Well guess who has swelling in their knee...

[TheGreek1973]

Kelly is not a bust---yet. But I wish the team shuts him down for the year because it might hurt him in the long run. Let the kid study and learn the offense and get ready for next year. hey did anyone pickup Mcmullen? If not shut down Kelly and bring this guy in here. He played well in preseason for us.

[NeckBone]

Seattle has McMullen. NFL.com has his stats at (rec., yards, ypc, td) 7 124 17.7 0

[bird_1972]

If we do put Kelly on IR, who can we bring in as a 5th receiver to replace him on the roster?

Keenan McCardell?

[bleedsb&G]

I don't think people should be so hard on the guy, in all honesty, these things just happen, sometimes it's hard to overcome the injury bug, and it looks even worse being that he is a rookie and all. I hope he pulls through and makes some major contributions down the road.

[Thinking Skins]

Say what? What happened to Griffin in 2006 is why we addressed it by picking up Monty, Golsten, and Alexander. Except they were already on the team in 2006. Wow, Snyder can afford a time machine now? He went into the future and saw what was gonna happen in 2006, so he picked up Monty, Golsten, and Alexander beforehand.

And it still didn't work. Wow.

We signed the guys to address the depth concerns at DT. Before we had them, we had a bunch of old guys who were stop-gaps. Now we have a young rotation. As these guys develop, we're developing a nice rotation at DT. I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years? I hope you're not saying that because Monty had a really good season against the run last year and was getting push inside.

The key thing is that we have addressed the DL and have some depth there.

Meanwhile, drafting Rinehart is a start and Heyer is suitable depth. But then what. What happens in the future once our starters start to age? Are we going to use some stupid excuses about "All of our linemen are rookies! They need to gel! They need to learn the blocking schemes! They need to learn the protection schemes!"

So you expect us to sign an entire new offensive line overnight? We have one of the best offensive lines in the league, we don't NEED to replace everybody right now. What we need is to get some depth and have them ready to contribute in the case of an injury. Thats what we have right now. I'm confident in Heyer and Reinhart. And if Crummer and/or Geisner are forced to play, then it means we've suffered a lot more injuries along the OL than we were expecting. but we DO have some backups there who could come in. And right now we're training them the schemes, and the WCO, and we have one of the best in the business in Buges. You're just grasping for straws by saying that we don't have any youth along the OL because you ingore that we actually addressed that position these last two years.

If you think a disproportionate amount of credit goes to our backup DL and backup LB in our wins against Dallas and Philly... Then you are the one grasping for straws.

So you're saying that Demetric Evans didn't play a good game both times? You're saying that Campbell (the backup LB) didn't play well on that 3rd down at the goal line? HB Blades started twice for Washington now and has played well. You're looking for reasons to criticize the team. I understand being cautious, but at least be legitimate.

[Thinking Skins]

Kelly is not a bust---yet. But I wish the team shuts him down for the year because it might hurt him in the long run. Let the kid study and learn the offense and get ready for next year. hey did anyone pickup Mcmullen? If not shut down Kelly and bring this guy in here. He played well in preseason for us.

I don't think they can put him on the IR list if he's been cleared to play. And I think it takes an agreement from the player himself.

And its not like we don't have other WRs participating in practice. We have a practice squad that contains 2 WRs - one who was here all training camp, and one who had a good year last year. So its not like Kelly is taking reps away from other players. Just have some patience.

[Shilsu]

We signed the guys to address the depth concerns at DT. Before we had them, we had a bunch of old guys who were stop-gaps. Now we have a young rotation. As these guys develop, we're developing a nice rotation at DT. I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years? I hope you're not saying that because Monty had a really good season against the run last year and was getting push inside.

Here's what you said.

Thinking Skins:our lack of depth in 2006 and 2007 are what led us to address the positions in the past, hence there is not a pressing need to address them again.

So you admit that we lacked depth in 2006 and/or 2007 when we had Monty, Golsten, and Alexander. But then you say they are depth.

Seriously, wtf are you trying to say? And thanks for proving one of my other points with your "max potential in their rookie years" comment.

The key thing is that we have addressed the DL and have some depth there.

Like I said, if we had addressed the DL properly, we wouldn't have gone out and gotten Taylor. Wait, what, we got him for morale reasons? :doh:

So you expect us to sign an entire new offensive line overnight? We have one of the best offensive lines in the league, we don't NEED to replace everybody right now. What we need is to get some depth and have them ready to contribute in the case of an injury. Thats what we have right now. I'm confident in Heyer and Reinhart. And if Crummer and/or Geisner are forced to play, then it means we've suffered a lot more injuries along the OL than we were expecting. but we DO have some backups there who could come in. And right now we're training them the schemes, and the WCO, and we have one of the best in the business in Buges. You're just grasping for straws by saying that we don't have any youth along the OL because you ingore that we actually addressed that position these last two years.

