Akh's Thoughts Divisional Playoffs

[akhhorus]

http://www.hailredskins.com/blog/index.php?p=232

[helimech24]

4-Mike Wise…why do you cover the Redskins anyways? You write a column before the Redskins’ second playoff game this season completely on how the native tribes in the Pacific Northwest don’t like the name “redskins”? Why again is the Post wasting valuable space and ink on your drivel? And then you follow up that column the next day with an almost gleeful column on the Skins’ loss. You sir-in my opinion-are a D*****bag.

4a-I look forward to your offseason columns where you will make such sweeping and in the end, ridiculous predictions on how all the Skins’ moves will end up in disaster. Too bad the Skins don’t have a need for a Giants’ beatwriter.

4b-Really, why do you bother covering them? You couldn’t get the college basketball beat or the Wizards beat from your editor? Maybe Weekend or Style could use you.

4c-On second thought, maybe Don Graham should transfer you to the Kensington Gazette or something….

I decided last month to boycott the WP and I have been getting all of my Skins news from this site. Is there a good paper out there that does support the Redskins?

[akhhorus]

I decided last month to boycott the WP and I have been getting all of my Skins news from this site. Is there a good paper out there that does support the Redskins?

Well, I think the Post has the best coverage, and Wilbon, Boswell and Kornheiser are good, fair columnists. But Wise and Jenkins are war criminals in my mind.

[helimech24]

Well, I think the Post has the best coverage, and Wilbon, Boswell and Kornheiser are good, fair columnists. But Wise and Jenkins are war criminals in my mind.

I just got tired of everyone bashing the skins including Wilbon. I can take Kornheiser in small doses. Boswell in my mind is the best in the coverage area. I just got tired of all the crap that surrounded the good articles.

[danny's stogie]

Peyton will get ripped in the press for what he said, but he’s 100% right. His Oline was a disaster area sunday.

Wait, did Peyton call out his Oline?

[akhhorus]

Wait, did Peyton call out his Oline?

Yeah, in a very nice way, he called them out in his post game press conference. But he did rip them.

[akhhorus]

I just got tired of everyone bashing the skins including Wilbon. I can take Kornheiser in small doses. Boswell in my mind is the best in the coverage area. I just got tired of all the crap that surrounded the good articles.

Well, I think Wilbon is one of the best. When the Skins are doing well, he is very complementary of them, when they aren't, he isn't. And he talks to the opposing players to get insights about the Skins. Which too few sports writers do.

[RedskinRyan]

peyton said that the protection "just wasnt there" or something like that, which in some cases it wasnt, but he didnt always make great decisions when being blitzed.

[MONK_in_HOF]

I agree with most of your thoughts.

I couldn't agree more on your assessment of Wise. This guy is a bum and needs to be returned to sender. Go back to NY jerky.

[danny's stogie]

Yeah, in a very nice way, he called them out in his post game press conference. But he did rip them.

What a tool. True that right side sucks, but Pittsburgh sent more men than blockers half the time. If Peyton is so great at calling audibles how about calling a screen or draw or pulling people back into protection, or how about making better throws on your quick drops.

[FanFromArizona]

8-As a preliminary list for what the Skins need in this offseason:

A-A legitimate recieving threat at WR to go with Moss. They don’t need to break the bank on this, but a legit possession WR; someone who can catch 45-55 catches and get break up the stack coverages on Santana.

B-A WLB who can replace Lavar and give a pass rush. I would favor a rookie over a Vet because Williams can mold him into what he wants.

C-A pass rushing DE. Again, you don’t need Pancakes Peppers here, but a guy like ND Kalu or Bryan Thomas would fit perfectly. Someone who can spell Renaldo Wynn on obvious passing downs and pressure the QB consistantly.

D-A nickel CB. Again, I would prefer a rookie who can be molded, but Walt Harris isn’t worth the cap space he takes up. A real nickel back can replace Harris and hopefully replace Springs in a year or two.

E-A Legit TE. Not a blocker and not a reciever, but a combo of both. A guy like Jeff King would be perfect. Sellers and Cooley are great H-Backs, but the Skins could really use a TE who can be a better blocker and reciever than Royal.




I agree, with everything here, you must be a smart person :lol1:
[just don't let the swelling of your ego get to your head, that's all I ask]

A)I have been adding bits and pieces in various postings, I would like to see us make a trade with Patrick Ramsey and Ladell Betts [and if necessary a low pick] to the Arizona Cardinals for one of their young receivers. I think it would be an interesting trade that could be of benefit to both teams.

B)Clemons is my up and coming man. I would like to see our 2005 picks in action next year. Would line up nicely with "being molded by Gregg Williams". If trade Lavar, fill other needs.

C) I am sure we will see this addressed in offseason. Trust in GW for this.

D) No argument there. No benefit to paying a 1 down [3rd down] when I can use a 3rd/4th rounder to get the same performance at cheaper cost and get younger in the process.

E) It will be interesting to watch this position develop, I have the most uncertainty as to what we will see because I am sure Cooley's/Sellers role will get totally redefined next year to make room for this years draftees.

[akhhorus]

I agree, with everything here, you must be a smart person :lol1:
[just don't let the swelling of your ego get to your head, that's all I ask]

Don't worry, my ego has already has an international agency to monitor it closely and is currently occupied by a South Asian UN peacekeeping force.

A)I have been adding bits and pieces in various postings, I would like to see us make a trade with Patrick Ramsey and Ladell Betts [and if necessary a low pick] to the Arizona Cardinals for one of their young receivers. I think it would be an interesting trade that could be of benefit to both teams.

I think we could swap Betts for Bryan Johnson straight up. But I like Kevin Curtis and/or Shaun McDonald.

B)Clemons is my up and coming man. I would like to see our 2005 picks in action next year. Would line up nicely with "being molded by Gregg Williams". If trade Lavar, fill other needs.

Clemons has shown some raw ability, either him or someone like Angelo Crowell would be a good pick up.

E) It will be interesting to watch this position develop, I have the most uncertainty as to what we will see because I am sure Cooley's/Sellers role will get totally redefined next year to make room for this years draftees.

Well, Cooley is the star and is going nowhere, but Sellers could get a big deal from someone thinking that he's a real talent. He isn't and is only good in this system. Royal is a UFA and a guy like Aaron Shea or Christian Fauria would be a great pick up.

[FanFromArizona]

I think we could swap Betts for Bryan Johnson straight up. But I like Kevin Curtis and/or Shaun McDonald.

Straight up? THAT would be a steal for us, Bryan Johnson is young, a first round pick from 2003, and Betts is a former 6th or 7th rounder, a good north-south running back.


Clemons has shown some raw ability, either him or someone like Angelo Crowell would be a good pick up.

Why bother if we have someone already? It takes time to learn the system, I would stick with my boy who has the experience in the system and is going to be a BEAST next year.


Well, Cooley is the star and is going nowhere, but Sellers could get a big deal from someone thinking that he's a real talent. He isn't and is only good in this system. Royal is a UFA and a guy like Aaron Shea or Christian Fauria would be a great pick up.

I meant I am unsure what adding a Nemo and White to the equation will do to the roles played by Cooley and Sellers. Will we see Cooley as a pure Tight End if this happens or will Cooley still play the Hback role or will the Hback role get provided by Sellers/White?

[akhhorus]

Straight up? THAT would be a steal for us, Bryan Johnson is young, a first round pick from 2003, and Betts is a former 6th or 7th rounder, a good north-south running back.

Well, not to be picky, but Betts was a 2nd rounder. And he's a rotation players, so is Johnson. It would be a good deal for both teams.

Why bother if we have someone already? It takes time to learn the system, I would stick with my boy who has the experience in the system and is going to be a BEAST next year.

Williams drafted Crowell. He knows the system.

I meant I am unsure what adding a Nemo and White to the equation will do to the roles played by Cooley and Sellers. Will we see Cooley as a pure Tight End if this happens or will Cooley still play the Hback role or will the Hback role get provided by Sellers/White?

Well, Nemo is a RB and will back up Portis. White is probably a combo back: short yardage RB and H-Back. He could replace Sellers, but they still need a real TE.

[Skins7ny]

(1) I agree generally with your assessment of team needs. I think that they are, in order:
(a) a veteran who can play OG/OT and be the first lineman off the bench, unless they think Molinaro can be that guy.
(b) a starting-caliber WR. If Patten comes back, he is best suited to 3rd WR status. Jacobs should be cut, and Thrash is at best a #4 or even #5 at this point in his career. Most draft pick WRs do not make a big impact their first year, so a veteran FA would seem to be indicated. A young WR who can be groomed would be worth our 2nd or 3rd-rounder, even if we do sign a veteran. This was one of the worst WR corps in the league this year, and it really cost us. I hate to even mention this, but we were very fortunate that Santana stayed healthy all year. We should have a quality backup for him next year.
(c) Pass-rushing DE. Daniels played great down the stretch, but they cannot count on that, and still need a speed rusher even if Daniels is healthy and effective. This is the missing piece on the defense. If this defense can generate pass rush with the front four, they could be #1 next year.
(d) Starting-caliber CB. I say starting-caliber, b/c with all the 3-receiver sets, and the slippage of Walt Harris, and the injuries you usually get in the secondary, whoever fills this spot will likely have to start some games for us. I think this is where you go young and get a draft pick-good ones can be found outside of round 1 (see Denver's 2 rookies, Ronald Bartrell of the Rams, etc.).
(e) Blocking TE. I like Robert Royal, but they need a stud blocker in the Donnie Warren mold. If he could catch passes, that would be a plus.
(f) KR. We all root for Antonio Brown and want him to succeed, but everytime he went back to field a kick this year, my blood pressure rose to dangerous levels. I always have been in favor of a Mike Nelms-type who takes up one roster spot but handles KR and PR very well, and contributes on the other teams. If such a guy is available in the draft (or Mike Lewis, who is a free agent off the Saints), I would grab him.
(g) DT depth. I thought Killings played well, and from what my untrained eyes could see, so did Boschetti, but if the coaching staff did not, they need to draft a big body in the lower rounds that they can groom for some minutes next year.
(h) a veteran/quick learning rookie who can play C (and preferably also fill in at OG), unless they for some reason think Raymer still has something left in the tank
(2) It all goes down to drafting well outside of round 1, where the Snyder/Vinny regime's record has been downright abysmal. This is why there was no young veteran who could step in and play RG last Saturday, why the we did not have any catches from any WR other than Moss and why they were signing people off the street and playing them at WR. Despite what most people are saying this week, this off-season is going to be vital for next year's hopes. The holes they have are huge, especially the first two, and they were very fortunate with injuries this year, not losing any starter of consequence until Thomas went down late in the year. In today's NFL, the teams that do well year-in and year-out are those that draft well, and I am not convinced that Gibbs values his draft choices enough to keep them and use them, and I am even less convinced that Gibbs' lieutenants are skilled at finding players beyond round 1.
(3) If Nate Clements' asking price has come down, don't be surpised to see the Skins make a play for him. They would then cut Harris to make up some of the salary cap room. Clements played for Williams in Bufallo, and I think Williams and he have a mutual admiration. Clements is going to be seeking big money, which the Skins cannot afford.
(4) I cannot agree with what you said about Mike Wise and the article about the Skins' name. Just because you disagree with his viewpoint on the team name does not make him worthy of insult (as to the 2nd article you referenced, I cannot remember it well, it must not have made much of an impression on me). I can understand it if you also did not like the timing of the article, but, after all, he was in the Pacific Northwest, which has a heavier concentration of Native Americans!
(5) I will personally swear to it that just because you are from New York, does not mean that you cannot bleed burgundy and gold-in fact, it is a lot harder to do so when you are born and raised in enemy territory!

