Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Hall On Vick, Skins, Punt Returning

Cornerback DeAngelo Hall, a close friend of former Atlanta quarterback Michael Vick, said today he spoke to Vick since he was released from prison last month after serving time for his part in running a dog-fighting ring. Both players grew up in the Tidewater area of Virginia -- Hall in Chesapeake, Vick in nearby Newport News -- and they both went to Virginia Tech and were teammates on the Falcons.

"He was in pretty good spirits, sounded good," Hall said. "I plan on getting down there probably next weekend just to go visit him, making everything's going all right with him. But he sounded good. I can't wait to see him."

Vick's two months of home confinement is over July 20.

"Right now, I think he's just thinking about finishing out his time, and then just trying to take it one step at a time," Hall said. "He definitely sounded a lot more mature, a lot more focused on his family, the task at hand, and what it's going to take to eventually get back in this thing."

Hall is going through his first training camp with the Redskins, whom he joined midway through last season. He said it is already an improvement over his time with Oakland, which released him during the 2008 season.

"I expect it to be fun," Hall said. "I expect it to be a lot less stress-free. I think last year in training camp early on in Oakland, I actually broke my hand. So in the preseason I might have played six plays in all four games. To say was I rusty coming into the season? Heck yeah.

"But I'm hoping to come out healthy for the season, go through training camp and try to gain as much knowledge and understanding of the defense as I can. I've only been in this defense for a couple months when I came in from Oakland. To be able to go through an offense with it and go through training camp with it is going to prepare me tremendously."

One wrinkle Hall might add this year: catching punts. He has been working with Antwaan Randle El and Santana Moss during the current offseason workouts.

"I told Santana, me and him were joking, we might have to run the option like I did back in Atlanta," Hall said. But he downplayed his potential for replacing Randle El, who struggled to average 6.5 yards per punt return last year.

"To be a full-time returner, I think we got a pretty good one in Randle El already," Hall said.

By Barry Svrluga  |  June 3, 2009; 1:35 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Santana Moss's Slightly New Deal
Next: Orakpo Pulling Double Duty

Comments

1st

Posted by: Vicc | June 3, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

"....To be a full-time returner, I think we got a pretty good one in Randle El already," DeAngelo Hall said.

DeAngelo Hall claiming Randle El is a good punt returner?

He must be full of Hokie.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 3, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

On the offseason, I give the Skins a B-.

Best things they did.
(grade: A)
1. Used the top pick on a player at a need position
2. Let go of Jansen, Marcus, Springs and Taylor
3. Got Dockery

Good things they did, with a but ...
(Grade: B)
4. Got Albert
5. Signed Hall

Hall and Albert are both very talented and that's very good. Still, the Skins committed a lot -- too many eggs in too few baskets. Plus, both guys have had issues and Albert doesn't play 16 games a year

Not good things
(grade: C or worse)
6. Lost Evans
7. Didn't draft a single OL
8. Didn't trade for a proven OL
9. Played ugly mind games with Campbell
10. Didn't address P or K

Incompletes:
The unknowns are some of the FA they brought in, Williams, Bridges, Thomas and that KR from Canada. Its good to bring guys in, but who knows if they do anything.

Overall, the Skins mgmt did OK, but clearly the OL is still the issue with the age/injury history there.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"10. Didn't address P or K"

They signed a punter.....although I'd sign on to your assessment in general...

Posted by: chrislarry | June 3, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

would prefer the Skins not put ARE at PR -- he's not very good and he fumbled one away that was pretty key. Not Moss, who is too valuable at WR. Not Hall, since we''re not deep at CB.

So, we have the kid from Canada (Aldridge?), Rock, Tryon, Betts. Maybe Kareem Moore. Devin Thomas? Marcus Mason??

Out of that list, I'm sure one of these guys is an upgrade over ARE.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

"10. Didn't address P or K"

They signed a punter.....although I'd sign on to your assessment in general...

Posted by: chrislarry

I recall they did, but I also recall the guy seemed to be worse than Plackemeier.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Not a bad grade overall! They have signed many punters and kickers over the last few years, but have not been able to find that solid guy to come in year in and year out.

