Page 3 of 4
Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2008 9:53 pm
by GSPODS
VetSkinsFan wrote:It's tough to argue isolating a team function to one player. It's quite an irrational way to think and many people have given ample amounts of input and theory (since that's all we're ALL doing, is theorizing). Whether it's in a rant, a blog, or an organized post graduate thesis, it's still not concrete. Not what I say about Santana having a place or what the other side of the coin says about him not. Argue what you will, but such an aggressive stance on any subject will only be detrimentally overall.
Agreed on all counts, but the subject of the thread is isolating one player.
So, yes, all of us are theorizing, whether it be the median or the extremes. For all any of us know, Santana Moss could be cut. The odds are highly against it, but it could happen. Moss could also catch 100 receptions this season. The odds are also highly against that, but it could happen. The reality likely lies somewhere in the middle. Relative to this thread, the question to be answered is: Is that somewhere in the middle enough to guarantee Santana Moss a future with the Redskins? Unless and until another Redskins wide receiver can outperform Moss the answer is "Yes."
The real question is: How long will it take for another Redskins wide receiver to outperform Santana Moss? And even then, will he be moved to the other side? Traded? Released? Retired? Who knows?
Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2008 10:16 pm
by CanesSkins26
The question is still: What does Santana Moss bring to the table that guarantees his future with the Washington Redskins?
Moss isn't going anywhere anytime soon. He is the only receiver on this team that is even close to being a #1 receiver. In fact, I would argue that at this point he is the only starting caliber receiver that we have on our entire roster. Thomas and Kelly are rookies and we have no idea if they are going to be studs or busts. Thrash, while a hard worker, is a #4 receiver at best and the thought of him playing meaningful minutes is scary. ARE should be a slot receiver but due to our lack of experienced talent, he is unfortunately our #2 receiver right now. So Moss isn't going anywhere because he is the only proven receiver on our roster right now.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:44 am
by KazooSkinsFan
OK, I admit it. NO ONE has a future on this team. We need to get rid of them all and just have no team this year so we can eat the cap and start over next year. Then we can go with them until we have sufficiently decided they have no future on this team and we can dump them too. I think this let's get rid of Moss, Collins, Portis, Betts, AC, Rogers, Jansen, Samuels, ARE, Thrash ... is really onto something. I don't see how we CAN'T win a Super Bowl if we keep eating tons of cap to get rid of all our players.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:16 pm
by jmooney
W e are forgetting that alot of the underneath catches by
ey and others in what was already a pretty anemic passing attack, was a direct result of the coverages that Santana drew as a deep threat. Teams simply shut him down and it was easier to do last year with the injuries.
If a guy can help the team away from the ball, its almost as good as him having the ball and you wont find that on a stats sheet. Trust me, the deep safety primary read was Santana first, then find the football. No team was worried about getting beat deep by any other player on the Skins.
Is that Value? yes
Will teams be able to play him that way this year? no
Does he have a future with this team ? That will be determined by his play ability vs. his salary
Isnt the #1 reciever pretty much who the QB likes most anyway?
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:23 pm
by GSPODS
jmooney wrote:W e are forgetting that alot of the underneath catches by
ey and others in what was already a pretty anemic passing attack, was a direct result of the coverages that Santana drew as a deep threat. Teams simply shut him down and it was easier to do last year with the injuries.
If a guy can help the team away from the ball, its almost as good as him having the ball and you wont find that on a stats sheet. Trust me, the deep safety primary read was Santana first, then find the football. No team was worried about getting beat deep by any other player on the Skins.
Is that Value? yes
Will teams be able to play him that way this year? no
Why will teams not be able to play Moss the same way this season?
The only thing that would prevent that is having Moss and Thomas on the field at the same time. That doesn't look like it's the first option of Jim Zorn. Randle El and Thrash aren't threatening any defenses with their lack of speed and separation. It'll be the same as last season. Double cover Moss, and double cover
ey, and make someone else, anyone else beat the coverage. It will be that way until someone else steps up as another legitimate threat.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:36 pm
by BnGhog
GSPODS wrote:jmooney wrote:W e are forgetting that alot of the underneath catches by
ey and others in what was already a pretty anemic passing attack, was a direct result of the coverages that Santana drew as a deep threat. Teams simply shut him down and it was easier to do last year with the injuries.
