Taylor Jacobs (#2 with the cap situation?)

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 7:47 pm

I believe you mean Phil Simms...

but you're right. Teams (fans) give up on a player and the next thing you know, they find their potential with another club...

Let's let it be us this time!

fredp45 · Post by **fredp45** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:10 pm

skinsfan55 -- you're right, thanks. When I see or talk about the Simms boys, I spaz out. They kill us.

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:19 pm

The learning curve is much faster for wide recievers, so I'm not sure how the Phil Simms comparison is valid.

Of the 19 wide recievers who had over 1000 yards this season, none had not had at least 200 yards in a season through their first three years in the league, with the exception of Jimmy Smith, who missed his first three seasons due to injuries.

In fact, the only two players whose production was even close to Jacobs' was Derrick Mason and Donald Driver, neither of whom started more than two games in a season (Jacobs has started four and three games the last two years).

Just because some players end up succeeding in different places from their original team, doesn't mean we should hang on to every bad player we have.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:30 pm

Not every bad player, just the players who have readily apparent potential that is astounding.

Why give up on someone so talented?

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 8:33 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:Why give up on someone so talented?

Oh, I'll take this one!

How about to make room for someone who is productive?

spenser · Post by **spenser** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:09 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:

Why give up on someone so talented?

Im not sure what your seeing, but All ive seen is a guy underachiving. EVERY player in the nfl is talented. what they do with that talent is another story. yes it takes time to learn the posistion, and yes he has been injured. But at what point do you say, ok this guy although talented, is injury prone? I dont see KiJana Carter hanging on with a team for years and there is no question he has talent. But he was oft injured and never reached his potential. As my father once told me after a particularly sad break up with a girlfriend "son... somtimes you just need a new watch."

Gibbs4Life · Post by **Gibbs4Life** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:19 pm

Taylor Jacobs makes Michael Westbrook look like Jerry Rice. He doesn't deserve to come into camp with anything but the no.4 reciever spot at best.

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:50 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:Why give up on someone so talented?

Aren't you the same guy trashed Darnerian McCants? At least he showed us something on the field. I don't get it.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:25 pm

Darnerian McCants never had half the talent that Taylor Jacobs does.

A lot of stats are luck, being in the right place at the right time when you're talking about these small sample sizes.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:30 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:Darnerian McCants never had half the talent that Taylor Jacobs does.

A lot of stats are luck, being in the right place at the right time when you're talking about these small sample sizes.

I'm trying to reconcile your comments about cooley earlier with your comments about Jacobs. Cool

ey has been a productive member of this team who had a break-out season resulting in being the leading vote-getter for the Pro Bowl. Jacobs has done nothing but be injured and not produce. Cool

ey was a third-round pick in his second year. Jacobs was a second-rounder. Seems like you have a double standard. Or, you trust the 2005 pre-season scouting report about Cool

ey more than your own eyes.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:35 pm

Taylor looks spooked, for some reason. I think the grace period has expired. He was brought in by his college coach, who has since gone back to school.
Time for Taylor to go someplace like Miami...and I wish him all the best. He did try, but to no avail.

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:43 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:Darnerian McCants never had half the talent that Taylor Jacobs does.

A lot of stats are luck, being in the right place at the right time when you're talking about these small sample sizes.

What good is talent if it doesn't translate to catches, yards and touchdowns? I get the feeling you are basing your entire opinion of these players on the round they were drafted and what your scouting site tells you.

And by the way, a we have three years of numbers (including seven starts) for Taylor Jacobs (just as we did McCants - who, by the way, only got two starts). That's not a small sample size.

Just for the record, I was also in favor of getting rid of McCants (if he isn't going to practice or play special teams, why waste a roster spot?) But I fail to see why McCants, who was not only bigger but more productive (and, in my opinion, much more talented), wasn't a better bet to turn things around.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:46 pm

Taylor was all geared up for the Fun 'n Gun, but we don't play that anymore, and he never really had a chance to grow into the big leagues. Got hurt too often.
D-Mac, on the other hand, was a fine WR with a bad attitude.
Either/or. We could do without them.

aswas71788 · Post by **aswas71788** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:50 am

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

It is time to give up on Taylor Jacobs and send him packing, he has wasted enought of the Rerdskins time and space. Didn't you watch any of the games that he played in? He was never open, couldn't get open even when he was not covered. I remember one particular play where there were 4 defensive players in Mosses area and guess what? Jacobs can running towards them. All he would have had to do was go down field and there was no one with him. But noooooo, he comes running right into the coverage.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:34 am

aswas71788 wrote:Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

It is time to give up on Taylor Jacobs and send him packing, he has wasted enought of the Rerdskins time and space. Didn't you watch any of the games that he played in? He was never open, couldn't get open even when he was not covered. I remember one particular play where there were 4 defensive players in Mosses area and guess what? Jacobs can running towards them. All he would have had to do was go down field and there was no one with him. But noooooo, he comes running right into the coverage.

