inmate running the asylum Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Hmm. Is this true? I mean come on. The Skins had to deactive 8 players yesterday, so who else could they have deactivated? As it was, Taylor Jacobs was activated, but didn't play either. -- McCants Falling Out of Favor -- Mon Sep 13, 2004 --from FFMastermind.com WTEM reports Washington Redskins WR Darnerien McCants, who tied for the team lead in touchdown catches last season, was a surprise inactive for Sunday's game against the Buccaneers. McCants entered training camp battling WR James Thrash for the third wide receiver spot, but has apparently angered or disappointed coaches. The Washington Post adds McCants has lost out to WR Taylor Jacobs for the final slot at that position on the active roster. Washington gave McCants a four-year, $4.5 million contract extension in the offseason, including a $2 million signing bonus, making the decision to list him as inactive even more surprising. Jacobs dressed for the game but did not play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaveli Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Didnt Gibbs say he reminded him of Art Monk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenchild Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I don't see how that could be true. I mean, the guy was one of the first players to comment on Gibbs coming back, and he was enthusiastic as can be. The only thing that would "anger" the coaches, I'd think, would be a lack of effort. But if he played hard for Spurrier and sounded psyched about playing for Gibbs, why would he turn lazy? I'm thinking it's because the rest of the wideouts are pretty impressive, not because of his own faults. Jacobs probably was activated because he's a solid STer, although I'm not sure if he got in there at all. And obviously Thrash is the perfect Gibbs player, so there ain't no way he's ever gonna be inactive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjinhan Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 umm IMHO Gibbs' game plan was to pound the ball and use max protect almost every time we passed... no point of activating so many WRs... i think throughout the season Jacobs and McCant will take turns being active for the game depending on what Gibbs want to do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 how many thread topics are you going to start today that has aready being posted and discussed??? :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I think D Mac will have to work on his run blocking and it depends on matchups against future opponents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Jacobs is the only guy on the Roster with plenty of upside and speed. It is my opinion that if Coles goes down with injury Jacobs will see the field in order to keep the defense honest. McCants and Thrash compete for the slot receiver/3rd reciever spot and so far Thrash is winning. Basically I don't think it's as simple as 1-5 depth chart. Different gusy for different things. Right now McCants is the odd man out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 it sounds like he was one player chosen along with several others that was deactivated this week. - one "source" suggests it means doom. Now, every week are we going to assume who ever doesn't play has fallen out of favor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmchairRedskin Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I think Gibbs was really restricting the passing game in favor of the run. I'm thinking he isn't really too confident in our passing game as of yet. Might change against NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Could character be an issue? Was he hurt? We've seen Darnerian produce on the field so if he has fallen from grace, I would suspect something other than lack of acheivement on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afparent Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 On the Joe Gibbs Show he explained that he wished he could carry five receivers but he can't. I think what we have to get use to is Gibbs will and did carry 8 linemen yesterday and 3 or 4 TE/HB. By doing this he can only dress 3 RB and 4 WRs. This is probably not ordinary and definitely against what the ole ball coach would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiredGun Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Just a thought but could it be that he hasn't practiced well? In training camp he looked horrible but just about everyones account. I even heard a few jokes that if he keeps it up he might be Mr 30/70. Could it be he just isnt concentrating like he did last year? Perhaps he isnt blocking downfield the way he should or fighting for the jump etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlsbadd Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I wouldn't worry about McCants very much, I don't think he did much untill the later part of last season also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSchwartz Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I think the problem is the fact that Gardner, Thrash, and McCants are the "possession" receivers, while Coles and Jacobs are the "speed" receivers. So in order for McCants to see the field he will have to be ahead of Thrash and not necessarily Jacobs. And to beat out Thrash McCants will have to prove that he can do all of the things on STs at which Thrash excels. If you look at the depth chart at redskins.com you will see Gardner, Thrash, and McCants listed at one wr spot, while Coles and Jacobs are listed at the other spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GEB Posted September 14, 2004 Share Posted September 14, 2004 Originally posted by TheSchwartz I think the problem is the fact that Gardner, Thrash, and McCants are the "possession" receivers, while Coles and Jacobs are the "speed" receivers. So in order for McCants to see the field he will have to be ahead of Thrash and not necessarily Jacobs. And to beat out Thrash McCants will have to prove that he can do all of the things on STs at which Thrash excels. If you look at the depth chart at redskins.com you will see Gardner, Thrash, and McCants listed at one wr spot, while Coles and Jacobs are listed at the other spot. Good points Schwartz. I agree that Jacobs is most probably more of a back up to Coles rather than the other WR's. Outside of Coles & Jacobs I don't think there are any other WR's on the roster that can truely stretch a Def....so Jacbos does fill more of a speed (or should I say Gary Clark) role. Thrash can adequately serve as a back up to Gardner and provide a more solid & experienced (and we know how much Joe values experience fellas) ST player than DC can. While I think very highly of DC, I also believe that Thrash probably fits better in the starting roster right NOW (not the future - DC is young and we have him under contract for a few more years - plenty of time to develop). It's all good.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagletooth Posted September 14, 2004 Share Posted September 14, 2004 I'm not sure why a guy like McCants or even Sultan do not play special teams? Seems like guys who are not front line starters or primary backups would be begging Gibbs to play on special teams. I know you need some big meat heads in there to break the wedge, but if Smooty can play on teams then so could DMac or Sultan. Seems like anyone could, so long as they are willing to throw their body around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.