Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

I think at this point it will be

Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hankerson
Banks

Paul and/or Robinson to the PS. Also once Paul is on the PS, can't he decline an offer to join another team? I've heard of that happening before, like last year with some rb on our practice squad who wanted to stay because of Shanny's system. Not saying it won't happen with Paul but you never know.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=mooby;827938]I think at this point it will be

Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hankerson
Banks

Paul and/or Robinson to the PS. Also once Paul is on the PS, can't he decline an offer to join another team? I've heard of that happening before, like last year with some rb on our practice squad who wanted to stay because of Shanny's system. Not saying it won't happen with Paul but you never know.[/quote]

I believe you're thinking of James Davis who had the choice of joining our practice squad, and I believe Indy's, but chose ours in large part because of the system..which apparently kept him down and led to his release

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=saden1;827919]#1 Moss
#2 Gaffney
#3 Armstrong
#4 Austin
#5 Stallworth
#6 Hankerson

Practice Squad:
Paul, Robinson

Banks is making the team as a Special Teamer much like our punter and kicker.[/quote]

this seems to make the most sense, that's still a lot of "WR" spots though. I don't think they'd keep that many on the 53 AND 2 on the PS. i don't think robinson makes it.

daniels, sellers, and banks would be nice people to find a spot for. daniels in jarvis, banks in clemons spot, and sellers instead of the 9th OL or whatever since we don't have enough quality bodies yet to justify roster space.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=mooby;827938]I think at this point it will be

Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hankerson
Banks

Paul and/or Robinson to the PS. Also once Paul is on the PS, can't he decline an offer to join another team? I've heard of that happening before, like last year with some rb on our practice squad who wanted to stay because of Shanny's system. Not saying it won't happen with Paul but you never know.[/quote]

active roster pays 3-5x more than the practice squad, so...

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=That Guy;827943]active roster pays 3-5x more than the practice squad, so...[/quote]

So maybe if he wants more money he joins an active roster elsewhere, but it's not uncommon for ps players to decline spots on other teams' rosters if they feel more comfortable with where they're at. Either way we'll see, I'm just happy that we have this problem to begin with.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=SmootSmack;827941]I believe you're thinking of James Davis who had the choice of joining our practice squad, and I believe Indy's, but chose ours in large part because of the system..which apparently kept him down and led to his release[/quote]

I believe you're right. Funny how that worked out. And technically he's not released yet, we still own his rights just in case he does decide to come back (which will probably lead to his release).

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

I think he actually did finally get released

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hankerson
--------------
Stallworth - If we cut Clemmens, then we could possibly keep Stallworth as a 6th?
Paul - PS
Banks - PS
Robinson - PS

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=SmootSmack;827950]I think he actually did finally get released[/quote]

Oh. Well then I guess I am mistaken.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Bucket;827953]Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hankerson
--------------
Stallworth - If we cut Clemmens, then we could possibly keep Stallworth as a 6th?
Paul - PS
Banks - PS
Robinson - PS[/quote]

No way Banks lands on the PS. It's either active roster or another team for him.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Just a thought here, but does Banks have any trade value?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Jontrem;827960]Just a thought here, but does Banks have any trade value?[/quote]

Probably minimal. Teams will try to devalue him because of the NFL's new kickoff rule.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

I would absolutely hate to lose Banks. He's a playmaker... we don't have many playmakers. There's always room for players like him. It's not like he's only a return man, he can play some receiver too. We just have to find ways to get him the ball, that's the coaches job.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Bucket;827953]Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hankerson
--------------
Stallworth - If we cut Clemmens, then we could possibly keep Stallworth as a 6th?
Paul - PS
Banks - PS
Robinson - PS[/quote]

Banks can't go on the PS.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Kindoy;827998]I would absolutely hate to lose Banks. He's a playmaker... we don't have many playmakers. There's always room for players like him. It's not like he's only a return man, he can play some receiver too. We just have to find ways to get him the ball, that's the coaches job.[/quote]

Banks value significantly dropped with that kickoff rule. I really couldn't tell you how good is Banks as a WR, I feel like I haven't seen enough of him and he didn't get the chance to showcase that this offseason. Unfortunately, I just can't see the team keeping Banks over Austin.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

If I had to choose between Banks and Paul as our final WR, would choose Paul (bigger with more upside).