Big ups to Moss for the restructured deal. Even though a 6 mil bonus should be a pat on the back enough.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | June 3, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

"....Out of that list, I'm sure one of these guys is an upgrade over ARE..."


It would be very easy for anybody to be an upgrade over ARE.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 3, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

10. Didn't address P or K"

They signed a punter.....although I'd sign on to your assessment in general...

Posted by: chrislarry

I recall they did, but I also recall the guy seemed to be worse than Plackemeier.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:22 PM

You're thinking about Dirk Johnson (since axed). Hunter Smith is the deal. Skins are good at P now.

Posted by: dcsween | June 3, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: dcsween | June 3, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

The guy looks like a date rapist.

10 years from now we will see him on Forensic Files.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | June 3, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

That's journalism?

the refreshing thing about the last few days is that what we've been getting was a straight report without the little diggs a the front office...

Posted by: jumbo5383

What you've been getting is PR, same thing as you get at Redskins.Com. It is a journalists job to report news, good and bad. The Washington Post isnt' a fanzine--at last not yet.--THECORK

Can yourself or jason reid honestly say that the Skins havn't been succesfull because of their cap management?

Posted by: jumbo5383


I most certainly can for myself--tho it's a lote more than just cap management. (Reid can speak for himself). Cap Management is more than rewriting contracts so there's enough cap room left to try to fix the mistakes of the past.

Cap management includes the egregious and ongoing overpaying of fading, injured and/or questionable players.

Jon Jansen is only the most recent example. (He follows overpaying Archuletta and Receiver, The) Moss's revamp was necessary because of mistakes made overpaying Jansen and those dolts.

Let me take an educated guess that the next such problem will involve Clinton Portis. Warrior, yes. Just like Jansen was. But for an RB, he's ancient.

I'M not saying it, but I have read in several places that the $100 million figure for Haynesworth is too much--not because he lacks talent, but because he has a tendency to get hurt.

Posted by: TheCork | June 3, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

I'M not saying it, but I have read in several places that the $100 million figure for Haynesworth is too much--not because he lacks talent, but because he has a tendency to get hurt.

Posted by: TheCork | June 3, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Haynesworth's contract is worth $41 million. If we end up paying out the max $100 million that his contract could be worth, that means he'll have played like a beast for 6-7 years and was completely worth it. So, I hope we do end up paying Haynesworth the full contract.

Posted by: Section104 | June 3, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Its not a bad grade. The failure to draft multiple OL was mind-boggling.

They had to get rid of the high priced talent that wasn't delivering -- and did. Of the 4, only Springs played at a high level in 2008.

The real issue is that the Skins have a bunch of 'C' grade offseasons prior to this one ... so they had a lot of stuff to cover.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Hunter "The Punter" Smith is a sizable up grade over Plack....I actually think it was our most prudent off season signing, and a holder ta boot!

Here is the RI post:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/redskins-agree-to-terms-with-p.html

Posted by: chrislarry | June 3, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone on this blog realize that Suisam has the highest feild goals made percentage of any kicker in Redskins history? Beter even than Chip Loehmiller.

Posted by: kaasmaster | June 3, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Missed the Hunter Smith signing. That looks like a good call. Thanks for updating me on that.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

No problem Z

Posted by: chrislarry | June 3, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

On the offseason, I give the Skins a B-.

Best things they did.
(grade: A)
1. Used the top pick on a player at a need position
2. Let go of Jansen, Marcus, Springs and Taylor
3. Got Dockery

Good things they did, with a but ...
(Grade: B)
4. Got Albert
5. Signed Hall

Hall and Albert are both very talented and that's very good. Still, the Skins committed a lot -- too many eggs in too few baskets. Plus, both guys have had issues and Albert doesn't play 16 games a year

Not good things
(grade: C or worse)
6. Lost Evans
7. Didn't draft a single OL
8. Didn't trade for a proven OL
9. Played ugly mind games with Campbell
10. Didn't address P or K

Incompletes:
The unknowns are some of the FA they brought in, Williams, Bridges, Thomas and that KR from Canada. Its good to bring guys in, but who knows if they do anything.

