Skip to content

Need to Know: Redskins Stock up/Stock down vs. Bucs

Sep 1, 2016, 5:34 AM EDT

Sudfeld-Brown

Here is what you need to know on this Thursday, September 1, two days before the Washington Redskins cut their roster to 53 players.

Timeline

Today’s schedule: Off day, no availability

—The Redskins last played a game that counted 233 days ago. It will be 11 days until they host the Steelers in their 2016 season opener.

Days until: Cowboys @ Redskins 17; Browns @ Redskins 31; Redskins @ Ravens 38

Stock up/stock down vs. the Bucs

Up—If Mack Brown had stopped after his 60-yard touchdown list he would have been up but he didn’t quit there. I still don’t think he will make the 53 but it’s hard to say he doesn’t deserve to.

DownLogan Paulsen is on the bubble and he won’t work himself onto the good side of it with his performance against the Bucs. His three first-half drops kept Nate Sudfeld from getting untracked.

UpRobert Kelley saw some action and rushed for 99 yards on 16 carries. He was a lock before the game but he could be earning some running back by committee carries.

Down—All Matt Ioannidis had to do to lock up a roster spot was show up this summer. He didn’t and it was capped off tonight with another invisible performance. He’s very much on the bubble.

UpCullen Jenkins may have been a roster lock after Stephen Paea was cut but he solidified his spot with a sack and some lively play on the line.

DownNate Sudfeld did suffer from some drops but he didn’t make many good throws. The Redskins wanted to run the ball but it’s hard to play for four quarters in the NFL and pass for only 72 yards. He didn’t turn the ball over but that was about it on the plus side.

Tandler on Twitter

 

 

114 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. austrianhttrfan - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:23 AM

    I think you forgot definitely Everett…this guy had an amazing game…and to be honest…with all our safeties being age 30+…Everett looks like a keeper…maybe no Blackman?
    However, I would like to have him on the roster!!!

    • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:28 AM

      I missed your comment but I agree with you.

      Everett was on the outside looking in list near the bubble prior to this game, but I don’t see how he did not play himself onto this roster IF the coaching staff was going to include this game in their final assessment of players. Everett was close enough, probably 55-56 prior to the game, and he passed Paulsen and the back end of the roster with his play yesterday.

      • ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:41 AM

        Going back to yesterday before the game, I mentioned Everett as one of the younger guys at another position I’d prefer to keep rather than a 4th tight end…
        ~

        • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:59 AM

          After last night’s final audition, I agree with you. Everett came to play last nigh, albeit the performance was not against first string caliber players.

    • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 12:20 PM

      How can you guys justify keeping a player based off one performance against Tampa’s backups?

      Remember how good Houston Bates looked last pre season? How did he end up doing? Or Ross? Looked great in the preseason against backups then disappeared in the regular season when he got a chance.

      There were three other games for these guys to shine. I’m not saying Everett looked bad in those games but let’s not overreact to the fourth preseason game. Same goes for Brown.

      • ET - Sep 1, 2016 at 12:51 PM

        Both Everett and Brown are on the bubble, though. Surely their performances last night matter a little? I’m not convinced either one makes the final 53, though Everett looks good enough that he would’ve made it in many recent seasons, IMO. If they’re waived, I suspect Brown makes it to PS and Everett is snapped up.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:26 PM

          Well that sounds plenty reasonable to me. There’s just a lot of posts around here saying someone definitely did or didn’t make the team based off last night’s game.

          Of course the game counts for something. Just not more than the other 3 combined or years of regular season games in the case of some guys who would be getting cut to make room.

        • ET - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:50 PM

          We seem to be on the same page re: 3rd stringer hype.

        • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:45 PM

          Yes, I agree. Coach Gruden said that the pre-season games particularly mattered, 8-9 spots were “up for grabs” last night (although I imagine some of this relates to practice squad spots) and he wanted the players play in final pre-season game to speak for the player (knowing the competition was going to be 2nd and 3rd string). For players on the bubble, you have to imagine that very strong play or very weak play could push them one way or the other.

      • lezziemcdykerson - Sep 1, 2016 at 5:09 PM

        Down—All Matt Ioannidis had to do to lock up a roster spot was show up this summer. He didn’t and it was capped off tonight with another invisible performance. He’s very much on the bubble.

        This just makes the fourth round hurt even more. Even though Billings is hurt now (who’s to say if that would’ve happened if we drafted him?) at least he’s going to make a team. I know they were talking about mixing it up maybe Hood seeing some time at NT but come on. We’ve gone the FA route for this pos and I’m a little skeptical.

        • chimps000 - Sep 2, 2016 at 9:13 AM

          completely agree- I wanted scott to draft a big dlineman- preferably a DT- maybe they just didn’t line up with how they were rated by the personnel staff and the team didn’t want to reach.

          But I still think sherff was overdrafted (a reach) and Kendall fuller was overdrafted… but I’m just a guy on the couch.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Sep 2, 2016 at 5:57 PM

          I think Fuller went about where he hould have but we saw a LOT of injured guys slide in this draft so who knows? Scherff Mmmm I mean maybe a reach in the first round but where we were picking in the second maybe not. A lot of people say G is nota value pick in the first rd but they did draft him to be a RT so maybe it’s a good problem to have that the guy we drafted can add depth at RT. I’m just wondering if the staff thought less of Morgan’s ability or if they thought he couldn’t stay healthy. If we were drafting Scherff with the intent of playing him at G then I think we could’ve gambled and waited.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 2, 2016 at 7:01 PM

          Yeah I completely agree about Ioannidis making the fourth round sting that much. I try not to bring it up much because A) it was unreasonable for anyone to expect Ioannidis to contribute this season B) I already made a big stink about the fourth round and people are probably sick of hearing me say it and C) Billings is probably my favorite college player of all time. So I’m obviously biased and it’s a little personal for me. But he was right there, in the fourth. A guy who is incredibly strong and athletic for his size and who I know is a good kid who works hard, is surprisingly humble for a football player, and who stays out of trouble. I was furious when we traded that pick. You’re also correct that you can’t assume he would have broken his leg had we drafted him. Different circumstances.

          I don’t think Fuller was over drafted. the 3rd round is outstanding value for a potential starting CB. I think we just judge these guys a little too soon. We won’t really know for 2-3 years if he was a good pick or not. But as a prospect, I think it was a good pick.

