Next year trying to help for a new "posse"

skinpride1 · Post by **skinpride1** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:03 pm

You all know the famed "posse" that help win three Superbowl's.The combination of small recievers and one tall one known as Art monk.I could not have dreamed, how much a good receiver could help a team, until Santana Moss fell into our hands!!!A speedy short W.R. just like the smurf's, that tore defenses apart in the eighty's(I guess some things haven't changed).We have one piece of the puzzle(Moss) but we still lack another and thats a tall speedy receiver with good hands(cough, not rod gardner).I haven't ruled out David Patten as our second small receiver,next year if he comes back from the injury should tell us.I'm hoping that Gibbs will go after, another tall receiver in the offseason.I know that there has been alot of talk about T.O. and if he wasn't such an idiot,then maybe so!!!The thought of T.O. and Moss on the same team would have to scare the hell out of any defense!!!That one will never happen and we couldn't afford T.O. if we wanted too, because of our salary cap.I know that I'm starting to see some startling resemblance's of the famed super bowl teams.I think that we need that second wide receiver that can help in the red zone!!!!

Snout · Post by **Snout** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:07 am

skinpride1 wrote:I know that there has been alot of talk about T.O. and if he wasn't such an idiot,then maybe so!!!The thought of T.O. and Moss on the same team would have to scare the hell out of any defense!!!That one will never happen and we couldn't afford T.O. if we wanted too, because of our salary cap.

If we can pick up T.O. cheap I say it is worth the risk -- but along the lines of "one strike and you're out." Kind of how the Lakers took a chance on Rodman a few years ago. He did not change his behavior, and by Christmas the Lakers did the right thing and sent him packing before he could do much damage. If T.O. is smart (and I think he is probably a lot smarter than Rodman), he will figure out that everyone's perception of him (and his value) has already dropped, and it would be a disaster to him if it drops again.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:20 am

"Worth the risk" ?
Clearly, you're willing to sell your soul for receiving yards and TD's.
Everywhere the man has been, he's taken the team up and then down.
He's called his QB's everything from gay to wimpy.
T.O. has plumbed depths that Deion never knew existed.
Monk's role in the Posse had nothing to do with his size. It was his heart, my friend.
To say differently tells me that you know what you think you know from books.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:53 am

Snout wrote:If T.O. is smart (and I think he is probably a lot smarter than Rodman), he will figure out that everyone's perception of him (and his value) has already dropped, and it would be a disaster to him if it drops again.

your mind need not wander farther than those first few words. if the sentence begins with "if T.O. is smart...", there is absolutely no for the "then" portion of the sentence.

this man is a megalomaniacal narcissist. even if he CAN redeem himself (which is highly dubious), it still destroys all the morale/character gibbs has worked so hard to forge in the locker room. it sends the message "you can have a place on this team even if you're disruptive and selfish, as long as you're good enough". it's suicide.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:01 am

Yeah, I think we have enough "redemption" around here anyway.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:04 am

tcwest10 wrote:"Worth the risk" ?
Clearly, you're willing to sell your soul for receiving yards and TD's.
Everywhere the man has been, he's taken the team up and then down.
He's called his QB's everything from gay to wimpy.
T.O. has plumbed depths that Deion never knew existed.
Monk's role in the Posse had nothing to do with his size. It was his heart, my friend.
To say differently tells me that you know what you think you know from books.

I agree Monk was also one tough dude. Thats exactly what we need a guy who can take a tough catch over the middle in no mans land. Im thinking someone like keyshawn minus the attitude. Thats who reminds me of Monk but Monk was twice as tough and kept out of the limelight. Dagnabbit he should be in the hall already. Well Hail to the skins baby.....

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:05 am

tcwest10 wrote:Yeah, I think we have enough "redemption" around here anyway.

floridaskinsfan · Post by **floridaskinsfan** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 8:27 am

If we can pick up T.O. cheap I say it is worth the risk -- but along the lines of "one strike and you're out."

I disagree, if T.O. were to play well and get along with everyone for the first few games, then start reverting back to his old ways, it would be an even bigger disadvantage because we would be depending on his contribution. If we never had him, we wouldn't miss him. He is amazing on the field but even more amazing off the field.

