Devon Thomas vs. Desean Jackson

1fan4ramsey · Post by **1fan4ramsey** » Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:12 pm

Didn't we have a shot at selecting Desean Jackson of the Eagles in last years draft but passed on him to select Thomas? Just want to get some opinions on that move by the Skins. Jackson seems to be having an immediate impact for Eagles, returning punts and being a key receiver, they seems to rely on him heavily. While Thomas is having trouble just seeing time on the field for the Redskins. Being of slight build, I question whether Jackson will enjoy longevity in the league, but you never know, he may just be a thorn in our side for years to come. :cry:

PulpExposure · Post by **PulpExposure** » Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:43 pm

The last thing the Redskins needed to draft was another small receiver.

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:45 pm

Jackson has a QB in a passing offense.

Thomas does not have a QB in a running offense.

Tough to make a call now.

brad7686 · Post by **brad7686** » Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:55 pm

Well, Thomas never really cracked the starting lineup, while Jackson did. Big difference in playing time. Plus, Jackson is extremely explosive, and that translates easily from college to the NFL. Thomas is somewhat explosive, but he also is physical, which will pay off when he learns to run routes a little better. He is going to have to stay healthy and learn more about being an NFL WR before he makes a big impact.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:07 am

Desean is playing with a future hall of fame QB. Mcnabb has made mediocre wideouts look good.

Deasean is in a system which is good for him. Also having a vet QB is great. Brian Westbrook also gives him good chances of being open as well.

I do not think Desean would have done so well if we would have drafted him.

VRIEL1 · Post by **VRIEL1** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:26 am

I think all of you are correct. Yes he's a smaller WR but he's getting the job done. Yes he's explosive but Thomas was supposed to be explosive also. Yes he's returning punts....we tried it in preseason with Thomas and he fumbled or didn't get any yrds if I'm not mistaken. I think he did so well in Philly cause the whole team was on the same page and they only had to get him ready to take a few plays and learn them. Perhaps each week even. We had a new coach with a new system for all our players to learn including our Rookies.

However I will not stop complaining about Hixon. I think he is the cog in the wheel. 5 yrs with us and the team has no real passing threat. 5 yrs and no developed WR's ready to step on the field. Every rookie WR we picked up has been let go except Gant who we picked up last yr. Kelly had an excuse but Thomas really didn't and neither saw the field hardly. or not as much as Jackson. Also Philly needed a tall WR also if you remember they tried for Williams and CJ also but failed to pick them up.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:41 am

2 things.

1: You cannot begin to accurately evaluate WR's until they have been in the league for 2 or 3 years.

2: Hindsight would be a wonderful resource for any team's draft gurus to have.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:05 am

It's very simple. This has nothing to do with who is the better athlete or whom has the better QB.

It comes down to 1 HC being able to use talent better than the other. Nobody on this forum/earth can tell me that he couldn't have made an impact at PR... As usual, we don't know how to use the talent we have, we kick them to the curb and piss them off, he'll eventually leave and do well for another team.

TeeterSalad · Post by **TeeterSalad** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:28 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:It's very simple. This has nothing to do with who is the better athlete or whom has the better QB.

It comes down to 1 HC being able to use talent better than the other. Nobody on this forum/earth can tell me that he couldn't have made an impact at PR... As usual, we don't know how to use the talent we have, we kick them to the curb and piss them off, he'll eventually leave and do well for another team.

I agree with this, we didn't really try and use Thomas.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:36 am

TeeterSalad wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:It's very simple. This has nothing to do with who is the better athlete or whom has the better QB.

It comes down to 1 HC being able to use talent better than the other. Nobody on this forum/earth can tell me that he couldn't have made an impact at PR... As usual, we don't know how to use the talent we have, we kick them to the curb and piss them off, he'll eventually leave and do well for another team.

I agree with this, we didn't really try and use Thomas.

Amen. It steams from Zorn trying to show he has some gonads by being unnecessarily hard on the rookies, IMHO. /thread

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:46 pm

My problem was with them drafting both Kelly and Thomas did we need both of them or did we draft them both hoping one would work out? If we did need two WR’s a strong case can be made for taking Kelly or Thomas with either Royal or Jackson.

Sorry but you can’t compare Jackson to Thomas totally different. Reid runs a different (better IMO) style of the WCO and Jackson fit right in…plus gave them a huge boost in the kick return game…We wouldn’t even have used him there…we have a better one in Moss but we don’t use him!!

John Manfreda · Post by **John Manfreda** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:53 pm

Its not fair to judge these receivers, when you have such an awful Qb, that takes an eternity to make decisions, wr's are generally not going to produce. Once we get a servicable Qb than we can start judging the receivers.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:09 pm

John Manfreda wrote:Its not fair to judge these receivers, when you have such an awful Qb, that takes an eternity to make decisions, wr's are generally not going to produce. Once we get a servicable Qb than we can start judging the receivers.

