Welcome to the Redskins Bryce Love RB Stanford

[kingdaddy]

Would love to see Bryce in the backfield with Gibson, TMac, Sims Jr. spread out....lets get creative. If Gibson played WR in college lets get both him and Bryce on the field together. 

[abdcskins]

Out of all the players on our team, I'm cheering for Love the most.  Not sure why, other than I saw him play several times at Stanford and was impressed with his game.  Great vision and speed.  Tearing your ACL in your final college game can only be described as tragic.  I think drafting him in the fourth round was a reach, but he's only 23.  He has a chance to do something still.

[kingdaddy]

24 minutes ago, abdcskins said:

Out of all the players on our team, I'm cheering for Love the most.  Not sure why, other than I saw him play several times at Stanford and was impressed with his game.  Great vision and speed.  Tearing your ACL in your final college game can only be described as tragic.  I think drafting him in the fourth round was a reach, but he's only 23.  He has a chance to do something still.

Wouldn't it be great to see him tear up Dallas on Thanksgiving Day while Chase and Montez each get two sacks? At some point these draft picks have to step up and lead this team out of the basement. Not putting pressure on B. Love, just venting a little. 

[PartyPosse]

I firmly expect Bryce's debut to go something like this:

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[FootballZombie]

His health is irrelevant. Even at 100%, There are virtually no snaps available to this kid right now.

 

Until something changes, it can be hard to fit 4 RBs on a game day roster, let alone getting in the game. Where is he getting his touches?

Opportunity has not been in the cards for Love as of yet.

 

Shame, I'd love to see Love out there one day.

[method man]

4 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

His health is irrelevant. Even at 100%, There are virtually no snaps available to this kid right now.

 

Until something changes, it can be hard to fit 4 RBs on a game day roster, let alone getting in the game. Where is he getting his touches?

Opportunity has not been in the cards for Love as of yet.

 

Shame, I'd love to see Love out there one day.

Why can’t you fit 4 on the game day roster? Try activating 4 receivers and maybe flex McKissic/Gibson into the slot often. 

[CobraCommander]

Peyton Barber has 38 attempts and 81 yards to go with 1 catch and 4 yards. Can't we deactivate him and see what Love has? How can we move forward in 2021 if we don't evaluate all the backs we have.

[goskins10]

4 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

His health is irrelevant. Even at 100%, There are virtually no snaps available to this kid right now.

 

Until something changes, it can be hard to fit 4 RBs on a game day roster, let alone getting in the game. Where is he getting his touches?

Opportunity has not been in the cards for Love as of yet.

 

Shame, I'd love to see Love out there one day.

 

I could not disagree more. Snaps are there if you make room for them. Sit someone if you need to. It's not like any of our RBs have shown to be amazing. Love has huge potential - like top 10 RB production potential. If he is ready, you get him touches - no matter how you have to do it. 

 

 

[Malapropismic Depository]

2 hours ago, Florgon79 said:

Peyton Barber has 38 attempts and 81 yards to go with 1 catch and 4 yards. Can't we deactivate him and see what Love has? How can we move forward in 2021 if we don't evaluate all the backs we have.

 

Because noone else on our team can do what Peyton Barber does, the way that Peyton Barber does it.

Barber is there to get short-yardage 1st Downs, and Goal-Line Touchdowns. He does that. And that's a good reason to have a low yardage total and low YPC avg.

[CobraCommander]

Just now, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Because noone else on our team can do what Peyton Barber does, the way that Peyton Barber does it.

Barber is there to get short-yardage 1st Downs, and Goal-Line Touchdowns. He does that. And that's a good reason to have a low yardage total and low YPC avg.

 

 

Is this sarcasm?  

[Malapropismic Depository]

4 minutes ago, Florgon79 said:

 

 

Is this sarcasm?  

 

Maybe a hint of exaggeration.

But my point is that Barber is a role player, and someone like Love who is somewhat of a dancer/weaver may not fill that role as well. Hence, Barber's  consistent hold on the spot.

