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

but we sure have had more than our fair share of hamstring and groin problems

We had 3 linemen hurt by groin and hammy injuries during the mud game in GB. I lay those squarely on whomever made the call on which cleats/shoes to wear. GB's linemen were not slipping around like ours, and THAT (not conditioning) was why our guys got hurt.

Also do you have a better explanation?

How about because he got popped really hard on the collar bone? That IS, generally, how it happens.

You may recall that Lloyd put on about 10 pounds of muscle mass last off season... he did that by an intensive program... and, as you pointed out, muscle protects bone... but lifting also directly strengthens bone.

Conditioning is not involved here, dude.

He got hit hard. It's that simple.

Countertrey wrote:

Also do you have a better explanation?

How about because he got popped really hard on the collar bone? That IS, generally, how it happens.

You may recall that Lloyd put on about 10 pounds of muscle mass last off season... he did that by an intensive program... and, as you pointed out, muscle protects bone... but lifting also directly strengthens bone.

Conditioning is not involved here, dude.

He got hit hard. It's that simple.

There are many injuries on the Redskins squad.

It would be wise for the training staff to at least question why these injuries are occurring?

Also is there anything further that can be implemented into there diet and training that may help in preventing further injuries to the players.

Now I am not sure whether each player has there own personal dieticians and physical trainers. But, something has to change.

The least I would want to hear is that the teams doctors and trainers are having the players submit how they are training and what kind of foods these guys are eating. I mean heck they are million dollar investments it only makes sense.

Quite frankly this team has been sub par on the playing field. Sub Par in the Front office.

Why wouldnt I think they would be sub par as far as training and diet are concerned?

At this point I would not be surprised if they are slacking in any department. (sigh)

I´m betting right now you´ll hear about this subject in the local sports media soon. The number of injuries is just ridiculous compared to other teams.

Great observation guys! You read it first on the Hogs.net all you lazy journalists!

Not ready to give up on my Redskins during this season.

Not ready to give up on my Redskins against the hated PUKES.

Surely, the ten point spread seems generous for -us- at this time but I feel that we either win or lose by a score much worse than 10 points. I select the former because I do KNOW that it can happen, not probable but it can happen if the coaches design the right game plan and the no-names EXECUTE correctly.

Redskin in Canada wrote:Not ready to give up on my Redskins during this season.

Not ready to give up on my Redskins against the hated PUKES.

Surely, the ten point spread seems generous for -us- at this time but I feel that we either win or lose by a score much worse than 10 points. I select the former because I do KNOW that it can happen, not probable but it can happen if the coaches design the right game plan and the no-names EXECUTE correctly.

I have not given up on the SKins at all. I am just adressing the injuries with this team.

Just looking ahead a bit. Yes I do think we have a fighting chance. In fact if JC can light up the questionable Dallas secondary we will be in very good shape.

JT going down hurt, he is a "Joe Gibbs type guy", Who on this roster is gonna step up? Who is the next Alvin Garrett?

The Skins consistantly suffer more than their fair share of injuries at key positions every year. At first I just thought it was unfortunate coincidence, but it's been happening for so long now I wonder if it's a problem with how the coaches prepare the players for the games? It just doesn't seem like it would happen every year without fail if it was just coincidence.

every year

As Joe Gibbs has said since 1981, every team has injuries every year. Some are pure freak accidents, such as Joe T and Jon Jansen (twice). For that matter, we all remember that the Redskins would have won SB 7 if Sonny had not suffered a snapped achilles tendon in the first Giants game. No hit...he was fading back to pass.

Things happen. I noticed years ago that the teams with the feest significant injuries often got to the playoffs.

welch wrote:As Joe Gibbs has said since 1981, every team has injuries every year. Some are pure freak accidents, such as Joe T and Jon Jansen (twice). For that matter, we all remember that the Redskins would have won SB 7 if Sonny had not suffered a snapped achilles tendon in the first Giants game. No hit...he was fading back to pass.

Sonny says that he actually turned around and yelled at the ref: "Did you just kick me?!" because it was so confusing to feel his heel 'snap' like that.

Al I remember that Sonny said it felt like he'd been kicked in the heel. Strange things, achilles tendon injuries.

Regarding injuries, see http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25346

The fewer the players, the greater the victory.

Get me a tall, fast, WR, with good (NOT Tod Pinkston )

Make Jake can find an ex-Redskin who fellow that Gibbs decided didn't like to practice. Endinded up in CFL, but was the best receiver, of a poor bunch, that Spurrier brougtt in. Charlie Taylor, the greatset of them all (and I'm preparrd to arghue that Taylor was better than Jerry Rice, and Rice was better than any WR playing today)

Charlie is on my Avatar, thanks again to our atist-in-residentce NC43, along with the finest passer of modern football.


Back to he topic. The Skins have won before with loads on injuries This week the DB's worry me.

Maybe Redskin fans wre spoiled by Baugh, Jurgensen, Charlie Taylor, and Art Monk.