that is the fault of the play-caller, not the WR. WRs aren't supposed just make up their routes as they go, this isn't backyard football. the QB expects them to be in a predetermined spot. the fact that there are 4 defenders there merely illustrates the predictability of the offense (this was a trend i noticed a LOT toward the end of the season- the WRs would cut TOWARD DBs instead of toward open field. the DB already KNEW where the route was going and had started heading that way ahead of time).

anyways, i think jacobs has looked like he does play "soft" and chances are he won't amount to much. but seriously, he was WIDE OPEN for at least 4 or 5 long TDs that brunell totally honked. that is a fact.

and no, brunell wasn't to blame for everything. i'd say the blame should go about 3 parts brunell, 2 parts play-calling, 1 part offensive line. the line is OK but only looks particularly good against lousy teams.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:48 am

Football is a team concept. You strap it on with the players you have, the coaches you have, and you run what you think gives you the best chance.

People, quit blaming one component of our team i.e. Brunnell and the coaching. Doing so only shows that you are not grasping the TEAM concept.

No one player, cost us the season just like no one player does it all alone. We simply didn't put it all together last week..PERIOD.

Brunell could have made the Pro-Bowl this year, now we are throwing him under the bus?

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:41 am

It is true that Brunell did not throw at Jacobs at various times when he was wide open.

It is true that Brunell did not hit Jacobs accurately when he threw at him.

BUT

It is true that Jacobs never played aggrssively to win the ball from opponents when the ball was thrown at him.

It is true that Jacobs did not create enough separation in other instances when Brunell looked him up.

I was a Jacobs supporter. I wanted him to succeed. His chance came. He could have been a hero. He could have shown hunger, courage and talent. He did not. His chance is gone.

He lost my support and I do not believe the guy has the character to be a Redskin. He may have talent and speed. He can be shown the door with all of that as far as I am concerned. He disappointed me as a character player.

He is not one of us. I wish him well in his future endeavours elsewhere. Let's trade him for something. We can use a good punter.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:58 pm

he definitely does not seem to have the "toughness" neccessary.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:02 pm

The Hogster wrote:Football is a team concept. You strap it on with the players you have, the coaches you have, and you run what you think gives you the best chance.

People, quit blaming one component of our team i.e. Brunnell and the coaching. Doing so only shows that you are not grasping the TEAM concept.

No one player, cost us the season just like no one player does it all alone. We simply didn't put it all together last week..PERIOD.

Brunell could have made the Pro-Bowl this year, now we are throwing him under the bus?

i guess you are right. so now to IMPROVE the "team", i guess we should just wave a magic wand and gaze into our crystal ball, instead of taking the trouble to isolate areas that seemed to be weaknesses, that we'd like to see improved. :roll:

as far as brunell is concerned: we are not throwing him under the bus-- it already ran over him about 5 weeks ago.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:06 pm

Redskin in Canada wrote:It is true that Brunell did not throw at Jacobs at various times when he was wide open.

It is true that Brunell did not hit Jacobs accurately when he threw at him.

BUT

It is true that Jacobs never played aggrssively to win the ball from opponents when the ball was thrown at him.

It is true that Jacobs did not create enough separation in other instances when Brunell looked him up.

I was a Jacobs supporter. I wanted him to succeed. His chance came. He could have been a hero. He could have shown hunger, courage and talent. He did not. His chance is gone.

He lost my support and I do not believe the guy has the character to be a Redskin. He may have talent and speed. He can be shown the door with all of that as far as I am concerned. He disappointed me as a character player.

He is not one of us. I wish him well in his future endeavours elsewhere. Let's trade him for something. We can use a good punter.

I agree with everything, everything, evertything you said 300%

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:35 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:Are you kidding me? Taylor Jacobs is very fast!

He's a former sprinter, and maintains his well-above average speed.

He's got good hands, and good vision...

IMO all he needs is to imrpove his strength, then all the other dominoes will fall.

Come on, is Jacobs even still on the team! I woul feel better with J Farris than the "Training room bandit".

PulpExposure · Post by **PulpExposure** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:38 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:Are you kidding me? Taylor Jacobs is very fast!

He's a former sprinter, and maintains his well-above average speed.

He's got good hands, and good vision...

IMO all he needs is to imrpove his strength, then all the other dominoes will fall.

Come on, is Jacobs even still on the team! I woul feel better with J Farris than the "Training room bandit".

I have a concussion!!!!!

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:53 pm

die cowboys die wrote:
The Hogster wrote:Football is a team concept. You strap it on with the players you have, the coaches you have, and you run what you think gives you the best chance.