          And Scherff was over drafted in hind sight. There’s simply no way around that. You don’t take a guard with the 5th overall pick. It’s been forever since that happened for a reason. Generally the first round is too high for a guard. But I would be happy to take Zac Martin in the 20s so that’s not a steadfast rule for me. Now, I said hindsight because we thought we were drafting a tackle. So, it’s a ding on Scot for missing he evaluation (which a lot of “non-football guys saw”) but he didn’t think he was drafting a guard 5th overall. I would take a pass rusher over a right tackle that high. But it’s not the end of the world. We got a good guard instead of a bust. I can live with that. Because someone from that top 10 will be a bust. My bet is Fowler. And not because of injury

        • lezziemcdykerson - Sep 2, 2016 at 8:06 PM

          I completely agree with all of that. I only wonder what the coaching staff was thinking in wanting to move on from Moses or if they were thinking what we always hear Scot say “you don’t want to not draft the BPA because you’re already solid at that spot because of injury probability.” Scherff was a reach at guard but will be on our line for the next 10 years Lord willin. Now, let’s all make sure we wear our seatbelts on the way home. Me, Trey and Bang all agreed with each other today. Could it be? The start of the season is bringing us all together like the dysfunctional long distance family we are.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 2, 2016 at 10:27 PM

          Ha. It was bound to happen eventually.

          I believe in the BPA thing because you end up missing on players like JJ Watt or Aaron Donald if you go for a position.

          But it’s my opinion that Moses has slow feet. His handwork isn’t great, but that can be fixed. I don’t know that he will ever be able to fix his feet. If I can see that, then McClougan and Callahan absolutely see it. I’ll bet they wanted an upgrade. Moses may be adequate for now but we need to upgrade there the first chance we get.

          Which I didn’t notice until this preseason. I was very anti drafting along the O-line early because I thought Moses and Kouandjo were better than I do now. It’s not a dire situation but I would at least like two solid bookends before worrying about a center and guards. But it appears we have a future pro bowl guard anyway. Who can be an emergency tackle. I can live with that.

  2. redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:24 AM

    Agree with your assessment, but I don’t believe the Redskins will want to leave Sudfeld exposed.

    But no one did more to stock up than Deshazor Everett. If Gruden was going to let this game count in his final player assessment, then there’s no way Everett is not the 53rd player on the roster. Was Everett perfect? No But he was clearly a Redskin last night against the Buccaneers.

  3. austrianhttrfan - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:29 AM

    So what happened to Tarik?
    Was he kicked out? Did he change his job? Is he on vacation? If I may ask…

    • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:35 AM

      Caps reporter now. I could be wrong but I think his son plays hockey and he wanted to be closer to that sport / team.

    • Rich Tandler - Sep 1, 2016 at 10:25 AM

      Tarik is on CSN Caps coverage now. Shuffling around, one of those things that media companies do now.

  4. troylok - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:35 AM

    I thought Sudfield did okay last night. First off and pointed out in the article, Paulsen dropped three Sudfield passes that could have advanced field position. Second, he scored. Third, I thought he exercised some pocket awareness. Clearly, the guy needs to work on his throwing mechanics and he needs to put on a little more muscle, but he’s a prospect they can ill afford to expose to waivers.

    As for Mack Brown, it would be nice if they could keep him. He’d be great insurance. If they can’t, I hope they can get something for him in trade before the final cuts.

    • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:47 AM

      Keeping Sudfeld is ridiculous. There are plenty of guys like him. Can he even run a good scout team offense? I don’t think so. However, with Marshall and Daniels on IR and Ioannidis on the bubble too, maybe Nate makes it because GMs like to have their picks make the team.

      • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:35 AM

        I don’t know why but I feel it’s risky if the Redskins feel Sudfeld has long-term potential; to me, it’s too early to tell but Sudfeld has shown enough that I can’t rule out that he could be a solid QB option down the road.

        • Ryan Jarrett - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:00 AM

          Not saying he is going to be an NFL QB but Sudfeld is still transitioning from a shotgun offense to being under center more. You can’t do that in one offseason. The whole point of picking him up is to give him a year to develop and then make a decision before next years draft. The steady franchises can develop a QB instead of using a 1st rounder every 3 years.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM

          You don’t need a roster spot to see IF there is potential. This wouldn’t even be a discussion of Daniels was playing like Garvin, if Ioannids was playing like Hood, and if Marshall was playing like Kelly. Then the narrative would be much different. It would be how inaccurate his passes generally are, how he needs a lot of time, how there just isn’t room on the roster for three quarterbacks.

      • mtskins - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:32 AM

        Not sure if keeping Sudfeld on the 53 is the right call or not, but I certainly don’t think it is ridiculous to consider that he might not make it onto the practice squad. I wasn’t a huge fan of the pick due to mechanics and accuracy but developmental QBs with size and strong arms that show any glimmer seem to end up on somebody’s roster. See Logan Thomas and the recent addition of Zach Mettenberger to the Steelers.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 11:09 AM

          Thomas and Mettenberg have experience and are going to get picked up. There were 11 QBs drafted ahead of Sudfield in this year’s draft. Below are the teams that could be a landing spot for Sudfeld because they have just two QBs and their investment in their 3rd QB is less than the Redskins’ investment in Sudfeld. Mind you that some of these teams have been working with their guy since May or longer and many teams do not carry three QB.

          Dolphins — 3rd stringer, Brandon Doughty, was picked 36 spots later than Sudfeld in this year’s draft. They also have Zac Dysert, a former 7th round pick from 2013 on their roster.

          Bengals — 3rd stringer, Keith Wenning, was a 6th round draft pick of the Ravens in 2014.

          Colts — 3rd stringer, Stephen Morris, is a college free agent that the Colts snatched from Eagles practice squad at the end of last year. The Colts basically don’t know what they’re doing so they might try to take Sudfeld based on McCloughan’s reputation alone.

          Jaguars — 3rd stringer, Brandon Allen, was picked 14 spots after Sudfeld in this year’s draft.

          Titans — 3rd stringer, Alex Tanney, was claimed off the Colts practice squad last December. He’s on his eighth team since being undrafted in 2012.

          Chargers — 3rd stringer, UDFA Mike Bercovici. Presumably the Chargers are happy with him since they let go of Mettenberger.

          Bears — 3rd stringer, David Fales, is their 6th rounder from 2014. The Bears have been able to stash him on their practice squad for two seasons in row and carry just two QBs.