Stop using the phrase "grasping for straws" if you don't know what that term means. And so let me get this straight...

You DON'T draft player until you need to replace them. Especially on an OL that is getting old that plays 100% of the snaps.

But you DO draft Fred Davis to wait in the wings because Mike Sellers and Todd Yoder are getting old at the 2nd TE/FB position that plays less than 100% of the snaps.

Seriously, stop running circles around yourself.

Here's another counterpoint to yourself that you wrote:

"I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years?"

That's exactly my point. Draft some linemen to figure things out so we don't have them playing like crap when they are put into the game. That way when they're going through a transition, I don't have to hear:

"I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years?"

So you're saying that Demetric Evans didn't play a good game both times? You're saying that Campbell (the backup LB) didn't play well on that 3rd down at the goal line? HB Blades started twice for Washington now and has played well. You're looking for reasons to criticize the team. I understand being cautious, but at least be legitimate.

Don't attack anyone's credibility if your own arguments contradict yourself.

Demetric Evans and his one tackle in Dallas and lack of pass rush is now considered playing a good game in Philly and Dallas. One tackle in two games.

God damn, why didn't we pick up Calais Campbell. He has SEVEN tackles! That's averaging more than one tackle per game!

HB Blades is great. But what are you gonna do when Washington and Fletcher both get too old? Draft someone THEN and then say, "I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years?"

[Thinking Skins]

Here's what you said.

Thinking Skins:our lack of depth in 2006 and 2007 are what led us to address the positions in the past, hence there is not a pressing need to address them again.

So you admit that we lacked depth in 2006 and/or 2007 when we had Monty, Golsten, and Alexander. But then you say they are depth.

Seriously, wtf are you trying to say? And thanks for proving one of my other points with your "max potential in their rookie years" comment.

well add 2005 to that. The main thing is that we drafted depth at DT and DE. So if we were to address that position again, then we'd either be keeping 5 or 6 DT's which is unreasonable or cutting some quality DTs, when we have bigger holes at other positions.

Like I said, if we had addressed the DL properly, we wouldn't have gone out and gotten Taylor. Wait, what, we got him for morale reasons? :doh:

If you don't want to believe that players were on pins and needles when two players went down the first day of training camp, then you can go right ahead. But this has been discussed ad nauseum at this site.

Stop using the phrase "grasping for straws" if you don't know what that term means. And so let me get this straight...

You DON'T draft player until you need to replace them. Especially on an OL that is getting old that plays 100% of the snaps.

But you DO draft Fred Davis to wait in the wings because Mike Sellers and Todd Yoder are getting old at the 2nd TE/FB position that plays less than 100% of the snaps.

Seriously, stop running circles around yourself.

I'm saying that we've addressed the offensive and defensive lines...to the point that they were not the most dire positions of need on this team. We have players being trained to take over for many of the starters at those positions. But we needed a player ready to take over for the Mike Sellers/Todd Yoder type role because we have little depth at that position, and getting somebody next to Cooley could really help the offense.

If you think I'm talking in a circle, point out the contradiction and we can easily discuss it, but don't just say that I'm wrong without pointing out why...you're starting to sound like a Tina Fey impressionation of Sarah Palin.

Here's another counterpoint to yourself that you wrote:

"I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years?"

That's exactly my point. Draft some linemen to figure things out so we don't have them playing like crap when they are put into the game. That way when they're going through a transition, I don't have to hear:

"I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years?"

Why are you ignoring the fact that we've already drafted defensive linemen and were able to add offensive players in lower rounds? You act like there's a black hole behind Sameuls, Kendall, Rabach, Thomas and Jansen - oh wait, one of those youger guys we're grooming beat out Jansen this year.

What about Reinhart?

What about Geisner?

What about Crummey?

Thats 3 guys as backups on our offensive line "to figure things out so we don't have them playing like crap when they are put into the game". Isn't that what you want?

Oh, I get it, we don't have a 1st day pick waiting in the wings, so these guys must be bums? Is that what you're saying?

As long as you ignore my points, I'm gonna keep repeating them - cause you're making no sense.

- You're saying we need youth along the lines, but you ignore the youth we have there.