That doesn't explain why he wasn't allowed to PR....or KR....

It's a fault of the coach.

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:55 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:That doesn't explain why he wasn't allowed to PR....or KR....

It's a fault of the coach.

No and yes.

NO, a good punt returner does not make plays by HIMSELF ALONE. You need good coverage by the ENTIRE special team. Our coverage stinks quite often.

For the record, I do not think that Jackson is better than ARE in speed or reflexes. They simply have a better special team PERIOD.

And YES, it is the fault of Danny Smith for not improving the performance of the special teams as a whole. But it is not the direct job of Jim Zorn.

Jackson would have stunk around here with a QB who takes a lifetime to

1) Think;

2) make up its mind; and

3) release the ball (and even improve the mechanics of his slow release).

It starts at the QB position folks.

John Manfreda · Post by **John Manfreda** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:07 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
John Manfreda wrote:Its not fair to judge these receivers, when you have such an awful Qb, that takes an eternity to make decisions, wr's are generally not going to produce. Once we get a servicable Qb than we can start judging the receivers.

That doesn't explain why he wasn't allowed to PR....or KR....

It's a fault of the coach.

Maybe he sucked at it in practice. If its the fault of the coach, than as I said its not fair to judge these wr's, what exactly are you trying to say? ARE sucks at PR, I agree with you. Or we should have put Devin Thomas at PR, not sure I agree with you there, I would like to give Rock a try at Punt returnsm I think he deserves a shoot.

John Manfreda · Post by **John Manfreda** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:09 pm

Redskin in Canada wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:That doesn't explain why he wasn't allowed to PR....or KR....

It's a fault of the coach.

No and yes.

NO, a good punt returner does not make plays by HIMSELF ALONE. You need good coverage by the ENTIRE special team. Our coverage stinks quite often.

For the record, I do not think that Jackson is better than ARE in speed or reflexes. They simply have a better special team PERIOD.

And YES, it is the fault of Danny Smith for not improving the performance of the special teams as a whole. But it is not the direct job of Jim Zorn.

Jackson would have stunk around here with a QB who takes a lifetime to

1) Think;

2) make up its mind; and

3) release the ball (and even improve the mechanics of his slow release).

It starts at the QB position folks.

Great Post :celebrate:

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:43 pm

I too believed that he had horrific blocking but Moss was brilliant every time he touched a PR. I'm not equating Devon to Moss but Moss proved that things can happen at PR for us!

ARE hasn't done a darned thing since 2006!!!! What would it have hurt to put ANYBODY back there?

Give the guy a freaking chance. Devon looks good when he has the ball in his hands, he is aggressive and has good moves.

cleg · Post by **cleg** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:09 pm

DeSean is a punk and will get himself into trouble soon enough. T.O. but smaller body.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:15 pm

cleg wrote:DeSean is a punk and will get himself into trouble soon enough. T.O. but smaller body.

I haven't been on much but I'm sure this is the most uninformed and wildly useless post of 2009. I hope that you simply forgot your sarcasm tags.

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:21 pm

PulpExposure wrote:The last thing the Redskins needed to draft was another small receiver.

Agree with this.

Also agree with subsequent posters that McNabb made Jackson better. JC does not have the ability that McNabb has in hitting his receivers. Put Jacksons on this team and he wouldn't have had half the numbers he had in Philly.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:01 pm

markshark84 wrote:
PulpExposure wrote:The last thing the Redskins needed to draft was another small receiver.

Agree with this.

Also agree with subsequent posters that McNabb made Jackson better. JC does not have the ability that McNabb has in hitting his receivers. Put Jacksons on this team and he wouldn't have had half the numbers he had in Philly.

I don't disagree with that but he could have aided in other areas.

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:27 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
markshark84 wrote:
PulpExposure wrote:The last thing the Redskins needed to draft was another small receiver.

Agree with this.

Also agree with subsequent posters that McNabb made Jackson better. JC does not have the ability that McNabb has in hitting his receivers. Put Jacksons on this team and he wouldn't have had half the numbers he had in Philly.

I don't disagree with that but he could have aided in other areas.

Are you referring to JC?

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:27 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
markshark84 wrote:
PulpExposure wrote:The last thing the Redskins needed to draft was another small receiver.

Agree with this.

Also agree with subsequent posters that McNabb made Jackson better. JC does not have the ability that McNabb has in hitting his receivers. Put Jacksons on this team and he wouldn't have had half the numbers he had in Philly.

I don't disagree with that but he could have aided in other areas.

Are you referring to JC or Jackson? If Jackson, everyone would have gone nuts for picking an undersized-punt returning WR. We haven't made that mistake since Casserly did with Howard in 1992.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:31 pm

Devon Thomas.

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:58 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Devon Thomas.

Then I don't disagree with you either, although he did make a number of mental errors during the season. If I were the coach, I am not sure I would have trusted him in a PR role, though.