If a guy can help the team away from the ball, its almost as good as him having the ball and you wont find that on a stats sheet. Trust me, the deep safety primary read was Santana first, then find the football. No team was worried about getting beat deep by any other player on the Skins.
Is that Value? yes
Will teams be able to play him that way this year? no
Why will teams not be able to play Moss the same way this season?
The only thing that would prevent that is having Moss and Thomas on the field at the same time. That doesn't look like it's the first option of Jim Zorn. Randle El and Thrash aren't threatening any defenses with their lack of speed and separation. It'll be the same as last season. Double cover Moss, and double cover
ey, and make someone else, anyone else beat the coverage. It will be that way until someone else steps up as another legitimate threat.
And that's the reason we went with larger WRs. (I think we are making progress here GSPODS. )Possession Type WRs.
until someone else steps up as another legitimate threat
That's the hope. Double Moss, and just try to single Thomas or Kelly.
Well, that's if they step up, but that is what we want.
That's the threat with Thrash, if you sleep on him, he will burn you because he is not going to drop a pass. He is unexpected.
The more threats the better, and the more they prove themselves, the more confused the D will get as to who they respect the most, ie see NE last year.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:38 pm
by jmooney
More passing routes out of the backfield
Two tight end sets in PASSING SITUATIONS
Up to 5 passing options (threats)
Healthy O- Line (so far)
Healthy Santana (so far)
having Thomas on the field with Moss may not be the first option but id wager it is an option
This offense will force safties to play up instead of dropping backers and ends into coverage, simply because teams must still respect our run. The west coast style will nickle and dime you to death if you dont get your safties up to cover it.
Look I doubt Santana will lead the league this year in anything BUT Id say he will lead the team in YPC and REC yds. expect him to burn a team deep maybe 2 times a game, salt in a few screens and 7 yd outs and he will be right in the mix
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:52 pm
by Champsturf
jmooney wrote:More passing routes out of the backfield
Two tight end sets in PASSING SITUATIONS
Up to 5 passing options (threats)
Healthy O- Line (so far)
Healthy Santana (so far)
having Thomas on the field with Moss may not be the first option but id wager it is an option
This offense will force safties to play up instead of dropping backers and ends into coverage, simply because teams must still respect our run. The west coast style will nickle and dime you to death if you dont get your safties up to cover it.
Look I doubt Santana will lead the league this year in anything BUT Id say he will lead the team in YPC and REC yds. expect him to burn a team deep maybe 2 times a game, salt in a few screens and 7 yd outs and he will be right in the mix
STOP being rational and seeing the big picture!
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:32 pm
by CanesSkins26
Double Moss, and just try to single Thomas or Kelly.
Moss is one of my favorite players, but with the way that he played last year there is simply no need for other teams to double team him.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:40 pm
by Champsturf
CanesSkins26 wrote:Double Moss, and just try to single Thomas or Kelly.
Moss is one of my favorite players, but with the way that he played last year there is simply no need for other teams to double team him.
Let's see, he wasn't healthy most of the season and had the dropsies. That doesn't sound too normal for him, so I can let it slide.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:49 pm
by CanesSkins26
Champsturf wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Double Moss, and just try to single Thomas or Kelly.
Moss is one of my favorite players, but with the way that he played last year there is simply no need for other teams to double team him.
Let's see, he wasn't healthy most of the season and had the dropsies. That doesn't sound too normal for him, so I can let it slide.
You can let it slide all you want but if we get a repeat of last season from him we're in huge trouble on offense.
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:26 pm
by Champsturf
CanesSkins26 wrote:Champsturf wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Double Moss, and just try to single Thomas or Kelly.
Moss is one of my favorite players, but with the way that he played last year there is simply no need for other teams to double team him.