- You're saying that rookies should be able "to figure things out so we don't have them playing like crap when they are put into the game", but you're complaining that we drafted Davis to do just that?

- You're saying that we should only address the positions that play 100% of the snaps, even when we have guys we're training to take over at those spots?

Really, you're making no sense to me. I can try to make my points more clear, but it seems like you're going to just ignore what I'm saying until I say that "our offensive and defensive lines are complete and utter crap and we will be a crappy team until we spend an entire draft on those positions." But I refuse to say that. Look at what we did last year, and look at what we did so far this year. The lines are not our problem. Even depth along the lines isn't our problem. Our main problem has been that we need to inject youth ALL OVER the roster, after a Gibbs regime that relied on too many veterans. We've done that and hopefully we'll continue to do that.

Don't attack anyone's credibility if your own arguments contradict yourself.

Demetric Evans and his one tackle in Dallas and lack of pass rush is now considered playing a good game in Philly and Dallas. One tackle in two games.

God damn, why didn't we pick up Calais Campbell. He has SEVEN tackles! That's averaging more than one tackle per game!

Yeah, I'm really impressed with your football IQ </sarcasm>

How many times was Philly able to run at Evans? How about Dallas? Just because he didn't get tackles doesn't mean that he didn't have an effect on the plays. Evans got a key deflection against Arizona that led to the game winning pic by Rogers.

HB Blades is great. But what are you gonna do when Washington and Fletcher both get too old? Draft someone THEN and then say, "I really hope you're not saying that these guys had reached their max potential in their rookie years?"

How much of an injury concern is Fletcher? He has no recurring history of injuries, and unlike Taylor, he has participated in full offseason workouts and probably won't be getting injured any time soon. And if he does, Blades is his backup. If Washington gets injured at the same time, we'll get Fincher involved. He looked real good in the preseason, and he's another young guy we have waiting in the wings.

[Thinking Skins]

Here's a look at the position by position youth on our team roster and practice squad:

Defensive Line

79 Alexander, Lorenzo DT 6'1" 300 lbs 2

64 Golston, Kedric DT 6'4" 320 lbs 3

94 Montgomery, Anthony DT 6'6" 315 lbs 3

98 Jackson, Rob DE 6'4" 259 lbs R

78 James, Erasmus DE 6'4" 266 lbs 4

95 Wilson, Chris DE 6'4" 246 lbs 2

Linebacker

54 Blades, H.B. LB 5'10" 250 lbs 2

51 Fincher, Alfred LB 6-1 238 3

52 McIntosh, Rocky LB 6'2" 232 lbs 3

57 Baldwin, Johnny LB 6-1 230 1

Secondary

37 Doughty, Reed S 6'1'' 209 lbs 3

32 Hamilton, Justin S 6-3 222 1

48 Horton, Chris S 6'1" 216 lbs R

30 Landry, LaRon S 6'2'' 213 lbs 2

41 Moore, Kareem S 5'11" 213 lbs R

22 Rogers, Carlos CB 5'11" 199 lbs 4

29 Torrence, Leigh CB 6'0'' 179 lbs 3

20 Tryon, Justin CB 5'9'' 190 lbs R

40 Richardson, Matteral CB 6'0" 197 lbs R

34 Westbrook, Byron CB 5'10'' 194 lbs 1

Quarterback

5 Brennan, Colt QB 6'3" 201 lbs R

Offensive Line

68 Geisinger, Justin OG 6-4 315 3

74 Heyer, Stephon OL 6'6'' 325 lbs 2

75 Rinehart, Chad OL 6-5 311 R

62 Clark, Devin OL 6'4" 312 lbs R

72 Crummey, Andrew OL 6'5" 301 lbs R

Tight End and Fullback

86 Davis, Fred TE 6'4" 247 lbs R

36 Broughton, Nehemiah FB 5'11'' 250 lbs 3

Wide Receiver

12 Kelly, Malcolm WR 6-4 219 R

11 Thomas, Devin WR 6'2'' 218 lbs R

84 Gant, Horace WR 6'3" 218 lbs R

80 Aromashodu, Devin WR 6-2 200 2

Kicker/Punter

14 Brooks, Durant P 6'2" 204 lbs R

6 Suisham, Shaun K 6'0'' 197 lbs 3

I'm not saying that we have 33 Pro Bowlers waiting in the wings, but if you look at how we addressed the youth on this team, you have to say that we have been able to add a nice number of younger players to this roster who are competing for a starting spot. So many people are saying that we should have signed a defensive or offensive lineman in the second round, but I can't knock the picks of Thomas, Davis, and Kelly because they were supplainted with picking players like Chad Reinhart, Kerry Brown, Andrew Crummey, Rob Jackson, and Devin Clark. And we went and signed young free agents like Justin Geisner, Erasmus James, and Alfred Fincher, who we can train to take over for our older guys along the OL, DL, and LB. So often people choose to ignore that we did address these positions this offseason.

