refuze Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 He exceeded expectations as a #4 with New England two years ago, but he came to Washington basically to make a name for himself. Right now, it looks like he's our 4th wideout. I'm not sure if he's thrilled about that but I think it's better off if he stays. After all, can he really get a better job elsewhere if he leaves? We need as much depth as possible, and with him here, it's an insurance policy if someone goes down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 i doubt they would cut him at this point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgun88 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I don't think we should cut him. We have depth now which was something we dreamed about last season. Why screw it up now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBeast36 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 yea i really doubt he will be cut.... now Brown and Jacobs on the other hand will probably be gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIDETHEWALRUS Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I do not know the cap implications if we release or trade him, but I do not think he really has a place here anymore. I suspect he is pissed about being moved to the #4 WR spot after coming here to be a #2. He complained about not getting the ball when he was playing, I don't see him being good in the locker room now. CPSTRETCH...How can you leave Johhny Whiteguy off of your list of recieving threats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Patten may be history after June 1. You have the top three of Moss, Lloyd and Randle El and then you have Thrash who returns punts and is a special teams gunner on the outside. Patten is 32 years old and doesn't play special teams. I don't think he has a role here in 2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VI_SkinsFan Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Don't cut him. Gibbs said he's fine with all the signings. Let him be the #4 WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 theres like a billiondy threads about this already http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148303&highlight=cut+patten for example. Please use the search feature next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 No, but we can if we have to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Taylor Jacobs, Antonio Brown, and Jimmy Farris are the first on the chopping block. Then Thrash. Then Patten. However, Patten's the #4 so there's no way he gets cut or traded and Thrash is likely to be kept on for his special teams play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philal0102 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 i personally think so... he would be and ok #4 or 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Patten may be history after June 1. You have the top three of Moss, Lloyd and Randle El and then you have Thrash who returns punts and is a special teams gunner on the outside. Patten is 32 years old and doesn't play special teams. I don't think he has a role here in 2006. I don't think that Thrash is going to be returning punts any longer; do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spm Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I don't know why we would keep Patten. He's our #4 right now, and it's not clear that he's any better than Thrash, plus Thrash is a great special teams player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Patten will be an insurance policy (particularly for Randle El, since he will do returns) and #4 receiver. So he still has quite a bit of value to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattGeorge85 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 The complexity of the offense that Al Saunders will help expand will require weapons of all kinds. Considering how lean the WR position was at the end of the season, one would certainly recognize that depth would be a smart conservative call right now. It's remarkable to me that this team can go from "desperately needing receivers" to "how can we use so many?". Santana had an undeniably fantastic season and had to face the frustration of being double and triple teamed towards the end. Those days are over. I truly believe that he will be a huge factor in the Redskins plan next year...but he wont have to carry the team in clutch situatons as often. Four potential threats at WR (some more than others) with Cooley, and and Clinton's grinding running game will break most teams backs next year if correctly orchestrated. I would like to see Patten stay healthy and make his bid to contribute to the tempest that will be the Redskins next year. :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDMAN7 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Taylor Jacobs, Antonio Brown, and Jimmy Farris are the first on the chopping block. Then Thrash. Then Patten.However, Patten's the #4 so there's no way he gets cut or traded and Thrash is likely to be kept on for his special teams play. I agree 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I don't think that Thrash is going to be returning punts any longer; do you? Thrash doesn't return punts. He returns kickoffs. He and Betts do. Antonio Brown returning punt. Now, we don't have a need for Brown (Randle-El). But we can still use Thrash and Betts on kickoffs. Although, I'm aware there has been some rotation of those roles in the past - mainly due to circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IM A REDSKIN FAN Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 to answer this, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 http://washingtontimes.com/sports/20050304-121358-4055r.htm "David Patten left New England for a five-year, $13 million deal including a $3.5 million signing bonus." Given those numbers... I don't think it's imperative that the Redskins release the guy just for the sake of it. Those are reasonable numbers. And Thrash is making $1.1M this year. If one WR goes down to injury this year... or Randle-El needs a break after work on special teams.... Patten is a nice luxury to have as a #3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVAbrendan Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 It's not a guaranteed that Randle-El is going to be above Patten, is it? To my knowledge, El's numbers aren't too impressive. Patten's got some gas left in the tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Thrash doesn't return punts. He returns kickoffs. He and Betts do. Antonio Brown returning punt. Now, we don't have a need for Brown (Randle-El). But we can still use Thrash and Betts on kickoffs.Although, I'm aware there has been some rotation of those roles in the past - mainly due to circumstances. My bad, I'm sure I meant kickoffs because I know that I heard Randle El say that he also wanted to return kickoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 My bad, I'm sure I meant kickoffs because I know that I heard Randle El say that he also wanted to return kickoffs. I read the quote too.... which I found odd. But I seriously doubt he's going to return kickoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazhog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Patten's fine... He will contribute this coming season!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I don't see any need to cut him. We can have Moss, Lloyd, Randle-El, Patten, and Thrash (more of a utility guy). Why would you go out and get depth at WR and then weaken your depth right away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana87 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Who ever said we are cutting Patten? We have plenty of room for him. The whole Idea of getting both Randle El and Lloyd is so that we don't have a repeat of last year. 1WR) Santana Moss (#1 Deep Threat) 2WR) Brandon Lloyd (Mid range Threat) 3WR) David Patten (Mid to Deep Threat) XF) Antwaan Randle El (The X-Factor) HB) Cris Cooley (underneath Threat) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.