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:37 am

No way on TO. He's destroyed two teams......Let me say that again, HE'S DESTROYED TWO TEAMS!!! I don't want that guy here at all. As for a reciever like Art Monk. I agree, we need someone like that, but I doubt we'll find someone like that. A reciever with his talent and his heart is hard to find. Its a shame that Art isn't in the Hall. But what can you do other than send a bunch of drunken hate mail to Dr. Z?

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:39 am

All this T.O. talk is irrelevant anyway; I doubt we have the money for him, and I doubt even more that Gibbs would ever take on a gamble like that. I simply don't see T.O. ever suiting up in a Redskins uniform.

Michaelf382 · Post by **Michaelf382** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 10:28 am

maybe redeemskins can exorsize his demons

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 10:28 am

HEROHAMO wrote:[Thats exactly what we need a guy who can take a tough catch over the middle in no mans land.

We don't need this because we never throw in the middle of the field, even though it is open 90% of the time, but I digress.

ryanw7196 · Post by **ryanw7196** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:18 pm

after the debacle in philly many people have been saying that he wont be signed for much more than the veterans minimum because he is such a risk

weneedcharlesmann · Post by **weneedcharlesmann** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:02 pm

Ok, I'm not going to get into the TO is the worst man alive debate, but I do want to point out that the Eagles have made it to the Super Bowl exactly once in the last 25 years...the year TO played...every team he's been on has imploded, but both of them had serious problems---the 9ers had just come off a 15 year span of buying championships at the expense of the future, and the eagles have proven to be as miserly as possible (letting corey simon go? nice, hope mike patterson is working out)

Having said all that, I still don't want TO on this team, despite his talent. My concern is more about continuing to bring in 30+ yr old veterans who are on the downside of their career. The Posse was great, but they got to play together for a few years...that's what we need...a young guy who can grow up with moss, cooley, and most importantly Campbell...

Reggie Wayne would still be nice...Brandon Lloyd's an option, etc

In either circumstance, I see us as having two major needs--a D-end and a second receiver (though i still think taylor jacobs will be ok)...we've gotta get one of those positions in the draft, and one through free agency...

As I see it, John Abraham will probably be the premiere end coming out (unless they franchise him) and from the list we saw earlier, it looks like Wayne or Moulds would be the big receivers...

Out of those, I'd like to get Abraham, b/c he's a proven threat off the edge....in addition, some have been saying that he's having a down year, in which case, we may be able to get him at a bargain...

If we do land him, then, how about Smardjza (or whatever) out of ND? I don't know if he's declared or not, but he's a big guy who would fit in well...

In any case, no matter what, I'd like to see some new d-ends next year...and if we do get some edge rushers, the league better watch out, b/c our D is going to knock some people out....

weneedcharlesmann · Post by **weneedcharlesmann** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:05 pm

Oh, one more thing---what is our draft pick situation exactly for this upcoming draft?

I believe we have a 2, 5, 6, and 7th round picks...am I getting that right, or do we have more/less?

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:56 pm

tcwest10 wrote:"Worth the risk" ?
Clearly, you're willing to sell your soul for receiving yards and TD's.

I knew that deep inside you were in bed with ...

Never mind. :lol:

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you TCWest:

tcwest10 wrote:Monk's role in the Posse had nothing to do with his size. It was his heart, my friend.

Fanforever · Post by **Fanforever** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:57 pm

Mursilis wrote:All this T.O. talk is irrelevant anyway; I doubt we have the money for him, and I doubt even more that Gibbs would ever take on a gamble like that. I simply don't see T.O. ever suiting up in a Redskins uniform.

What amazes me is the fact anyone would ever think he should.

skinpride1 · Post by **skinpride1** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:14 pm

I hope to see gibbs go fo a tall wide receiver in the off season in the draft.The correct spelling is receiver, not reciever(I have made the same mistake before) :wink:

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 12:54 am

skinpride1 wrote:I hope to see gibbs go fo a tall wide receiver in the off season in the draft.The correct spelling is receiver, not reciever(I have made the same mistake before)

I before E except after C.

