Mattyk72 Presents the "Redskin Most Likely to Bounce Back in '07" Poll

What about Portis? Due to injuries he didnt do anything in 06 and it will be interesting to see if he can regain his form and stay injury free in 07.

My feeling is that if Archuleta can work his way onto the field, he's the Favorite for Comeback Player of the Year. The pants-crappingly bad 2006 season left the bar that low.

What about Portis? Due to injuries he didnt do anything in 06 and it will be interesting to see if he can regain his form and stay injury free in 07.

Yeah I didn't count Portis or Priloeau because their disappointing 2006 seasons weren't the result of their performance on the field, just their in ability to be healthy and get on the field.

Lloyd-Really, there's no evidence to expect this guy to improve for us. It's not like he was a great disappointment last year, he's simply just not a great WR.

Marshall-Boy would I love to pick my boy #98 here. However, I predict Rocky beats him out for the WLB job in training camp. He's going to be one of the best backup LBs in the business for us, and a great STeamer.

Rogers-I don't think Rogers had a horrible 2006. I think he's never going to be good enough to shut down an elite player in man coverage, but I don't think he's looking for a bounceback season.

Archuleta is my selection. He's done it in this league before, and I'm thinking he got scapegoated for a problem that only got worse after he was replaced. Nobody is going to complement his cover skills, but I think the last 7 games proved very clearly that Archuleta wasn't the problem on this defensive unit.

He has to stop missing open field tackles though. He may have had a bad back, but either you tough it out and make the good form tackle, or you get on that injury report. It seems to me that Archuleta probably had a pretty significant injury and was hiding it in an attempt to justify a huge deal.

I think he wins the starting job in camp next year. I'll even go on record as saying I think he and Sean Taylor will be playing together for many more years. He gets my vote.

I like Rogers. Like 724Skins said, he cathces those ints, we forget all about Walt Harris.

The Secondary needs rogers to come into his own and be able to shut down those #1 WR's.Not to crap all over your parade, but football outsiders does keep statistical rankings of teams defending certain positions in the passing game.

Our ranks vs:

#1 receiver: 19
#2 receiver: 30
"other" receiver: 20
TE: 28
Running backs: 32

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2006 and 2005 (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef.php)

Considering we were the 32nd ranked passing D, we actually defend No. 1 receivers pretty well. These numbers support the case that LINEBACKERS and SAFETIES are where our trouble spot is, not the corners. That #2 receiver number is also pretty disturbing, but considering either Rogers or Springs was defending the #1 most of the time, those two guys are pretty much getting it done, even on the 32 ranked pass D.

I'm riding the bandwagon and going with Rogers. I think with improved play from guys around him he'll really benefit.

Not to crap all over your parade, but football outsiders does keep statistical rankings of teams defending certain positions in the passing game.

Our ranks vs:

#1 receiver: 19
#2 receiver: 30
"other" receiver: 20
TE: 28
Running backs: 32

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2006 and 2005 (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef.php)

Considering we were the 32nd ranked passing D, we actually defend No. 1 receivers pretty well. These numbers support the case that LINEBACKERS and SAFETIES are where our trouble spot is, not the corners. That #2 receiver number is also pretty disturbing, but considering either Rogers or Springs was defending the #1 most of the time, those two guys are pretty much getting it done, even on the 32 ranked pass D.


Even still statistics only tell you so much and really should be taken with a grain salt when measuring what the Redskins did good and bad in '06.

My point is, because the defense as a whole was so bad, I wouldn't put too much stock in any one statistical category on the defensive side of the ball.

I'll say David Patten. Damnit, at some point he's got to be good again right?

Really though, Rogers seems to make the most sense

Speaking of bounce back, I'm glad we don't have to go through the Taylor Jacobs soap opera this year.