Still, an Art Monk / Charlie Taylor clone is on my draft wish-list. Charlie: 6-3, 217 pounds, rookie of he year as a RB with a mediocre line, and played two-way football at Arizona State. Coladhave started as a Redskin strong safety.

Oh, well. I'm so sleepy that I can't type. Just dream of another Charlie T or Art Monk.

Still, we are not toast. Remember when Mike Bass got badly hurt, and was temporaruily paralized? Never played again.

[Really, truly: never type when you are that sleepy!]

Looks like Wade has a sprained knee. Our oline becomes an even bigger question mark now.

welch wrote:Regarding injuries, see http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25346

The fewer the players, the greater the victory.

Get me a tall, fast, WR, with good had (NOT Tod Pinkston )

Make Jake can find an ex-Redskin who fellow that Gibbs decoded didn't like to practice. Endinded up in CFL, but was the best receiver, of a poor bunch, that Spurrier brougtin. Charlie Taylor, the greatset of them all (and I'm peparerd to arhue that Talalor was better than Jerry Rice, and Rice was better than any WR playing tody)

Charlie is on my Avatar, thanks again to our atist-in-residentce NC43, along with the finest passer of modern football.


Backto he topic. The Skins have woi before with loads on injuries Thius week the DB's worry me.

Maybe Redskin fans wre spolied by Baugh, Jurgensen, Charlie Taylor, and Art Monk.

Still, an Art Monk / Charlie Taylor clone is on my draft wish-list.es, Charlie: 6-3, 217 pounds, rookie of he year as a RB with a medocre line, and played two-way fotball at Arizona State. Coladhave started as a Redskn strong safety.

Oh, well. I'm so sleepy that I can't type. Just dream of another Charlie T or Art Monk.

Still, we are not toast. Remember when Mike Bass got badly hurt, and was temporaruily paralied? Never okayed again,

Charlie Taylor was the best all time and I agree he was better than Rice.

Who wouldn't want a Art Monk type? Ask yourself who would help this team more right now, Rice in his prime, Monk in his prime or C Taylor in his prime. I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Any news on RANDY THOMAS??....is he close to returning ?? whats the the story there anyone know...Its been 10 weeks since the injury(counting bye week) I hope hes close.

Skinsfan33 wrote

I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Me too. Without a doubt.

skinsfan#33 wrote:

welch wrote:Regarding injuries, see http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25346

The fewer the players, the greater the victory.

Get me a tall, fast, WR, with good had (NOT Tod Pinkston )

Make Jake can find an ex-Redskin who fellow that Gibbs decoded didn't like to practice. Endinded up in CFL, but was the best receiver, of a poor bunch, that Spurrier brougtin. Charlie Taylor, the greatset of them all (and I'm peparerd to arhue that Talalor was better than Jerry Rice, and Rice was better than any WR playing tody)

Charlie is on my Avatar, thanks again to our atist-in-residentce NC43, along with the finest passer of modern football.


Backto he topic. The Skins have woi before with loads on injuries Thius week the DB's worry me.

Maybe Redskin fans wre spolied by Baugh, Jurgensen, Charlie Taylor, and Art Monk.

Still, an Art Monk / Charlie Taylor clone is on my draft wish-list.es, Charlie: 6-3, 217 pounds, rookie of he year as a RB with a medocre line, and played two-way fotball at Arizona State. Coladhave started as a Redskn strong safety.

Oh, well. I'm so sleepy that I can't type. Just dream of another Charlie T or Art Monk.

Still, we are not toast. Remember when Mike Bass got badly hurt, and was temporaruily paralied? Never okayed again,

Charlie Taylor was the best all time and I agree he was better than Rice.

Who wouldn't want a Art Monk type? Ask yourself who would help this team more right now, Rice in his prime, Monk in his prime or C Taylor in his prime. I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

With all due respect, you guys are smoking some of that Redskin peace pipe.

You may be able to argue that Charlie Taylor was a better football player than Jerry Rice, because of his versatility, but as far as being a better receiver... no way on Earth. And that's putting it lightly. And Art Monk better than Jerry Rice? The only place that's even possible is in the mind of a dedicated Skins fan.

Rice Taylor Monk
Games-- 303 165 224
Top 10 catches(seasons)-- 12 9 4
Top 10 rec yds(seasons)-- 12 6 3
Top 10 rec tds(seasons)-- 12 6 1
Top 10 yds from scrimmage(seasons)-- 8 2 0
Top 10 rush/rec tds(seasons)-- 9 3 0
All time catches (rank)-- 1st 36th 6th
All time rec yds (rank)-- 1st 37th 12th
All time rec tds (rank)-- 1st 19th 31st
All time yds fm scrimmage-- 1st unk 33rd
Pro Bowls-- 13 8 3

Postseason) Taylor’s best years were obviously his first few in the league, when he was productive as a runner and receiver. Monk played in 15 postseason games, but outside the Buffalo superbowl, his big games were all in losing efforts. Jerry Rice logged more postseason games than some guys log career games, and his best games were the biggest games:

In 4 Super Bowl appearances, Jerry Rice tallied 39 catches for 589yds and 8tds.
Case closed.

