Moss WANTS to be a Redskin

[MTK]

A few plays doesn't sum up his body of work here.

Fact is he's been one of our more productive players for quite a while.

His career numbers as a Skin: 442 catches, 6142 yards, 34 TDs

Bottom line, is anyone else currently on the roster ready to step up and fill his shoes? Doubt it.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Bottom line, is anyone else currently on the roster ready to step up and fill his shoes? Doubt it.

Which is why I said this.

That said, I'd sign him to a 1-2 year contract and move him to the slot until he can be replaced.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Bottom line, is anyone else currently on the roster ready to step up and fill his shoes? Doubt it.

I can think of at least four guys who deserve the opportunity. And if they fail, they fail. But I think it's a better process than holding on dearly to whatever Moss can continue to give us in the next two years.

I agree with you that he'll be a hot commodity on the FA market. I can see both Portis and Moss in New England next year. They are very much the Belichick kind of player.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I can think of at least four guys who deserve the opportunity. And if they fail, they fail. But I think it's a better process than holding on dearly to whatever Moss can continue to give us in the next two years.

I agree with you that he'll be a hot commodity on the FA market. I can see both Portis and Moss in New England next year. They are very much the Belichick kind of player.

Not sure about CP but Moss would thrive there.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I can think of at least four guys who deserve the opportunity. And if they fail, they fail. But I think it's a better process than holding on dearly to whatever Moss can continue to give us in the next two years.

I agree with you that he'll be a hot commodity on the FA market. I can see both Portis and Moss in New England next year. They are very much the Belichick kind of player.

Even if we're rebuilding (which I doubt) it makes sense for an offense to have a foundation.

Our best offensive unit was our passing game.
Moss was the focal point of a passing attack that only had 1 other viable WR threat yet was still able to produce like a top WR.
If you take Moss out of the equation you're asking an unproven group of WRs to become the focal point of the best unit (arguably the only good unit) on this team.

And even if Moss is re-signed all those wasted targets that went to Joey Galloway and Roydel Williams would be enough to for at least 1 other WR threat to emerge.

And 1 other target would help an already good passing attack be even better.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Even if we're rebuilding (which I doubt) it makes sense for an offense to have a foundation.

Our best offensive unit was our passing game.
Moss was the focal point of a passing attack that only had 1 other viable WR threat yet was still able to produce like a top WR.
If you take Moss out of the equation you're asking an unproven group of WRs to become the focal point of the best unit (arguably the only good unit) on this team.

And even if Moss is re-signed all those wasted targets that went to Joey Galloway and Roydel Williams would be enough to for at least 1 other WR threat to emerge.

And 1 other target would help an already good passing attack be even better.

Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.

But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.

But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.

Why'd you choose Antonio Bryant for comparison?

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Ultimately, I don't believe Santana is going to be part of the foundation of the offense. You could be right. We might let him walk, and he signs elsewhere, and then we watch Armstrong struggle with additional coverage on him, and Kelly can't get on the field, and Terrence Austin gets easily taken away by single coverage. Then there is no foundation on which to build the receiving corps until Hankerson develops.

But at the very least, in the absolute worst case scenario, Hankerson would get the opportunities to produce as a no. 1 type as a rookie, and he can't do that if Moss is here. I would prefer to just do what Tampa Bay did, and not extend Antonio Bryant into his mid thirties, but rather take the steal of the draft at the receiver position, put him on the field, and end up with a "Top 100" player four months later.

Just because Santana could resign does not mean he would stay as the "number 1 receiver". He could easily move to the slot, a position that he would be very good at, while leaving the outside routes to Hankerson, AA and the like. Shanny is about putting the best players on the field no matter what the age or tenure on the team. This isn't old Redskins football anymore IMO. If Hankerson and AA play better than Santana, if he resigns, then they will play more than Santana. I would like to see Santana in the slot regardless.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

Just because Santana could resign does not mean he would stay as the "number 1 receiver". He could easily move to the slot, a position that he would be very good at, while leaving the outside routes to Hankerson, AA and the like. Shanny is about putting the best players on the field no matter what the age or tenure on the team. This isn't old Redskins football anymore IMO. If Hankerson and AA play better than Santana, if he resigns, then they will play more than Santana. I would like to see Santana in the slot regardless.

The utility Moss will provide this team post-33 years of age will likely be a big goose-egg. It might seem unjust, but I care about the team's welfare more than I care about one player. The team needs assets that will provide more than just one more good year for us. We need players who have provide at least 5 years of service.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

The utility Moss will provide this team post-33 years of age will likely be a big goose-egg. It might seem unjust, but I care about the team's welfare more than I care about one player. The team needs assets that will provide more than just one more good year for us. We need players who have provide at least 5 years of service.

I disagree, he is definitely not the Santana of old, but he did have a good year last year and even if he is not the best receiver on the team anymore, which I am not yet convinced is the case, he can still contribute off the bench, in the slot, and especially as a mentor to the young WR corp we now have that needs a guiding hand. If you are saying he has shown that he will not be able to provide for this team 5 years down the road, I agree with you. But to say not to resign someone that can help us next exclusively because they will not contribute 5 years down the road is ludicrous. He can help us now and why would we not want someone who can help this team next year?

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

The utility Moss will provide this team post-33 years of age will likely be a big goose-egg. It might seem unjust, but I care about the team's welfare more than I care about one player. The team needs assets that will provide more than just one more good year for us. We need players who have provide at least 5 years of service.

So you think Santana will move from first on the stat chart (by a wide margin) to......last in the space of one off-season?
THAT should be interesting indeed.

BTW, your beliefs are idiotic!