[CobraCommander]

4 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Maybe a hint of exaggeration.

But my point is that Barber is a role player, and someone like Love who is somewhat of a dancer/weaver may not fill that role as well. Hence, Barber's  consistent hold on the spot.

Ok then deactivate someone else. Love needs to play 8 games, not get hurt and show us something in order to justify drafting him and having him on this team.

[goskins10]

7 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

His health is irrelevant. Even at 100%, There are virtually no snaps available to this kid right now.

 

Until something changes, it can be hard to fit 4 RBs on a game day roster, let alone getting in the game. Where is he getting his touches?

Opportunity has not been in the cards for Love as of yet.

 

Shame, I'd love to see Love out there one day.

 

Sorry to be piling on here - but I wanted to add there is zero excuse to not get snaps for anyone who you need to look at. Not enough snaps is for a team that is winning, in the hunt, has been playing at a very high level. None of these apply to this team. There is certainly not any group where you can't find snaps. If we had a pro-bowler and 2 high functioning back-ups or 3 guys that together were controlling football games, maybe. But these three? Other groups are the same. None are so loaded you can't get snaps for someone if you want them.  

 

This is a very bad football team still. The coaches are looking at who is going to be with them next year. So you get snaps for whoever you need to get snaps for - no matter the position.

 

So "not enough snaps" is not something anyone on this team should be saying this year, and probably next year too. 

[Est.1974]

2 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

Sorry to be piling on here - but I wanted to add there is zero excuse to not get snaps for anyone who you need to look at. Not enough snaps is for a team that is winning, in the hunt, has been playing at a very high level. None of these apply to this team. There is certainly not any group where you can't find snaps. If we had a pro-bowler and 2 high functioning back-ups or 3 guys that together were controlling football games, maybe. But these three? Other groups are the same. None are so loaded you can't get snaps for someone if you want them.  

 

This is a very bad football team still. The coaches are looking at who is going to be with them next year. So you get snaps for whoever you need to get snaps for - no matter the position.

 

So "not enough snaps" is not something anyone on this team should be saying this year, and probably next year too. 

Disagree. Kyle Allen’s ankle is in too many pieces because Gibson couldn’t block. There’s more to it than just getting snaps. Pardon the pun.

[goskins10]

3 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Disagree. Kyle Allen’s ankle is in too many pieces because Gibson couldn’t block. There’s more to it than just getting snaps. Pardon the pun.

 

Sorry but this honestly makes no sense at all. First, Allen's ankle is broken due to a dirty leg whip and grass. Yea, the blocking was poor but other QB live with poor blocking. It's part of the job - unless someone cheats. How much worse can Love make it if they cheat? None.

 

You guys are way over thinking this - Are you worried about Love getting hurt? Are we waiting for a better line to come along? That is a total waste of time if Love is ready. Good RBs can make average OIlines look good. Maybe he is that guy. The other 3 are definitely not - one has a chance maybe so you give them both touches. But Love needs to see action as soon as he cleared unless the coaches do not think he is ready. If that;s 1, 2, 5 10, 20 snaps, that is up to the coaching staff. 

 

if I were them, unless I saw something in practice that changed my mind, Love is getting some touches as soon as he is ready - not just healthy, but ready. 

[Est.1974]

2 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

Sorry but this honestly makes no sense at all. First, Allen's ankle is broken due to a dirty leg whip and grass. Yea, the blocking was poor but other QB live with poor blocking. It's part of the job - unless someone cheats. How much worse can Love make it if they cheat? None.

Firstly, it’s not non-sense

Secondly, yes the leg whip was dirty

Thirdly, the blocking was very poor. That is why McKissic is predominately the safer option right now.

Lastly, I’d like to see Love get reps, but he must be ready. Not just to run the ball. But also to block, read defences, do the full job. 
 

You said, stick Love in. No caveat, just stick him in. Can’t do any harm. 
 

That makes no sense at all.

