Darrell Jackson?

Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor · 03-15-2008, 10:06 AM

I've always liked in since his Florida days and he a big receiver that has extensive knowledge of the west coast offense that Zorn plans to run. I think that he may be cheaper than Hackett. Also he has been injury prone in the past, but did play a lot last season. Zorn should know him pretty well. I saw on profootballtalk.com that he was just released from the 49ers. What do you guys think? Hell if it works out we can have him and Hackett to get this type of offense of of the ground. Just wishful thinking.

Redskin Warrior · 03-15-2008, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor

I've always liked in since his Florida days and he a big receiver that has extensive knowledge of the west coast offense that Zorn plans to run. I think that he may be cheaper than Hackett. Also he has been injury prone in the past, but did play a lot last season. Zorn should know him pretty well. I saw on profootballtalk.com that he was just released from the 49ers. What do you guys think? Hell if it works out we can have him and Hackett to get this type of offense of of the ground. Just wishful thinking.

mmm..........I think it might work but with his age you can't depend on him for long.

SmootSmack · 03-15-2008, 10:20 AM

I definitely think the Redskins would be interested considering Jackson's history with Zorn. I doubt they'd take both Hackett and Jackson.

SeanTaylor21 · 03-15-2008, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor

I've always liked in since his Florida days and he a big receiver that has extensive knowledge of the west coast offense that Zorn plans to run. I think that he may be cheaper than Hackett. Also he has been injury prone in the past, but did play a lot last season. Zorn should know him pretty well. I saw on profootballtalk.com that he was just released from the 49ers. What do you guys think? Hell if it works out we can have him and Hackett to get this type of offense of of the ground. Just wishful thinking.

He knows the west coast offense that Zorn runs, but I dunno about calling him a big wide reciever, hes only 5'11.

Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor · 03-15-2008, 10:35 AM

Some sites list him at 6'0 and some at 5'11 buy hey he is not slim. He is built in the mold of a Hines Ward body type meaning he can break tackles. No he is not 6'4 but 6'0 is not bad at all when our best receivers are 5'10.

Stuck in TX · 03-15-2008, 10:38 AM

Just because we have a former Seahawks coach doesnt mean we need to become the Seahawks. Geez people when is something going to happen? I am tired of all this speculation on what should happen whenever a FA is released.

SeanTaylor21 · 03-15-2008, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuck in TX

Just because we have a former Seahawks coach doesnt mean we need to become the Seahawks. Geez people when is something going to happen? I am tired of all this speculation on what should happen whenever a FA is released.

This thread was just to see if people thought we should sign Darrel Jackson, not to sign a bunch of Seahawks kuz of Zorn, but just to sign a wide reciever.

Eknox · 03-15-2008, 01:36 PM

He couldn't hurt, and should come cheap I would like to have both of them we need something different to happen at wideout, it was pititful and painful watching the receivers last year. Especially in Indianapolis

SmootSmack · 03-15-2008, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eknox

He couldn't hurt, and should come cheap I would like to have both of them we need something different to happen at wideout, it was pititful and painful watching the receivers last year. Especially in Indianapolis

Indianapolis?

Eknox · 03-15-2008, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Indianapolis?

Yeah it sucks!!!!!!

30gut · 03-16-2008, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eknox

He couldn't hurt, and should come cheap I would like to have both of them we need something different to happen at wideout, it was pititful and painful watching the receivers last year. Especially in Indianapolis

??? I don't get it? Idianapolis?

SeanTaylor21 · 03-16-2008, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 30gut

??? I don't get it? Idianapolis?

Yea, same here I don't get it, we didn't face Indianapolis last year?

Dirtbag59 · 03-15-2008, 04:07 PM

I wonder if the people that don't want Jackson to come to Washington are the same people who want Mix to get on the field in 2008. The funny thing is, if we sign Jackson not only will we shore up our recieving core for a year or two, but Mix will be the only big guy in the whole recieving core, so that would make him a special commodity. Plus Jackson has a slight history of injuries.

If we don't add a Hacket or a Jackson then that leaves the draft, in which case your boy Mix will have to compete for time with possible additions like Thomas, Sweed, and Nelson who more likely then not will be favored by ownership and the coaching staff.

Think about it, you're so close. Also for the record I say the Redskins would pay him around 2 years $4 million. However thats just a guess.

sportscurmudgeon · 03-15-2008, 05:45 PM

Darrell Jackson is a gamble.

He has had injuries - - to his legs. Not good for a WR.

He was let go by the Niners who signed Isaac Bruce to take his job. Bruce is way over the hill.

