Thread: WR David Patten released by redskins

David Patten was released from the Redskins after 2 years and little productivity, but then again look at who his QBs were.
I say we take a look at him considering our WR situation.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2808744

HMMMMM.
Not sure if we are that desparate yet.

Only cracked 50 receptions twice and only played 1 out of the last 4 seasons.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/player...?playerId=1393

It would have to be for league minimum.

"Marrdro" wrote:

HMMMMM.
Not sure if we are that desparate yet.

Only cracked 50 receptions twice and only played 1 out of the last 4 seasons.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/player...?playerId=1393

It would have to be for league minimum.

I agree.
But I wouldn't use '50 receptions only twice' as my criteria.
He would be expected to catch only 25-40 passes this year, at his age and skill level, and the contract should be for 1 year at the vet min.
He would be WR#4 or 5, behind Wade.
He was productive in New England, where I saw him a lot.
But that was a few years ago, and the Pats let him go, which indicates he isn't productive since Bellichick has kept some aging vets until they have nothing left in their tank; e.g. Flutie, and Johnson (LB).

The question to ask of an older WR who is released is 'why did his team release him if he could still be productive?'
The answer is probably that he isn't likely to be productive, or that the team recently acquired 1 or 2 other good WRs and there isn't enough room for him in training camp.

The Vikings will almost certainly pass on him.
I doubt that he will even see the Mpls-St. Paul Airport lounge.

The Patriots will probably sign him up real quick...so that they can run their 10 WRs and Tom Brady Offense!

No Thanks I would rather give somebody young a chance to prove themselves than try and salvage Patten.

i love how as soon as someone is released there is a topic about how the vikings should sign him.