So who *aren't* Redskins on this team?

again, chad sucked cause the blocking sucked... in those early games when betts and thrash returned ball they got 1, 4, and -2 yards... chad also had a 30 and 50 yd return called back... he's not bad, and he helps with a bit of the coaching stuff... the question is whether betts and thrash (and simon) are good enough that we don't really need him, and right now (even though chad is better), i'd say thrash is good enough.

betts isn't going anywhere, he's the best backup RB we have (BY FAR), and he can do special teams...

There have been no surprises for me this year. Our poor record is a carry over from the Cerrato-Spurrier regime.

Bad move: HOF Coach Gibbs wanted a rag armed Brunnell. Didn't like the move then, and like it less now!

Good move: Defensive HC Williams wanted and got a lot of additional parts this past year.

Bad move: Signing Barrow.

ST play was bad early, better now.

30 Second Clock for HOF Coach Gibbs. A difficult move.
Helmet speakers. A difficult move for HOF Coach Gibbs.

So, this year is a real struggle!

All of the Ramsey/Brunell talk is not the way HOF Coach Gibbs will do things.
Probably bad move. See first sentence.

But we are still on track for that 8-8 record I predicted. We just have to win more than we lose the rest of the way.

Unfortunately, there have been more bad bounces than good bounces this year. (or more bad moves if you will)

I agree with all of them except for Dockery and Sellers.

I really think that Dockery is coming along. Sellers, is simply a beast on ST and a great blocker. He really is a Gibbs-type of guy.

Betts is hard to figure out. He blocks like a pussy, but he seems like a serviceable back-up. I don't know.

I know this is the most playing time Dockery has been given, but when you look at his size 6"6, 345lbs, he should be opening holes for a tank to fit through. Instead, he's getting a lot of false starts and holding penalties. I would really like to see Sellers stay here, especially since he has multiple job assignments.

Ok - we definately can't cut Brunell, but I think we can definately take the cap hit for Barrow, can't we?

What kind of SB did he get?

JoeRedskin mentioned $8.6M signing bonus but that's actually what Brunell got.

Barrow only got a $2.5M signing bonus, so if we wanted to cut him next year it would cost us about $2.1M in dead cap. Then again if we keep Barrow next year he'll also count about $2.1M against the cap, so is there any reason to cut him?

oops sorry. I didn't read that carefully. I thought the question was how much was Brunnell's signing bonus. Sorry.

JoeRedskin mentioned $8.6M signing bonus but that's actually what Brunell got.

Barrow only got a $2.5M signing bonus, so if we wanted to cut him next year it would cost us about $2.1M in dead cap. Then again if we keep Barrow next year he'll also count about $2.1M against the cap, so is there any reason to cut him?
How about to pick up a player that can actually play on Sunday??? I know Barrow doesn't have a history of injuries, but it seems that as well a Pierce is playing, they should just put Barrow on IR and re-evaluate in the offseason.

How about to pick up a player that can actually play on Sunday??? I know Barrow doesn't have a history of injuries, but it seems that as well a Pierce is playing, they should just put Barrow on IR and re-evaluate in the offseason.

I agree if the guy can't play then he should be on IR. All I'm saying is that cutting/trading him this year or next will not free up any cap space, only a roster spot.