Randle El
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/12/AR2006031201424.html
Am I glad that the Redskins acquired Randle El? Yes. But was Randle El worth $11.5 million in guaranteed money? No way. So far he's topped out at 601 yards receiving in a season and has scored only 7 TDs over four seasons. In fact, he started 15 games this season compared to 7 last season and caught fewer balls. Funny thing is, of Rod Gardner's four seasons with the Redskins, his worst season was when he had 600 yards receiving, and he had 22 TDs over those four years.
The flip side is that Gardner was the #1 option his first two years and the #2 option his third and fourth years (alongside Coles). Meanwhile, Randle El wasn't featured until the last two years and even then, it was in a run first offense. Despite the "potential," it's unimaginable to see how the Redskins broke the bank for him. They are sacrificing future years by spending right now in a weak talent pool for receivers. I guess when you sign Al Saunders, you have to give him some weapons to play with.
In addition, the Skins will be paying Brandon Lloyd almost $10 million in guaranteed money. I can understand signing either Lloyd or Randle El. But signing both of them? Why not see how Patten turns out as the 3rd receiver? Instead, they'll probably waste the $3.5 million signing bonus they gave him by cutting him or having him play a minimal role as the fourth receiver.
5 comments:
You're right. The Redskins overpaid - by a lot! - to get Randle El. The following Steelers' blog has several posts analyzing Randel El's play, and Redskins fans will be disappointed to learn that he only catches about 50 percent of the balls thrown in his direction.
http://the-steelyard.blogspot.com
Signing Antonio Bryant is a good upgrade for the 49ers. Although he seems to be trouble in the attitude department, getting over 1000 yards is good production. Having Arnaz Battle as your starting #2 receiver, though, is a stretch. I have trouble even seeing him as a #3 receiver.
I think we're just scared of having a situation like last year where we lost patton, then moss had to fend for himself through the double and triple teams. Why not have 4 guys to lessen the risk?
I hear what you're saying. On the other hand, though, money spent on four quality receivers means less money available for other positions -- like LB, CB, and OL.
True. BUT. Those are positions that are much more easily filled for less money. You can spend $500K to get a decent o-lineman. You cant do that with WR. Regardless, Gregg Williams is so set on having an effective SYSTEM, rather than players on defense, we won't be spending much money on those guys.
Post a Comment