[#98QBKiller]

Just FYI Landry's 6 ft tall, not 6'-2"

[Thinking Skins]

Just FYI Landry's 6 ft tall, not 6'-2"

send that to the Redskins. They're lying on the roster page, trying to up his height.

[flexxskins]

I for one don't even care anymore if his knee or ankle swells up. We are doing great without him. Don't get me wrong, I hope that he is able to recover. But, I just don't even consider this news anymore.

My question is; just what in the world did he do for his knee to start swelling again anyway?

Brush his teeth?

[#98QBKiller]

send that to the Redskins. They're lying on the roster page, trying to up his height.

Must've confused him with Sean Taylor

[bulldog]

the truth remains that Marcus Washington, Jason Taylor and Malcolm Kelly need to be held out until they are ready to play. these guys keep coming back early and then suffer a setback.

the players we have out there in their places are WINNING football games against good teams on the road, so let's stop panicking about Kelly's NFL future after 5 games

[Shilsu]

well add 2005 to that. The main thing is that we drafted depth at DT and DE. So if we were to address that position again, then we'd either be keeping 5 or 6 DT's which is unreasonable or cutting some quality DTs, when we have bigger holes at other positions.

So now you change your argument around and it still doesn't make much sense since we did not have any injuries in 2005 to expose our problems at DL depth.

And if you really think having 4 TE/FB is really important....

If you don't want to believe that players were on pins and needles when two players went down the first day of training camp, then you can go right ahead. But this has been discussed ad nauseum at this site.

Yeah, okay. Is that your explanation for trading for TJ Duckett, too?

I'm saying that we've addressed the offensive and defensive lines...to the point that they were not the most dire positions of need on this team. We have players being trained to take over for many of the starters at those positions. But we needed a player ready to take over for the Mike Sellers/Todd Yoder type role because we have little depth at that position, and getting somebody next to Cooley could really help the offense.

This is why your entire premise makes no sense. How did we address the offensive and defensive lines?

Meanwhile, we spend draft picks on Manuel White, Nemo Broughton, and now Fred Davis. Fabulous.

If you think I'm talking in a circle, point out the contradiction and we can easily discuss it, but don't just say that I'm wrong without pointing out why...you're starting to sound like a Tina Fey impressionation of Sarah Palin.

One contradiction: You say we don't need to draft OL because we don't need an immediate replacement. Meanwhile, you say we need to draft Fred Davis.

Another contradiction: You say we addressed the DL because of what happened in 2006. Um, we have the exact same DL we had in 2006. So you backpedal and change that to add 2005. Even though nothing happened in 2005 to expose our lack of depth.

Why are you ignoring the fact that we've already drafted defensive linemen and were able to add offensive players in lower rounds? You act like there's a black hole behind Sameuls, Kendall, Rabach, Thomas and Jansen - oh wait, one of those youger guys we're grooming beat out Jansen this year.

What about Reinhart?

What about Geisner?

What about Crummey?

Thats 3 guys as backups on our offensive line "to figure things out so we don't have them playing like crap when they are put into the game". Isn't that what you want?

Oh, I get it, we don't have a 1st day pick waiting in the wings, so these guys must be bums? Is that what you're saying?

Oh okay, so then why are YOU ignoring Manuel White and Nemo Broughton, brought in specifically to backup Chris Cooley and what would later become Mike Sellers' position?

I suppose if any of our linemen goes down and Geisner and Crummey have to come in, you won't be making stupid excuses blaming injuries if we hav eproblems with pass protection and run blocking, right?

As long as you ignore my points, I'm gonna keep repeating them - cause you're making no sense.

- You're saying we need youth along the lines, but you ignore the youth we have there.

- You're saying that rookies should be able "to figure things out so we don't have them playing like crap when they are put into the game", but you're complaining that we drafted Davis to do just that?

- You're saying that we should only address the positions that play 100% of the snaps, even when we have guys we're training to take over at those spots?

Hey, we already had Nemo Broughton and Manuel White according to your logic. Hell, we even got Lorenzo Alexander. Why did we draft Davis?