[akhhorus]

(1) I agree generally with your assessment of team needs. I think that they are, in order:
(a) a veteran who can play OG/OT and be the first lineman off the bench, unless they think Molinaro can be that guy.

That would be nice, but its hard to justify that as the first priority of the offseason.

(4) I cannot agree with what you said about Mike Wise and the article about the Skins' name. Just because you disagree with his viewpoint on the team name does not make him worthy of insult (as to the 2nd article you referenced, I cannot remember it well, it must not have made much of an impression on me). I can understand it if you also did not like the timing of the article, but, after all, he was in the Pacific Northwest, which has a heavier concentration of Native Americans!

ok:
1-Wise can write any article he wants, but right before the Skins' biggest game in 6 years, all he chooses to write about is how the tribes in the Pacific Northwest don't like the name Redskins? I take issue with that. He's paid to be a Redskins' columnist, not "Redskins, but focusing on things completely unrelated to THE ACTUAL GAME" columns. And his second column spend no time taking about the Skins, and how this was a successful season, and how he was completely wrong about this team or anything to do with the Skins. It was on how Seattle overcame history and won a playoff game. Thats fine for the Seattle PI, but this is a WASHINGTON NEWSPAPER.
2-Also considers that just about every article he writes about the skins is negative and how they are going to fail, and they are doomed, and Lavar is an Angel and the Skins are oppressing him, and how the Skins' offseason moves are going to be terrible; he deserves every name in the book because he refuses to admit he was wrong. Every other writer at the Post will admit they were wrong about this team(except Kornheiser who was right), but Wise just doesn't want to discuss how much of a D-Bag he truly is when it comes to the SKins
3-On to the Native American point: A sizable majority of Native Americans aren't offended by the name Redskins. I've seen Redskins, Chiefs, Indians and Braves hats on Native Reservations worn by natives. They dig it, and its the PC police who want to get rid of it. Wise has an agenda, and he's willing to find any little group of people who are mildly offended by it to promote it. The Logo for the Seahawks is a bad imitation of the Pacific Northwest tribes' totem poles. Why isn't Wise mentioning that?

(5) I will personally swear to it that just because you are from New York, does not mean that you cannot bleed burgundy and gold-in fact, it is a lot harder to do so when you are born and raised in enemy territory!

He came from the NY Times. And considering that he has nothing but venom for the Skins when he writes, he would be better off as a Giants(or Cowboys or Eagles) beat writer.

[Farmer Ted]

What a tool. True that right side sucks, but Pittsburgh sent more men than blockers half the time. If Peyton is so great at calling audibles how about calling a screen or draw or pulling people back into protection, or how about making better throws on your quick drops.

Yeah, the 4th and 16 play at the end of the game was classic. I watched it 3 or 4 times. It was hilarious watching Peyton standing over center, and doing his pointing routine. He was looking to the right the whole time, as Joey Porter just sort of casually tip-toed up to the line. And then came in from the left side and blind-sided Peyton before he had a chance to exhale. Great play.

[cal_junior]

And his second column spend no time taking about the Skins, and how this was a successful season It was on how Seattle overcame history and won a playoff game. Thats fine for the Seattle PI, but this is a WASHINGTON NEWSPAPER.

History is written by winners. I would be willing to bet that if the Skins won the game the Seattle PI would have had at least one of their columnists (especially if they had four at the game) write about the improbable seven-win streak and return to glory of JG and the Redskins.

[akhhorus]

History is written by winners.

Actually, its not. History's written by whomever can write it down.

I would be willing to bet that if the Skins won the game the Seattle PI would have had at least one of their columnists (especially if they had four at the game) write about the improbable seven-win streak and return to glory of JG and the Redskins.

And do you think that same columnist for Seattle would only mention the Seahawks with something like this:

"And now, they take out Washington, 20-10, in an NFC semifinal playoff game."(this is the only mention of the Redskins in his article)

And not even talk about how the team got there at all? If the roles were reversed, and the Skins were playing at home with the 13-3 record and the Hawks overcame a lot to get where they were, would that same Seattle columnist barely notice that the Hawks existed?

[BurgundyNGold]

Don't worry, my ego has already has an international agency to monitor it closely and is currently occupied by a South Asian UN peacekeeping force.
Great, a $50 "contribution" and you're on your way. ;)

[BurgundyNGold]

(4) I cannot agree with what you said about Mike Wise and the article about the Skins' name. Just because you disagree with his viewpoint on the team name does not make him worthy of insult (as to the 2nd article you referenced, I cannot remember it well, it must not have made much of an impression on me). I can understand it if you also did not like the timing of the article, but, after all, he was in the Pacific Northwest, which has a heavier concentration of Native Americans!
First off, welcome to the site. Secondly, are you honestly defending Mike Wise? Prepare to be baptised... by fire.

Mike Wise only exists as a hired gun to attack the Redskins and can barely contain his joy when anything goes wrong that he can write about. When things don't go wrong he tries to make the news by writing inflammatory stories the week before the big game. He routinely cites unnamed, uncorroborated sources being the ONLY person to report items, sometimes using his fellow journalists as sources. Did I mention that none of what he has reported under these sources has ever come to pass? He's a hack who should stick to basketball.

As for the Native American story, Mike Wise is a hypocrite. He is the only who made an off color joke about West Virginians which went over like a lead balloon. He then decided to try and redirect blame in his "apology" column, making the whole article about the Redskins name, as if somehow that absolves him of his insensitivity. How pathetic.

Mike Wise is a hack as a journalist and a tool as a human being. As a journalist, I hope Danny revokes his press pass next year; I will probably write a letter and start a petition to that effect sometime in the offseason. As a human being, if he were on fire I wouldn't relieve myself in his general direction for fear of impeding the flame.

[MONK_in_HOF]

Mike Wise is a hack as a journalist and a tool as a human being. As a journalist, I hope Danny revokes his press pass next year; I will probably write a letter and start a petition to that effect sometime in the offseason. As a human being, if he were on fire I wouldn't relieve myself in his general direction for fear of impeding the flame.
Just let me know where to sign my name. But why does he need a press pass anyway with all his unnamed sources?

[helimech24]

I think we could swap Betts for Bryan Johnson straight up. But I like Kevin Curtis and/or Shaun McDonald.


Isn't Kevin Curtis known more for his speed than his size? I only bring this up because I think a big possession receiver would be a better pick up as the #2 in our system. We will need another speedster to challenge the safeties deep, but isn't Patten another speedy small guy?

[akhhorus]

Isn't Kevin Curtis known more for his speed than his size? I only bring this up because I think a big possession receiver would be a better pick up as the #2 in our system. We will need another speedster to challenge the safeties deep, but isn't Patten another speedy small guy?

Both of them are, Patten is probably suited to the Z position at WR; but Moss, Curtis and Patten would give defensive secondaries fits with their speed alone.

[CNYSkinFan]

Bein in enemy territory I haven not got as mad at wise and Jenkins as the rest of the people on this site have. I am used to negative articles about the Redskins year round from the NY "columnists" and I don't have that "They are my hometown paper" betrayal that some on this board have. But this year both of them have gotten me pretty disgusted with their negative when we lose NEVER being balanced by p[ositive articles when we win. I just simply never read a Jenkins or Wise column.....period. I love reading the other columnists because they are fair (in the case of Shapiro and Wilbon) and funny (in the case of Kornheiser) and write positive stuff AND negative stuff. I don't need only positive news, i like fair and balanced (oh that phrase *shudder*) reporting, but Wise and Jenkins are all negative all the time. Even Pasquareli has written positive things about the Redskins this year, you would think Wise and Jenkins would do it as well.

[BurgundyNGold]

Just let me know where to sign my name. But why does he need a press pass anyway with all his unnamed sources?
LOL, he doesn't, but I want to make sure that Danny knows that we, the fans do not like Wise or what he tries to do to our team. I want him to know that he can and should cut that little weasel out of the locker room and relegate him to the parking lot with the rest of us.

This has a three pronged effect. First, it cuts out a cancer. Secondly, it sends a message to the Post that destructive, divisive forces will be eliminated... so don't even try it. Third, it weakens Wise's already tenuous credibility as anybody in the know will that he has no real access. Slowly, his Redskin reporting will wither on the vine. Problem solved.

[cal_junior]

A sizable majority of Native Americans aren't offended by the name Redskins. They dig it, and its the PC police who want to get rid of it.

That simply isn't true. I spent the better part of a day last year researching this topic, primarily because I love the Redskins name and wanted an argument to counter the PC police of which you speak. What I found was that depending on which side of the issue you consult, the polling numbers are drastically different. Yes, there are Native Americans who like the name and logo, but to say a "sizable majority" is on one side of the fence is not accurate.

