hunterx Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Did anyone notice that Anthony Armstrong, Niles Paul, Donte Stallworth and Terrance Austin got the looks in the first half? I didn't see Hankerson until mid to late 3rd quarter. Is Hankerson running the risk of getting cut? We all assume he is safe, being a highly touted 3rd round pick. Though he seems to have improved, he might have dropped more passes than caught in the preseason. Shanahan wouldn't dare put a player on the field who he feels is a risk to drop crucial passes is he? Paul seems to have made the most of every opportunity he has had. Heck, on Banks' TD return tonight did you see Paul catching up to him with ease? Watch the highlight on NFL.com if you don't have Preseason Live. Look at the beginning of the return when Banks is in full speed a good 8-10 yards ahead of a (standing still facing the other way) Niles Paul. Then fast-forward to when Banks crosses the Buccs 40 yardline and you see Paul has caught up. He has got to be top 5 on the team in terms of speed. Stallworth just keeps showing up, like Austin has been. When you are ancy to see the young rookies make a move, Stallworth is catching a first down or showing great rapport with the QB's on timing routes. He showed tonight he still has speed to get behind (3rd string) defenders. He showed similar speed last week against the Ravens, but he seemed to not expect the ball and gave up. That's correctable, especially by a veteran. After Bruce Allen hinting that some teams will keep a "special teams" player utilizing the new rules in the CBA, could we see 6 WR's make the team? That would just leave Hankerson and Paul fighting for a spot. Conventional wisdom says you can't quit on a 3rd round pick too early, but solid play and practice by Paul makes you scratch your head, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sekhmet187 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 My guess would be that Paul is on the practice squad this season in case some of the other WRs get injured. The chance that Banks and Moss go all season without missing a game is slim, IMO, and thats not including anything that might happen to some of the other guys. Plus Paul can be stashed easier than a guy like Hankerson who is highly touted. People would pick up Hankerson in a heartbeat and keep him still he improves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZRagone Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Personally I think we go 6 WR's... Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong, and Austin who we use regularly. Paul and Hankerson on the team to help develop. Before someone goes "WAAAA" I think we keep Banks specifically as a KR essentially. I think we keep Paul and Hank easily over Stallworth. We have 3 guys who are definitely set for reliable WR's and one in Austin who looks like he should come into his own this year. I just don't see a lot of benefit to having Stallworth where as I see benefit in keeping Paul and Hankerson here and developing them. I see 25 people on Offense, 24 on Defense, and 4 Special Teamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I wish we could IR Hankerson, but I'm guessing you can't IR anyone anymore unless they actually are legitimately injured. No way he lasts on the PS and no way do you cut a third round pick with so much upside. Paul will go on the PS. He's got some talent but nothing special. I don't think there is any real risk of a team picking him up and even if they do, I don't think it'd be anywhere near as big a loss as losing Hankerson or Banks would be. Speaking of Banks, he's absolutely on the team. The only concern for him is if his knee can hold up, but the way I see it they should use him as much as they can until he wears down. Sounds cruel but that's football. Fact is Banks can literally win games for you with his returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braindx Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Hankerson is a lock. IMO Paul was given the chance to play early to show off what he can do because he could be the odd man out at WR given Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong, Hank, Austin.... that's 5. Usually teams keep 5 or 6 max. There's a spot for Paul or Banks (unless they try to rip another one away from other positions. I think Paul is gonna go to PS. Or they will just make a spot for him on the team and bench him since they're only allowed to dress 46 anyway. Stallworth is getting cut. I fully expect us to go younger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero21 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Paul's going to the practice squad. I'm not sure how you justify using a spot on him instead of Banks, Austin, or Stallworth at this point in his career. Next year, re-evaluate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I think we keep Paul and Hank easily over Stallworth. We have 3 guys who are definitely set for reliable WR's and one in Austin who looks like he should come into his own this year. I just don't see a lot of benefit to having Stallworth where as I see benefit in keeping Paul and Hankerson here and developing them. I don't know how you can say it's "easy" to keep (insert rookie WR name here) over Stallworth. All he's done thru preseason is catch everything thrown to him, always seems open and runs crisp routes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santana_89 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 The chance that Banks and Moss go all season without missing a game is slim, IMO, and thats not including anything that might happen to some of the other guys It's been at least two possibly even three years since Santana has missed a game, perhaps you meant someone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong are givens. Banks IMO solidified himself, though he'll count as a returner. Austin has looked sharp and I think he's gets a spot. The end WR spots have to do well on STs as well, and Stallworth continued to impress me tonight. I think Hankerson has looked well enough and is too much of a risk to be taken if he goes to PS. So IMO Banks stays and we drop the 3rd QB. Moss, Gaffney, AA, Austin, Hankerson, Stallworth, and Banks counts as a returner. Paul has done well enough, but I don't think he's done enough to supplant the others, so he'll go to PS then. JMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrifNick21 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Hankerson dropped, what, two passes? Chill. He's going to make the team. He's going to be too good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswerdlw Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 We keep 6 wide receivers: Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong, Austin, Hankerson and Banks. If we decide to think of Banks as only a return man, then I can see us keeping Paul as well. In that case, we'll probably keep only 3 RBs (Hightower, Helu, Torrain), and put