          Lions — 3rd stringer, Jake Rudock, was selected four spots later in this year’s draft.

          Packers — have two college free agents battling for number three.

          Falcons — 3rd stringer, Matt Simms, is a college free agent from 2012. Has been on Falcons practice squad since last September.

          Buccaneers — 3rd stringer, Ryan Griffin, was waived by New Orleans last year but claimed by the Bucs.

          Seahawks — 3rd stringer, Jake Heaps, was undrafted last season and signed by Seattle this May.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:36 PM

          And Bang didn’t even get to the team’s with 4 QBs who are likely to cut one. Like the Jets with Fitz, Genk, Bryce Petty, and Christian Hackenberg. Geno or Petty would be the cut and are more desirable for a team to pick up than Nate Sudfield. There are some other team like this but they’re not coming to me now.

          Then you also have to consider the teams with 3 QBs who are happy with their QB situation. The Rams are a good example. They have their current QB and soon-to-be backup in Case Keenam, their future QB in Goff, and a developmental QB (who came into the leave FAR ahead of Sudfield) in Sean Mannion. The Saints have a similar situation with Garrett Grayson. Teams like that won’t be trying to poach QBs off practice squads.

          So there’s all the teams who drafted a developmental QB this year, then all the teams who are happy with their 3 QB, then all the other free agent QBs and proactive squad QBs out there to consider. The chances of Sudfield getting poached is low. 2/3 of the league probably isn’t even looking.

          And I don’t know how much preseason from other teams you guys watch (I assume not much). So maybe that’s why some people get so scared about losing guys like Brown, Sudfield, and think Ross is a stud. But every team has guys like these. Go watch some other fourth preseason games this weekend and you’ll see them.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:25 PM

          mtskins,

          To your 5:11PM post:

          The timing is important for guys getting claimed by waivers. 90-man and 75-man rosters have A LOT more claims than 53-man roster times. Thomas doesn’t have much experience but he was a 4th rounder in 2014. Many times teams kick the tires on guys like this because 4th rounders usually don’t get cut. If they do, they often bounce around. I don’t believe the Giants are a team that traditionally keeps three QBs but every team is looking to develop a future QB. Some keep them on the roster and others don’t.

          Perhaps I should clarify an earlier statement. I think it is ridiculous that the Redskins are considering keeping Sudfeld on the roster. I understand the developing for the future stuff and the contracts but Sudfeld is in no way going to be able to help the team AT ALL this year. I’m fine if Fans want him as a project or are just trying to predict the tea leaves, personally its senseless. If Cousins and McCoy get hurt the Redskins are looking at Matt Hasslebeck and anyone else coming out of retirement. They’re not playing Nate. There are other projects on this team. Cravens, Ioannidis, Kouandjio, Kelly, Brown, Grant, Ross, Murphy, Bates, Spaight, Hall, Blackmon, etc. Too much really to list. The point is we don’t need another one at a position that’s taken care off. We might as well get a kick-off specialist (not really).

          Yeah, I saw Rich’s synopsis. I’ve got to believe he’s on to something but it could just as well be because they don’t think it would matter. Look, I was also of the mindset that the ‘skins should give Cousins a market value contract this year instead of next year. Clearly, the organization and I don’t share the same kind of logic.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 2, 2016 at 3:08 AM

          I’m dead serious, I would take a return specialist over Ross as the 6th WR or Sudfield on the 53.

          I’m also serious that I don’t understand why we don’t make Paul a WR again. He’s too small to block on the line. I mean, why not just bring Young back and make him a TE too if size doesn’t matter? Paul seems like a perfect possession receiver because of his size and toughness. A poor man’s Garcon once he’s gone. List Paul as a WR but use him as an all purpose type player, keep either Paulsen or Carrier (when he returns) as the 3rd TE, and let Ross be a waste of a roster spot on someone else’s team. It would make me so happy.

        • bangkokben - Sep 2, 2016 at 7:31 AM

          Paul is NOT a WR. He’d get NO separation from corners. Factually, Ross is a much better wide receiver than Paul. Your disdain for Ross ic clouding your judgement. But do the Redskins NEED 6 WR? Not really.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 2, 2016 at 3:21 AM

          Oh, you forgot Trevon Boykin on your list of QBs. I just read through and noticed. Went undrafted in 2016 and looks to have the #2 spot in Seattle locked up. And I had to look this up but Vernon Adams is playing in the CFL right now. I wonder if NFL teams can poach CFL players or if they have to wait for a contract to end. I should know that, I looked it up once but forgot.

          Anyway, my point is there’s guys out there. From the 2014-2015 draft and undrafted classes and also a few vets teams may kick the tires on again. Of course there’s a chance we could lose Sudfield, I just don’t find it likely. He didn’t show that well. There’s an element of fan goggles going on here.

          I’ve fast forwarded through a few other preseason games this year to see some of my fav college players on the field and there’s other no-name guys doing just as well or better than Sudfield. Do you guys really think Dolphins or Seahawks fans know who Nate Sudfield is? Just like you probably don’t know most of the other developmental QBs. But they’re out there. Lots of them. And it’s a fool’s errand to put your hope in a 6th round QB. Brady’s story is so wild because it’s so unusual. It could happen, but I’ll play the odds.

        • redskins12thman - Sep 2, 2016 at 8:58 AM

          I have 0 opinion on Sudfeld; indifferent to the situation; I just don’t think Redskins will chance placing him on the practice squad.

      • chimps000 - Sep 1, 2016 at 10:42 AM

        amen- there are a ton of qbs like him that come out EVERY year- I don’t understand why they would keep him on the 53 with a roster with as many holes and veterans as this one.

        I know he was drafted, but cmon, I would be surprised if he gets picked up by another team- and if
        it does, not a huge deal. So few lower drafted qbs are able to become franchise qbs.

        • ET - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:01 PM

          It’s not just about finding a franchise QB, or even a game manager type QB. It’s about finding a smart, quality backup if QB 1 goes down. Every time there’s an injury to a starting QB, I’m thankful we have a solid (but unspectacular) guy like Colt who’s ready to go. I do think Sudfeld can be that kind of player—and there’s nothing wrong with that.

