Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-07-2008, 12:01 AM   #1
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

Malcolm Kelly has yet to make any contribution this year due to injury. Now it appears that despite recovering from the ankle, his bad knee is back again.

Should we have IR'd Kelly when putting together the 53-man and opted for another player, WR or other - maybe Billy McMullen?

From the Post (the snipet about Kelly is on the 2nd page of the article):

Rookie wide receiver Malcolm Kelly played sparingly after finally coming back from a knee injury, but his knee is swelling again, so his status will be evaluated through the week. . .


Brooks Continues To Struggle - washingtonpost.com
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 10-07-2008, 12:08 AM   #2
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

No, because as long as he's week to week, we can hope that he will be ready to contribute in the future. Billy McMullen is the very definition of camp scrub.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 12:30 AM   #3
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
No, because as long as he's week to week, we can hope that he will be ready to contribute in the future. Billy McMullen is the very definition of camp scrub.
Well, I didn't necessarily say we should have only taken McMullen if we IR'd him, just threw him out there.
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 08:24 AM   #4
Camp Scrub
 
HAILItsGAMEDAY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 94
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

I really do feel that Malcolm will eventually contribute to this team. Its a very long season guys and hes just a little banged up right now.
HAILItsGAMEDAY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 08:30 AM   #5
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,722
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

The only way to find out if he will make it is to put him on the field and let him learn, just like DT. This whole season may end up being just getting his feet wet, but at least he will have the year on the field and under his belt.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 09:14 AM   #6
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 35
Posts: 16,275
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

Absolutely not. He's not injured severe enough to miss the entire season. Right now, we can make him inactive most weeks because he's really not needed. He's 5th on the WR depth chart right now.

If we'd sustain some injuries to anyone ahead of him, we may need him to play. We'd regret placing him on IR then.
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 09:21 AM   #7
Propane and propane accessories
 
JWsleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Age: 45
Posts: 4,588
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

Plus, he's practicing, participating in lots of ways that will help with the learning curve. And he still may get healthy for the second half--he will be a good target when he's ready.
__________________
Hail from Houston!
JWsleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 10:00 AM   #8
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,808
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

I agree that his injuries don't really warrant putting him on IR. It's frustrating but they are injuries that you have to try to work through. It's a long season, you don't want to shut guys down prematurely.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 10:07 AM   #9
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,278
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

we're 4-1 looking at a possible 8-1 at the bye, so... it hasn't really hurt us.

that said, he doesn't exactly inspire confidence that he was a good pick thus far...
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 10:24 AM   #10
The Starter
 
drew54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: IOWA
Age: 31
Posts: 1,290
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

This is why the NFL needs a disabled list. We could have put him on the DL for 4 weeks, and then he could have healed and been ready for last week.
__________________
No pressure, no diamonds.
drew54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 10:39 AM   #11
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,808
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by drew54 View Post
This is why the NFL needs a disabled list. We could have put him on the DL for 4 weeks, and then he could have healed and been ready for last week.
Well, there's the PUP list.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 11:00 AM   #12
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,920
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

Nah, he's not hurting us right now with his absence so why shoot yourself in the foot for a whole season when you don't need to.
__________________
Challenge Greatness! Be A Leader! Make A Difference!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 11:01 AM   #13
The Starter
 
drew54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: IOWA
Age: 31
Posts: 1,290
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

I forgot about the PUP list. Was he on the active roster at the start of camp?

Per Wikipedia:

Physically Unable to Perform is the term for a rule in the National Football League which allows teams to designate players as "Physically Unable to Perform" or "PUP". Once they are designated as such, they are prohibited from practicing with the team. They can, however, rehabilitate and participate in team meetings. If a player begins training camp on the PUP list, they can be moved to the active roster at any time, even after one practice. A player is not allowed to be placed on the PUP list if they start training camp on the active roster.

A player who begins the season on the PUP list must sit out his team's first six games. After that point, the player is allowed to practice with the team through Week 10 of the NFL season, and can be activated any time within that window. If the player is not activated by Week 10, he must stop practicing and is unavailable to be moved to the active roster for the remainder of the season.
__________________
No pressure, no diamonds.
drew54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 11:13 AM   #14
The Starter
 
Swarley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Age: 25
Posts: 1,035
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

It's a bit early to be looking at this retrospectively, we don't know what kind of impact (if any) he'll have as the season progresses.
Swarley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2008, 02:03 PM   #15
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 29
Posts: 14,659
Re: Retrospect: Should we have IR'd Malcolm Kelly?

I've actually wanted him on IR for a while. Maybe bring back Anthony Mix for depth or at least find a way to use Fred Davis more, I mean for God's sake the guy used to play receiever, maybe you can split him out near the 10 yard line.

However with Kelly I feel it's better for the long run if we just give him a year to heal and then hopefully he'll end up being the next Rocky McIntosh. Then again Rocky played a little during his Rookie year but still. Actually I think the success with Rocky is one of the main reasons the Redskins decided to draft Kelly in spite of his bad knees. Either way Kelly needs to be brought along slowly.
__________________
"It's nice to be important, but its more important to be nice."
- Scooter

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 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 11:52 PM.


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 0.26307 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