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Firstly, it’s not non-sense

Secondly, yes the leg whip was dirty

Thirdly, the blocking was very poor. That is why McKissic is predominately the safer option right now.

Lastly, I’d like to see Love get reps, but he must be ready. Not just to run the ball. But also to block, read defences, do the full job. 
 

You said, stick Love in. No caveat, just stick him in. Can’t do any harm. 
 

That makes no sense at all.

 

LOL  I never said just throw him - nor would I. Of course he has to be ready from the coaches standpoint. That is why you can see below, from my initial comment that I said I was adding to - I state very clearly "if he is ready." I honestly should not even say that - it's an absolute given - but yet I did because i know someone would say - "He has to be ready." I was trying to save us this very conversation. Yet here we are... 🙂  

 

Tto to get this back on track, what I was responding was the statement that there are not enough touches for him even if he is ready - no matter how healthy. I strongly disagree with that statement. My point is, again, if he is ready you get him touches. I stand by that. 

 

 

[kingdaddy]

8 hours ago, Florgon79 said:

Ok then deactivate someone else. Love needs to play 8 games, not get hurt and show us something in order to justify drafting him and having him on this team.

I agree, we need to play Love with Gibson together. Move them around, give them both carries, put McKissic out there too. Barber is not needed, we need to find out about Bryce Love and we need more of Gibson. I think the coaches know this, they are just trying to protect the QB and the vets are better prepared to do that than the kids are. 

[FootballZombie]

We don't have a back on the roster that can properly play Barbers role. When its forth down and you need to send someone up the middle, B Love should not be put in the game. That means Barber's touches are off the table.

 

It will also be a struggle to get him on a game day roster. I don't think I've seen us run a game w/ more than 3 RBs active this season. McK Gibson or Barber will not be displaced by Love, so that means you have to make a move somewhere else just to give him an opportunity to be on a gameday roster.

 

Even after both those hurdles, you come to the biggest issue. In order for Love to play, he has to take reps from either Gibson or McK. Mck is your best all around back, and Gibson has proven to be somewhat dangerous. It would be simply unfeasible to give Love anything outside the bare minimum of scraps. Gibson had 6 carries last game. McK had 3. We are already in a situation where we need to feed those two more, not divide their touches even further. Our regular rotation of backs are barely qualifying as regular contributors and we are supposed to find space for a whole 'nother guy?

 

Unless something happens (fumble benching, injuries) there is very little space for Love. Even if he is hypothetically 100% today.

The good news is Love plays the best possible position for rapid turnover, so by this time next week, things can change.

[goskins10]

5 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

We don't have a back on the roster that can properly play Barbers role. When its forth down and you need to send someone up the middle, B Love should not be put in the game. That means Barber's touches are off the table.

 

It will also be a struggle to get him on a game day roster. I don't think I've seen us run a game w/ more than 3 RBs active this season. McK Gibson or Barber will not be displaced by Love, so that means you have to make a move somewhere else just to give him an opportunity to be on a gameday roster.

 

Even after both those hurdles, you come to the biggest issue. In order for Love to play, he has to take reps from either Gibson or McK. Mck is your best all around back, and Gibson has proven to be somewhat dangerous. It would be simply unfeasible to give Love anything outside the bare minimum of scraps. Gibson had 6 carries last game. McK had 3. We are already in a situation where we need to feed those two more, not divide their touches even further. Our regular rotation of backs are barely qualifying as regular contributors and we are supposed to find space for a whole 'nother guy?

 

Unless something happens (fumble benching, injuries) there is very little space for Love. Even if he is hypothetically 100% today.

The good news is Love plays the best possible position for rapid turnover, so by this time next week, things can change.