Hoss · Post by **Hoss** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 12:55 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
skinpride1 wrote:I hope to see gibbs go fo a tall wide receiver in the off season in the draft.The correct spelling is receiver, not reciever(I have made the same mistake before)

I before E except after C.

glad to know the english language is alive and well

as i teach my daughter.....i before e except after c...... :roll:

Snout · Post by **Snout** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:39 am

Fanforever wrote:
Mursilis wrote:All this T.O. talk is irrelevant anyway; I doubt we have the money for him, and I doubt even more that Gibbs would ever take on a gamble like that. I simply don't see T.O. ever suiting up in a Redskins uniform.

What amazes me is the fact anyone would ever think he should.

T.O. will go to a new team for a greatly reduced salary and one of a number of things may happen:

(1) After seeing his $49 Million contract with the Eagles disappear, T.O. knows that his reputation is catching up with him, so he changes his ways and becomes a model citizen and a team leader. Odds: 1000 to 1

(2) After seeing his $49 Million contract with the Eagles disappear, T.O. knows that his reputation is catching up with him, so he tones it down a little bit and makes more of an effort to get along. Odds: 3 to 1

(3) After seeing his $49 Million contract with the Eagles disappear, T.O. learns nothing, mouths off, and gets cut before he has have much of an impact at all, positive or negative. Odds: 2 to 1

(4) After seeing his $49 Million contract with the Eagles disappear, T.O. initially seems to change his ways, but as time passes seems to gradually go back to the old pattern. The team is faced with a choice -- it can either look the other way and let the problem fester, or be proactive and cut the guy at the first sign of trouble. Odds: 3 to 2

Looking at this like a business, which is what the NFL is, if I am a coach or an owner and I can pick the guy up for nothing, I would take the risk and sign the guy, but I keep the guy on a very short leash. At the first sign of trouble, he's gone. There's potential for huge upside, and as long as you are disciplined, minimal downside.

If you sign a guy to a huge contract with a huge signing bonus, like the Eagles did, your already committed and already heavily invested. But if you sign him to a minimal contract, the potential benefits outweigh the risks.

Like everyone else, I cheered when the Eagles showed some backbone and showed the guy the door. But if he became a Redskin, in my mind he would be judged not by his past, but for his behavior as a Redskin.

roybus14 · Post by **roybus14** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:16 am

There are a couple of names out there that we could look at:

1. Joe Jurevicius, Seattle

2. Eric Moulds, Buffalo

3. Brian Finneran, Atlanta

4. Brandon Lloyd, San Fran

5. Justin MaCairens, NYJ

6. One of the Detroit Williams' (Roy or Mike)

Moulds is the most seasoned out of the bunch but the others are pretty good and could fit in well. It all has to do with the QB situation too. Do we good to Campbell next year or stick with Brunell?

I hope that Gibbs and Musgrave have Campbell studying game film of Peyton Manning and Carson Palmer. Right now, they are the hot QBs and a couple of the few QBs in the league that know how to spread the ball around and not "lock-in" on one or two guys. That is one thing that Brunell is missing. And I don't know if that has anything to do with lack of confidence in his receivers or they are just not getting open enough for him to throw to when the primary is covered??? When defenses are doubling Moss, Jacobs and Farris should be killing them.....

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:13 pm

Brian Finneran would be nice but I think that most of those guys will be resigned.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 2:16 pm

roybus14 wrote:I hope that Gibbs and Musgrave have Campbell studying game film of Peyton Manning and Carson Palmer. Right now, they are the hot QBs and a couple of the few QBs in the league that know how to spread the ball around and not "lock-in" on one or two guys. That is one thing that Brunell is missing.

I don't know about Cincy, but having watched a few Indy games, it sure seems like the Colts usually send more guys out on routes (vs. keeping them in to block) than the 'skins ever do. Most plays, the Colts have 3-4 guys running routes, whereas the 'skins only have 2-3. Plus, Manning has total freedom to change the play on the field, and he's such a film hound, he can frequently recognize the defensive package and quickly change the play at the line to take advantage. I think Gibbs is too conservative to 1) send more guys out, and 2) allow Brunell to audible as much as Manning. But it's sure be nice to see the 'skins offense resemble the Colts a little more!!

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Next year trying to help for a new "posse"

Next year trying to help for a new "posse"

Re: Next year trying to help for a new "posse"

Re: Next year trying to help for a new "posse"