Overall, the Skins mgmt did OK, but clearly the OL is still the issue with the age/injury history there.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Great post

May i suggest you for the permanent replacement of jlc?

Posted by: jumbo5383 | June 3, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Can yourself or jason reid honestly say that the Skins havn't been succesfull because of their cap management?

Posted by: jumbo5383


I most certainly can for myself--tho it's a lote more than just cap management. (Reid can speak for himself). Cap Management is more than rewriting contracts so there's enough cap room left to try to fix the mistakes of the past.

TheCork

I must agree with Cork on his assessment. Although I think this offseason they have done a really good job of the contracts they were redone, i.e. Carter, El, and even Moss. These players will be at a cap friendly level when their FA year next roll around, giving the team the flexibility to resign them or let them go.

Posted by: TWISI | June 3, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Based on the Hunter Smith signing, I'll up the offseason grade to a 'B' from a 'B-'. Punting and holding were genuine problems.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Let me take an educated guess that the next such problem will involve Clinton Portis. Warrior, yes. Just like Jansen was. But for an RB, he's ancient.

I'M not saying it, but I have read in several places that the $100 million figure for Haynesworth is too much--not because he lacks talent, but because he has a tendency to get hurt.

Posted by: TheCork | June 3, 2009 2:34 PM


So, to understand here, you're implying that the 1,428 yards Portis racked up just last season is "ancient"?

What makes him "ancient"? His lack of break away speed?

I hope you don't think that, and if you do, you can surely thank Gibbs for that. Gibbs asked Clinton Portis to be a workhorse, so he had to gain weight to take the punishing of running between the tackles.

If you gain weight, you lose speed. Simple physics, really.

I'm not saying that Gibbs' request had a negative effect on Portis, but it did have an effect.

But at least you give the man his due props. That's a helluva lot more than I can say for some.

Posted by: RedDMV | June 3, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Yes, we know we haven't been an elite franchise for the past 10 years - the fanbase does not need the constant reminders.

Posted by: McMetal |

Actually, Pollyanna, it does. It reminds them not to just buy the latest jersey Snyder is peddling and hold the FO's feet to the fire for their ongoing errors. It would be easier if they learned from past errors. For instance, it appeared for a while there they were rebuilding through the draft, avoiding overpaying FAs, and adding players judiciously (Fletcher, for instance). NE, Steelers, Giants, etc. are masters of that. Great plans to emulate.

But the snap of Daniels injury hadn't even stopped echoing around Snyderatto's cranium, than they abandoned that to squander a 2nd and a 6th and bring in $10 mil worth of near worthless Jason Taylor.

In for a dollar, in for $150 million, I guess, this year they paid that and more out for two FA's and resigning Hall.

Posted by The Cork

The creative cap management has also allowed the team to pursue top talent without slipping into the abyss of Cap Hell that so many uninformed, lazy "journalists" keep predicting. CASH creates CAP. Maybe write a column about that, eh?

Posted by: McMetal

This "creative cash management" has resulted in ten years of mediocrity. Many columns have been written about their so-called genius with the cap. What we'd LIKE to see written is how the team is fairing after it's latest Super Bowl win.

Posted by: TheCork | June 3, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

With the way the 'skins do their signings/re-signings/extensions, the figure release to the public normally isn't the figure the player actually sees.

Only in 'skins land 100 million isn't 100 million.

Posted by: RedDMV | June 3, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Can yourself or jason reid honestly say that the Skins havn't been succesfull because of their cap management?

Posted by: jumbo5383


I most certainly can for myself--tho it's a lote more than just cap management. (Reid can speak for himself). Cap Management is more than rewriting contracts so there's enough cap room left to try to fix the mistakes of the past.

TheCork

I must agree with Cork on his assessment. Although I think this offseason they have done a really good job of the contracts they were redone, i.e. Carter, El, and even Moss. These players will be at a cap friendly level when their FA year next roll around, giving the team the flexibility to resign them or let them go.

Posted by: TWISI | June 3, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

You guys are funny,and here i thought that you guys(cork in particular)thought it was the teams talent evaluation process,and lack of a consistant plan that was keeping them from building a winner..

So can we agree that they can evaluate talent,but do a bad job of putting together contracts? or are you guys arguing that they mis-manage the cap so they can never get any top talent in here?

