Redskins Sign Fred Beasley

GhettoDogAllStars · 08-23-2007, 08:47 PM

I'm not sure how good Beasley is now, but I definitely would not say he sucks. A couple years ago he was a premier fullback. I'm definitely curious of this signing. Sellers can block and catch, so I can't see why that would be the motivation.

dmek25 · 08-23-2007, 08:57 PM

seems like AL Saunders wants a fullback in his offense. just wish it was one that played last season. back in the day, Beasley was a monster( back in the day)

RMSkins · 08-23-2007, 10:28 PM

Does anyone think the FO brought Beasley in just to get on Brandon Lloyd's case?? In all seriousness though Beasley is a decent pickup, he was a great FB when he was with the Niners, not to sure how much he has left in the tank, but if Sellers goes down I will feel a lot more comfortable knowing that we have a former Pro Bowl FB backing him up.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 08-23-2007, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmek25

seems like AL Saunders wants a fullback in his offense.( back in the day)

That's the interesting thing. I know Saunders had Tony Richardson in KC, but I thought I remember hearing last offseason that we were switching to more singleback formations.

GMScud · 08-23-2007, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

That's the interesting thing. I know Saunders had Tony Richardson in KC, but I thought I remember hearing last offseason that we were switching to more singleback formations.

Between the single back sets and the Betts/Portis 2 RB formations, I don't think the FB will play a prominent role. When we do need a FB, I don't see why Sellers can't fit the part. He's a great short yardage receiver and a load as a blocker. Only thing I can see is Schmitt getting cut and Beasley being nothing more than a backup.

70Chip · 08-23-2007, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMScud

Between the single back sets and the Betts/Portis 2 RB formations, I don't think the FB will play a prominent role. When we do need a FB, I don't see why Sellers can't fit the part. He's a great short yardage receiver and a load as a blocker. Only thing I can see is Schmitt getting cut and Beasley being nothing more than a backup.

I don't think we will see Betts and Portis together much. But Sellers should be in there if a FB is called for. He's a beast. Whoever the other fullback ends up being is purely a backup and special teamer. I can't imagine any situation where we wouldn't be better off with Sellers in the game if a FB is called for.

GMScud · 08-23-2007, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 70Chip

I don't think we will see Betts and Portis together much. But Sellers should be in there if a FB is called for. He's a beast. Whoever the other fullback ends up being is purely a backup and special teamer. I can't imagine any situation where we wouldn't be better off with Sellers in the game if a FB is called for.

I agree 100% with everything you say about Sellers. He's one of my favorite Skins. But I've read (sorry, I have no link) a couple of times that they have sets designed with both Portis and Betts in the backfield. Think of how fun it would be to have Portis, Betts, Moss, Cooley, and Randle El all in at the same time with Campbell at the helm?? Goosebumps...

70Chip · 08-23-2007, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMScud

I agree 100% with everything you say about Sellers. He's one of my favorite Skins. But I've read (sorry, I have no link) a couple of times that they have sets designed with both Portis and Betts in the backfield. Think of how fun it would be to have Portis, Betts, Moss, Cooley, and Randle El all in at the same time with Campbell at the helm?? Goosebumps...

I guess I was going off what they've done up until now. But, hey, we shouldn't be afraid to try some new things. Sometimes the answer is hiding in plain sight...

Skins_4_Lyfe · 08-24-2007, 11:25 AM

Oh no whats next, will Sellers be let go...

MTK · 08-24-2007, 11:29 AM

Beasley is just going to be a backup... not sure why this would mean anything for Sellers.

Sometimes a move is just a move, why do some people have to read too far into things?

MonkFan4Life · 08-24-2007, 12:22 PM

My sentiments exactly Matty. Everytime the Skins sign someone, Skins fans go batshit over it. The freaking sky is falling EVERY time we bring someone in except for Kendall I heard good things about that pick up. But anyone we bring in there's always a reason why we shouldn't. And then when the SKins don't adhere to what all the pundits say we need we question the team again. See the defensive line situation. The SKins pretty much stayed pat with who they had and they look like a whole new squad out there. Go figure, we really didn't NEED to bring in Okoye ? I thought that the team would implode with suckiness because that's how it was told to me. Beasley will be a back-up. I'm thinking about the Jumbo/Goal Line situations where you bring in Beasley and Sellars out there. Creating holes for the RB or one another.

HAIL

GusFrerotte · 08-24-2007, 04:58 PM

Beasley was pretty good for the 49ers a few years back, but why get him now? I think they are taking a lot of risks getting rid of guys for injury prone vets. Our offseason was pretty good this year, now we potentially muck it up with these recent signings.

backrow · 08-24-2007, 11:22 PM

Fred was out of the NFL for a year. I don't see him sticking. Please don't bet on his retention after final cuts.

08-23-2007, 08:47 PM	#16
GhettoDogAllStars Playmaker Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Denver Age: 43 Posts: 2,762	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley I'm not sure how good Beasley is now, but I definitely would not say he sucks. A couple years ago he was a premier fullback. I'm definitely curious of this signing. Sellers can block and catch, so I can't see why that would be the motivation. __________________ To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered.

08-23-2007, 08:57 PM	#17
dmek25 MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: lancaster,pa Age: 63 Posts: 10,672	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley seems like AL Saunders wants a fullback in his offense. just wish it was one that played last season. back in the day, Beasley was a monster( back in the day) __________________ "It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan

08-23-2007, 10:28 PM	#18
RMSkins The Starter Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Harrisburg, PA Age: 37 Posts: 1,066	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley Does anyone think the FO brought Beasley in just to get on Brandon Lloyd's case?? In all seriousness though Beasley is a decent pickup, he was a great FB when he was with the Niners, not to sure how much he has left in the tank, but if Sellers goes down I will feel a lot more comfortable knowing that we have a former Pro Bowl FB backing him up.

08-24-2007, 11:25 AM	#24
Skins_4_Lyfe Special Teams Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Upper Marlboro, MD/Greensboro, NC Age: 37 Posts: 482	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley Oh no whats next, will Sellers be let go... __________________ WARRIOR

08-24-2007, 11:29 AM	#25
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,846	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley Beasley is just going to be a backup... not sure why this would mean anything for Sellers. Sometimes a move is just a move, why do some people have to read too far into things? __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

08-24-2007, 12:22 PM	#26
MonkFan4Life The Starter Join Date: Mar 2006 Age: 48 Posts: 1,851	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley My sentiments exactly Matty. Everytime the Skins sign someone, Skins fans go batshit over it. The freaking sky is falling EVERY time we bring someone in except for Kendall I heard good things about that pick up. But anyone we bring in there's always a reason why we shouldn't. And then when the SKins don't adhere to what all the pundits say we need we question the team again. See the defensive line situation. The SKins pretty much stayed pat with who they had and they look like a whole new squad out there. Go figure, we really didn't NEED to bring in Okoye ? I thought that the team would implode with suckiness because that's how it was told to me. Beasley will be a back-up. I'm thinking about the Jumbo/Goal Line situations where you bring in Beasley and Sellars out there. Creating holes for the RB or one another. HAIL __________________ Catch me on YouTube ! http://www.youtube.com/user/DowntimeRB?feature=mhw5 The "punishment" by the league : "It's like getting a ticket for going too fast on a road a week ago and they changed the speed limit today"

08-24-2007, 04:58 PM	#27
GusFrerotte Registered User Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Detroit area Posts: 4,153	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley Beasley was pretty good for the 49ers a few years back, but why get him now? I think they are taking a lot of risks getting rid of guys for injury prone vets. Our offseason was pretty good this year, now we potentially muck it up with these recent signings.

08-24-2007, 11:22 PM	#28
backrow The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: 36.28 x 76.22 Age: 73 Posts: 1,812	Re: Redskins Sign Fred Beasley Fred was out of the NFL for a year. I don't see him sticking. Please don't bet on his retention after final cuts. __________________ '37, '42, '83, '88, '92. Championship!

Redskins Sign Fred Beasley

Locker Room Main Forum