Page 1 of 1
Kelly on the block/cut?
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:44 am
by frankcal20
The Redskins could cut the next Andre Johnson
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 22, 2010 10:30 AM ET
M. Kelly.jpgBack in March of 2009, Albert Haynesworth was asked to explain why his agent met with Redskins owner Dan Snyder at the NFL Scouting Combine, which appeared to be a crystal clear case of tampering.
The official explanation at the time: Haynesworth's agent Chad Speck and Snyder were discussing wide receiver Malcolm Kelly.
"Chad told me he met with the Redskins at the Combine," Haynesworth said. "But they were talking about Malcolm [Kelly] and how he could become the next Andre Johnson and stuff like that."
Well, the rest of the NFL may get the chance to sign the next Andre Johnson shortly. Ryan O'Halloran of Comcast Sportsnet Washington predicted on Wednesday Kelly won't even make the team because of his injury issues and lack of special teams value.
That information makes it all the more ridiculous the Redskins got off the hook for tampering using the Kelly excuse. It also points out how Washington bungled the second round of that draft.
The team selected Devin Thomas 15 spots ahead of DeSean Jackson, and tight end Fred Davis one spot ahead of Jackson before grabbing Kelly three picks later. (We like Davis plenty, but they still passed on Jackson twice.)
Vinny Cerrato may be gone, but his legacy continues to live on.
I think this is a really stupid article. We all know that Mike loves tall receivers. We know that per Cooley and Campbell, they have said that Kelly has the best hands on the team. He's not afraid to go over the middle and his big play potential is there. So, because he doesn't play on ST's he's not worth a roster spot? Don't think so. He's gonna be our #3 WR or possibly our #2 with Thomas as the #1 if Moss get's hurt or they feel he's better suited for the slot. I hate everything about this article because I really love what Kelly can bring to the team if he can stay on the field a little bit.
Re: Kelly on the block/cut?
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:56 am
by yupchagee
frankcal20 wrote:The Redskins could cut the next Andre Johnson
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 22, 2010 10:30 AM ET
M. Kelly.jpgBack in March of 2009, Albert Haynesworth was asked to explain why his agent met with Redskins owner Dan Snyder at the NFL Scouting Combine, which appeared to be a crystal clear case of tampering.
The official explanation at the time: Haynesworth's agent Chad Speck and Snyder were discussing wide receiver Malcolm Kelly.
"Chad told me he met with the Redskins at the Combine," Haynesworth said. "But they were talking about Malcolm [Kelly] and how he could become the next Andre Johnson and stuff like that."
Well, the rest of the NFL may get the chance to sign the next Andre Johnson shortly. Ryan O'Halloran of Comcast Sportsnet Washington predicted on Wednesday Kelly won't even make the team because of his injury issues and lack of special teams value.
That information makes it all the more ridiculous the Redskins got off the hook for tampering using the Kelly excuse. It also points out how Washington bungled the second round of that draft.
The team selected Devin Thomas 15 spots ahead of DeSean Jackson, and tight end Fred Davis one spot ahead of Jackson before grabbing Kelly three picks later. (We like Davis plenty, but they still passed on Jackson twice.)
Vinny Cerrato may be gone, but his legacy continues to live on.
I think this is a really stupid article.
We all know that Mike loves tall receivers. We know that per
ey and Campbell, they have said that Kelly has the best hands on the team. He's not afraid to go over the middle and his big play potential is there. So, because he doesn't play on ST's he's not worth a roster spot? Don't think so. He's gonna be our #3 WR or possibly our #2 with Thomas as the #1 if Moss get's hurt or they feel he's better suited for the slot. I hate everything about this article because I really love what Kelly can bring to the team if he can stay on the field a little bit.
Receivers added since last season:
Armstrong 5"11
Austin 5"11
Banks 5"7
Furrey 6"0
Galloway 5"11
Hodge 6"2
Wade 5"10
Williams 6"0
median height 5"11
Andre Johnson
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:58 pm
by SnyderSucks
PFT scared the crap out of me with that headline. I thought they were referring to 1996 when Andre Johnson was the number one pick Olineman who got cut without ever playing a down.
Luckily it's just a rehash of the speculation that Kelly or Thomas could get cut.
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:26 pm
by brad7686
T.O.!!!
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:31 pm
by ATX_Skins
^^ Agreed, let's just do it already.
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 4:19 pm
by CanesSkins26
So, because he doesn't play on ST's he's not worth a roster spot? Don't think so
No, he might not be worth a roster spot because after his injuries he doesn't have enough speed to gain any separation from NFL defensive backs.
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:30 pm
by yupchagee
CanesSkins26 wrote:So, because he doesn't play on ST's he's not worth a roster spot? Don't think so
No, he might not be worth a roster spot because after his injuries he doesn't have enough speed to gain any separation from NFL defensive backs.
He will be on our roster for 1 simple reason: We have no one better to replace him. We will carry at least 5 WR's. Name 5 on our roster better than Kelly
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 8:25 pm
by Countertrey
It IS a stupid article... apparently, written by a bitter Titans suck-up...
