bradskins Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Is the reason Duckett gets no carries b/c it would effect the trade with the broncos? If he gets X amount of carries the price is steeper? Just makes no sense to dress him and not put him in on the goaline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silencer6091 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 its simple..its because we dont really need him...and would rather have him suited up sitting on our bench then have him suited up in green and on the field... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzpackage Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 I think the clauses in the draft pick trade is centered around how our schedule looks once the season is over(someone correct me if I'm wrong). I think you hit the nail on the head when you said it just doesn't make sense. I chalk it up to Coach Gibbs' loyalty to Portis first and then Betts for the reason he gives them the ball on the goaline. Nice way to piss away a third rounder/lower first rounder, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Is the reason Duckett gets no carries b/c it would effect the trade with the broncos? If he gets X amount of carries the price is steeper? Just makes no sense to dress him and not put him in on the goalineNo. His production has no relation to the trade. The trade was designed to give the Broncos a certain value based on draft picks. edit: that value is predetermined. what it takes to fill that requirement will vary based on our final record and draft order, but has nothing to do individually with Duckett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Redskin Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 does it have anything to do with his contract? Like if he meets certain incentives like # of carries his last year is voidable. If he does not carry X# of times he has to live up to extra year of contract therefore giving us the ability to keep him next year or trade him as opposed to just letting him walk after this year. I don't know, just reaching. Does anyone know about his contract enough to answer this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schizlor Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 It's very simple....we signed him when Portis had a serious injury and it was unclear how long it would take for him to return to full form, if ever, this season. Betts would have started, with Duckett backing him up. Portis is back. Betts is the backup. Duckett goes to third. Third string backs come in because of injury. There are no significant injuries at running back. No Duckett. Thats it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 does it have anything to do with his contract? Like if he meets certain incentives like # of carries his last year is voidable. If he does not carry X# of times he has to live up to extra year of contract therefore giving us the ability to keep him next year or trade him as opposed to just letting him walk after this year. I don't know, just reaching. Does anyone know about his contract enough to answer this?there are no goals or incentives that he needs to reach to void the last year of his contract. while there is always the possibility he will not void it, i would bet a lot that he does. it's a 2 year, $1.363 million deal. i would think that he has a much higher value on the FA market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Made Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 It's very simple....we signed him when Portis had a serious injury and it was unclear how long it would take for him to return to full form, if ever, this season. Betts would have started, with Duckett backing him up. Portis is back. Betts is the backup. Duckett goes to third. Third string backs come in because of injury. There are no significant injuries at running back. No Duckett. Thats it. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rm8899 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 What kind of FA is duckett after this year anyways?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Never21Forgotten36 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 My money is goin on both Duck and Betts walking this offseason. We will get some castoff has been (ala Corey Dillon if he is cut in favor of Maroney) to fill the void of backup next season. Duckett probably wouldnt listen to negotiations from us because of how hes been treated here this season, and Betts desperately wants to try to compete somewhere for the starting job. So smart front office, hows it gonna feel when both of them are gone in the offseason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SantanaClaus89 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Duckett will get the ball next time we're on the goal line... mark my words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Gibbs said the reason is Clinton Portis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 CP before Sunday was dominating in goal line situations credit to Dallas for manning up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPortJGibbs89 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 It's very simple....we signed him when Portis had a serious injury and it was unclear how long it would take for him to return to full form, if ever, this season. Betts would have started, with Duckett backing him up. Portis is back. Betts is the backup. Duckett goes to third. Third string backs come in because of injury. There are no significant injuries at running back. No Duckett. Thats it. This is pretty much dead on. Portis got hurt, we freaked out and picked up TJ. Someone else made a point about how when betts and sellers got really upset that maybe Gibbs is still trying to keep them happy and is not playing TJ unless an injury happens to portis or betts. I have said this over and over again, I can not believe TJ is handling this situation like he is. I would not be mad one bit if this guy mouthed off because of the way he is being treated. Read his comments in the