Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Redskins only 7 round mock
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 20454
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
Woz wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Yes we will have more cap room next year. As I've tried to say to those who want to draft a TE or WR, next year we will have $ to spend on another one if we choose to do so, or we can rework Morgan's deal to keep him.


You do realize that we intentionally crafted Morgan's contract as a two year deal, right? He wasn't supposed to be a long term solution. Second, even if we do have the cap room, do we really want to go out onto the free agent market and splurge? Has that ever worked for us?

http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features/freeagents/fa.php?option=WR&y=2014

That market is super-thin. It's basically Jeremy Maclin, and Hakeem Nicks/Victor Cruz (depending on who the Giants keep of those two). I suppose Emmanuel Sanders, James Jones, and Anquan Boldin make up the second tier, and the latter two will be on the wrong side of 30 come 2014.

If the value is there for corner, then take a corner. However, if it isn't, don't rend your clothes from your body in agony because we might take a WR. We could just as easily take a RT there as well. The simple thing is: don't wed yourself to a single position.
I hear you about the value on the board and what I'm saying is the value of this draft is on the defensive side of the ball, I certainly think in the 3rd round there will be a DB worth selecting, a CB if we take a S in round 2 or a S if we take CB round 2. If we take a S in round 2 and Terrance Williams falls to us in round 3, trust me, I hope they are running to the podium, but there are very few wrs I get that excited about over taking 2 DBs with our first two picks.


http://sports.yahoo.com/video/deepest-position-2013-nfl-draft-004500612.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/04/17/2013-nfl-draft-position-preview-cornerbacks/
(one in your favor, but notice that Jones' top ten has all of them with no worse than a 2-3 grade)

Looking at CBS's rankings, once you get past the 2-3 guys (Tyrann Matthieu is their last in that category, 72nd player overall, best 10th corner), the players start thinning out. Pure 3rd round value: Robert Alford (82nd best player/11th best corner), Blidi Wreh-Wilson (83/12), Jordan Poyer (88/13); 3rd-4th value: Leon McFadden (102/14), Logan Ryan (114/15); pure 4th value: B.W. Webb (128/16), Tharold Simon (130/17).

It almost creates an argument to go corner over free safety in second, except the free safety position is awfully thin (6th best FS is T.J. McDonald at 106 and a 3rd/4th grade, and there's only 6 more guys before we start playing in the UDFA range).

Quote:
I know what the "original" intent was for Morgan's contract, but if he goes out this season and has a great year because he's closer to 100%, which he wasn't last year I think we could let his contract void and re-sign him or just rework his deal. If he does well, I don't see us letting him go.


Last year saw the following for Morgan in terms of his career:
- tied for most starts in a year (15, only other year was 2009)
- second most receptions (48, only beat out by 52 in 2009)
- third most yards (510, only beat out by 698 in 2010 and 527 in 2009)
- tied for third most TDs (2, only beat out by 3 in both 2008 and 2009)

His best three seasons have been:
2009: 52-527-3
2010: 44-698-2
2012: 48-510-2

We want to throw money at that sort of production? For the record, all three of those seasons he played in all sixteen games (not true in 2008 (12 GP, 1 GS) and 2011 (5 GP, 5 GS)).

To be honest, those are middle of the road tight end stats.

Quote:
I think Hall will be gone next year but I'm not so sure about Wilson. Wilson has to play much better this season to warrant us keeping him, but it could happen. I firmly believe Hall was only brought back because they couldn't afford an upgrade this offseason and he knows the system, not encase they actually wanted to retain him.


The salary cap is probably part of the reason why we brought Hall back. However, another way to look at is this way:
Hall's value as a CB = N
Hall's cap number before being cut (BC) = $8.3M
Hall's cap number after being cut (AC) = $1.25M

Assuming that N is constant (Hall is the same player in February that he is now), then they increased the cost/value ratio 6.64x.

The math: ( BC / N ) / (AC / N ) = ( BC / AC ) = $8.3M / $1.25M = 6.64 improvement

So, simply by waiting him out and letting the market dictate his value, they got 6.64 improvement in terms of cost/value at a vital spot.

Okay, what if Hall's value as a corner isn't constant? What if he falls off 10% from last year (a staggering drop in terms of play)?

