Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

It'd be great to see Stallworth/Henderson NOT make the final roster, as an indication of the talent and depth already there. That said, consistency (of one type or another) is an issue with each guy: Garcon (injury questions and just looking at his historical production); Morgan (not much there); Hank (hands, waiting on a breakout season); Moss (still probably the most talented/consistent WR on the roster but not a #1).

So, it's like we're searching for more rotation guys. Maybe Henderson has something worthwhile left in the tank.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=mredskins;1011907]Cheers!

[IMG]http://www.gerberjuice.com/media_en_uk/transfer/img/sunny_d_tangy_florida_logo.jpg[/IMG][/quote]

You know if Sonny hadn't ruptured his Achilles tendon we could have won the Super Bowl that year Billy took over. Since we are all excited about Sonny.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=RGIII;1011870]Skins don't need help at the WR position. These two guys have been brought in to get familiar with the offense and be on standby (as FAs because they won't make the cut) if a guy or two goes down.[/quote]

Glad to know that. I see you talked to Shanahan already and know why it was done. Good job. You should tell some others they won't be battling for the 6th WR or make the team since they won't make the cut. Hoping you're right and we are just fine at WR though. I actually like the receivers we have if they will be consistent. I think they have the talent and Stallworth is a veteran presence.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011913]Glad to know that. [B]I see you talked to Shanahan already and know why it was done. Good job.[/B] You should tell some others they won't be battling for the 6th WR or make the team since they won't make the cut. Hoping you're right and we are just fine at WR though. I actually like the receivers we have if they will be consistent. I think they have the talent and Stallworth is a veteran presence.[/quote]

Chill out a little. Everyone who gets a shot is auditioning for slots on other teams as well. These moves will push the young guys and we know how Shanny is bout receivers, as many in camp as possible.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Chico23231;1011917]Chill out a little. Everyone who gets a shot is auditioning for slots on other teams as well. These moves will push the young guys and we know how Shanny is bout receivers, as many in camp as possible.[/quote]

I believe I said this was a good move initially and that Stallworth was a veteran presence. He was stating a declarative that me saying this was a good move to have them come in was wrong and we needed no help. How does he know we need no help? Sounds like he was just trying to be chitty actually. I will respond in kind. I don't come here and disagree with people and have an attitude. I only respond that way to those who do it to me. Manners go a long way. He knows how he meant it. He didn't tell anyone else that who liked the move. Maybe it was a bad idea bringing them on but that isn't why he said it..

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

How often does a 31 year old receiver bust out?

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

I'm curious if anyone knows about Potter signing. I assumed we are set with Forbath. Are we searching for a kicker who can do better kickoffs than Forbath and keep both kickers?

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=GridIron26;1011924]I'm curious if anyone knows about Potter signing. I assumed we are set with Forbath. Are we searching for a kicker who can do better kickoffs than Forbath and keep both kickers?[/quote]

I think he's just a kick-off specialist.

Perhaps Shanahan will consider keeping both.

Forbath's kick-offs were definitely lacking, but that was his first full year doing it.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1011923]How often does a 31 year old receiver bust out?[/quote]

Only the pretty good ones.

:laughing2

And hey, he averages 30 catches a year for his career, so he's definitely in that pretty good category.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=GridIron26;1011924]I'm curious if anyone knows about Potter signing. I assumed we are set with Forbath. Are we searching for a kicker who can do better kickoffs than Forbath and keep both kickers?[/quote]

I see it as more of an extra leg for the preseason, to not wear out Kai's leg

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Mattyk;1011928]Only the pretty good ones.