Posted by: jumbo5383 | June 3, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

I view letting Evans go as a good thing. He was not getting it done... Redskins could never get a 4 man rush, and were getting the ball rammed down their throat in 4th quarters last year when the D needed to get a stop to give the Offense a last gasp chance.

Evans is a journeyman lineman...best wishes to him in SFO, but in my view letting him go was the correct move.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | June 3, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

The cap has managed the front office, not the other way around. Its why the Skins put up with guys like Archeletta and Lloyd -- they couldn't cut them right away BECAUSE of the cap hit.

Obviously, everything is up in the air with the next labor agreement, so who knows if the cap will play a role in the future.

There is no doubt that the Skins, by operating so close to the cap, have made numerous personnel decisions that, when they turned bad, they couldn't extract themselves from

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

I think they got rid of Arch after his first season here,and LLoyd after year two.

Posted by: jumbo5383 | June 3, 2009 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone on this blog realize that Suisam has the highest feild goals made percentage of any kicker in Redskins history? Beter even than Chip Loehmiller.


Posted by: kaasmaster | June 3, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Wow I honestly would not have guessed that. I guess Im typical though, I only remember the big misses. Plus he is Canadian, which is ironically a minus (just for me)

Posted by: CheyenneWY | June 3, 2009 3:03 PM | Report abuse

And they got Chicago to pay half of his signing bonus,and give up a 6th round pick

Posted by: jumbo5383 | June 3, 2009 3:03 PM | Report abuse

I view letting Evans go as a good thing. He was not getting it done... Redskins could never get a 4 man rush, and were getting the ball rammed down their throat in 4th quarters last year when the D needed to get a stop to give the Offense a last gasp chance.

Evans is a journeyman lineman...best wishes to him in SFO, but in my view letting him go was the correct move.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe

I'll just disagree. We had two guys, both supposedly elite pass rushers, in Carter and Taylor. Evans had the same sack total as they did ... and was easily the best run stopper of all of them. Of all our DL, only Evans and Golston played better than expected -- they were our two best DL.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

So can we agree that they can evaluate talent, but do a bad job of putting together contracts? or are you guys arguing that they mis-manage the cap so they can never get any top talent in here?

Posted by: jumbo5383 | June 3, 2009 2:54 PM

I think they probably do average or better than average at talent evaluation. Plenty of hits that should have hit, plenty of misses that should have hit, enough rough diamond finds. I don't think the contracts are the problem as much as who to sign to what. I think they undervalue high quality guys who went undrafted. I think they overvalue the starters. The starters get paid well, but unfortunately they also get injured. The depth is undervalued and, because of the investment in the starters, underpaid. I dunno about the cap management stuff ... seems like its probably alot of math. But my guess is that the average salary of the starters (weighted per snap played) would put the Skins on the high end of the range in the NFL.

Posted by: dcsween | June 3, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

But why wasn't the most important question asked?

Is being rated a 68 in MAdden '10 enough motivation for him to play like this is his contract year?

Posted by: 4thFloor | June 3, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

evans is slowly approaching pierce/mason/torrence level hysterics...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | June 3, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

So can we agree that they can evaluate talent,but do a bad job of putting together contracts? or are you guys arguing that they mis-manage the cap so they can never get any top talent in here?

In some ways you cannot fault the FO. All big name free agents want to come to the Skins because thats the team that is going to pay them. Its the players that are not living up to the potential.

Im sure the big name guys arent clammering to go to Oakland because its a terrible situation. Arch should have been a good pick, but he could not get it done. Same with J. Taylor

If any of the big name guys we picked up would have played the way they are capable of playing, the FO would be hailed as geniuses. Gibbs held onto guys for too long out of loyalty instead of putting the best product on the field.

Brunell should have been gone at least a year, maybe two before he got the hook.

All that said, even if they traded Campbell and signed Heath Shuler to a 200 mil contract, I would not miss a game.

In short, i am a sheep! BAAAA

Posted by: CheyenneWY | June 3, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

My namesake ARE is a great on return? He has great vertical coverage skills, sideline to sideline...too bad he's not on coverage.

