the ST kamakazies last year and hardly played at all. He gave a terrible interview earlier this year which showed a pretty poor attitude for a guy in his position. Now his tone is better and the latest articles say he will be on ST. I see him on the bubble with Dyson on his tail.

Dyson has injury issues but is solid and dependable. I see DMC as the odd man out here. In the end the coaches will make those decisions as the tough Darwanism of the NFL unfolds in the training camp. They'll make the decision at the end of the pre-season. Let the best man win.

[HanburgerBum]

Hey, I'm a big DMC fan. I think he should be our third receiver. But apparently Gibbs doesn't think so, and until I see evidence that DMC will be on the field for more than 5 or 6 snaps this season, I'm gonna leave him out of the equation.

I think you and I are looking at this in different ways. You're thinking about Thrash in a very prominent, almost starting receiver light. I'm looking at him as our version of a very good utility infielder. He makes big plays during the sparse moments he's in the game (ST), and if someone higher on the depth chart goes down, he can fill in very well. He's got very good hands, decent speed, and won't make any rookie mistakes. And, when facing a nickel (or, with Moss/Patten/Jacobs, probably dime) back, I think his experience against starting corners will make him very good at getting open.

As for making a difference, the reason that special teams wasn't an area of strength is that he was pretty much the only difference maker there. He made a couple spectacular saves on punts that were about to roll into the end zone, nailed punt and kick returners when no other would-be tacklers were within 10 yards, and even, if I remember this right, blocked a punt. He was crucial when no one else was.


I like your comparison of Thrash to an utility fielder. Although, apparently you think he can produce when given the chance to play wideout. On the other hand, I think he is pretty much a zero there. Besides, Thrash has no size and is similar to the receivers (Moss, Patten, Jacobs) ahead of him. So, he is unlikely to see significant action as a wideout. On the other hand I can visualize DMac on the field plenty of times, especially in the red zone. A couple more TDs last year could have spelled the difference between making the playoffs and going 6-10.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

I like your comparison of Thrash to an utility fielder. Although, apparently you think he can produce when given the chance to play wideout. On the other hand, I think he is pretty much a zero there. Besides, Thrash has no size and is similar to the receivers (Moss, Patten, Jacobs) ahead of him. So, he is unlikely to see significant action as a wideout. On the other hand I can visualize DMac on the field plenty of times, especially in the red zone. A couple more TDs last year could have spelled the difference between making the playoffs and going 6-10.

Hey, I don't think he'll play ahead of Patten or Moss. Jacobs, maybe. He has yet to do much on the field. And I'd like to see DMC in more too, but if he really does have the attitude that he seems to have, it's pretty clear why he doesn't suit up.

[aprius]

Hey, I don't think he'll play ahead of Patten or Moss. Jacobs, maybe. He has yet to do much on the field. And I'd like to see DMC in more too, but if he really does have the attitude that he seems to have, it's pretty clear why he doesn't suit up.

the competition for the last 2 slots are between Dyson, DMC, Thrashed, and Gardener.
Gardener if he stays is guaranteed a slot and Dyson is a better ST performer and WR than Thrashed and DMC .
Both Dyson and Gardener would make good #2 recievers on most teams.
Dyson and Gardener are big targets and give the team a more balanced attack.
DMC is only tall.
Thrashed and DMC would barely make any team as #4 or #5 recievers
Thrash is a good ST'er and a below average WR.
DMC is a decent/average WR but below avg WR.
Dyson is an average - slightly above average WR and a great ST'er.
Who has the advantage right now?
Dyson and Gardener.

[whitskins]

the competition for the last 2 slots are between Dyson, DMC, Thrashed, and Gardener.
Gardener if he stays is guaranteed a slot and Dyson is a better ST performer and WR than Thrashed and DMC .
Both Dyson and Gardener would make good #2 recievers on most teams.
Dyson and Gardener are big targets and give the team a more balanced attack.
DMC is only tall.
Thrashed and DMC would barely make any team as #4 or #5 recievers
Thrash is a good ST'er and a below average WR.
DMC is a decent/average WR but below avg WR.
Dyson is an average - slightly above average WR and a great ST'er.
Who has the advantage right now?
Dyson and Gardener.

Gardner isn't even part of the equation at this point, he has been excused from all team activities, in Joe Gibbs terms that means you aren't on this team any more, the only reason he's still on the roster is in hopes that we can trade him at some point soon, otherwise he is cap fodder.

I wouldn't say Dyson has any advantage over Thrash, the dude hasn't played in two years, Thrash was our best special teamer and can contribute as a 4th WR or a backup, plus he is already a leader on this team.