My question to you would be, what if only 30 percent of Native American had a problem with the nickname, the other side of your "sizable majority". Would the opinion of 800,000 US citizens not be important enough to consider a change? As I said, I would like to see the team keep its name, but this is by no means a black and white issue.

[cal_junior]

Secondly, it sends a message to the Post that destructive, divisive forces will be eliminated... so don't even try it.

Let's detail what's happened since Wise was hired by the Post:

- Joe Gibbs, the greatest coach ever, was re-hired by the Skins
- The team returned to the postseason for the first time since 1999.

Personally, I don't mind if Wise continues to be so "destructive" and "divisive." Maybe he can destroy us to the Super Bowl next year.

[BurgundyNGold]

Let's detail what's happened since Wise was hired by the Post:

- Joe Gibbs, the greatest coach ever, was re-hired by the Skins
- The team returned to the postseason for the first time since 1999.

Personally, I don't mind if Wise continues to be so "destructive" and "divisive." Maybe he can destroy us to the Super Bowl next year.
Personally, I prefer that Gibbs and the players spend their energies and efforts on football, not having to deal with engineered distractions by your boy.

[cal_junior]

Personally, I prefer that Gibbs and the players spend their energies and efforts on football, not having to deal with engineered distractions by your boy.

But you understand my point. I haven't seen one bit of evidence that the team was impacted negatively by the media this season. If anything, the general feeling that the team was no good (mostly at the national level) might have given the Skins an 'us against the world' mentality.

[lakeskin]

Couldn't agree more on your assesment with Shaun Alexander. I was actually thinking the same thing when he went out. We probably still would have lost the game considering the ineptitude of our offense, but our defensive gameplan was thrown out the window and we never could consitently recover defensively.

[akhhorus]

That simply isn't true. I spent the better part of a day last year researching this topic, primarily because I love the Redskins name and wanted an argument to counter the PC police of which you speak. What I found was that depending on which side of the issue you consult, the polling numbers are drastically different. Yes, there are Native Americans who like the name and logo, but to say a "sizable majority" is on one side of the fence is not accurate.

I get it straight from the horse's mouth. One of my best friends here is a Cherokee who does Native American history, and when we went to her people's reservation in NC, I saw about 100 Skins' related things and plenty more from other teams with Native-related names. And when I mentioned that I was a skins' fan, they said that most natives are fans of the Skins, chiefs, braves etc because its a pride thing for them. And they said this isn't just for Cherokees, its for every tribe in the US. They think its cool, and don't understand the fuss over it. So, believe whatever PC claptrap you want Carl.

My question to you would be, what if only 30 percent of Native American had a problem with the nickname, the other side of your "sizable majority". Would the opinion of 800,000 US citizens not be important enough to consider a change? As I said, I would like to see the team keep its name, but this is by no means a black and white issue.

If 70% of a people have no problem with it, then I don't. If one person is offended by any name, then any organization that has a name of any group must be eliminated. No Patriots, Giants, Quakers, Demon Decons, Blue Devils, Tarheels, Cavaliers, etc etc etc.

And Carl, I've noticed that you're not defending Wise's articles anymore...wonder why that is....

[akhhorus]

But you understand my point. I haven't seen one bit of evidence that the team was impacted negatively by the media this season. If anything, the general feeling that the team was no good (mostly at the national level) might have given the Skins an 'us against the world' mentality.

That's not the point. We as fans shouldn't have to suffer through schmucks like Mike Wise and Sally Jenkins, especially when they won't admit that they were completely wrong about a sports team. Thats what really pisses me off-they just slammed the skins all offseason about Gibbs and the moves and when they turned out ot be great moves, there's nary a peep from them about how they were wrong. Wilbon, Kornheiser and even Lenny P admitted they were wrong.

[helimech24]

Both of them are, Patten is probably suited to the Z position at WR; but Moss, Curtis and Patten would give defensive secondaries fits with their speed alone.

I think I would rather have a possession receiver that can use his body to get position in the intermediate area of the field than another speedster that will have to juke or run past to get the ball. I like both of those players, but I don't think they will go after the ball like Moss does, so that scares me in the middle of the field with safeties and LBs trying to hit them.

[BurgundyNGold]

I think I would rather have a possession receiver that can use his body to get position in the intermediate area of the field than another speedster that will have to juke or run past to get the ball. I like both of those players, but I don't think they will go after the ball like Moss does, so that scares me in the middle of the field with safeties and LBs trying to hit them.
A speedster will open up both intermediate and deep routes. Taking the safety off the top should help Moss and keep 8 men out of the box. You have to respect speed. That's why I think that it's very possible that the Redskins get two new WRs this year, one via FA or trade and one in the draft.

[akhhorus]

I think I would rather have a possession receiver that can use his body to get position in the intermediate area of the field than another speedster that will have to juke or run past to get the ball. I like both of those players, but I don't think they will go after the ball like Moss does, so that scares me in the middle of the field with safeties and LBs trying to hit them.

You are correct, but Gibbs loves speed. I think he might fall back and go after a guy like Jurevicius, but if he can get another tough burner at wr, he'll do it.

[helimech24]

A speedster will open up both intermediate and deep routes. Taking the safety off the top should help Moss and keep 8 men out of the box. You have to respect speed. That's why I think that it's very possible that the Redskins get two new WRs this year, one via FA or trade and one in the draft.

But we have 2 speedsters in Patten and Moss which didn't open up anything except for Moss. I think we need someone that can take the hit and fight for position over the middle rather than someone who has to depend on speed. Patten had to depend on speed instead of size and length. We need a big tall possession IMO because we have the speed already.

[helimech24]

You are correct, but Gibbs loves speed. I think he might fall back and go after a guy like Jurevicius, but if he can get another tough burner at wr, he'll do it.

I would love for us to get JJ or McCardell in free agency, and then either draft of sign another speed guy in case Patten or Moss goes down for a couple games. That way we don't get screwed like this year.

[BurgundyNGold]

But we have 2 speedsters in Patten and Moss which didn't open up anything except for Moss. I think we need someone that can take the hit and fight for position over the middle rather than someone who has to depend on speed. Patten had to depend on speed instead of size and length. We need a big tall possession IMO because we have the speed already.
Patten will be in his 10th season next year and coming back from a knee injury. That usually means that he will not be back up to what he was until the year AFTER the return. You can't count on that for his 10th season and maybe not in his 11th season. We need 2 WRs, a speed guy and a big bodied guy. Plus a true TE.

[cal_junior]

So, believe whatever PC claptrap you want Carl . . . If one person is offended by any name

You really believe that this whole issue is "PC claptrap" That's dangerous, close-minded thinking my friend. The opinon of Americans (and there are a heck of a lot more than one that are offended) are not something I can dismiss so quickly. Just because you talk to 100 that felt one way doesn't mean there aren't hundreds of thousands who feel differently. Not being Native American myself, I have a hard time marginalizing their beliefs quite so quickly.


And Carl, I've noticed that you're not defending Wise's articles anymore...wonder why that is....

The best article I read on the Skins this year, without a close second, was the one Wise did on Cooley.

[helimech24]

Patten will be in his 10th season next year and coming back from a knee injury. That usually means that he will not be back up to what he was until the year AFTER the return. You can't count on that for his 10th season and maybe not in his 11th season. We need 2 WRs, a speed guy and a big bodied guy. Plus a true TE.

I agree with that statement. After what happened this year, it would be silly to not to add a lot of depth to our WR core. I just replied to AKH and said the same thing.

Why do we need a true TE if we have Sellers, Cooley, Royal, and Robert Johnson. I know that Johnson was injured this year, but don't you think that we have other areas to fill, and we can give Johnson a chance in his second season?

[akhhorus]

You really believe that this whole issue is "PC claptrap" That's dangerous, close-minded thinking my friend. The opinon of Americans (and there are a heck of a lot more than one that are offended) are not something I can dismiss so quickly. Just because you talk to 100 that felt one way doesn't mean there aren't hundreds of thousands who feel differently. Not being Native American myself, I have a hard time marginalizing their beliefs quite so quickly.

And if there was a groundswell of Native complaining about the names, I would be more sympathetic to it. But I have not seen this. What I have seen is isolated people(the 7 activists who sued) who are offended. No tribe has joined their lawsuit, and only 1 inter-tribal organization says they support it(but they refuse to join it or file an amicus brief in favor of it).

The best article I read on the Skins this year, without a close second, was the one Wise did on Cooley.

And that was a human interest piece, not a football one. Wise has shown that he cannot intelligently cover actual football.

[BurgundyNGold]

I agree with that statement. After what happened this year, it would be silly to not to add a lot of depth to our WR core. I just replied to AKH and said the same thing.
LaVar for Donte' Stallworth? :D

Why do we need a true TE if we have Sellers, Cooley, Royal, and Robert Johnson. I know that Johnson was injured this year, but don't you think that we have other areas to fill, and we can give Johnson a chance in his second season?
Sellers and Cooley are HB's, which is what they should be. A true TE can exploit vertical seams in the middle of the defense and can create mismathes in coverage in ways that Robert Royal just doesn't have the ability to do. I'm sure they'll give Johnson a chance next season too but in all truth, if he were better than Royal, Gibbs wouldn't have stashed him on IR in midseason for the roster spot. ;)

[helimech24]

LaVar for Donte' Stallworth? :D


Sellers and Cooley are HB's, which is what they should be. A true TE can exploit vertical seams in the middle of the defense and can create mismathes in coverage in ways that Robert Royal just doesn't have the ability to do. I'm sure they'll give Johnson a chance next season too but in all truth, if he were better than Royal, Gibbs wouldn't have stashed him on IR in midseason for the roster spot. ;)


What I was thinking to clear our roster and get some WRs in return is Ramsey to buffalo for Moulds, Lavar and Betts to Arizona for Kevin Johnson and a 2 or 3 pick.

As far as Sellers and Cooley, I thought they were both TEs and run blockers. Cooley seems to get open very often over the middle and in the flat and makes mismatches all the time. I also think that with 2 more receivers in the game, will we really need to send our TE out into coverage or keep him in for protection?

[BurgundyNGold]

What I was thinking to clear our roster and get some WRs in return is Ramsey to buffalo for Moulds, Lavar and Betts to Arizona for Kevin Johnson and a 2 or 3 pick.
Betts isn't going anywhere. He a more than capable backup and his pricetag is pretty cheap. When his contract is up, we'll probably let him walk, but until then I think he stays here.