post today, nothing but class. FREE TJ!!!!, or give him the damn ball next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tastes Like Chicken Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 I was begging for the heavy jumbo package with Sellers in front of Duckett. Oh well, we won so forget about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGJOE44 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 It's very simple....we signed him when Portis had a serious injury and it was unclear how long it would take for him to return to full form, if ever, this season. Betts would have started, with Duckett backing him up. Portis is back. Betts is the backup. Duckett goes to third. Third string backs come in because of injury. There are no significant injuries at running back. No Duckett. Thats it. You hit the nail on the head Duckett is insurance. Noone could tell how long Portis injury was going to take to heal. Betts has an injury every years since he has been hear, so TJ was brought in for ins, simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roqnap1 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Duckett has 5 out of the 700 pages of the playbook because he won't be on our team after this year. At least that's my theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Duckett will be gone after this year. We just gave away a third round pick. A high one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana87 Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Duckett probably wouldnt listen to negotiations from us because of how hes been treated here this seasonQUOTE]What do you mean the way he has been treated? First off he knew why we were bringing him in when we traded for him. If you remember Betts and Cartwright were upset and Gibbs came right out and said that he was being brought in for depth and that their roll on the team would not change. Well we are half way through the season, Portis is healthy enough to play and Betts and Cartwright's roll with the team hasn't changed. I believe Gibbs is sincere about wanting to give TJ his chance but it just hasn't worked out that way YET! I do think that Ladell will move on but I think TJ resigns to be CCP's back-up and 1, 2 punch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Duckett probably wouldnt listen to negotiations from us because of how hes been treated here this seasonQUOTE]What do you mean the way he has been treated? First off he knew why we were bringing him in when we traded for him. If you remember Betts and Cartwright were upset and Gibbs came right out and said that he was being brought in for depth and that their roll on the team would not change. Well we are half way through the season, Portis is healthy enough to play and Betts and Cartwright's roll with the team hasn't changed. I believe Gibbs is sincere about wanting to give TJ his chance but it just hasn't worked out that way YET! I do think that Ladell will move on but I think TJ resigns to be CCP's back-up and 1, 2 punch. What does he mean?!? Duckett probably hates Gibbs with a passion. He brought him into Washington in a contract year and has completely killed his free market value by inexplicably benching him. The guy is a proven #2 back for starters, and regardless of his nose for the end zone would be a much better change of pace than Betts any day of the week. I do believe that anyone would feel a bit slighted if placed in his shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 What does he mean?!? Duckett probably hates Gibbs with a passion. Yeah, I'm sure. After all, Coach Gibbs has such a long track record of people hating him... :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Yeah, I'm sure. After all, Coach Gibbs has such a long track record of people hating him... :doh: What are you talking about? Seriously, this makes no sense. I said Duckett probably hates Gibbs, which is very possibly true considering that every minute he sits on the bench his value in the free agent market goes down. I guess you wouldn't dislike Gibbs if he essentially robbed you of hundreds of thousands of dollars, huh? Believe it or not, these players probably don't view Gibbs as a God like many people around here. They're in this game to do more than "be a Redskin". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Yep. Duckett is going to lose out on millions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Believe it or not, these players probably don't view Gibbs as a God like many people around here. They're in this game to do more than "be a Redskin". Until you can substantiate Duckett actually hating Coach Gibbs, you're talking subjunctive nonsense from your rear. The guy is not a starter, everyone knew that before he got here, everyone still knows that. He'll get his payday as a backup, just as he would before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Until you can substantiate Duckett actually hating Coach Gibbs, you're talking subjunctive nonsense from your rear. The guy is not a starter, everyone knew that before he got here, everyone still knows that. He'll get his payday as a backup, just as he would before. I like how you only quote a part of my response to substantiate your post. Very crafty. You ever heard of platooning RB's? Seems to be quite the fad in the NFL these days, and Duckett is an excellent candidate for a team running such a game plan. However, his year spent riding the pine will make teams hesitant to sign him therefore hurting his value. He was a monster around the goal line in Atlanta and very effective filling in for Dunn from anywhere on the field. They got rid of him there because they knew that he would command more value on the open market than they could afford....they drafted Norwood knowing this. That said, I am going to guess that Duckett is not a big fan of Gibbs. Any rational human being interested in making money would agree with that assumption. So...guess I don't really care whether or not you think that's coming out of my "rear". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.