        • mtskins - Sep 1, 2016 at 5:11 PM

          Bang- If you mean practice and training camp experience regarding Thomas then maybe but the only the games I can find in his career stats are in 2014. They have him for a grand total of 2 games with 1 Completion and 9 Attempts (although his one completion was an 81 Yd TD). Mettenberger does have some experience if not a great track record. Who knows if either will stick on the final roster but they have both been claimed multiple times and is it because of their previous body of work.? I’m not saying it’s a sure thing somehow grabs but it’s a consideration and as you noted QBS can get plucked off practice squads at the end of the year as well.

          Personally I’d risk sending Sudfeld to the practice squad but I can see how someone else might think differently. I agree that there are a lot of guys that are like him at this stage (although I don’t find Geno Smith more desirable Trey) but given Cousins’ current contract and the fact that Colt’s ceiling seems to be a quality backup it seems like a smart move to have developmental QB on either the roster or the practice squad. If Sudfeld is who they have decided on out all these guys then they may deem it not worth the risk to place him on the practice squad. Interesting to note that in Rich’s final projection he has them making room for him especially given his extended play time in the final game.

  5. austrianhttrfan - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:36 AM

    + Mack Brown should be on the Roster…that guy…has some first steps speed its incredible…
    To me…with Matt Jones not being guaranteed to be all season healthy, with Thompson I don´t even need to start if he´s an injury concern…I think you also have to keep Brown…at the end…Week 4 will roll around and probably Thompsons ankle hurts or whatever….so I would find a way to keep him!

    • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:48 AM

      I think Redskins try to put Brown on practice squad. He does not offer more all around than Kelley, and if Jones and Thompson will play, there’s little or no room for Brown to get reps. Now if Jones or Thompson have to get placed on IR then Brown will get another shot, but has the Mack done much against first string competition? If so, why would he have been behind Marshall?

      • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:44 AM

        He was behind Marshall because Marshall is a draft pick. He may have made the team but playing behind the first string was not a good thing unless you’re Fat Rob. Marshall’s one carry behind the first string and he’s on IR. Jones was inconsistent, then played well before getting injured. Thompson hasn’t run the ball well behind the first string either but we know what we have as a receiver. Mack did do well in pass pro last week behind the first string.but it comes down to Jones” shoulder and whether the team is comfortable with two inexperienced back-ups.

        • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:01 AM

          Uh… Kelley was not a draft pick.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:29 AM

          Yes and Marshall got the first opportunity against Atlanta ahead of both Kelly and Brown. Kelly then got to split carries against the Jets and was clearly ahead of Marshall against the Bills but again it was split carries with the ones before Marshall got injured on ONE carry. Brown did get time with the ones against Buffalo but I don’t think he got a carry. So the three all played behind the ones against the Bills but it was Kelly, Marshall, and Mack in that order. Bottom line, draft pick get every opportunity to make the guy picking them look good while undrafted guys have to make the most of every rep they get. Sometimes there’s not enough opportunity to make your case. I doubt there would’ve been for Brown had Marshall not been injured.

    • Yusuf Obleton - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:59 AM

      I agree I don’t see how after the last 2games you could cut Mack Brown… I actually envision him.playing a huge roll this year

      • Rich Tandler - Sep 1, 2016 at 10:23 AM

        Just look who Brown was playing against. Not that he can control that but if they do cut him, that’s why. And in a league littered with running backs if the gets picked, he does. There are others who can be picked up if they need a 4th RB.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 11:17 AM

          Completely agree. I wanted a fourth TE but Paulsen played himself off the team last night. They still might try to practice squad Brown. Seems like everyone forgets Lache Seastrunk. The same things were said about him before he was cut.

        • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:35 PM

          I agree with you Rich. I think the Redskins will waive him and will put him on the practice squad if he is available, realizing there’s a chance he won’t be.

    • Jalomangino - Sep 1, 2016 at 12:15 PM

      Silas Redd Jr comes back week 4

      • Rich Tandler - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:53 PM

        I wouldn’t be so sure of that. He’s eligible to apply for reinstatement from his indefinite suspension. Not sure the Redskins are going to give him another chance to screw up.

      • lezziemcdykerson - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:49 PM

        More like Pierre

    • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:38 PM

      There’s no guarantee Brown stays healthy either. There’s no guarantee anybody stays healthy. If the team is that convinced someone can’t stay healthy then they should be cut and we should move on. Not stashing 10 RBs on the roster so other areas of the team suffer. RB is not important enough to warrant four roster spots.

      • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:08 PM

        “RB is not important enough to warrant four roster spots.”

        What??! Music to my ears. This team may see otherwise due to the durability of the starter. Then again if it’s a question between 4th RB or 3rd QB, I’m taking the RB. Two years ago, I’m taking the QB. Before last night, I would’ve taken a 4th TE. Shocked to see Logan let the pressure/elements get to him.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Sep 1, 2016 at 10:03 PM

          Mehhh Logan wasn’t really a sure handed TE to begin with. And if he did catch it he’s not going anywhere fast. Not saying he can’t catch at all, but I’m just not shocked. Better known for blocking but whoa… just looked at his stats and he has way more targets than Niles Paul. I’m wondering now, because I never paid attention, do they use Logan more on third down than Paul? Paulsen came in a year early but only caught 2 passes on 2 targets that year. Everything else being equal it looks like they look for/use him more than the guy ahead of him. Wonder why that is.. you’d want to have your best guys on the field right?

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 2, 2016 at 2:50 AM

          Paulsen is surprisingly sneaky. He’s not peri unarmed fast or shifty but he gets open. Probably because defenses kind of ignore him. But this team has definitely used him, with success, in the passing game.

          But also keep in mind that Paul transiotioned positions and didn’t really hit his stride as a TE until 2014. He was largely invisible on this team before 2014.

          Paul is hands down the better receiver, but Paulsen is hands down the best blocking TE on the team. So, like you said, he was never really known for his hands but that’s not why he’s on the team in the first place. I’m not going to let one preseason game sway my opinion of him. If one bad preseason game gets a guy cut then I can think of multiple starters and key backups who need walking papers too. Paulsen has many actual NFL games on his resume for me to know who he is. A 2 hour glorified wet ball drill doesn’t change that to me.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Sep 2, 2016 at 5:52 PM

          I’m not saying he can’t catch. I’m saying him dropping a fews balls doesn’t surpise me because I’ve seen him do it before and he’s not really know for his receiver capabilites. What shocked me is that Paulsen has more targets and rec than Paul which leads me to think they either used him more than Paul in their systems or he is more effective so the look for him more. It’s almost like you’d expect the converted rec to have 80 rec and the blocking TE to only have 50 in their 6 season span together. They both missed ’15 and Logan only had 2 rec prior to Niles being drafted. So again I’m not saying Logan can’t catch but because I don’t really think of him as a catching TE I’m ok with a few drops. Like you said I’ve seen him make catches and heave ho for 3 yds.

