Blades - Frustrated But Not Yet Released
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 12:46 pm
blades954: Right is right wrong is wrong. Don't ask people to be loyal when ur not. It's been real dc appreciate ya
The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era
Washington football community discussions spanning the Redskins to Commanders era. 20+ years of game analysis, player discussions, and fan perspectives.
https://the-hogs.net/messageboard/
Blades - Frustrated But Not Yet Released
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 12:50 pm
I'm confused - didn't he get re-signed last week?
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:07 pm
Says he hasn't been cut yet, but that the writing is on the wall
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:11 pm
Yea, apparently he's not cut yet.
@granthpaulsen: Just talked to HB Blades. He has NOT been cut but says "writing is on wall." His tweet was in reference to his situation
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:14 pm
If he's so butt hurt, why did he re-sign?
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:22 pm
andyjens89 wrote:If he's so butt hurt, why did he re-sign?
Because we he re-signed the team had not yet re-signed Rocky or signed Fox.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:29 pm
CanesSkins26 wrote:andyjens89 wrote:If he's so butt hurt, why did he re-sign?
Because we he re-signed the team had not yet re-signed Rocky or signed Fox.
Rocky was here last year, and they cut Henson so they added Fox.. it's not like there's an obscene amount of ILB on the team. Beat out Fox or Riley or McIntosh and you become #2 or #3.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:32 pm
andyjens89 wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:andyjens89 wrote:If he's so butt hurt, why did he re-sign?
Because we he re-signed the team had not yet re-signed Rocky or signed Fox.
Rocky was here last year, and they cut Henson so they added Fox.. it's not like there's an obscene amount of ILB on the team. Beat out Fox or Riley or McIntosh and you become #2 or #3.
You're forgetting Lorenzo Alexander, who also might be in play for PT at ILB. That's six potential ILBs on the roster right now.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:35 pm
Competition at a position of weakness...
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:47 pm
Sorry but you have to perform at a certain level. If he were that good he would be starting. We cant feel sympathy for a player who is not up to par. We have to only except excellence. That is the only way we get back to a SuperBowl.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:47 pm
1niksder wrote:Competition at a position of weakness...
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
A couple of things...One, I would disagree that ILB is a position of weakness on the team. Obviously you weren't referring to Fletcher, but I think that Rocky did okay last year in the first year of the defense and I think that he'll be just fine opposite Fletcher. Second, it appears that Blades is upset because he thinks that he is going to get cut, hence the "writing on the wall" statement, and not necessarily the competition.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:17 pm
CanesSkins26 wrote:1niksder wrote:Competition at a position of weakness...
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
A couple of things...One, I would disagree that ILB is a position of weakness on the team. Obviously you weren't referring to Fletcher, but I think that Rocky did okay last year in the first year of the defense and I think that he'll be just fine opposite Fletcher. Second, it appears that Blades is upset because he thinks that he is going to get cut, hence the "writing on the wall" statement, and not necessarily the competition.
Not a position of weakness?
Sure Rocky did OK last year, but like you said it was his first year at a new position. After Fletcher who do they have? before bringing Blades back they had nothing to hang their hats on. They had Riley and Henson, with OMG practicing on the inside at the players only get together.
Now they have Riley, Blades, Rocky, Fox and maybe OMG. Rocky will more than likely keep his starting spot although Fox has more time in the scheme, Blades should be next in line but sounds like he's giving up without a fight. I think Alexander beats out Riley as the fourth ILB.
A week ago it was a position of weakness, a week later it's still a position of weakness but the answer may be on the roster. Let's also this can't be a quick fix because Fletcher won't play forever and his replacement needs to be found sooner rather than later
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:35 pm
So long Horatio. If you have competition anxiety, you need to hit the road jack. Does this dude expect to start? 
Better yet, does he think he'll start anywhere else?? #agentfail
Better yet, does he think he'll start anywhere else?? #agentfailPosted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 3:30 pm
If he wasn't cut, I would think this will probably do it for him. Acting like a baby isn't going to get you anywhere. Sucks that you aren't given a job anymore with the Redskins, but rather you must earn it.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 3:34 pm
1niksder wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:1niksder wrote:Competition at a position of weakness...
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
A couple of things...One, I would disagree that ILB is a position of weakness on the team. Obviously you weren't referring to Fletcher, but I think that Rocky did okay last year in the first year of the defense and I think that he'll be just fine opposite Fletcher. Second, it appears that Blades is upset because he thinks that he is going to get cut, hence the "writing on the wall" statement, and not necessarily the competition.
Not a position of weakness?
Sure Rocky did OK last year, but like you said it was his first year at a new position. After Fletcher who do they have? before bringing Blades back they had nothing to hang their hats on. They had Riley and Henson, with OMG practicing on the inside at the players only get together.
Now they have Riley, Blades, Rocky, Fox and maybe OMG. Rocky will more than likely keep his starting spot although Fox has more time in the scheme, Blades should be next in line but sounds like he's giving up without a fight. I think Alexander beats out Riley as the fourth ILB.
A week ago it was a position of weakness, a week later it's still a position of weakness but the answer may be on the roster. Let's also this can't be a quick fix because Fletcher won't play forever and his replacement needs to be found sooner rather than later
I agree with you regarding depth being a concern at ILB and about needing to find an eventual replacement for Fletcher. However, I think that with Rocky (who I think will hang onto the starting job) and Fletcher we will have a very solid set of ILBs.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 4:40 pm
CanesSkins26 wrote:
I agree with you regarding depth being a concern at ILB and about needing to find an eventual replacement for Fletcher. However, I think that with Rocky (who I think will hang onto the starting job) and Fletcher we will have a very solid set of ILBs.
They gave him a $1.5M signing bonus, it's his job to lose
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 5:29 pm
Blades should just go show these idiots that he's better off playing for some other franchise
we'll wait and see if he get's picked up - I will not be holding my breath
we'll wait and see if he get's picked up - I will not be holding my breath
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:47 pm
1niksder wrote:Competition at a position of weakness...
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
Are you taking about Tatupu? We all know that name.
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:53 pm
1niksder wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:1niksder wrote:Competition at a position of weakness...
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
A couple of things...One, I would disagree that ILB is a position of weakness on the team. Obviously you weren't referring to Fletcher, but I think that Rocky did okay last year in the first year of the defense and I think that he'll be just fine opposite Fletcher. Second, it appears that Blades is upset because he thinks that he is going to get cut, hence the "writing on the wall" statement, and not necessarily the competition.
Not a position of weakness?
Sure Rocky did OK last year, but like you said it was his first year at a new position. After Fletcher who do they have? before bringing Blades back they had nothing to hang their hats on. They had Riley and Henson, with OMG practicing on the inside at the players only get together.
Now they have Riley, Blades, Rocky, Fox and maybe OMG. Rocky will more than likely keep his starting spot although Fox has more time in the scheme, Blades should be next in line but sounds like he's giving up without a fight. I think Alexander beats out Riley as the fourth ILB.
A week ago it was a position of weakness, a week later it's still a position of weakness but the answer may be on the roster. Let's also this can't be a quick fix because Fletcher won't play forever and his replacement needs to be found sooner rather than later
I would have to say the coaches agree with you which is why they kept trying to sign more LBs after Rocky signed, when a lot of us thought that we were set when they re-signed Rocky.
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 7:35 am
1niksder wrote:Competition at a position of weakness...
This makes no sense. They should just sign someone we all know and give them the job. Isn't that how it's done
Who dat? Tatupo..?