BUT, if Jackson is healthy and it was his health that made him expendable on a truly bad team in SF, then he's worth a shot. But the FO can't invest their ego in this signing. If he comes in and doesn't cut it, then they have to cut him.

BOTTOM LINE: If he'd sign a two year deal - with a TEAM option on year three for sensible money - I'd sign him and give him a shot.

SeanTaylor21 · 03-15-2008, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Darrell Jackson is a gamble.

He has had injuries - - to his legs. Not good for a WR.

He was let go by the Niners who signed Isaac Bruce to take his job. Bruce is way over the hill.

BUT, if Jackson is healthy and it was his health that made him expendable on a truly bad team in SF, then he's worth a shot. But the FO can't invest their ego in this signing. If he comes in and doesn't cut it, then they have to cut him.

BOTTOM LINE: If he'd sign a two year deal - with a TEAM option on year three for sensible money - I'd sign him and give him a shot.

If we sign him, then should we still go after some WR in the draft, or just stay with the unit we have?

03-15-2008, 10:06 AM	#1
Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor Special Teams Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Queens Village, NY Age: 44 Posts: 349	Darrell Jackson? I've always liked in since his Florida days and he a big receiver that has extensive knowledge of the west coast offense that Zorn plans to run. I think that he may be cheaper than Hackett. Also he has been injury prone in the past, but did play a lot last season. Zorn should know him pretty well. I saw on profootballtalk.com that he was just released from the 49ers. What do you guys think? Hell if it works out we can have him and Hackett to get this type of offense of of the ground. Just wishful thinking.

03-15-2008, 10:20 AM	#3
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: Darrell Jackson? I definitely think the Redskins would be interested considering Jackson's history with Zorn. I doubt they'd take both Hackett and Jackson. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

03-15-2008, 10:35 AM	#5
Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor Special Teams Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Queens Village, NY Age: 44 Posts: 349	Re: Darrell Jackson? Some sites list him at 6'0 and some at 5'11 buy hey he is not slim. He is built in the mold of a Hines Ward body type meaning he can break tackles. No he is not 6'4 but 6'0 is not bad at all when our best receivers are 5'10.

03-15-2008, 10:38 AM	#6
Stuck in TX Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Colorado Springs, CO Age: 38 Posts: 545	Re: Darrell Jackson? Just because we have a former Seahawks coach doesnt mean we need to become the Seahawks. Geez people when is something going to happen? I am tired of all this speculation on what should happen whenever a FA is released. __________________ We will miss you Sean. RIP 1983-2007 REMEMBER VT Go Hokies

03-15-2008, 01:36 PM	#8
Eknox Impact Rookie Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Flint,Mi Posts: 528	Re: Darrell Jackson? He couldn't hurt, and should come cheap I would like to have both of them we need something different to happen at wideout, it was pititful and painful watching the receivers last year. Especially in Indianapolis

03-15-2008, 04:07 PM	#13
Dirtbag59 Naega jeil jal naga Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland Age: 38 Posts: 14,750	Re: Darrell Jackson? I wonder if the people that don't want Jackson to come to Washington are the same people who want Mix to get on the field in 2008. The funny thing is, if we sign Jackson not only will we shore up our recieving core for a year or two, but Mix will be the only big guy in the whole recieving core, so that would make him a special commodity. Plus Jackson has a slight history of injuries. If we don't add a Hacket or a Jackson then that leaves the draft, in which case your boy Mix will have to compete for time with possible additions like Thomas, Sweed, and Nelson who more likely then not will be favored by ownership and the coaching staff. Think about it, you're so close. Also for the record I say the Redskins would pay him around 2 years $4 million. However thats just a guess. __________________ "It's nice to be important, but its more important to be nice." - Scooter "I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now." - FRPLG

03-15-2008, 05:45 PM	#14
sportscurmudgeon Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,159	Re: Darrell Jackson? Darrell Jackson is a gamble. He has had injuries - - to his legs. Not good for a WR. He was let go by the Niners who signed Isaac Bruce to take his job. Bruce is way over the hill. BUT, if Jackson is healthy and it was his health that made him expendable on a truly bad team in SF, then he's worth a shot. But the FO can't invest their ego in this signing. If he comes in and doesn't cut it, then they have to cut him. BOTTOM LINE: If he'd sign a two year deal - with a TEAM option on year three for sensible money - I'd sign him and give him a shot. __________________ The Sports Curmudgeon www.sportscurmudgeon.com But don't get me wrong, I love sports...

Darrell Jackson?

Locker Room Main Forum