Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Campbell, Rogers Earn Increases

From Jason La Canfora:...

Carlos Rogers's base salary has increased from $602k to $1.403m due to an escalator.

Jason Campbell's base salary has increased from $783k to $2.858m for the same reason.

The increases come from playing time clauses in their contracts, according to sources with knowledge of the situation, with those escalators negotiated into the rookie contracts they signed in 2005.

Both are eligible to be free agents after the 2009 season. They would normally be unrestricted but if there is not an extension to the CBA this year they would be restricted.

By CJ Holley  |  March 8, 2009; 4:15 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Redskins Make Contract Offer to Daniels
Next: Talks Continue with Daniels

Comments

Let me be the FIRST to congratulate them.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 8, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Have heard 2 estimates on cap space, $7million and $11million. This is about $3million. So where does this leave cap space?

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 8, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

thunder (repost, I know)

'....There are still going to be some pretty fine prospects in the 3rd round...'

Which is why I'm wondering if surrendering a high pick from 2010, let's say a 1 and a player (Davis?), to get two picks this year- a 2 and a 3, is a good idea or possibility.

Such a move then gives the team two third round picks to go with the one it already has and the two it doesn't have. That allows the team to draft:

By Round:

1. rt

2. c/g

3. slb
dt

4. cb or te

5. wlb

7. special teamer

But of course, this is all a fantasy.

But if it was a reality, it would fill a couple of holes.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 8, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

But if it was a reality, it would fill a couple of holes.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 8, 2009 4:17 PM
==========================================
My objection comes from being a beaten-down-by-the-brutal-facts Redskins fan:

We are always mortgaging the future to win now. Then we don't win now, and we lather, rinse, and repeat.

There could be an awesome DE waiting for us with our number one pick in 2010. Maybe, just for once, we do the best to help our team LONG TERM this year, and do it again next year?

P.S. I will now don my hair shirt, prepare to wander in the desert for 40 years, and row upstream without a paddle, and further mix my metaphors.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 8, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

My objection comes from being a beaten-down-by-the-brutal-facts Redskins fan:

We are always mortgaging the future to win now. Then we don't win now, and we lather, rinse, and repeat.

There could be an awesome DE waiting for us with our number one pick in 2010. Maybe, just for once, we do the best to help our team LONG TERM this year, and do it again next year?

P.S. I will now don my hair shirt, prepare to wander in the desert for 40 years, and row upstream without a paddle, and further mix my metaphors.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 8, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Yaaawwwnnn. You mean do something smart, act mature, and all that bs. That will never happen.

Posted by: frediefritz | March 8, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Fuzzy21 | March 8, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

I heard this news three days ago. The writer is obviously a communist. Ninth!

Posted by: SMACK1 | March 8, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

From the Watchmen:

1. Dr. Manhattan - a refugee from the Blueman group.
2. the Comedian - a ripff of Robert Downey Jr.
3. Nite Owl II - a ripoff of Batman. Also, is this Snidely Owl? I have been wondering about his identity for some time and (a) he is an owl and (b) the film was make by a Snyder.
4. The first five minutes. The best flick opening there ever was.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 8, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Got a feelin' that Campbell is going to have a breakout year to play for that next contract. All of a sudden receivers come a bit moer open! Hmmmm....

Posted by: rickyroge | March 8, 2009 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Let me be the FIRST to congratulate them.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 8, 2009 4:25 PM |

Let me be the first to congratulate you for scoring a first.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 8, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

More pay, less production - it's the way of the Redskins.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 8, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

This is why Gibbs kept playing Brunell. If we hadnt cut Brunell, we wouldnt have to pay Campbell.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 8, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Let me be the first to congratulate you for scoring a first.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 8, 2009 5:20 PM

Whatever rookie.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 8, 2009 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Curious fact - up to six OTs have been projected to be first round picks by Wally's World but none of them cracked the top 13 in the bench press at the Combine (the Tide's Smith did excuse himself from the festivities).

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 8, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

' http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/redskins_ask_albert?utm_source=a-section '

Gaddamn it, Fuzzy, quit putting ideas in Little Lord Danny's head! LMAO

Posted by: ericenderle | March 8, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

You should really state that you got this information from 'PCINOZ' on the CPDN messege board.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=71&f=1348

Posted by: kenshejoezac | March 8, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

JLC gets called out again.........WHOOP!

Posted by: ericenderle | March 8, 2009 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Almost plagarism if you ask me:

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=71&f=1348&t=4039600

Posted by: kenshejoezac | March 8, 2009 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Anton

I didn't stay around to see the end of Watchman.

Yes: it sucked that bad.

I went to the ticket counter and demanded a refund. They went to a cop working security and he demanded that I leave.

Of course, he and the other policemen on duty were the men who watched me leave Watchmen.

(INSERT rimshot audio and accompanying bad pun groan.)

But the title credits--the 1st 5 minutes-- was indeed exceptional.

So I suggest they re-cut the movie to where the 1st five minutes runs on a loop for about two and a half hours.

Then, they'd have a good money.

Rent 'Changling.' It's a quality film most folks probably missed last Fall.

'Cadillac Records' is good, too.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 8, 2009 6:20 PM | Report abuse

From PFT:
Meanwhile, Evans is slated to compete at left defensive end with Kentwan Balmer.

Balmer is a former first-round draft pick from North Carolina who had seven tackles as a rookie in 16 games with no starts last season.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 8, 2009 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Were people really suggesting drafting Mark Sanchez at 13 on the last thread? If that happens I hope whoever is closest punches Vinny in the face.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | March 8, 2009 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Was anyone else aware that we almost got John Elway in burgundy and gold? From PFT:

CUTLER IN GOOD BRONCOS COMPANY
Posted by Aaron Wilson on March 8, 2009, 6:12 p.m.
As upset as quarterback Jay Cutler is about being involved in trade discussions, he’s not alone in Denver Broncos history as far as prominent players who were once placed on the trading block.

As noted by Jim Armstrong of the Denver Post, former Broncos coach Dan Reeves attempted to trade quarterback John Elway to the Washington Redskins in 1992. And former tight end Shannon Sharpe was linked to a trade discussion by former Broncos coach Mike Shanahan regarding former Arizona Cardinals defensive tackle Eric Swann.

The prospective deals were never executed, though.

Like Cutler and Elway, Sharpe was unaware of the situation initially. Like Cutler, Sharpe was enraged by the fact that the Broncos were considering dealing him away.

“I remember somebody asking me about it and I said, ‘There’s no truth to that,’” Sharpe told the Post. ”And then I find out there is. I was hurt. I thought about all the times I took injections and played hurt and that’s all they thought of me.

“So I went up to Mike’s office and said, ‘Mike, if you think you can get someone in here who’s going to do a better job than I can, go ahead and do it.’ Then I went out and caught 80 balls for a thousand yards and we wound up winning two Super Bowls together.”

According to Sharpe, it took a while before he repaired his relationship with Shanahan.

“It took me a long time to trust Mike,” Sharpe said. “I was a little distrustful, but I got over it. You learn early on that if you play this game long enough, sometimes you’re the wolf and sometimes you’re the lamb. A few times I’ve been the wolf, but more times than that, I’ve been the lamb. You have to be OK with that.

“This is going to take a while. This isn’t a thing where they have a meeting and everything is OK. There’s a natural progression. The old saying is time heals all things, but how much time do they have to mend this? How much time does Josh McDaniels have?”

Cutler and McDaniels are scheduled to meet this week to discuss the situation.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 8, 2009 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Sanchez would not be a bad pickup at 13. No one knows if Campbell is the real deal. And Sanchez will have to sit his rookie year and learn anyway. Campbell still would have this year to prove himself.

Posted by: thehogs | March 8, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Anton

I didn't stay around to see the end of Watchman.

Yes: it sucked that bad.

I went to the ticket counter and demanded a refund. They went to a cop working security and he demanded that I leave.

But the title credits--the 1st 5 minutes-- was indeed exceptional.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 8, 2009 6:20 PM |

Mista - I agree that after the first 5 minutes the flick took a nose dive off of a steep cliff. I had the same thought you did about demanding a refund but then I thought to myself that if I had had the wisdom to leave at the end of the title sequence like a friend had suggested then my $13 would have been well spent.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 8, 2009 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Sanchez started 15 games in college surrounded by a lot of talent and was having a hard time throwing out patterns at the combine. I am not sold on Campbell but I'd rather wait till the end of the year than take a player who is gonna hold a clipboard and has a decent chance of being a bust anyway. 13 has to be a starting OL, LB/DE or trade down.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | March 8, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Sanchez would not be a bad pickup at 13. No one knows if Campbell is the real deal. And Sanchez will have to sit his rookie year and learn anyway. Campbell still would have this year to prove himself.

Posted by: thehogs

The skins have way too many holes not to have the #13 pick has to be able to contribute meaningful time this year. The skins picking a QB that high will be a wasted pick.

Posted by: TWISI | March 8, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Sanchez started 15 games in college surrounded by a lot of talent and was having a hard time throwing out patterns at the combine. I am not sold on Campbell but I'd rather wait till the end of the year than take a player who is gonna hold a clipboard and has a decent chance of being a bust anyway. 13 has to be a starting OL, LB/DE or trade down.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | March 8, 2009 6:57 PM |

Good point about talent surround. In fact, SC's LBs were Stud City. Three are projected 1st rounders. Yet if, say, the Skins were to pick one of them what kind of performance could you project? On the Skins, instead of being one stud among three you would have one lonely stud. Two of the three, Cushing and Matthews, do have good combine stats.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 8, 2009 7:36 PM | Report abuse

This is good news Campbell and Rodgers will be happy. We may miss Springs, but aside from that we are better and younger.

Campbell started 16 games, passed for over 3000 yards, 13 td and 6 int. These are the stats of a guy about to emerge as an elite QB. Now he is possibly a restricted free agent meaning we can match any offer, same with Rodgers.

If we go anywhere in the playoffs, all the negative post writers should resign for being crybabies for the last 5 years. The first 5 years OK, but this team has changed.

Posted by: pabrian2003 | March 8, 2009 8:07 PM | Report abuse

actually im pretty sure watchmen was awesome. you guys know nothing

Posted by: amsaul | March 8, 2009 8:08 PM | Report abuse

pabrian2003: NICE POST!

Ph@ck the negatrons!

Posted by: hollabolla | March 8, 2009 8:28 PM | Report abuse

On the Skins, instead of being one stud among three you would have one lonely stud.
If, sir, by that use of obscure accounting rules and quadratic logic, you intend to imply that Mr. London Fletcher-Baker is not a stud, I shall have to ask you to step outside.

Posted by: daggar | March 8, 2009 8:30 PM | Report abuse


I'm surprised the redskins haven't done anything in reference to the starting OLB to replace Washington, not to mention they still need to upgrade the backup position as well

Posted by: thehogs | March 8, 2009 8:31 PM | Report abuse

At which time I shall endeavor to walk a mile in your shoes.
Then I'll be a mile away, and have your shoes.

Posted by: daggar | March 8, 2009 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Anyone else find the fighting Abe Lincoln commercial as funny as I do? I think its brilliant.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 8, 2009 8:47 PM | Report abuse

At which time I shall endeavor to walk a mile in your shoes.
Then I'll be a mile away, and have your shoes.

Posted by: daggar | March 8, 2009 8:32 PM

And I've got a bicycle and I'm gonna catch your asz and make you fix the bike and give me back my shoes. That's what I'm gonna do. So what's your backup plan?

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 8, 2009 8:50 PM | Report abuse

I'll take the camel.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 8, 2009 8:51 PM | Report abuse

And I've got a bicycle and I'm gonna catch your asz and make you fix the bike...
First, what broke on the bike?

Knowing it's you, I'd simply shout out "Look, it's Andre Smith on the bench press!" and depart while you evaluated his clean and his jerk.

Posted by: daggar | March 8, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I'll take the camel.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 8, 2009 8:51 PM

And you'll either die of lung cancer or you'll get humped to death.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 8, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

kenshejoezac, maybe JLC is PCinOz?

Posted by: Alan4 | March 8, 2009 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Almost plagarism if you ask me:

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=71&f=1348&t=4039600


Posted by: kenshejoezac

Why "almost"?

Posted by: Kenbeatrizz | March 8, 2009 9:25 PM | Report abuse

be warned I once rode a camel and all it did the whole trip was lick my leg. But I guess that it could have been worse.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 8, 2009 9:31 PM | Report abuse

be warned I once rode a camel and all it did the whole trip was lick my leg. But I guess that it could have been worse.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 8, 2009 9:31 PM

This is the "glass is half full" view of camel riding. If you were a "glass is half empty" guy you would have said that it could have been better.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 8, 2009 9:58 PM | Report abuse

First, what broke on the bike?

Knowing it's you, I'd simply shout out "Look, it's Andre Smith on the bench press!" and depart while you evaluated his clean and his jerk.

Posted by: daggar | March 8, 2009 8:58 PM

Why are you asking me what broke? You're the repairman. That's why I'm bringing it to you.

Andre Smith? Clean and jerk? The jerk was clean out of town before I could get my clipboard warmed up.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 8, 2009 10:00 PM | Report abuse

be warned I once rode a camel and all it did the whole trip was lick my leg. But I guess that it could have been worse.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 8, 2009 9:31 PM

Hey, you're clutching its hump, it's entitled to lick your leg. I hope you bought it dinner afterwards.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 8, 2009 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Please, for once Danny, draft a freaking DE in the 1st round!!! PLEASE!!

Posted by: jj250 | March 8, 2009 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Alan4:

Fell down laughing dude. Primo funny.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 8, 2009 11:42 PM | Report abuse

Maybe we should cal lthe editorial board of the post, just to see if they were aware, LOL

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | March 9, 2009 1:06 AM | Report abuse

Coming from Hawaii, I hope that when we Jason Campbell play this year, we don't see the same deer in the headlights that we see every year for the last 5 years. If we do, I think it's time for Colt. This kid is like Kurt Warner, He reads defenses quickly and gets the ball to the receivers. He scans the field and has a quick release and is ACCURATE! I watched him at the QB challenge before he was drafted and he was more accurate than Flacco, Matt Ryan, and all the other soon to be drafted QB's. Take my word, this kid is GOOD!

Posted by: KurtShanaman | March 9, 2009 1:35 AM | Report abuse

I don't get the "deer in the headlights" remark regarding Campbell...he didn't look that way when he went the first half of the season without an interception. He didn't have that look when he threw the big touchdown that won the game against the Saints. Dude is a legit NFL QB--just because he's not Peyton Manning or Tom Brady doesn't mean he's not good. Give the man some weapons and an offense that actually gets the most out of its available talent and THEN judge. Right now that offense is such a joke it's not fair say what type of player he is with any certainty.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 9, 2009 5:52 AM | Report abuse

Having said that, I'll bet you could plug JC into Carolina's lineup and they'd be a better team than they are today.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 9, 2009 5:54 AM | Report abuse

All I know is during the pre-season, Colt outplayed JC big time. We had JC for 5 years and he had a decent half season then fell apart. How many more years do we have to wait?

Posted by: KurtShanaman | March 9, 2009 6:49 AM | Report abuse

Plug Garcia into Carolina and he will win for them.

Posted by: KurtShanaman | March 9, 2009 6:51 AM | Report abuse

You can't be serious Kurt...Colt vs. 3rd stringers and street free agents in the preseason is far from being ready to start Week 1. Colt may get his chance to prove himself but it won't be for another year or two. Don't forget this team has some ridiculous attachment to Todd Collins and Colt will be the 3rd stringer at least for one more year.

