Adrian Peterson (Signed)

[turtle28]

28 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

Crowder was arguably our #1 last year. Just because he operates out of the slot, he doesn’t get the “starting nod”, but him and Doctson were the starters for the majority of the season last year. Jay’s protege, Ryan Grant, may have got the starting nod, but he wasn’t a starter IMO.

I can’t seem to find an opening day depth chart from last year, but the majority of the offense remains the same. 

I definitely agree that a majority of the offense is the same as last year. All I’m saying is that a majority of the time we have 3 WRs on the field. So, we didn’t re-sign one of those players and upgraded them with Richardson.

Is Richardson a new starter or not? I think the answer to that is clear. He’s a starter. That’s a new starter, meaning at the least we have 3 new starters and if AD beats out Kelley/Perine, that’s 4 new starters.

[turtle28]

14 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

 

The only thing I want to say on the Smith-Cousins thing, is that I trust Smith to make smarter throws. I do not believe either is a “better QB”, but I think Smith is the better decision maker.

Part of the reason for my optimism is that I believe so strongly that a smart QB can win you games. Now I don’t know the ages of all the posters, but most of us can remember Matt Hasselbeck. He never had the strongest arm, nor was he the most accurate, but he was the ideal “game manager”. He made “mostly” smart throws. I compare Smith a lot to what we saw from Hasselbeck, but I believe Smith is a lot better at it. I believe Smith will put us in good positions to win games, and make less game-changing plays for our oppositions. 

But that’s just like, my opinion man.

Love this! That’s a really good comparison, and I do agree that Smith is similar to Matt Hassleback only a better version because he’s more accurate and I think he’ll make even better decisions than Hassleback did in his prime for the Seagulls.

[Slappy Mc]

14 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

Is Richardson a new starter or not? I think the answer to that is clear. He’s a starter. That’s a new starter, meaning at the least we have 3 new starters and if AD beats out Kelley/Perine, that’s 4 new starters.

I view Doctson and Crowder our starters, so the answer to your question, IMO, is no he is not “a starter”. I think it is all kind of useless to label them “starters”, because I think we will see a lot of committee WR corps. Obviously our top 3 is set, but we should see a lot of different looks.

We ultimately will know more on opening day. With our luck with injuries, we probably aren’t done there. (Knock on the biggest piece of lumber around)

[turtle28]

14 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

I view Doctson and Crowder our starters, so the answer to your question, IMO, is no he is not “a starter”. I think it is all kind of useless to label them “starters”, because I think we will see a lot of committee WR corps. Obviously our top 3 is set, but we should see a lot of different looks.

We ultimately will know more on opening day. With our luck with injuries, we probably aren’t done there. (Knock on the biggest piece of lumber around)

You might want to watch the last preseason game. Richardson was starting and got the first target and reception from Alex Smith in the preseason. 

Richardson is a starter, it’s not debatable. You don’t give a WR a 5 year, $40 million deal to be a back up. He’s a starter. Period.

[Slappy Mc]

26 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

You might want to watch the last preseason game. Richardson was starting and got the first target and reception from Alex Smith in the preseason. 

Richardson is a starter, it’s not debatable. You don’t give a WR a 5 year, $40 million deal to be a back up. He’s a starter. Period.

I watched it. Richardson is going to be a big part of the offense. For comparison, Vernon Davis is not the “starter,” but he figures to be highly involved. The label doesn’t really matter, because yes will be highly involved. 

[turtle28]

26 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

I watched it. Richardson is going to be a big part of the offense. For comparison, Vernon Davis is not the “starter,” but he figures to be highly involved. The label doesn’t really matter, because yes will be highly involved. 

BUT he literally started the game and he’s replaced last years starting WR opposite Doctson for most of the season, Ryan Grant. The first preseason action the season starters had all season and he was out there... starting...

There’s a clear difference between PRich & VD:

1. The contract. PRich is getting starters money.

2. One is listed as a starter, the other is listed as a back up to Jordan Reed.

3. The plan is that PRich will be on the field more than VD. PRich will be on the field almost every snap, whether it’s 2 or 3 WR sets. The plan is that VD will only be on the field in 2 TE sets and short yardage. 

[Slappy Mc]

1 minute ago, turtle28 said:

BUT he literally started the game and he’s replaced last year so starting WR opposite Doctson for most of the season, Ryan Grant. The first preseason action the season starters had all season and he was out there... starting...

There’s a clear difference between PRich & VD:

1. The contract

2. One is listed as a starter, the other is listed as a back up to Jordan Reed.

So because Paul is making more money than Jamison, you think he will be a more prominent figure in the offense? Or you are specifically referring to the “starting” thing?

Kind of silly to say that his salary indicates his importance. I understand you get paid to perform, but there are plenty of players that “aren’t starters” that play significant roles. I don’t think P-Rich has to be labeled the starter, but I understand where you are coming from.

