But keep in mind that if Gardener is traded, then who are we gonna have as a "possession" guy who utilizes his size and strength to catch his passes...Nobdody!
Dude, have you ever seen McCants actually play the game? That's exactly what he brings to the table...a physical receiver that will go over the middle and utilize his size and strength to muscle in the catches. That what he did at Delaware State....and that's exactly what he brings to the Skins.
Fran Farren "Justice Hog"
Newark, DE
“God didn't give us a spirit that is timid but one that is powerful, loving and controlled.” 2 Timothy 1:7
We have a lot of good recievers right now. We're five deep.
Coles
Gardner
McCants
Jacobs
Thrash
All of them could be a starter somewhere. (I know, Jacobs hasn't played much. But he was a projected 1st rounder which=starter and he's recovered from his injuries.)
While I disagree that we will mostly see 2 WR sets, (I anticipate a lot of three WR sets with McCants in the slot) we probably won't see too many four or five WR sets.
If someone could/should be traded, who would it be?
Not Coles...
Not McCants...
Not Thrash...
That leaves Gardner and Jacobs.
I believe Jacobs impressed the coaches at the minicamp plus he has a smaller contract than Gardner. Also, Gardner would command more in a trade. So if one of the WR is traded, I think it would be Gardner. I also think we can get a 2nd rounder for him.
SonnyRules wrote:Don't forget the one thing that no one here seems to have mentioned. Gibbs wants what he himself calls "Redskin players." What is a "Redskin Player?" He's never really defined it, but I think it's a guy who's relatively blue collar (as far as millionaire athletes go), who's smart about the game, who cares more about the team's success than his own stats, who's willing to take some lumps for the sake of a game, who has good character, etc., etc.
From what I've seen of McCants in interviews and on the field, he's a "Redskin Player" through and through. Gardner I'm not so sure about. He's always seemed like a show-boater to me, always reminded me a bit of Westbrook, i.e. great potential not totally realized.
I agree with the sentiment of not trading him unless a good offer comes along, but I know Gibbs puts more values on those "intangibles" he looks for than on sheer physical ability. I don't know if he's sold on Gardner excelling in those intangibles.
Thrash had 'em, and he's back in the fold. McCants has 'em, and he's back in the fold. We'll see if Gardner makes the cut...
Did you read what McCant's said when he heard Gibbs was comparing him to Monk. "Man that's crazy." That's someone who nkows the history of the game, and humble, and a hard worker. That's a good Redskin for me.
i like mccants but people are singing his praises a little too highly right now...and since when did gardner become the devil?? mccants is no saint himself, it's not like the guy is some super humble guy. i've seen him throw the ball in the other teams face after a catch, drawing personal fouls, and he's got a trade mark td celebration for cryin out loud. but i guess gardner is the show-boater. but don't get me wrong i see the potential in mccants too but as a 3rd receiver. let him prove himself as the every down 3rd receiver before you boot gardner out of town. i just can't believe that people act like gardner has lost it after having one year that wasn't even THAT bad...i guess certain people will just overlook what he did the year before. i betting that he'll have a bounce back year this next year and HOPEFULLY it will be with the skins.
"People that think they know it all are especially annoying to those of us who do."
I don't overlook it, nor do I consider last year as bad, just not very consistent.
I think Gardner, in his 2002 form will do well by the team. Gardner in his 2003 form isn't worth the #13 overall pick.
I like the fact that he has potential, but so did Westbroke, and his constant inconsistency was a heartache to watch. If we can have WR that consistently catch the ball so that every drop is a shock... that is the way it should be. If we have it where the catch is the shock... that isn't.
Rich in Roanoke
_______________________________________
Let others hail the rising sun:
I bow to that whose course is run
skinsfaninroanoke wrote:I don't overlook it, nor do I consider last year as bad, just not very consistent.
I think Gardner, in his 2002 form will do well by the team. Gardner in his 2003 form isn't worth the #13 overall pick.
