D. Thompson and D. Stanley ...

*RamsInfiniti* · #1 (**permalink**) -10-10-2007

With all the injuries, I'm a little surprised that Linehan didn't promote one of these guys to the active roster. Hagans is a return man so I'm not quite sure why we bring in a new WR who can only return kicks and knows nothing about our offense. This move lends two possibilities:

1. The coaches have no confidence in Thompson or Stanley

2. The coaches are high on both Thompson and Stanley and are worried if they are moved to the active roster that they might be snatched up by another team when others return from injury and they are waived, since applicable game film will be available to the league

What do you guys think about this?

*tanus* · #2 (**permalink**) -10-10-2007

I definitely think it is option 2. At least I hope it is otherwise I don't see why even bother keeping them on the practice squad if you don't see any future plans (next season and beyond).

*RAMarkable* · #3 (**permalink**) -11-10-2007

Probably has more to do with their lack of experience as anything else. Neither has yet ti play in a NFL game and, at this point in time, Linny is just trying to get some results to save his job. BTW if Linny had any real vision for the future, he most certainly should bring up one or both of these guys to get them some experience for next year. I don't see Brandon Williams as anything but stop gap at best; why not see what the kids can do?

WHAT SAY YE?

*tanus* · #4 (**permalink**) -11-10-2007

Because then you run the risk of exposing your prospects. If we bring Stanley up and he rips it up, what do you do when Bruce and Hall are healthy? You are going to have to cut one of them and then there is no guarantee they will end up back on your PS.

*BigGameMN* · #5 (**permalink**) -11-10-2007

I think it's reason #2, but it shouldn't be.

If one of them comes in and tears it up then you cut Looker and put them in his spot. And don't give me that 'Oh he's Wilken's holder' stuff either. Wilkens got along fine without him last week.

*tanus* · #6 (**permalink**) -11-10-2007

How about that Looker is a better receiver then?

*BigGameMN* · #7 (**permalink**) -11-10-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanus

How about that Looker is a better receiver then?

I didn't say you cut him now and put one of those guys on the roster, I said if they came in and tore it up. Plus Looker doesn't offer anything not already on the roster. Lets say they brought Stanley up and he did good, not great but good. I would also say in that instance to cut Looker and put Stanley on the roster because Stanley brings something we don't have at WR: Blazing speed and a deep threat.

*tomahawk247* · #8 (**permalink**) -11-10-2007

Hagans isnt just a return man, he was our best receiver in pre season. We only need the cover at the WR position for probably one game until one of Bruce, Hall or Looker get healthy. That means the new guy is in and then out straight away.