- Joined
- Apr 11, 2009
- Messages
- 49,336
- Reaction score
- 7,223
- Points
- 2,244
- Location
- Greensboro, NC
- Military Branch
- Alma Mater
The question was, what information do you have about Helu's Achilles being an ongoing concern?
 }})
-
Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.
Sproles released... Fit for us?
- Thread starter SilentThreat
- Start date
Lanky Livingston
Guest
No insider info, except that Achilles injuries are particularly prone to re-injury. I'd be scared to rely on him for 16 games.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Rymanofthenorth
BGObsessed
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2010
- Messages
- 5,705
- Reaction score
- 106
- Points
- 143
- Alma Mater
sproles has lost a step and would impede the development of helu and royster. we are not in a position yet where 1-2 guys are gonna be difference makers and even though we are yet again building this team assbackwards, we need to actually start using our damn brains. we need to be looking for cheap players who can play effectively, for more than a year or two, we need to spend resources on positions of weakness not positions where we actually have some youth and depth. is sproles better than the guys we have for 3rd down backs as of right now? possibly but its not like he is worlds better and unlike our young guys , he is not getting better.
the old redskin way was to sign big name free agents on the cusp of their decline and rely on the fact that they were so good that even declining they would at least be decent while they collected that last big payday, but we cant do that if we want to build for long term. if we start signing a bunch of one year wonders who are on the decline, it will show that we are not serious about building a long term dynasty. so again, not just no but hell no.
the old redskin way was to sign big name free agents on the cusp of their decline and rely on the fact that they were so good that even declining they would at least be decent while they collected that last big payday, but we cant do that if we want to build for long term. if we start signing a bunch of one year wonders who are on the decline, it will show that we are not serious about building a long term dynasty. so again, not just no but hell no.
Lanky Livingston
Guest
Very hard to argue any of that.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Ok, agreed, but the difference with Sproles is he's not a bank buster... The whole point I was making was if we can get him on the cheap. I see what you're saying about Helu, but Helu is also 25 and has been beaten out every year since he's been in the league to be the starter. He's due to make $1.4 this year, so Sproles at $1.5 is a better value. Again, I don't want to throw money at Sproles to get him here, but if we could get him at a reasonable number, I feel Bruce and Co. should be open to the option.
Are Helu/Royster a part of our long term plans? I'm not so sure. Helu was supposed to be the guy who excelled out of the backfield and he hasnt done that. He's shown that he's an adequate backup on the short term, but he hasn't shown the development we would have hoped for a guy going into his 4th season. You can't tell me that Helu did any better then pretty much any other backup RB in the league. I hope I'm wrong because I've liked Helu since we got him.. but adding a potentially dynamic player to an offense that lacks a piece that the new OC is know for, shouldn't be dismissed.
As far as 'the old Redskins' goes, you're right. Throwing money at has been players cannot continue. But if we can get him at $1.5 that's not throwing money at him. The difference between us and successful franchises when it comes to signing veterans, is signing the RIGHT veterans. Every team signs players that have been cut by other teams, we've just picked 'the best' ones instead of 'the best fit.'
Bulldog
The Legend
One thing I agree with Shanahan on - don't overpay for running backs. If you need one. , use the draft.
Report: Redskins 'leading contender' for Sproles | Comcast SportsNet Washington
Apparently I'm not alone here... Granted it's CSN reporting something from Bleacher Report so take that for what it's worth, but I guess answers will come (i'm assuming) by the end of the week
Apparently I'm not alone here... Granted it's CSN reporting something from Bleacher Report so take that for what it's worth, but I guess answers will come (i'm assuming) by the end of the week
If we are serious about Sproles, I guess that is an indicator that Chris Thompson is not in the teams plans. I wonder why they haven't released him.
Or Helu/Royster aren't in the teams plans... Of the 3, Helu might have some trade value, the other 2 wouldn't.
I said in a different thread that may be they could package Cousins/Helu to Cleveland for a possible 1st round pick... if they pulled that off, I would bow at the feet of the front office.
I'm on your side with that trade, ST. But not even the Browns are that stupid. Or are they? 
Goaldeje
The Legend
Clearly, you have paid no attention to the Browns front office fiasco this off season, aka, Raiders-East.
Sent from my SCH-R530X using Tapatalk
Sent from my SCH-R530X using Tapatalk
Lanky Livingston
Guest
Browns just traded Trent Richardson to Indy for a first, a move called crazy by many (myself included). After Richardson basically flopped with the Colts, looks like Cleveland isn't as inept as some say. At least in terms of trades.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
I'm on your side with that trade, ST. But not even the Browns are that stupid. Or are they?
People call it crazy, personally i call it the smartest thing Kyle Shanahan can do... you get a starting QB and starting RB who already know you system day 1 of camp? Any new OC would be crazy to not consider it
I don't think that either will amount long-term to anything more than career backups.
OK, but would you have given a first round pick to not have to teach your QB everything about your offense year 1? Or would it be better to focus all that energy on the rest of the offense, letting your QB and RB help in progression? I know I might sound like I'm reaching but it makes total sense to me.
Lol i dont know, maybe i'm off base
The 4th pick overall is a tremendous price.
You and I value Kirk differently, Mike.
And were not alone, apparently Houston is looking to trade for Mallet... MALLET.. I dont care if Clowney is available... if there's a good QB in the draft, you're not looking to trade for someone who has been a backup for 3 years
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)
You haven't joined any rooms.