NVskinsfan Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 We can all expect Cincy to be knocking on the door for Watson...Don't worry as he will not be unemployed for long! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GURU Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Matt Kyriacou, you are an idiot. By your logic, Art Monk should have been benched, and maybe even cut, after dropping two consecutive, potnential game-winning passes in the end zone in the last minute of a game against the Rams during the '88 season. It happened. It's true. It's fact. By some morons' standards, no receiver with Monk's experience and reputation should EVER drop a pass that hits him in the hands. In fact, in some other threads, some have quoted John Madden saying that if a pass hits you in the hands, you should catch it. But it happens. It happens to the very best. It happens to Jerry Rice. It happens to Marvin Harrison. It happens to Terrell Owens. Hell, when the Bears beat the 49ers a couple of seasons ago on a Mike Brown interception return for a TD in overtime, it was off a pass that bounced right off Owens' hands. Are we holding Kenny Watson to even higher standards than these guys? Look, I can't predict greatness for Watson. But who could have predicted greatness for Priest Holmes, who was another undrafted free agent? The fact is, this Redskins team needs players that set the standards for other players. Kenny Watson worked as hard, if not harder than, any player on the team. He set the bar with his work ethic. EVERY TIME he hit the field, he produced something positive, even if not neccessarily impressive. And from what I've seen, Kenny Watson runs Spurrier's beloved draw play better than ANYBODY on this roster. The guy averaged over 12 yards a carry out of the shotgun formation, last season. He had a HUGE first down with a draw play for 7 yards on 3rd and 5 against Dallas in the final game when the Skins needed it the most. He had only two carries Thursday, but one of them went for a first down on third down on, well, a draw play. I think this move was a mistake. If you are going to carry only two QBs, it makes more sense to keep a guy like Watson rather than a safety like Franz. What the hell? What kind of message does that send to players when you cut one of your hardest working players who does nothing but produce for guys with "potential." I just hope this doesn't come back to haunt them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 I don’t get all this emotion over Watson…. WTF, McDonalds start putting estrogen in their happy meals? Watson would have been productive – Betts will be productive. Just don’t get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boozeman3 Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Originally posted by nfchamp1 What are their 40 times? Betts had a pretty good 40 coming out of college. But that does not mean jack squat. You guys kept the better player, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 No, draftorder isn't the only thing that determines upside but it does probably have something to do with it. My point is simply that Watson and Betts were more or less even in terms of output and, in my opinion (and obviously the opinion of the FO, Betts was ahead of Watson in terms of potential. Watson is fine as a running back in the NFL but he's not special. I don't understand why we're acting like we just cut a sure-fire stud. He will not be missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 If Trung fails us, and we look to the bench and Betts is still nursing some injury, we'll miss Watson then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryman of the North Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Gamebreaker i couldnt agree more i cant believe that we are only carrying 2 QBs and couldnt find a way to keep watson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Originally posted by Gamebreaker If Trung fails us, and we look to the bench and Betts is still nursing some injury, we'll miss Watson then. No we won't. We will just hand it to the Sultan and watch him take it to the house. :high: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 I hate the "odd man out" mentality. All it's basically saying is,"We're not keeping you on the team because we didn't bring you here. The last coach did. Forget the fact that you outplayed our guy, forget the fact that your more durable than him. He's our second draft pick, and we're giving him a third chance to be something in this league because you weren't even drafted. Thanks anyway!" Every year we see another player become a probowler, when he wasn't even drafted or was a second day draft pick. People are quick to forget the players that become extremely productive, despite the scouts saying they didn't have what it takes. Rod Smith, Terrell Davis, and Zach Thomas come to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spear Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 and obviously the opinion of the FO, Betts was ahead of Watson in terms of potential So you're citing the Bug-Eyed Menace as the final word on which player was the better back... I hope that sinks in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Just my curiousity, why the hell FO drafted Betts when we already had Watson if both of them happened to have the same running style?? Finally, we have to cut one RB that could provide us good depth and had to trade picks for help along the questionable D-line. None sense for me at all. This is why Cerrato's picks are always very doubtful for me. We have wasted so many mid-rounders. Not to mention Lloyd Harrison. :doh: C'mon. :jerkoff: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Well Duke, to be fair I think no one knew about Watson including the coaches and FO really until last year. He was a practice squader that was undrafted and showed a little spark. They rated Betts highly and obviously were planning to make last year Stephen's last. Watson came on and proved himself the equal of Betts (statistically speaking). I go back and forth. Two months ago, it was a foregone conclusion on this board that Watson would be cut. Of course, then we were going with three rb's. He certainly did nothing to merit his cutting. Betts, unfortunately did not do much to merit his keeping. Sultan had one very nice rb game and a couple good st plays last