As for the "how many more years do we have to wait" comment: however long it takes for the crappy FO to stop changing offenses like tube socks and give JC a chance to actually run the same thing consecutive seasons for a change. As many draft choices were given up to get this kid the least the FO could do is give him every opportunity to succeed instead of annually setting him up to fail.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 9, 2009 7:07 AM | Report abuse

glad to see minimal effort on my part provide some fodder

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 7:13 AM | Report abuse

I like Colt as much as the next guy, you watch him in an interview and how can you not like the kid, though I think he should have kept the dreds. But people act as if Campbell has never improved from what he did last year and the year before, this is his first off season where he is not losing the play book from the year before. Year 1 was the Gibbs run and dump offense, year 2 was the Gibbs/Saunders who's on first war, year 3 was weird Al's air ball O, year 4 Zorn WC. Year 5 will be the same.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Questions about JC???

Wonder why teams don't build for the long term...it's jackazz "fans" that don't have patience to develop a franchise QB. You can pick Colt over Campbell if you want to...but watch how long he sits on any team's bench.

Posted by: rickyroge | March 9, 2009 7:30 AM | Report abuse

True, Alex...I don't know why some up here think that simply dumping JC is going to magically make this team a contender. Unless you've got a better option (and half the teams in the league don't), dumping JC does nothing but set this team back.

And unless he's going to block for himself, catch his own passes, and rush the passer, he's far from the biggest concern for 2009.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 9, 2009 7:40 AM | Report abuse

Draft Mark Sanchez?

Why?

Are you really trying to upset Pete Carroll?

J Campbell gets this Fall to make the wheels on the redskins bus go round 'n round.

And if the wheels fall off the bus, again, he'll be looking for a new route to drive with another team.

Which is why I'd cut Colt--yes I said that-- resign him to the practice squad, and bring in a WCO vet to hold the fort should Campbell be sent packing.

Collins is just collecting a check he shouldn't have gotten. But a vet would be good to have as an 'Break Glass In Case Of Emergency' option. For three reasons:

1. Campbell gets hurt during a playoff push, the vet takes over.

2. Campbell sucks, the vet takes over until the next new savior--not M Sanchez-- is drafted.

3. Campbell has ineffective stretches, the vet steps in and runs a offense he already knows, a la K Collins in titansville.

And who might be the next new savior should Campbell not be up to snuff?: Sam Bradford.

Get on the bandwagon while you can, people.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Good to hear about JC, and CR getting a bump, I'd say they earned it.

Wish the Skins had made a run at Igor, I personally thought he could help at the DE spot, but wasn't to be.

I'm managed to convince myself that the Redskins are trading back no matter who is at 13. Some of the 2nd tier guys, Meredith, Fulton, Beatty, Loadholt, are to me, more tempting than the other guys if it means picking up a 2nd in the process.

60 degrees yesterday, snow today....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 8:26 AM | Report abuse

"And who might be the next new savior should Campbell not be up to snuff?: Sam Bradford."

They run no-huddle, spread offenses in the NFL?

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 8:48 AM | Report abuse

hello......is this thing on.....anyone out there....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

I think Colt would get picked off the p-squad in 4 minutes by a team like TB or NYJ (QB collectors).
I wish the team traded Todd after the 4 game run. He is not worth what they are paying now and can't run a WC offense.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 9:06 AM | Report abuse

greenterror

'...They run no-huddle, spread offenses in the NFL?.

No: but even Jason Campbell plays better inthe shot gun, which is the formation teams like the stillers, bronk-hoes, colts, iggles, pats, titans, chargers, cards, et al all run well.

The NFL will become more 'spread' as the rules are designed to reward passing and scoring, not run heavy, two-tight fullback style, run it out and win 14-10 style offense from the 1980s.

Look at the rushing leaders and the passing leaders in NFL.com and you'll notice the passing teams were in the final four championship series and the rushing, under the center teams are aping for a change.

So many 'spread' type quarterbacks are coming out of college that smart teams will modify what they do in order to get these high round drafted, well paid guys on the field. Tebow's case is going to be more interesting than Bradford's as what the gators run is what wierd.

Next year, Tebow, Bradford et al will be in the draft, and what, folks aren't going to draft them because they amassed huge numbers in a style of offense most NFL teams eschew?

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Mista...

You are correct....now if the Skins can abandon that "smashmouth", 80's running game, espcially with Portis we'd be o.k. Portis can't carry the ball 30 times a game for 16 games being only 5'9" 200LBS.

Posted by: rickyroge | March 9, 2009 9:12 AM | Report abuse

"Next year, Tebow, Bradford et al will be in the draft, and what, folks aren't going to draft them because they amassed huge numbers in a style of offense most NFL teams eschew?"

Never said teams would pass on him, he'll probably go #1. BUT, I think Bradford benefited from playing behind arguably the best offensive line in college football AND running an offense at an incredible pace that doesn't translate to the pro-game. I'm just not as sold on Bradford as you seem to be. To me, he's Chase Daniel with a great offensive line.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 9:16 AM | Report abuse

"60 degrees yesterday, snow today...."

At least the weather got the sunday/monday ratio right...

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Its good to see that in this tough economy, the escalator business is doing well. I always wanted one in my house.

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 9, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

cl good call....being that I've become a parody of myself, I guess I had no room to complain either.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Does this mean we have less cap room?

Posted by: zjfr2 | March 9, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

just helping you keep on the sunny side beantown.

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 9:23 AM | Report abuse

What possibly makes anyone think Colt would even sign a practice squad contract? He showed tremendous promise as a rookie last preseason, and there's no shot he'd take a weekly practice squad paycheck when he could be competing for back-up spots elsewhere. That's not including the the very good (if not great) chance that he wouldn't clear waivers.

I'd give it less that 0.1% chance of that occurring, even if it were attempted.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

"Does this mean we have less cap room?

Posted by: zjfr2"

My guess is this is the discrepancy between the unofficial salary cap sites that claim we have in the ballpark of $11 million of space and JLC's sources that claim it's more likely around $7 million.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 9:34 AM | Report abuse

psps,
giving it a .1% chance is high. Colt is the no 1 reason the NFL needs a AAA system.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 9:37 AM | Report abuse

'...I think Colt would get picked off the p-squad in 4 minutes by a team like TB or NYJ (QB collectors).'

If he--Colt B--was all that, how did he last so long in the same draft as Flacco and Ryan?

Not that he's bad--in fact, your argument is that developing him while the team also works to get Campbell's deep passing issues worked out is what's best in the long term.

The thing is, if Campbell does well and gets an extension, the team has the luxury of knowing it has a back up, Colt, versed in its system chilling on the sidelines--not a bad thing, in my book.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

The PCinOZ (the real Insider Salary Capologist) has us at $8.009M under as of Saturday, with the JC and CR escalators included.

Posted by: daggar | March 9, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

I'm curious to see how A. Smith does at his pro-day workout on the 11th. Someone is gonna fall. Be it Smith, or Oher, someone is gonna slide to 13.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

the times says no visits are scheduled this week......that's odd, I would have thought we might think about looking at a LB or two this week.

Posted by: zjfr2 | March 9, 2009 10:03 AM | Report abuse

zj,

There are still a few out there that would make sense.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 9, 2009 10:06 AM | Report abuse

beantown

'...someone is gonna slide to 13...'


And hopefully, Smith or Oher or Britton will slide into a burgandy 'n gold jersey sometime that afternoon.

btw: The Sox have a built-in reason to snatch a jump on the Yanks with A-Rod getting surgery on his back side.

I think if they did deep into A-Rod's back side, they'll find the phallus up in it that's been troubling him his whole life.

And he'll beg for them to let it stay there.

Cashman didn't add the extra bat the team needed--they're depending on old Jeter/Cano/Gardener/Swisher/Nady--or the quality defensive glove, so a slow start by the Yanks should give the Rays and Socks enough room to pull away early on.

Think of the crying in the Bronx after a bunch of well-pitched losses. 'Cuz that's what's going to happen.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Angelo Crowell is reportedly visiting the Bucs today. I was really hoping the Skins would take a shot at landing him.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Moe,
I am saying that teams that love to stockpile a decent QB would take a Colt of any practice squad. He is a lot of raw talent and upside for a 3rd QB.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Mista Moe - can't help but notice many of your posts involve some sort of sexual/phallic allusion. Perhaps some issues that need to be hashed out?

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 9, 2009 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Theres no way we go into the season $8M under cap, even with our rookies to sign. There must be SOMEBODY we have in mind.

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 9, 2009 10:14 AM | Report abuse

I'm curious to see how A. Smith does at his pro-day workout on the 11th. Someone is gonna fall. Be it Smith, or Oher, someone is gonna slide to 13.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 9:45 AM

If it isn't a tackle that falls, then it might be some unexpected guy that teams are willing to trade up for -- get him at 13 because you're sure he won't last to 14.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 9, 2009 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Mista Moe - can't help but notice many of your posts involve some sort of sexual/phallic allusion. Perhaps some issues that need to be hashed out?

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 9, 2009 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Sounds like my "Symbolism in Film 101" teacher there... That class was 10 weeks of hearing how everything in every movie was somehow wang chung.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

"DRAFT NUDGES CLOSER TO PRIME TIME
Posted by Mike Florio on March 9, 2009, 9:20 a.m. EDT
Last year, the league tinkered with the centerpiece of the offseason experience — the draft.

Moving it from a 12:00 p.m. EDT start to 3:00 p.m. EDT and reducing the time that teams have to make up their minds in the first round from fifteen minutes to ten (and in round two from ten minutes to seven), the goal was to expand the television audience and generally to make the thing more television-friendly.

This year, the draft will start another hour later, at 4:00 p.m. EDT. (A reader noticed this somewhere, and NFL spokesman Greg Aiello confirmed it for us.)"

4pm?? I was a fan of 1pm...just having it on in the background during the day.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

and by 1 I meant 12.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 10:24 AM | Report abuse

I am a minority but I would not mind the skins wait on making moves till post-draft.

I would use the draft to get the OT we need, a LB and a End then whatever else with the last pick. Then get some Undrafted Rookie FA's ah la Heyer y1 at whatever holes we see. Maybe watch who other teams cut to clear space for their own rookie class and maybe catch a break on a few spots.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 10:24 AM | Report abuse

mista moe Yankees didn't add a big bat?? Ever heard of a little signing they made called texiera????? Come correct please!

Also no a-rod for a few months is a net positive

F a-rod

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 10:26 AM | Report abuse

I find watching the draft a total waste of time. If ESPN could just show a sporting event while the draft took place in the bottom corner I would watch.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

moe, agree about the yanks, but disagree about Smith or Oher.

I think its imperative that the Redskins garner more picks than the current 4 they have. If losing out on one of those guys means they get a second rounder in the process, I'm all 4 it.

If losing out on Smith/Oher, means getting Loadholt, and a DL or LB in the second, then they've gotta make it happen.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

"I find watching the draft a total waste of time. If ESPN could just show a sporting event while the draft took place in the bottom corner I would watch."

I use it as an excuse to cookout and drink some beer. I only pay attention to the 1st round, then the Skins picks after that. With only 4 picks it might be easier to miss them.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

I keep hearing we're going to resign Wynn. Ugh....I just puked in my mouth a little.

Posted by: zjfr2 | March 9, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

The draft on TV is great. You watch the first half of the first round intently and than have the rest on as almost white noise. Very soothing.

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Sorry I just never found Bermans voice soothing...

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

think its imperative that the Redskins garner more picks than the current 4 they have. If losing out on one of those guys means they get a second rounder in the process, I'm all 4 it.

If losing out on Smith/Oher, means getting Loadholt, and a DL or LB in the second, then they've gotta make it happen.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

I don't know about that. We need to take steps to figure out the future of our LT position. Does anyone think Samuels is gonna make it through a whole season this next year? Loadholt projects to be a RT.

If we have the opportunity to find a potential cornerstone LT at 13, we've got to go for it.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

The Eagles lost Tra Thomas they will be desperate for a T, maybe they will offer a bunch to move up to 13.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 9, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

I think its imperative that the Redskins garner more picks than the current 4 they have. If losing out on one of those guys means they get a second rounder in the process, I'm all 4 it.

If losing out on Smith/Oher, means getting Loadholt, and a DL or LB in the second, then they've gotta make it happen.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 10:30 AM

This is the Redskins. It's not either/or. It's both. We're going to trade our first rounder in the 2010 draft for a second rounder in this draft, probably with New England.

As for next year's draft, we'll worry about that later.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 9, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

"Sorry I just never found Bermans voice soothing..."

Every NFL anchor from ESPN is terrible. They should have Emmitt do player interviews for comic relief.

"How it feel be drafted?"

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

The Eagles lost Tra Thomas they will be desperate for a T, maybe they will offer a bunch to move up to 13.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 9, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

True...but we are also desperate for a T.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

p1, Loadhold project to RT, which the team currently needs. Heyer and Jansen aren't the answer at RT.

I think drafting a LT right now, would be akin to drafting a qb. Samuels is coming back next year.

I think if you can get one of the second tier guys at RT, as well as picking up a DE in the second, that would allow the team to go after a LT in 2010.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

I think it is in the ESPN by-laws that every broadcast must feature an ex-Cowboy from the 90's...no matter how moronic and incompetent they are.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

If any of the top 4 tackles are available, Cerrato would be certifiably insane to trade down. You don't pass up your best shot at a sure thing for the sake of adding bodies.

That being said, he would probably do it just so he could have more picks to play with and hopefully hit on 1 of his 5 selections.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

p1, Loadhold project to RT, which the team currently needs. Heyer and Jansen aren't the answer at RT.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

I certainly understand the need for both.

I just feel that between Jansen, Heyer and possibly Rhino, we have options going into next season at RT...after Samuels what are the options at LT???

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Flound, eagles lost both T's, Thomas and Runyan, so to call them desperate is putting it gently.....

I've thought they could be a trading partner if one of the T's falls to 13. I'm assuming Philly has a second round pick?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Intra-division trades are as a rare as baby albino dolphins.

But a one was just captured on photo last week:

http://www.splashvision.com/upphotos/7701/Pink_Albino_Dolphin431.jpg

So yeah maybe we will trade with Eagles...

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

The Redskins are reportedly interested in adding free agent DL Renaldo Wynn.

Wynn, 35, is nearing the end of the line and should come cheaply as a reserve lineman. He and another elder statesman, Phillip Daniels, are selling themselves as a package deal for the Redskins.
Source: Washington Times
Related: Redskins

Posted by: slimbo-Rice | March 9, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Also, I forgot to mention that if we draft an LT, we can move Samuels to RT and maybe draw out his career a little bit. If our draft pick at LT starts to tank, we have the insurance of moving Samuels back to LT to give the pick some wiggle room to develop...

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Sign Wynn to a vet's min. He can rotate in at tackle as well (I think). Certainly not a long-term option, but a cheap decent vet.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

cl, didn't the iggles and cowboys get together for a trade if not last year, then the year before?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

I think Wynn and Daniels for a year or two rotating, keeping fresh is a good option until we draft or develop someone. Both vet min.

Posted by: slimbo-Rice | March 9, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

rypien11

'...Mista Moe - can't help but notice many of your posts involve some sort of sexual/phallic allusions...'


...and bad puns, horrible jokes, baseball chatter, movie reviews, presidential put-downs, scheme issues, no facts, whining, complaining, examples of bad judgements, poorly constructed sarcastic commentary, cultural observations, (INSERT AFFLACK!!!), (INSERT rimshot audio), hip hop commentary,Geico Caveman issues: in other words, a lot of weirdness in a tight and controlled space.

Did you notice all this other stuff?

Or were you just looking for the 'phallic allusions'?

Guess what: there's one in your hand.

Let it go, my friend, and you happiness will follow.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 11:00 AM | Report abuse

If we resign Wynn.....wow.

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Daniels + Wynn > Demetric Evans

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

LOL... Now the fat bag of pus is stealing - almost word-for-word - from Warpath.

