Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Why not Keenan McCardell?

Locker Room Main Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-19-2007, 09:30 PM   #16
mredskins
Gamebreaker
 
mredskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 12,730
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

I agree the guy looks really good but, I question the durability.
mredskins is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 11-19-2007, 09:35 PM   #17
theJBexperience
Impact Rookie
 
theJBexperience's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 579
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

I was concerned when the Texans cut him, but before that, I thought going after him was a no-brainer. I'm glad everything's worked out the way it has, and he's finally back in a Skins uniform. I say bring him back for another year, but he may retire again after this season, right?
theJBexperience is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 10:23 AM   #18
rypper11
The Starter
 
rypper11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,228
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

Few, if any, teams want a #4 wr who can't cover kicks or contribute in some way on special teams. It's the biggest reason why Jerry Rice couldn't keep playing until he was 57. Thrash's staying power has always been his ST ability. Early in is career he wasn't the 3 or 4 best wr on the team (though I think he is now) but his punt and KO coverage skills were extremely valuable. KM is no longer a true #1 or #2. IMO, as good as Thrash and Espy are on ST we can afford a #4 receiver who plays in specific packages and catches a few balls a game. He started his career with a SB ring w/ the Skins, let him finish it with another next year.
__________________
Playing a kids game for a kings ransom.
rypper11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 12:37 PM   #19
dmek25
MVP
 
dmek25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 63
Posts: 10,672
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by WillH View Post
I was all for bringing him here, and am all for him staying. I dont mind our wr core next year to consist of:

1. Moss
2. Randel El
3. Thrash
4. Keenan McCardell

But I have to say I am still of the opinion that we need a taller, stronger WR to compliment the speedsters we have, and it might as well be a young guy, so I wouldn't mind grabbing one in the draft if we can find a gem in the later rounds.
until someone can explain to me why the size matters, please stop with all the "redskins need a tall receiver" crap. the redskins need someone to get open, and then catch the ball receiver
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan
dmek25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 12:45 PM   #20
BDBohnzie
Playmaker
 
BDBohnzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Frederick, MD
Age: 45
Posts: 4,628
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

16th season in the NFL, and at 37 (38 in January), he's definitely coming down from the apex of his career. While the Skins need a possession receiver to go along with speedsters Moss and ARE, I'm not sure McCardell is the answer beyond this year. While veterans like McCardell are nice to have, the team also needs to get younger and build towards the future. And while there are worse options than McCardell going forward, there is probably better ones as well.
__________________
Bad Things man, I mean bad things...

“WE TOOK HIM IN THE SIXTH ROUND SO WE'RE NOT SMART EITHER.” - Shanny on what the Skins saw in Alfred Morris
BDBohnzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 12:48 PM   #21
MTK
\m/
 
MTK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,464
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmek25 View Post
until someone can explain to me why the size matters, please stop with all the "redskins need a tall receiver" crap. the redskins need someone to get open, and then catch the ball receiver
LOL we've been hearing this same stuff over and over since 2004.

We've had bigger WRs in the past like Gardner and McCants. How did they work out?

It's very simple, we need productive WRs.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
MTK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 01:14 PM   #22
WillH
The Starter
 
WillH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,590
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmek25 View Post
until someone can explain to me why the size matters, please stop with all the "redskins need a tall receiver" crap. the redskins need someone to get open, and then catch the ball receiver
I can buy that to a degree. I mean I have much love for Santana and Randel El, but neither of them is gonna win a jump ball you know? At the end of the game last week the Cowboys put TO in on defense for the bomb, because he is taller and stronger then our guys. I am not saying that our guys arent able to contribute because of their size, obviously they will still be the big play makers getting open down field. But there are just some situations (especially near the goal line, or trying to get a first down, or a long bomb at the end of the game) where you need a guy that can go up and win the jump ball.

