- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Saints re-signed Michael Ola; Boston Scott Waived; Boston Scott Cleared Waivers
Posted on 9/5/18 at 12:53 pm to bonethug0180
Posted on 9/5/18 at 12:53 pm to bonethug0180
quote:
My concern is we cut some late round picks that actually looked promising while keeping guys like Gray, Carr, and TLL.
yea it's not so much the cuts alone, more who was kept on instead of them. yes the team is deep but JT Gray, TLL, Carr over Jamerson and Scott is highly questionable, at best. Jamerson showed promise. I can live without Moore. CSP is really rolling the dice with the Scott move. I wasn't keen on trading Lawrence either. We'll see.
This post was edited on 9/5/18 at 1:03 pm
1
Posted on 9/5/18 at 12:54 pm to REG861
waived boston scott?
Posted on 9/5/18 at 12:54 pm to Chad504boy
Alright I've bit my tongue on a few cut decisions they've made lately, but this is an absolutely insane move.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 12:56 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
I would think he has a much lower percentage of clearing waivers than Gray or Carr.
I don't agree. Carr is a veteran WR who in a pinch could help a team. The playbook for a special teams player is limited enough to where he can catch on fast too.
6th RD Rookie RB is low hanging fruit any time something like this comes up.
The bigger picture is that Scott or Jonathan Williams or another unknown RB will be on the active roster come Sunday. Scott's situation is the best to gamble with in this situation.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 12:59 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
No team is adding this dude to their active roster
so if a team claims him, he has to be active for sunday?
Posted on 9/5/18 at 12:59 pm to Fun Bunch
This is strange. I don’t get it
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:02 pm to Chad504boy
I can not believe we have cut 3 draft picks, Elliott, and Williams instead of a no name 4th string safety with 2 unimpressive special teams tackles
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:02 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
The bigger picture is that Scott or Jonathan Williams or another unknown RB will be on the active roster come Sunday. Scott's situation is the best to gamble with in this situation.
Not really, considering Williams already cleared waivers and is on the PS. You already gambled with him and won.
Why do it again?
This is a beyond odd move. No team was going to claim Carr or Gray.
I do not mean to offend you here, but you have not liked the Scott draft pick from the beginning, so this may be some confirmation bias from you.
What I saw with my own eyes from Scott makes this utterly perplexing, regardless of if it works out or not.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:03 pm to Chad504boy
Chad I’m pretty sure if he is claimed he has to go to the 53.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:03 pm to Fun Bunch
I still don't get running TLL over Scott on kickoffs. or at anything.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:03 pm to Lester Earl
I think what Chad was trying to get at was he could be on the 53 but not active on gameday
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:03 pm to Chad504boy
Payton has just stashed Scott somewhere only he knows so no worries.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:03 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
This is a beyond odd move. No team was going to claim Carr or Gray.
I'd argue, people will claim Carr.
I don't think they'd claim Gray though.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:04 pm to htran90
quote:
I don't think they'd claim Gray though.
They've probably never even heard of him.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:05 pm to htran90
This shite is crazy the amount of good players cut for this Gray guy. I would love to hear why we kept Gray.
And to the person who said we’d have another running back on the roster by game day if that’s true why risk cutting them and not cut whoever won’t be on the roster then?
And to the person who said we’d have another running back on the roster by game day if that’s true why risk cutting them and not cut whoever won’t be on the roster then?
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:06 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Carr is a veteran WR
You mean the guys that has all of one career regular season games played (two if you count postseason)?
Yeah real vet that guy is.
And we only have 4 or 5 active receivers on game day. Carr is going to be inactive unless someone is injured.
Waste of a spot over, say, your third HB that would see some time.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:06 pm to Charlito
quote:
And to the person who said we’d have another running back on the roster by game day if that’s true why risk cutting them and not cut whoever won’t be on the roster then?
Exactly. I often don't understand some roster decisions, but this one is one of the more bizarre I've seen from a competent franchise.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:08 pm to Chad504boy
quote:
so if a team claims him, he has to be active for sunday?
No, just on their 53. Which is why it isn't so crazy to believe some team lacking depth, especially at HB, would claim him.
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:08 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Not really, considering Williams already cleared waivers and is on the PS. You already gambled with him and won.
Why do it again?
Because no team is signing a 5’6” RB to their active roster who has spent all camp with another team
quote:
do not mean to offend you here, but you have not liked the Scott draft pick from the beginning, so this may be some confirmation bias from you.
That wouldn’t offend me bunchie but let’s deal In facts here.
I liked the pick actually, thought this guy could be a passing game weapon for us. And even last week I conceded he should make the team after people got in an uproar because I thought he was on the bubble. All the while though, I knew he was expendable.
I’ve been wrong before but I’d be shocked if someone claimed him
Posted on 9/5/18 at 1:09 pm to bonethug0180
quote:I thought we were the team lacking HB depth.
No, just on their 53. Which is why it isn't so crazy to believe some team lacking depth, especially at HB, would claim him.
Page 3 of 9
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News