        • bangkokben - Sep 2, 2016 at 7:21 AM

          I think Paulsen takes advantage of the worst guys covering him and he knows the holes in a zone. He is always open. Seemed like Sudfeld was just looking for him.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Sep 2, 2016 at 5:53 PM

          This is also true he’s a reliable safety valve whenever we use him.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 2, 2016 at 2:59 AM

          Well it’s not. The run game matters. Just like every position matters. But an extra O-tackle, CB, receiver, TE, QB, DLinemen, OLB, or safety is more important than a 4th RB. The kind of guy who will fill that slot is a dime a dozen. There’s literally probably 30-40 of them about to get cut.

          This overreaction to one game with Mack Brown against retail workers is nuts. He showed some good moves and burst but Kam Chancellor would have had him flat on his ass when he made that move at the second level on his 60 yard TD run. People have to keep some context. Either this dude from our practice squad suddenly became as good as Ezekiel Elliot (after 3 preseason games with only an OK showing). Or he was playing against extremely inferior competition. Which seems more likely? And if Brown gets claimed (which I doubt) and someone gets injured then we will quite simply claim one of the other 40 RBs on a practice squad.

          I like Brown just fine. But Kelley is the guy for the 3rd spot and we’re not keeping 4 RBs. Kelley shocked me with how well he ran against a good buffalo first team defense. Brown put on a show against Osceola High School’s varsity team. Not the same thing.

        • bangkokben - Sep 2, 2016 at 7:25 AM

          I think there is some middle ground for Brown but you’re right that there are 30 guys like him and that he’s not likely going to get claimed. The fallacy is that every GM is watching every tape and ready to snatch the diamond in the rough. If you were a 6th rounder or UDFA, then they look at you like that first and tape later if even.

          As far as the RB position that is what I’ve been saying all along, however, it would be different in Dallas and Minnesota.

  6. redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:42 AM

    Here are my observations from the game last evening just after the first half (i.e., includes just a tiny bit of the 2nd half):

    It’s hard to judge performances in the 4th preseason games b/c you don’t know how they’ll do against first string competition; with that caveat, I like the energy with which the Redskins are playing.

    Players not doing themselves a favor:
    1. Paulsen – three dropped balls (don’t know how his run blocking is)
    2. Ross – I’d like him to take on punt return responsibilities but he looks so hesitant doing them; Thorpe got no reps at PR (in first half); still not sure anyone has done better as 6th receiver however
    3. Sudfeld – Struggled but looked better than Tampa Bay 1st half QBs; still too risky to expose him to waivers in my opinion
    4. Dunbar – Looked awkward / out of place at times

    Players doing themselves a favor:
    1. Everett – He’s stood out the most to me; I’d find a way to roster him
    2. Brown – I’m sure Redskins wanted to have him on practice squad, but now may get picked up by another team (cross your fingers he’s still a Redskin)
    3. Jenkins – Again inferior competition, but has a sack, tackle for loss, penetration into the backfield (so hard to judge); have to make a decision with no first team competition this offseason
    4. Other D young guns (decent job by so many guys) — Spaight, Fields, Ioannidis [Note: I didn’t study him specifically like Rich, but I did like his penetration and tackle to stop that 3rd and inches run but not enough for me to roster him over Everett], Lanier, Wakefield [the latter probably long shot for team but might have played himself onto practice squad invite] — It will be interesting to see where Garvin stands vis-a-vis taking extra D-lineman or Fields

    It will be interesting between now and Saturday; some tough decisions to be made especially if tonight’s game is important to the process.

    • freddie dempsey - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:37 AM

      ROSS has got to go. I Mean how many chances does this guy get. Yes he has speed , but can’t do anything with it. He looks scared to return a punt and seems lost in his routes hafe the time. He cut that first catch 1 yard short across middle that would have been a easy first down. He has the guy bear but cut short. Know where you are and the chain’s..GOT TO GO… Punt returner lets give Thrope a shot.. He is a thick guy who doesn’t look scared and catches the ball and goes with it.. Garvin makes 53 on Special teams. Has too.. I hate to say it but I feel that Matt Lionattis was a wasted pick. Showed nothing..To small for what we needed.. We will address that next draft. And a center. Lol Remember people , last nights game was all 3rd and 429th team people..

      • mattphillipsdc - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:11 AM

        Agree, but with our injury and performance history at running back I don’t see how we can’t keep Brown and Kelley on the 53 man roster. There is no way Brown makes through to the practice squad again.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 12:15 PM

          Because of one game against Tampa’s backups? Seriously?

  7. freddie dempsey - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:14 AM

    Mack had a career game. He will play for someone , just not us. Big Mate did nothing to hurt him self . Dint think he could have anyway. He will pass Volt next year as the backup.. We can’t afford to dangle him out there and Gruden or Scott would anyway..Everett played his way on the 53. Special teams only. HTTR

  8. sidepull - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:05 AM

    Up
    Brown
    Everett

    Down
    Marshall (he didnt play but Kelly and Mack did) Keep em and Marshall is your 5th and out RB.
    Ross, scares me on returns. Can he not move his feet forward? Why does he seem to always step back? Thorpe looked better honestly.

    Dont see what they are gonna do w RB decision. I now feel they may roll w what they have and see how it looks against the Steelers. I thought for sure we would see them sign a vet like Pierre Thomas but now I am not so sure.
    If they are going to expose a RB I hope it is Marshall. I think they gotta keep the other 4 just because of the unreliability of Jones and Thompson. Who knows?

    • Clayt - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:20 AM

      Garvin 52 had an outstanding preseason, and was everywhere last night, making great tackles, and blew up the full back knocking him back into the RB on the 3rd and inches to get his team off the field, very good open field tackles, excellent pass defense, on TE and slot. 72 had a great game, and the safety came on late making excellent tackles. Bucs wouldn’t have gotten in the end zone but for the televised all out blitz at the end. These 2 in my opinion definitely solidified themselves as a member of the 53.

      • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:02 PM

        I’m glad to hear this about Garvin because I did not watch game footage just looking at him. This is another reason why the team felt comfortable moving on from Riley.

    • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:26 AM

      Marshall is on IR and off 53 count; can exclude him from consideration for now.

      i think Redskins just take 3 RBs for now unless they are concerned neither Jones nor Thompson can play against the Steelers.

      • mattphillipsdc - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:16 AM

        I would be very risky to only keep 3 running backs with their injury history history and lack of performance so far.

      • ET - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:28 PM

        I think they keep four RBs—with a close eye on cuts from teams with better backfield depth. I wouldn’t be surprised to see both Brown and Marshall on the practice squad at points this season. That is, whoever is 4th on the depth chart will be livin’ a week-to-week existence.

  9. redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:29 AM

    I’ve heard some references that the Redskins may be trying to “hide” Jensen and Kerridge, i.e., not giving them a lot of footage / highlights so they can sneak them onto the practice squad. Do you think there is any truth to that or is that a bunch of hot air?

    • Mr.moneylover - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:32 AM

      I can see that because kerridge was suppose to get snaps behind rob kelly and mack brown but instead did not play at all…marcel Jensen did have a great TD play against the falcons but after he didnt play at all

  10. Skulb - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:35 AM

    I would add Garvin and Everett to the up column. They may have shown something already but they made sure the arrow pointed even more upwards in this game. Very impressed with their energy in this game on both sides of the ball. Yes it’s PS against the bottom of the Bucs roster. But it was the same for them and they had like six yards of offense in the first half and couldn’t stop a thing on defense..

    • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:43 AM

      I only watched the game once (and not focusing on specific players), but my sense was that Garvin played well at times and at other times was a little behind the play — so I had him as an average / slightly above average performance against 2nd / 3rd string competition.

  11. sidepull - Sep 1, 2016 at 8:49 AM

    One thing stuck out to me. The Redskins have depth. They are probably going to get players poached. Its a good thing in a way. It seemed at times in seasons past that they couldnt give a player away. I dont think they can hide anybody anymore.

    • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:39 AM

      We say that every year and then squadoosh. Maybe this is our year.

      • ET - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:41 PM

        Do we say that every year?

        About certain players, yes Exhibit A: Lache Seastrunk). But this is the first time in years that the Skins have poachable DB prospects, for example. Given our secondary issues in recent seasons, I find that amazing.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 2:13 PM

          Our secondary absolutely looks better. A lot better. But there’s a few other position groups that don’t have that kind of quality. Like the D-line and probably our ILBs. Probably the O-line too.

          Where I definitely agree with Ben is that fans, on every single team, get delusions of grandeur about their team every single preseason. We analyze and dissect all these guys who are really just guys every preseason. Then the regular season comes around and reality sets in. Remember how people said we “finally have depth on the D-line” last preseason? How exciting Pot Roast, Paea, RJF, Jeron Johnson, and Culliver were? Only one of those guys is still on the team.

          The preseason is designed for this. The stories are specifically written to hype average players up and make fans believe. But there’s still a lot of depth that need to be built on this team. And you only get that kind of depth through years of quality drafting. There’s no other way to do it and McCloughan hasn’t had nearly enough time to accomplish that.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 2:36 PM

          We said that about Rashad Ross last year.We kept him and now folks can’t wait to get rid of him for just about anyone else. Some were saying that about Bates but he was always available when “we” needed him and that is the delicate balance. Cut the young guys that weren’t drafted because chances are that if you need them they’ll be available. Does that mean that the Redskins are giving up on Deshazor Everette or Quinton Dunbar if they release them? No. It means they think they have a better chance of getting one of them back then if they cut Greg Toler or Will Blackmon.

  12. blazerguy234 - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:06 AM

    The Skins will keep both Kelly and Brown. Another position will probably lose a player. Matt and Chris, both have injuries now, and a history of injuries. In addition, Jones has to show he won`t keep putting the ball on the ground. Kelly and brown may be better than Jones, and will cost less. No way Brown will make it to the practice squad as some team will surely claim him. There is a crowd at tight end…..

    • nikoknight - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:24 AM

      I have to agree with your take on Jones. I think as fans we all have seen his potential and think he can be a solid player in this league, but I haven’t heard anyone (including myself) think he’s going to be top player in his position…the point I’m getting at is what has he done thus far to say we shouldn’t keep Kelly and Brown? He can’t stay on the field and he can’t keep the ball off the ground. I know he’s young and we are all hoping that changes (as it may). But there is no way, after last night, Brown does not land on another team

    • Mr.moneylover - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:26 AM

      Exactly…Mack Brown will not make it to the Practice Squad if they release…it makes sense to keep him to sure up the RB postion…cant rely on Chris Thompson Health or Matt jones

  13. Mr.moneylover - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:23 AM

    They gonna end up keeping 4 running backs they dont have to keep 4 TEs right now …Mack Brown showed all pre-season long hes ready and more improved we cant rely on Chris Thompson staying Healthy for 16 games he got banged up in the pre-season to the point coaches got scared and sit him out last game…right now it makes sense to keep 4 RB…right now its to evaluate the WRs because Nate Sudfeld had a off game…thats how the starting O-line suppose to open up holes for the RBs but for some reason they struggle to do that …the backups showed what our starting unit is suppose to look like now if our starter cant give our RBs no room to run then we have a big problem on our hands

  14. kenlinkins - Sep 1, 2016 at 10:15 AM

    If you want to keep Everett and Brown you must make room on the roster. You have to do TWO of the following:
    1. Keep Doctson on the PUP list.
    2. Go with only 8 O-Linemen to start the season
    3. Place Sudfield on the wire, hope you can get him back
    4. Go with only 6 D-Linemen to start the season
    5. Cut or trade Dunbar to keep Everett
    6. Trade way a starter or Top back up for a draft pick (say McCoy to Minn)
    7. Cut another older guy and say you are on a youth movement.
    Now, I like 1 & 2, but they are short term and in six weeks you have to make another move, but by then you can move someone to IR, or cut someone else who did not pan out.
    It is nice to have 58 guys who belong in the NFL on your roster, but they can not keep all of them. This is where the GM makes his money by gaining the best roster for the long term.

    • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 11:24 AM

      “This is where the GM makes his money by gaining the best roster for the long term.”

