Skins @ Eagles Week 1

[CRedskinsRule]

Unless AP has escalators in his contract that pay him bonus for being on the game day actives (and he may), it really shouldn't matter whether he is active or not. With our line in constant flux and JR's concussion tendencies I would rather have an extra guy from OL/TE group than a 4th RB.

Still most bothered by the fact that we have a roster spot taken up by a qb that couldn't play even if needed and only 3 TE's, Colt should be gone Holtz or Parham should be active.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Unless AP has escalators in his contract that pay him bonus for being on the game day actives (and he may), it really shouldn't matter whether he is active or not. With our line in constant flux and JR's concussion tendencies I would rather have an extra guy from OL/TE group than a 4th RB.

Still most bothered by the fact that we have a roster spot taken up by a qb that couldn't play even if needed and only 3 TE's, Colt should be gone Holtz or Parham should be active.

I think they kept Colt for two reasons... One, we actually may need him. Second, I think they possibly mismanaged his injury and are throwing him a bone for being a good soldier. Next year the Colt era ends.

Eagles overwhelm our o-line. 27-13.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I think they kept Colt for two reasons... One, we actually may need him. Second, I think they possibly mismanaged his injury and are throwing him a bone for being a good soldier. Next year the Colt era ends.

Eagles overwhelm our o-line. 27-13.

It could be a bone, but put him on IR, or he could have started on PUP to get past the first portion of the season. Just stupid to have him take a spot on the 53 unless you are afraid that he will come after you with a lawsuit or something.

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Unless AP has escalators in his contract that pay him bonus for being on the game day actives (and he may), it really shouldn't matter whether he is active or not. With our line in constant flux and JR's concussion tendencies I would rather have an extra guy from OL/TE group than a 4th RB.



Still most bothered by the fact that we have a roster spot taken up by a qb that couldn't play even if needed and only 3 TE's, Colt should be gone Holtz or Parham should be active.

Agreed about Colt should be cut and we should have a 4th TE.

But I do think finding ways to play both Guice and AP back and forth would be great for an offense that lacks a proven receiving corps and will need to run the ball effectively...

Envoyé de mon SM-J320FN en utilisant Tapatalk

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by FrenchSkin

Agreed about Colt should be cut and we should have a 4th TE.

But I do think finding ways to play both Guice and AP back and forth would be great for an offense that lacks a proven receiving corps and will need to run the ball effectively...

Envoyé de mon SM-J320FN en utilisant Tapatalk

1. I still don't believe this because this was reported by the Junkies, who are worthless. No credible reporter (JP, Keim, Hoffman, Hawksworth) has even mentioned this.

2. In looking at the RBs, I do see a conundrum with AP on gamedays; unless the team is willing to have 4 RBs active (they typically have 3 RBs active)

- Guice: starting RB
- CT: 3rd down RB
- Smallwood: can play special teams
- AP: can only be Guice's backup

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

1. I still don't believe this because this was reported by the Junkies, who are worthless. No credible reporter (JP, Keim, Hoffman, Hawksworth) has even mentioned this.

2. In looking at the RBs, I do see a conundrum with AP on gamedays; unless the team is willing to have 4 RBs active (they typically have 3 RBs active)

- Guice: starting RB
- CT: 3rd down RB
- Smallwood: can play special teams
- AP: can only be Guice's backup

It's simple math, carrying 4 game day RB's is tough especially when AP doesn't play teams.