Mario Manningham to Redskins: Why Ex-Giants WR Would Look Good in Washington
It would be a smart move for the Redskins to pursue Manningham as a backup plan if the team fails to land a marquee name like Vincent Jackson.
Manningham has endured his share of struggles in New York. The fact that he has not managed to emerge as a legitimate No. 1 receiver would have to be a concern for interested parties.
However, the fourth-year wideout proved that he is capable of coming up big in the clutch during the Giants' triumphant march to Super Bowl glory. Indeed, Manningham caught a touchdown pass in each of the team's three playoff wins en route to Super Bowl 46.
In the title game itself, he hauled in five passes for 73 yards, including the memorable 38-yarder which set up the winning score. Manningham has shown himself to be a playmaker with a knack for finding the end zone.
His game is defined by pure speed. The former Michigan standout is a true deep threat—an element that is sadly lacking in the Redskins offense. Manningham would give Washington's pass attack the capability to go long and stretch the field at any moment. This would improve the potential of the play-action pass, which is a staple of Mike and Kyle Shanahan's offensive design.
Sadly, Redskins fans know first-hand how dangerous Manningham can be vertically. In Week 17 of the 2010 season, he burned Washington's defense on a 92-yard scoring play during a 17-14 Giants win.
At 6'0" and 185 pounds, Manningham lacks the prototypical size Shanahan usually likes in a receiver. He has also been guilty of poor drops and running untidy routes at times during his brief career.
However, the 25-year-old could relish the chance to escape the shadow of Victor Cruz and Hakeem Nicks. He is a young player with tremendous upside who should be eager to prove he can be a featured receiver.
If he is used right, in a way that maximises his big-play potential, Manningham would be a dangerous weapon in the Redskins scheme.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?