:laughing2

And hey, he averages 30 catches a year for his career, so he's definitely in that pretty good category.[/quote]

These people thought he was pretty good. But they aren't moderators thinking they know talent giggling amongst themselves never having played while people they pass judgement on have proven what pretty good actually is. I'll take their opinions below over yours of course. Point proven so why haven't you moved on. If you still giggle after this then giggle away. These people can say it better than me. I guess if you don't think he is pretty good that is OK but I think others could set you straight that he is no scrub and better than most the receivers we have had other than about 4 or 5 in the last 20 years. Never said he was Art Monk. But I did say he was pretty good. Respect those who have proven what good actually is. :smashfreak:


Washington Redskins rookie wide receiver James Thrash has burst onto the scene so quickly and with such a flair for the dramatic that it's natural to ask a few questions: Who is he? Where did he come from? Why did he get passed over by all 30 NFL teams for all seven rounds of last spring's draft? And what prompted the Philadelphia Eagles to cut him a few days before training camp?

Some answers are easier than others.

What's easiest to see is that Thrash will be playing in the NFL this fall. Having started training camp as the last wide receiver on the Redskins' roster, Thrash has sewn up a spot by returning kickoffs for game-clinching touchdowns in both preseason games.

If he didn't clinch a roster spot with a 91-yarder in the first exhibition game against Tampa Bay, he certainly did with a 96-yarder in Saturday's 18-12 victory over Tennessee. He also caught three passes for 63 yards, including a 35-yarder to set up a field goal.

"You can't have enough good football players," Redskins Coach Norv Turner said. "If a guy can do what James can do, you find a way to keep him."

In the beginning, Thrash will team with Brian Mitchell as a kickoff returner. There might not be much other work for him as a rookie, but considering where he was a few weeks ago, that's a large accomplishment.

He grew up the son of a factory worker in Wewoka, Okla., population 3,500, in the Dust Bowl plains 60 miles east of Oklahoma City. He was a star football player and sprinter in high school, but had no college scholarship offers.

He attended Division II Missouri Southern State College in Joplin because his high school coach, Bill Brown, was a friend of Missouri Southern Coach Jon Lantz.

Brown said he made the call "because I've never been around anyone who worked as hard as James Thrash. He'd stay until the last guy left and then get coaches to throw him passes. This summer, I watched him bench-press 465 pounds three times. He takes it seriously. He proves that all those things coaches say about hard work paying off are true. I never dreamed he'd go this far, but I knew he could play."

Thrash played little as a freshman because Missouri Southern had a star wide receiver in Rod Smith, now with the Denver Broncos. Thrash eventually won track championships and set receiving records.

Until the past two weekends, Thrash's biggest thrill in sports might have been playing in the Division II all-star game - the Snow Bowl, played annually in Fargo, ND.

"Shows what a science recruiting is, doesn't it?" Lantz said with a laugh. "I'd really never heard of James until Bill called and asked me to take him. He told me James had enough other aid to pay most of his tuition, and I agreed to pick up the rest. It turned out to be a great move."

The NFL passed on Thrash on draft day in April.

"With James, we knew someone was going to have to be patient," Lantz said. "He started slowly with us, then all of a sudden - boom. He's got blazing speed and that's something you can't coach. Don't give him daylight. He'll break it - in any league."

The Eagles signed Thrash, then cut him shortly before training camp. Sources close to the team say the roster spot was needed for others, and the Eagles didn't think Thrash was going to be anything special.

However, the Redskins had always considered him a prospect, and signed him quickly.

From the beginning, Turner said Thrash was good enough to make the practice squad, then have a chance to earn a spot on the regular roster next fall. With five receivers, there seemed no other way to fit him in.

When Thrash returned his first kickoff against Tampa Bay, he forced Turner to look again. He was added to the punt return team and given more playing time.

Against the Oilers, in addition to the 96-yard kickoff return for a touchdown, he returned another kickoff 36 yards and made receptions of 17 and 35 yards to set up a field goal.

Thrash has seemed more overwhelmed by the attention than the football. He has answered questions with one- or two-word answers, saying again and again that he can't believe how things have unfolded for him in the past few weeks.

"I've got to pinch myself," he said. "It's hard to imagine how it has turned out. I just thank God for the opportunity."

