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 Haven't We Signed Brian Brohm

Locker Room Main Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-08-2009, 04:39 PM   #1
dmvskinzfan08
Impact Rookie
 
dmvskinzfan08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 968
Re: Why Haven't We Signed Brian Brohm

Quote:
Originally Posted by celts32 View Post
Actually, he was the name that intrigued me more then any other cut this weekend. He was a top NFL prospect 2 years ago after his JR year with Bobby Petrino. His 1st year in the league was also spent learning the West Coast Offense with Green Bay. I am not saying that he's going to take Jasons job or anything but I think he is worth a spot at the end of the roster. I would much rather be developing a QB with the 53rd spot then keeping a 3rd string Mason who contributes nothing to special teams.
Prospect means nothing unless you show something during the process of you being a player in the NFL. Colt & Chase were Heisman candidates. We just cut one of them and put the other one on IR. So what are you really saying? Woodson on the other hand had many accolades also. Could have sworn at one point he was in Heisman contention. So just to say we should sign Brohm because he was a top prospect is ridiculous.

Also if in case you haven't notice. The Redskins aren't into grooming QB's from rookies. Our fan base and ownership are too impatient and we will never use the word "rebuilding" for that matter.

Mason will contribute to special teams "he has no choice". He is our insurance policy because Betts hasn't been productive and Rock doesn't really service us at RB. So the need for him being on the roster is more pressing. Especially if anything happens to Portis. He will get just as many touches if CP gets injured as Betts in my opinion. Betts is good for catching the ball out of the backfield. That's why he is here and because he is a vet and knows the offense. Other than that he is not a threat at RB. That is why Mason is here.
__________________
HTTR 09 - RIP#21
HATERS << Misery Loves Company
dmvskinzfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2009, 04:45 PM   #2
wolfeskins
The Starter
 
wolfeskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: chesapeake,va.
Posts: 2,160
Re: Why Haven't We Signed Brian Brohm

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmvskinzfan08 View Post
Prospect means nothing unless you show something during the process of you being a player in the NFL. Colt & Chase were Heisman candidates. We just cut one of them and put the other one on IR. So what are you really saying? Woodson on the other hand had many accolades also. Could have sworn at one point he was in Heisman contention. So just to say we should sign Brohm because he was a top prospect is ridiculous.

Also if in case you haven't notice. The Redskins aren't into grooming QB's from rookies. Our fan base and ownership are too impatient and we will never use the word "rebuilding" for that matter.

Mason will contribute to special teams "he has no choice". He is our insurance policy because Betts hasn't been productive and Rock doesn't really service us at RB. So the need for him being on the roster is more pressing. Especially if anything happens to Portis. He will get just as many touches if CP gets injured as Betts in my opinion. Betts is good for catching the ball out of the backfield. That's why he is here and because he is a vet and knows the offense. Other than that he is not a threat at RB. That is why Mason is here.

agreed. good post.
__________________
Hail to Allen/Shanahan .... bring in some baby hogs and load up on diesel fuel !!! (budw38)
wolfeskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2009, 10:37 PM   #3
celts32
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 54
Posts: 2,665
Re: Why Haven't We Signed Brian Brohm

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmvskinzfan08 View Post
Prospect means nothing unless you show something during the process of you being a player in the NFL. Colt & Chase were Heisman candidates. We just cut one of them and put the other one on IR. So what are you really saying? Woodson on the other hand had many accolades also. Could have sworn at one point he was in Heisman contention. So just to say we should sign Brohm because he was a top prospect is ridiculous.

Also if in case you haven't notice. The Redskins aren't into grooming QB's from rookies. Our fan base and ownership are too impatient and we will never use the word "rebuilding" for that matter.

Mason will contribute to special teams "he has no choice". He is our insurance policy because Betts hasn't been productive and Rock doesn't really service us at RB. So the need for him being on the roster is more pressing. Especially if anything happens to Portis. He will get just as many touches if CP gets injured as Betts in my opinion. Betts is good for catching the ball out of the backfield. That's why he is here and because he is a vet and knows the offense. Other than that he is not a threat at RB. That is why Mason is here.
The Heisman is a college award...it has nothing to do with being an NFL prospect. Brohm was a top NFL prospect 1 yr ago. Colt and Chas were marginal NFL prospects as evidence by their draft position. As for Mason...Zorn said today that Mason will not even be active unless he improves on special teams or they have an injury.
__________________
Section 116 Row 19

“Goal line, goal line. I-left, tight wing, 70 chip on white.”

www.facebook.com/HackettstownBeerClub
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 1.10966 seconds with 11 queries