[helimech24]

Betts isn't going anywhere. He a more than capable backup and his pricetag is pretty cheap. When his contract is up, we'll probably let him walk, but until then I think he stays here.

I think I would rather resign the Rock and move Nemo up than to have Betts back. He is a good back-up but he struggles to get short yardage, and he has no breakaway speed. He is an average running back that can catch IMO.

[akhhorus]

And here's some polls for you to chew over Carl:

Annenberg Poll:
9/2004
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:o5w_sD-3LeIJ:www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/naes/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr.pdf+Native+American+Poll+Redskins&hl=en&client=firefox-a

90% of Natives polled don't find "redskins" offensive, 9% do.


Harris Poll 2002:
http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nrprint030802.html

81% of Natives aren't offended by sports teams with Indian names. 83% say they should not stop using the names. 75% of natives don't think these names of sports teams contribute to discrimination. The name "Redskins" isn't controversial either; 69 percent of Native Americans don't object to it.

[cal_junior]

And if there was a groundswell of Native complaining about the names, I would be more sympathetic to it. But I have not seen this. What I have seen is isolated people(the 7 activists who sued) who are offended. No tribe has joined their lawsuit, and only 1 inter-tribal organization says they support it(but they refuse to join it or file an amicus brief in favor of it).

I think you are arguing with yourself here. I too believe the Skins should keep their nickname. My only point was that when people are offended by something on a racial level, even it is a small group, I can't write if off as PC claptrap. These are real people we're talking about here.


And that was a human interest piece, not a football one. Wise has shown that he cannot intelligently cover actual football.

It was both a human interest piece and a football one. Virtually all of his stories are human interst.

[akhhorus]

I think you are arguing with yourself here. I too believe the Skins should keep their nickname. My only point was that when people are offended by something on a racial level, even it is a small group, I can't write if off as PC claptrap. These are real people we're talking about here.

Oh please carl, you're the one defending Wise for it, but you support my position? So you're just a Wise apologist? Which is it Carl? And I believe the polls I posted say everything else I need to say on the subject.


It was both a human interest piece and a football one. Virtually all of his stories are human interst.

No, it had nothing to do with football. It was strictly human interest about a football player. Again, Wise has shown that he can't write about football to save his life. And since he can do only human interest, maybe he should go to another section and keep his crap off the sports page.

[BurgundyNGold]

And here's some polls for you to chew over Carl:

Annenberg Poll:
9/2004
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:o5w_sD-3LeIJ:www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/naes/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr.pdf+Native+American+Poll+Redskins&hl=en&client=firefox-a

90% of Natives polled don't find "redskins" offensive, 9% do.


Harris Poll 2002:
http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nrprint030802.html

81% of Natives aren't offended by sports teams with Indian names. 83% say they should not stop using the names. 75% of natives don't think these names of sports teams contribute to discrimination. The name "Redskins" isn't controversial either; 69 percent of Native Americans don't object to it.

Mike Wise and his sycophants?

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/1879/owned1ro3bp.th.jpg (http://img18.imageshack.us/my.php?image=owned1ro3bp.jpg)

[cal_junior]

And here's some polls for you to chew over Carl:

Annenberg Poll:
9/2004
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:o5w_sD-3LeIJ:www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/naes/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr.pdf+Native+American+Poll+Redskins&hl=en&client=firefox-a

90% of Natives polled don't find "redskins" offensive, 9% do.


Harris Poll 2002:
http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nrprint030802.html

81% of Natives aren't offended by sports teams with Indian names. 83% say they should not stop using the names. 75% of natives don't think these names of sports teams contribute to discrimination. The name "Redskins" isn't controversial either; 69 percent of Native Americans don't object to it.

Again, you're preaching to the choir here carl. I agree there is no evidence to suggest the Skins should get rid of their nickame. Do you even read my posts?

[akhhorus]

Again, you're preaching to the choir here carl. I agree there is no evidence to suggest the Skins should get rid of their nickame. Do you even read my posts?

yes I do, and you're the one defending Wise for saying something you disagree with. So, that would make you a Wise apologist. Go back and read what you wrote. You sound like you agree with Wise, but when cornered, you're trying to back out. Nice try.

[NoDannyNo]

Ok, boys and girls. Play nicely now.

Can we get back on topic please?

:Peace:

[BurgundyNGold]

I think you are arguing with yourself here. I too believe the Skins should keep their nickname. My only point was that when people are offended by something on a racial level, even it is a small group, I can't write if off as PC claptrap. These are real people we're talking about here.
Actually, a small group claiming to represent a much larger contstituency by being louder and more obnoxious is pretty much the going rate in this town, regardless of the issue. However, when someone succumbs to the perceived political pressures or advances the cause of such an extreme minority, why shouldn't it be written off as the fringe element? This is the second time Wise has tried to advance his putrid agenda via this particlaur tack. The numbers aren't there, but he'll never admit that. He'll never admit anything.

It was both a human interest piece and a football one. Virtually all of his stories are human interst.
Then put it in the "Style" section.

[BurgundyNGold]

Ok, boys and girls. Play nicely now.

Can we get back on topic please?

:Peace:

No NoDannyNo.

:D

[helimech24]

No NoDannyNo.

:D

Yeah, reply to what I said buddy!:lol1:

Here it is:

I think I would rather resign the Rock and move Nemo up than to have Betts back. He is a good back-up but he struggles to get short yardage, and he has no breakaway speed. He is an average running back that can catch IMO.

[NoDannyNo]

No NoDannyNo.

:D

Too funny! At least we are keeping our sense of humor.

:lol1:

[BurgundyNGold]

Yeah, reply to what I said buddy!:lol1:
We'll see. I think Betts has more potential than either of those guys. However, he's always hurt and puts the ball on the ground to much. His special teams spot as a returned gives him double duty too. If we sign a returner, it may be a sign that Betts might be gone.

[helimech24]

We'll see. I think Betts has more potential than either of those guys. However, he's always hurt and puts the ball on the ground to much. His special teams spot as a returned gives him double duty too. If we sign a returner, it may be a sign that Betts might be gone.

I think he struggles for the most part here too. Except for the one return, which was great, he barely made it to the 20 yard line all season. IMO, we need two new returners because I think Betts is to slow and Brown scares the hell out of me.

[BurgundyNGold]

I think he struggles for the most part here too. Except for the one return, which was great, he barely made it to the 20 yard line all season. IMO, we need two new returners because I think Betts is to slow and Brown scares the hell out of me.
I agree wholeheartedly with this.

[helimech24]

I agree wholeheartedly with this.
:dance:

[cal_junior]

yes I do, and you're the one defending Wise for saying something you disagree with. So, that would make you a Wise apologist. Go back and read what you wrote. You sound like you agree with Wise, but when cornered, you're trying to back out. Nice try.

I never did that, in fact. At no point have I defended the Wise piece on the Skins nickname. I have backed out of nothing. You were marginalizing a small segment of the country and I was calling you on it.

[akhhorus]

I never did that, in fact. At no point have I defended the Wise piece on the Skins nickname. I have backed out of nothing. You were marginalizing a small segment of the country and I was calling you on it.

No, you were defending Wise from my criticism about the total Seattle article, and after I posted a retort to your defense, you mysteriously changed topics (wonder why that is, eh?) and criticized me for saying that a majority of natives aren't offended by the name Redskins(which I backed up with poll numbers). Since Wise's column before the game was attacking the skins for the name and holding up Seattle-area tribes as people who are offended by the name, and I attacked Wise for writing about it and for his subject matter and how he was in error because a majority of the natives didn't mind it or weren't offended by it, and then you attacked me for it, you are defending Wise. I haven't marginalized anyone and they actually agree with me. Maybe when you do your "research" on the topic, listen or talk to someone else by these shrill activists who filed the suit.

[cal_junior]

No, you were defending Wise from my criticism about the total Seattle article, .
I accept your apology for saying I did something I never did. Such as it was, I guess.

you mysteriously changed topics (wonder why that is, eh?) and criticized me for saying that a majority of natives aren't offended by the name Redskins

It seemed like you didn't understand the way newspaper coverage works, so I didn't feel it necessary to continue that debate. That's why I dropped it. Once I saw your remark about Native Americans (which, BTW, you hadn't defended in any way at the time I read it) I commented on it. And I prefaced the entire thing by saying that I came to learn more about the subject because I think the whole thing is silly and I had been debating those that would like the Skins to change. Something I continue to do.


Since Wise's column before the game was attacking the skins for the name and holding up Seattle-area tribes as people who are offended by the name, and I attacked Wise for writing about it and for his subject matter and how he was in error because a majority of the natives didn't mind it or weren't offended by it, and then you attacked me for it, you are defending Wise.
Uh, no. I really hope you understand why this isn't true. I was debating you on your specific comments about Native Americans, never about Wise. You can debate the things I actually say, but I simply can't defend the opinions you want me to have.

I haven't marginalized anyone

Uh, PC-claptrap?

[akhhorus]

I accept your apology for saying I did something I never did. Such as it was, I guess.

I didn't apologize. You were defending Wise and defending his views on the issue. I took issue with that and you're desperately trying to reverse course to save face.

It seemed like you didn't understand the way newspaper coverage works, so I didn't feel it necessary to continue that debate. That's why I dropped it. Once I saw your remark about Native Americans (which, BTW, you hadn't defended in any way at the time I read it) I commented on it. And I prefaced the entire thing by saying that I came to learn more about the subject because I think the whole thing is silly and I had been debating those that would like the Skins to change. Something I continue to do.

What remark would that be? That most Natives agree with me? They do. And I have defended it. Nice try again trying to change the subject.

And no, you didn't start this debate trying to learn more about this issue, you say that you had researched the issue last year. Again, you're trying to change the subject. And you said that the polls were split. I would love to see what polls you're referring to. All the polls I've seen are in favor of the Redskins' name.

Uh, no. I really hope you understand why this isn't true. I was debating you on your specific comments about Native Americans, never about Wise. You can debate the things I actually say, but I simply can't defend the opinions you want me to have.