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[url=http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9376010/rename-washington-redskins]Rename the Washington Redskins - Grantland[/url]

SMH

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011932]These people thought he was pretty good. But they aren't web page moderators thinking they know talent giggling amongst themselves never having played while people they pass judgement on have proven what pretty good actually is. I'll take their opinions below over yours of course. Point proven so why haven't you moved on. If you still giggle after this then giggle away. These people can say it better than me. Never said he was Art Monk. But I did say he was pretty good. Respect those who have proven what good actually is. :smashfreak:[/quote]

Hearing a coach talk up a player really doesn't say much. All coaches do it.

I respect the career Thrash had, he was definitely a hard working over achiever. Just not in the pretty good category.

Santana Moss = pretty good.

Thrash = eh, good special teamer, hard worker, good locker room guy, ok at WR. Nothing to write home about.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Mattyk;1011937]Hearing a coach talk up a player really doesn't say much. All coaches do it.

I respect the career Thrash had, he was definitely a hard working over achiever. Just not in the pretty good category.

Santana Moss = pretty good.

Thrash = eh, good special teamer, hard worker, good locker room guy, ok at WR. Nothing to write home about.[/quote]

Yea OK and Santana is better than pretty good. The boy can flat out ball. Geez

I see how you judge folk now. From your perspective you are right on the money

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011938]Yea OK and Santana is better than pretty good. The boy can flat out ball. Geez

I see how you judge folk now. From your perspective you are right on the money[/quote]I am not sure you could handle me.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1011942]I am not sure you could handle me.[/quote]

:laughing2

post of the day

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1011942]I am not sure you could handle me.[/quote]

Makes no sense Who cares

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011938]Yea OK and Santana is better than pretty good. The boy can flat out ball. Geez

I see how you judge folk now. From your perspective you are right on the money[/quote]

Moss must be one of the best ever in your book. What about Monk, is he from other planet?

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Mattyk;1011946]Moss must be one of the best ever in your book. What about Monk, is he from other planet?[/quote]

One of the best we have had. Art Monk was a baller too. Very good receiver. I like Gary Clark myself.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Mattyk;1011946]Moss must be one of the best ever in your book. What about Monk, is he from other planet?[/quote]

If that is post of the day maybe we should ask what planet your way.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

Is pretty good and pretty darn good the same thing? Because, I don't know, but adding that "darn" in there makes it kind of different.

But why are we still talking about this? It's James Thrash, for crying out loud

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1011951]Is pretty good and pretty darn good the same thing? Because, I don't know, but adding that "darn" in there makes it kind of different.

But why are we still talking about this? It's James Thrash, for crying out loud[/quote]

I didn't bring him back up. He was referenced as an answer to you over 31 bust out question. Randy Moss come to mind after sub par seasons with the Raiders. And yea pretty darn good and pretty good are one in the same just to clarify.

From [url=http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1550869-what-does-history-say-about-investing-in-receivers-entering-their-30s]What Does History Say About Investing in Receivers Entering Their 30s? | Bleacher Report[/url] below

Devery Henderson and Brian Hartline, all under 30, should get some play on the open market. While none of them is a true No. 1 wide receiver, they will produce at a higher level for a longer period of time than Jennings and Welker.

Now go argue with someone else. Like some nagging schoolgirl.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

Your example is Randy Moss? What exactly does "bust out" mean to you?

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1011955]Your example is Randy Moss? What exactly does "bust out" mean to you?[/quote]

Make a significant contribution of course. Stop being so worrisome.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

See, because "bust out" to me isn't Randy Moss because we saw in Minnesota how great he could be. To me it's someone who kind of flies under the radar for much of his career and then takes his game to another level not yet seen.

And stop getting so pissy when asked to clarify/defend your position

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Mattyk;1011927]I think he's just a kick-off specialist.

Perhaps Shanahan will consider keeping both.

