Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=irish]I didnt say he played in the SB for the good of the team, I said he played to try to get Philly a championship. Two totally different things.[/QUOTE]

Yes, you've managed to differentiate between the two quite well. I think we can agree that Owens played to get Owens a championship - it just so happened that he has to do that in a team environment, and Philly ended up being that team.

[QUOTE=irish]How many people in other lines of work would stay at a lower paying job when the company down the street wants to give them a 25% raise? I doubt you would stay for the good of the company. Why do we think ballplayers would be any different.[/QUOTE]

For starters your analogy makes no sense - nobody offered owens additional money after he signed his contract, he simply tried to extract more from the Eagles. Very different situation. But let's go with your analogy anyway:

Had Owens played out his contract he would have been the 2nd or 3rd highest paid WR in the league (behind Marvin Harrison and possibly Randy Moss). What you're suggesting is that if you're one of the top three highest paid individuals in your position throughout the world and you sign a legally binding contract outlining this compensation over 6 or 7 years, that the second year into the deal you can just change your mind and decide you want more money. When you don't get what you want, you stop showing up to meetings, don't bring the appropriate items to meetings, sleep through said meetings, publically criticize your coworkers, supervisors and company, park in the CEO's parking spot and generally make yourself a shameful nuisance to the entire organization...that your company should just drop its pants, bend over and give you what you want?

Where I work that behavior gets you fired each and every time. I don't know what world you live in where such behavior is not only tolerated but rewarded, but I'm sure as hell glad I don't work for your company.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

There is only one way for any team to deal with Owens and thats 1 year contracts, just give him a 1 year deal every year and you will eliminate a lot of the nonesense, no one will be over committed to the other, if things don't go well he's gone at the end of the year, no money issuies or long term contracts to deal with.

The problem is I don't believe Owens would want to play for a QB like Brunell, remember what he said about Garcia he wanted out because he said Garcia was incapable of getting him the ball deep, thats why he wanted a strong armed QB like McNabb, it is also the reason he turned down the Ravens, he felt Boller was a lowsey QB, turns out he was right about all of them, something tells me if we ever tried to sign him so long as brunell and his 30 yard arm is throwing the ball for us he would say thanks but no thanks.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

NOOOOO! He destroyed the SF clubhouse and did it in Philly too. Let him sign with someone else next year and wreck that team. Skins are trying to rebuild this organization into a winner. Don't take a chance on this clown tearing it up!!!!

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=huntz]NOOOOO! He destroyed the SF clubhouse and did it in Philly too. Let him sign with someone else next year and wreck that team. Skins are trying to rebuild this organization into a winner. Don't take a chance on this clown tearing it up!!!![/QUOTE]

Don't forget about Baltimore. They hate him there too and he wasn't even on the team for a single game.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=mheisig]Yes, you've managed to differentiate between the two quite well. I think we can agree that Owens played to get Owens a championship - it just so happened that he has to do that in a team environment, and Philly ended up being that team.



For starters your analogy makes no sense - nobody offered owens additional money after he signed his contract, he simply tried to extract more from the Eagles. Very different situation. But let's go with your analogy anyway:

Had Owens played out his contract he would have been the 2nd or 3rd highest paid WR in the league (behind Marvin Harrison and possibly Randy Moss). What you're suggesting is that if you're one of the top three highest paid individuals in your position throughout the world and you sign a legally binding contract outlining this compensation over 6 or 7 years, that the second year into the deal you can just change your mind and decide you want more money. When you don't get what you want, you stop showing up to meetings, don't bring the appropriate items to meetings, sleep through said meetings, publically criticize your coworkers, supervisors and company, park in the CEO's parking spot and generally make yourself a shameful nuisance to the entire organization...that your company should just drop its pants, bend over and give you what you want?

Where I work that behavior gets you fired each and every time. I don't know what world you live in where such behavior is not only tolerated but rewarded, but I'm sure as hell glad I don't work for your company.[/QUOTE]

Please look at my entire paragraph, not just a sentence taken out of context and maybe you will understand the point I was trying to make.

The bottom line in pro sports is winning, all this locker room happiness, and buddy buddy stuff is for high schools and colleges. When a team is winning everyone is happy and no spats come out of the locker room (Indy now). When a team is losing everybody is unhappy and looking for stuff to snipe about (philly this year). When TO is on a winning team he is fine (philly last year, SF a few years ago) so if the skins brought him here and they won TO would be just fine. The thing is if TO did not think the skins were real contenders he would not come here to begin with (like he did with Balt last year) so like you all think, it may not happen but I think it will be because TO says no to the skins, not the other way around.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=offiss]There is only one way for any team to deal with Owens and thats 1 year contracts, just give him a 1 year deal every year and you will eliminate a lot of the nonesense, no one will be over committed to the other, if things don't go well he's gone at the end of the year, no money issuies or long term contracts to deal with.

The problem is I don't believe Owens would want to play for a QB like Brunell, remember what he said about Garcia he wanted out because he said Garcia was incapable of getting him the ball deep, thats why he wanted a strong armed QB like McNabb, it is also the reason he turned down the Ravens, he felt Boller was a lowsey QB, turns out he was right about all of them, something tells me if we ever tried to sign him so long as brunell and his 30 yard arm is throwing the ball for us he would say thanks but no thanks.[/QUOTE]

Somehow it always comes back to Brunell.

Hilarious.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=irish]The bottom line in pro sports is winning, all this locker room happiness, and buddy buddy stuff is for high schools and colleges. When a team is winning everyone is happy and no spats come out of the locker room (Indy now).[/QUOTE]

You put the cart before the horse - team chemistry is a requisite for winning. Look at the Skins "super team" Snyder bought in 2000, and the first two Patriot Superbowl teams, which were largely role players. The Skins lost and the Patriots won. You simply CANNOT have team chemistry if there is dissension in the locker room.

You brought up Indy, which is a perfect example. That is a team of superstars, but no egos. You don't hear Marvin Harrison say "Give me the damn ball" because he hasn't broken 1000 yards through 12 games.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets]You put the cart before the horse - team chemistry is a requisite for winning. Look at the Skins "super team" Snyder bought in 2000, and the first two Patriot Superbowl teams, which were largely role players. The Skins lost and the Patriots won. You simply CANNOT have team chemistry if there is dissension in the locker room.


You brought up Indy, which is a perfect example. That is a team of superstars, but no egos. You don't hear Marvin Harrison say "Give me the damn ball" because he hasn't broken 1000 yards through 12 games.[/QUOTE]

The winning creates the happy and close knit locker room, not the other way around. Remenber what happened in the Nationals locker room this past season?

Thats because Indy is winning. If Indy started 8-0 and had lost their last 5 things would likely be different. Indy is full of big egos (all pro athletes have huge egos) but the players on Indy are better at putting their egos aside than most other teams.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

Donovan McNabb endorsed TO coming to the Eagles. That only worked one season. If the Skins were only one season away from the Super Bowl -- and they are not -- maybe you take the risk with a one year contract. I bet they can upgrade the receivers without the risk of dysfunction that Owens brings.

And think about this: say you sign Owens to a one year high incentive contract, about the second game that he's triple covered and the plays go to another receiver, are you ready for the reaction you will surely get? Be careful what you wish for.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=irish]The winning creates the happy and close knit locker room, not the other way around. Remenber what happened in the Nationals locker room this past season?[/quote]
I'm not talking about "happy" - I said non-devisive (OK, I said "dissension", but same thing). There's a big difference. I don't argue that happiness comes from winning. I do think you are flat wrong if you are saying that a devisive locker room is conducive to winning.

[QUOTE=irish]Thats because Indy is winning. If Indy started 8-0 and had lost their last 5 things would likely be different. Indy is full of big egos (all pro athletes have huge egos) but the players on Indy are better at putting their egos aside than most other teams.[/QUOTE]
Sure they would be different, but I seriously doubt they would have TO-type issues.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=irish]The winning creates the happy and close knit locker room, not the other way around. Remenber what happened in the Nationals locker room this past season?

Thats because Indy is winning. If Indy started 8-0 and had lost their last 5 things would likely be different. Indy is full of big egos (all pro athletes have huge egos) but the players on Indy are better at putting their egos aside than most other teams.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, but that's just a huge leap. Not every losing team in the league has the same problems that seem to follow Owens around, in fact virtually none of them do. His attitude has destroyed the Eagles team this year. Does losing games contribute? Sure. But saying that a losing team makes for locker room dissension is just asinine - plenty of teams have losing records each season and manage to maintain their professionalism and sense of team unity.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=irish]Please look at my entire paragraph, not just a sentence taken out of context and maybe you will understand the point I was trying to make.

The bottom line in pro sports is winning, all this locker room happiness, and buddy buddy stuff is for high schools and colleges. When a team is winning everyone is happy and no spats come out of the locker room (Indy now). When a team is losing everybody is unhappy and looking for stuff to snipe about (philly this year). When TO is on a winning team he is fine (philly last year, SF a few years ago) so if the skins brought him here and they won TO would be just fine. The thing is if TO did not think the skins were real contenders he would not come here to begin with (like he did with Balt last year) so like you all think, it may not happen but I think it will be because TO says no to the skins, not the other way around.[/QUOTE]

But the sniping with TO started in the offseason, just after the Eagles made the Super Bowl for the first time in 25 years, so the bottom line for TO doesn't necessarily seem to be winning. Going into the season, the Eagles were legitimate SB contenders again. Their downward spiral began when TO started complaining about getting paid more.

Not to drop names, but when I spoke to Tony McGee about this whole notion of winning at all costs he told me that's just not going to happen in a Gibbs locker room. He has no inside info on whether they would actually pursue TO but he doesn't believe it's going to happen. Simply because what Gibbs, and I'm sure many if not all other coaches, preaches is knowing that when you sit in the locker room the person to each side of you is going to have your back win or lose. That you don't sell out your teammates, that you are there to pick them up when they're down and they're to cheer with them when they do well. Players don't win, teams win.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=mheisig]Sorry, but that's just a huge leap. Not every losing team in the league has the same problems that seem to follow Owens around, in fact virtually none of them do. His attitude has destroyed the Eagles team this year. Does losing games contribute? Sure. But saying that a losing team makes for locker room dissension is just asinine - plenty of teams have losing records each season and manage to maintain their professionalism and sense of team unity.[/QUOTE]

Al I can say is that I 100% believe that had Philly been winning early this season like they were last season the TO thing would not have happened.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

I know TO is a basket case, but with Santana Moss and Terrell Owens on the same team? Who do you double team?

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]But the sniping with TO started in the offseason, just after the Eagles made the Super Bowl for the first time in 25 years, so the bottom line for TO doesn't necessarily seem to be winning. Going into the season, the Eagles were legitimate SB contenders again. Their downward spiral began when TO started complaining about getting paid more.

Not to drop names, but when I spoke to Tony McGee about this whole notion of winning at all costs he told me that's just not going to happen in a Gibbs locker room. He has no inside info on whether they would actually pursue TO but he doesn't believe it's going to happen. Simply because what Gibbs, and I'm sure many if not all other coaches, preaches is knowing that when you sit in the locker room the person to each side of you is going to have your back win or lose. That you don't sell out your teammates, that you are there to pick them up when they're down and they're to cheer with them when they do well. Players don't win, teams win.[/QUOTE]

The way I saw it, TO complained, the team suffered some key injuries that caused them to start losing, and the downward spiral started and TOs complaints went way up. So to me the downward spiral started when the injuries mounted causing the team to start losing.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=Bozzy]I know TO is a basket case, but with Santana Moss and Terrell Owens on the same team? Who do you double team?[/QUOTE]

Moss, because TO has been suspended for conduct detrimental to the team.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

LOL Yeah... putting aside TO, we still need another WR that is of equal or greater value than Santana.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=irish]The way I saw it, TO complained, the team suffered some key injuries that caused them to start losing, and the downward spiral started and TOs complaints went way up. So to me the downward spiral started when the injuries mounted causing the team to start losing.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough. Let me ask you this then, when our backs were to the wall after having lost 3 in a row and we were about to face the Rams how do you think TO would have acted if he were a Redskin? Do you think he would have been a positive for this team? Or let's say it was TO, not Moss, that was with us this year. And his numbers were great to begin with but had recently been going down, do you think he would handle it the same way Moss has?

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=irish]Al I can say is that I 100% believe that had Philly been winning early this season like they were last season the TO thing would not have happened.[/QUOTE]

They were 4-2 before they totally fell apart. That's not stellar, no, but losing 2 out of 6 games is hardly something to whine about.

Still, for the sake of argument I'll grant that their start was not up to expectations - so now it's ok for Owens to act like a child? Who wants players who are only useful when things are on the up? Just like the old saying "A fairweather fan ain't a fan," I maintain a fairweather teammate isn't a teammate.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]Fair enough. Let me ask you this then, when our backs were to the wall after having lost 3 in a row and we were about to face the Rams how do you think TO would have acted if he were a Redskin? Do you think he would have been a positive for this team? Or let's say it was TO, not Moss, that was with us this year. And his numbers were great to begin with but had recently been going down, do you think he would handle it the same way Moss has?[/QUOTE]

No not the same as Moss. But there is no way TO would have come here because the redskins are not a championship contender and he would only go to a championship contender (thats why he went to philly instead of balt). Like I said above, I think TO would reject any offer the skins make because even next year they are not contenders for the championship. But lets say TO was here and if this team had TO I dont think they would have lost those 3 in a row and would I think only have 1 or 2 losses now and be cruising to the playoffs instead of hanging on by a thread.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=mheisig]They were 4-2 before they totally fell apart. That's not stellar, no, but losing 2 out of 6 games is hardly something to whine about.

Still, for the sake of argument I'll grant that their start was not up to expectations - so now it's ok for Owens to act like a child? Who wants players who are only useful when things are on the up? Just like the old saying "A fairweather fan ain't a fan," I maintain a fairweather teammate isn't a teammate.[/QUOTE]

TO was very useful even when they were losing. All he did was talk too much. Remember, the eagles stopped TO from playing, TO did not stop playing for the eagles.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

This was TO's reaction after the 49ers dropped their third straight to fall to 1-3 in [URL=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2003/writers/don_banks/09/28/owens_moss/]2003[/URL]

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

It puzzles me to no end how anyone can actually defend this guy.

:confused:

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=mheisig]Since when is $42 million for seven years and a $10 million signing bonus "cheap"???

If that's "cheap" then sign me up for a fraction of "cheap" as my salary.[/QUOTE]

It is when you are the best receiver. Look around the league and look at the other receivers making more than him. Now who fault is it in a sense for him signing the contract? TO and his past agent. Agreed but none the less Philly got a bargin. Too bad-or be thankful- he figured out what other receivers made.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

T.O with the redskins,lets see i would think not.
he is a problem child and way too much ego to go with it ,too much baggage for me.no thanks.
i love his talent but other than that no thank you.he would be a helluva addition
to this team opposite of moss.

did i say no thanks,lol

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=Skins fan 44]It is when you are the best receiver. Look around the league and look at the other receivers making more than him. Now who fault is it in a sense for him signing the contract? TO and his past agent. Agreed but none the less Philly got a bargin. Too bad-or be thankful- he figured out what other receivers made.[/QUOTE]

Bullshiat - TO isn't the best receiver, I don't care which way you look at it. A top receiver? Sure. NOT the best.

Had TO played out his contract he would have been the 2nd or 3rd highest paid receiver (with Marvin Harrison and possibly Randy Moss in front of him). Harrison and TO have both been in the league 10 years, Moss has been in the league 8 years.

[IMG]http://test.extensibletech.com/stats.jpg[/IMG]

Owens is a solid THIRD here, even compared to Randy Moss who has two less years in the league.

In addition, there was a feature on the NFL Network at the beginning of the season interviewing cornerbacks on who they thought was the best receiver. The only names mentioned were Harrison, Moss and Owens - but Harrison was virtually the unanimous favorite (all the DBs said his routes were virtually perfect.) So even among the players themselves Owens isn't the best receiver.

Owens got paid exactly what he was worth - he's the current #3 overall receiver in the league, and he got paid the salary to equal that. The stats prove it.

What a jackass to whine about his pay when he's getting precisely what he's worth.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]This was TO's reaction after the 49ers dropped their third straight to fall to 1-3 in [URL=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2003/writers/don_banks/09/28/owens_moss/]2003[/URL][/QUOTE]

:lol: Man that's a good read - thanks for posting it.

Whenever I'm watching TO speak I get the feeling it's one of those, "Help! I'm talking and I can't shut up!" situations. It's like he'll just go and go and dig himself into an amazing hole until someone cuts him off or the show runs out of airtime.

It's really quite humorous watching someone who almost literally can't stop talking.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

mheisig- OK OK so he is not the best receiver. BUT I still think that having Moss and TO on the field would be great. I can't argue that he was not a jackass during this year. I think you can credit his agent for that one. I dont think that he was the 3rd highest paid receiver though. I cant rembember who was else was making more but when I heard it I thought what a slap in the face and that is still no excuse to hold out when you have a contract just signed last year. I also think deep down that Philly knew they signed him for a bargin.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]NO, NO & NO.

How many more teams does this guy have to burn before people finally wake up and realize he is nothing but a cancer and a selfish media whore.[/QUOTE]


Agreed, Seems as though we just went through this same topic just a little while ago, and I really don't see why we continue discussing this guy I don't care who endorses him. Any team would have to want to win very badly to have TO on their team. Granted, he may be a talent but his returns are diminishing because of his charachter.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=mheisig]BS. Owens "put his career" on the line for his own personal glory, which is the motivation for everything he does. Owens is the ultimate antithesis of a team player - he is in this game solely for money and his own glory, not the team's.

You've got to be the most naive football fan around to think for an instant that Owens "put his career on the line" for the good of the team. It's also quite unfortunate that there are fans like yourself that support such self-serving antics.

Being a die-hard Skins fan I have hated Philly most of my life, but I have a newfound respect for Reid and the team owner for standing up to such childish behavior as Owens' and make an example of him.

::sigh::

Whatever happened to guys playing because they loved the game and made a more-than-adequate living doing so?[/QUOTE]

I don't believe that, I think he put his career on the line for a SuperBowl, I know he is selfish but this time I think your wrong, that brother wanted to win a Superbowl, and even though I cheered for New England, watching him play was amazing

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]Fair enough. Let me ask you this then, when our backs were to the wall after having lost 3 in a row and we were about to face the Rams how do you think TO would have acted if he were a Redskin? Do you think he would have been a positive for this team? Or let's say it was TO, not Moss, that was with us this year. And his numbers were great to begin with but had recently been going down, do you think he would handle it the same way Moss has?[/QUOTE]

Good Point, except we wouldn't had lost 3 games in a row with T.O., period

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]TO is a cancer because of exactly this reason! He has created a divide in the locker room. McNabb hates him and wants him gone. Trotter loves him and wants him to stay. And there's a bunch of other guys on each side of the fence. You're telling me that because a portion of the players want to keep him, that's a good sign???

