Aside from the fact that they robbed us a few years ago. I am starting to think we go screwed royaly with the Moss Coles situation. I know that it too early to write off coles, but he may be slowing down. I think the skins took the best years ( and will continue to take them from Moss) of Coles. I know the QB sit. was what it was last year but the more I think about our O and the receivers the more pissed I am about the Coles Moss deal. I would say that we definitely have at least one question mark at WR and maybe two.
We got Coles because Pennington's noodle arm couldn't get Santana the ball, and the Hermway style offense was too stupid to make adjustments to change any of that anyway. They're both rather useless WRs, but Moss will have a better career probably. Coles has a foot injury, and I was told last time that if he had surgery it could end his career. However, not having surgery makes him rather slow and useless imo. Coles will either have to take a huge paycut or he will be gone within the next 2 years, but for now we are stuck with him. I feel sorry for Ramsey in all of this, if he gets a crack at the starting job he'll be stuck throwing to Coles again, and that didn't work the first time either.
In disagree we made out quite well with Coles. Moss would most likley have never succeeded here. He had lost confidence in his abilty to catch the ball. His teamates and the CS had also lost confidence in him. The best thing for Moss and the Jets was for him to move on and start fresh. We were lucky to get Coles for him. Its a trade that worked out great for both teams. But don't be surpised if Moss reverts back to form next year and becomes the redskins version of Becht.
70+ catches, 800+ yards, 5 TDs is a solid year if you have to go through 5 QB's, no running game and no offensive line. Sorry guys, but to say Coles is already finished is absurd. Not one single offensive player could be judged after last year's trainwreck. There was just too many injuries and unlucky circumstances.
They took Moss away from us. That's all I'm mad about. Coles, Moss, and McCareins. I wish that was our 3 guys.
Actually the problem was not that they took Moss, but rather that they took Coles in the first place. If the Jets had made the proper tender they would probably have never lost him to begin with and we would have Moss and Coles still here.
damn if we could held on to moss one more year we could probably traded him for javon walker.. anyone though i think coles is fine he made some tough catches last year if he gets a qb he will get 1,000 yards plus this year.
1) 2 Years ago, we ROBBED THE SKINS. We purposely put a mid-tender on Coles hoping someone with a fairly high 1st rounder would bite, and the Skins did. This was done on purpose. Now, what we did with the 1st rounder (dealing it for the #4) was bad, but that can't count as fleecing by the SKINS. In my opinion, we robbed THEM. 2) Morton: We're talking a kick returner here, who cares. 3) Hall/Thomas: Thomas' offer was OFF THE CHARTS and so was HALLs (who is not that good). Keep in mind, they were UFAs, so we had no choice 4) Ramsey - 6th rounder for a former #1? He still has talent, and we robbed them here. 5) Coles/Moss - I was against this deal when it happened. Coles got a lot of $ to come back here to the Jets. However, MOST PEOPLE not just on this board said we FLEECED them making this deal. Moss ended up turning things around in an offense more suited for him. Also, we didn't want to pay moss big $, which is why the deal was done. I don't see where we were fleeced... not even once.
The Jets DID make the proper tender. They made this tender HOPING someone with a high #1 (Skins qualify here) signed Coles. If the Eagles had that year, with their #30 pick, that would have been an issue, but with #12 from the Skins, the Jets actually got what they wanted. They did not want to pay Coles. Now dealing away the pick to acquire the #4 was a bad move, but you can't judge the tender thing on that.. it's separate.
A Redskin/Ramsey fan weighing in here... For the first six games of the 2005 season, and until defenses started doubling Santana, the Brunell-Moss combination was as productive as any I've ever seen. Laverneus performed well for us in 2004, even with the toe injury, but he wanted out of Washington and away from the Gibbs' offense and its horizontal passing game. Gibbs tried to convince him to stay but Coles wan't buying into the promises that the offense would stretch the field in 2005. We had to unload him and he wanted to go back to the Jets. I doubt that anyone, including Joe Gibbs, knew what we were getting with Moss. His is a classic case demonstrating the difficulty of evaluating a player. So often, we are simply evaluating the player, the team, and the coaching all at once. Santana's stock was low because of the way he was used with the Jets. Ramsey's stock is low because of the way he was used and abused in Washington. If your current staff gives him something to work with, my bet is that you guys will have a starting QB that you will enjoy watching.
^^ Well said. In the end I think the Coles-Moss trade will work out for both of us, and I'm hoping Ramsey shows us enough to make him our starting qb after this season and beyond. As much as I like Chad P, I don't think I'll ever look at him as a tough, durable qb that we can rely on every season. Lets hope Schott can work his magic on somebody... Ask yourself this question: Would Moss have had the breakout season he had in Washington in New York. Not a chance. That offense suits him better, and we would still be right where we are today with or w/o him. You will see after this year that getting Coles was a great move.
That's contrary since it goes against everything that actually happened. Fact:Moss was Productive when he was used properly College- Over the Middle, all over the field (Productive) Jets- 5&10 yd Outs to the sidelines, Field stretch Patterns(Non-Productive) Skins- Over the Middle, all over the field (Productive) IOW, It wasn't MOSS. When he's Used properly he is an incredible weapon. Trying to predict that he will begin dropping balls is not a good argument
We have made out quite well w/ all the redskin moves, the only move that looks bad at this point is Moss for cols but Coles put up GREAT #s considering he was on a team w/ no QBs and no running game.
Exactly, if Moss was still on the team last year his numbers would've been no where near what they were with the Redskins. He just didn't fit in our system and with Chad at QB he never would've, with a QB who could get him the ball downfield like Brunell he could excell, which he showed, but Coles was a better fit as a possesion reciever and more quality over quantity.
I just don't think Moss was happy with the fact that our offense did not play to his strengths. He is a deep guy, and an outside guy, and we were throwing alot of medium patterns and stuff to the middle. I honestly think that the coaches wanted those plays to go to Justin because Moss' forte is not catching the ball over the middle. Therefore his role was confined to the deep ball and we did not go there often. Coles, albeit the fact that he may be slowing down just a little, will go over the middle and I also think he is better when the corner and receiver are both right there and fighting for the ball. I think each of them is better at certain things than the other. Santana can certainly break away deep and get open, but Coles in more aggressive when he has to fight for the ball, feels comfortable over the middle, and in my opinion is just more dimensional. Santana can go over the middle and on a hook he is dangerous if he gets outside.... I dunno, I am not too unhappy about the trade but I will know better after how they perform this season.