Forbath's kick-offs were definitely lacking, but that was his first full year doing it.[/quote]

I remember reading an article, Forbath did say that he has been working on it through out the offseason. But yeah I think it's what Cult said, bringing someone in to give Forbath some break in camp and preseason sometimes. We will find out soon enough

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1011958]See, because "bust out" to me isn't Randy Moss because we saw in Minnesota how great he could be. To me it's someone who kind of flies under the radar for much of his career and then takes his game to another level not yet seen.

And stop getting so pissy when asked to clarify/defend your position[/quote]

You know darn well what I meant. You were just trying to start it up again. Because you were trying to say Henderson wouldn't be able to make a substantial contribution because he was 31?. All I said was he may bust out. Especially with a different team now. Not that he would but he might. But you still are worrying me about it after I gave you one example of a player who wasn't getting it done and then started to.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011960]You know darn well what I meant. You were just trying to start it up again. Because you were trying to say Henderson wouldn't be able to make a substantial contribution because he was 31?. All I said was he may bust out. Especially with a different team now. Not that he would but he might. But you still are worrying me about it after I gave you one example of a player who wasn't getting it done and then started to.[/quote]

Sigh. Fine, whatever. moving on

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1011961]Sigh. Fine, whatever. moving on[/quote]

Thank you

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

I would be willing to bet serious money that neither Henderson nor Stallworth are going to "bust out" (per SS's definition) this year. In fact, I would be mildly surprised if both make the roster. Looking at the WR corp and depending on how many we keep, I think one of them has a pretty good shot to be that 5th or 6th "insurance" WR who is only active in injury situations. As I recall, Stallworth played some ST for in his last stint and, if he is willing to do so again, that might give him a leg up.

I can see our top 5 from last year returning w/ possibly Briscoe being cut in favor of Henderson/Stallworth and then one of the UFA guys (I'm specifically thinking of L. Lewis) making the final cut.

Again, such a nice change from a couple of years ago when we had no depth.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011953]I didn't bring him back up. He was referenced as an answer to you over 31 bust out question. Randy Moss come to mind after sub par seasons with the Raiders. And yea pretty darn good and pretty good are one in the same just to clarify.

From [url=http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1550869-what-does-history-say-about-investing-in-receivers-entering-their-30s]What Does History Say About Investing in Receivers Entering Their 30s? | Bleacher Report[/url] below

Devery Henderson and Brian Hartline, all under 30, should get some play on the open market. While none of them is a true No. 1 wide receiver, they will produce at a higher level for a longer period of time than Jennings and Welker.

Now go argue with someone else. Like some nagging schoolgirl.[/quote]

Nobody is nagging or arguing with you. Nor is anyone giggling at you.

If you can't have a discussion with someone that disagrees with you maybe a discussion board isn't for you.

No need to get so defensive when someone challenges your position. This is what we do around here.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Mattyk;1011965]Nobody is nagging or arguing with you. Nor is anyone giggling at you.

If you can't have a discussion with someone that disagrees with you maybe a discussion board isn't for you.

No need to get so defensive when someone challenges your position. This is what we do around here.[/quote]

Honest debate I love. Arguing because you are ill at me about previous Thrash talk and want to pick something else to argue about because of the poster is totally different. I guarantee that if you had said what I said you would have got no such response from Smoot or anyone else. Guaranteed.

It wasn't a "I don't think Henderson can get it done here" but more of an argument towards the poster than the topic. Let's be honest here and not hide behind "challenging your position" nonsense. When the debate is an honest one you will here no worrisome comments from me. Why would I get mad if someone doesn't think Henderson can get it done. Clearly I wouldn't. It's how it is said rather than what is said. If you don't like me then just say so and not hide behind if you challenge my position I get mad nonsense. It seems personal with you and Smoot. Not the topic.

Be honest and just kick me off the board rather than disingenuous debate. We know the score. We've been at it before. Not once have we ever agreed and I remember it being ugly before. So let's not say it is the topic anymore. Do what you must.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011968]If you don't like me then just say so
[/quote]

I don't like you. LOL.

