Sign in to follow this  
Redskinscub

Kendall Fuller is a free agent soon, should we sign him? He is not doing well with the Chiefs

Recommended Posts

We need fresh start as much as possible. No point in bringing him back now, unless KC is will to take Alex Smiths contract off our hands.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without knowing who the DC is, it's tough to say.  It'll be a few years since he was here, a lot will have changed.  We cant bring him back thinking it'll automstically be the same.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not, though is not completely out of the question.   He would slightly upgrade the cornerback unit so its something to look at it, but we are rebuilding, so you don't want to commit a lot of money to a small upgrade.  If you can get him for a good price, then sure, bring him back.  But if he will be expensive, then get a slot corner through the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, philibusters said:

........... but we are rebuilding, so you don't want to commit a lot of money to a small upgrade.  ......

? Are we? Until Bruce is gone I would dispute that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say we stick with Moreland in the slot.  He is only a Rookie and he has had a much better season the Fullers rookie year.  I would say that Morelands Ceiling is higher in the slot.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We absolutely need to add another corner to the mix, especially because Dunbar and Moreau have proven to be so injury prone. I don't think we are going to take Okudah in the draft so we'll need to pick up someone in FA.

 

Given that Kendall enjoyed his highest level of success here, I'd sign him to a 1-year 5/6M deal to man the slot. If he walks, then...great...a comp pick. If not, then we have our long term slot corner. We can let Moreau, Moreland and Simeon Thomas battle it out on the outside for the other starting position. Yes Moreland is smaller but he has more outside corner experience than as a slot corner.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moreau/Dunbar/Fuller would be phenomanal.  Sign me up!  Moreau has proved he's an outside guy.  Fuller was a beast in the slot, and IMO Dunny was a pro-bowl alt snub...if that's even a thing.  Well, it is a thing, I just made it up if it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to know who the Defensive Coordinator and Head Coach will be first.  I would be for it since we are losing Norman and need to figure out longer term plans for Dunbar and Moreau.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm okay rolling with Moreau, Dunbar, and Moreland next year.  We'll see if Danny Johnson builds on a good performance over the next two games. G. Stroman, S. Thomas, and/or a mid to late draft pick should round out the group.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loved him as a nickel corner. He was absolutely lights out the year before he got traded. I haven't followed him since, so I don't know what the problem was for him with the Chiefs. Generally, I'd love to get more aggressive on defense and I love his physical play  and I also don't think he'd be super expensive now that he was basically canned by the Chiefs. If the price is right, and there is somewhat of a logical explanation for his decline, sign me up for this. But we would need a D-coordinator who would play a scheme where he fits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He fractured his thumb and had mid-season surgery...

 

Obviously that's pretty disappointing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

And this was supposed to be one of Scott M's better picks when he was here. I can't believe posters still defend his draft record.   

 

He was the top slot corner in the league, under this DC, his second year.

 

Other picks say what you want, but Fuller was the worst part of the Smith trade before he got hurt.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go for next time

 

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_8#

 

Rule 8. General Rules of Pleading
Primary tabs

(a) Claim for Relief. A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain:
(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support;
(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and
(3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.
(b) Defenses; Admissions and Denials.
(1) In General. In responding to a pleading, a party must:
(A) state in short and plain terms its defenses to each claim asserted against it; and
(B) admit or deny the allegations asserted against it by an opposing party.
(2) Denials—Responding to the Substance. A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the allegation.
(3) General and Specific Denials. A party that intends in good faith to deny all the allegations of a pleading—including the jurisdictional grounds—may do so by a general denial. A party that does not intend to deny all the allegations must either specifically deny designated allegations or generally deny all except those specifically admitted.
(4) Denying Part of an Allegation. A party that intends in good faith to deny only part of an allegation must admit the part that is true and deny the rest.
(5) Lacking Knowledge or Information. A party that lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of an allegation must so state, and the statement has the effect of a denial.
(6) Effect of Failing to Deny. An allegation—other than one relating to the amount of damages—is admitted if a responsive pleading is required and the allegation is not denied. If a responsive pleading is not required, an allegation is considered denied or avoided.
(c) Affirmative Defenses.
(1) In General. In responding to a pleading, a party must affirmatively state any avoidance or affirmative defense, including:
• accord and satisfaction;
• arbitration and award;
• assumption of risk;
• contributory negligence;
• duress;
• estoppel;
• failure of consideration;
• fraud;
• illegality;
• injury by fellow servant;
• laches;
• license;
• payment;
• release;
• res judicata;
• statute of frauds;
• statute of limitations; and
• waiver.
(2) Mistaken Designation. If a party mistakenly designates a defense as a counterclaim, or a counterclaim as a defense, the court must, if justice requires, treat the pleading as though it were correctly designated, and may impose terms for doing so.
(d) Pleading to Be Concise and Direct; Alternative Statements; Inconsistency.
(1) In General. Each allegation must be simple, concise, and direct. No technical form is required.
(2) Alternative Statements of a Claim or Defense. A party may set out 2 or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically, either in a single count or defense or in separate ones. If a party makes alternative statements, the pleading is sufficient if any one of them is sufficient.
(3) Inconsistent Claims or Defenses. A party may state as many separate claims or defenses as it has, regardless of consistency.
(e) Construing Pleadings. Pleadings must be construed so as to do justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.