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


this team sucks

Locker Room Main Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-04-2004, 11:15 AM   #46
Daseal
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 8,341
Someone will take him. We won't get a high pick but we'll clear enough cap room to sign another big name receiver.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 12-04-2004, 01:24 PM   #47
LongTimeSkinsFan
Impact Rookie
 
LongTimeSkinsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: LaVale MD
Age: 62
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES
Ill be watching a Skins game, we'll get the ball first and goal. I KNOW we are going to lineup with no receviers on first and second down and hand the ball off twice.
1. The way our O-line has played this year, Joe has to put in the "BIG" package to have half a chance of moving the ball inside the 10. No big secret there. It's also statistically proven that the passing game becomes more difficult inside the 20 because there is less space to operate, so Joe is going to go with what has the best chance of success. It seems so many people love to bash Gibbs play calling whether we abandon the running game or rely on it too heavily. I wish we'd make up our minds!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES
We dotn try anythign fancy, we dont even have a wideout to have some sort of an option out there. Then after two failed attemps I know we are going to try and throw it to a TE, but we still might only have one receiver out.
2. It's no big secret that Gardner has been one of our most inconsistent receivers the whole year and Coles has been hampered since his injury. Cooley probably is our best pair of hands on the offense so why not throw it to him?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES
The problem with our passing game is that we never gave brunell more than two options to throw at. If both of them were covered whats he supposed to do. They usually dont even let portis pop out and dump it off for a screen pass to keep the D honest.
3. Failing to mention here that options or not Brunell didn't have the combination of arm strength and accuracy to complete a pass period. We could have run a Spurrier style offense with a half dozen passing options and he still couldn't have completed more than half his attempts.
LongTimeSkinsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2004, 02:08 PM   #48
MTK
\m/
 
MTK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal
Someone will take him. We won't get a high pick but we'll clear enough cap room to sign another big name receiver.
and we'll have to eat a sizeable cap hit in the process
MTK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2004, 06:40 PM   #49
sportscurmudgeon
Playmaker
 
sportscurmudgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,159
A true Redskin will decide to have surgery that may make him a good player again or possibly end his career entirely because it will be better for the team?

Tell that to the players who get cut or released by the Redskins and who are out of jobs like Trotter or Armstead. Tell that to Mark Brunell when you don't honor the 3rd 4th and 5th years of the contract you signed with him.

The NFL is a business. Coles has a contract with the Redskins. They can pay him or they can cut him. They really don't have a lot of other choices because he's not going to bring much in a trade if the reason you are trading him is that he needs surgery that he may or nay not elect to undergo. He - and no one else - is going to decide on whether or not he has surgery.

And if you met him in a bar some night and gave him that "true Redskin line", my guess is that he'd laugh a long time.
__________________
The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
sportscurmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2004, 06:43 PM   #50
MTK
\m/
 
MTK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,462
Good points SC and I agree 110%.
MTK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2004, 09:42 PM   #51
NY_Skinsfan
Impact Rookie
 
NY_Skinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Albany, NY
Age: 51
Posts: 838
SC, I wasn't aware that the surgery could be career ending. I thought he was just being stubborn and didn't want to end this season early. Sorry, I misunderstood. But if you ask me players these days care less about playing for a team and more about playing for a fat paycheck. I wouldn't mind seeing players care more about the "team" for once. What ever happened to loyalty?
NY_Skinsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 01:17 PM   #52
skinsguy
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,766
I agree with that NY! Today, players have the "me" attitude or in better terms, the "pay me" attitude! I honestly believe that the younger fans of football today have been cheated! Don't get me wrong, football is exciting to watch and there are players that play because they want to win a championship, but to me, it just seems as if players back in the day played with more loyality for a team regardless of what team it was. I know free agency and the salary cap has alot to do with that, but I enjoyed the time knowning that when a player played for the Redskins, he WAS a Redskin, he wasn't just a player in the NFL who happens to play for our team.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 2.29996 seconds with 10 queries