Let's see, he wasn't healthy most of the season and had the dropsies. That doesn't sound too normal for him, so I can let it slide.
You can let it slide all you want but if we get a repeat of last season from him we're in huge trouble on offense.
I agree 100%, but like I said, it wasn't a normal season for him. If it becaomes normal, the yes, deep do-do.
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 5:28 pm
by SkinsFreak
CanesSkins26 wrote:Champsturf wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Double Moss, and just try to single Thomas or Kelly.
Moss is one of my favorite players, but with the way that he played last year there is simply no need for other teams to double team him.
Let's see, he wasn't healthy most of the season and had the dropsies. That doesn't sound too normal for him, so I can let it slide.
You can let it slide all you want but if we get a repeat of last season from him we're in huge trouble on offense.
That's being pretty harsh and unrealistic. The entire offense is in "huge trouble" if Moss drops a few passes and misses a game or two? I guess by that logic, Moss is far more valuable to this team than most would admit here.
Listen, Moss struggled in a few games, not the entire season. Moss isn't our entire offense, we have some pretty darn good players and options. But please, I sincerely hope defensive coordinators plan to just single cover our fastest, most elusive and most productive receiver our team currently has. Don't plan on it though. The nice thing, however, is if Kelly, Thomas and Davis become the pass catchers we hope, things could get real complicated for opposing d-coaches.
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 5:48 pm
by GSPODS
SkinsFreak wrote:
That's being pretty harsh and unrealistic. The entire offense is in "huge trouble" if Moss drops a few passes and misses a game or two? I guess by that logic, Moss is far more valuable to this team than most would admit here.
Listen, Moss struggled in a few games, not the entire season. Moss isn't our entire offense, we have some pretty darn good players and options. But please, I sincerely hope defensive coordinators plan to just single cover our fastest, most elusive and most productive receiver our team currently has. Don't plan on it though. The nice thing, however, is if Kelly, Thomas and Davis become the pass catchers we hope, things could get real complicated for opposing d-coaches.
Moss had 61 receptions in 14 games even with injuries and bad hands.
Had he played all 16 games, he would have been close to or at 70 receptions. Had he both played all 16 games and not had injury problems, he might have been close to 80 receptions. The numbers are all speculation, based upon the law of averages, but Moss is by far the best and most productive wide receiver on the Redskins. He is dangerously close to being the only starting caliber wide receiver on the Redskins.
I'm as fickle as anyone, but it's completely foolish to write Santana Moss off based upon last season alone.
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 5:52 pm
by Paralis
SkinsFreak wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Champsturf wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Double Moss, and just try to single Thomas or Kelly.
Moss is one of my favorite players, but with the way that he played last year there is simply no need for other teams to double team him.
Let's see, he wasn't healthy most of the season and had the dropsies. That doesn't sound too normal for him, so I can let it slide.
You can let it slide all you want but if we get a repeat of last season from him we're in huge trouble on offense.
That's being pretty harsh and unrealistic. The entire offense is in "huge trouble" if Moss drops a few passes and misses a game or two? I guess by that logic, Moss is far more valuable to this team than most would admit here.
Listen, Moss struggled in a few games, not the entire season. Moss isn't our entire offense, we have some pretty darn good players and options. But please, I sincerely hope defensive coordinators plan to just single cover our fastest, most elusive and most productive receiver our team currently has. Don't plan on it though. The nice thing, however, is if Kelly, Thomas and Davis become the pass catchers we hope, things could get real complicated for opposing d-coaches.
It's really not that hyperbolic. It's not that much of a stretch to say that Moss single-handedly lost the game in GB. Counting on another game-plus margin in getting into the playoffs next year seems a bit much.
Do I think that's going to happen? Of course not. But last year, when Santana was bad, he was
bad, and that's something that bears remembering, both by the fans and the coaching staff, because the best men should be on the field, starters or not.[/b]
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 7:47 pm
by CanesSkins26
The entire offense is in "huge trouble" if Moss drops a few passes and misses a game or two? I guess by that logic, Moss is far more valuable to this team than most would admit here.