 

 

I am not sure why you keep beating this same drum. We are NOT a good team. So there is no rotation to protect here. You are acting like these are 3 great backs with excellent production. Could it be that McK only got 3 carries because they don't have much faith in him. And no one to take Barbers role?  LOL  We are 2-6! LOL  The only thing the coaches should be doing right now is evaluating who will be on the team next year. To do that, they need to play. Love has the potential to easily be the best back on the team. He would have gone 1st rd had he not been injured so badly. Not the draft position matters- more about his potential. And you want to make him sit for 2 journeyman RBs? They have no role. Not on a 2-6 football team.  

 

Not to mention you can always get Gibson reps at WR - sit one of them so you can get 4 RBs on the game day roster. Or is our WR corp so great we can't afford at 2-6 to sit one out? 

 

Bryce Love needs to play. And if the coaches think he is ready, sit whoever you need to sit so he can play. We know what we have in the other 3 - and it isn't much. Give Love the rock! 

[Darrell Green Fan]

27 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

I am not sure why you keep beating this same drum. We are NOT a good team. So there is no rotation to protect here. You are acting like these are 3 great backs with excellent production. Could it be that McK only got 3 carries because they don't have much faith in him. And no one to take Barbers role?  LOL  We are 2-6! LOL  The only thing the coaches should be doing right now is evaluating who will be on the team next year. To do that, they need to play. Love has the potential to easily be the best back on the team. He would have gone 1st rd had he not been injured so badly. Not the draft position matters- more about his potential. And you want to make him sit for 2 journeyman RBs? They have no role. Not on a 2-6 football team.  

 

Not to mention you can always get Gibson reps at WR - sit one of them so you can get 4 RBs on the game day roster. Or is our WR corp so great we can't afford at 2-6 to sit one out? 

 

Bryce Love needs to play. And if the coaches think he is ready, sit whoever you need to sit so he can play. We know what we have in the other 3 - and it isn't much. Give Love the rock! 

 

I have been a big fan of the Bryce pick from the start. I can't wait to see him play. And I'm no fan of Barber who is a pedestrian back. But he does fill a roll that the other backs can not fill, I'm not sure why you keep arguing this point.   When it's 1st and goal at the 2 you don't give the ball to an inexperienced Gibson or a small back, you give it to your bigger short yardage back.

[goskins10]

20 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

I have been a big fan of the Bryce pick from the start. I can't wait to see him play. And I'm no fan of Barber who is a pedestrian back. But he does fill a roll that the other backs can not fill, I'm not sure why you keep arguing this point.   When it's 1st and goal at the 2 you don't give the ball to an inexperienced Gibson or a small back, you give it to your bigger short yardage back.

 

I get what you are saying and overall agree. But since we are not winning if Barber is the one you have to sit then sit him. I would be surprised if they did for the reasons you said. I think there are many other options. 

 

So my point was not really about Barber just that you need see what you have in Love. If the only the way coaches see it, is to do without the short yardage back, then I am OK with it. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

22 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

I get what you are saying and overall agree. But since we are not winning if Barber is the one you have to sit then sit him. I would be surprised if they did for the reasons you said. I think there are many other options. 

 

So my point was not really about Barber just that you need see what you have in Love. If the only the way coaches see it, is to do without the short yardage back, then I am OK with it. 

 

The problem is Ron is actually trying to win games, he sees the division still within reach so you can't blame him. This is not preseason, these are live games. And he owes it to his team to try to win on Sunday, not to sit a player who fills a roll just to get a look at another player. 

[goskins10]

Just now, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

The problem is Ron is actually trying to win games, he sees the division still within reach so you can't blame him. This is not preseason, these are live games. And he owes it to his team to try to win on Sunday, not to sit a player who fills a roll just to get a look at another player. 

 

Barber was a very very minor part of my overall comment that Love needs to get a look. Not once did I say, Barber HAS to be the guy. In fact I said I would find it very unlikely given the very reasons you stated - so in fact agreeing with you. The only thing I added is that if that is what the team needs to do then I would understand.  

 

If you are trying to make the point that Bareber should NEVER be the guy, OK. I just disagree. I don't think anyone should be off limits. Just to be clear, again I would seriously doubt they sit Barber. There are too many other options to get Love in the game.