( BC / N ) / ( AC / (0.9 * N) ) = ( ( BC * 0.9 ) / AC ) = ($8.3M * 0.9) / $1.25M = 5.976x improvement

Even if Hall's value is half of what it was last year as a player, they improved their cost/value ratio by 3.32 times.

Does this mean that Hall is a better player now? No. It just means they decided to bring his cost more in line with the value he provides. At the same time, because the market for secondary players was so weak, we got Hall back at a significant discount. I'd argue that he's now undervalued relative to what he provides to the team.

On top of all that, if in fact he's still poor, you can replace him next year. The free agency market (which was slow to develop this past offseason) looks to be jammed with players. That again means that supply will exceed demand and you can get guys back like Hall and Wilson at reasonable prices.

Quote:
I think Jeremy Maclin or James Jones are excellent pick up for us next year. I'd be for us signing him if Morgan is gone and Hank or Briscoe don't take the next step.


Except that Maclin and Jones are basically it. Unlike with cornerbacks, there's a dearth of players in free agency at WR, which means we'd have to pay top dollar for them. In this case, supply looks to greatly exceed any expected demand.

Quote:
As for you saying how has us signing wr Free agents in the past, (even Garcon)?


He's looked good ... for half of a season for us. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Remember, we do have a thread on the front page that he still isn't healthy.

Quote:
I'd say we have to do our homework and select the right free agents and don't blindly throw money at what everyone else says is the ever player out there. The good thing is we don't do things the way we did them last description and in 2010 anymore, it seems we've learned.


Did we learn, or did events force our hand? Remember 2011 was the lockout so there was a mad dash for players in late July. 2012 and this year were hamstrung by the cap penalty. Also, remember, teams must spend with an eye on the salary floor. The first four year window just opened, and if the new revenue boosts the salary cap that means the floor goes up as well. We might get the "money burning in our pockets" feeling real quickly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 64582
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are leaving out that Josh Morgan is our best blocking WR, he's close to being as good at blocking as our tight ends are.

I also do not think that Morgan will get a big pay day from us or anyone. I honesty think we are overpaying for him now. If Moss is gone in 2014, it would probably behoove us to rework Morgan's deal and bring him back at a more salary cap friendly price.

You could make a strong argument that the blocking of our Wrs (especially Morgan) helped our running game become the what in the NFL last year.

If he plays well again, and is willing to take a pay cut to stay, I'd try to keep Morgan for sure.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 20454
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
You are leaving out that Josh Morgan is our best blocking WR, he's close to being as good at blocking as our tight ends are.

I also do not think that Morgan will get a big pay day from us or anyone. I honesty think we are overpaying for him now. If Moss is gone in 2014, it would probably behoove us to rework Morgan's deal and bring him back at a more salary cap friendly price.


There's no deal to rework. Contract voids and he's gone. I suppose its possible to extend him, but I don't know what it would mean to extend a voided contract for pro-rated amount purposes. I assume since you've already dealt with those monies (they were accounted as part of the Redskins' 2012 and 2013 caps), only new cash would go onto the deal, but I'm not sure on that point.

That said, while it's great that he's a good blocker, he's giving us mediocre at best numbers. Unless he really turns it on in camp, I could see him losing his starting job with ease.

Quote:
You could make a strong argument that the blocking of our Wrs (especially Morgan) helped our running game become the what in the NFL last year.


I-formation:
QB - 1
RB - 1
FB - 1
WR - 2
TE - 1
OL - 5

If we're keeping Morgan because of his blocking along with the tight ends, we're talking about one true wideout target, two runners, and eight blockers in this formation. That's somewhat excessive.

Ace formation:
QB - 1
RB - 1
WR - 3
TE - 1
OL -5

Two main passing targets, seven blockers, and two runners. A little more flexibility, but still overkill in the blocking.

Quote:
If he plays well again, and is willing to take a pay cut to stay, I'd try to keep Morgan for sure.


"If he plays well again?" When he has he played well to start with? To date in Morgan's career, his best output has been of a mediocre tight end, not a #2 wide receiver. Can you find me another WR last year who had 15 starts, but an equivalent stat line of 48-510 [10.6 YPC]-2? That's an average of 3.20 recept-34.0 yards-0.133 TD per start.