You started this defending Wise over his second column, but then backed away and you switched to defending his views(not directly, but you're defending his viewpoint, so you're defending the column) on something he's not correct about. And now you're trying to back out of your comments since you were cornered.

Uh, PC-claptrap?

Again, trying to change the subject. You criticize me for belittling the Natives, but now you're saying that I'm belittling Political correct people?

[NoDannyNo]

Dallas QB Danny White calls a desperate, last second audible at the line of scrimmage.

Tom Landry, the normally stoic, reserved and unflappable coach of the Cowboys, becomes unhinged, screaming uncharacteristically from the sideline in vain to his confused QB: NO! DANNY, NO!!!

:lol1:

Just a little humor here to lighten things up a bit...

[BurgundyNGold]

Dallas QB Danny White calls a desperate, last second audible at the line of scrimmage.

Tom Landry, the normally stoic, reserved and unflappable coach of the Cowboys, becomes unhinged, screaming uncharacteristically from the sideline in vain to his confused QB: NO! DANNY, NO!!!

:lol1:

Just a little humor here to lighten things up a bit...
LMAO! I remember that. And here I was thinking that your screen name is pleading with Snyder to not do something impulsive. :D

[akhhorus]

Dallas QB Danny White calls a desperate, last second audible at the line of scrimmage.

Tom Landry, the normally stoic, reserved and unflappable coach of the Cowboys, becomes unhinged, screaming uncharacteristically from the sideline in vain to his confused QB: NO! DANNY, NO!!!

:lol1:

Just a little humor here to lighten things up a bit...

yeah, we need to get back on topic here. Why don't you throw out a new topic for us to discuss here whilst cal_junior gets relegated to the Paintedbird Memorial Ignore list.

[BurgundyNGold]

yeah, we need to get back on topic here. Why don't you throw out a new topic for us to discuss here whilst cal_junior gets relegated to the Paintedbird Memorial Ignore list.
You have one too?!

[akhhorus]

You have one too?!

I think its become standard for HR members now....

[NoDannyNo]

LMAO! I remember that. And here I was thinking that your screen name is pleading with Snyder to not do something impulsive. :D

Wow! You remember that? One of the greatest moments in Redskin history.

Sweet.

[NoDannyNo]

yeah, we need to get back on topic here. Why don't you throw out a new topic for us to discuss here whilst cal_junior gets relegated to the Paintedbird Memorial Ignore list.

He he, I would if I could but I'm still a papoose!

:lol1:

[cal_junior]

Is this how you argue a point, use facts that are completely innacurate? I bet you always win.
I'll go through this one more time and unless you can at least concede what the facts are, I'm done with this. If you can't it means either you don't want to remember what was posted or you don't understand, either way there would be no point in continuing.

You were defending Wise and defending his views on the issue.

This is not true. Again, this is not true. I defended the Post's coverage of the game (along with saying I enjoyed the Cooley article). That's it. Saying different is putting words in my mouth. Frankly I have no idea what Wise's view on the subject is, so how could I defend it?


What remark would that be? That most Natives agree with me? They do. And I have defended it. Nice try again trying to change the subject.
Actually, it was the one where you said a large majority of Native Americans were on the side of Skins, a point you gave no evidence for in your blog entry. Your 'stats' came later


And no, you didn't start this debate trying to learn more about this issue, you say that you had researched the issue last year. Again, you're trying to change the subject.

Maybe you just don't read carefully enough. You simply can't argue against me by using something I never said. I prefaced my first post on this subject by saying that I looked at the issue more carefully a year ago. I never said I started this debate to learn more about the subject. Please, look closely at my posts.

You started this defending Wise over his second column, but then backed away and you switched to defending his views(not directly, but you're defending his viewpoint, so you're defending the column) on something he's not correct about. And now you're trying to back out of your comments since you were cornered.

Again, go back and look closer before assigning me an opinion. I started this by defending the Post's coverage, never a word that Wise wrote. And I never 'switched' anything. This thread is about your blog entry which included both topics, the second of which I hadn't read until after my first few entries. Once I saw that, I wrote a new post, having nothing to do with the previous discussion.

---

Some info related to the general feeling on mascots in the Native American community:

http://www.allarm.org/articles/resolution_list.html

http://aistm.org/fr.groups.htm

[akhhorus]

He he, I would if I could but I'm still a papoose!

:lol1:

No no, start a new topic here relevant to what we were discussing.

[BurgundyNGold]

I'm not really in on this, so I'm only going to inject points that are relevant.
This is not true. Again, this is not true. I defended the Post's coverage of the game (along with saying I enjoyed the Cooley article). That's it. Saying different is putting words in my mouth. Frankly I have no idea what Wise's view on the subject is, so how could I defend it?
Wise wrote an article lambasting the name as racist just as the season began. He's on record with his opinion and it was a spineless and dastardly way to attempt to refocus debate from his faux pas to a non sequitur point. Way to be a man, Mikey.

Actually, it was the one where you said a large majority of Native Americans were on the side of Skins, a point you gave no evidence for in your blog entry. Your 'stats' came later
And yet, we're supposed to take Mike Wise and his "unnamed sources" over someone who has earned a great deal of respect for knowing his facts up here? I'll tell you one thing, I might not agree with Akh all the time, but the man knows his facts.

Some info related to the general feeling on mascots in the Native American community:

http://www.allarm.org/articles/resolution_list.html

http://aistm.org/fr.groups.htm
These are two worthless links. And I venture to guess that the American Jewish Committee, Asian American Journalist Association, Calvert Investment Group, etc. aren't Native American groups. Neither are the majority of these "organizations" you cited. They're politically motivated, misguided souls who tragically don't have a message board to fill their time as an outlet. ;)

[NoDannyNo]

Right. Before that, though, I have a correction to make. It wasn't an audible Danny was calling, he was doing a long snap count to draw the Skins offsides on a 4th-and-1, but the play clock was running out.

The second half played like a sad, slow country song for the Cowboys. Their confusion reached its fretful height on the first drive of the third quarter. On fourth and one from his 49, White tried a long count, hoping to draw the Redskins offsides.

With four seconds left on the 30-second clock and Landry on the sideline yelling, No!" White did a no-no: he took the snap and handed off to surprised running back Ron Springs, who was hit for a two-yard loss. Butz said he heard White arguing with center Tom Rafferty.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sports/redskins/longterm/1997/history/allart/dw1983b.htm

Still sweet.

:lol1:

[akhhorus]

These are two worthless links. And I venture to guess that the American Jewish Committee, Asian American Journalist Association, Calvert Investment Group, etc. aren't Native American groups. Neither are the majority of these "organizations" you cited. They're politically motivated, misguided souls who tragically don't have a message board to fill their time as an outlet. ;)

Two things destroy those links' credibility:
1-The poll numbers that are overwhelming that the Natives don't mind or support the names.
2-They play the Hitler card really quickly. So our treatment of the Native Americans is to blame for the Holocaust?

[cal_junior]

These are two worthless links. And I venture to guess that the American Jewish Committee, Asian American Journalist Association, Calvert Investment Group, etc. aren't Native American groups. Neither are the majority of these "organizations" you cited. They're politically motivated, misguided souls who tragically don't have a message board to fill their time as an outlet. ;)

So because those three groups aren't Native American, the links are worthless? Not sure I follow.

[BurgundyNGold]

So because those three groups aren't Native American, the links are worthless? Not sure I follow.
It's becoming clear that you have a hard time following a lot of things, so I'll type this slowly for you.

You specifically mentioned that you would not be so quick to speak for all Native Americans when Akh offered his own personal sampling from the sum of his experiences and those of his associates. OK, I can see that. When he offered up not one, but two polls that showed that a cross section of Native Americans overwhelmingly have no problem with the Redskins name, you ignored those facts as presented and proceeded to post two non sequitur links to random groups of people who feel that Native American sports names are offensive; however, the majority of which are not even Native American based. That makes their opinions about as valid to this discussion as my opinions regarding used baby diaper dumping along the New Jersey shorleline.

In summary, since the crux of your argument was that it was offensive to Native Americans and you offered up links that listed real eastate investment groups as groups that supported changing of Native American names, I would most assuredly say, yes, the links you provided are worthless and are out of order.

[NoDannyNo]

I sense there is a reply coming...

:lol1:

[cal_junior]

I sense there is a reply coming...

:lol1:

I don't think I can. Very little of BnG's last post has anything to do with what I've been discussing with Akh.
How about this for a reply? Go Skins!

[NoDannyNo]

I don't think I can. Very little of BnG's last post has anything to do with what I've been discussing with Akh.
How about this for a reply? Go Skins!

Roger that. Give it up man.

Go Skins, 2006!

:lol1:

[BurgundyNGold]

I don't think I can. Very little of BnG's last post has anything to do with what I've been discussing with Akh.
How about this for a reply? Go Skins!
:confused:

I actually thought I had stepped through it with you rather clearly, alternating between your and Akhs talking points along the way. Oh, well. You and I have had discussions about reading comprehension before, so there really isn't much new that I can add to that.

I do like how you ended your post though. That's something we can agree on. :awesomewo

[Paintedbird]

http://www.hailredskins.com/blog/index.php?p=232

You analysis is accurate, not wierd. I'm glad you made the central point. I strongly disagree with you that an injured Brunell should have been playing, but I admit to finding your piece enlightening. Exceptional post!

[NoDannyNo]

Tickets, tickets...

...in recognition of my promotion to "Scalper".

Oh, you mean scalper...woo woo woo!!

:lol1:

[cal_junior]

:confused:

I actually thought I had stepped through it with you rather clearly, alternating between your and Akhs talking points along the way. Oh, well. You and I have had discussions about reading comprehension before,

Did you really? Or did you assign arguments to me that were convenient for your purposes? C'mon, be honest.

Lets' try again, shall we:

When he offered up not one, but two polls that showed that a cross section of Native Americans overwhelmingly have no problem with the Redskins name, you ignored those facts as presented

At no time have I represented the opinion that I believe any certain amount of Native Americans are for or against the Redskins nickname. I just said I think the issue is more gray then Akh did. And I followed that by saying I thought he was being dismissive of the NA's we do know that oppose the nickname. Since all of that is the case, there would be no reason for me to respond to anything he posted. I AGREE WITH HIM COMPLETELY AND ALWAYS HAVE. I found those same polls he posted a year ago when I looked into the issue.

and proceeded to post two non sequitur links to random groups of people who feel that Native American sports names are offensive; ; however, the majority of which are not even Native American based. That makes their opinions about as valid to this discussion as my opinions regarding used baby diaper dumping along the New Jersey shorleline.

