Where are they this week?

We have 5 capable receivers. We should just rotate them and wear the hell out of the DBs.

We have 5 capable receivers. We should just rotate them and wear the hell out of the DBs.


Daseal - that's brilliant! I can see it now..... Coles and Thrash take their CB's all the way down the field to the end zone - windsprint. They come out and Taylor and McCants do the same thing on the next play. (Garner stays in and does shorter post routes because he's got lead feet.) Third down, Coles and Thrash go down the field again and we throw it long ---- Coles, Touchdown!!! OK - maybe this would take several series to take effect.

Here's another strategy.... Stick Hasselbeck, Tupa, and Hall in as a 3-wide receiver set. Have LaVar come in as the TE. The defense will be confused as hell. THEN - have Tupa take the handoff and fake the reverse to Hall. Then Tupa laterals across the field to Hasselbeck who shuttle passes to LaVar. TOUCHDOWN! And even if LaVar somehow gets stopped prior to the endzone, our kicking team is already on the field for a hurry-up field goal!

See - I am capable of drawing up a play with involving The Ade!

I can't say I'm surprised that RG went from a monster game to 3 catches for 19 yards. That's been his MO his entire career.

We have 5 capable receivers. We should just rotate them and wear the hell out of the DBs.

why do we keep five receivers on the roster anyhow?

hail marys? just in case our starters get hurt? well, sucks to say, i'd wanna really hear it from him first, but i think Coles is playing hurt.

and despite his big game, Gardner has a proven history of clutch drops. he may not be a bigtime playmaker, but i never knew Thrash to drop any with us or philly.

i also knew McCants to get open and focused enough to score in the red zone. Jacobs seems speedy and healthy, why dont we see him out there more often or to spell one of our struggling starters?

I don't think it's a secret, Coles is playing hurt. He's got a bad toe and his finger can't be 100% just yet either. So what, I'd still rather have him in the lineup than not. He's still notched two 100 yard games so far, he has 4 catches of 20 yards or more and 1 over 40.

He's on pace for 96 catches and 1164 yards. Why should be bench him?

How about Gardner? Well he's on pace for 80 catches and 1252 yards. So far he has 5 catches of 20 yards or more and 3 over 40 yards.

They do need to be more consistent, but overall they haven't been terrible by any stretch. They should only improve as they settle in to the offense. It's hard to justify benching either of these guys right now. Especially when all we have is relatively unproven guys behind them.

Gardner only had 3 catches vs Cleveland, but he had ZERO drops. That is the #1 thing that he has been inconsistent with throughout his career. It seems that him and Coles have been alternating as as the go-to-guy from week to week, so if he can keep it up, even if he doesn't have a ton of catches some weeks, it is a definite improvement. And like Matty pointed out, if the two of them keep it up, they will both have a great season. Just need more TD's...especially Coles.

I don't think it's a secret, Coles is playing hurt. He's got a bad toe and his finger can't be 100% just yet either. So what, I'd still rather have him in the lineup than not. He's still notched two 100 yard games so far, he has 4 catches of 20 yards or more and 1 over 40.

He's on pace for 96 catches and 1164 yards. Why should be bench him?

How about Gardner? Well he's on pace for 80 catches and 1252 yards. So far he has 5 catches of 20 yards or more and 3 over 40 yards.

They do need to be more consistent, but overall they haven't been terrible by any stretch. They should only improve as they settle in to the offense. It's hard to justify benching either of these guys right now. Especially when all we have is relatively unproven guys behind them.

Good points, Matty. But this post may serve as a great example of how stats and numbers by themselves don't tell the whole story. Coles had 82 catches -- the most by any Redskin receiver since 1989 -- and over 1100 yards last year, but what did it contribute to?

Answer: A 5-11 record and a passing attack that nobody was scared of.

A great passing game, in the mold of the Rams or Vikings, is sometimes measured in ways other than raw numbers. Do the wideouts stretch the defenses away from the line of scrimmage? Do they draw linebackers and safeties into the secondary in anticipation of a big play? Do they divert attention away from the running backs open up the ground game? Can they be counted on to pick up big chunks of yardage in a bind, when the game is on the line and time is running out?

Right now, our receivers are doing absolutely none of the above. What their current numbers project, are quite obviously not enough to get us out of our present, losing situation.

Bring in Mike Williams in the draft!! Jus kidding... Gardner is a possesion reciever and need to get more passes throughout the game to become effective. I rarely seen
McCants in the Gibbs offense maybe he doesn't like him or something. I feel we just need to settle down and let things play out. Also Brunnel needs to go through his checkdown recievers. 1 option, 2nd option, 3rd option, etc. Not look at 1st option, he not open throw the ball away. Gardner was wide open many times on film and it looked as if Brunnel never looked in his direction. Sometimes you have to be a playmaker not a victom of the system.

Ramseyfan:

I want to do some math here and then ask you a question.

There are 32 teams in the NFL. The Redskins are one of them so there are 31 other teams.

You said that "Any scout in the league will tell you they would trade 30 teams' #2 wideout for Gardner."

I don't agree with that, but let's just say it is the gospel truth for the moment. So that means there is ONE #2 receiver in the NFL who is better than Gardner - the one that they would NOT trade for Gardner.

So, since you know what all these scouts say, who's the #2 receiver better than Gardner?

Here's why I don't think that amy scouts would say this. In New England, they have THREE WRs all of whom are better than Gardner. So, right there we have two guys who are not #1 that no one would trade for Gardner. Then I think about teams like Pittsburgh (Ward and Burriss in whatever order you'd like to put them), and Dallas (Johnson and Bryant and Glenn) and Arizona (Fitzgerald and Boldin (as soon as he gets back) and Indy (Harrison and Wayne) and...

don't forget isaac bruce (rams)... still there's a lot of teams that'd find him useful (better than anything baltimore has, and miami aint so hot right now)...