He'd have to play out of his mind to justify keeping him. And if that happens, I'd let someone else take him on given that there would be a significant risk of him reverting to his mean.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 64582
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Morgan had the most receptions on the team last year, the most first downs receiving in the team. I'd consider that playing well- considering our team ran the most in the NFL, which means we were one of the least passing teams. He is our possession wr. Tough, across the middle, first down maker.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
MKnight82


Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Posts: 7940
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
Morgan had the most receptions on the team last year, the most first downs receiving in the team. I'd consider that playing well- considering our team ran the most in the NFL, which means we were one of the least passing teams. He is our possession wr. Tough, across the middle, first down maker.
I agree with what you're saying, but he needs to keep his head on straight. Remember he lost us the Rams game last year with that bonehead penalty.
_________________

Thanks to mike23md for the sig

Adopt - a - Redskin
Bashaud Breeland - 24 tackles, 5 PD, 2 FF, 2 TFL, 1 INT
Jordan Reed - 21 catches, 190 rec yards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 20454
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
Morgan had the most receptions on the team last year, the most first downs receiving in the team. I'd consider that playing well- considering our team ran the most in the NFL, which means we were one of the least passing teams. He is our possession wr. Tough, across the middle, first down maker.


Arrow Most receptions ... but got 15 starts. Meh. Barely beat Garcon (44 catches in 10 starts) and Moss (41 catches in 16 games played, but only 1 start). Even Hankerson was in the neighborhood (38 catches in 16 games played, but only 5 starts).

Arrow Most first downs receiving? Had most receptions. How about we look at his 1st down percentage(*)? Fred Davis (70.8%), Logan Paulsen (68.0%), Leonard Hankerson (65.8%), and Santana Moss (63.4%) all had better first down rates than Morgan (60.4%). Even if you discount the rate, his 29 first downs tied for 73rd alongside Danario Alexander (10 GP, 6 GS), Golden Tate (15 GP, 15 GS (**)) ... and some TEs (Dennis Pitta, Jacob Tamme) and RBs (Darren Sproles). And if you want to discount that, Garcon and Moss each had 26 first downs, so it wasn't like he was blowing anyone out of the water (Garcon's 1st down% was 59.1%, just behind Morgan).

He's a completely replaceable cog.


(*) Technically, Cooley had a 100% 1st down percentage on one catch, Darrel Young 75.0% 1st down percentage on eight catches, and Niles Paul had 62.5% on eight catches. Since they had so few receptions, I discounted them from the above ranking.

(**) Golden Tate might be the closest WR to having the fewest catches per start as Morgan. However, he managed 45-688 [15.3 YPC] -7. That would be 5.0 YPC more than Morgan along with 5 extra touchdowns. And the Seahawks were more run focused than we were (averaged 33.5 carries per game to our 32.4).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 64582
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MKnight82 wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Morgan had the most receptions on the team last year, the most first downs receiving in the team. I'd consider that playing well- considering our team ran the most in the NFL, which means we were one of the least passing teams. He is our possession wr. Tough, across the middle, first down maker.
I agree with what you're saying, but he needs to keep his head on straight. Remember he lost us the Rams game last year with that bonehead penalty.
His actions didnt help us win the Rams game, but he alone did not just lose us that game. We dropped a few passes in that game including a possible TD to Robinson who flat out dropped the pass, DHall couldn't stop Amendola all game (15 recs, 160 yds, TD), Orakpo and Carriker were lost for the year and I believe something else happened like a missed FG. Also, the Rams hit all of our players late (mostly RG3). If the game is not called by replacement officials and is held more in check (in control) like a normal NFL game and more flags are thrown, we win the game.

So yes, Morgan acted foolishly and shouldn't have allowed Finegan to be the punk he is and get him to react, but there was no guarentee Cundiff was hitting the 45 yard FG anyways. On top of that, instead of going for a 60 yd FG, he should t have went for the first down because the %'s were enter to do that.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 64582
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woz wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Morgan had the most receptions on the team last year, the most first downs receiving in the team. I'd consider that playing well- considering our team ran the most in the NFL, which means we were one of the least passing teams. He is our possession wr. Tough, across the middle, first down maker.


Arrow Most receptions ... but got 15 starts. Meh. Barely beat Garcon (44 catches in 10 starts) and Moss (41 catches in 16 games played, but only 1 start). Even Hankerson was in the neighborhood (38 catches in 16 games played, but only 5 starts).