This blog is always good for a laugh.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | March 9, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Wynn? I don't see a reason to sign him, other than he's a Blache guy. Looking at our Dline as it stands, there are plenty of bodies to serve as rotational guys at both tackle and D End. I really don't see why we would sign Wynn? We have youth, talent & a surplus of men, plus we are looking for a sack artist in the draft, right?


Moe,
Britton will not be drafted that high. He'll fall into the 20's easily.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Rob Jackson = Reynaldo Wynn ?

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Moe -


"Or were you just looking for the 'phallic allusions'?

Guess what: there's one in your hand."

There's another one.

No, I wasn't looking for it... I just began to notice it every time I read your posts.

Not judging, just making an observation. Doesn't bother me.

But remember, this is a family blog...

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 9, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

"Daniels + Wynn > Demetric Evans"

Agree to agree you are wrong

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 11:11 AM | Report abuse

"Cerrato also denied a report that Arizona Cardinals offensive lineman Elton Brown visited the Redskins last week. Cerrato said that as of now, no free agents are scheduled to visit this week."

- David Elfin

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 11:12 AM | Report abuse

I see the anti-JC posse has taken to spreading misinformation. 5 years of deer in the headlights look? Ah, no.

He's actually played in the past 3 years, and Alex enumerated well some of the unusual circumstances he's been working on.
From Redskins.com

In 36 career starts, Campbell has completed 711/1,130 passes, a 62.9 completion percentage, for 7,242 yards, 35 touchdowns and 23 interceptions. In 2008, he started all 16 games for the first time in his career.

Last year, JC was 16th in passing yards and 19th in QB rating despite working behind a makeshift O-line most of the season. He took some hits that would have ended the season for most QBs.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 9, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

"Daniels + Wynn > Demetric Evans"

Agree to agree you are wrong

Posted by: chrislarry

-----

Agree to agree the same about your position, CL.

Wynn made his way onto the field for the Giants last season, fighting for time behind Tuck, Kiwi, Robbins, Cofield, and Alford. He still ended the season with 25 tackles and 2 sacks. It's just my opinion that Phillip Daniels, the guy who owned Evans' starting spot prior to the season starting, can make up that last 8 tackles and 1.5 sacks that Evans mustered up over Wynn in his utterly dominant contract year.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

He took some hits that would have ended the season for most QBs.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 9, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Really? I don't remember any except for one cheap shot in the Steelers game. He certainly didn't have a lot of time back there but he didn't take any hits that were any worse than all QBs in the league do, don't make him out to be some kind of warrior, he's an average qb, with a better Oline he's good enough to go to the playoffs with, but 13 TDs in 16 games with all your starting skill guys healthy the entire season and the league's leading rusher for half the year isn't good enough.

Posted by: zjfr2 | March 9, 2009 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Speaking of Daniels, has he signed that stinken' contract yet?

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Ok we can agree to agree that we are both wrong. Yet I am not.

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

I agree with psp on the evans versus daniels and wynn issue. I'm pretty surprised that wynn had that many tackles, I was impressed by that.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Beantown you could equal that many tackles playing in garbage time with that defensive line the Giants had.

Good grief.

Posted by: chrislarry | March 9, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

RI brethren...

After reading countless posts about the FO's successes and failures I have concluded this:

1) No on offense that teams really fear. Stack 8 in the box and take Portis away...Double Moss and who else we got?

2) People talk about how old the O-line is but no one talks about how they are used. Betts is underused as a passing threat out of the backfield and pounding Portis 30 times a game decreases production.

3)Zorn needs to play Thomas and Kelly. So what if they don't run all routes well, put em' in the game and let em' do what they can do well.

4) JC needs to stop thinking and just play.


Agree or disagree?

Posted by: rickyroge | March 9, 2009 11:36 AM | Report abuse

rypien11

Point taken. I'll tone it down, bro'

Some people like Philip Daniels, but Vonnie Holiday can still play.

Either, as a vet depth guy, would be nice.

But has it come down to choosing between two old guys?

That's a sad thing.

Some time ago, Vinnie mentioned he'd like to see Rob Jackson/Chris Wilson get on the field. Perhaps the D Evans release signaled his intention of same.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

"...don't make him out to be some kind of warrior, he's an average qb, with a better Oline he's good enough to go to the playoffs with, but 13 TDs in 16 games with all your starting skill guys healthy the entire season and the league's leading rusher for half the year isn't good enough."
Posted by: zjfr2 | March 9, 2009 11:23 AM

Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed today, ZJ? Campbell was probably one of the most pressured QBs this past season, especially after week 8. Only one game where he wasn't sacked (Cincy).

Campbells 13 tds is a problem? I beg to disagree that this an issue consistent with our QB and not our protection, playcalls, and passing threats... all of which we're subject to a learning curve last season.

Rothlesburger threw 17TDS and 15INTS and his team won the Superbowl.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

No matter what they pay Campbell now the most important thing is to have an open competition in camp. No one expected Ryan or Flacco to be starters and EXCEL in their first year but they got the chance to show what they could do, won the job and got their teams into the playoffs. There's a reason Campbell didn't get an extention in the off season. He has shown himself to be limited in what he can do.. he has trouble reading defenses, and getting the ball downfield and once defenses realized he couldn't beat them deep they blized him which is why his numbers tanked at the end of the season. Campbell seems afaid to make a misake, he throws only short safe passes.. which explains his high completion rate and few picks but also why he threw so few TD's and there were so many 3 and outs. Maybe he steps up this year but my guess is this is about as good as he gets.. Colt has a year under his belt now.. he should be given a chance to see to see if he can do better...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

rickyroge
1) we got Cooley too... thats it
2)not sure what you mean about how they are used. They are trained to be a running line and we need to change that.
3) I think we will see T/K1112 on the field.
4) Agree and he will after a year of knowing the offense.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Colt has a year under his belt now.. he should be given a chance to see to see if he can do better...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

But they wont because he probably cant yet.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 11:46 AM | Report abuse

well put Alex. Let us hope Fred Davis catches some passes this year too. Thomas needs to step up big. 30 receptions a piece for 11 & 12 would be huge. Here's to wishful thinking.

I know Colt is our next big thing. But It's silly to think Colt is better than JC, at this moment in time. Colt has a long way to go.... The NFL isn't the western division in NCAA.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 11:48 AM | Report abuse

I think the thing to keep in mind here is... we're not going to have all the holes filled by the start of this year. We just don't have the resources for it.

But, if we play our two drafts and one more FA right (plus if theres no cap, that should help).. we should have a pretty complete team next year.

Between these two drafts and FA, we should be able to obtain starters at RT, C, RG, DE, and SLB.

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 9, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Can someone please explain to me how a guy with 62% completion and the lowest interception per pass play in the league has trouble reading defenses? It really is mind-boggling to hear that criticism of Campbell.

Almost as mind-boggling to hear that Campbell holds on to the ball too long at the same time he decides to dump the ball off too quick.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Option 1 - If any of these guys are available they should absolutely grab them at 13
Oher
Andre Smith (a lot depends on his pro day but his interview on nfl.com indicates he may be starting to get it)
Orakpo – most of the mocks have him gone by 13

Option 2 - trade down for more picks, OL, OLB, and DE being the most pressing.

Option 3 if they stay at 13 and the above three are gone maybe they go with one of these guys (I’m definitely less certain on these guys:
Brian Cushing – Can this guy play OLB I’ve seen him listed at both ILB and OLB
Voshon Davis (if they’re planning on trading Rogers or letting him walk after next year)
Rey Mauluga – combine #’s are worrisome but if he’s all that on the field, an eventual replacement for Fletcher
Everette Brown – can he play OLB?
RB like Moreno or Wells – tempting but no thanks – get a RB later IMO
QB - no

If they go RB later in the draft, one guy I like that I’ve seen a couple of times is Gartrell Johnson from CSU. He looks like Stephen Jackson, albeit a lot slower. He’s a tough hardnosed runner with decent moves - can move the chains, just not a homerun threat.

Posted by: skinswest | March 9, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

alex...don't want to change a running line, but Portis isn't as durable or explosive as he used to. Also, our offense lacks imagination (because it lacks weapons on the edges other than Moss) which cause defenses to take away Portis.

Posted by: rickyroge | March 9, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

in the next 2 drafts I would like to see the team get 2 new RB's to replace Betts. 1 big bruiser type back think the Mike Sellars of RB's and one speed back.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

psps23

To me, it's that he--Campbell--doesn't have the kind of touch where he hits a guy in stride so a receiver can take the ball and get yards after the catch.

And in the WCO, YAC are what makes it work.

Second, a 62% completion is great if the average pass is thrown 15-30 yards downfield.

But Campbell completes a lot of check downs, hitches, 'smoke screens,' and short out cuts--the kind of passes that also allow defenses to play close to the line and thus, play the run better.

Perhaps a better rt and lg improves the blocking to where Campbell has the time (3 or 4 more seconds) for things to open up--this is what we have to hope for this season.

Otherwise, given the way the Skins FO operates, he's a goner, and the next new savior gets Pat Ramsey's old jersey number.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

If we draft a RB, I think we need a Darren Sproles type rather than a Stephen Jackson.

Posted by: rickyroge | March 9, 2009 12:07 PM | Report abuse

"To me, it's that he--Campbell--doesn't have the kind of touch where he hits a guy in stride so a receiver can take the ball and get yards after the catch."

Yep, that's a fair criticism. He has the touch, just not consistently. A couple (I think 3) of Moss' touchdowns were picture-perfect passes hit in stride on crossing routes. That's definitely one area he will need to improve, getting that consistency.

Of course, it will also help to get WRs out on routes that aren't 5 yard outs and comebacks. Too many times in the second half Moss was used in an improper manner. And that falls on Zorn.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 12:12 PM | Report abuse

I don't get the "deer in the headlights" remark regarding Campbell...he didn't look that way when he went the first half of the season without an interception. ... Give the man some weapons and an offense that actually gets the most out of its available talent and THEN judge. ...
Posted by: brownwood26 | March 9, 2009 5:52 AM |

The thing was, after the nice 6-2 start, teams were wise to what the Skins were doing and the Skins had no response to their response and ended up going 2-6. It was like they had shot their wad and that was it. There were no more bullets in the chambers. With a young QB like JC you don't expect a ceiling, you expect an expanding bag of tricks. Now you you can trot out the usual cliches about the collapse that are not QB related - the OL wore down, Portis wore down, the young receiver corps was a no-show, etc., but at this point, the QB side of it don't augur well for the future. Nevertheless, to expand the bag of cliches and mixed metaphors, the jury is still out so we will see what we will see.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 9, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"With a young QB like JC you don't expect a ceiling, you expect an expanding bag of tricks."

How much of this is JC, and how much of this is Jim Zorn?

Most would argue it's the opposite, that with a young QB and a first-time head coach, let alone playcaller and offensive coordinator, there is very much a ceiling -- and a low one at that. There's only so much you can implement in a limited timeframe, especially when every player is learning the playbook from scratch and half the weapons you plan on using are learning to be professionals for the first time.

I think you've got your cliches mixed up my friend. The expanding bag of tricks should come from a wily old veteran well versed in each and every awkward situation a QB would find himself in, not from a young buck learning the ropes from a new playbook, scheme, and coaching staff for the first time.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

The only time JLC gets cap/contract details right is when he plagiarizes CPND's PCinOz. That ought to merit at least a hat tip, no?

Posted by: janpower2 | March 9, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

http://www.examiner.com/x-772-Nashville-Pro-Sports-Examiner~y2009m3d8-NFL-tampering-Titans-vs-Redskins

Maybe we could call this.. Clash of the Titans

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Cry me a river. If AH had not signed w/the Skins he would have gone to Tampa Bay. The Titans were out of the running the moment they let him hit FA.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Good argument, PSP.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Colt has a year under his belt now.. he should be given a chance to see to see if he can do better...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Oh, he will! He's gonna put up Danny-Wuerffel/Shane-Matthews-type numbers in preseason. It'll be Osaka all over again! It's gonna be GREAT!

And then the donkeys are gonna come out and give everyone their oh-so well thought through opinion that Colt should be starting in the year that Campbell is playing for a contract.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Dont get me wrong P1 I don't think the skins will get any trouble, unless the Titans are spying on the Danny hard core. FYI that is the future of the NFL spying on owners and the agents in the off season to ensure there is no troublesome hanky panky.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

I'm seriously getting concerned about who our SLB is going to be? They better sign a solid veteran soon! We've got 1 pick where we can add a potential starter - Rd 1. That should definietly be a top tier OT, unless they are all gone by #13. It sucks that we didn't get Willis (IF he's all that). This Offense cannot continue to hold this team back... I'm sure the DEF is sick of carrying all the weight.

Eventhough, we need a DE and LB we need O-Line 1st!!!!!!!

They better not F this up.

Posted by: EinVB | March 9, 2009 1:09 PM | Report abuse

They better not F this up.

Posted by: EinVB

why would you be worried about our front office F-in things up?

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 1:12 PM | Report abuse

JC is no young buck. If JLC had a vote, he'd be getting his shiny new big-time contract right now -- maybe a Roethlisberger + inflation type of contract (let's say 8 yr/$130M with $40M guaranteed).
Would I pay that?
I would, only after I get the proven pro player's best effort -- that is, the final year of his existing contract.
Ah, I think I see a plan!

Posted by: daggar | March 9, 2009 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Can someone please explain to me how a guy with 62% completion and the lowest interception per pass play in the league has trouble reading defenses? It really is mind-boggling to hear that criticism of Campbell.
_______
Well it's simple.. teams that blitz alot open themselves up to get burned because there is a lot of single coverage downfield. But it's up to the QB to spot the blitz coming and get the ball to the open reciever for a big gain. But when did you ever see Campbell burn a team becaused they bliitzed?? He either dumped it off to a back or took a sack. Either way it doens't hurt his completion percentage or interception numbers.. But on 3rd and 7 and he throws for four yards.. that mean another punt is coming and Campbell did that far to often.

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 1:19 PM | Report abuse

"JC is no young buck."

Kurt Warner was just in the Super Bowl and he's 10 years older.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 1:20 PM | Report abuse

One of the beauties of the WCO is that it codified into offensive plays for the first time the concept of counterpunching. If we're the offense and you're the defense then when we run a play, you react to what we are doing and we counter-react, so the offense always is one step ahead of the defense. Of course, if you don't have the personnel to read what the defense is doing and understand what counter-reactive measure to take, then you are verscrewed.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 9, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Skins Fans!
Can whomever is responsible take off T.O and Jerry Pictures from the Skins site?
Thanks, its very offensive.

Posted by: abxinc | March 9, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

zcezcest1,

I know right! I'm about sick of hearing how much Snyder has been involved in this and that this offseason already. I actually thought he might have learned to step the F back and let football guys do what is necessary. I'm afraid its still the SOS.

As good as Haynesworth can be... Renaldo Wynn - seriously! WTF. Sign Daniels let Wilson and Buzbee rush on 3rd, lets sign a SLB now. I have a real hard time believing Roosevelt Colvin, Crowell or Dansby aren't better then HB Blades. Who the hell is going to play on that side seriously! I have nothing against Blades, but he's too small to play that side. I'm sure not betting our 3rd Rounder will pan out... Rhinehart couldn't sniff the field last year and our O-LINE STRUGGLED!

Posted by: EinVB | March 9, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Do people here not know about the "redshirt role that the skins have the past few seasons?"

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Campbell is a good QB. If he leaves DC after this year, 1/2 the teams in the league will want him. Just in the NFC, I can see 9 teams that would consider him: SF, AZ, Sea, StL, Chi, Minn, Det, TB and Car.

To me, Campbell has proven he can win at this level. He's somewhere around the 15th best QB in the league.

