Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

Nice, really wanted him back in 08 during the draft

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

[quote=over the mountain;1063738]4 yrs 28 mil for tracy effing porter?

we've been penny pinching on everyone decent at positions of need but ... spend twenty eight million dollars on tracy effing porter.

im just assuming this is a joke.

we could have kept biggers for a slot corner or let crawford or one of the depth guys step in .... 28 million for a below average no 3 corner?[/quote]

It was a joke.

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

^^Yeah Tony Pepperoni should of been the tell tale sign.^^

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

[quote=Skinsfanatic;1063741]It was a joke.[/quote]

lol you shouldnt have told me.

i would have whined and bitched and made a total embarrassment of myself for the next few hours.

i thought tony p was an industry nickname like pasta belly etc. i dont have twitter or facebook so when i hear random names implied as sources i just assume its some legit twitter source guy.

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

Chalk another one up for the pizza slinging twitter source

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

I feel like this move was made because their first options didn't pan out. I've never been very impressed by him but he has made some plays. I think he's a gambler in the mold of D.Hall. We'll see if this pans out.

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

[quote=over the mountain;1063746]lol you shouldnt have told me.

i would have whined and bitched and made a total embarrassment of myself for the next few hours.

i thought tony p was an industry nickname like pasta belly etc. i dont have twitter or facebook so when i hear random names implied as sources i just assume its some legit twitter source guy.[/quote]

lol I just had a good laugh over Tony Pepperoni.

I can't take credit, it started here

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/56775-santana-moss-back-1-year-deal.html#post1062671[/url]

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

[quote=mooby;1063754]I feel like this move was made because their first options didn't pan out. I've never been very impressed by him but he has made some plays. I think he's a gambler in the mold of D.Hall. We'll see if this pans out.[/quote]

Keim says he is signed as the third corner and is better at man than zone.

Burgundy Glasses On: Okay, that makes sense and seems to fit the scheme. Should be quality signing if we aren't relying on him to be the No.2 corner and Amerson steps up.

Burgundy Glasses Off: WTF? Tracy "2 steps behind you" Porter? Working on his 4th team in four years? Smells like desperation to me.

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

Porter or Biggers?

Give me Porter.

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

^I'll side with that...

..but laugh with this..
[QUOTE=Dirtbag59;1063739]Nice, really wanted him back in 08 during the draft[/QUOTE]

HAHA!

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

Wow. Oakland's pass defense last year was terrible - 5th most yards/pass attempt (7.9). We were tied with Atlanta and San Diego for slots 2-4 at 8.0.

I am sure it was not ALL Porter's fault, but ...

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

Didnt Biggers play safety mostly?

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;1063768]Wow. Oakland's pass defense last year was terrible - 5th most yards/pass attempt (7.9). We were tied with Atlanta and San Diego for slots 2-4 at 8.0.

I am sure it was not ALL Porter's fault, but ...[/quote]

Ifso thenso.... We upgraded.....

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

We upgraded from Biggers - at least Porter makes some plays - but the margin of upgrade is not large.

Re: Redskins agree to terms with CB Tracy Porter
 

Porter is actually really good at man coverage, just sucks in zone. Not the brightest and like has been said he is a gambler. Part of which explains why he is considered weak in zone bc he will jump the under routes constantly looking for the big play. But he is a definite upgrade over Biggers and is bigger and better than Josh Wilson IMO. But he would be solid at the Nickel at the least.