Arrow Most first downs receiving? Had most receptions. How about we look at his 1st down percentage(*)? Fred Davis (70.8%), Logan Paulsen (68.0%), Leonard Hankerson (65.8%), and Santana Moss (63.4%) all had better first down rates than Morgan (60.4%). Even if you discount the rate, his 29 first downs tied for 73rd alongside Danario Alexander (10 GP, 6 GS), Golden Tate (15 GP, 15 GS (**)) ... and some TEs (Dennis Pitta, Jacob Tamme) and RBs (Darren Sproles). And if you want to discount that, Garcon and Moss each had 26 first downs, so it wasn't like he was blowing anyone out of the water (Garcon's 1st down% was 59.1%, just behind Morgan).

He's a completely replaceable cog.


(*) Technically, Cooley had a 100% 1st down percentage on one catch, Darrel Young 75.0% 1st down percentage on eight catches, and Niles Paul had 62.5% on eight catches. Since they had so few receptions, I discounted them from the above ranking.

(**) Golden Tate might be the closest WR to having the fewest catches per start as Morgan. However, he managed 45-688 [15.3 YPC] -7. That would be 5.0 YPC more than Morgan along with 5 extra touchdowns. And the Seahawks were more run focused than we were (averaged 33.5 carries per game to our 32.4).
Woz, I didn't say Morgan wasn't replaceable. (I said last offseason, I would have kept Gaffney instead of signing Morgan to a contract 3x as much). That being said he fits what the Shanahans wanted in a veteran wr. So, if that's the case and if for some reason Hankerson and Briscoe don't improve, Morgan could be kept of they like him. I mean you're telling me people have found good reasons to keep Rex Grossman around but you can't find a good reason to keep Morgan around after this season at a reduced price?

Come on woz. Shame on you
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 20454
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
Woz wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Morgan had the most receptions on the team last year, the most first downs receiving in the team. I'd consider that playing well- considering our team ran the most in the NFL, which means we were one of the least passing teams. He is our possession wr. Tough, across the middle, first down maker.


Arrow Most receptions ... but got 15 starts. Meh. Barely beat Garcon (44 catches in 10 starts) and Moss (41 catches in 16 games played, but only 1 start). Even Hankerson was in the neighborhood (38 catches in 16 games played, but only 5 starts).

Arrow Most first downs receiving? Had most receptions. How about we look at his 1st down percentage(*)? Fred Davis (70.8%), Logan Paulsen (68.0%), Leonard Hankerson (65.8%), and Santana Moss (63.4%) all had better first down rates than Morgan (60.4%). Even if you discount the rate, his 29 first downs tied for 73rd alongside Danario Alexander (10 GP, 6 GS), Golden Tate (15 GP, 15 GS (**)) ... and some TEs (Dennis Pitta, Jacob Tamme) and RBs (Darren Sproles). And if you want to discount that, Garcon and Moss each had 26 first downs, so it wasn't like he was blowing anyone out of the water (Garcon's 1st down% was 59.1%, just behind Morgan).

He's a completely replaceable cog.


(*) Technically, Cooley had a 100% 1st down percentage on one catch, Darrel Young 75.0% 1st down percentage on eight catches, and Niles Paul had 62.5% on eight catches. Since they had so few receptions, I discounted them from the above ranking.

(**) Golden Tate might be the closest WR to having the fewest catches per start as Morgan. However, he managed 45-688 [15.3 YPC] -7. That would be 5.0 YPC more than Morgan along with 5 extra touchdowns. And the Seahawks were more run focused than we were (averaged 33.5 carries per game to our 32.4).
Woz, I didn't say Morgan wasn't replaceable. (I said last offseason, I would have kept Gaffney instead of signing Morgan to a contract 3x as much). That being said he fits what the Shanahans wanted in a veteran wr. So, if that's the case and if for some reason Hankerson and Briscoe don't improve, Morgan could be kept of they like him. I mean you're telling me people have found good reasons to keep Rex Grossman around but you can't find a good reason to keep Morgan around after this season at a reduced price?

Come on woz. Shame on you


I was going to start out by saying that Morgan would have been a step up over Gaffney ... but he wasn't if you compare Morgan's 2012 stats to Gaffney's 2011. I don't know if Gaffney would have done better in the read-option offense, but that's somewhat unknowable. In any event, Gaffney was a 32 year old receiver. They tried to replace him, and got less out of his replacement.

That does not speak well of keeping Morgan. It certainly doesn't point to saying don't draft a WR early.

