Quick Links

The Redskins are very young at receiver — and OC Scott Turner doesn't care at all

The Redskins are very young at receiver — and OC Scott Turner doesn't care at all

Are the Redskins really young at wide receiver? Absolutely.

Does offensive coordinator Scott Turner care about that? Absolutely not.

While Washington doesn't feature a single player at the position who's currently 28 or older, Turner isn't worried about how that could impact his offense. During a Zoom call with reporters on Wednesday, he explained why.

"I never have gotten caught up in that," Turner said. "I just want the best players possible. I don't care if their rookies or 10th-year guys. We want them to compete and whoever's the best guy who we feel like gives us the best chance to win, we'll put him out there."

Turner acknowledged that veterans may have some extra "savviness" in their game that can only be acquired by playing week in and week out as a pro. Experience, however, won't act as a determining factor at all when it comes to divvying out snaps for the Burgundy and Gold as long as he's calling the plays.

"It's not a requirement in my eyes," he said. 

That works out well, because if age was a necessity for a wideout to see the field, Turner would be running a lot of three tight end and two running back looks with his new team.

The core of the Redskins' receiving group consists of Terry McLaurin (24), Kelvin Harmon (23), Steven Sims (23) and Antonio Gandy-Golden (22). Others, like Cody Latimer (27), Darvin Kidsy (25), Trey Quinn (24) and Cam Sims (24), will fight to make the back end of the roster.


In all, what happens at that spot over the coming months should, at the very least, produce a collection of hungry targets for Dwayne Haskins. 

"What we tried to do at every position is we tried to create competition, bring in quality football players to create competition," Turner said. "Look at some of the additions we made, yeah, they might not be flashy names, but that's not necessarily always the best route to go either. We brought in guys that'll create competition."

Of course, it'd be foolish to think the youth is strictly a positive thing. That's how Turner has to approach the situation, but some problems will inevitably arise because of it.

One such issue could be the growth period that some of Turner's players may need before they start really contributing.

Gandy-Golden, for example, will have to make the jump from Liberty to the NFC East, a jump that would be hard enough without this strange offseason on top of it. Can Sims and Harmon, meanwhile, find roles in this new offense right away even though it'll be totally new to them?

Fortunately, Turner seems calm about handling that type of potential setback, as well as any others that could pop up. Maybe that's because he, too, is young for his job, at just 37 years old. Or maybe it's because he grew up in a football family and understands that the sport is always presenting challenges.

Regardless of the reason, he's not going to rush the development of his Redskins receivers. Their careers are just getting started, and his time with them is just getting started as well.

"The beauty of this is we don't have to play anybody until Sept. 13 for real," he said. "We don't have to set our lineup today."


Quick Links

One analyst explains why Redskins' financial value won't decrease with name change

One analyst explains why Redskins' financial value won't decrease with name change

As it stands now, the Washington Redskins are one of the most valuable sports franchises in the world. According to Forbes, the team is worth a whopping $3.4 billion -- the 14th most-valuable franchise in all of sports, and the fifth most valuable team in the NFL.

With the team currently conducting an internal review of the moniker, it's worth wondering if a new name would hurt the value of the team. According to Randy Vataha -- the president of Game Plan LLC., which helps the service of helping people buy and sell sports franchises -- it shouldn't.

"I don't think it will really hurt the team's value ultimately," Vataha said to NBC Sports Washington's JP Finlay.

Vataha explained that each franchise's actual name has little to do with its value.

"We're big believers and have a lot of data that indicates that yes, branding is important, yes, names are important in a lot of ways, but what's really important is the size and the demographics of the market," Vataha said.

The analyst gave the example of New York sports franchises, such as the Knicks and Rangers, and how they are consistently two of the most valuable teams in all of sports. Why? Because they play in New York City.

"The New York teams are all the top teams in every league," Vataha said. "The NFL is a little different because of how they share revenue, but the New York teams are always at the top, not because of the names of the teams. It's because of the marketplace.