[turtle28]

2 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

So because Paul is making more money than Jamison, you think he will be a more prominent figure in the offense? Or you are specifically referring to the “starting” thing?

Kind of silly to say that his salary indicates his importance. I understand you get paid to perform, but there are plenty of players that “aren’t starters” that play significant roles. I don’t think P-Rich has to be labeled the starter, but I understand where you are coming from.

I’m just saying they’d paid PRich the $40 million contract to come in start for them. In fact they paid him to be a starting outside WR because Crowder isn’t good on the outside and they felt they needed an upgrade there over Ryan Grant.

So far in his career, Crowder has only proven he is a slot WR, slot WRs don’t start unless a team opens up with 3 wide. I’m not saying that either one is better than the other but that when the team comes out for the first serries of the game Richardson will be listed with the starters. The only way Crowder is listed as a starter is if they start the game in 3 wide instead of a two TE set.

Imo neither is better than the other, they’re different. Crowder will catch 60-70 passes but only get 12 ypc. PRich will catch 50-60 passes and get 15-16 ypc. Last year PRich doubled Crowder’s TD total.

[BeaReylo]

On 8/19/2018 at 4:27 PM, turtle28 said:

I’d much rather have the younger Darkwa than AD or Charles for the reasons Mknight & RSkinGM. 

From what I've gathered AD is in better shape than Darkwa:  "He's a physical freak," Redskins coach Jay Gruden said. "He's in great shape, explosive, and that's what sold us. Some of the backs we had in here (for workouts) were huffing and puffing, keeling over. He was standing straight up. He could have gone on another two hours." http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24439369/adrian-peterson-first-practice-washington-redskins

Adrian Peterson avg 3.1 yds behind the worst O-line, in Ari. The Redskins had the 12th best line last year.  Already he's in a better place to excel.

Not to mention The Cardinals and The Saints employ ZBS and AP works better in PRS, which Jay likes to run.  Couple that with basically having a year off, due to his neck injury giving his legs a chance to rest he has a 50 50 chance off working out here.  We'll have to wait and see?

 

 

[turtle28]

9 minutes ago, FosterTheSkins said:

From what I've gathered AD is in better shape than Darkwa:  "He's a physical freak," Redskins coach Jay Gruden said. "He's in great shape, explosive, and that's what sold us. Some of the backs we had in here (for workouts) were huffing and puffing, keeling over. He was standing straight up. He could have gone on another two hours." http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24439369/adrian-peterson-first-practice-washington-redskins

Adrian Peterson avg 3.1 yds behind the worst O-line, in Ari. The Redskins had the 12th best line last year.  Already he's in a better place to excel.

Not to mention The Cardinals and The Saints employ ZBS and AP works better in PRS, which Jay likes to run.  Couple that with basically having a year off, due to his neck injury giving his legs a chance to rest he has a 50 50 chance off working out here.  We'll have to wait and see?

 

 

I would still have rather signed Darkwa, but he made it clear he expected to start. I’m not upset that we have Peterson. I hope it works out.

[Thaiphoon]

5 hours ago, Slappy Mc said:

Out of curiosity, how?

The addition of Paul Richardson? The health of the team? The progression of the players from last year? Or Adrian Peterson joining?

To me, the offense is very similar to last year. 9 returning starters (everyone except Cousins and Long( No I don’t count Pryor as a starter, even though the D.C. disagreed)) 

RB - can you honestly tell me that the RB corps hasn't improved with AP the potential starter?

TE - Reed is healthy

WR - yes, Richardson gives us the DJax-like WR to take the tops off of defenses. And we now have better depth.

OL - healthier (still lack a good LG)

[Thaiphoon]

4 hours ago, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

But less talent on offense than we had in 2015 or 2016, IMO.

Not disagreeing there. Might disagree at the RB but 2015/2016 was definitely better overall

[Thaiphoon]

4 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Not sure why the last sentence matters. If we care that the team is improved and that it looks better rather than how it looked for the former QB then we should be happy about that.

I mean, as we all know the team surrounding the former QB was better than the team surrounding the former former QB too once Crowder, Scherff, Long and Moses were added.

I cant be happy that we improved the offense around our new QB? 

[Thaiphoon]

4 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Same here, and I’m not sure why the sentence even matters unless people are already setting up for “yeah buts” if the team does better this year than it did from 2015-17.

Again...stating my opinion about the state of the offense and being happy about it...is still allowed on these forums, no?

[Thaiphoon]

4 hours ago, turtle28 said:

And, what’s the point? I don’t understand why that matters now, for this year unless... ohhhh right, if the team does better this year it certainly won’t be because of the QB. I get it, that’s the narrative, right, sure...

Dude. Just stop. You're not a mind reader and imputing motives to people who post non-controversial posts (like mine - which not only agreed with you on the running game but stated my happiness about the offense), is pretty mind boggling stuff