People, quit blaming one component of our team i.e. Brunnell and the coaching. Doing so only shows that you are not grasping the TEAM concept.

No one player, cost us the season just like no one player does it all alone. We simply didn't put it all together last week..PERIOD.

Brunell could have made the Pro-Bowl this year, now we are throwing him under the bus?

i guess you are right. so now to IMPROVE the "team", i guess we should just wave a magic wand and gaze into our crystal ball, instead of taking the trouble to isolate areas that seemed to be weaknesses, that we'd like to see improved.

as far as brunell is concerned: we are not throwing him under the bus-- it already ran over him about 5 weeks ago.

You are a notorious pessimist with an agenda...to cry and moan until somebody comes to give you back your pacifier.

It's pointless debating with you because you think the sky is falling because Brunell is our quarterback. We get it already, you think we are doomed with Brunell..

Write a new chapter in your book will ya? We won 11 games and came within 2 games of a ring. Brunell gets congrats from me.

I live in DC and some of you don't realize how intense the media coverage is here during the year. Last year NO ONE had ANYTHING good to say about Brunell...his kids and wife live here and I am sure he would have had to turn off the local news, never listen to the radio, read the paper or get on the internet to avoid criticism last year.

Through all of that and a strained knee late in the year, Brunell lead this team on a six game win streak and a road playoff game against a Division Champ. We lost to the #1 seed for Christ sakes.

Had the Tampa elbow call gone our way, we would have been the #2 seed in the NFC...get over yourself and cry that river to some other depressed person who will listen. Brunell did a decent job for us, and he gave us the best chance to win.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:20 pm

The Hogster wrote:I live in DC and some of you don't realize how intense the media coverage is here during the year. Last year NO ONE had ANYTHING good to say about Brunell...his kids and wife live here and I am sure he would have had to turn off the local news, never listen to the radio, read the paper or get on the internet to avoid criticism last year.

Through all of that and a strained knee late in the year, Brunell lead this team on a six game win streak and a road playoff game against a Division Champ. We lost to the #1 seed for Christ sakes.

Had the Tampa elbow call gone our way, we would have been the #2 seed in the NFC...get over yourself and cry that river to some other depressed person who will listen. Brunell did a decent job for us, and he gave us the best chance to win.

Thanks. That was sorely needed.

As for Taylor. The man has had too many chances. I'd feel more confident giving A. Brown a shot at earning a spot ahead of Taylor, at this point in his tenure with the Skins, and this coming from an eternal optimist.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 4:29 am

The Hogster wrote:
die cowboys die wrote:
The Hogster wrote:Football is a team concept. You strap it on with the players you have, the coaches you have, and you run what you think gives you the best chance.

People, quit blaming one component of our team i.e. Brunnell and the coaching. Doing so only shows that you are not grasping the TEAM concept.

No one player, cost us the season just like no one player does it all alone. We simply didn't put it all together last week..PERIOD.

Brunell could have made the Pro-Bowl this year, now we are throwing him under the bus?

i guess you are right. so now to IMPROVE the "team", i guess we should just wave a magic wand and gaze into our crystal ball, instead of taking the trouble to isolate areas that seemed to be weaknesses, that we'd like to see improved.

as far as brunell is concerned: we are not throwing him under the bus-- it already ran over him about 5 weeks ago.

You are a notorious pessimist with an agenda...to cry and moan until somebody comes to give you back your pacifier.

It's pointless debating with you because you think the sky is falling because Brunell is our quarterback. We get it already, you think we are doomed with Brunell..

Write a new chapter in your book will ya? We won 11 games and came within 2 games of a ring. Brunell gets congrats from me.

I live in DC and some of you don't realize how intense the media coverage is here during the year. Last year NO ONE had ANYTHING good to say about Brunell...his kids and wife live here and I am sure he would have had to turn off the local news, never listen to the radio, read the paper or get on the internet to avoid criticism last year.

Through all of that and a strained knee late in the year, Brunell lead this team on a six game win streak and a road playoff game against a Division Champ. We lost to the #1 seed for Christ sakes.

Had the Tampa elbow call gone our way, we would have been the #2 seed in the NFC...get over yourself and cry that river to some other depressed person who will listen. Brunell did a decent job for us, and he gave us the best chance to win.

first of all, you are being incredibly childish with your personal attacks that are against board regulations. it is ironic that you are accusing me of being histrionic, when you are the one interjecting the discussion with such vitriol. it is troubling that you would have such a strong response to something you are perceiving that doesn't actually exist.

when have i said that we are "doomed" with brunell? i think my point has been pretty consistent that we can do "OK" with him, perhaps even achieve the same level of success we enjoyed this year. i do not, however, believe he is capable of taking us to the next level. how exactly does that qualify as "doom and gloom"? :hmm: