Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Can Santana Moss be Wes Welker?

Locker Room Main Forum


 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 02-19-2008, 01:33 PM   #20
skinsfan69
Living Legend
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 17,504
Re: Can Santana Moss be Wes Welker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell17 View Post
If we get Ocho-cinco look at our receiving corps: Ocho Cinco, Santana Moss, COOOLEY, Randle El, etc. We have better receivers than New England. Not to mention I think getting ochocinco would bring the best play out of moss because he is covered less than ochocinco. That is some of the reason welker was so good this year, everyone focused on moss. Think about it, what D will be able to cover ochocinco and moss as receivers, cooley at TE, and not to mention Portis and Betts on the ground. Our offense goes from good to outstanding. Our defense could use a little work and if we do that... SUPER BOWL! GO SKINS!!!
If we get #85 our wr's are still NOT BETTER than NE's.

R.Moss is better than #85. R.Moss is one of the best ever and is coming off setting a record for TD catches.
Welker is better than SM or ARE
Stallworth is about the same as SM and is better than ARE
Watson is just as good as Cooley. He just doesn't get the same amount of balls thrown his way.
NE has Brady and we don't.
skinsfan69 is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 3.81217 seconds with 11 queries