BigRay Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 What you guys think about bringing in Mike Anderson as our short yardage running back ? I apologize if this has already been posted in advance.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefPowhatan17 Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 I like the way Mike Anderson plays, he runs hard and north south. I like it, but what about Stephen Davis? I f he is healthy. Plus Mike Anderson puts his full name on the back of his jersey.:point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shallyshal Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 What you guys think about bringing in Mike Anderson as our short yardage running back ? I apologize if this has already been posted in advance.. a fine third down back as well because he is a solid receiver...a whole lot better than the idea some have floated of bringing davis back anderson is a gibbs type player for certain. i just do not like the idea of losing nemo or rock which would happen if they get anderson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Full Monty Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 If possible, why not bring him in and let him compete with Rock and Nemo, may the best man win. It's all about competition and depth baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooper02145 Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 I like the way Mike Anderson plays, he runs hard and north south. I like it, but what about Stephen Davis? I f he is healthy. Plus Mike Anderson puts his full name on the back of his jersey.:point2sky[/QUOTDavis is all done. He has missed time each of the last two years. I like the thought of Anderson but not sure of the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty-eight Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 We dont have a need for Mike Anderson, unless we want him to save us from all of the money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted March 3, 2006 Author Share Posted March 3, 2006 I like the way Mike Anderson plays, he runs hard and north south. I like it, but what about Stephen Davis? I f he is healthy. Plus Mike Anderson puts his full name on the back of his jersey.:point2sky That would be my #1 pick would love to see Stephen back here in a redskin uniform not sure if he can stay healthy .. I think his knees are shot.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelM Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 I'd expect Anderson is looking to be more than a short yardage back. That role worked great for Bettis as he was on his last leg in his career, but Anderson should look to be a larger part of an offense than just short yardage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jivelikenice Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 He wouldn't be bad but I would sign him only to a minimal contract. He has played fullback before so he might also be able to fit into thet h-back role. He's also a much bettwre back-up then Betts in my opinion..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Heck....no What about we need cap space and we have Ladell Betts do you NOT understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macnoke03 Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 I'd expect Anderson is looking to be more than a short yardage back. That role worked great for Bettis as he was on his last leg in his career, but Anderson should look to be a larger part of an offense than just short yardage. My thoughts exactly. I think Anderson will be looking for a situation where he is an every down type of back, not just short yardage. No way he comes here IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Ive heard alot of good things about him, but the one spot we dont have a glaring need to fix with FA is RB. We are deeper there than anywhere. fix the spots that need fixing first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted March 3, 2006 Author Share Posted March 3, 2006 Heck....noWhat about we need cap space and we have Ladell Betts do you NOT understand? Look it was just a simple question yes or no would have been acceptable.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizkiteer Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Why? He's old and will command more money. We are tight w/ our cap already and to spend any kind of money on a position that we already have covered makes absolutely no sense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted March 3, 2006 Author Share Posted March 3, 2006 Why? He's old and will command more money. We are tight w/ our cap already and to spend any kind of money on a position that we already have covered makes absolutely no sense at all. Umm isn't Cartwright an free agent ? So how is it covered ? especially if Betts is going to be the backup to Portis.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SackMachine Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Redskins RB: Portis Betts Nemo Cartwright Lumsden Did I forget anyone? We have enough RB, even if we lose Cartwright and Betts we'll still have 3. We have positions that are more in need depth at the moment (OL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizkiteer Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 The coaching staff already think Portis is capable to run it in the redzone. Add that Betts runs well between the tackles and we have a few FB's on the roster....IT'S NOT A NEED. Matter of fact, if I wanted to get a goaline type back for a year..."your in goood hands with Alstott!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty-eight Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Umm isn't Cartwright an free agent ? So how is it covered ? especially if Betts is going to be the backup to Portis.. NEMO BABY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty-eight Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Matter of fact, if I wanted to get a goaline type back for a year..."your in goood hands with Alstott!" :doh:NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Dude needs to retire, he is done. He should have retired before last year. I dont want to give him any money. Will he play for egg rolls? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted March 3, 2006 Author Share Posted March 3, 2006 The coaching staff already think Portis is capable to run it in the redzone. Add that Betts runs well between the tackles and we have a few FB's on the roster....IT'S NOT A NEED. Matter of fact, if I wanted to get a goaline type back for a year..."your in goood hands with Alstott!" That would be a pretty good pick as well .. I know it's not a major need but I just threw that name out there to see what you guys think mostly like they will not make that attempt to go after him but I thought it would just be an interesting name to throw around.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Anderson is a proven short yardage back. Betts is good, but I'd rather have Mike Anderson. If it was up to me, I'd package Ramsey and Betts for a DE or other need position(maybe even picks) and go sign Anderson. Him and Portis would be a beastly 1-2 punch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsfan1311 Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Yes I think he could help the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butz65 Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 SD has an outside shot b/c of all the question marks regarding his injury, etc. He might be willing to back someone else up at this point. No way Anderson will accept a backup role - someone will make him a starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizkiteer Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 That would be a pretty good pick as well .. I know it's not a major need but I just threw that name out there to see what you guys think mostly like they will not make that attempt to go after him but I thought it would just be an interesting name to throw around.. Fair enough!! Of course, adding any talented player at any position is always good, but in this case...I think Anderson wouldn't want to play a true second fiddle spot. Anderson would know that he only has a year or two left for productivity, so he'd want to carry the rock much more than just being a GL RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted March 3, 2006 Author Share Posted March 3, 2006 Fair enough!! Of course, adding any talented player at any position is always good, but in this case...I think Anderson wouldn't want to play a true second fiddle spot. Anderson would know that he only has a year or two left for productivity, so he'd want to carry the rock much more than just being a GL RB. Maybe, I should've written the post differently.. I agree he probably would want the rock in his hands more than just gl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.