Redskins Add WRs Pierre Garcon and Joshua Morgan

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Screw Armstrong. Rather keep Moss but we have 3 young WRs, Garcon/Hank/Morgan someone has to play slot right?

[MTK]

Armstrong is not a slot guy, not sure where this idea is even coming from.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

^ Because he's small and fast I assume. He's like Devery Henderson , speedy deep threat and not much else.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Armstrong is not a slot guy, not sure where this idea is even coming from.

Maybe because people assume he's still a relevant part of the team, even though he's not?

[Lotus]

Armstrong is a very, very poor man's Randy Moss. One-trick pony.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Yeah, lets meet Armstrong in a back alley and jump him. Or maybe Dirtbag can get Captain Insaneo to take him down.

[IrMitchell]

Armstrong was beyond terrible last year.

[Monkeydad]

I liked AA until last year's never-ending drops on deep balls. Rex would broken even on INTs and TDs without him!

(16 TDs/20 INTs)

[#56fanatic]

Garson, Morgan, Hankerson could be a good trio. However, we really dont know how Garson will be as a #1 in this offense. He wasn't a #1 in Indy, and although he has the speed and experience, he just may not cut it. Moss has been the #1 in this offense for 3 years now and has put up some pretty decent numbers with virtually no help from other WR on the roster. So, I really dont see us getting rid of him.

Armstrong is probably gone, given his virtual zero impact and being a speed guy ala Garson and Moss. I would like to see Gafney as well, but I am guessing Morgan or Hankerson will fill that role.

Hopefully Davis and Cooley can get on the field together as well, which will limit the 4 WR sets, and have more 3 WR sets with match up issues created by Davis and Cooley.

[diehardskin2982]

I wonder if we can bring Plaxico Burress in for a visit to scare the Eagles

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Who says Hank can't be a number 1?

[mooby]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Who says Hank can't be a number 1?

It's like Greg Cosell's article (which you can read here) says, the definition of a #1 wide receiver is overrated in this day and age of 3 wr sets designed to exploit mismatches (i.e. your #1 WR lining up in the slot against a linebacker/safety, etc.). But whomever is saying Hankerson won't contribute is someone who's opinion I wouldn't necessarily agree with.

[Bubba305-ST21-]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

^ Because he's small and fast I assume. He's like Devery Henderson , speedy deep threat and not much else.

exactly who he is, except not good. he will be gone, he has to be. i would like to keep moss to help mentor the youngins, and he can still contribute.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by mooby

It's like Greg Cosell's article (which you can read here) says, the definition of a #1 wide receiver is overrated in this day and age of 3 wr sets designed to exploit mismatches (i.e. your #1 WR lining up in the slot against a linebacker/safety, etc.). But whomever is saying Hankerson won't contribute is someone who's opinion I wouldn't necessarily agree with.

yeah, people get carried away almost as if #1 wr is a position, like if you don't have one it's like not having a true point guard! Just need decent playmakers, consistent routes & good hands. I'd rather three guys rack up 800+ yards each in a balanced attack than see one wr get 1400 himself.

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

yeah, people get carried away almost as if #1 wr is a position, like if you don't have one it's like not having a true point guard! Just need decent playmakers, consistent routes & good hands. I'd rather three guys rack up 800+ yards each in a balanced attack than see one wr get 1400 himself.

IMO can't argue with that.