      The thing is that he doesn’t seem to care too much about youth this season. Toler and Reyes didn’t even make the trip. You mentioned earlier in the year you were concerned the team would keep Hall and Blackmon over a young guy. Now add Toler and likely Cullen Jenkins to that list. If they do go with the grey beards it say at least one of two things. A) the young guys weren’t that good. and B) this is a push for a short-window. With Garcon and Jackson still playing at high levels and being at the end of their contracts. There could be a little, what if we’re better than we think we are influencing “long-term” decisions.

      • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:06 PM

        Toler and Hood didn’t make the trip. Reyes, RJF, Paul, McCoy and Grant made the trip but did not play.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:23 PM

          You’re right. Some guys made the trip in case of injuries to the guys who were expected to play. Doesn’t change my point — that the GM is concerned with the young ‘talent’ on this team.

      • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:43 PM

        I think we should be focused on youth too. But not just for the sake of it. What Ben just said is reality knocking. A lot of these young players just really aren’t that good and don’t have much foreseeable upside. A young safety would be great but we’re not going to release a player like Hall just for the sake of getting younger.

        4-5 years guys. That’s how long a proper rebuild takes. Because there will be draft busts and unfortunate injuries (like Jarrett) so it takes a few drafts to really infuse the team with that young talent, the to get them coached up, and have the next crop ready by the time that first group is either signing a second contract or out the door. It doesn’t happen in 2 offseasons. In the meantime they’re going to sign the older vets to keep the shop afloat. For their jobs and because they owe it to the fans to put a competitive team on the field. Those vets are important to developing the young guys too. But not every young guy is worth keeping around.

    • ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Sep 1, 2016 at 11:45 AM

      2 and 3 work for me.
      ~

    • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:57 PM

      This is great and well laid out: I would roster Everett and go with (2) only 8 O-Linemen to start the season.

      Of course, depending who else becomes available from the roster cuts of other teams, we may need additional scenarios…

  15. Chris wilder - Sep 1, 2016 at 10:46 AM

    HTTR. We looked good on defence. We still need to tackle better. We are still struggling with stopping the run. I don’t know if Dunbar makes the team. We have good depth at RB but could still use veteran presence. Letting Morris walk was a mistake…

  16. smotion55 - Sep 1, 2016 at 11:04 AM

    Keep 4 RB’s and 3 TE’s/ Ioannidis to the practice squad, and Everett is a keeper. I also would keep Reiter because of 1st year growth and smarts. Keep Sudfeld and would get rid of Ross. He will never become a punt returner, and Harris and Thorpe have more upside. Arie and LiRebius are gone if this my choice. All the rest I don’t know

    • ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Sep 1, 2016 at 12:09 PM

      I think they can put Reiter on the practice squad for another year, can’t they?

      Don’t think he’s all that likely to be picked up off waivers.
      ~

    • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 1:41 PM

      Ross is only taking punt return duties while Crowder is out. He’s out kick returner, not punt returner, and they’re very different things.

      I doubt Ioannidis makes it through waivers. And McCloughan won’t risk losing his 5th round pick anway. Especially after trading away our 4th. So just get the “Ioannidis to the practice squad” idea out of your head now.

      • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:11 PM

        I concur. For all the TJ Thorpe for punt returner talk, it’s amazing how much folks forget about the Falcon or Jet game, He was horrible there. It would’ve been nice to see a new punt returner emerge but Randal El could’ve won the punt returning job this year.

      • chimps000 - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:29 PM

        hmm- you that sure another team signs ioniadis to their 53 man roster? guy didn’t show much at all in the preseason… doesn’t seem like a guy another team would pick up on the fly like that, but maybe another team really liked his college tape.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:32 PM

          Yeah. I’m about positive. A 5th round pick for nothing? Yup.

          These coaches have giant egos. They all think they can fix someone if the talent is there.

        • chimps000 - Sep 1, 2016 at 5:33 PM

          I can see Belichick cutting a 5th round pick who just isnt that good- don’t know if Scott will pull the trigger or not. Koundijo has been bad as well (4th round), we will see how the GM handles these two picks.

          My point was more that I would lean to the side that Ionniades does not get signed to another teams 53 man roster if he does get cut, mainly because he hasn’t shown much talent, and he would then be able to be signed to the skins practice squad. Obviously he is a rookie and may just take more time to develop into an NFL level player.

  17. colorofmyskinz - Sep 1, 2016 at 2:52 PM

    Wow Mack was like a possessed beast!!

    Paulson was like a flat tire.

    Sua and Martrell savages. Unreal beasts.

    Fuller OMG what a find to have him as a third round pick.

    Riter showed up!

    Kelley shows us why he is second.

    Jenkins better than Paea for sure.

    Ionnadis has a few good plays.

    Ross looked horrible and very scared at punt returns. But what a great endzone catch.

    Frontline was amazing in the run game.

    LeRibeus reminded us why he is not making the cut.

    Everett was a beast of a corner. He was everywhere.

    Inhencho was making contact and very much a nose for the ball.

    Callahan showed his value to develop the line.

    Great game by our 2nd, 3rd, and 4th stringers!!

    • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:29 PM

      And what did we really learn from all of that? How much value is there from seeing guys dominate a bad defense full of guys who will be working at Best Buy next week? It’s a trap guys. These games are traps into thinking players are better than they really are.

      Now, it’s significant if they couldn’t compote against those defenses, like Leribus. But playing well against scrubs doesn’t tell me a lot. And it doesn’t undo what we’ve seen in the other preseason games or over time.

      Paulsen had 3 drops. But he’s also played for years and we know who he is: a good blocker who is occasionally good to go out and catch a pass. I’m not going to roast him for dropping 3 wet balls, in the rain, thrown by a rookie 6th round pick.

      I would suggest caution before getting too excited about guys who show up in the 4th preseason game. Or the preseason in general. It’s a trap! These guys know they’re days away from either being cut and losing a job, or making the team and getting a lot of money. Of course they’re motivated to play hard. But how motivated are they during practice and just any other game?

      One of the reasons Norman is a great player is because of his intensity in every single play. So much of this game is about mindset. We don’t need guys who are only going to play hard when their job or contract are on the line. For the rookies, they should be that intense all OTAs, mini camp, camp and in all the preseason games. For everyone else, we should have seen that intensity throughout the offseason too but also in their past games.

      • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:20 PM

        For this reason, I’m surprised the Redskins didn’t bring in Jenkins a little earlier to train with the team and play in the 3rd preseason game. Even though the Bills rested a lot of starters, it still would have been a better test than the 4th pre-season game. I guess they thought Paea would finally show up and he didn’t?