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:55 pm
by CanesSkins26
yupchagee wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:So, because he doesn't play on ST's he's not worth a roster spot? Don't think so
No, he might not be worth a roster spot because after his injuries he doesn't have enough speed to gain any separation from NFL defensive backs.
He will be on our roster for 1 simple reason: We have no one better to replace him. We will carry at least 5 WR's. Name 5 on our roster better than Kelly
Wade, Thomas, and Moss are better than Kelly. We also have several rookies/young players in camp that could earn roster spots. I think that Kelly will be one of our 5 wide receivers, but I certainly would not be surprised if Kelly is cut. In two years he has been injured and not productive. He certainly hasn't done a thing to guarantee himself a roster spot.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:06 am
by frankcal20
he's also been a player in a system that has proven that didn't work. If you were in Zorn's woodshed, that doesn't mean anything. Kelly stayed there amongst other players as well. I agree he's going to battle for his playing time but I don't think he's battling for a roster spot.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:04 am
by CanesSkins26
frankcal20 wrote:he's also been a player in a system that has proven that didn't work. If you were in Zorn's woodshed, that doesn't mean anything. Kelly stayed there amongst other players as well. I agree he's going to battle for his playing time but I don't think he's battling for a roster spot.
You can only blame Zorn so much. It wasn't Zorn's fault that when he was in the game Kelly had a lot of trouble getting separation from defensive backs. Also, Thomas was able to show flashes of potential in Zorn's system, but Kelly wasn't. Sure, he could surprise, but at this point I'm not expecting much out of him.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:23 am
by yupchagee
CanesSkins26 wrote:frankcal20 wrote:he's also been a player in a system that has proven that didn't work. If you were in Zorn's woodshed, that doesn't mean anything. Kelly stayed there amongst other players as well. I agree he's going to battle for his playing time but I don't think he's battling for a roster spot.
You can only blame Zorn so much. It wasn't Zorn's fault that when he was in the game Kelly had a lot of trouble getting separation from defensive backs. Also, Thomas was able to show flashes of potential in Zorn's system, but Kelly wasn't. Sure, he could surprise, but at this point I'm not expecting much out of him.
Wade 34 catches 367 yards
Kelley 25 catches 347 yards
Thomas 25 catches 325 yards
Not much difference.
Sure, it's possible that several young WR's will explode in preseason, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:46 am
by CanesSkins26
Wade 34 catches 367 yards
Kelley 25 catches 347 yards
Thomas 25 catches 325 yards
I see you conveniently left out touchdowns...
Wade - 2
Thomas - 3
Kelly - ZERO
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:24 pm
by Bob 0119
CanesSkins26 wrote:Wade 34 catches 367 yards
Kelley 25 catches 347 yards
Thomas 25 catches 325 yards
I see you conveniently left out touchdowns...
Wade - 2
Thomas - 3
Kelly - ZERO
I seem to recall we didn't have all that many receiving TD's to begin with. How many TD's did Moss have?
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:45 pm
by CanesSkins26
Bob 0119 wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Wade 34 catches 367 yards
Kelley 25 catches 347 yards
Thomas 25 catches 325 yards
I see you conveniently left out touchdowns...
Wade - 2
Thomas - 3
Kelly - ZERO
I seem to recall we didn't have all that many receiving TD's to begin with. How many TD's did Moss have?
More than Kelly.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:17 pm
by brad7686
T.O.!!!
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:02 pm
by VetSkinsFan
brad7686 wrote: JUST SAY NO TO T.O.!!!
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:39 pm
by frankcal20
CanesSkins26 wrote:Bob 0119 wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Wade 34 catches 367 yards
Kelley 25 catches 347 yards
Thomas 25 catches 325 yards
I see you conveniently left out touchdowns...
Wade - 2
Thomas - 3
Kelly - ZERO
I seem to recall we didn't have all that many receiving TD's to begin with. How many TD's did Moss have?
More than Kelly.
I thought it was all Campbell's fault? Now it's Kelly's fault.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 7:42 pm
by yupchagee
frankcal20 wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Bob 0119 wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Wade 34 catches 367 yards
Kelley 25 catches 347 yards
Thomas 25 catches 325 yards
I see you conveniently left out touchdowns...
Wade - 2
Thomas - 3
Kelly - ZERO
I seem to recall we didn't have all that many receiving TD's to begin with. How many TD's did Moss have?
More than Kelly.
I thought it was all Campbell's fault? Now it's Kelly's fault.
Of course! Campbell's gone sp it's time to find a new scapegoat.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 7:46 pm
by Law Hog
Sorry, but I still think Kelley may have some potential. Let's give him 3-4 games this year until we decide to give up on him completely.
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:09 pm
by CanesSkins26
frankcal20 wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Bob 0119 wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Wade 34 catches 367 yards
Kelley 25 catches 347 yards
Thomas 25 catches 325 yards
I see you conveniently left out touchdowns...
Wade - 2
Thomas - 3
Kelly - ZERO
I seem to recall we didn't have all that many receiving TD's to begin with. How many TD's did Moss have?
More than Kelly.
I thought it was all Campbell's fault? Now it's Kelly's fault.
I never said it was his fault. With his injuries, I just don't think that he is going to do much on the NFL.