Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Randy Moss? Why Not.

(I can see him in Burgundy and Gold, just not as #81- that's a sacred number around these parts)
 Before you start saying "Are you out of your mind Deadman? Don't we already have enough divas on this Redskin team?" you need to read on and hear me out on the Moss situation. There are some clear cut cons to taking Randy Moss and as many of you might know, I was very much against seeing T.O. come to DC (can you imagine T.O. with McNabb playing like he has in 2010?). Nor is Moss to DC a great long term solution. He wants a new contract and personally, with an unstable QB situation and a horrible O-line I can't see signing an older Randy Moss to a new mega-deal as one of the Redskins major needs at this moment. Moss is also generally known for being a malcontent but it really depends on the situation and how he and the team for whom he's playing is doing. All of that said, I think for 3+ million he might be worth brining in for 8 games, here's why.

1. Height- Moss is 6'4". The next tallest WR on the roster is Roydell Williams at 6'0". One of the things Mike Shanahan really liked about Malcolm Kelly is his height and that's why the Skins wanted Kelly to be out on the field so badly. Jump balls and fades are doable for the taller WRs. With Kelly on IR, you bring in Moss for the height factor and if Moss isn't back in 2011, then you have Kelly or some other FA/draftee who may be able to fill that role. Right now, there's nobody better available to do that.

2. Production- Moss' numbers haven't been that great in 2010 but let's look at the stats anyway. In his 4 games with the Vikings, Moss had 13 catches for 174 yards and 2 TDs. Now let's look at the Redskins. Roydell Williams and Joey Galloway have less catches in 8 games combined (11 catches 184yds, 0TD). Anthony Armstrong (who I like) only has 17 catches (although he's averaging 21.6 yds/catch) and 1 TD. Even in a off year for Moss, he's doing better than most of the Redskins WRs.

3. More opportunities for Cooley and S. Moss- Randy Moss still requires double coverage against many teams, so this opens up more opportunities for Cooley and Santana Moss and the run game for that matter.

4. Would bringing in Moss hurt Armstrong's development? No. You still rotate Armstrong in with Moss. Moss takes plays off on the field, so it makes sense to rotate him in (kind of similar to Haynesworth) and let Armstrong get some snaps.

So yes, I think it only makes sense to take a shot with Moss. What the heck. If worse comes to worse you cut him just like the Vikings did.

1 comment:

Bleaux Leaux said...

I kind of agree. What the hell? This isn't a playoff caliber team yet anyway; so it's not a big gamble. Throw him in there and see what happens. Like you say, we can always cut him.

On the other hand, I kind of feel like Haynesworth has already helped us meet our headcase quota...lol

Post a Comment