He even scored 1 less rushing touchdown than Taylor on 1/5th as many carries and less than half as many yards. He wasn’t just statistical dominance, he was as big a big game player as there’s ever been, and bigger than most.

Simply put, if the league weren’t so biased towards QBs and RBs when determining the game’s best players, Jerry Rice would be considered the best football player that ever lived. Charlie Taylor and Art Monk were greats, but Jerry Rice is the standard against which all other receivers are measured.

When it comes to the notion that any other receiver that’s ever played is better than Jerry rice, there is no good argument. Not yet.

welch wrote:Skinsfan33 wrote

I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Me too. Without a doubt.

I say this with the caveat that I didn't start watching football until, really, 1994 but Terrell Owens is the best I have ever seen.

welch wrote:Skinsfan33 wrote

I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Me too. Without a doubt.

Monk ahead of Rice? Like any sensible fan, I think Monk belongs in the HoF (to quote Parcells, downhill on rollerskates), but ahead of Rice? I'd like to read your case on that - not saying it can't be made, but I'd like to see it. As for Taylor, he was before my time, so I'm not going to question that.

Fios wrote:

welch wrote:Skinsfan33 wrote

I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Me too. Without a doubt.

I say this with the caveat that I didn't start watching football until, really, 1994 but Terrell Owens is the best I have ever seen.

Hate to say it, but Randy Moss (when he bothers to try), is better. He'd be a HoF lock if he wasn't so undisciplined and lazy at times, but his talent is so tremendous, he'll probably still get in.

Mursilis wrote:

welch wrote:Skinsfan33 wrote

I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Me too. Without a doubt.

Monk ahead of Rice? Like any sensible fan, I think Monk belongs in the HoF (to quote Parcells, downhill on rollerskates), but ahead of Rice? I'd like to read your case on that - not saying it can't be made, but I'd like to see it. As for Taylor, he was before my time, so I'm not going to question that.

Monk was a better receiver, but Rice could make the RAC like nobody's business. How many times did he take a 10 yard catch over the middle 50 yards to the house?

Mursilis wrote:

Fios wrote:

welch wrote:Skinsfan33 wrote

I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Me too. Without a doubt.

I say this with the caveat that I didn't start watching football until, really, 1994 but Terrell Owens is the best I have ever seen.

Hate to say it, but Randy Moss (when he bothers to try), is better. He'd be a HoF lock if he wasn't so undisciplined and lazy at times, but his talent is so tremendous, he'll probably still get in.

I would agree that Moss is better than T.O. in talent and in his best moments. The "who is greatest" questions are maddening in anything (players, movies, books) because genre has to play a role. I prefer to think about the 'greatest x player' discussions similarly to how they are supposed to judge the Heisman Trophy: Who contributed the most to his team's success?

If that's the relevant question (rather than length of career, talent, "when he was in his prime" moments, or elsewise), I can't see either Moss or Owens cracking a top-5 list of great WRs. But I don't want to discredit their talent, either.

All of that to say: I don't know. Carry on. . .

Rice played against such strong division rivals in Atlanta, New Orleans, and LA Rams, it's no wonder he set so many records.

Irn-Bru wrote:

Mursilis wrote:

Fios wrote:

welch wrote:Skinsfan33 wrote

I would rank it this way: Taylor, Monk, Rice.

Me too. Without a doubt.

I say this with the caveat that I didn't start watching football until, really, 1994 but Terrell Owens is the best I have ever seen.

Hate to say it, but Randy Moss (when he bothers to try), is better. He'd be a HoF lock if he wasn't so undisciplined and lazy at times, but his talent is so tremendous, he'll probably still get in.

I would agree that Moss is better than T.O. in talent and in his best moments. The "who is greatest" questions are maddening in anything (players, movies, books) because genre has to play a role. I prefer to think about the 'greatest x player' discussions similarly to how they are supposed to judge the Heisman Trophy: Who contributed the most to his team's success?

If that's the relevant question (rather than length of career, talent, "when he was in his prime" moments, or elsewise), I can't see either Moss or Owens cracking a top-5 list of great WRs. But I don't want to discredit their talent, either.

All of that to say: I don't know. Carry on. . .

I'm actually not much of a fan of superlatives either, I'm not making a claim about his rank in NFL history, just that of the receivers I have watched, he is the best. Not to go too far off topic but I recognize the talent Moss has but not trying means he's had stretches of sub-par play. No such equivalent for Owens, his attitude can suck but he always shows up.

The "best" should really be who makes their team win, which means TOTAL contribution, not just spectacular plays. BO, I mean TO is dead right there with Randy. They both provide such huge negatives on that regard greatly offsetting their positives.

Rice and Monk are at the top of that list. Both were great team players who despite everyone knowing the key to stopping their team through the game was to limit them, yet they couldn't do it anyway.