Dyson has to prove he is fully healthy and still can perform at an NFL level. If DMC can't beat out Dyson, a guy who hasn't played the game in about two years thanks to two massive injuries, then the guy will be selling paintings to guys like Portis for the rest of his life.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

the competition for the last 2 slots are between Dyson, DMC, Thrashed, and Gardener.
Gardener if he stays is guaranteed a slot and Dyson is a better ST performer and WR than Thrashed and DMC .
Both Dyson and Gardener would make good #2 recievers on most teams.
Dyson and Gardener are big targets and give the team a more balanced attack.
DMC is only tall.
Thrashed and DMC would barely make any team as #4 or #5 recievers
Thrash is a good ST'er and a below average WR.
DMC is a decent/average WR but below avg WR.
Dyson is an average - slightly above average WR and a great ST'er.
Who has the advantage right now?
Dyson and Gardener.

Let's just say that I think you're quite imaginative. ;)

[aprius]

Let's just say that I think you're quite imaginative. ;)

Gee, That is the nicest thing anyone has said to me today....and I am serious about that.....

:doh:

[JoeDaSchmoe]

Gee, That is the nicest thing anyone has said to me today....and I am serious about that.....

:doh:

Ouch, rough day.

[HanburgerBum]

Hey, I don't think he'll play ahead of Patten or Moss. Jacobs, maybe. He has yet to do much on the field. And I'd like to see DMC in more too, but if he really does have the attitude that he seems to have, it's pretty clear why he doesn't suit up.


Thrash definitely will be behind Moss and Patten, I think that's what I said in my post. I believe Thrash will be behind Jacobs as well, because Taylor just has so much more talent. And, I wouldn't want Thrash on the field in 3 or 4 wideout sets. So, I really can't see a WR role for Thrash barring a rash of injuries at that position.

As for DMac's attutude, I think that will improve, since he should know that he is on thin ice. He should also know that there are a lot more starving artists than successful ones.

[HanburgerBum]

the competition for the last 2 slots are between Dyson, DMC, Thrashed, and Gardener.
Gardener if he stays is guaranteed a slot and Dyson is a better ST performer and WR than Thrashed and DMC .
Both Dyson and Gardener would make good #2 recievers on most teams.
Dyson and Gardener are big targets and give the team a more balanced attack.
DMC is only tall.
Thrashed and DMC would barely make any team as #4 or #5 recievers
Thrash is a good ST'er and a below average WR.
DMC is a decent/average WR but below avg WR.
Dyson is an average - slightly above average WR and a great ST'er.
Who has the advantage right now?
Dyson and Gardener.


Let's simplify the issue a little. Gardner is NOT in the equation. There is no way under the sun that he will be with the Skins this season, unless Marty suddenly takes over for Gibbs. Not only has Gardner burned his bridges here, the Skins need his cap space badly.

So, barring a rookie stepping forward, the WR battle should boil down to DMac, Thrash, Dyson for two spots (if 6 are kept), or for one spot (if only 5 are kept). As you may have noticed, I rank DMac, Dyson and Thrash in that order. But, most people on this board appear to favor Thrash.

[dj_stouty]

Gibbs also acknowledged that he spoke with DMac's agent after the season and said that he felt DMac was a talent and that the Skins need to figure out ways to get him on the field. The point is Gibbs isn't going to bad-mouth any of his players in public. He is just being diplomatic.

Gibbs had to make a statement about DMC because he was specifically asked about DMC's contract status by the press. That may or may not have been coach speak. I think it was...

Gibbs rarely volunteers praise to individuals. But when he does, my ears perk up. Gibbs didn't have to call out an individual player when asked what he should have done differently in 2004. But he did. You know as well as I do,that when Gibbs volunteers individual praise about a player, he means it.

As for getting the ball to Thrash more often, I see that as, if not an impossible task, at best questionable strategy. Why would the Skins want to feature their least talented, least productive WR?

Depends on how you define "least talented" and "least productive". Gibbs believes Thrash is dependable...and while he may not put up the fastest 40 time, run the most precise route, or catch the most TD passes...Thrash is a reliable WR and a clutch performer, who made the most of the few times he saw the ball come his way.

[HanburgerBum]

Gibbs had to make a statement about DMC because he was specifically asked about DMC's contract status by the press. That may or may not have been coach speak. I think it was...

Gibbs rarely volunteers praise to individuals. But when he does, my ears perk up. Gibbs didn't have to call out an individual player when asked what he should have done differently in 2004. But he did. You know as well as I do,that when Gibbs volunteers individual praise about a player, he means it.



Depends on how you define "least talented" and "least productive". Gibbs believes Thrash is dependable...and while he may not put up the fastest 40 time, run the most precise route, or catch the most TD passes...Thrash is a reliable WR and a clutch performer, who made the most of the few times he saw the ball come his way.


What I meant was Thrash can't stretch the field due to a lack of burner speed. Also, he has no size and has never demonstrated any ability to produce in the red zone. Of all the wideouts on the Skins roster, Thrash would be the one least feared by opposing DBs. Can he catch a 5-yarder? Probably, but so what?

