Please Draft Calvin Johnson

by **Gibbs4Life** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:38 pm

We have Moss and El...then it gets sketchy with lloyd...what makes us think brandon is a number two? Last year he had every opportunity and didn't produce. Calvin Johnson will strike fear into every team we face and with Santana opposite and Cool

ey in the slot! Forget about it. Give JCam the perfect weapon Moss, Johnson, Lloyd, El, Cool

ey! Defense is a need but the bottom line is the guys we already have on Dline need to just step up. At wideout however we are missing that guy, that possesion reciever who can also stretch the field. I suggest we trade #6 and next years 1st for Calvin Johnson. I just keep having the vision of us going down to dallas and lining up Calvin and Moss and it being lights out.

If CJ is an absolute no possibility... Laron Landry next to ST baby.

by **LOSTHOG** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:58 pm

Landry over Jphnson, but I still feel we will trade down a bit and end up with a DE w/ a mid 20ish pick and hopefully have a 2nd or 3rd rd pick to go w/ it

by **LOSTHOG** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:01 pm

Hey everyone must be asleep. this is a draft thread and it hasn't been moved yet...and its been up for 2 hrs. I guess Big Brother needs sleep too. :lol:

by **1niksder** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Just resting their eyes.... :wink:

Or maybe checking for pinholes in my eyelids... MODS NEVER SLEEP

by **JPM36** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 11:25 pm

We don't need Johnson or Landry.

We need defensive linemen....

by **Justice Hog** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:34 am

Do you really think Johnson is gonna be available at #6? I certainly don't!

by **1niksder** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:24 am

Justice Hog wrote:Do you really think Johnson is gonna be available at #6? I certainly don't!

I'm getting the feeling that he won't be avaiable at #2 :shock:

by **BossHog** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:15 am

Yeah... we need five big receiving targets in a run-based offense.

:oops:

NFL receivers would never, EVER complain if they didn't get the ball enough.

And you want to give up next year's number one to get him as well?

Are you My Cousin Vinny per chance? :twisted:

Why don't we just trade Marcus Washington and Sean Taylor instead of giving up next year's pick... after all, if we had a 'can't miss' prospect like CJ, we wouldn't need defense. :wink:

by **JPM36** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 2:50 pm

If we used 2 #1 picks to get a WR I'd be furious. I don't care how good Calvin Johnson is that would be a horrible move.

by **UK Skins Fan** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:36 pm

In other words, some of us say "please don't draft Calvin Johnson".

Unless...

by **Gibbs4Life** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:51 pm

Yeah... we need five big receiving targets in a run-based offense

Saunders offense is run based? I guess I missed all those I-formations he had marshall faulk running out of...wait that's right OUR OFFENSE IS A PASSING OFFENSE. Only reason we still run is to set up big pass plays, gone are the days of 50 gut.

by **PulpExposure** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:15 pm

Gibbs4Life wrote:
Yeah... we need five big receiving targets in a run-based offense

Saunders offense is run based? I guess I missed all those I-formations he had marshall faulk running out of...wait that's right OUR OFFENSE IS A PASSING OFFENSE. Only reason we still run is to set up big pass plays, gone are the days of 50 gut.

Huh. Did you watch the Redskins play at all in the last 6 games of the year?

You're also referring to Mad Mike Martz' offense in St. Louis. When Saunders was the Offensive Coordinator for real, in KC, what do you remember?

Oh yeah, Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson running the ball. A lot.

by **SkinsFreak** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:37 pm

PulpExposure wrote:Huh. Did you watch the Redskins play at all in the last 6 games of the year?

In all fairness, the main reason why we were so "run heavy" the last six games of the year was because they didn't want to put too much pressure on Campbell; not yet having the time to gel with our receivers at that point. Gibbs said that in a press conference.

I think Saunders offense displays a nice balance of both the run and the pass.

by **Gibbs4Life** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:52 pm

In all fairness, the main reason why we were so "run heavy" the last six games of the year was because they didn't want to put too much pressure on Campbell; not yet having the time to gel with our receivers at that point. Gibbs said that in a press conference.

I think Saunders offense displays a nice balance of both the run and the pass.

Thank You Freak! Hey I want to run the ball just as much as anyone. Reality is CP had problems last year call it injury or whatever bottom line no production, then late in the year JCam was being limited somewhat but not this year. I'll bet we throw more td's than rush for them next season anyone wanna take that bet for the record?

by **PulpExposure** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 8:55 pm

SkinsFreak wrote:In all fairness, the main reason why we were so "run heavy" the last six games of the year was because they didn't want to put too much pressure on Campbell; not yet having the time to gel with our receivers at that point. Gibbs said that in a press conference.

They also said they were getting back to "Redskins" football, which intimates a change of offensive philosophy more than purely to accomodate a young QB. Our team has 2 guys with 1000 yards rushing. We don't have even have 2 1000 yard receivers. It's easy to do the math with which we're more successful doing...

Gibbs4Life wrote:I'll bet we throw more td's than rush for them next season anyone wanna take that bet for the record?

I'll happily take that. But that's not a great measurement of run/pass. Run/pass playcall ratio is.