The issue is simple. QBs get big $$ and if the Skins wait until after this season, Campbell will be more expensive. If 2010 is uncapped, maybe not a big deal. If there is a cap, the ability to retain Campbell may be problematic. And if Campbell goes, this team is truly starting over.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 1:28 PM | Report abuse

EinVB

my post on the FO messing things up was just me being facetious.

Of note, facetious (if I spelt it corectly), is one of very few words that contains all 5 vowels in alphabetical order. Facetiously even contains the sometimes 'y'. But apparently, I've digressed.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 1:33 PM | Report abuse

In the WCO, the QB is the most important part of the offensive puzzle. The QB must possess three important attributes:

1. Field vision. The ability to see the entire field of action and what is happening.
2. Playbook IQ. The ability to understand how plays are unfolding and which option has the best chance for success.
3. Throwing prowess. This includes (a)arm strength, (b)accuracy and (c)touch. Of the three, (b) is probably the most important.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 9, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Dont get me wrong P1 I don't think the skins will get any trouble, unless the Titans are spying on the Danny hard core. FYI that is the future of the NFL spying on owners and the agents in the off season to ensure there is no troublesome hanky panky.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

I wasn't a shot at you, alex. It was a shot at the whiny pouty execs over in Tennessee who are contemplating this...

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 1:19 PM"
"..teams that blitz alot open themselves up to get burned because there is a lot of single coverage downfield. But it's up to the QB to spot the blitz coming and get the ball to the open reciever for a big gain."

I'd like to see you do any better at avoiding the rush and getting the ball down field, to a receiver in stride & on the money. Did you watch the same offensive line that I watched last season?

'..But on 3rd and 7 and he throws for four yards.. that mean another punt is coming and Campbell did that far to often.'

But isn't the mantra of the WCO YAC? I mean 3rd & 7 doesn't make sense to throw 4 rds, unless your team practices 4rd catches & seeks 3-4yrds after the catch. Isn't that what the WCO excels in? YAC?

Pretty simple, Indeed.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

But when did you ever see Campbell burn a team becaused they bliitzed??

I guess you were asleep during the Saints, and Lions games.

Posted by: Predator48 | March 9, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

it's not JC people!

I've won the Superbowl twice in a row in Madden with JC as my starting QB

Posted by: TheTruth11 | March 9, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

"The only time JLC gets cap/contract details right is when he plagiarizes CPND's PCinOz. That ought to merit at least a hat tip, no?"

Not sure plagiarism rules apply as strictly in blogs versus print articles. The first two sentences are blatant plagiarism and bad form, even if it is just a blog and not a print article.

Posted by: swowra | March 9, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Too often, Campbell threw short of the 1st down marker on 3rd down. But ... wayyyy too often, his top WR ran a pattern that was wayyyy short of the 1st down marker.

Who owns that? The QB, the coach, the WR? Not clear.

BTW, the Skins decline really began in Detroit when Santana tweaked his hammy.

Moss had 5 TDs and 5 of his 7 games were for 75 yards or more, with 3(!) at 140 yards or more.

After Det, his best game was 72 yards and he had only 1 TD in the final 8 games. Yes, the OL, was a major part of the issue, but Moss's health was a big factor, too.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, I should have said "appear to be blatant plagiarism," because I haven't checked time stamps to see who lifted from who, but the sentences are exactly the same and neither gives attribution.

Posted by: swowra | March 9, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I guess you were asleep during the Saints, and Lions games.
____
I'll give you the Saints game.. yeah that was one fine long pass.. but one pass hardly makes a great season. Lions??? They HAD a defense?? Hard to give a lot of credit here. But will say Campbell would have got more credit from me IF the Skins had scored more points last season than the 0-16 Lions.. thing is they didn't!

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

"Well it's simple.. teams that blitz alot open themselves up to get burned because there is a lot of single coverage downfield. But it's up to the QB to spot the blitz coming and get the ball to the open reciever for a big gain. But when did you ever see Campbell burn a team becaused they bliitzed?? He either dumped it off to a back or took a sack. Either way it doens't hurt his completion percentage or interception numbers.. But on 3rd and 7 and he throws for four yards.. that mean another punt is coming and Campbell did that far to often.

Posted by: sovine08"

That's a fair criticism, but it seems that either you or I are operating under false pretenses.

Below is a list of the players that recorded sacks against the Redskins in the second half of the season (if a player is listed twice, they had 2 sacks):

Justin Smith - 49ers, DE
Darren Howard - Philly, DE
Victor Abiamiri - Philly, DE
Ray Lewis - Baltimore, MLB
Terrell Suggs - Baltimore, DE/OLB
Justin Tuck - NYG, DE
Justin Tuck - NYG, DE
Renaldo Wynn - NYG, DE
Barry Cofield - NYG, DT
Julian Peterson - SEA, OLB
Daryl Tapp - SEA, DT
Jay Ratliff - DAL, DT
Jay Ratliff - DAL, DT
DeMarcus Ware - DAL, DE/OLB
James Harrison - PIT, OLB/DE
James Harrison - PIT, OLB/DE (half sack)
Lamar Woodley - PIT, OLB/DE
Lamar Woodley - PIT, OLB/DE
James Farrior - PIT, ILB (half sack)
Lawrence Timmons - PIT, ILB
Nick Eason - PIT, DT
Aaron Smith - PIT, DE

As you can see, a vast majority of these sacks came from defensive lineman or 3-4 OLBs who's primary responsibility is rushing the passer. These are NOT blitzing players.

Now it's possible that these defensive lineman recorded sacks due to blitzes being called and the o-linemen shifting assignments, but I submit that this isn't the case for a majority of them. No, teams rushed 4 men against our line and routinely got pressure, and they got it quickly. And when you're able to drop 7 into coverage and still get pressure to the QB, you end up looking like the 2002 Buccaneers. There are no holes to exploit in that defense. It's not a blitz. This is how teams were able to double Moss and Cooley, while at the same time getting pressure to Campbell. Teams hardly blitzed the Redskins. Why? Because they didn't need to.

I can give you a couple specific blitzes where Campbell DID burn them. New Orleans, the bomb to Moss. Detroit, another TD to Moss. Dallas, when Moss toasted Terrence Newman for a big gain. But then in the second half of the season, it became obvious that the way to beat the Redskins was to NOT blitz, double the only 2 receiving threats on the field, then let your pass-rushers work the deject offensive lineman.

This was not a case of Campbell failing to exploit blitzes. It was the opposite. It was the line failing to exploit an undermanned pass-rush.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"Too often, Campbell threw short of the 1st down marker on 3rd down. But ... wayyyy too often, his top WR ran a pattern that was wayyyy short of the 1st down marker.

Who owns that? The QB, the coach, the WR? Not clear"

To me, this was the offensive coordinators fault. JC is running the play that was called. So he bears no responsibility. If its 3rd and 4, don't run a pay for 3 yards, and put it on the player to get the extra yard. Run a play for 10 yards. There needs to be a huge step up in the play calling from last year to this year. Sherm needs to get his stuff right.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

This is who the Redskins should get in the 2nd round.

I know we don't have a 2nd rounder at the moment, but my redskins senses are telling me no one will be available that the skins will like at #13 so they will trade down for more picks. And one of those picks should end up as

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=174065

Portis needs the help. Then we should finally trade Betts.

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Excellent post by PSP @ 1:56PM.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Beantown -- Zorn called the plays, not Sherm. But I agree, its mostly on the coaches to call plays that get the first down. Still, its impossible to know if JC changed the play or if a receiver ran an option rout well short of the 1st down

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

4th,

The nations leading rusher doesn't go in the first round? I think he does.

What's killing me is the Eagles have two picks in round one! With Tra Thomas leaving, they'll probably look at an OT (Beatty or Britton). And they might be smart to get a running back (after losing Buckholter) and watching the Skins sign Haynesworth.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

psps23

Your last post also underscores the point made by those of us who support the 4-3, 3-4 hybrid look on D.

Blache's scheme is fine except where it comes to attacking to get sacks and create turnovers. More sacks/turnovers equals short field, defense that scores, and shutting down drives.

Folks in this blog hate on the idea of defensive scheme flexibility but haven't noticed that not one pure 4-3 defensive team made it to the NFL final 4.

Hybrid looks attack protection schemes, confuse quarterbacks and allow specific guys to make plays.

The defense doesn't depend on scheme alone to shut things down, but 'big time players' being put into position to step up and make big time plays.

With the skins, this means a player like Chris Wilson should be turned lose a la James Harrison, and freed to go after the quarterback without a thought. If Brian Orakpo/A Maybin are drafted, the same tactic gets put to use against some team's slow-moving left/right tackle.

Let's do to others what they're doing to us with success, people.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: matthewvickers
I'd like to see you do any better at avoiding the rush and getting the ball down field, to a receiver in stride & on the money. Did you watch the same offensive line that I watched last season?
_________
hey I'm not the guy saying I should be the starting QB of the Redskins.. he is. And yeah I watched the OL last season.. it was pretty much the same OL as the one Collins won 4 games with and he was almost immobile coming off the bench after not playing for TEN YEARS! Also to me hard to blame it all on the OL when the other team is blitzing 7 or 8 players.. what they'll suppose to block more than one each? Campbell has to read this and get rid of the ball. To often that he only threw to the guy underneath which lead to a punt.

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Beantown -- Zorn called the plays, not Sherm. But I agree, its mostly on the coaches to call plays that get the first down. Still, its impossible to know if JC changed the play or if a receiver ran an option rout well short of the 1st down

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

I personally hate it when plays get thrown short of a first down, but I can also understand the logic.

1) Defender will be guarding first-down marker.

2)Run a route short of first down marker for higher likelihood that you will be open.

3)Make a play after the catch to get to the marker.

IMO, the offense is a whole "system failure". Coaches failed to develop the right schemes to bring out players' strengths/abilities. Players made too few plays.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Sport radio station today was talking about speculations around Haynesworth indictment around a traffic accident back in December. Also there is world of the Titans invesigating possible tampering charges against the Redskins going after Haynesworth. Has anyone heard anything concrete?

Posted by: erleach | March 9, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

sovine08,

That offensive line (the one that Collins lead to the playoffs) was far younger and healthy albeit it was practically the same personnel and it happened not so long ago.

Collins benefited from Al Saunders calling the plays. Collins was under Saunders tutelage for TEN years before coming into that game against the Bears and taking over the reigns for the next four or five games.

Collins was brought over for the purpose of backing up JC because he already knew how to run the offense. Saunders knew that, Gibbs knew that; that's why they coach.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Moe, I don't think people are against a flexible 4-3, 3-4 scheme, I just think people are skeptical about transitioning into a 3-4 with the players we have. Most of the guys we have have never played a 3-4, and it's possible a transition could negate the biggest strength this defense has, which IMO is the natural instincts London Fletcher brings to the 4-3 Gregg scheme. The entire front seven would change responsibilities, the assignments of which player hits which gap would change, and it's likely the players would revert to "thinking" instead of "reacting" on the field (as it happens with a lot of new schemes). At that point, the question is: is it worth the risk?

In principal, I agree that a flexible defense is the way to go. Maybe Blache implements a little bit at a time (like he did with Taylor during the 2nd Philly game). I would be very weary of pulling an all-out transition, however, as some on here have suggested.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Good luck to the titans proving tampering. Who is gonna come clean on that?? They're wasting their time....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Ofcourse we tampered. The thing is, Danny is too smart to get caught (outside of OTAgate).

He needs to go knock on P King's door because he made us look awful on that (Snyder meeting with AH's agent at Morton's during the combine) and the Chris Canty after midnight thing (vinny called at 12:00:06 am and used Canty as leverage to bring down AH's gaureenteed value).

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

No, teams rushed 4 men against our line and routinely got pressure, and they got it quickly.
____
Well I repectfully disagree. Pittsburgh started it by blitzing a lot and their success was copied by the teams after. Now I don't have the numbers of how many times Campbell was sacked when it was a 4 man rush to when it was a a blitz.. But I remember it differently. No matter the fact is the OL is going to look pretty much the same this year as last and if your saying Campbell can't be successful with this line.. then give someone else a shot. That's what Arizona did last year, they let Warner and Leinart compete.. Skins should let their QB's compete this year and let the best man win...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

The thing about the tampering charge is that Haynseworth's agent is also M. Kelly's agent. So Danny and the agent are claiming they only spoke about M.Kelly.

But we all know that tampering happens, every year.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

erleach

If:

'....there is world of the Titans invesigating possible tampering charges against the Redskins going after Haynesworth...'


this is true, do you realize how stupid the front Office of the Washington Redskins will appear in light of recent events:

The Jason Taylor "I Don't Want to Train in DC After Y'all Handed Parcells Two Picks" affair.

The Demetric Evans "We Don't Need Him....Oooops, I guess We Do" screw up.

The "We Want to Get Younger By Signing Philip Daniels" issue.

The "Let's Bring in T.O.--Wait a minute, MeAngelo Hall's Agent Has Some Ideas to Spit At Us" flub up.

If it's true--the tampering charges which might be valid given the speed and time it all seemed to get done, the skins will lose draft picks and gain more laughter bhind their backs.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

sovine, there were times when teams rushed 2 guys, and got sacks. You can spin it into any form you want, but the oline was awful the second half of the year last year.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

They are in Tennessee not like they have any other sports teams doing anything right now.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

It does feel more and more like they will be trading down, as they did last year. I agree with the posters about "mortgaging the future" by trading picks.

But think it may be propitious to trade picks from 2010 to acquire picks in this year's draft. They have gaping holes in the OL, at OLB, DE, future featured running back, field goal kicker and kick off specialist, punter, punt returner, and wide receiver that must be addressed sooner rather than later. I contend that they need a starting LT (moving Samuels to the right with fellow vet Randy Thomas) and having a younger, stronger right side.

I still also think they should consider using some of the cap to sign Pittsburgh's backup QB and let him compete with Campbell. This I believe might resolve the quarterback situation for the next several years. If you put Colt in the mix I think they would have reasonable, young, depth at the position.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

"No matter the fact is the OL is going to look pretty much the same this year as last

Posted by: sovine08"

You sure about that? Samuels was playing on one knee for half the season, then placed on IR with 4 games to go (I think). Both injuries have been surgically repaired.

Derrick Dockery plays in place of Kendall.

If the Skins draft one of the top 4 tackles at #13, they immediately replace Jansen/Heyer on the right side of the line.

That's 40% of the line being replaced, with another 20% hopefully coming back refreshed and in much better form.

And that's not including the fact that the 3 second round "weapons" from last season will contribute more than they did this season (simply because it's impossible for them to contribute less).

Heyer has another year of tutelage under Bugel, as does Rinehart. It stands to reason both youngsters will have improved.

Nope, in fact I say that the line and the offense will look decidedly different than it did last season. And we already know what Campbell can do under a good line; just take a look at his stats from the first 8 games of the season.

Oh, and don't discount an extra offseason for Zorn and his 1st-year coaching staff. That should not be understated, either.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

That offensive line (the one that Collins lead to the playoffs) was far younger and healthy albeit it was practically the same personnel and it happened not so long ago.
Collins benefited from Al Saunders calling the plays. Collins was under Saunders tutelage for TEN years before coming into that game against the Bears and taking over the reigns for the next four or five games. Collins was brought over for the purpose of backing up JC because he already knew how to run the offense. Saunders knew that, Gibbs knew that; that's why they coach.
______
First off Kurt Warner was brought to Arizona to backup Leinart.. That doesn't mean he should of stayed the backup if he was the BETTER QB. And if your saying Collins knowing Saunders system made him the better QB.. then they should have PLAYED Collins!! Right now we don't know who is the best QB because the Skins for some reason won't let them compete for the starting job. Everyone says' Colt looked good last year in preseason because he played against the scrubs in the league. First off if that is true every backup QB should have better numbers in preseason than the starter and that is not true. Also it would mean when Campbell was the 3rd string QB he should of lighted up the score board.. he didn't. and lastly yeah Colt played against the the 3rd string defense.. but he did it with the 3rd string offense.. and if the 1st string OL is as bad as you say imagine how bad the 3rd string OL is? Want to know how Colt would do against a 1st string defense.. easy to find out.. START HIM for a game in preseason.. problem is I don't think Zorn will do that..

