Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Mason v. Rock

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-05-2008, 09:05 AM   #31
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 82,365
Re: Mason v. Rock

I don't see Mason beating out Rock. The only way I see Mason making the team is if someone in front of him gets hurt.

By the way PS players can be signed away from other teams as long as they are signed to that team's active roster.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 08-05-2008, 09:13 AM   #32
Playmaker
 
freddyg12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,540
Re: Mason v. Rock

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemnseven View Post
No way they keep six wideouts -- there'll be five at most, and then one would be inactive every week. I believe the rule of thumb is to keep 9 or 10 offensive linemen. That means Mix is gone, unless he can unseat Thrash. I don't see that happening.

Nemo can't be on the practice squad anymore since this is his third year.

I think they'll also need one more fullback behind Sellers. That makes Mason the odd man out.
Sure about that? I haven't looked at all the position scenarios, but I've thought all along that they might make it work to keep 6 wr's for 3 reasons:
1) injuries; we're already seeing the hamstring problems & it's a position that has frequent injury problems & has been in the past (Moss)
2) Both Mix & Thrash play spec teams & play it well. Don't know if they'd have the #4 wr play teams, but that would make it even more feasible to keep 6.
3) Solid Depth; the potential of all these wideouts combined w/Thrash's value to the team might allow them to keep 6. Zorn is an offensive guy too.
freddyg12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 09:30 AM   #33
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 82,365
Re: Mason v. Rock

Mason was solid but keep in mind he broke a few long runs late in the game when the super scrubs were in. I thought Rock ran well too but the holes just weren't there at times. That's what happens when you're juggling guys in and out on the OL.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 10:34 AM   #34
The Starter
 
skinsnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,224
Re: Mason v. Rock

Mason is good enough to keep on the roster, no doubt.
They need to find a way to keep him.

Perhaps they should have him trying to return kicks or punts or something.
Keep in mind that Mason did very well with the draws that Zorn was calling...he is quicker than Rock for our new offense.
Rock is old school Gibbs....yes he's decent, but Mason fits the scheme better...kinda like a poor man's westbrook....
If he catches well...something we don't know yet....he could actually be a viable 3rd and long back...I just don't see Rock in that situation.

Rock cannot be cut...he is a must keep with special teams and a key team player...kinda like a Thrash...only younger...so that means to keep Mason, he must be able to play teams....
It is entirely possible if Mason returns kicks well with Rock, that may eliminate the need for Thrash....I'd keep my eye on this
__________________
I hate Dallas...Period
skinsnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 10:43 AM   #35
MVP
 
dmek25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 52
Posts: 10,518
Re: Mason v. Rock

if Mix shows anything, Thrash is gone. i dont understand all the man love for him. and , barring injury, Mason is gone too. just cant beat out Cartwright. but i am not saying Mason cant play in this league. i thought he ran well
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan
dmek25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 11:23 AM   #36
Impact Rookie
 
hail_2_da_skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 58
Posts: 863
Re: Mason v. Rock

Competition is good. Mason looks like a better runner, especially for this scheme. Rock has proven himself as a standout special teams player. This is going to be a tough choice the Redskins staff. Lets just see how it plays out the next four weeks. Injuries seems to solve these problems.

In regard to the battle for punter, I think Brooks is already the winner. The kid can boom them. I don't care if he cannot hold for the place kicker, that's what backup quarterbacks are for. Having a backup quarterback as holder opens up fake kicks.
__________________
"HAIL TO THE SKINS"
hail_2_da_skins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 02:40 PM   #37
Impact Rookie
 
WillH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 905
Re: Mason v. Rock

There is no way you take CP out on third and long . . . so Mason is no help there.

We kept Rock for a reason, he is our ST.

I like Betts alright, but two years ago anyone could have been running through the holes our OL was creating. If we could get anything of value for him Id be all for it, but I doubt we would.

So Mason really is overkill. I love the way the guy runs, but we really dont NEED him, he would just be a luxury. Hopefully we can keep him for another season on PS and see what to do from there.