Really, you're making no sense to me. I can try to make my points more clear, but it seems like you're going to just ignore what I'm saying until I say that "our offensive and defensive lines are complete and utter crap and we will be a crappy team until we spend an entire draft on those positions." But I refuse to say that. Look at what we did last year, and look at what we did so far this year. The lines are not our problem. Even depth along the lines isn't our problem. Our main problem has been that we need to inject youth ALL OVER the roster, after a Gibbs regime that relied on too many veterans. We've done that and hopefully we'll continue to do that.

Yeah, I'm really impressed with your football IQ </sarcasm>

You should be after this nugget...

How many times was Philly able to run at Evans? How about Dallas? Just because he didn't get tackles doesn't mean that he didn't have an effect on the plays. Evans got a key deflection against Arizona that led to the game winning pic by Rogers.

Rogers got an interception off of Evans' deflection?

WTF are you watching?

How much of an injury concern is Fletcher? He has no recurring history of injuries, and unlike Taylor, he has participated in full offseason workouts and probably won't be getting injured any time soon. And if he does, Blades is his backup. If Washington gets injured at the same time, we'll get Fincher involved. He looked real good in the preseason, and he's another young guy we have waiting in the wings.

Fletcher is not an injury concern, the problem is he is getting OLD. Once he passes his prime, we will need someone to plug in.

And I love how we can just plug in Fincher, we can just plug in Crummey, but we CAN'T plug in Broughton or White.

Great logic.

Evans deflected a pass for Rogers in the Cardinals game. Great football IQ. Or you need some glasses. Or some knowledge of who the Redskins players are. Something. Anything. Evans deflected a pass for Rogers in the Cardinals game? It'd be bad enough if you were just making things up. But the fact you actually believe Evans deflected a pass for the Rogers interception. And you attack others' "legitimatcy" or "football IQ" or claim "grasping for straws".

Once you actually watch Redskins games and understand what's going on, come back to me.

[Thinking Skins]

Rogers got an interception off of Evans' deflection?

WTF are you watching?

Maybe you'll like this:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2008/10/demtric_evans_plugging_holes_a.html

Evans Played Big Role in Stuffing Barber, Westbrook

While the Redskins lose some pass rush without Jason Taylor at the left end spot, they have not suffered against the run in his absence. Greg Blache continued the rotation of linemen again Sunday in Philadelphia and Demetric Evans had another fine outing filling in for Taylor.

The Eagles and Cowboys were unable to move the ball on the ground, and Evans has to get a lot of credit for that. He's also been able to switch to tackle in the nickel package, and with tackle Cornelius Griffin suffering a shoulder injury during Sunday's game, Evans was more in demand than usual.

and here's another one

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/17/horton-earns-honor-for-week-2-exploits/

Horton recovered a first-quarter fumble forced by Rocky McIntosh that resulted in a field goal. He then intercepted a Drew Brees pass tipped by Fred Smoot that gave the Redskins another field goal and halted New Orleans' comeback hopes when he intercepted a pass deflected by Demetric Evans with 2:59 remaining. Horton finished with four tackles.

So I got the name wrong. Evans had a deflection that led to a Horton pick.

[Thinking Skins]

This is why your entire premise makes no sense. How did we address the offensive and defensive lines?

Meanwhile, we spend draft picks on Manuel White, Nemo Broughton, and now Fred Davis. Fabulous.

Thats the point though. These guys didn't make the team. We tried before and they didn't make the team. Nemo is on the practice squad.

I just went and posted all the players we have on our roster that are younger guys. Notice the number of younger guys we have at the DE and DT position. Notice the number along the OL. Then notice that we have nobody young at the FB/TE position other than Davis and Nemo. Maybe this was a showing that we didn't have much faith in Nemo making the roster.

[Shilsu]

Maybe you'll like this:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2008/10/demtric_evans_plugging_holes_a.html

and here's another one

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/17/horton-earns-honor-for-week-2-exploits/

So I got the name wrong. Evans had a deflection that led to a Horton pick.

Great. So you got the wrong team and the wrong name, and list an example where Evan was put in as DT for a pass rushing situation. And I'm supposed to trust the other drivel you have.

[Thinking Skins]

So now you change your argument around and it still doesn't make much sense since we did not have any injuries in 2005 to expose our problems at DL depth.

I'm not changing my argument. I'm saying that we addressed the depth. And We had Joe Salava there before and he got cut in favor of the young guys. Why must the DL depth be "exposed" before we address it? We did a good job of signing players that year. You're looking at 2006 and saying taht we have depth problems there, but I'm saying not to judge Monty and Golston based on their rookie years because rookies who have gotten better. Monty looked real good last year against the run and Golston has looked good this year.