Hall-You mean he catches and returns punts? Not last year. Hall would be an upgrade.

Posted by: ElYeah | June 3, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

z,
Cool to agree to disagree, (and i do, LOL) but if our best run stopper was leading a run stopping effort that was not stopping the run, isn't it better to get another guy who can better stop the run instead of hoping that his run stopping will magically improve this year?

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | June 3, 2009 3:11 PM | Report abuse

What's so genious about the FO's cap management? Don't they just convert the salary to a bonus and spread it over the years? How is it genious? What it does is 1)forces them to keep the guy much longer even if his performance worsens because if they release him they'd have to pay the full amount which takes up much needed cap space. 2)if they release him they'll have to pay his full bonus amount whereas in case of salary they don't have to pay the remainder of the contract.

Posted by: thor2 | June 3, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

We should have never traded Pierce...

wait for it...

Posted by: CheyenneWY | June 3, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Z,

Great assessment, but I'd give 9."Played ugly mind games with Campbell", its own grade of "F" just for the embarrassment it brought to the franchise and for the crap we've had to put up with from fans of other teams.

Posted by: will_ga | June 3, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

But why wasn't the most important question asked?

Is being rated a 68 in MAdden '10 enough motivation for him to play like this is his contract year?

Posted by: 4thFloor | June 3, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

"....evans is slowly approaching pierce/mason/torrence level hysterics..."

It's all a sign that there just ain't no news worth the chatta.

Again: Moe takes the Magic in 7 games.

One of the Williams Sisters will win Wimbledon.

The Fall Classic: Yanks v. Dodgers, aka Torre v. Girardi and the ghosts of 1997-2006.

Boxing will continue to fade from the public view.

The Clippers will once again select the wrong guy with the 1st pick.

GM still won't be able to sell cars as there are too many good used ones around for folks to buy.

Moe will eat plenty of barbeque and get fat--count on it!!

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 3, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Z,

Great assessment, but I'd give 9."Played ugly mind games with Campbell", its own grade of "F" just for the embarrassment it brought to the franchise and for the crap we've had to put up with from fans of other teams.

Posted by: will_ga | June 3, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse


Thats what I meant. I dont think it was inconcievable to think that Cutler would be a better QB than Campbell (Sanchez was a dumb idea being he in unproven)

But why does Campbell deserve such loyalty from the fans. What does the FO owe him?

But once again, I am SO happy Campbell is still here and I hope he has the best year of his career, and I think he will.

Then the FO owes him!

Posted by: CheyenneWY | June 3, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Beep beep

Posted by: CheyenneWY | June 3, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

"....To be a full-time returner, I think we got a pretty good one in Randle El already," DeAngelo Hall said.

DeAngelo Hall claiming Randle El is a good punt returner?

He must be full of Hokie.


Posted by: MistaMoe | June 3, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse


He said what he had to say. What should his response have been?

"Yeah I plan on taking over full-time return duties 'cause everyone knows ARE sucks."

I'm actually glad he gave the "correct" PC answer. It shows that he's grown up some and is more aware of his teammates instead of being selfish MeAngelo.

Posted by: p1funk | June 3, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

I am all for going after Free Agents. but I think the Cap issues would be better solved if we went with a draft heavy strategy. The team is slowly getting better about that. I just did the math based off the 85 man roster that is on NFL.com. 52 of the players on our roster are guys either drafted by the skins or signed as rookie free agents, 33 of the players are guys we signed as free agents.

Posted by: alex35332 | June 3, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

I view letting Evans go as a good thing. He was not getting it done... Redskins could never get a 4 man rush, and were getting the ball rammed down their throat in 4th quarters last year when the D needed to get a stop to give the Offense a last gasp chance.

Evans is a journeyman lineman...best wishes to him in SFO, but in my view letting him go was the correct move.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | June 3, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse


Evans could have probably been re-signed for the amount that we ended up giving Daniels/Wynn. He was better at doing what they did and he was 4-6 years younger, a great teammate and a hardworker.

The move made zero sense to me.

Blache has since said that the reason they let him walk is b/c they plan on using Alexander in the same role. I guess that could work out...we'll see.