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

It appears that the Skins are OK letting JC fail or succeed. Now I don't know if JC is worth a new deal or not and, I submit, neither do the Skins. Unlike many, I am OK with trying to use Free Agency to build a team. But it is clear to virtually everyone that the Skins offense was the weakest part of the team - specifically the scoring part. How the team could focus on defense is beyond me.

I can think of but 2 reasons. First, they could be so sure that the offensive picks from last years draft are going to provide enough game-changing ability, they don't need to focus there (the lack of O-line improvment notwithstanding). Secondly, they want to easily be able to get a WCO QB next year. That may or may not be JC. If he improves with the same cast of characters, he stays. No improvement, he goes. As sad as I am in saying this, it would have been better for the Skins to get TO than Haynesworth. They could have better seen what they have in JC, got a player that while past his prime can still score. What have the past SB teams tend to all had in common? At least one truly dynamic offensive player or a group of really really good ones. How many truly dynamic offensive players do the Skins have? I argue zero. Moss and Portis are both really good but they are not truly dynamic and they lack their needed couterparts. I still maintain the Skins would have been better off staying pat on D and adding an offensive playmaker or two, while trying to shore up the O line.

Posted by: amaranthpa | March 9, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

ummm, no. - Think about it - how many defenses did we play against in the latter part of the you even felt that they HAD to blitz to get to the Quarterback? The list of folks with sacks against us proves that point - very few times sent that extra man - instead they had full coverage, and that's part of the reason JC had problems in the second half of the season.

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | March 9, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

The Titans should learn from the Patriots. Next time trade the guy before he becomes an unrestricted free agent as they did with Cassel. Get draft picks. The more picks the better because of the risk/unknowns associated with raw rookies. Statistically, wheh you end up with more (and higher picks) you end up ... usually you end up getting better while at least minimally staying at the same level (advancing in the playoffs).

That is where the Patriots are this year. Lots of extra high round picks. In your heart of hearts, do you think they are going to get worst or better?

This is the sort of thing the Skins should be attempting to do. Creating the "core" that Gibbs described while exceeding expectations when there is turn-over through the draft.

Now they have now lost key "core" individuals in their defense in Springs and Washington. McIntosh is not one of the "leaders". Nor is LaRon Landry. Its not just in terms of athleticism; but in terms of character and chemistry. They still have Fletcher, Griffin and perhaps Daniels ... nevertheless ... there is a high risk that the defense could get considerably worst after the recent turn of events.

Everyone will just have to learn to "manage" their expectations. Expecting Haynesworth to
be all and everything in this defense appears to be setting everyone up for disappointment.

Unless the draft yields a surprise OLB, perhaps a 4-3 DE?

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

SPRINGS, T.O. CONTINUE TO BE LINKED
Posted by Mike Florio on March 9, 2009, 1:48 p.m.
Amid word that the Patriots have, as first reported recently by Shalise Manza Young of the Providence Journal, agreed to terms with cornerback Shawn Springs, a reader has pointed out an interesting connection between Springs and receiver Terrell Owens.

With both players taking up residence with separate AFC East teams in 2009, Springs and Owens will continue their seven-year string of playing on teams that face each other twice per year.

It started in 2002, when Springs’ Seahawks moved from the AFC West to the NFC West. Owens at the time played for the Niners.

Both men landed in the NFC East in 2004, with Owens in Philly and Springs in Washington.

Owens signed with Dallas after two years, staying in the division for three more thereafter.

So, now, Spring and T.O. will take their on-field rivalry to yet another division.

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Nope, in fact I say that the line and the offense will look decidedly different than it did last season.
___
Well of course I hope they improve. But if the Skins are still one of the lowest scoring teams in the league who are you going to blame then?? The WR's or the Head Coach?? cause somehow I feel Campbell will be the last guy you will hold responsible...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

psps23 > sovine08

dude, he's taking you to the woodshed...don't give up though, it's hilarious.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 9, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Right now we don't know who is the best QB

Posted by: sovine08

I think most up here has an idea who the better Qb is.

Posted by: TWISI | March 9, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

To put it differently; teams didn't HAVE to blitz against us to get a lot of pressure last year - so they didn't.

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | March 9, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

sovine08,

I never said Collins is a better qb than Campbell. I never said that I wanted to see colt start against a 1st string offense either. Kurt Warner is HOF QB, seasoned with multiple offensive coordinators, coaches, all-pro players and yes, I think it's sad to believe that Kurt was actually gonna backup Lienhart.

If I wanted to see anybody start or at least take a snap from time to time, it would be the young OLinemen that we have on our team. Guys like Devin Clark, Rhino, Will Montegomery, Issiah Ross & Ruben Riley. Just give them one snap a game!

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

"First off Kurt Warner was brought to Arizona to backup Leinart.. That doesn't mean he should of stayed the backup if he was the BETTER QB."

No, Matt Leinart proved to be a failure of epic proportions. An unmitigated bust. It had nothing to do with the fact that Warner was the better QB, but everything to do with the fact that Leinart was not progressing anywhere near the level of a starting QB.

That does not apply to Campbell. Every year he's been in the league he's improved his completions, completion percentage, yards, total INTs, TD/INT ratio, INT per pass play, fumbles, turnovers per pass play, rush yards, passer rating, and win total. The two situations don't come close to comparing.

There's a reason Warner was brought in to be the back-up, despite the fact that is was KNOWN that a 2-time MVP was a better QB than a rookie-1st year quarterback. It's about preparing for the future. Campbell has given enough improvement and proven enough regardless of age and situation to show that he's a competent NFL QB. Even if he doesn't improve an inch (which he will), he'll have made it in this league. And the simple facts are that he has NOT show any signs to believe that he's finished progressing. He's a competent starting QB that's only going to get better. Willingly stopping that would be one of the worst decisions this franchise could make right now.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I think most up here has an idea who the better Qb is.

Posted by: TWISI | March 9, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Slinging Sammy.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

"As sad as I am in saying this, it would have been better for the Skins to get TO than Haynesworth."
Posted by: amaranthpa | March 9, 2009 2:43 PM

That's a sad redskins fan right there.

You need cheering up! Don't give up, Don't give in & Never forget what it means to be a Redskins. For Honor!

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

"Nope, in fact I say that the line and the offense will look decidedly different than it did last season. And we already know what Campbell can do under a good line; just take a look at his stats from the first 8 games of the season.

If the Skins draft one of the top 4 tackles at #13, they immediately replace Jansen/Heyer on the right side of the line.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009"

Let me help sovine08 here gee mssr psps23 aren't you making a HUGE assumption? That the Skins will draft a left tackle at #13. That they won't trade down as they did last year and pick up much less value in someone like a Rhinehart WHO WAS drafted as a tackle not a guard?

If they don't use that pick and the next one on a guard/center the only upgrade will be at left guard with Dockery replacing Kendall. The center position looks awfully suspect to me, especially against the better nose tackles in the 3-4 (like the Ravens). Randy Thomas has spent significant time on the IR as well and is not the same guy they originally signed.

IF THEY draft a LEFT TACKLE and move Samuels to the right (as Joe Jacoby did when they acquired Jim Lachey) then I believe you would see marked improvement sans injury. They would still have a serious problem with depth in the OL unless Rhinehart comes around.

This is not an offense that finished 4th in the NFL as the defense did. They were not very good, especially toward the end ... when injuries and age began to show serious gaps and flaws ...

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

sovine08

'....who are you going to blame then?? The WR's or the Head Coach?? cause somehow I feel Campbell...'

Blame all of them right after pointing out that maybe they all pieces of a puzzle that's just not fiiting right or weren't supposed to be together in the 1st place.

Since the days of M Westbrook, the skins have tried to get a talented wide out group--Jacobs-Gardener-Moss-Coles-Patton-Thrash-Mix-Russell-Green, and none of the team's machinations have prevailed in this regard.

That's why last year's two wideout, one tight end draft occured. The team wants offense, but can't seem to get the personnel to match the system they have.

One can only hope the vets on offense get in Zorn's head and say things like, 'more shot gun,' not less. More two back attack, and not Portis v. the World.

More: 'Hey, let's use Aldrige like the Chargers use Sproles" meaning the team might want to also use the guy as a slot receiver/running back who also returns punts.

So blame everyone offense and hope they take it upon themsleves to become the dominant third of the team.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse

"As sad as I am in saying this, it would have been better for the Skins to get TO than Haynesworth."
Posted by: amaranthpa | March 9, 2009"

Given a one year contract at 6.5mil. I guess I have to agree.

Haynesworth would make a fine addition to a team like TB with 60 million in salary cap space. And a reasonable supporting cast which would come from both the draft, current players, and supporting FA. Not a team like the Redskins with only 4 picks and only 1 in the first 3 rounds. No cap space and lots of dead cap from failed "experiments".

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 3:02 PM | Report abuse

periculum
Rine-Heart did play tackle at the college level but when he was drafted he was drafted to be a OG.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 3:03 PM | Report abuse

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=174065
Portis needs the help. Then we should finally trade Betts.
Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 2:02 PM

I think most teams would rather just draft Brown or another decent back than trade for Betts. Not sure there would be much of a market for him.

Posted by: will_ga | March 9, 2009 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Yes peri, it is a huge "if". And as I stated multiple times, if they don't address that position seriously in the draft, I will be all over the FO for blowing that opportunity.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 3:05 PM | Report abuse

'More: 'Hey, let's use Aldrige like the Chargers use Sproles" meaning the team might want to also use the guy as a slot receiver/running back who also returns punts.

So blame everyone offense and hope they take it upon themsleves to become the dominant third of the team.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009"

Sounds a lot like Joe Gibbs and the Joe Washington type backs he coveted.

As you well know they still need blocking up front ... no blocking no offense.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 3:05 PM | Report abuse

"Yes peri, it is a huge "if". And as I stated multiple times, if they don't address that position seriously in the draft, I will be all over the FO for blowing that opportunity.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009"

GIGANTIC, noting for the record that Mr. LTaylor defense himself ... Bill Parcels made sure that the very first thing he did was to draft Jake Long at left tackle for the Fins.

Noting again that the very first thing the Panthers did even before attempting to sign Julius Peppers was to resign their young left tackle ...

Left Tackle: You can't win without one. And this team needs more than one given the nature of Samuel's injuries. Right tackle is easily addressed once left has been won ...

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 3:09 PM | Report abuse

"periculum
Rine-Heart did play tackle at the college level but when he was drafted he was drafted to be a OG.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009"

I believe he was tried at guard after he failed to handle the tackle position in the later exhibition games. Even then they knew they needed a replacement for Jansen. And it seemed as if he might fit the bill as a 3rd round pick.


Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

"If Brian Orakpo/A Maybin are drafted, the same tactic gets put to use against some team's slow-moving left/right tackle.

Let's do to others what they're doing to us with success, people.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009"

Maybin would definitely be a DE in the 4-3. Orakpo would be made into an OLB. Those are two definite possibilities in this year's draft.


Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

I honestly do not remember him ever playing Tackle in pre-season

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 3:15 PM | Report abuse

No to Orakpo

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

'....it would have been better for the Skins to get TO than Haynesworth....'


Somebody give this poster a hug.

Then, show him to the Bills' Fans blog where, he, and that team's other two supported can yak about T.O. the human ego show.

Moe is not on the Prince Albert Bandwagon--no matter what happens.

But he is a Redskin, and so, I'll tip a few 'green lizards' this Fall in his name.

Ours is a team that scores like a South American Soccer team. I wonder why the team didn't take the path the fins took, and signed Jake Grove-center away from the raiders.

I wonder if a pick at 13 would've been enough to slink J Gross- a starting tackle-away from the panthas.

Goodness--you mean they have offensive line issues and couldn't break down and sign Ray "What You Talkin' Bout?" Willis before he chose to head back to the cee-hawks and the vomit green outfits?

We needed o-lineman moves, not Prince Albert.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

I doubt even Warner (with his quick release) would have been successful behind the Skins OL in the latter half of the year. Not only did the Skins play most of the top defensively ranked teams, but they did so with most of the OL either injured or fielding backups. They lost both starting tackles in the Ravens game and did not have enough OL on the active list to cover the losses (i.e. playing Geisinger at LT, because Fabini was inactive)...

The point is no NFL QB will be successful behind an OL that can only pass protect for two seconds! That is why the team averaged a paltry 6 yds/pass. The opposing defenses always disrupted the play before the WRs could run down field. All the Skins had offensively were running plays and pass plays that took 2 sec or less to develop (WR/RB screens, quick slants, etc...)

Posted by: siris | March 9, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/3414674/NFL-Offseason-Player-Tracker:-NFC-East

We have 11 new guys and Denver has 13. Detroit has 6 and then no one else has more than 5 with many of the better teams adding very few. We really are bucking the trend of developing/nurturing your own talent.

Posted by: will_ga | March 9, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

I personally hate it when plays get thrown short of a first down, but I can also understand the logic.

1) Defender will be guarding first-down marker.

2)Run a route short of first down marker for higher likelihood that you will be open.

3)Make a play after the catch to get to the marker.


Posted by: p1funk

Art Monk used to run 8 yard patterns when the team needed 10. He'd make the catch. Thing about Art, he was bigger and stronger than the DB -- so he'd lower his shoulder, play fullback after the catch -- and gain 12.

We don't have that kind of WR now. I like the size of Thomas and Kelly -- similar to Monk. But so far, that's the only resemblance I've seen.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

will, who are the 11 guys that are new??

doesn't sound right...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

How do we 11 new guys?

DUDE, look at the list. Most of those guys have 3 years of less experince. They have a slim chance of making the final 53. Those are just bodies for training camp.

The way you want to do it, you could only count AH, Dock, and Dirk. That's 3 buddy.

Come on..........

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

And maybe the kicker Dave something........

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 3:30 PM | Report abuse

I think TO and buffalo are a great fit, after september Buffalo is to cold for a passing game so TO basically does not have to do much at home games from then on.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

4th, you need to click the link ... the 11 new guys include lots of off-season scrub pickups too.

Posted by: dcsween | March 9, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

This one goes to 11 ...

RB Anthony Aldridge (waivers, DEN)
P Zacrey Atterberry (FA, DNP in '08)
LS Jeremy Cain (FA, DNP in '08)
G Derrick Dockery (cut, BUF)
RB Dominique Dorsey (FA, CFL in '08)
FB Jonathan Evans (FA, DNP in '08)
DB Michael Grant (FA, DNP in '08)
DT Albert Haynesworth (FA, TEN)
P Dirk Johnson (FA, cut by ARZ in '08)
K Dave Raynor (FA, cut by CIN in '08)
OL Isaiah Ross (FA, cut by MIN in '08)

Posted by: dcsween | March 9, 2009 3:37 PM | Report abuse

well, sovine appears to be new here

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | March 9, 2009 3:39 PM | Report abuse

When Dockery left, Skins had a hole and they needed to pick up Kendall to solve the Dockery Problem.

When Daniels went down, Skins picked up Jason Taylor to solve the Daniels Problem.

Sounds like there are new solutions to those two Problems. Dockery solving the Dockery Problem and Daniels solving the Daniels Problem.

Problems solved?

[Next up ... the Jansen Problem and the Marcus Washington Problem ...]

Posted by: dcsween | March 9, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Like I said, only 3/4 really count. The only one I neglected was the RB.