You're "grasping for straws" hoping to prove this point that we have no talent on the DL. We may not be as talented as you like, but we didn't NEED to draft a DE or DT or OL instead of Davis, Thomas or Kelly.

[Thinking Skins]

Great. So you got the wrong team and the wrong name, and list an example where Evan was put in as DT for a pass rushing situation. And I'm supposed to trust the other drivel you have.

Your point? I said that Evans was playing well. That was one example. The JLC argument proves my point better though.

Here's your quote:

If you think a disproportionate amount of credit goes to our backup DL and backup LB in our wins against Dallas and Philly... Then you are the one grasping for straws.

And here's the JLC opener:

Evans Played Big Role in Stuffing Barber, Westbrook

While the Redskins lose some pass rush without Jason Taylor at the left end spot, they have not suffered against the run in his absence. Greg Blache continued the rotation of linemen again Sunday in Philadelphia and Demetric Evans had another fine outing filling in for Taylor.

The Eagles and Cowboys were unable to move the ball on the ground, and Evans has to get a lot of credit for that. He's also been able to switch to tackle in the nickel package, and with tackle Cornelius Griffin suffering a shoulder injury during Sunday's game, Evans was more in demand than usual.

Now I think that JLC disagrees with you that our backup defensive lineman didn't have a role in stopping the running games of those two teams.

[Ray Brown]

Not trying to get in on the arguement going on here, but back to the original topic for the thread

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=263875

"When Redskins coach Jim Zorn said yesterday that rookie receiver Malcolm Kelly had experienced swelling in his knee in brief action on Sunday oin Philadelphia, eyes rolled in the press room. But Kelly just said that his knee, which was scoped on Aug. 4, was siimply a little stiff and that he would be on the practice field tomorrow and be ready for him to play against St. Louis this week."

[Thinking Skins]

Not trying to get in on the arguement going on here, but back to the original topic for the thread

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=263875

"When Redskins coach Jim Zorn said yesterday that rookie receiver Malcolm Kelly had experienced swelling in his knee in brief action on Sunday oin Philadelphia, eyes rolled in the press room. But Kelly just said that his knee, which was scoped on Aug. 4, was siimply a little stiff and that he would be on the practice field tomorrow and be ready for him to play against St. Louis this week."

queue the :

- we still shouldn't have drafted him

- he needs to sit til he's healthy

- he's only going to make mistakes

- just put him on IR

- I wanted Sweed

- Jackson's a better all around player

- Vinny is stupid

replies.

[Saqs]

Not trying to get in on the arguement going on here, but back to the original topic for the thread

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=263875

"When Redskins coach Jim Zorn said yesterday that rookie receiver Malcolm Kelly had experienced swelling in his knee in brief action on Sunday oin Philadelphia, eyes rolled in the press room. But Kelly just said that his knee, which was scoped on Aug. 4, was siimply a little stiff and that he would be on the practice field tomorrow and be ready for him to play against St. Louis this week."

Good to hear. I'm just eager to see our rooks contribute. Hope he gets some burn on Sunday.

[Ray Brown]

Good to hear. I'm just eager to see our rooks contribute. Hope he gets some burn on Sunday.

i think he and devin, especially devin will get a lot more chances over the next couple weeks to make some plays. Their performance and the experience they gain over the next three weeks could be huge in late, big games this season.

[SonnyJ]

I'm just baffled as to why it is so important that the rookies step up and be counted at this point. :confused:

The team doesn't need them to take any more of a role than what they have right now. Why force something that isn't necessary? Why not just be glad that the team has this untapped potential that is (hopefully) learning the game without the pressure of having to perform immediately, and that the team is playing so well as to not require significant contributions from them? Not to mention that I like the fact that they are playing special teams, which is humbling, yet shows their desire and willingness to contribute to the team.

I'm glad that the team doesn't have to rely on rookies, that they can be brought along slowly in the NFL game. Not to mention the depth that they provide. Cooley or Yoder goes down? Not ideal, but at least the Redskins have an immensely talented option to put in that the defense will have to account for. Moss or ARE hurt? Again, hope it doesn't happen, but how cool is it to be able to sub in big, fast, talented receivers in their place? (BTW, was anyone else surprised at how much bigger Thomas looked than the Eagle CBs?)

I think people might be surprised at how much these rookies could contribute if the Redskins were in the position of needing their contribution. :2cents: