What I would like to see the rest of the year.

Its now time to start evaluating our potential.
Here would be my starters for the rest of the year. Evaluating players for next year is about all I see we have left.

DEFENSE

CB - Bartell
DE - Green
DT - Pickett
DT - Kennedy
DE - Hargrove
CB - Johnson \ Groce

LB - Pisa
MLB - Claiborne \ Trev Faulk
LB - Chillar \ Wahlroos

FS - Furrey \ Atogwe
SS - Carter \ Furrey


OFFENSE

WR - Curtis
LT - Pace
LG - Terrell
C - Turner \ Saipaia
RG - Saipaia \ Tucker
RT - Barron
WR - Mc Donald \ Thompson

QB - Fitzpatrick
RB - Jackson
FB - Hegecock \ Manu
TE - Manu \ Hedgecock

My starters would be based off the need to evaluate at positions and speeding up learning curves for some. Manu was my only option at TE other then Cleeland and the water boy. I would like to see Hedgecock a game or two at TE. The first name would be the primary starter with the second name splitting time with the primary.

[ramhard]

This isn't exhibition season. You're telling me you're going to tell players like Holt, nope you are the best at your position but we are going to sit you, despite all the off-season work - your career goals- your professionalism - your competitiveness - to evaluate others? You're going to ask fans to come pay full dollar to watch us evaluate our backups?

Just plain Nope. If there are injuries or people close in talent you may dole our more time - but as you describe - Nope.

[wanderer]

Some players such as Holt, Timmerman, and Bruce are playing hurt. Wouldn't it be better to shut them down adn allow them to heal for next year instead of risking comlicating the injuries. In the case of Timmerman he is obviously not healed from last years injuries and surgeries. Holt has a bad knee requiring him to wear a brace and is not able to cut or turn on the speed. Bruce still has something left in the tank if we don't abuse him for meanless games. I'm sure others are in the same situation.

I agree, lets see what the rookies and backups have and evaluate what we need for next year.

[Nick]

I don't think it's quite as simple as a list makes it out to be. You've listed your starters, and you've listed names you'd like to see subbed in, but there are some glaring absences. Guys like Coakley, Little, Holt, Bruce, and Archuleta still need to see the field, I believe. In Holt and Bruce's case, I don't think you can just sit them because you want to see what the guys behind have to offer. These are two of the best receivers in the game; they deserve to be on the field regardless of what our season priority is. Besides, I think we have a good idea of what we have in our receiver corps. If they're still hurt, then you can sit them until they're healthy. But if they're good to go, I don't think you can make a case to bench them, especially if you want to see what Fitz brings to the table. Hard to make an accurate evaluation on a QB when you take away two of his biggest weapons.

But for Coakley, Little, and Arch, I think we need to see them on the field to evaluate where they are. Little's not having a great year, and this is on the heels of not having a good 2004. He's had off the field concerns that may play a role, but with some questions already surfacing on the RDE side, I think we need to figure out what's going on at LDE, too. Coakley signed a five year deal this spring but isn't even in your rotation. We need to keep him on the field and see how effective he can be to determine if we need another starting linebacker. And Arch is a free agent this spring, and I think we need to see him as well to determine if we want him back or not. Who knows, maybe we franchise him and try to make a deal. But I don't think you can just sit some of these guys so you can look at players below them on the chart.

Originally Posted by wanderer

Some players such as Holt, Timmerman, and Bruce are playing hurt. Wouldn't it be better to shut them down adn allow them to heal for next year instead of risking comlicating the injuries. In the case of Timmerman he is obviously not healed from last years injuries and surgeries. Holt has a bad knee requiring him to wear a brace and is not able to cut or turn on the speed. Bruce still has something left in the tank if we don't abuse him for meanless games. I'm sure others are in the same situation.

I agree, lets see what the rookies and backups have and evaluate what we need for next year.

Exactly my point I agree most of the veterans have been playing hurt and we need to have this ship going full speed ahead next year. These young players if they are to be counted on next year need experience. These older veterans will not benefit or get better by playing this year they are as good as they are going to get we just need them healthy next year.

These guys are all hurt or have been playing hurt.
Bruce
Holt
Bulger
Timmerman
Arch
Fisher

Little would be the most questionable one to sit but I really want these other two young DEs to get all the snaps they can before next year. I would still want to see Little get snaps just not interested in seeing him start. I am more interested in next year having some one opposite him that can play.

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

You've listed your starters, and you've listed names you'd like to see subbed in, but there are some glaring absences.

Nick the second people I listed were also starters not subs. The first player would start the majority of the games at that position and the second would at the least get a start or two at the position to see what they have.

Guys like Coakley, Little, Holt, Bruce, and Archuleta still need to see the field, I believe.

That’s fine they can play but I would prefer they not get the bulk of the load. If they have any lingering health issues they need to sit.

I think we have a good idea of what we have in our receiver corps.

IMO if we let Curtis and Mc Donald play they will get better with the more playing time they see. Also if McDonald shines we may have a pawn to trade for some other position.

But for Coakley, Little, and Arch, I think we need to see them on the field to evaluate where they are.

I feel we know Little is a starter if on the roster next year. IMO we should upgrade the other two positions if possible so why not look from with in first and see what our younger players have.

IMO the vets would not benefit as much as the younger guys would. I would rather the younger guys learn on the job this year then I would next year when we have playoff aspirations.

All we have left this season is to prepare ourselves as best as we can for next year. My opinion getting the younger players more playing time would do just that. If we saw something we did not like in one of them then maybe we dump him in the off season instead of finding out next year when we are counting on him to help us win games.

People were saying Hargrove is young and would take time when he was not playing so well. I don’t want to hear the same thing about some of these other guys next year if we don’t get them some major playing time this year when we can afford to let them learn on the job.

We let Hargrove learn on the job this year in games we needed to win. Why not let some of these other guys learn in games that it don’t matter if we win (playoff wise).

[Nick]

Originally Posted by STLRAMSFAN

IMO if we let Curtis and Mc Donald play they will get better with the more playing time they see. Also if McDonald shines we may have a pawn to trade for some other position.

I'm not sure there's a lot that McDonald's going to do that's going to make him worth trading. I don't think the return will be worth it.

Originally Posted by STLRAMSFAN

IMO the vets would not benefit as much as the younger guys would.

They wouldn't in terms of getting better or growing, but we need to know where some of these guys stand. We need to see guys like Coakley and Arch more to know what their role is going to be for next year.

I'm not opposed to getting younger guys more playing time, but the current starters also need some time as well. I don't believe we can close the book on them this season just because we're out of the hunt.