Yes, the entire offense is in huge trouble if Moss goes down. That would leave us with ARE and Thrash as the starters and that would be a downright joke. I would argue that given our lack of experienced talent at WR Moss is as important to our offense as an other player on the team.
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:17 pm
by SkinsFreak
CanesSkins26 wrote:The entire offense is in "huge trouble" if Moss drops a few passes and misses a game or two? I guess by that logic, Moss is far more valuable to this team than most would admit here.
Yes, the entire offense is in huge trouble if Moss goes down. That would leave us with ARE and Thrash as the starters and that would be a downright joke. I would argue that given our lack of experienced talent at WR Moss is as important to our offense as an other player on the team.
Well then, I guess it was pretty smart to draft 2 WR's and the best pass catching TE in the draft. If Moss goes down, ARE and Thrash are not our only options.
Funny, you bash Moss and his lack of production, his injuries and his dropsies last year, but even with a less than perfect Moss, AND the loss of our starting QB, the team still managed to make the playoffs. So I guess your argument doesn't hold much water.
I'm fairly confident the team would argue your point that the loss of one player alone isn't enough to end the season.
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:09 pm
by yupchagee
CanesSkins26 wrote:The entire offense is in "huge trouble" if Moss drops a few passes and misses a game or two? I guess by that logic, Moss is far more valuable to this team than most would admit here.
Yes, the entire offense is in huge trouble if Moss goes down. That would leave us with ARE and Thrash as the starters and that would be a downright joke. I would argue that given our lack of experienced talent at WR Moss is as important to our offense as an other player on the team.
Is this the Cane in you talking?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:07 am
by Deadskins
On page one of this thread
GSPODS wrote:Does Santana Moss have a future with the Redskins? Not much of one.
Santana Moss is not a legitimate #1 receiver. Not by a long shot. A career best of 84 receptions (one time) with a second best of 74 receptions, and a third best of 61 receptions makes a great #3 receiver, not a #1 receiver, or even a legitimate #2 receiver. Chris
ey caught more receptions last season. As a matter of fact, 36 players caught more receptions last season.
The reason for drafting Thomas and Kelly is that top two receivers combined barely caught more passes than the top receivers in the league did by themselves last season.
Six players caught at least 100 receptions last season.
Fourteen players caught at least 90 receptions.
Twenty-one player caught at least 80 receptions.
Thirty players caught at least 70 receptions.
No Redskins player was in the Top 30.
The Redskins top two receivers,
ey and Moss combined, had 127 receptions. Houshmandzadeh and Welker had 112 each.
To be among the best teams in today's pass-heavy NFL, your #1 and #2 wide receivers have to catch 200 receptions.
To be competitive, your #1 and #2 wide receivers have to catch at least 150 receptions. The Redskins fall far short of that mark.
Jim Zorn's QB completed 94 passes to Bobby Engram last season. I think he is fully aware of the Redskins issues at wide receiver. Sanatana Moss being the #1 wide receiver is easily one of them.
And now on page seven
GSPODS wrote:Moss had 61 receptions in 14 games even with injuries and bad hands.
Had he played all 16 games, he would have been close to or at 70 receptions. Had he both played all 16 games and not had injury problems, he might have been close to 80 receptions. The numbers are all speculation, based upon the law of averages, but Moss is by far the best and most productive wide receiver on the Redskins. He is dangerously close to being the only starting caliber wide receiver on the Redskins.
I'm as fickle as anyone, but it's completely foolish to write Santana Moss off based upon last season alone.
I won't disagrre with the fickle thing.
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:33 am
by VetSkinsFan
It's really not that hyperbolic. It's not that much of a stretch to say that Moss single-handedly lost the game in GB. Counting on another game-plus margin in getting into the playoffs next year seems a bit much.
This is a team sport. If the game was that close where 1 player can have that significant an impact, then there are more deficiencies than 1 WR....