I like the fact that he has potential, but so did Westbroke, and his constant inconsistency was a heartache to watch. If we can have WR that consistently catch the ball so that every drop is a shock... that is the way it should be. If we have it where the catch is the shock... that isn't.
i think the biggest reason not to compare him to westbrook is the fact that he plays every down. westbrook's biggest flaw was the fact he was usually in street clothes at game time. one thing that gardner is consistant with that he's always on the field. in my opinion i don't really see the reason to be so critcal of gardner saying he was inconsistant because of the state of the team last year. i think most people would agree that the ONLY consistant player on O was probably coles but i don't hear the other 10 players names come up when trade discussions start. just my two
"People that think they know it all are especially annoying to those of us who do."
I say he was inconsistent because he kept dropping the ball on third downs for first down yardage. Sorry - it is just one of the main disappointments of the season - I figured with Coles across from him that Rod would have had another 1000 yard season. The drops and disappointment were often enough to have a lot of them burned into my memory - the slants and crosses that he didn't catch having a good two steps on a coverage man with no one in front of him....
I know I just started associating him with "awwwwwww s**t"
Rich in Roanoke
_______________________________________
Let others hail the rising sun:
I bow to that whose course is run
I still say unless its a nice offer why bother trading him? He has been with us now for three full seasons, doesnt seem to have any type of negative locker room presence and it will cost us money to get rid of him. I just dont see much advantage to trading him away.
Those drops were just another disappointment in a disappointing season under a disappointing coach. I think last season pretty much rubbed off on most of the players. Rod is good. And I think he fits in very well in Coach Gibbs system. I can very well see him going across the middle or down field opposite Coles. McCants probably would do better across the middle because of his ability to fight for the ball. But Gardner's no slouch in that area either. We did bring him in for a reason and I think that reason still holds true. But..... Playing Devils advocate...... IF a team were to give up a second rounder for him maybe not such a bad thing. Although next year might be better. I beleive his contract expires next year.
There is a reason why Lavar reffered to Gardner as "50/50" in an interview. Rod Gardner never seems to get seperation from the defender, and he just flat out drops too many balls. I say trade Rod to the Ravens for a 2nd or 3rd round pick(the Ravens need a wideout really bad). Coles, McCants and Thrash are more than ready to put up big numbers. When Thrash played his frist stint in Washington he did not have a speed demon at the other wideout position. to help spread the field. Westbrook was a joke. Thrash also played with Irving Fryar Andre Reed and one year with Ellard if I am not mistaken. all possesion wideouts
With Coles on the other side of the field. Washington has some nasty speed at both flanker positions. McCants will have a great year with Thrash and Coles spreading the field he will find holes in coverage behind the linebackers. So in closing this up...I say trade Rod and use that pick to shore up the defensive front and we can take Sean Taylor at #5 that will add depth at safety by pushing back Ohalete or Bowen and Andre Lott is a promising young player. With the 5th and 6th round picks you can get good depth at linebacker and maybe even a young tight end
ImissRFK wrote:I say trade Rod to the Ravens for a 2nd or 3rd round pick(the Ravens need a wideout really bad).
NO! NO! NO!
Not to the Ravens! I live up here in Raven land....a magical place where people are blind to everyother team in the league....a place where nothing exists after Jan. 2000....
You can't trade him to the ravens! If the Raven's have T.O. Heap AND Gardner they would start to actually become an offensive threat. Remember they scored tons of points last year without a legitimate receiving corp. Say no on prop 313. DOn't send Gardner to the Ravens......We have to play them this year you know!
ImissRFK wrote:I say trade Rod to the Ravens for a 2nd or 3rd round pick(the Ravens need a wideout really bad).
NO! NO! NO!
Not to the Ravens! I live up here in Raven land....a magical place where people are blind to everyother team in the league....a place where nothing exists after Jan. 2000....
You can't trade him to the ravens! If the Raven's have T.O. Heap AND Gardner they would start to actually become an offensive threat. Remember they scored tons of points last year without a legitimate receiving corp. Say no on prop 313. DOn't send Gardner to the Ravens......We have to play them this year you know!
Chad
T.O. is with the eagles dude.
"People that think they know it all are especially annoying to those of us who do."