No, really though, I sort of agree with you about James Thrash. He was a good receiver. Nowhere near HOF quality, but he had a respectable career.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

Lock it.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=SirLK26;1011971]I don't like you. LOL.

No, really though, I sort of agree with you about James Thrash. He was a good receiver. Nowhere near HOF quality, but he had a respectable career.[/quote]

Very cool.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011968]Honest debate I love. Arguing because you are ill at me about previous Thrash talk and want to pick something else to argue about because of the poster is totally different. I guarantee that if you had said what I said you would have got no such response from Smoot or anyone else. Guaranteed.

It wasn't a "I don't think Henderson can get it done here" but more of an argument towards the poster than the topic. Let's be honest here and not hide behind "challenging your position" nonsense. When the debate is an honest one you will here no worrisome comments from me. Why would I get mad if someone doesn't think Henderson can get it done. Clearly I wouldn't. It's how it is said rather than what is said. If you don't like me then just say so and not hide behind if you challenge my position I get mad nonsense. It seems personal with you and Smoot. Not the topic.

Be honest and just kick me off the board rather than disingenuous debate. We know the score. We've been at it before. Not once have we ever agreed and I remember it being ugly before. So let's not say it is the topic anymore. Do what you must.[/quote]

I really have no idea what you're talking about.

Nothing about my posts with you have been personal. Before yesterday I really had no idea who you are. I don't keep score when it comes to discussions.

Feel free to leave if you want. Or just chill and don't take things so personal.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;1011964]I would be willing to bet serious money that neither Henderson nor Stallworth are going to "bust out" (per SS's definition) this year. In fact, I would be mildly surprised if both make the roster. Looking at the WR corp and depending on how many we keep, I think one of them has a pretty good shot to be that 5th or 6th "insurance" WR who is only active in injury situations. As I recall, Stallworth played some ST for in his last stint and, if he is willing to do so again, that might give him a leg up.

I can see our top 5 from last year returning w/ possibly Briscoe being cut in favor of Henderson/Stallworth and then one of the UFA guys (I'm specifically thinking of L. Lewis) making the final cut.

Again, such a nice change from a couple of years ago when we had no depth.[/quote]

A thoughtful post.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Mattyk;1011974]I really have no idea what you're talking about.

Nothing about my posts with you have been personal. Before yesterday I really had no idea who you are. I don't keep score when it comes to discussions.

Feel free to leave if you want. Or just chill and don't take things so personal.

[/quote]

Yea OK I'll not mention the Laron Landry back and forth we had and others but who am I to know what you remember and don't. I don't take things personal unless they are.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[url=http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tandlers-real-redsk/2013/06/need-to-know-meriweather-a-key-in-2013.html]Need to Know: Meriweather a key in 2013 - Rich Tandler's Real Redskins[/url]

Meriweather will add tons of talent to the secondary. If only he can stay healthy this season.

Re: Redskins "Sign" Running Back (Redskins News and Notes Version 5.0)
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1011968]Honest debate I love. Arguing because you are ill at me about previous Thrash talk and want to pick something else to argue about because of the poster is totally different. I guarantee that if you had said what I said you would have got no such response from Smoot or anyone else. Guaranteed.

It wasn't a "I don't think Henderson can get it done here" but more of an argument towards the poster than the topic. Let's be honest here and not hide behind "challenging your position" nonsense. When the debate is an honest one you will here no worrisome comments from me. Why would I get mad if someone doesn't think Henderson can get it done. Clearly I wouldn't. It's how it is said rather than what is said. If you don't like me then just say so and not hide behind if you challenge my position I get mad nonsense. It seems personal with you and Smoot. Not the topic.

Be honest and just kick me off the board rather than disingenuous debate. We know the score. We've been at it before. Not once have we ever agreed and I remember it being ugly before. So let's not say it is the topic anymore. Do what you must.[/quote]

it's nothing personal from my end. I don't see how asking how many WRs really "bust out" is some sort of personal attack.