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:49 am
by roybus14
I think he does as long as he can continue to be productive. You have a 1 in 2 chance to get a starting WR out of the two picks we made. We have a couple of problems with the passing game here.
1. So many options especially in a WCO. You got a Pro Bowl TE/H-Back in
ey, ARE, Moss and now with the WCO Betts or Portis out of the backfield. The question should be is there enough balls to go around.
2. The adjustment by JC to the new offense. Collins is struggling with it and he's a vet. Brennan is just too green. JC is our best hope and I am confident that once he get's comfortable in this offense, he will be fine and so will Moss.
We need a speed burner (Moss) to go down the field with when we do go down field. The big problem with Moss IMO has been lack of touchs. If he is not being thrown to, how does he remain productive? One of the two rookie's could be a #1 but not now. They are not Calvin Johnson. But from what I've seen so far, they got some "learning" to do. The real question should be who do you cut and who do you keep at WR. Thrash is necessary. ARE and Moss are locks. One of the rookies is bound to make it but who becomes the odd men out. McMullen, Mix, Toler or the other rookie?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:20 pm
by John Manfreda
People are also forgetting that Santana finished strong. The Giants he had a solid outing, The Vikings he looked good, and against Dallas he played really well. The playoff game he had a solid outing also. I know the last route but to be honest I think he just thought the play was over, I didn't think he took it off because he wasn't getting the ball thrown to him. He did though have correct me if I am wrong 4-5 receptions and td.
Even though we drafted two receivers there different types of receivers, there big ones, Santana is a deep threat. I think he will team really well with them.
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:03 pm
by Champsturf
VetSkinsFan wrote:It's really not that hyperbolic. It's not that much of a stretch to say that Moss single-handedly lost the game in GB. Counting on another game-plus margin in getting into the playoffs next year seems a bit much.
This is a team sport. If the game was that close where 1 player can have that significant an impact, then there are more deficiencies than 1 WR....
Take Manning out of the Colts...Brady out of the Pats...
Granted, they are QB's, but one player on each team and I don't think those team do squat without them I'm sure there are more, but I thought 2 examples would be enough.
Moss is very important to this offense. Without him, doubling
ey probably seals the deal, since nobody else is even close to being a #1. That is, until one or all three of these rookies pan out...
Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:43 am
by VetSkinsFan
Champsturf wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:It's really not that hyperbolic. It's not that much of a stretch to say that Moss single-handedly lost the game in GB. Counting on another game-plus margin in getting into the playoffs next year seems a bit much.
This is a team sport. If the game was that close where 1 player can have that significant an impact, then there are more deficiencies than 1 WR....
Take Manning out of the Colts...Brady out of the Pats...
Granted, they are QB's, but one player on each team and I don't think those team do squat without them I'm sure there are more, but I thought 2 examples would be enough.
Moss is very important to this offense. Without him, doubling
ey probably seals the deal, since nobody else is even close to being a #1. That is, until one or all three of these rookies pan out...
Let's keep it relavent, we're contemplating a WR's worth. Maybe I should have been more specific, but I
assumed(yeah I know, I know) that we could compare apples to apples. When Manning's favorite receiver went down, they STILL performed with the rest of the team. I think that we would do the same. It's debatable whether it was to the same standard, since it's literally impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that production suffered post-injury to Harrison. Am I arguing that we don't need Moss? Hell no, Moss is one of my favorite players, but one WR will not make or break the team.
Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:05 am
by GSPODS
VetSkinsFan wrote: Moss is one of my favorite players, but one WR will not make or break the team.
Thank You, voice of reason. If one player going down, or away makes or breaks a team, the team isn't built very well. New England is a perfect example. If Brady goes out, that team is cooked. If any one player, Moss or otherwise, is out of the Redskins lineup, the Skins have more than enough capable backups.
Even if the Skins had acquired Chad Johnson this past off-season, they still weren't trading or cutting Santana Moss. He is certainly valuable to the Redskins offense. But he isn't the end all, be all of the team's existence. The team did, after all, make the playoffs last season with Moss having been out of some games, and playing hurt in others.