"You'll have a lot of people, you'll have a lot of social media, you'll have a lot of political commentary back and forth," Vataha continued. "But at the end of the day, the core value is decided by the size of the market and the demographics of the market."


This past week, a report surfaced from the Washington Post that the Redskins three minority owners were looking to sell their stake in the team, citing that they were "not happy being a partner" with Redskins majority owner Dan Snyder. The three minority owners -- Fred Smith, Dwight Schar and Robert Rothman -- make up approximately 40 percent of the team's ownership group.

Vataha said he understands both sides of the argument surrounding the team. Additionally, he said that the safest financial decision for the team would be to keep the name, despite all the public backlash they've received over the past couple of weeks.


However, immediately after, Vataha emphasized once more that he doesn't envision the name change truly making a big difference value-wise.

"I understand the arguments on both sides pretty well," Vataha said. "But I think from the financial standpoint, the safest thing is never change it. But, on the other hand, I don't think it'll be a big hit to value any way at all."

Stay connected with the Redskins in the MyTeams app. Click here to download for comprehensive coverage of your teams.


Quick Links

Fred Smoot laughs at Asante Samuel's dig at Darrell Green: 'Darrell will always be cornerback royalty'

Fred Smoot laughs at Asante Samuel's dig at Darrell Green: 'Darrell will always be cornerback royalty'

On July 4, former NFL cornerback Asante Samuel got the Twitter-sphere and Redskins nation fired up when he sent out a tweet questioning what was so special about former Washington defensive back Darrell Green, who is a Hall-of-Famer.

Though Tony Dungy and others chimed in to show Samuel what he was missing, the 11-year veteran couldn't quite grasp why his statement was so surprising. Samuel's argument was based on the fact that in a career that spanned two decades, Green "only" had 54 interceptions to show for it.


For former Redskins defensive back Fred Smoot, Samuel's claim that the numbers dictated who Green was as a player is just wrong. Smoot, who played two seasons alongside Green, believes Samuel was a victim of not understanding how football has changed over the years.

In modern times, a pass-heavy league not only makes interceptions more common but makes the stat a way to grade defensive backs. When Green dominated the field, the league didn't play out the same way.

“First of all, Darrell played in a league that ran the ball most of the time," Smoot said on NBC Sports Washington's Redskins Talk and Friends. "Second of all, he took on the number one receiver all the time. They never threw balls his way."


Because the NFL wasn't as pass-heavy back in the 80s and 90s, Green didn't have a wild number of interceptions to show for his success. But, that didn't mean he wasn't making an impact and performing as one of the best at the position. As Smoot explains, Green would excel in numerous categories that sometimes don't show up on paper.

“Darrell did more than just intercept the ball, he shut down one side of the field, actually return a lot of punts, scored a lot on defense. And he tackles well, all-around defensive back," Smoot said. 

Another stellar trait of Green's was his speed. Though there are no official measures of his 40-yard times back when he played, there are reports that it hovered in the 4.1-area, giving him a reputation as one of the fastest players in football. Even at age 50, he casually ran a 4.43. That speed was valuable on the field, as he could stick with any receiver and chase down players from behind.

Smoot saw the speed first-hand, even when Green was getting toward the end of his career at the age of 41. He recalled racing Green during practice, and even though Smoot was nearly 20 years younger, he couldn't keep up.

“I raced that old man and lost to that old man," Smoot said. "Right then I was about to retire from football. I was about to throw my cleats away.”

Green may not have averaged a large interception total, but that stat is only a small part of his NFL career. As Smoot showed, there was so much more brilliance to him as a player. That's why, to Smoot, Green's name always comes up when discussing the best at the position.

“You want to talk about one of the best cornerbacks of all time? That’s how the list starts out. Deon Sanders, Darrell Green, so and so," Smoot said. "Darrell will always be, how should I say, cornerback royalty.”

Green also has a bust in Canton to show for his work.

“I don’t have to say anything about Darrell Green, he’s a Hall-of-Famer for a reason," Smoot said. 


Stay connected with the Redskins in the MyTeams app. Click here to download for comprehensive coverage of your teams.