WR McCardell considering signing with Redskins, Texans

[MTK]

Why does a player have to have a future to be worth signing? You can't have an entire team full of young guys, veterans have to be part of the mix as well. We have our share of youth at WR with guys like Moss, ARE and Lloyd all under the age of 30.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Why does a player have to have a future to be worth signing? You can't have an entire team full of young guys, veterans have to be part of the mix as well. We have our share of youth at WR with guys like Moss, ARE and Lloyd all under the age of 30.

That is what I have been saying

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

That is what I have been saying

Someone needs to train you on sig etiquette. How many lines and spaces do you really need?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Why does a player have to have a future to be worth signing? You can't have an entire team full of young guys, veterans have to be part of the mix as well. We have our share of youth at WR with guys like Moss, ARE and Lloyd all under the age of 30.

OR, we could give Espy a shot, and if he doesn't set the world on fire, cut him and move on with 4 recievers on the 53 man.

I don't get this. Are we happy letting Lloyd and ARE prove themselves or not? We say we are, and now we want McCardell?

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

OR, we could give Espy a shot, and if he doesn't set the world on fire, cut him and move on with 4 recievers on the 53 man.

I don't get this. Are we happy letting Lloyd and ARE prove themselves or not? We say we are, and now we want McCardell?

Remember that the people who are considering this have been watching OTA's. I've heard Campbell, Mcintosh, and Cooley singled out for praise, but not Lloyd. If they see a problem I would like them address it now. Let's not limp along hoping things improve on their own.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I don't have a problem with vets. What I have a problem with is that since he's rejected our veteran minimum offer, that we'll overpay for a position that we need to explore what we have in, or else we're going to stunt their growths.

For me, I feel like signings like that are for when you're on the cusp and just need one more guy to put you over the top.

[SmootSmack]

Anyone else think this thread title is sort of misleading? Saying he's considering "return to NFL" makes it sound like he's Cris Carter, and has sat out for a few years. He played 11 games just last year

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

when you put it that way it does seem a little misleading.

[freddyg12]

I see both sides of this, and as I mentioned earlier I'd love to see Espy break out & make the roster from day 1, but let's not get carried away thinking that he is based on some good preseason games last year. I think we have a tendency to over value some guys w/the hope that they become good players, but truth is they're a dime a dozen till they prove otherwise.

KM is old, but I bet he can beat out espy as a wr. If we add spec. teams in, that's a different story, but first Espy has to show the coaches enough as a wr to make the case.

[MTK]

Just 4 WRs?

That's leaving things a little thin there.

I don't think McCardell is a threat to Lloyd or ARE's playing time. He'll be a quality guy for depth and situational type stuff.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Just 4 WRs?

That's leaving things a little thin there.

I don't think McCardell is a threat to Lloyd or ARE's playing time. He'll be a quality guy for depth and situational type stuff.

Thin, of course, but if you use Betts, Cooley, Cartwright, and even maybe ST's services there, you'd have a hard time convincing me that Al Saunders (or anyone else for that matter) couldn't come up with a creative way to use his personel.

We'd have to have 3 receivers out at one time before we ever have to pull someone up off the practice squad.

And its not like its unprecidented. We only had 4 recievers in 2005 and Gibbs used his personel masterfully.


What type of personel package would we have to come up with to have Saunders sit there all like, "You know which NFL player this package needs to work? Keenan McCardell!"

I'm just wondering what skill McCardell brings that makes him a valuable situational player.

[theJBexperience]

A Keenan McCardell signing doesn't really excite me. It would basically admit that we really screwed up with the B Lloyd and ARE acquisitions.

Has there been any development to the possibility of trading for Aaron Schobel?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'm just wondering what skill McCardell brings that makes him a valuable situational player.

Experience, good hands, good size, as JLC alludes to on his blog:

In 2005, though, McCardell started all 16 games, had 70 catches had nearly 1,000 yards; he caught 9 TDs and had 50 first-down catches - which is exactly the kind of thing the Skins need, someone savvy to move the chains and make catches in the high-traffic areas

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Experience, good hands, good size, as JLC alludes to on his blog:

Alright. Fair point by JLC.

I would still think that the rare occurence of a situation in which we need McCardell over Moss is probably not enough to warrent a roster spot for McCardell, but I could at least see that.

Just be poor roster management, IMO.

[Warrior1971]

I say sign him, we need a go to guy on 3rd down and he fits the bill compaired to what we currently have. Why is most people on this forum so against bringing in proven talent. Look at Henry Ellard, Irvin Fryer (my spelling may be off here)they were at thier end but still produced descent numbers. We can always use a depth guy who can fill some voids at times (as long as we don't over pay them for thier services), keep an open mind 16 game seasons require good depth not pitty on certain players because we feel they need a pitty party to stay on the team. If they can not help us, we don't need them no matter who the player is. We need to win this year, we will worry about next year after this season is over.