4 DNPs in '08? Wow freakin wow.

Gibbs 2.3 signed like 13 guys right after the SuperBowl was over if you guys remember. How many made the team?

None.

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

New to you, but ripening elsewhere ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sovine

Posted by: dcsween | March 9, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

RB Anthony Aldridge (waivers, DEN)
P Zacrey Atterberry (FA, DNP in '08)
LS Jeremy Cain (FA, DNP in '08)
G Derrick Dockery (cut, BUF)
RB Dominique Dorsey (FA, CFL in '08)
FB Jonathan Evans (FA, DNP in '08)
DB Michael Grant (FA, DNP in '08)
DT Albert Haynesworth (FA, TEN)
P Dirk Johnson (FA, cut by ARZ in '08)
K Dave Raynor (FA, cut by CIN in '08)
OL Isaiah Ross (FA, cut by MIN in '08)

Regardless of whether they are on the final 53 man roster they are there now. I'm neither praising nor criticizing just pointing out that we have signed twice as many new people to our roster than thirty other teams that's all.

Posted by: will_ga | March 9, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

I read those transactions a long time ago Sweeny and saw it as no news......

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm... took forever for that to post.

Posted by: will_ga | March 9, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Gibbs 2.3 signed like 13 guys right after the SuperBowl was over if you guys remember. How many made the team?

None.

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 3:41 PM

Something to "feed" to camp ... unless one of them turns out to be Johnny Opportunity, in which place he'll light up the stratosphere ... and then either end up on injured reserve ... or not get re-signed when his FA contract is up.

If last year's line up was any indication, one or two of these Marocco Brown candidates (also called chumps ... except that they will get snapped up elsewhere after we let them go), will make the roster.

Posted by: dcsween | March 9, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

RB Dominique Dorsey (FA, CFL in '08)
FB Jonathan Evans (FA, DNP in '08)

By the law of averages,* these two should be the ones who make the roster.

* The particular average to which I'm referring is the average roster longevity of a player who gets the praises from Jasno ... and Sellers and Cartwright seem like they draw lots of such Jasno praise ... which means they probably are marked men.

Posted by: dcsween | March 9, 2009 3:49 PM | Report abuse

"This was not a case of Campbell failing to exploit blitzes. It was the opposite. It was the line failing to exploit an undermanned pass-rush.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009"

It is interesting that the previous offensive coordinator, since fired by Snidely, had garnered reknown for exploiting the 3-4 defense. He of the massive tome playbook. The current offensive coordinator/head coach is a bald-faced boy rookie comparatively speaking. Even when compared to the young Joe Gibbs taking over the Redskins in the 80's. IMHO, Dr. Zorn needs a "Dan Henning" or perhaps a lesser known Bob Saunders type to help him against the prevalent 3-4's in the NFC eastern division. I believe this individual should be made the OC as opposed to Zorn and Sherman Smith. I would think this would be an off season priority.

Apparently, Snidely's new philosophy may be to allow the "poor performing" segments to get even weaker while "rewarding" the better performing segments with FA's like Hall and Haynesworth.

That said I think the teams exploiting the Redskins for the most part had younger or in their prime DE/DT/OLB. Whereas the Redskins featured a decidedly older, veteran offensive line (except for Heyer) that became worn out by the second half of the season.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Its not clear the Skins are better because of who they've gotten and who they've lost.

Springs, Taylor and Washington are all talented players who were hurt in 2008. Evans was our best DE.

Clearly Albert is a major upgrade in the middle. Our DTs were pretty good in '08, with Monty, Alexander, Evans (part time), Golston and Griffin. Dockery is clearly an upgrade over Kendall -- though Pete played every game the past 2 years and did pretty well overall.

Basically, we upgraded 2 positions and lost guys in 4.

Overall, I think we're a bit ahead, mostly since a top DT is especially important in the NFC East and the matchups that Springs excels at are guys like plax and owens ... one is gone and the other might be. Losing Springs would have been more problematic if both owens and plax remained in the NFC East.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

here sa home grown talent who played his high school ball at patuxent high school in lusby md he should get another look at rb as a sproles type back small and fast plays a lot bigger then he is and has big break capabilities set a bunch of ncaa records as a rookie with u conn we signed him last year as an undrafted rookie and released him in june he now plays in canadian football league check him out tell me what you think cant figure out how to put any links up so google him TERRY CAULLEY

Posted by: all_this_bs | March 9, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

"And maybe the kicker Dave something........

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009"

Why they are talking to Daniels. Perhaps Olshansky said no?

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 3:53 PM | Report abuse

peri, Igor signed with Dallas.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 9, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

"peri, Igor signed with Dallas.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009"

It figures ... :) We will likely end up finishing at the bottom of the NFC East given the improvements and a comparison of the draft picks each team will have in the division.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

i missed stated he did not break a buncha records but he did tie a couple records with emmit smith and marshall faulk for touchdowns in a quarter and he ran like a 4.38 in college gibbs sign him once i think 2 years later he may be worth another look what do you guys think
TERRY CAULLEY??

Posted by: all_this_bs | March 9, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

per, I was disappointed as well in not at least making a run at him, not trying to make him out to be the second coming of deacon jones, but he'd hold the point on run defense.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Can someone here explain to me why no one ever counts the Redskins pre-merger championships when racking up the hardware for the teams in the NFL? We have a total of six championships not 3. I believe that ties us with Pitt and most the other teams in the league.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

"per, I was disappointed as well in not at least making a run at him, not trying to make him out to be the second coming of deacon jones, but he'd hold the point on run defense.

Posted by: BeantownGreg"

Clearly seemed better than Philip Daniels or Wynn. Both combined. Much younger.

Sadly, Snidely's previous "rep" pre-Gibbs may have reared its ugly head again.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Can I get on that escalator!

Posted by: rb-freedom-for-all | March 9, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

just saw a headline on fox sports stating Jags land 3 time pro-bowl OT. Couldn't open the link, anyone know who it was they signed?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

CHECK OUT HIS YOU TUBE CLIPS THE KID IS FAST AS H*LLAND CAN DROP HIS SHOULDER FOR A HIT AND KEEP ON TRUCKIN HAS THE ABILITY THAT PORTIS HAS LOST TO MAKE PEOPLE MISS IN THE OPEN FIELD KEEP CRYING FOR OUR SPROLES -TYPE BACK HERE HE IS
TERRY CAULLEY
CFL HAMILTON TIGER-CATS

Posted by: all_this_bs | March 9, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Greg -- Tra Thomas

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Greg, it was Tra Thomas.

Posted by: Curzon417 | March 9, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

thanks guys, good news for us. Means that maybe philly is a little more desperate, perhaps....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

zceszcest

'...Art Monk used to run 8 yard patterns...'


Monk's size helped as did the skins running game.

If you tried to double Monk, you took a guy out of the box--and Riggo rocked.

The reverse of this tactic worked to our advantage as Monk single-covered couldn't be covered by a smaller corner.

It also helped that R Saunders/G Clark worked deep/mid field to occupy safeties.

The trick, though, in 2009 football is having a slot receiver guy who expliots the spaces created by safeties moved up in the box or who can read a blitz and get open underneath against a guy who can't cover him. Wes Welker, Boldin, and S Holmes excel at this.

And here is where Thomas must grow: he must beat out Randle El and make himself that smooth underneath guy who takes pressure off Moss/Cooley.

Presently, there is nothing to fear once the skins go three wide. Randle El can't beat most teams third corner--or so it seems--and so, coverage can roll to Cooley/Moss without fear.

Davis is a fine 3rd option in a 3 wide set as like J Witten/Gates/Gonzalez/Clark, he can flex out and run much better than most teams' slb.

Too much scheme talk,. My head hurts.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Overcoming any advantage by signing Haynesworth:

2009 Draft

1st round:
Was Redskins 13

Phi Eagles 21
Phi Eagles 28

NY Giants 29

_________________
2nd round:
NY Giants 13(45)
NY Giants 28(60)

Dal Cowboys 19(51)

Phi Eagles 21(53)

_______________________
3rd Round:
Dal Cowboys 5(69)

Was Redskins 16(80)

Phi Eagles 21(85)

NY Giants 27(91)

______________________
4th round:
Dal Cowboys 1(97)
Dal Cowboys 17(113)

Phi Eagles 21(117)

NY Giants 29(125)

______________________
5th round:
Was Redskins 14(142)

NY Giants 15(143)
NY Giants 28(158)

Phi Eagles 17(145)
Phi Eagels 21(149)

Dal Cowboys 20(148)
Dal Cowboys 30(158)

___________________________
6th round:

Was Redskins 13(173)

Phi Eagles 21(181)
Phi Eagles 22(182)

Dal Cowboys 24(184)

NY Giants 27(187)

_______________________
7th round:
Dal Cowboys 1(193)
Dal Cowboys 18(210)

Phi Eagles 21(213)

NY Giants 29(221)

___________________________
Totals:

Eagles: 10 draft picks 5 in first 4 rounds.
(2 first round picks)
NY Giants: 9 draft picks 5 in first 4 rounds.
(1 first round pick).
Cowboys: 7 draft picks 4 in first 4 rounds.
(0 first round picks)

Deadskins: 4 draft picks 2 in first 4 rounds.
(1 first round pick)

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

The Eagles and Giants should be the odds on favorites to win the "superbowl" of the off season with the FA signings plus their draft picks.

Dallas would be the runner up.

Washington dead last.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

This just in a new upstart league The UFL will be getting their games aired on national TV on VERSUS, (owned by comcast). Games will be on during football season (fall) playing on Thursday and Friday Nights, against the NFL Networks' fledgeling Thursday night games.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Let's see how mch they all end up with.

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

peri,

the pukes having the first pick of the 4th is kind of a big deal. Thats the first pick on the 2nd day of the draft. Good spot to be.

Send 13 to Philly for 28 and 53, and 145.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Its nice that the WaPo is giving the little kid from Bad Santa a job in these hard times. http://views.washingtonpost.com/theleague/panelists/2009/03/terrell-owens-buffalo-bills-zobel.html

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Alex. I'll add the UnFL to things I already don't watch on Versus.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 9, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

How can you not say that Mr. Shawn Zobel and Mr Brett Kelly are not twins.

Mr. Kelly (for your perusal)
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2794559744/nm0962260

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

So whatever REALLY happened with Erasmus James? Is he not even worth a Vet min to try and bring along this offseason? It seemed he had a big upside long term when they traded for him, so long as he got his knee healthy. Um, WTF happened there... He just kind of dropped off the face of the earth without any news/comments of what went wrong there? He's not better then any of our other BAD A$$ DE's... seriously?

Posted by: EinVB | March 9, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Hey,
HD makes hockey watchable

Posted by: alex35332 | March 9, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

EinVB, my guess is that the Skins faced the same problem the Vikings faced ... no fire in the motor.

Posted by: dcsween | March 9, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Pat Kirwan on how one team in the NFC east has helped themselves in FA ... before exercising their 9 draft picks ...


1. These teams have helped themselves

Spending money doesn't necessarily mean getting better as a football team. I have been part of teams that have attempted to buy a championship during free agency only to find out very quickly that it doesn't work. Smart spending on a few key players can finish off a project that brings great results.

Outside of CB Andre Goodman and S Brian Dawkins, the Broncos signed 10 new players for very little guaranteed money and are well on their way to changing the face of their roster. They still have a long way to go if they want to convert their defense to a 3-4, but they're off to a good start overall.

The New York Giants, already a very good team, have bolstered their defensive roster with the signings of Canty and DT Rocky Bernard.

Whether you like the deal or not (I don't), the signing of Haynesworth will help the Redskins on the field, but the release of DE Jason Taylor days later sprung a leak on the defense which now has to be repaired. The Jets found a much needed defensive leader in LB Bart Scott and an underrated safety in Jim Leonhard. Both will go a long way towards helping Rex Ryan's defense.


2. These teams have taken a hit

We often spend lots of time talking about the players signed by new teams and not enough on the teams they left. The teams that jumped out at me are Atlanta, Baltimore, Seattle, and Cincinnati.

The Falcons had a great year in 2008 and played good defense with a group that struggled in years past. But the loss of CB Domonique Foxworth to the Ravens, and linebackers Keith Brooking and Michael Boley to the Cowboys and Giants, respectively, will hurt. It means the club has work to do just to get back to where they were, let alone move forward. Falcons fans are struggling to accept their team's inactivity, but that may change in the coming weeks.

Baltimore's answer to the loss of center Jason Brown is Matt Birk, which is okay for the short term but the loss of Scott and Leonhard will be tough to recover from next season.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

peri

The iggles make me jealous and sick at the same time.

It looks like they've gone all new england patriots on us and are stockpiling picks to make their team younger and deeper.

Sounds like they have a plan.

And all we have to combat a non-running team with an athletic quarterback is Prince Albert and his upfield rush.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

"thanks guys, good news for us. Means that maybe philly is a little more desperate, perhaps....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009"

Not hardly. With 2 first round picks, 5 on the first day ... the ability to TRADE UP! They can certainly land one of the top LT's in the draft and start him. While also filling gaps in other areas on the team.

They are in good shape right now.

The deadskins on the other hand are definitely hurting.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

With the remaining cap at $8M, perhaps $3M for draft picks and $3M as a reserve, and no one left to cut for cap space, it would seem that the phrase you're going to hear for everyone we sign is "vet minimum".
I think that explains Daniels vs. Olshansky, and why R. Wynn might be attractive. The youth movement they've made so far is about all the youth movement they can afford.

Posted by: daggar | March 9, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

peri, they need a LT, which one could argue is the most important position on the field apart from qb. There wont be any LT's on the board at 21 or 28 that can compete with one of the big 4 who potentially falls to the Redskins.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 9, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Sween.... Interesting, I never heard that was an issue with him. I thought our new DLine coach Palmiero knew how to get the best out him from their time together at Wisconsin? DAMN - Losing the 7th rounder is going to hurt like a mofo...

Posted by: EinVB | March 9, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

By game nine of the 2008 season the league had seen enough of Zorn to be able to counter program. The pendulum started to swing the other way and we all know how the movie ended. But like some movies, we know how it ended but we are not sure why it ended the way it did. Some possibilities:

1. Zorn's playbook had no answer to the counter-programming. He isn't the WCO guru we thought he was.
2. The ending was inevitable given (a) Portis wore out and (b) the OL crumbled because of injuries and age.
3. The league saw what JC's repertoire was and defensed against it, it effect saying "you've got to beat us with something else". He couldn't.

The actual answer to what happened is probably some vexing combination of all three of the above, and it will be a real challenge to figure out what the best solution is.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 9, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Hmmmmm...now the theme is working in the other direction - at least everyone is consistent - just because Philly has a lot of high picks does NOT mean that the players that they choose will have an immediate impact.

Question for debate - While a high draft pick increases your chances to select a good player - does that mean that you are AUTOMATICALLY going to get someone who contributes the first year?

I think not...

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | March 9, 2009 5:16 PM | Report abuse

And all we have to combat a non-running team with an athletic quarterback is Prince Albert and his upfield rush.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

...ummm, and a pretty darn good secondary...

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

The deadskins on the other hand are definitely hurting.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

If we can walk away with one of the top LTs in this draft, then I will be satisfied with the Skins moves this offseason - not jumping for joy, but satisfied.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 5:30 PM | Report abuse

psps23 > sovine08

dude, he's taking you to the woodshed...don't give up though, it's hilarious.
______
Give up? The proof is ON THE FIELD not what anyone say's here. I want the best QB on the field for the Skins.. The only way to see is to have them COMPETE. Campbell fans just want to keep giving the ball to Campbell thinking he has to eventually win. Sorry I don't see it. Campbell lead the Skins to less points than the Lions last year. You really think adding a guard and a tackle will change that? I honestly believe Colt will be a better QB for the Skins.. maybe this year maybe next. Disagree with me fine, training camp opens soon, the proof will be on the field.

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

You really think adding a guard and a tackle will change that? I honestly believe Colt will be a better QB for the Skins.. maybe this year maybe next. Disagree with me fine, training camp opens soon, the proof will be on the field.

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 5:33 PM

I honestly think a better gaurd and tackle will change that. How much? I'm not sure. I do agree that the proof will be on the field and I hope the best QB, whomever it may be, ends up on the field during the regular season.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 9, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse

sovine08,

Obviously you're entitled to your strong opinion. We'll see what happens.

You say "Campbell (led) the Skins to less points last year than the Lions". What if I was to say that it was not Campbell that did the leading of that offense, but Zorn. Can you tell me where I was wrong? I can point you to statistic after statistic that says Campbell did what was asked of him. Everything from his completion percentage, to players targeted, to distribution of receptions by his WRs, all of it. Moss, Cooley, and Randle El ran the routes asked of them, and Campbell hit them with decent accuracy, and he did it with the lowest turnover percentage in the league, despite the fact that 2 of those targets were the most consistently double-teamed players on the field. Look up the distribution of receptions, you'll see that Campbell was in fact NOT dumping the ball off, but instead hitting his top targets a majority of the time.

Something somewhere doesn't add up.

It was my argument all of last season that it all points back to the coach. The tricky part is figuring out whether Zorn was calling the conservative plays by design or whether he was forced to call them (either due to lack of confidence in his QB, lack of confidence in his WRs, or more likely, lack of confidence in his offensive line --- or possibly a comination of all of them).

As you say, the proof is on the field. And the proof says that Campbell is more than competent for a QB. Don't believe me? Just compare Campbell's stats to that of $60 million QB David Garrard, AFC pro-bowl QB Kerry Collins, or 2-time Super Bowl winning QB Ben Roethlisberger.

Posted by: psps23 | March 9, 2009 5:56 PM | Report abuse

p1funk

'...ummm, and a pretty darn good secondary...'

'...ummm, and an offense that scores like an European soccer team....'

mistamoe/posted right now!!!!


Why is the choice to lose with a great defense 14-10 when the rules encourage you to win with a versitile, quick strike offense 32-21?

By all accounts, the stillers offense and not its killer defense won the super bowl.

The cards offense dominated the panthas/iggles D and carried the team to the big game.

What'll win the big game: the pats/stillers/colts/cards/chargers/iggles offense or the skins/panthas/vikings/ravens/bucs/bears/packers defense-running games?

Easy: the offensive teams have all won rings the past 3-4 years.

Yes: the saints are all 'O' and no 'D.' We'll see what Grilliams does in Nawlins before commenting.

But I'll take points over no points anyday--beating people by outscoring them is how you win---and I want to win it all.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

look moe, I know you love the sight of your own posts and that is why you make them long and rambling. I don't what your manifesto is all about with high-scoring/low-scoring philosophies. But my post was a simple response to your statement that "all we have" to combat a non-running team w/ an athletic QB was AH.

That's simply not true. We've also got a top-flight secondary...

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 6:19 PM | Report abuse

I personally hate it when plays get thrown short of a first down, but I can also understand the logic.

1) Defender will be guarding first-down marker.

2)Run a route short of first down marker for higher likelihood that you will be open.

3)Make a play after the catch to get to the marker.


Posted by: p1funk

Art Monk used to run 8 yard patterns when the team needed 10. He'd make the catch. Thing about Art, he was bigger and stronger than the DB -- so he'd lower his shoulder, play fullback after the catch -- and gain 12.

We don't have that kind of WR now. I like the size of Thomas and Kelly -- similar to Monk. But so far, that's the only resemblance I've seen.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | March 9, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

I hear you.

We talk alot about the O-line and JC's decision-making and the play-calling. But let's not forget that we have a receiving corps that's not earning their paychecks (except Moss).

Sometimes it's as simple as dumping it to a playmaker and letting him make a play. Of course that logic is predicated on having playmakers...

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 6:22 PM | Report abuse

You really think adding a guard and a tackle will change that?

Posted by: sovine08 | March 9, 2009 5:33 PM

Yes, I really think that upgrading our O-line to give JC an extra couple seconds to throw will change ALOT.

Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Ideal scenario - find team that wants 13th pick and is willing to trade picks it has. Drop down to low 1st round pick, high second round pick, get OT Beatty or Britton, just as good if not better than Oher, never had a chance at Smiths, Monroe, also pick up Matthews or English, slight drop-off from Cushing, fill two gasping holes instead of one if kept 13th pick.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 9, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

psp, I love your passion for JC but have you considered that the coached asked so little of JC because he believed that's all JC could handle? Zorn's job is to win games. Are you suggesting he spoon fed JC to the team's (and his) detriment?

Garrard? Collins? Is that the standard (not that he's actually a better QB than Collins)? And you know you were dead wrong for comparing him to Roethlisberger. Numbers don't always tell the tale. JC would not have QB'd the Steelers to the Super Bowl and you know it.

Was the o-line better in '07? You JC lovers always talk about how he's improved each season when in reality he only threw one more TD in '08 than in '07 where he played fewer games. His ypg, ypc and ypa were all better in '07.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 9, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

"I honestly think a better guard and tackle will change that. How much? I'm not sure. I do agree that the proof will be on the field and I hope the best QB, whomever it may be, ends up on the field during the regular season.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 9, 2009"

Tackle, Center/Guard in that order. Yep I agree entirely. Still think they might be talking to Byron Leftwich. I suspect he would like to try playing in front of the home crowd for a change.

Mark Tauscher may be a possibility at right tackle only.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 7:36 PM | Report abuse

"And you know you were dead wrong for comparing him to Roethlisberger. Numbers don't always tell the tale. JC would not have QB'd the Steelers to the Super Bowl and you know it.
Posted by: p1funk | March 9, 2009 6:24 PM"|

p1,

I believe that was me. In a response to criticism suggesting that Campbell's low touchdown number was a problem of the offense. "Campbells 13 tds is a problem? I beg to disagree that this an issue consistent with our QB and not our protection, playcalls, and passing threats... all of which we're subject to a learning curve last season.

Rothlesburger threw 17TDS and 15INTS and his team won the Superbowl."Posted @ March 9, 2009 11:39 AM

Eagles take an OT & RB in round one; no trade. You gotta take an OT with AH in the division. You gotta take an OT with Tra Johnson leaving.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

"Was the o-line better in '07? You JC lovers always talk about how he's improved each season when in reality he only threw one more TD in '08 than in '07 where he played fewer games. His ypg, ypc and ypa were all better in '07.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 9, 2009"

Yes, I think they were. They were all one year younger and a plethora of injuries less. Heyer played relatively injury free. Jensen was still on the mend. I think Todd Wade was a bit better as a backup than they had last year. Certainly better than Fabini.

I believe the guard play was better as well given the problems that Kendall had this year as opposed to last year. The center play (Rabach) also seemed better.

Posted by: periculum | March 9, 2009 7:44 PM | Report abuse

p1funk,

My bad. That post was not you. It was Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 9, 2009 7:08 PM

Sorry.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 7:44 PM | Report abuse

learnedhand: "And you know you were dead wrong for comparing him [Jason Campbell] to Roethlisberger. Numbers don't always tell the tale. JC would not have QB'd the Steelers to the Super Bowl and you know it."

The stats don't show all that much difference. Roethlisberger struggled some this season, to the point where after the Skins game, Boomer Esiason suggested he be benched in favor of Leftwich (Bill Cowher's eyes crossed in horror).

Look, psps is absolutely correct in his reading of the stat line. Of course there's more to QBing than percentages. But when folks on this board insist that Jason will never be good enough to take a team into the playoffs, the only logical answer is: he already is.

Can he win a Super Bowl? Who knows? It takes an amazing amount of good fortune. Ask Kurt Warner. Ask John Elway. Or even better, ask Archie Manning or Dan Marino.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 9, 2009 7:45 PM | Report abuse

"Was the o-line better in '07? You JC lovers always talk about how he's improved each season when in reality he only threw one more TD in '08 than in '07 where he played fewer games. His ypg, ypc and ypa were all better in '07.
Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 9, 2009 7:08 PM"

He was in a different offense too; one that is not a WCO.

Posted by: matthewvickers | March 9, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

you suggesting he spoon fed JC to the team's (and his) detriment?

learnedhand1

I think he did actually.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2008/12/jim_zorn_defends_the_scheme_bu.html?nav=rss_blog

Posted by: TWISI | March 9, 2009 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Anybody watching the Jim Zorn led Packers about to be demolished by the '85 Bears?

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 8:05 PM | Report abuse

fill two gasping holes instead of one if kept 13th pick.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 9, 2009 7:03 PM

Sounds intriguing. I'd much rather fill two gasping holes that probably anything I can think of, with the possible exception of three gasping holes.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 9, 2009 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Yeah 4th, I'm watching it. He's not too medium!

Let's see if he converts this 3rd and 15....oh....he actually ran it and he's pretty fast!

Posted by: rickyroge | March 9, 2009 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Woops! Zorn just threw a pick to Fencik! C'mon Zorny!

Posted by: rickyroge | March 9, 2009 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Zorny is going to be running more than passing in this game. (They showed this one a few months ago and it was pretty funny watching Zorny run really really fast).

Watching this game you'd never think he'd be an NFL HC. Singletary on the other hand looks like a BEAST.

Posted by: 4thFloor | March 9, 2009 8:35 PM | Report abuse

I know those who post to sports blogs don't like to have facts get in the way of their arguments, but I thought I would take a game-by-game look at QB sacks the Skins allowed for 2008. It turns out that there were 38 total, 16 for the first 8 games and 22 for the second 8 games. If you look a little more closely at the second 8 games, there was one game in particular that stands out - the Steelers debaucle where the Skins gave up 7 sacks. Most of those sacks were blitz sacks where it is up to the QB and receivers to thwart the blitz - 5 OL are never going to hold the fort against 7+ DL, LBs and CBs. It would be an understatement to say that the Skins' QB/HC got undressed in that game by the Steelers' wily old DC, Dick LeBeau. In any case, if you consider that game an outlier, for the remaining 7 games of the second half of the season the offense gave up on average 2.1 sacks per game. For the first eight games they gave up on average 2.0 sacks per game. Not much of a difference, is it? Nobody is going to argue that the Skins had a primo OL in 2008. But as to the principal cause of their 2nd half demise? Hmmmm ...

Posted by: AntonChigurh | March 9, 2009 9:16 PM | Report abuse

AntonChigurh do you have the data to support that the 7 sacks allowed to the Stellers were the result of blizes of more than 5 rushers. If in fact, the sacks came on rushes of 5 or fewer players, would your position change?

Posted by: TWISI | March 9, 2009 9:29 PM | Report abuse

I know those who post to sports blogs don't like to have facts get in the way of their arguments...

This is RI. Facts R Us.

P.S. Nobody is going to argue that the Skins had a primo OL in 2008. But as to the principal cause of their 2nd half demise? Hmmmm ...

A team rushes two (2) (1+1) linemen. They sack J.C. before he can drop back in the pocket.

Your turn.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 9, 2009 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: TWISI | March 9, 2009 9:55 PM | Report abuse

JC trips over his own feet. Loses a few yards and gives away a sack. Your turn.
Seriously, you want to take one play in isolation and claim it as proof of something, go ahead. The more damning evidence is rushing stats -- we were unstopppable early, but all-too-stoppable late.
The Steelers game gave everyone that followed a template for beating the skins -- stop Portis, double Moss, and make JC beat you.
It was a template that other teams had tried, unsuccessfully. But the games had become much too close for comfort.
JC taking a step up and winning some games was really the only hope we had in the second half. It's not his fault that they got into that situation, not a fatal flaw that he didn't do it, but the fact of the matter is that he did not.
Do that just once early this year -- put that beeotch on your back and carry it over the goal line -- and the FO should put the contract in front of him before they get on the plane. Until then, he's going to have to play like it's his contract year.

Posted by: daggar | March 9, 2009 10:13 PM | Report abuse

psps23

I won't ramble.

The redskins' fanbase seems to love the idea of being some 1980s style, great shut down defensive team in an era when pass 1st, score quickly offense wins championships.

It's 2009 and some folks don't seem to have noticed the change.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to disagree mistamoe but defense still wins championships
http://www.nfl.com/kickoff/story?id=09000d5d80a44908&template=with-video&confirm=true

Posted by: caese | March 9, 2009 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Can he win a Super Bowl? Who knows? It takes an amazing amount of good fortune. Ask Kurt Warner. Ask John Elway. Or even better, ask Archie Manning or Dan Marino.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 9, 2009 7:45 PM


To quote a great philosopher: "They say when you play with skills, good luck'll happen"

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 9, 2009 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Dagger the template was to play coverage aginst the skins, and rush 5 or fewer players, not blitz s had been suggested.

Posted by: TWISI | March 9, 2009 10:40 PM | Report abuse

The Steelers game gave everyone that followed a template for beating the skins -- stop Portis, double Moss, and make JC beat you.
It was a template that other teams had tried, unsuccessfully. But the games had become much too close for comfort.

How about blow up the blown up O.L.?

That is the template everyone else followed.

That is why we went 2-6 the second half. Did you actually watch any of those games?
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 9, 2009 10:49 PM | Report abuse

"The redskins' fanbase seems to love the idea of being some 1980s style, great shut down defensive team in an era when pass 1st, score quickly offense wins championships.

It's 2009 and some folks don't seem to have noticed the change.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 9, 2009"

MistaMoe a team that did that, the Cardinals, went up against a team that features a shutdown defense ... and the defense won.

I would again point out that the Redskins BEAT the runner up to the NFC conference championship and the NFC conference champion handily. Solely because of last year's defense.

IMHO last year's defense WOULD HAVE BEEN the very best in the NFL had Marcus Washington and Shawn Springs played and started 16 games. They would have had the ultimate "shutdown defense".

Now they will have something more akin to the Redskins of the early to late sixties (pre-Lombardi) where they had the ultimate scoring machine sans a defense. They they traded for the ultimate "beast" in the person of Sam Huff. He was the entire defense, he had no supporting cast. At least those teams had the best offense in the league ...

This team will not be quite as bad ... but I suspect it will be close enough to make mssr. Haynesworth sorry he ever signed on the dotted line.

Posted by: periculum | March 10, 2009 12:42 AM | Report abuse

"This is RI. Facts R Us.
A team rushes two (2) (1+1) linemen. They sack J.C. before he can drop back in the pocket.

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 9, 2009'

FINE. Here's the HARD facts like it or not. Chris Samuels needs to move to right tackle. Pete Kendall isn't the only guard on his "last legs". Randy Thomas is also just about at that point. Casey Rabach is not a starting center ... at least from the Ravens perspective. They drafted 3 more after he became a starter including Brown, the one recently lost to FA.

The entire OL needs to be overhauled, replaced with young high round draft picks. Rhinehart was supposed to be the beginning of that phase ... but he failed to measure up.

They really minimally do need 1 starting left tackle, a starting guard and a starting center. Among other things.

Posted by: periculum | March 10, 2009 1:04 AM | Report abuse

IMHO last year's defense WOULD HAVE BEEN the very best in the NFL had Marcus Washington and Shawn Springs played and started 16 games. They would have had the ultimate "shutdown defense".

Now they will have something more akin to the Redskins of the early to late sixties (pre-Lombardi) where they had the ultimate scoring machine sans a defense. They they traded for the ultimate "beast" in the person of Sam Huff. He was the entire defense, he had no supporting cast. At least those teams had the best offense in the league ...

This team will not be quite as bad ... but I suspect it will be close enough to make mssr. Haynesworth sorry he ever signed on the dotted line.

