SlobberknockerSkinsFan Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 I'm seeing now that everyone is talking about RB's. Why would we want to spend a draft pick at this position? I thought everyone was so gung ho for Betts/Watson? We (still) have the best thing since Riggo on our team and everyone wants to see him go for 2 guys that had a few good games this year. If we're really letting Davis go (which IMO is retarded) and Betts/Watson are just sooooo good then why do we need to talk about McGahee? Do we really need to waste a pick like this? I mean here's a sophomore that just got hurt with something SD never experienced when he was ballin' at Auburn, but now over the past couple of years has missed a total of what....maybe 7 games? Give the man a break. There's still some left in the "Turbo-Diesel" and work the contract out. I mean it was Mr. Snyder that wanted him to be a "lifelong" Redskin. Just trying to understand why picking McGahee (or signing any other RB's) would be beneficial. HAIL TO THE REDSKINS HAIL VICTORY :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Dude, Davis is not happy in Spurrier's system. Let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 If Davis is willing to take a substantial pay cut, then we'd likely want to keep him around. But, the most likely situation is the team will be looking in another direction at this spot in an attempt to find backs that may be a better overall fit for what Spurrier is trying to do. The backing for a pick like McGahee is simple. If you can get what was a probable Top 10 pick two weeks ago in the in the third, fourth, fifth, whatever round of the draft, then you, perhaps, have a great reward to risk ratio if he recovers. It's not really even difficult to grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 I understand both sides of the issue. If McGehee were to slip to us in the third round and we were to pick say a DT/WR/OG/S who pans out to be a starter on the team while McGehee goes to somebody else, I would not be mad. I mean we don't NEED a RB. But if members of the management staff were to look at him and say, well he may be a star, lets draft him and redshirt him his rookie year, then I could understand that too, as long as we still get our DT/WR/OG & S. My main thing is that I dont want to get McGehee and miss out on a potentially dominant player at another position. I mean the RB is nice, but I dont want a team like Pittsburg or Denver where we've got a busload of RB's but holes at other places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsThug Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Right on MSF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Originally posted by Art If Davis is willing to take a substantial pay cut, then we'd likely want to keep him around. I'm not so sure anymore. I've come to agree with the "Davis doesn't fit the system" crowd. Spurrier seemed almost giddy about starting Watson/Betts the last two weeks and having Davis ride the bench. I really do believe he wants a smaller, faster, pass-catching RB. Even at a much lower price, I can't imagine Spurrier having much to do with Davis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.