Posted by: p1funk | June 3, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Hanyesworth gain negates the loss of Evans.

It's really that simple.

I can not wait until the day Rock Cartwright is released, the proverbial RI flag is sure as hell to be flown at half mast. With black patches to be worn by all RI posters, hell, I may even get a couple of tear tats, and an air brushed "In memory of Rock" t-shirt with his picture on it.

Blows my mind how we morun the departure of marginal (at best) players.

Posted by: RedDMV | June 3, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

"Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 3, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse"

Of this post, there's a couple I would change. Obviously you already caught the Hunter Smith signing.

After that, I'd move the "losing Evans" to a separate 'null and void' category, if you couple that with signing Daniels and Wynn. Or you can say losing Evans was bad, while signing Daniels and Wynn was good. In the end, the net loss is essentially zero. We lost a minimal pass-rusher and solid run-stopper, we gained two minimal pass-rushers and 2 solid run-stoppers. No harm done.

I'd also boost Haynesworth to an "A" grade, without a doubt. Regardless of what the mind-boggling $100 million figure projects into your mind, his cap hit is not that significant. In fact, it's right around what Jason Taylor would have cost for this, and last, season. And the FO signed him knowing full well that he doesn't play 16 games, as did every other FO in the league, yet many STILL valued him that high. There's a reason. Haynesworth is not Shawn Springs (who is still very good). When he plays, he changes the game. Significantly.

Hall? A little expensive, yes. His grade is about right, though he has the potential to move up (or down).

Personnel-wise, this was Snyder's best offseason ever, IMO. Youth movement, significant upgrade along the defensive line, multiple options brought in along the offensive line (though no draft picks spent being a major drawback), and plenty of re-structuring that allows the team to save cap space this year AND get rid of aging veterans sooner than they would have been able to before.

The real x-factor was the mind games with Campbell. Many QBs would have (or will) collapsed with that type of uncertainty. Luckily, Campbell seems to be handling it very well, using it as motivation. We'll see how it ends up, so that could either be a really good thing, or a really bad thing.

In the end, I'd pretty much agree with the overall assessment. B/B+

Posted by: psps23 | June 3, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Hall was an electric punt returner at Virginia Tech. I don't think he should be an every punt kind of guy, but I could see the team mixing it up a bit with Hall and Moss. Randal El is probably done returning punts. I can see Aldridge getting the job. Someone in the org was smart enough to see the Shannahan Broncos were really good at finding running backs and when the Broncos let Aldridge go with the regime change, they snatched him up. He might steal Cartwright's job on kick returns, too and I could see them using him occasionally in 3rd and long situations where a little swing pass to the running back in space could end up gaining ten yards.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | June 3, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

I too think Hall said the right thing about ARE, it's not the right thing to do to say one of your teamates is terribe at what he does.
Having said that, ARE is horrible at returning punts. I can't understand how or why he has been allowed to stay back there. I really hope somebody, anybody, is back there this year other than ARE. It can only be an upgrade over the constant running sideways, backwards, and anywhere but upfield.
When I helped coach rec league we always told the kids, "get us a least 5 yards, run straight ahead, if you see daylight to the sideline or wherever, then juke or make a move, but first, run straight and get us some positive yardage."
Seems like our special teams coach never mentioned anything like that to ARE.
There has to be somebody on the team who can do better.

Posted by: 72Redskins | June 3, 2009 3:48 PM | Report abuse

I am with you 72....ARE sucks, Hall would have been 3/4 tard to say anything but superlatives...

I liked Evans, would have kept him and steered clear of wynn....but whateves...

Te skins are reactive with the Cap not proactive. And while they do reactive ok, its not a good long term stragedy.

Posted by: chrislarry | June 3, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

"I can not wait until the day Rock Cartwright is released"

You and me both, brother. Rock has been a nice story but it is an enormous waste of a roster spot to carry a guy who is never going to be a reliable back-up RB. I would much rather have someone back there who has the potential to develop and move up the depth chart.

Let Thomas handle KR duties and sign Mason as the #3 back. Then we won't have to turn to retreads like Shaun Alexander if CP or Betts gets hurt.

Posted by: McMetal | June 3, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company