Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


WR McCardell considering signing with Redskins, Texans

Locker Room Main Forum


 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 06-20-2007, 07:26 PM   #11
SmootSmack
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
Re: WR McCardell considering return to NFL with Redskins, Texans

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmil12 View Post
Numbers don't lie...here are the last three years for both players. Does this explain why McCardell would be a better receiver then Thrash? McCardell has almost as many reception last year as thrash has had the last three years combined.

Thrash:
2004 WAS 17 203 11.9 0
2005 WAS 14 194 13.9 0
2006 WAS 12 151 12.6 1

McCardell:
2004 SDG 31 393 12.7 1
2005 SDG 70 917 13.1 9
2006 SDG 36 437 12.1 1
Sure, but I don't think we're talking about Thrash or Keenan as the #1 guy here. We're talking about the #4 receiver. When you're talking about the #4 receiver I don't think number of catches is the key factor to look at. These are the guys who are, as previously mentioned, playing special teams; making the key block on a long run, and all those other intangibles.

Sure, if injuries happen and the #4 becomes the #1 then yeah you want Keenan over Thrash. But you can't approach it that way.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.29716 seconds with 11 queries