"random"? I suppose I'm guilty of mislabeling the lead-in to the links, in that only one was NA-exclusive. Clearly you did not read both links, which was the reason for my confusion on the earlier post. Take a closer look.
Although I'm not sure why I even get attacked for those because they were meant only as an FYI. I was making no specific argument with those links.


the crux of your argument was that it was offensive to Native Americans

Really? Nobody told me. Can I play this game too? Ummm, the crux of your argument is that the Moon is made of horse farts and gumdrops. Seriously, the crux of my argument in this thread is as follows: 1. I understand why Wise wrote the Hawks-specific column for Sunday 2. I don't believe the Skins should change their nickname. 3. I don't think a group that is racially offended by something should be dismissed because they are low in number. Being white myself, I have a tough time doing that.

the links you provided are worthless and are out of order.

"Out of order? You're out of order! You're out of order! The whole trial is out of order! They're out of order!"

[Paintedbird]

I don't think I can. Very little of BnG's last post has anything to do with what I've been discussing with Akh.
How about this for a reply? Go Skins!


Welcome to the reality of discussing anything with the Akh/BmG combine. You spend part of your time denying what they pretend to think you said; part reading that all your sources are biased and intellectual/intuitive connecting of dots not proof enough of the obvious; and yet another part being called defective if you don't regard their smug remarks as subsitutes for corrective action. Their M.O.'s effect is to create moral, political, and intellectual stasis. In this they are beyond textbook conservatism.

[NoDannyNo]

"Out of order? You're out of order! You're out of order! The whole trial is out of order! They're out of order!"

Out of order, I'll show you out of order! You don't know what out of order is Mr. Trask! I'd show you but I'm too old, I'm too tired, and I'm too friggen blind. If I were the man I was five years ago I'd take a flame-thrower to this place. Out of order, who the hell do you think you're talking to? I've been around you know? There was a time I could see. And I have seen, boys like these, younger than these, their arms torn out, their legs ripped off. But there isn't nothin' like the sight of an amputated spirit, there is no prosthetic for that. You think you're merely sending this splendid foot-soldier back home to Oregon with his tail between his legs but I say that you are executing his soul. And why? Because he's not a Baird man. Baird men, you hurt this boy, you're going to be Baird Bums, the lot of ya. And Harry, Jimmy, Trent, wherever you are out there, frack you too.

:lol1:

[cal_junior]

Welcome to the reality of discussing anything with the Akh/BmG combine. You spend part of your time denying what they pretend to think you said; part reading that all your sources are biased and intellectual/intuitive connecting of dots not proof enough of the obvious; and yet another part being called defective if you don't regard their smug remarks as subsitutes for corrective action. Their M.O.'s effect is to create moral, political, and intellectual stasis. In this they are beyond textbook conservatism.

Oh my dear friend. You sound far too logical and well-spoken to have won a single argument. It must have been ugly.

[akhhorus]

Hey Cal, you might want to be friends with paintedbird, you'll both need each other after you find yourselfs on everyone's ignore lists soon. Just a piece of advice, don't listen his his rape allegations or his love affair(which borders on the stalker level) with Patrick Ramsey. if you have any questions on how Paintedbird is recieved around here, feel free to look at the warmhearted reactions he got in this thread:
http://hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?t=32204

Or any of his drug induced hallucinations in the politics forum.

[BurgundyNGold]

Did you really? Or did you assign arguments to me that were convenient for your purposes? C'mon, be honest.
I can only go off what you say. You dismissed the validity of Akh's assertion that the vast Native Americans don't have a problem with the naming conventions. When you were presented with polls that suggested otherwise -- to the tune of 80-90% of Native Americans not bothered by the naming -- you responded back with those two links of random organizations that were opposed to such naming. That was weak. I could've probably found equally as many idiot groups looking to End Women's Suffrage, lol.

At no time have I represented the opinion that I believe any certain amount of Native Americans are for or against the Redskins nickname. I just said I think the issue is more gray then Akh did. And I followed that by saying I thought he was being dismissive of the NA's we do know that oppose the nickname. Since all of that is the case, there would be no reason for me to respond to anything he posted. I AGREE WITH HIM COMPLETELY AND ALWAYS HAVE. I found those same polls he posted a year ago when I looked into the issue.
You're not opposed to the nickname. Great, we've got it. In fact, I don't think that anyone has debated that. And if you saw those same polls over a year ago and still saw fit to take exception with another person's assertion that Native Americans by and large do not have a problem with such naming, well that is just [argument for the sake of argument] is it not?

Not surprisingly, what you have done is somehow injected yourself smack dab in the middle of defending another of Mike Wise's articles, which is a fool's errand at best.

"random"? I suppose I'm guilty of mislabeling the lead-in to the links, in that only one was NA-exclusive. Clearly you did not read both links, which was the reason for my confusion on the earlier post. Take a closer look.
Although I'm not sure why I even get attacked for those because they were meant only as an FYI. I was making no specific argument with those links.
I followed the links. That's how I knew the totally unrelated nature of some of the dozens of groups listed on those pages. And don't come back with that smarmy "I was only trying to help" response. At the least, you were trying to muddy the water with irrelevant information. In the worst case, you were attempting to fool the stupid, lazy or drug addled into thinking you actually had something top back up your argument. Apparently, only Paintedbird took the bait.

Really? Nobody told me. Can I play this game too? Ummm, the crux of your argument is that the Moon is made of horse farts and gumdrops.
Sadly, you have more evidence of this than 1) Wise has in any of his accusations citing unnamed sources that you chose to defend, or 2) That Native Americans outside of a fringe group have a problem with the Washington Redskin name.

Seriously, the crux of my argument in this thread is as follows: 1. I understand why Wise wrote the Hawks-specific column for Sunday 2. I don't believe the Skins should change their nickname. 3. I don't think a group that is racially offended by something should be dismissed because they are low in number. Being white myself, I have a tough time doing that.
1) You can understand Wise doing something? Well, there's a departure from the norm. :rolleyes: Argument for the sake of argument, as per usual.
2) Great. And it's their ACTUAL name, not their nickname. The term "Skins" or the B&G are nicknames. Just like Carl is yours. ;)
3) As per a democracy, the smaller the number, the more that they should, in fact, be dismissed. That's how it works. If you can't get your agenda passed, get over it. You're on the fringe and it gets lonely out there. The good news is that medical science has progressed in leaps and bounds over the past decade or so. I'm pretty sure that there is a procedure to get those poles out of the collective arses of any fringe group. Even PETA.

"Out of order? You're out of order! You're out of order! The whole trial is out of order! They're out of order!"
Amusing. Irrelevant, but amusing.

[BurgundyNGold]

Oh my dear friend. You sound far too logical and well-spoken to have won a single argument. It must have been ugly.
I would most definitely choose my friends more wisely, pun intended. You will gain no credibility with that one in your corner. If you feel the need for companionship that badly, might I recommend you treat him like an ugly girlfriend that you PM back and forth with but that you make damn sure nobody sees you in public with.

If I actually went back and put together a list of links of PB's greatest drug induced hits, you might not be able to hold your bladder from the laughter.

[NoDannyNo]

This infighting is pathetic.

We lost the Seagulls game and emotions are high. Let's drop this puppy before somebody gets banned.

Eh?

:Peace:

[cal_junior]

And if you saw those same polls over a year ago and still saw fit to take exception with another person's assertion that Native Americans by and large do not have a problem with such naming, well that is just douchbaggery by another name is it not?


I was warned once for calling you a name. I apologized to the moderator and immediately edited the post. I hope there will be consitency with the mods here. Until you can rise above petty name-calling, I'm out.

[NoDannyNo]

We're all Skins fans here (or most of us) and you folks are arguing over nothing. You make yourselves look like hypocrites by pretending to ignore then goad each other into more pointless debate.

Enough is enough. There is no winning the arguments presented here. Grow up and move on to more rational discussion.

:Peace:

[BurgundyNGold]

I was warned once for calling you a name. I apologized to the moderator and immediately edited the post. I hope there will be consitency with the mods here. Until you can rise above petty name-calling, I'm out.
Your grammar is not so hot Carl. I did not call you anything. I did, however, characterize your behavior as per established metaphor. In any event, I'll change it to something more befitting an established member of the fine journalistic tradition. :rolleyes:

So am I to understand that you will not be coming back? Please, please, PLEASE don't make promises that you don't intend to keep.

[BurgundyNGold]

We're all Skins fans here (or most of us) and you folks are arguing over nothing. You make yourselves look like hypocrites by pretending to ignore then goad each other into more pointless debate.

Enough is enough. There is no winning the arguments presented here. Grow up and move on to more rational discussion.

:Peace:

Carl will be back to debate the finer points of Mike Wise again. That's where it always starts. Go back and check the record with him, you'll see how it goes.

[NoDannyNo]

Carl will be back to debate the finer points of Mike Wise again. That's where it always starts. Go back and check the record with him, you'll see how it goes.

Then leave him be. If he's determined to prove he's an idiot, let him do it. No argument required, unless you like that sort of thing...

:)

[burgundy4life]

Well, I think the Post has the best coverage, and Wilbon, Boswell and Kornheiser are good, fair columnists. But Wise and Jenkins are war criminals in my mind.


ROFLMAO

[BurgundyNGold]

Then leave him be. If he's determined to prove he's an idiot, let him do it. No argument required, unless you like that sort of thing...

:)
Carl likes to defend Mike Wise and Sally Jenkins. He's going to get called on it whether or not you like it.

[NoDannyNo]

Carl likes to defend Mike Wise and Sally Jenkins. He's going to get called on it whether or not you like it.

Not for me to decide, but you are welcome to it. As Rush says: If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

:)

[FanFromArizona]

Well, not to be picky, but Betts was a 2nd rounder. And he's a rotation players, so is Johnson. It would be a good deal for both teams.