week. I think I would have rather traded Betts and kept Watson, but this was almost a foreordained move. Actually, I'm a little more upset about Cowsette. I remember him doing pretty well for us last year in his limited opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woofer Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Originally posted by codeorama I'm not sure why so many of you are so upset yet. It seems like you would rather have Betts cut than Watson. Betts in my opinion and obviously the opinion of other teams has much more value than Watson, but, me personally, I'd send Sultan to the practice squad. Watson didn't do anything great in the preseson, Sultan did ok, but nothing great, and Betts didn't hardly play because of his elbow, but in the limited action that he did have, he made some nice runs up the middle, runs that no one else on the roster makes. You are correct in stating that would have rather seen Betts cut than Watson. But - that is based more on last season than anything seen in this pre-season. Watson was clearly the better back last year, and can be counted on to grind out yardage when you need a sustained drive. And despite Spurrier's reputation for passing, he calls a good number of running plays. Hopefully, Watson will be signed to the practice squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Matt Kyriacou Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Originally posted by GURU Matt Kyriacou, you are an idiot. Guru, you are a nutsack. I was actually half kidding. We have seen Kenny Watson's ceiling as far as I am concerned. The kidding part come from the fact that his gaffe was against Dallas and the standard should be that anyone who eff's up against Dallas needs to be gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Betts played as good as Watson last year with fewer snaps, and missing most of the year because he was a rookie. Watson was cut because he had little to no market value (or he would have been traded), and did not have the upside that Betts has. To bad, so sad…. next caller ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeCarl Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Matt: I hated that gaffe in the first Dallas game as much as you did. I particularly hated that it made rookie Roy Williams look better than he is (most of us could have caught that pop up and strolled in for the score). But remember the 2nd Dallas game? Antonio Bryant had utterly owned Smoot for about 170 yards. It was late in the game and we had the ball and it was 3rd and 6. If we have to turn the ball over, there's no doubt in my mind that Dallas goes right back to Bryant for an easy score. But Kenny Watson gutted it out for 7 yards. We kept the ball, ran out the clock and won the game, breaking that horrible streak. a) Doesn't Kenny get any love for the good plays as well as the bad? and How come we shouldn't cut Smoot for that day? It was one of the worst CB performances in Redskin history, ranking right up there with the game was made an ancient Boomer Esiason look like Johnny Unitas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinMac Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Is this thread made up of a bunch of Watson family members? There is no way anyone can say that Watson has been more productive than Betts. Look at the numbers, keeping in mind that Watson played in 5 more games than Betts (that is very important). Rushing, yards per carry: Betts 4.7 Watson 4.6 Receiving, yards per reception Betts 12.8 Watson 7.9 (this with a 62 yarder against NO) Kick return yards (avg) Betts 24.6 Watson 21.5 All purpose yards, per game played Betts 104.6 Watson 80.8 Everyone is in love with Watson because he was an undrafted free agent, and it's totally clouding the judgement of board members. This was not about politics. He was the odd man out because he was last on the depth chart. I'm sorry if that bothers some of you in the Watson camp, but it is a total fact. You can't dispute the numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 well, I can see the arguments in favor of Watson (hard work, demonstrated leadership on ST, productivity in 2002) and Betts (high pick, upside potential, contract, etc)................ my point is that at SOME point on a team that has floundered at or just below .500 the past 3 seasons, PERFORMANCE has to start counting more and POTENTIAL less the question to me is whether Watson's 534 yards and 2 100 yard games in 2002 was enough productivity to allow for keeping him over Betts. I am willing to go with the staff and FO in deciding that Betts was the better risk and fit for this team. At the same time I am cognizant of the fact that other coaches and front office people may have chosen to keep Watson and trade Betts. We shall see whether keeping ALL the draft picks such as Betts, Russell, etc.....regardless of how they have performed to date is the reasonable and long-sighted course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Matt Kyriacou Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Carl: I'm with you. My comment really was made partially in jest. I agree with you completely about Smoot's performance. Let us not forget Davis laying it on the turf as we are trying to run out the clock for the win on MNF. Players who have cost us against Dallas just stick out a bit more in my recollection. Certainly it was huge that we were able to run out the clock behind Kenny in game 2. My post was not made with real seriousness as far as him needing to go based on that play. It was just a poke at the old and thankfully ended streak. I have no favorites among the RB's at the moment and have not seen the first preseason play. I was in Australia for two weeks and preseason Redskin games are tough to come by in Atlanta as well. I hope that we made the right move and that Sultan is all that I have read about on the board and more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeCarl Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Matt: I think I knew you weren't serious. I'm just sort of a Kenny fan ever since I met him and some of his family up in Carlisle. And Lord help us all if I were ever given a 'Cut That Guy' button that was wired to Snyder's office. There aren't many players who'd have survived a season with my twitchy thumb on the button. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.