robbomango
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2011
- Messages
- 4,774
- Reaction score
- 2,239
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.If the Pats cared that much about losing Salas they wouldn't have waived him - they deemed it more important to get a third string offensive tackle onto the roster. So the Eagles claiming him doesn't really bother me.
Paging Jabar Gaffney, paging Jabar Gaffney...
What I find interesting is that the Eagles felt that Salas would be a bigger improvement for them over the 2 WRs they have on their PS in Marvin McNutt and BJ Cunningham.
What I find interesting is that the Eagles felt that Salas would be a bigger improvement for them over the 2 WRs they have on their PS in Marvin McNutt and BJ Cunningham.
Correction - They deemed it necessary to add another OL to the roster in the event that Cannon or Solder got injured during the game..
Salas was deemed most expendable at the time based on the circumstances. This idea that they didn't care about losing him is just stupid. They had put time and money into developing him including paying him more to not sign with another team previously.
If you don't think that Belichick / McDaniels muttered a "damn" when they heard that Salas was picked up, so be it. But don't sit there and try and pass it off as they couldn't give a damn because they did. Guaranteed.
He was inactive - it wouldn't have mattered if Solder or Cannon got hurt. They did it because it was the last day to activate him for the year, not because they needed him to play yesterday.
What I find interesting is that the Eagles felt that Salas would be a bigger improvement for them over the 2 WRs they have on their PS in Marvin McNutt and BJ Cunningham.
I know he was inactive. Doesn't change the fact that they needed another OT on the team in case of injury with Vollmer's back acting up. And yes, I understand that they had to activate him or lose him for the season. Doesn't change the fact they need another OT.
Nothing you've said changes the fact that the idea that the Pats didn't care if they lost Salas makes no sense at all.
They want to F with the Pats would be my guess. Of course, I could be wrong.
They want to F with the Pats would be my guess. Of course, I could be wrong.
He played 6 snaps.Greg Salas was activated against the Colts -- but did not play.