You want all of your players on the same page as the coaches. TO caused that huge rift. Reid and McNabb want him gone, and a bunch of other players want him back. No matter how you cut it, that ain't good.[/QUOTE]


Also, in situations like TO when players are asked directly by the Media how they feel about a particular player in a situation like this being welcomed back to the team, they hardly ever mention anything deragatory in reference because that's the smartest way to remain neutral. Some players are naturally going to say they would welcome him back when in reality, that's the farthest thing from the truth.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=wewhite3]Good Point, except we wouldn't had lost 3 games in a row with T.O., period[/QUOTE]



you don' know that, the skins could lose 3 or more games in a row due to any number of cercumstances. it's situations or scenarios like that that coaches have to be prepared for by having the right kind of players and coaches who are capable of handling and staying positive during such situations.

t.o clearly is not capable of handling or staying positive in a situation such as that.

gibbs would never sign t.o or any player like him.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

That would be AWESOME!!!


TO brings down every team he is a member of...... :food-smil

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]you don' know that, the skins could lose 3 or more games in a row due to any number of cercumstances. it's situations or scenarios like that that coaches have to be prepared for by having the right kind of players and coaches who are capable of handling and staying positive during such situations.

t.o clearly is not capable of handling or staying positive in a situation such as that.

gibbs would never sign t.o or any player like him.[/QUOTE]

Thats right, you don't know....but thats why we have these discussions....all about debate wheather or wheather not

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

Sorry didn't get your quote in there, but it was "NO, NO & NO"

Absolutely! He would ruin the unity that we are starting to develop. No doubt he is an incredible athlete. However, he is not of the mold of a "REDSKIN" I hope Vinny does not get his hands in this----please say NO thanks Mr. Gibbs.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=diehardskin2982]YES

I would take TO. I think this year will humble him in my opinion. His mouth got him in trouble, and jepordized his career, you think that doesn't play in his mind. The next team that gets him is gonna have a steal because he will be smarter in what he says.

He wants to be payed like a top ten reciever, I can't see why he shouldn't. HE IS A TOP TEN WIDEOUT. Can we give him the money, I don't know. I know we can pay him what he wants, but can we fit him under the cap?

If you look at what he would bring to the team. ~Moss would no longer be double or triple teamed. He would free up the run for portis, and with weapons like that Rogers has no option but to succed and become better.

If we can keep Greg Williams here for next year, we would become a instant superbowl contender, can't deny the potiential[/QUOTE]

I would take TO no in a heart beat. Who cares if he runs his mouth. We would have the fastest receiver on one side, the most dominant possession receiver on the other, cooley always finding somewhere underneath and portis in the backfield...That would be amazing.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=SKINSnCANES]I would take TO no in a heart beat. Who cares if he runs his mouth. We would have the fastest receiver on one side, the most dominant possession receiver on the other, cooley always finding somewhere underneath and portis in the backfield...That would be amazing.[/QUOTE]

Completely off topic, and pardon the ignorance, but what exactly does "possession receiver" mean? I hear the term all the time, but I don't know what it means.

Thanks!

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets]Completely off topic, and pardon the ignorance, but what exactly does "possession receiver" mean? I hear the term all the time, but I don't know what it means.

Thanks![/QUOTE]

It's a guy that can catch the ball in traffic and keep the chains moving. Traditionally, a "possession receiver" isn't a big-play guy. Examples of possession guys would be Keyshawn Johnson, Wayne Chrebet circa 2000, and the ultimate would be Art Monk.

I wouldn't call TO a possession receiver because he really is dominant at catching balls in traffic and at catching balls on deep routes.

Re: Portis Endorses T.O. Coming To Washington, Would You?
 

[QUOTE=SKINSnCANES]I would take TO no in a heart beat. Who cares if he runs his mouth. We would have the fastest receiver on one side, the most dominant possession receiver on the other, cooley always finding somewhere underneath and portis in the backfield...That would be amazing.[/QUOTE]

Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb definitely seem to care when TO runs his mouth. I think fans would be willing to listen to TO talk all he wanted if his talk didn't cause rifts in the locker room. That's the issue, and it shouldn't be ignored just because TO can bring big plays.