P.S. Thrash gets love because he has been a fairly consistent possession receiver in the NFC East for several years. No he is not a Super Star but he makes the clutch catches often.
WillH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 06:17 PM   #38
Impact Rookie
 
PennSkinsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Age: 44
Posts: 752
Re: Mason v. Rock

I wouldn't mind seeing if Mason can return kicks as well.
__________________
DC Pro Sports Report - Home of the Internet's Largest NFL Mock Draft Database. Best Redskins Redskins discussion, theWarpath.net

PennSkinsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 06:21 PM   #39
Assistant Regional Mod
 
EternalEnigma21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Warrenton VA
Age: 34
Posts: 2,953
Re: Mason v. Rock

yeah, i think the better competition is mix/thrash. there's two guys who both contribute well to special teams. thrash seems more dependable in the passing game, but we haven't seen mix in the mix that much, so who knows.
__________________
Need electrical work in the Northern VA, or Shenandoah Valley? Click here

...and why do we still have a Tom Tupa avatar???
EternalEnigma21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2008, 07:11 PM   #40
Special Teams
 
mmil12's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 107
Re: Mason v. Rock

If you go to redskins.com the question is posed to Zorn if he is going to keep 4 backs specifically Mason making the team. Zorn, sounded optimistic that he would make the team. However, he was very politically correct in not saying yes or saying no. However, he really seems to like mason and his ability. When we get to 53, I think we are going to see a few surprise cuts.
mmil12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 06:34 PM   #41
Registered User
 
SBXVII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,766
Re: Mason v. Rock

I'm sorry for possibly repeating what others may have said but I sorta got the feeling Rock was being given a chance to show case what he can do other then play special teams. I also kinda got the feeling Zorn was testing other kick returners to see if any would be a good fill in for Rock.

I'll agree that Rock is a good return man but if you need depth at other positions then someone has to go and I think Zorn was trying several things that night. I honestly felt Mason out played Rock completely. Rock did nothing other then look like a scared RB being chased all over the field. Atleast Mason would find a whole and run it through. I don't know what Zorn may or may not have said but I got the feeling that Sun. was a test for Rock and if Zorn can find someone who can be a kick returner and play another position...ie; WR, S, or RB that can do the job as well as Rock then Rock may be gone.

I know some have said to me that we kept Westbrook yrs ago and have kept Rock for yrs but keep in mind that was how Gibbs ran things. and maybe Norv but the others used him as a 3rd back/kick returner. I don't think he's all that great at being a RB but is awsome at being a KR.

again sorry if someone has inside info and have been told we will keep 4 and sorry for not reading all the discussion.
SBXVII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 06:37 PM   #42
Playmaker
 
redskins5044's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Schertz, Tx
Age: 35
Posts: 3,136
Re: Mason v. Rock

there is no way mason will stay on the practice squad. if we put him on it some other team will scoop him up in a heartbeat. i like mason i think he needs to be on our roster.
redskins5044 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2008, 09:15 PM   #43
Special Teams
 
DIRTEE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 256
Re: Mason v. Rock

If Mason does well the rest of the preseason, he could unseed Rock. He's really gonna have to show and prove. Also, I think there will be 6 receivers. There's no need for a situational rusher with Jason Taylor on the team. If possible, Wilson goes to the PS.
DIRTEE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2008, 07:38 AM   #44
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Re: Mason v. Rock

Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyg12 View Post
Sure about that? I haven't looked at all the position scenarios, but I've thought all along that they might make it work to keep 6 wr's for 3 reasons:
1) injuries; we're already seeing the hamstring problems & it's a position that has frequent injury problems & has been in the past (Moss)
2) Both Mix & Thrash play spec teams & play it well. Don't know if they'd have the #4 wr play teams, but that would make it even more feasible to keep 6.
3) Solid Depth; the potential of all these wideouts combined w/Thrash's value to the team might allow them to keep 6. Zorn is an offensive guy too.
Keeping six wideouts means there would only be room for one fullback, and that's not going to happen for a West Coast offense.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2008, 12:21 PM   #45
The Starter
 
skinsnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,224
Re: Mason v. Rock

Betts aint even worth a 3rd rounder...If we can get a 3rd for him, I'd do it.
And regarding not needing a situational passer, you are crazy....we probably keep 2 of em.
The skins should find a way to keep both Chris Wilson AND Erasumus James.

Mix will not make the team...its a numbers game...we will keep 5 and 3 RB and somehow need to keep both situational pass rushers...as you can tell, we need Dline pressure.

We may need to pick up a solid LB and DT as a late vet pickup. CB is fine, Safety is still unknown but firming up.

Regarding Mason....unless there is a RB trade (doubtful) he wont make the team unless EJames or CWilson gets cut
__________________
I hate Dallas...Period
skinsnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.29289 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25