Banks' value has declined but as a KR he's more valuable this year than say Niles Paul. And he's more valuable as a KR than Paul would be as an inactive 6th receiver

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

We need to keep Banks because he's a little big like Devin Hester, since Rex Grossman is our starting quarterback he's be perfect.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Isn't there a new rule for this year where you can have 46 players active instead of 45?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

I don't think we need to keep Banks. Austin and Armstrong showed the same explosiveness. With kickoffs being the way they are now. I would say cut Banks.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=jonny5dicky;828038]We need to keep Banks because he's a little big like Devin Hester, [B]since Rex Grossman is our starting quarterback he's be perfect[/B].[/quote]

:doh:

wide receiver thread to ehh?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

MY GOD! can someone get banned for polluting every thread with the same crap?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

We're gonna need to get Gaffney at starting receiver so he and Rex can be reunited on the main stage. Armstrong and Austin make nice slot receivers and I don't know what to do with Donte Stallworth

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[QUOTE=jonny5dicky;828048]We're gonna need to [B]get Gaffney at starting receiver so he and Rex can be reunited on the main stage[/B]. Armstrong and Austin make nice slot receivers and I don't know what to do with Donte Stallworth[/QUOTE

It is the.....sole purpose for my existence..J5

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hank

PS- Paul
IR - Banks

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Get well soon JJ!!!!! Hate to hear it cause uv impressed me and thats hard to do cause im sooo crusty!!! I would also like to appologize for cursing like a sailor when the skins picked you and i seen one of your highlight films, you made me eat my words. Rehab it a come back a beast!!!!!

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Moss
Gaffney
Grossman
Drew Rosenhaus
Austin

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=jonny5dicky;828038]We need to keep Banks because he's a little big like Devin Hester, since Rex Grossman is our starting quarterback he's be perfect.[/quote]

:laughing- He even manages to turn discussions about kick/punt returners into Grossman. There's no way he can be serious. Bravo man, bravo.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Stallworth
Austin
Hankerson

All of these guys have to be on the team.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=mooby;828090]:laughing- He even manages to turn discussions about kick/punt returners into Grossman. There's no way he can be serious. Bravo man, bravo.[/quote]

I cant even be 100% sure as to what he means by all that drivel, how did you decipher it?

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=Jontrem;828095]I cant even be 100% sure as to what he means by all that drivel, how did you decipher it?[/quote]

What's to decipher? He just wrote that last sentence as a means to insert Grossman into a completely unrelated conversation. It doesn't matter whether it makes sense or not. He may be a troll, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't entertained.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Hahaha

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=IrMitchell;828094]Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Stallworth
Austin
Hankerson

All of these guys have to be on the team.[/quote]

stallworth definitely does not have to be on the team

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

Banks lost value but he still has SOME value. Like Smooty said, Paul doesn't have any value as a 6th (inactive) receiver. I think we all can agree that Banks can make plays in the open field, so it's on the coaches to get him the ball in the open field. Banks will hopefully get to return a couple kicks a game, not to mention punts and it's not about scoring every time but rather field position...

[QUOTE=SirClintonPortis;828061]Moss
Gaffney
Armstrong
Austin
Hank

PS- Paul
IR - Banks[/QUOTE]

This seems to be common consensus amongst my buds. Not starting order persay.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

So weird how last season we're pulling our hair out over Joey Galloway and Devin Thomas, now it seems like we have a promising WR corps. What a difference a year makes.

Re: Redskins Receivers Rotation
 

[quote=12thMan;828225]So weird how last season we're pulling our hair out over Joey Galloway and Devin Thomas, now it seems like we have a promising WR corps. What a difference a year makes.[/quote]

That's what happens when you replace father time and a pompous d-bag with promising rookies and proven veterans.