As for Rex Grossman, while I'm not a fan of his, I understand the logic of keeping him around. There is a limited pool of NFL talent at all positions, but the talent pool for QBs is the smallest by far. If you have someone who knows your system, then there is value in keeping them around.

That said, Grossman is currently here at vet minimum and third on the depth chart. Do you think Morgan would re-sign for that little money and that long of job prospects? He'll be 28 come next off-season. It's laughable to think he'd stick around for that little.

Come on turtle. Shame on you
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 64582
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woz wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Woz wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Morgan had the most receptions on the team last year, the most first downs receiving in the team. I'd consider that playing well- considering our team ran the most in the NFL, which means we were one of the least passing teams. He is our possession wr. Tough, across the middle, first down maker.


Arrow Most receptions ... but got 15 starts. Meh. Barely beat Garcon (44 catches in 10 starts) and Moss (41 catches in 16 games played, but only 1 start). Even Hankerson was in the neighborhood (38 catches in 16 games played, but only 5 starts).

Arrow Most first downs receiving? Had most receptions. How about we look at his 1st down percentage(*)? Fred Davis (70.8%), Logan Paulsen (68.0%), Leonard Hankerson (65.8%), and Santana Moss (63.4%) all had better first down rates than Morgan (60.4%). Even if you discount the rate, his 29 first downs tied for 73rd alongside Danario Alexander (10 GP, 6 GS), Golden Tate (15 GP, 15 GS (**)) ... and some TEs (Dennis Pitta, Jacob Tamme) and RBs (Darren Sproles). And if you want to discount that, Garcon and Moss each had 26 first downs, so it wasn't like he was blowing anyone out of the water (Garcon's 1st down% was 59.1%, just behind Morgan).

He's a completely replaceable cog.


(*) Technically, Cooley had a 100% 1st down percentage on one catch, Darrel Young 75.0% 1st down percentage on eight catches, and Niles Paul had 62.5% on eight catches. Since they had so few receptions, I discounted them from the above ranking.

(**) Golden Tate might be the closest WR to having the fewest catches per start as Morgan. However, he managed 45-688 [15.3 YPC] -7. That would be 5.0 YPC more than Morgan along with 5 extra touchdowns. And the Seahawks were more run focused than we were (averaged 33.5 carries per game to our 32.4).
Woz, I didn't say Morgan wasn't replaceable. (I said last offseason, I would have kept Gaffney instead of signing Morgan to a contract 3x as much). That being said he fits what the Shanahans wanted in a veteran wr. So, if that's the case and if for some reason Hankerson and Briscoe don't improve, Morgan could be kept of they like him. I mean you're telling me people have found good reasons to keep Rex Grossman around but you can't find a good reason to keep Morgan around after this season at a reduced price?

Come on woz. Shame on you


I was going to start out by saying that Morgan would have been a step up over Gaffney ... but he wasn't if you compare Morgan's 2012 stats to Gaffney's 2011. I don't know if Gaffney would have done better in the read-option offense, but that's somewhat unknowable. In any event, Gaffney was a 32 year old receiver. They tried to replace him, and got less out of his replacement.

That does not speak well of keeping Morgan. It certainly doesn't point to saying don't draft a WR early.

As for Rex Grossman, while I'm not a fan of his, I understand the logic of keeping him around. There is a limited pool of NFL talent at all positions, but the talent pool for QBs is the smallest by far. If you have someone who knows your system, then there is value in keeping them around.

That said, Grossman is currently here at vet minimum and third on the depth chart. Do you think Morgan would re-sign for that little money and that long of job prospects? He'll be 28 come next off-season. It's laughable to think he'd stick around for that little.

Come on turtle. Shame on you
Wink We'll see what happens. The history of the shanahans is if they like a player ad think he's good for the team, they find a way to keep them, unless their price gets too expensive. I think he'll be back.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Woz


Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 20454
Location: in a land where the furniture folds to a much smaller size
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And I'm saying that given the current roster, it wouldn't surprise me if they went for a WR or TE in the 3rd because they are somewhat thin there. It also wouldn't surprise me if they went CB, ILB or RT, and would only mildly surprise me if they went OLB.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 64582
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woz wrote:
And I'm saying that given the current roster, it wouldn't surprise me if they went for a WR or TE in the 3rd because they are somewhat thin there. It also wouldn't surprise me if they went CB, ILB or RT, and would only mildly surprise me if they went OLB.
nothing would surprise me with the shanahans
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group