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:29 PM

          Yeah Paea certainly threw a wrench into things. I’m sure they wanted to give him every opportunity because of his salary. But he also SHOULD have played better. He should have gotten better. Paea isn’t a stud but he’s a good football player. He’s proven that over the years. He’s big, strong, and has decent speed. Something is up with him. His head isn’t in the right spot or something. Maybe it’s the deaths in the family, maybe he’s just unhappy in DC. I don’t know. But I’m sure they expected him to get it together.

          They also have a ton of tape on Jenkins. They know who he is at this point. The worry would be about a decline in his physical ability. But that may not show up in practice. It would have been nice to have him learning the system for sure. But I don’t think they expected to be bringing in another DLinemen.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:45 PM

          Those deadlines have a way of motivating action. It’s more than just Paea. Reyes got a million dollar signing bonus on a one-year deal and seems perfectly content to dare the Redskins to cut him. He’ll collect another $1.4 million if on the team. Just to put that in perspective. Both Golston and Hood won’t a make a million this year. Hood’s signing bonus was $20K. Goston doesn’t have a bonus. Both will count between $620K and $625K against the cap. Ioannidis was probably expected to distance himself from undrafted rookies. Jenkins is on the team because of the combination of Paea, Reyes, and Ioannidis. Got to wonder how different the DL will look next year. Jenkins and Golston can’t be expected to return. Hood and Reyes should only return if they have good years. Lastly, Baker is a free agent after the season.

        • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:44 PM

          I agree. How these contracts are structured seems to play a big part in how motivated a lot of players are to prove themselves during pre-season and contributing during the season. I’m sure a lot of these guys are intrinsically motivated too, but not everyone is pushing themselves / setting the examples in practice, etc.

  18. chimps000 - Sep 1, 2016 at 3:23 PM

    ET-

    IF sudfield can become a legit backup QB in this league, that would be a great accomplishment- it would likely take good fortune and several years in the league.

    IMO the redskins have a very good backup qb with whom you can definitely win games if your starter goes down.

    Also, if your top two qbs go down your season is lost anyways, so I just don’t see the point in keeping sudfield on the 53 man roster.

    Like someone mentioned, the jets are cutting either highly drafted Bryce petty or geno smith… either guy is likely getting picked up by a desperate team over sudfield.

    • smotion55 - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:13 PM

      very good, you changed my mind. Practice squad for Sudfeld.

      • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 4:36 PM

        Assuming Cousins works out, there’s really not much of a reason to carry 3 QBs on the roster. Eventually they’ll need to have a solid backup and a developmental QB. But I don’t think they need to for a couple of seasons. It’s never bad to have an extra QB around. But hopefully Sudfield never even gets a shot to be the starter because Cousins plays like an elite QB the next decade.

        This team is still very much rebuilding. There’s quite a few spots that need to be upgraded or where a battle will continue throughout the season. I hate to see a potentially quality player cut for a “maybe one day” 3rd QB. You can easily make the argument the other way (and I would for some other teams). But with this team in this moment, I don’t want 3 QBs on the 53.

        And remember. If a team claims him, they have to keep him on the 53. He can’t go to their practice squad. That would be a lot of faith in a 6th round pick that you’ve nerve even seen play in the NFL.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 5:07 PM

          The only issue is if the Redskins want to ensure Sudfeld is on their practice squad. Once he clears waivers he’s free to sign with whatever team gives him the best offer/opportunity. The Redskins are the logical choice since that is the offense he knows the best. However, if the Redskins sense another team would like him — like Dallas to pick his brain (if they decide to IR Romo and sign a vet for #2) or some other convoluted scenario — the Redskins could keep him on the “final 53” only to cut him later in the week after the practice squads are made elevating a position of need off the practice squad and then signing Sudfeld to the squad.

          Last year they did this with Deshazor Everette. He made the “final” 53 then two days later was cut so the Redskins could sign TE Anthony McCoy and the signed to the practice squad the next day.

        • Rich Tandler - Sep 1, 2016 at 5:36 PM

          Wrong in the last paragraph. A team could pick him up and then cut him the next day. Or he could just sign with another team’s practice squad like Chase Daniel did. You’re not the only one who is confusing rules of signing a player of another team’s practice squad vs. waiver claims.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:06 PM

          Ok I’ve actually been wondering about this. Because I meant that another team can’t just claim him off waivers and stick him on their practice squad. That’s correct isn’t it? I understand they could cut him. But they couldn’t cut and then put him on the PS right? Or is it simply that Washington could then claim him and put him back on their PS?

          Also, what do you mean by sign with another team’s PS? Is it that any guy they want to put on the PS has the option to leave and go sign with another team’s PS? That seems very logical but I wasn’t sure.

        • bangkokben - Sep 1, 2016 at 6:51 PM

          Trey, once a guy clears waivers he’s a free agent. Therefore, Sudfeld or anyone who is cut and not claimed off waivers by noon September 4th is free to sign with any team and any practice squad. Sudfeld may have had such a great time at Indiana that he prefers to sign with the Colts than the Redskins. He may see it as a better opportunity or whatever rationale. THIS is what the team likely fears more than him getting claimed off waivers.

        • redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:19 PM

          A player on a practice squad can only be signed by another team to its 53 player roster right?

          Also, any player that has been waived can sign with any team but presumably that player knows already whether the team it practiced with is interested in retaining the player on its practice squad (which may or may not interest that player)?

  19. greed - Sep 1, 2016 at 7:38 PM

    with the uncertainty of jones shoulder i think they have to keep mac brown on the 53 atleast to start the season , what happens if jones get popped and is out in the 1st qt against steelers are we going to rely on thompson who is banged up and injury prone himself and only with one healthy rb in kelley? Not smart

  20. redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:10 PM

    What’s the likelihood that any or all of the following occur (or some variation thereof) to complete the 53 player roster:

    OLB – Trail is selected over Bates?

    DL – Lanier is selected over Ioannidis?

    DB – Everett is selected over Dunbar?

    I think the middle one is the most likely to occur.

  21. redskins12thman - Sep 1, 2016 at 9:52 PM

    Rich, I like your roster selection except that I want Everett on it. I would prefer taking just 6 DL to get Everett on, but would be willing to consider other roster options too.

RealRedskins.com Archives

Follow Us On Twitter