You may not agree, but I think that is explanation enough, so until you can explain to me what is wrong with this thought process, then please give me a break.
WillH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 01:36 PM   #23
dall-assblows
The Starter
 
dall-assblows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: round the way
Age: 41
Posts: 2,211
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

im pretty that KM will retire after this or next year, he is good for now but we need youth.

he almost retired this year soo he is no spring chicken
__________________
SOMEBODY PINCH ME
dall-assblows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 01:38 PM   #24
GTripp0012
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by WillH View Post
I can buy that to a degree. I mean I have much love for Santana and Randel El, but neither of them is gonna win a jump ball you know? At the end of the game last week the Cowboys put TO in on defense for the bomb, because he is taller and stronger then our guys. I am not saying that our guys arent able to contribute because of their size, obviously they will still be the big play makers getting open down field. But there are just some situations (especially near the goal line, or trying to get a first down, or a long bomb at the end of the game) where you need a guy that can go up and win the jump ball.

You may not agree, but I think that is explanation enough, so until you can explain to me what is wrong with this thought process, then please give me a break.
Good offenses don't throw jump balls?

I don't have a problem with the fade route, but any coach who tells his QB to throw it high and playable doesn't know what he's doing.

Look at Dallas. They had T.O. one on one on the goal line, and they ran a quick fade and threw it on his back shoulder. We can do that with Moss and ARE, and we did do that with McCardell already.

To me, taking a receiver in the draft only makes sense if we are ready to move Moss out of that No. 1 role. Giving him the 6 games down the stretch to prove he's still elite seems like the right course of action at this point.

Teams should never, ever, ever, ever draft a receiver on the first day who they don't feel can be their number one in the future. No. 2 and 3. and 4. receivers are just so very easy to find, I mean McCardell and Caldwell were on the scrap heap just 2 months ago.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 02:04 PM   #25
BleedBurgundy
Playmaker
 
BleedBurgundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,471
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Good offenses don't throw jump balls?

I don't have a problem with the fade route, but any coach who tells his QB to throw it high and playable doesn't know what he's doing.

Look at Dallas. They had T.O. one on one on the goal line, and they ran a quick fade and threw it on his back shoulder. We can do that with Moss and ARE, and we did do that with McCardell already.

To me, taking a receiver in the draft only makes sense if we are ready to move Moss out of that No. 1 role. Giving him the 6 games down the stretch to prove he's still elite seems like the right course of action at this point.

Teams should never, ever, ever, ever draft a receiver on the first day who they don't feel can be their number one in the future. No. 2 and 3. and 4. receivers are just so very easy to find, I mean McCardell and Caldwell were on the scrap heap just 2 months ago.
I think the td to T.O. was a fade stop where it looks like they're going to throw the fade but the receiver turns early and catches it short. That only works when you have the threat of the fade route. That's why springs' back was turned, he thought it was going to be high pass. Instead, had he been looking, he could have definitely defended that pass, probably picked it.
__________________
"All natural institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

Thomas Paine
BleedBurgundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 10:47 PM   #26
WillH
The Starter
 
WillH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,590
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

"I think Keenan is just what we all know he is--a veteran who's capable of making plays," head coach Joe Gibbs said. "We have a lot of confidence in him. I wouldn't be surprised if he makes a lot of plays down the stretch for us.

"I think he has a lot left in the tank, too. He was telling me the other day that he wants to play another three years."

At Age 37, McCardell Makes An Impact

Sounds like he WILL be here next year.
WillH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 10:57 PM   #27
Crazyhorse1
Registered User
 
Crazyhorse1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 227
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

He's like a Christmas present. We'd be nuts not to keep him.
Crazyhorse1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 11:22 PM   #28
rypper11
The Starter
 
rypper11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,228
Re: Why not Keenan McCardell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmek25 View Post
until someone can explain to me why the size matters,
Gotta say, suprised people let that one go by.
__________________
Playing a kids game for a kings ransom.
rypper11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 1.16406 seconds with 12 queries