[bwparker]

What I meant was Thrash can't stretch the field due to a lack of burner speed. Also, he has no size and has never demonstrated any ability to produce in the red zone. Of all the wideouts on the Skins roster, Thrash would be the one least feared by opposing DBs. Can he catch a 5-yarder? Probably, but so what?
That can make a big difference on 3rd and 4...

[redskn65]

My point is either can win and both can win. Winners win. Speed doesn't win, Size doesn't win. Catching the ball and running with it wins and that characteristic is not determined by any easily measurable physical attribute.

Amen to this my fellow Redskin.............best point I`ve read from posts in a long time!

[JoeDaSchmoe]

What I meant was Thrash can't stretch the field due to a lack of burner speed. Also, he has no size and has never demonstrated any ability to produce in the red zone. Of all the wideouts on the Skins roster, Thrash would be the one least feared by opposing DBs. Can he catch a 5-yarder? Probably, but so what?

Well, that's the point, Hanburger. I think you'll see this year that Patten and Thrash are our two most reliable receivers. They both have the ability to consistently get enough seperation for the QB to make a decent throw, they'll work all parts of the field, and (we should all appreciate this more after last season) when the ball hits their hands, they hold on.

No, he's not the burner that Moss or even Patten is, but less than, say, 20 yards down the field, Thrash will be very, very reliable. Sounds a lot more boring than "burner" or "stretch the field," but I promise you, reliable comes in handy more often.

[HanburgerBum]

Well, that's the point, Hanburger. I think you'll see this year that Patten and Thrash are our two most reliable receivers. They both have the ability to consistently get enough seperation for the QB to make a decent throw, they'll work all parts of the field, and (we should all appreciate this more after last season) when the ball hits their hands, they hold on.

No, he's not the burner that Moss or even Patten is, but less than, say, 20 yards down the field, Thrash will be very, very reliable. Sounds a lot more boring than "burner" or "stretch the field," but I promise you, reliable comes in handy more often.


You apparently think Thrash is going to have significant playing time and production as a receiver this year. While I seriously doubt that, I will wait and see with an open mind. And, we can re-visit this issue once we are into the season. Actually, I hope you are right, because after all we are on the same side here.

[skinfanjon]

I'll say this, if its 3rd and 4 in the 4th quarter, I would want Patten, Moss and Thrash on the field. Line them up in trips, send Moss on a deep out or post to hold the safety, send Patten on a slant and let Thrash run a little curl route past the first down marker. If they follow Patten, Thrash will pick up the first. And he will CATCH the ball.

IMO, he still serves a purpose in those critical moments when all you need is someone to safely pull in the reception. He will go accross the middle and fight for extra yards also. And let's not forget about his special teams capabilities.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

You apparently think Thrash is going to have significant playing time and production as a receiver this year. While I seriously doubt that, I will wait and see with an open mind. And, we can re-visit this issue once we are into the season. Actually, I hope you are right, because after all we are on the same side here.

Depends on your definition of "significant." I'm guessing somewhere in the vicinity of 400-500 yards.

[redwolf1218]

Depends on your definition of "significant." I'm guessing somewhere in the vicinity of 400-500 yards.
I'd be surprised if Thrash got that much. he'll probably average around 10 yards a catch, so 40-50 catches for 400-500 yards seems a generous estimate. For Thrash to get that much would probably mean that he is starting, which in turn would mean that Moss, Jacobs and/or Patten got injured. Not that it couldnt happen, because of course injuries happen to all teams, but i dont really expect Thrash will be needed that much on offense if Moss, Jacobs, Patten and Cooley are all productive.

by the way, are they ever going to release Gardner, or just sit and wait? i really dont think anyone will give up a draft pick to get Gardner with a one year deal at 3M. it would be nice to start hearing about negotiations on the rookie contracts here soon.

[HanburgerBum]

Depends on your definition of "significant." I'm guessing somewhere in the vicinity of 400-500 yards.


Wow, you think Trash can produce 400-500 yards in 2005? Of course, that would be "significant". But, barring a slew of injuries to receivers ahead of him, I don't see any way that can happen. That kind of yardage requires 40 catches or so (an average of 2.5 per game). If Thrash has that kind of year as the 3rd or 4th wideout, the Skins offense should have a major turn around. Hope you are right.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

Wow, you think Trash can produce 400-500 yards in 2005? Of course, that would be "significant". But, barring a slew of injuries to receivers ahead of him, I don't see any way that can happen. That kind of yardage requires 40 catches or so (an average of 2.5 per game). If Thrash has that kind of year as the 3rd or 4th wideout, the Skins offense should have a major turn around. Hope you are right.

Me too. :awesomewo