Royster on the PS. I don't see another team going after Royster, and I can see us bringing him up when one of our backs (probably Torrain) is injured. I wonder if Robinson makes it to the PS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZRagone Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I don't know how you can say it's "easy" to keep (insert rookie WR name here) over Stallworth. All he's done thru preseason is catch everything thrown to him, always seems open and runs crisp routes. Simple... Would I put Stallworth on the field before Moss? No. Before Gaffney? No. Before Armstrong? No. Before Austin? Maybe. The majority of our multi-WR sets seems to be 3 wide. At best, we're going 4 wide. We see very few five wide for the skins. And I'd not take Stallworth over any of our first three, and its a toss up for number four. A toss up I'd go with the younger guy with. So that leaves us with the last two spots. Hankerson isn't going to clear waivers if we cut him and has too much talent. You've got to keep him. Which gives us the LAST spot. So we already know, the 5th WR isn't going to get on the field much. So their purpose is going to be covering for injury and/or developing. If one of our top 3 go down for an extended period of time that we absolutely HAVE to have a replacement I think guys like Stallworth will be available. I think the benefit of developing a guy like Paul over having Stallworth sitting on the bench the vast majority of his time is a far larger benefit. If this was last year and it was Stallworth vs Unproven AA, Galloway, and Bobby Wade then I'd say ABSOLUTELY. But with how he stacks up against the top four, I just can't. Top 2 is for playing, Middle 2 is for backup and multi-man sets, Bottom 2 are for developing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I agree, I think we keep Banks as a returner only. I think stallworth is the odd man out, but he should be able to get a job based on his performance I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 If it's a toss up between Stallworth and a young guy than you keep the young guy. We are still rebuliding and you don't keep 30+ year old retreads over young players with promise. Best case scenario we trade Stallworth for a backup OL or DB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AboveLegit Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Moss Gaffney Armstrong Austin Banks Hankerson It's the youth movement people, yes, Stallworth has performed well, but he won't be on this team in the next 3 years. And while Shanahan wants to win now, he realizes the opportunity to develop talent, so he will not demote Hankerson to the PS. As for Paul, I love his potential, but I don't think we carry more than 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coolio47 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 It kinda sucks because a part of me wants us to keep Stallworth but I just don't see how he will fit into our plans, with all these other WRs. But that's when you know competition is high-when every player has played so well that you cannot decide who to keep. Will be interesting to see how the final cuts unfold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Word on 980's postgame is the team are seriously thinking toward keeping 7 wide-out's. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailNatsSkinz Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 @Russellmania980 - Chris Russell As @AlGaldi is reporting, @ESPNRadio980 has learned that #Redskins are leaning heavily towards 7 WR w/final spot between Banks & Stallworth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Let's keep all 8 Honestly I can't remember having such tough decisions regarding WRs. They all can contribute. I hope whoever goes to the practice squad clears waivers cuz I want to hold onto them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Simple...Would I put Stallworth on the field before Moss? No. Before Gaffney? No. Before Armstrong? No. Before Austin? Maybe. The majority of our multi-WR sets seems to be 3 wide. At best, we're going 4 wide. We see very few five wide for the skins. And I'd not take Stallworth over any of our first three, and its a toss up for number four. A toss up I'd go with the younger guy with. So that leaves us with the last two spots. Hankerson isn't going to clear waivers if we cut him and has too much talent. You've got to keep him. Which gives us the LAST spot. So we already know, the 5th WR isn't going to get on the field much. So their purpose is going to be covering for injury and/or developing. If one of our top 3 go down for an extended period of time that we absolutely HAVE to have a replacement I think guys like Stallworth will be available. I think the benefit of developing a guy like Paul over having Stallworth sitting on the bench the vast majority of his time is a far larger benefit. If this was last year and it was Stallworth vs Unproven AA, Galloway, and Bobby Wade then I'd say ABSOLUTELY. But with how he stacks up against the top four, I just can't. Top 2 is for playing, Middle 2 is for backup and multi-man sets, Bottom 2 are for developing. Fair enough. I would assess Austin/Stallworth in the same way. However, he is clutch, we have a PS for "developing" players and don't overlook a critical team component, Special Teams play. Stallworth is a really good Special Teamer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sekhmet187 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 It's been at least two possibly even three years since Santana has missed a game, perhaps you meant someone else? I was saying the odds that neither miss a game, not necessarily both. Moss yes has been healthy the last two years, but hes still had issues in the past and Banks has had them so far too. So odds are one of them might get hurt if not both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswerdlw Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Could we get a 6th or 7th round pick for Stallworth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenspandan Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I was saying the odds that neither miss a game, not necessarily both. Moss yes has been healthy the last two years, but hes still had issues in the past and Banks has had them so far too. So odds are one of them might get hurt if not both. that's just stupid to say one of the most reliable players in the NFL has "had issues". moss is as reliable as anyone in the nfl in terms of injury -- more reliable than most. what are you even talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Could we get a 6th or 7th round pick for Stallworth? I think we'll try always to at the very least trade vet. guys for conditional picks before we outright cut them. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djbubba4life Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 what on earth happened to Aldrick Robinson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.