I was thinking he was a late rounder, but I will defer to you on this, I am no stats guy that's for sure. Do you think Johnson would be a good addition to this team if the trade was consumated? I do, but curious what you think?


Williams drafted Crowell. He knows the system.

Who is this guy and which team does he play for currently?



Well, Nemo is a RB and will back up Portis. White is probably a combo back: short yardage RB and H-Back. He could replace Sellers, but they still need a real TE.


From what I read on White, they were surprised he was still there in the 4th round, they described him as tough to bring down type of runner. It'll be interesting to watch White/Sellers in the Hback and have Cooley become a blocking TE who blocks on the line and goes for intermediate routes.

[BurgundyNGold]

Not for me to decide, but you are welcome to it. As Rush says: If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

:)
Getty Lee. The Canadian version of Plato.

[FanFromArizona]

Betts isn't going anywhere. He a more than capable backup and his pricetag is pretty cheap. When his contract is up, we'll probably let him walk, but until then I think he stays here.

I would rather we use the leverage we have now [he can be traded] and trade away Betts because:

1. He is prone to injury and will be entering the final year of his contract next year.
2. He has value to other teams and can thereby get us help in other areas of need [like WR].
3. We have DEPTH at running back, we should get some value back. I personally first thought of a trade in a previous thread to Arizona for one of their receivers would help both teams out.

[BurgundyNGold]

I would rather we use the leverage we have now [he can be traded] and trade away Betts because:

1. He is prone to injury and will be entering the final year of his contract next year.
2. He has value to other teams and can thereby get us help in other areas of need [like WR].
3. We have DEPTH at running back, we should get some value back. I personally first thought of a trade in a previous thread to Arizona for one of their receivers would help both teams out.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see him get traded for a 3rd or a 4th or a player. I just don't think we'll get many takers. I hope I'm wrong.

[FanFromArizona]

Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see him get traded for a 3rd or a 4th or a player. I just don't think we'll get many takers. I hope I'm wrong.

I think Arizona would an interesting suitor for Betts. Can you imagine their offense if they had a runner? They have the best receiver duo in Fitzgerald and Boldin, and for a trade like this, they would not have to use a draft pick for an experienced grinding running back like they would have in Betts. Arizona does not need a superb running back because their success will be in the passing game, as noted this year. They have line issues on both sides of the ball and need help at running back to keep other teams honest. They have had many losing seasons and Dennis Green needs to have a winning season next year after 3 years with the team who is also moving into a brand new house.

Ladell would address the need for a respectable running back and maximizing their chances to draft OLine and DLine in the draft. A straight up trade with both teams would be from positions that each team has depth in.

Believe me, I thought long and hard about this trade, and could see an argument made that it would be an equal and fair trade for both teams. It would also not hurt us by trading Ladell, I know our D would handle him just fine if we were to face him.

[BurgundyNGold]

I think Arizona would an interesting suitor for Betts. Can you imagine their offense if they had a runner? They have the best receiver duo in Fitzgerald and Boldin, and for a trade like this, they would not have to use a draft pick for an experienced grinding running back like they would have in Betts. Arizona does not need a superb running back because their success will be in the passing game, as noted this year. They have line issues on both sides of the ball and need help at running back to keep other teams honest. They have had many losing seasons and Dennis Green needs to have a winning season next year after 3 years with the team who is also moving into a brand new house.

Ladell would address the need for a respectable running back and maximizing their chances to draft OLine and DLine in the draft. A straight up trade with both teams would be from positions that each team has depth in.

Believe me, I thought long and hard about this trade, and could see an argument made that it would be an equal and fair trade for both teams. It would also not hurt us by trading Ladell, I know our D would handle him just fine if we were to face him.
The trade you suggest makes complete sense. I would do this in a heartbeat too. In fact, I would then go and draft Riggs Jr. as a legacy RB. :)

[FanFromArizona]

The trade you suggest makes complete sense. I would do this in a heartbeat too. In fact, I would then go and draft Riggs Jr. as a legacy RB.

Lord help us if we get another RB this year during the draft. :devil2: :banghead:

[BurgundyNGold]

Lord help us if we get another RB this year during the draft. :devil2: :banghead:
I'm not sold on Nemo just because he has a cool name. For that matter, I feel the same way about Rock. He's good for spelling Portis, but if God forbid something ever happened to CP, we'd be up the creek without Betts or an actual starting quality back.

[FanFromArizona]

I'm not sold on Nemo just because he has a cool name. For that matter, I feel the same way about Rock. He's good for spelling Portis, but if God forbid something ever happened to CP, we'd be up the creek without Betts or an actual starting quality back.

We need to give Nemo his chance, and we will not get anything for Betts if he goes into free agency, I think Betts will take less just to be a starting RB.
I think we will go with Clinton, Nemo, and Cartwright at RB next year and have Nemo and Cart playing special teams. Drafting another RB would be a waste as we all know that Joe prefers to play with vets over rookies, so I would be more inclined to see him playing Nemo over a rookie and get Nemo the playing time he needs to develop.

My .02 worth

[BurgundyNGold]

We need to give Nemo his chance, and we will not get anything for Betts if he goes into free agency, I think Betts will take less just to be a starting RB.
He's under contract next year and if he leaves after next season to be a starter somewhere, that's a pretty sweet compensatory pick right dare. ;)

I think we will go with Clinton, Nemo, and Cartwright at RB next year and have Nemo and Cart playing special teams. Drafting another RB would be a waste as we all know that Joe prefers to play with vets over rookies, so I would be more inclined to see him playing Nemo over a rookie and get Nemo the playing time he needs to develop.
We'll have to see. Nemo is big but from what I saw in preseason he didn't move the pile like a big guy. That's obviously open to interpretation but I hope he makes it as a RB.

[FanFromArizona]

He's under contract next year and if he leaves after next season to be a starter somewhere, that's a pretty sweet compensatory pick right dare. ;)


I would take a known commodity rather than an unknown 3rd or 4th round rookie pick.

[BurgundyNGold]

I would take a known commodity rather than an unknown 3rd or 4th round rookie pick.
We need a #2 WR. There is no doubt about this. For the sake of argument, what makes you think that Bryant Johnson is a viable #2 WR? He's definitely more of a proven commodity than Jacobs, but I don't know that I'd assume he could be a #2.

Plus, he's currently listed a being the Z receiver. When Patten comes back, wouldn't that give us two Z receivers?

[FanFromArizona]

We need a #2 WR. There is no doubt about this. For the sake of argument, what makes you think that Bryant Johnson is a viable #2 WR? He's definitely more of a proven commodity than Jacobs, but I don't know that I'd assume he could be a #2.

Plus, he's currently listed a being the Z receiver. When Patten comes back, wouldn't that give us two Z receivers?

I was not aware he was listed as being a Z receiver.

[BurgundyNGold]

I was not aware he was listed as being a Z receiver.
Bryant Johnson, right? It's on the Cards website:

http://www.azcardinals.com/team/depth_chart.html

This doesn't mean that he can't play another position (too) but I would prefer a more proven WR to come in and be a #2 right away. Maybe that's Johnson, I don't know.

It's still an interesting trade idea that I wouldn't be angry with, assuming we got some more depth behind Portis at some point.

[helimech24]

We need a #2 WR. There is no doubt about this. For the sake of argument, what makes you think that Bryant Johnson is a viable #2 WR? He's definitely more of a proven commodity than Jacobs, but I don't know that I'd assume he could be a #2.

Plus, he's currently listed a being the Z receiver. When Patten comes back, wouldn't that give us two Z receivers?

I would have to agree with you here. We would have to sign a clear proven #2 in order for this trade to happen. That way, when Training camp comes along, it can be a competition for the 3 top spots. Can you guess who the #1 could be?lol.

[Biggie]

I would have to agree with you here. We would have to sign a clear proven #2 in order for this trade to happen. That way, when Training camp comes along, it can be a competition for the 3 top spots. Can you guess who the #1 could be?lol.

I don't think we have the cap space to do that. Besides, it would be so much simpler for us to sign a free agent, play Patten in the slot, and then bring out Thrash and Farris (if he stays) in when we put out more wide recievers. I'm assuming the bust will be gone.

[BurgundyNGold]

I would have to agree with you here. We would have to sign a clear proven #2 in order for this trade to happen. That way, when Training camp comes along, it can be a competition for the 3 top spots. Can you guess who the #1 could be?lol.
Umm, Jacobs? ;)

[BurgundyNGold]

I don't think we have the cap space to do that. Besides, it would be so much simpler for us to sign a free agent, play Patten in the slot, and then bring out Thrash and Farris (if he stays) in when we put out more wide recievers. I'm assuming the bust will be gone.
We could trade for one. I like Donte' Stallworth in NO. He's a legit #2 and he still has a year on his contract.

[akhhorus]

I was thinking he was a late rounder, but I will defer to you on this, I am no stats guy that's for sure. Do you think Johnson would be a good addition to this team if the trade was consumated? I do, but curious what you think?

he doesn't excite me.

Who is this guy and which team does he play for currently?

buffalo OLB. He's pretty good and is very athletic.

From what I read on White, they were surprised he was still there in the 4th round, they described him as tough to bring down type of runner. It'll be interesting to watch White/Sellers in the Hback and have Cooley become a blocking TE who blocks on the line and goes for intermediate routes.

White was sort of a combo in college. He was a "FB", but was pressed into service as a feature back and gained about 700 yards and a whole mess of TDs. I think he has potential as a bruising short yardage back and as an HB.

[helimech24]

I don't think we have the cap space to do that. Besides, it would be so much simpler for us to sign a free agent, play Patten in the slot, and then bring out Thrash and Farris (if he stays) in when we put out more wide recievers. I'm assuming the bust will be gone.
We can get a #2 WR in free agency, and make a trade with Betts and/or Ramsey for another WR. A lot of our cap money will depend on whether or not Lavar is serious about re-doing his contract.

[akhhorus]

Getty Lee. The Canadian version of Plato.

I don't know if thats an insult to Getty Lee, Canada or Plato.

[BurgundyNGold]

I don't know if thats an insult to Getty Lee, Canada or Plato.
LMAO! Clearly, it's an insult to Canada.

[helimech24]

Umm, Jacobs? ;)

Oh yeah buddy, Jacobs= #1 and Moss= #2. I am all for that one.:lol1:

[akhhorus]

We can get a #2 WR in free agency, and make a trade with Betts and/or Ramsey for another WR. A lot of our cap money will depend on whether or not Lavar is serious about re-doing his contract.

Instead of doing that, get a DE and a TE through Free agency and a trade, and consider drafting Hank Baskett out of New Mexico. A 6-4 leaper at WR who has sleeper written all over him.

[helimech24]

Instead of doing that, get a DE and a TE through Free agency and a trade, and consider drafting Hank Baskett out of New Mexico. A 6-4 leaper at WR who has sleeper written all over him.

Do you really want to depend on a Rookie to fill the WR spot? I would rather have a proven one for a couple of years and bring up a young WR to take over.

[akhhorus]

Do you really want to depend on a Rookie to fill the WR spot? I would rather have a proven one for a couple of years and bring up a young WR to take over.

Well, to get a "proven" veteran might take up too much cap room. And I have zero problem with a rookie on the other side of moss. And most of the names being bandied about don't have much more experience as a starter in the NFL as a rookie does.

[BurgundyNGold]

Well, to get a "proven" veteran might take up too much cap room. And I have zero problem with a rookie on the other side of moss. And most of the names being bandied about don't have much more experience as a starter in the NFL as a rookie does.
Well, FFA has a pretty good trade idea involving Betts and Bryant Johnson from Arizona. It sounds plausible.

[akhhorus]

Well, FFA has a pretty good trade idea involving Betts and Bryant Johnson from Arizona. It sounds plausible.

Johnson is interesting, but he's not a proven player by any stretch. He's not even the Z in Arizona, he's the 4th wideout. And if it's a choice of Johnson or a rookie, I would probably take the rookie.

[FanFromArizona]

Johnson is interesting, but he's not a proven player by any stretch. He's not even the Z in Arizona, he's the 4th wideout. And if it's a choice of Johnson or a rookie, I would probably take the rookie.

Johnson is a good receiver, who does get time sparingly and is a good possession receiver. I am not sure though he would be the #2 receiver we need, but I think he would place us in a better position to help us spread the field sideline to sideline, I see him as the younger Joe Juravicius, definitely sure handed and tall [listed at 6'3" and is young at 25 with 3 years experience].

Info from depth chart page on AZ Cardinals:

1. The first of two first-rounders chosen by the Cardinals in the 2003 NFL Draft (17th overall), Johnson has played in every game except one in his first two years with the Cardinals. In those 31 games, Johnson has amassed 87 receptions for 994 yards and two touchdowns. [he missed one year due to injury]

2. The Cardinals first of two first-round draft choices in 2003, Johnson finished third among rookie receivers in 2003 behind teammate Anquan Boldin (101 receptions) and Houston’s Andre Johnson (66 receptions).

The only problem I have is [as has been pointed out] with my trade is that we have Patton already who is best suited for the Z position.

I definitely could see how Betts would be of interest to Arizona, but not sure what kind of interest we would have with Johnson if we are to incorporate both Patton and Johnson into the plans.

[akhhorus]

Johnson is a good receiver, who does get time sparingly and is a good possession receiver. I am not sure though he would be the #2 receiver we need, but I think he would place us in a better position to help us spread the field sideline to sideline, I see him as the younger Joe Juravicius, definitely sure handed and tall [listed at 6'3" and is young at 25 with 3 years experience].

Info from depth chart page on AZ Cardinals:

1. The first of two first-rounders chosen by the Cardinals in the 2003 NFL Draft (17th overall), Johnson has played in every game except one in his first two years with the Cardinals. In those 31 games, Johnson has amassed 87 receptions for 994 yards and two touchdowns. [he missed one year due to injury]

Thats 2.5 catches a game for 30something yards. Not impressive.

2. The Cardinals first of two first-round draft choices in 2003, Johnson finished third among rookie receivers in 2003 behind teammate Anquan Boldin (101 receptions) and Houston’s Andre Johnson (66 receptions).

The only problem I have is [as has been pointed out] with my trade is that we have Patton already who is best suited for the Z position.

I definitely could see how Betts would be of interest to Arizona, but not sure what kind of interest we would have with Johnson if we are to incorporate both Patton and Johnson into the plans.

See, I would rather work something for Kelley Washington or draft someone. Johnson is interesting, but I wouldn't give up Betts for him straight up. They would have to throw in a pick.

[BurgundyNGold]

See, I would rather work something for Kelley Washington or draft someone. Johnson is interesting, but I wouldn't give up Betts for him straight up. They would have to throw in a pick.
That's a guy I wanted to draft in the first place. I think he is being underutilized out in Cincy and now with the emergence of Chris Henry he is expendible.

[FanFromArizona]

That's a guy I wanted to draft in the first place. I think he is being underutilized out in Cincy and now with the emergence of Chris Henry he is expendible.

What excess player could we interest Cincy with? I think he would be interesting as well, but do not see what we could offer to Cincy[besides a draft pick] that would entice them into a trade....

I would much rather see a trade that involved Betts though. I think he will be leaving us next year in free agency for a chance at a new beginning and an opportunity to start. He simply wants to start, and he will be a viable starter for a pass first offense. Teams for Betts: Arizona, Baltimore[to replace J Lewis], Detroit[maybe], and very marginally Pittsburgh if Jerome Bettis retires for a bang bang 1-2 combo with Willy Parker and Bettis. Each of the teams could offer something of value to us, Arizona/Detroit with receivers, Baltimore and Pittsburgh on defense possibly.

I would love to keep Betts around, him and Clinton were a great tandem this year, but I would look to either lock him up and commit to him or let him loose and get something of value in return. I would try to lock him in now before March 1 or look to trade him once we know our status with Rock.

[danny's stogie]

Instead of doing that, get a DE and a TE through Free agency and a trade, and consider drafting Hank Baskett out of New Mexico. A 6-4 leaper at WR who has sleeper written all over him.

I saw Baskett play against Wyoming. It was Baskett's worst game all year, 2 for 12 yards. I tried to keep an eye out for him because I knew he was a prospect, but the fact that Wyoming has a pretty good secondary and possibly the worst front 7 I've ever seen equalled a new mexico team that did nothing but run the ball. I wish I had more to say on him than he had the look physically of an NFL reciever. Also, the Mountain West was awful this year, complete with some of the worst defenses in the country, so it's tough to gage him against good competition. Only TCU and Utah had respectable seasons.

[BurgundyNGold]

What excess player could we interest Cincy with? I think he would be interesting as well, but do not see what we could offer to Cincy[besides a draft pick] that would entice them into a trade....

I would much rather see a trade that involved Betts though. I think he will be leaving us next year in free agency for a chance at a new beginning and an opportunity to start. He simply wants to start, and he will be a viable starter for a pass first offense. Teams for Betts: Arizona, Baltimore, Detroit[maybe], and very marginally Pittsburgh if Jerome Bettis retires for a bang bang 1-2 combo with Willy Parker and Bettis. Each of the teams could offer something of value to us, Arizona/Detroit with receivers, Baltimore and Pittsburgh on defense possibly.

I would love to keep Betts around, they were a great tandem this year, but I would look to either lock him up and commit to him or let him loose and get something of value in return. I would try to lock him in now before March 1 or look to trade him once we know our status with Rock.
I'd have no problem trading Betts for whatever would could get for him assuming that we could get a solid, proven backup to throw into the mix. Since we're on about Pittsburgh, why not Duce Staley? He's been inactive most of the year. He'll probably get cut and I think he'd fit a Gibbs offense just fine as a backup to Portis.

[akhhorus]

What excess player could we interest Cincy with? I think he would be interesting as well, but do not see what we could offer to Cincy[besides a draft pick] that would entice them into a trade....

Washington is a Restricted Free agent, but its hard to see them offering him anything more than a minimum tender that would require a 3-4th rounder in compensation.

[FanFromArizona]

Washington is a Restricted Free agent, but its hard to see them offering him anything more than a minimum tender that would require a 3-4th rounder in compensation.

Man, I think I'm going to call you StatMan....you have every possible stat on the tips of your fingers. I didnt realize he was a RFA. I would hope it would be the 4th rounder though, we need to keep our 1st day picks, 4th rounders are a gamble with possible upswing at best, which is what Washington would be for Washington [lol].

[BurgundyNGold]

Man, I think I'm going to call you StatMan....you have every possible stat on the tips of your fingers. I didnt realize he was a RFA. I would hope it would be the 4th rounder though, we need to keep our 1st day picks, 4th rounders are a gamble with possible upswing at best, which is what Washington would be for Washington [lol].
Washington was taken in the 3rd round (65th overall) in 2003. That wouldn't necessarily be worth it if that's what the RFA price tag was.

[FanFromArizona]

Washington is a Restricted Free agent, but its hard to see them offering him anything more than a minimum tender that would require a 3-4th rounder in compensation.

say,

being that we are talking about upgrading our receiver position, it'd be cool to see your 5th mock draft assess receivers that are available in some capacity [ufa/rfa/straight up trade] and how they would fit into our system and propel us even further in the playoffs next year.

I also was looking at our schedule next year, it is definitely much more balanced in terms of strength of schedule for us: I see Carolina, Atlanta, Jacksonville at home and Indy and TB away as our tough games besides our divisional games and all others as winnable. It certainly helps that we have 3 games at home against potential playoff contenders next year.

[helimech24]

Well, to get a "proven" veteran might take up too much cap room. And I have zero problem with a rookie on the other side of moss. And most of the names being bandied about don't have much more experience as a starter in the NFL as a rookie does.

Well I was thinking that we could get Eric Moulds, but we would have to wait for him to hit the FA because his current contract would cost us 10.8 million. I don't think McCardell will get a high salary either because of his age, but he would be good for another year or two, and we could wait for another WR to take his place. I just don't want another Taylor Jacobs screwing us again.

[akhhorus]

say,

being that we are talking about upgrading our receiver position, it'd be cool to see your 5th mock draft assess receivers that are available in some capacity [ufa/rfa/straight up trade] and how they would fit into our system and propel us even further in the playoffs next year.

Ill do a free agency preview before march 1st.

[MDSkins#1]

good thoughts. I agree with what is posted about how the Skins game planned for Shaun Alexander and how it threw them off when he was knocked out of the game.