Posted by: periculum | March 10, 2009 12:42 AM
_________________________

I saw earlier where you asked someone if they watched the games last year? Well, did you? Because Washington and Springs healthy is a big IF. They haven't been healthy in 3 years, thus why they are gone. That's like saying if Rocky were just like LT we'd have a great pass rush.

Also, we had a nice defense but not an elite defense. Elite defense change the game by scoring points. They also continually give the offense a short field. Our bend but don't break defense was fine if our offense is great, but our TEAM needs more than that. That's why we went out and got playmakers in AH and Hall. I don't care if we give up more yards and a few more points if our defense scores some points and creates a short field for the offense by forcing turnovers. A fourth ranked defense in a non playoff year isn't something to puff your chest out about.

Posted by: 6-2StackMonster | March 10, 2009 1:22 AM | Report abuse

learnedhand: "they say when you play with skills, good luck'll happen."

There's good luck, and then there's Super Bowl level good luck.

If it's all about the QB's skill, then why didn't Archie Manning, Dan Marino, and Jim Kelly win Super Bowls?

And Trent Dilfer did. Doubt he shows up on msny Hall of Fame ballot.

Nor does Mark Rypien. Or Doug Williams, for that matter.

Joe Theismann shows up on his own ballot, of course.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 5:42 AM | Report abuse

antonchigurh: "In the WCO, the QB is the most important part of the offensive puzzle. The QB must possess three important attributes:1. Field vision. The ability to see the entire field of action and what is happening. 2. Playbook IQ. The ability to understand how plays are unfolding and which option has the best chance for success. 3. Throwing prowess. This includes (a)arm strength, (b)accuracy and (c)touch. Of the three, (b) is probably the most important."

OK, thanks for posting this. Because it raises a whole bunch of questions about the way QBs are evaluated in today's NFL.

Take 'field vision'. There's no measurable ability that involves 'seeing the whole field'. A QB needs to pick it out three or sometimes four receivers. He already knows where they're supposed to be, so it's a matter of seeing whether they got there, how close they're covered. and throwing it to one of them.

The only measurable part is how long it takes him and how often he completes. The rest if is subjective. "Wow, look at how he found that fourth receiver. He must have great field vision." Not necessarily. Maybe he got an extra second from his blockers. Or he has a talent for throwing off his back foot. Or the rush end slipped and fell. None of which has anything to do with his vision.

Now your second factor -- 'playbook IQ.' NFL QBs know the plays. But it takes them a while to get comfortable executing them. So coordinators adjust to the QBs strengths. The Ravens ran about half the available pass plays so Flacco wouldn't have to think so much. If Cameron has asked more, he would have struggled. On the other hand, a guy like Payton Manning is asked to do things that no NFL QB has done in recent decades. He's essentially calling his own plays. So how do you compare him to Joe Flacco? It's as if they play a different game.

Lastly, Jason Campbell is an accurate passer. He's not Aikman, but in that tradition. If you're where you're supposed to be, he'll usually hit you.

He's not a great deep thrower. Fortunately for him, the WC offense doesn't require a great deep arm. Brett Favre has one, but he's the exception.

Bill Walsh was frequently asked why Joe Montana wasn't drafted until the third round. His answer: because NFL scouts don't know anything about what takes to play QB. Actually he was more blunt than that. But we take his point.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 6:25 AM | Report abuse

periculum: "Here's the HARD facts like it or not. Chris Samuels needs to move to right tackle. Pete Kendall isn't the only guard on his "last legs". Randy Thomas is also just about at that point. Casey Rabach is not a starting center ... at least from the Ravens perspective. They drafted 3 more after he became a starter including Brown, the one recently lost to FA."

OK, here's the problem with this view. First, Samuels is not a good fit for RT. He may be struggling to stay healthy on the left side, but that's not a reason to shift him across the line.

The Ravens didn't want to lose Casey Rabach. And neither does Joe Bugel. He's arguably the best lineman they have.

The problem with the Skins' line last year, IMNSHO opinion, was they broke down physically. Not surprising, they're older. They do need to be replaced, as the Ravens replaced theirs, but the Skins are getting a late start. Signing Dockery was an attempt to partially rectify that.

When it comes to drafting linemen, Ozzie Newsome has a gift.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 6:36 AM | Report abuse

If the ravens are so great at drafting linemen, why did they just pay a ton for a mid 30's center.

I know he was a pro bowler last year, but he will start to wear down if not this year next year.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 10, 2009 6:41 AM | Report abuse

Good stuff @ 6:25, Samson. I just wish fans would understand a QB is only as good as the team around him. Peyton Manning has had at least 2 HoFers play with him in Indy. Tom Brady played great ball without an elite WR for years mainly because he had a very good O-line in New England (and having a genius coach didn't hurt). The Redskins won championships with mediocre QBs because they always had the best O-line in the game and had great WRs. Regardless of where JC is ranked as a QB talent-wise, if you give him a solid O-line and some quality targets to throw to, you'd be surprised at how good he could look.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 10, 2009 7:03 AM | Report abuse

The Redskins won championships with mediocre QBs because they always had the best O-line in the game and had great WRs. Regardless of where JC is ranked as a QB talent-wise, if you give him a solid O-line and some quality targets to throw to, you'd be surprised at how good he could look.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 10, 2009 7:03 AM

Plus they had running backs that would absolutely punish tired defenses.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 10, 2009 7:13 AM | Report abuse

Plus they had running backs that would absolutely punish tired defenses.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 10, 2009 7:13 AM

Yeah, I omitted reference of the RBs because they were just as interchangeable as the QBs were. If Timmy f-ing Smith can set Super Bowl rushing records (which still stand, I believe), I'm pretty sure the line gets the credit for much of the team's success. I just wish Danny and Vinny were paying attention to the team's history when planning for its future...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 10, 2009 7:31 AM | Report abuse

flounder21:"If the ravens are so great at drafting linemen, why did they just pay a ton for a mid 30's center.I know he was a pro bowler last year, but he will start to wear down if not this year next year."

Because they thought he was better than the young guy. And center is so important -- on most teams, he calls the line assignments. It's a vet's position, but some young guys (like Nick Mangold) can excel.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 7:37 AM | Report abuse

You know what we need? A QB simulator, along the lines of a flight simulator. So aspiring QBs could more easily practice finding and throwing at targets, and scouts could more easily measure it.

Not the same as the real thing, but a heck of a lot better than Boomer opining in front of a TV camera.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 7:41 AM | Report abuse

You know what we need? A QB simulator, along the lines of a flight simulator. So aspiring QBs could more easily practice finding and throwing at targets, and scouts could more easily measure it.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 7:41 AM

Doing well (or poorly) in what amounts to a video game simulation isn't the same as doing it in live action. I see what you're saying, but I'm thinking that's what practice is for...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 10, 2009 7:44 AM | Report abuse

"I just wish fans would understand a QB is only as good as the team around him."

Amen.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 10, 2009 7:45 AM | Report abuse

Daniels and Wynn? I can't believe the Skins couldn't find someone younger than those two old guys. Unreal.

Posted by: lsskinsfan | March 10, 2009 7:57 AM | Report abuse

"see what you're saying, but I'm thinking that's what practice is for..."

Absolutely practice is better. But the simulator would have two advantages:

1) you wouldn't need receivers. The big problem in NFL practice is getting the reps. Especially during the season.

2) Young guys could practice in different schemes. Just in case some owner decided to change coordinators on them...

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Where's JM220? Has he been masquerading as an owl in Maine or did an owl steal his hammer?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29605265/?gt1=43001

Posted by: bangkokben | March 10, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Absolutely practice is better. But the simulator would have two advantages:

1) you wouldn't need receivers. The big problem in NFL practice is getting the reps. Especially during the season.

2) Young guys could practice in different schemes. Just in case some owner decided to change coordinators on them...

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 8:08 AM

OK, Samson...I'll buy it. I thought you meant in lieu of practice having this simulator thing. But I guess if you're putting 3rd stringers through it who wouldn't be getting practice reps anyway (like Colt Brennan), then I guess I could see the benefit. That way you have a tangible way of seeing if a guy's "mental reps" are paying off...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 10, 2009 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Where's JM220? Has he been masquerading as an owl in Maine or did an owl steal his hammer?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29605265/?gt1=43001

Posted by: bangkokben

LMAO! That is one crazy story. I hope all well with everyone.

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | March 10, 2009 8:21 AM | Report abuse

Jason Campbell's base salary has increased from $783k to $2.858m

... by CJ Holley

I TOLD YOU WE SHOULD HAVE CUT THAT LOSER!

Posted by: Sports_Guru | March 10, 2009 8:40 AM | Report abuse

That is a funny story, can't imagine the surprise of getting wacked in the head in the middle of the forest, surrounded by darkness. Must have set their hearts racing.

Anyway, couple of DL types I looked at, Jarron Gilbert, from San Jose State, or some other CA school, and a McDonald, first name escapes me, from Memphis.

Couple guys who I think could be late round types.

Thats all I got...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 10, 2009 8:49 AM | Report abuse

peri

'....This team (Redskins) will not be quite as bad ...'


All snarkiness aside, I think the Redskins team will be better than what we all think, too.

I won't ramble, but I have a sense that a light might turn on for #17 sometime in mid-October, and Zorn will decide to ride him--and not #26-- for a little bit.

And remember, Redskins fans, it's okay if we become a passing team, 'cuz that is what wins nowadays.

The key is playing the AFC West teams we face well. They all feature (except Kansas City) good qb's, wr's, and te's.

We should hold our own against the NFC East.

11-5, playoffs?

It's possible if the lights turn on for #17. And Moe thinks they will.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 10, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Rypien likes what he reads about Aaron Maybin more and more, seeing as how Orakpo will probably be gone.

yeah, yeah I know... we need a right tackle.

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 10, 2009 9:07 AM | Report abuse

The key is playing the AFC West teams we face well. They all feature (except Kansas City) good qb's, wr's, and te's.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 10, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

KC has Matt Cassel at QB, Dwayne Bowe (12 TDs in 2 seasons) at WR, and Gonzalez (in the running for best ever)at TE, are you sure you meant that Moe?

Posted by: Redcoat | March 10, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

"It's possible if the lights turn on for #17. And Moe thinks they will."

I think so as well...

1. 1st time in the same offense in consecutive years in almost a decade

2. O-line should be changed up (hopefully more than it already is)

3. Zorn and the 2 WR's are no longer rookies

4. JC has improved every year in the league

It is "put up or shut up" time though. My fear is the O-line will break down again, leading to another mediocre year from JC. Then, once the o-line is finally overhauled and Zorn's offense is set in stone, someone else (Brennan or FA) will step in and reap the benefits. All the while people will be saying "I told you Campbell sucked." In the end, if the Skins win it's a small price to pay. I just don't like watching a guy's career being ruined and having ignorant people think they were right all along.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 10, 2009 9:15 AM | Report abuse

So, I am guessing that Redskins Park must have been closed for the last 36 hours...

Posted by: russberlin65 | March 10, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Interesting Haynesworth Sighting:

I have a family member in the Nashville area who spotted new #92 one day last week in a Nashville YMCA, apparently there to pick up one of his kids. Dude was already sporting his Redskins sweats and was in pretty good spirits, despite friendly ribbings from the staff and other folks around. Apparently he's considered a pretty good dude, quite popular in the Nashville community, although fans don't seem too concerned that he's leaving given the Titans' ability to produce defensive linemen.

Posted by: RambleOn | March 10, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

KC has Matt Cassel at QB, Dwayne Bowe (12 TDs in 2 seasons) at WR, and Gonzalez (in the running for best ever)at TE, are you sure you meant that Moe?

Posted by: Redcoat
________________________________________

My fear is the O-line will break down again, leading to another mediocre year from JC.

Posted by: GreenTerror23

Point taken, Redcoat.

I keep forgetting the Chiefs have, to quote Beyonce, "Upgraded," themselves quite nicely. Herm, like Denny Green, may have been fired before he could see the end result of his work.

The Chiefs' improvement means the entire division should be seen in a different light.

Greenterror,

The line breakdown aren't an issue if the FO is serious and drafts a lt, moves Samuels to rt, uses Heyer/Rhinehart as back ups, and Jnasen as a coach/"use in case of emergency" guy. Lo Alexander is a back up lineman and should be used as such.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 10, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

"I just wish fans would understand a QB is only as good as the team around him."
_____
Here's another way to look at it. A team is only as good as the QB leading it. A person once said put Troy Aikman on the Lions and he doesn't win 3 SuperBowls.. true. But the Lions QB's then were Scott Mitchell and Andre Ware.. you put them on the Cowboys and the Boys don't win 3 either. Yeah you need a good team around a QB but you need a good QB too.. Didn't watching Kurt Warner last year prove anything?


Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Yes I also have seen Rex Grossman, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Kerry Collins in a super bowl. I think JC may have more wins already in his career then Grossman and Dilfer.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 10, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

"Didn't watching Kurt Warner last year prove anything?"

Yea, I watched him lose to Ben Roethlisberger in the Super Bowl. Big Ben's numbers are pedestrian. It proved to me that team's win games, not QB's. Warner throws to the freak that is Fitzgerald and Roethlisberger is lucky Santonio Holmes made the catch of the year.

It's all relative, a good QB needs a good team to succeed and a good team needs a QB that won't lose them games. Campbell hasn't been winning games with his arm, but he hasn't lost any either. Which under the circumstances isn't as bad as some critics make it out to be. If the Skins had a great team and Campbell was out there turning the ball over, I would be the 1st calling for a change.

But I think most would agree that's not the case.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 10, 2009 10:05 AM | Report abuse

The Redskins won championships with mediocre QBs because they always had the best O-line in the game and had great WRs. Regardless of where JC is ranked as a QB talent-wise, if you give him a solid O-line and some quality targets to throw to, you'd be surprised at how good he could look.
________
In that case why did the Skins trade 3 draft picks for Campbell. They should of used them to upgrade the offensive line and WR's.. and they could have let mediocre Brunell or Ramsey lead them to a Super Bowl. Look ANY QB in the league will get better IF you can put them behind a hall of fame line and throw to hall of fame receivers. Problem is these guys aren't being handed to you so the BETTER the QB the easier it is to win with WHAT YOU HAVE!!!

Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

TAKE DOWN THE PICTURE OF T.O. ON THE REDSKIN WEBSITE. THIS THING HAS BEEN UP FOR 4 DAYS NOW. HE'S ALREADY SIGNED WITH ANOTHER TEAM. HOW LONG DOES THIS HAVE TO STAY UP? WHAT...YOU CAN'T WRITE ANYTHING NEW MR. WISE?????????

Posted by: mntb316 | March 10, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

... Here's another way to look at it. A team is only as good as the QB leading it. ...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 9:53 AM

A quarterback is only as good as the offensive line in front of him. Kerry Collins is not that good, but his numbers behind the Titans' line suggest otherwise.

Posted by: dcsween | March 10, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Call the undertaker. This thread is dead. Burial or cremation?

Posted by: talent_evaluator | March 10, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

It's all relative, a good QB needs a good team to succeed and a good team needs a QB that won't lose them games. Campbell hasn't been winning games with his arm, but he hasn't lost any either. Which under the circumstances isn't as bad as some critics make it out to be.
____
Yes it is. Campbell playing not to lose is a problem. Your thinking that Campbell is good ENOUGH that if they get a great team around him he could win a Super Bowl. Well that applies to pretty much every QB in the league.. including Collins and Colt. The Skins will try to improve the rest of the team in the off season like every other team.. but the MOST important player is the QB.. and to say we shouldn't have to look to improve that position because some teams in the past have won with a mediocre guy is ridiculous..

Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

sovine=guru=assininity

Posted by: BeantownGreg | March 10, 2009 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Viking funeral?

Posted by: bangkokben | March 10, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

"Problem is these guys aren't being handed to you

Posted by: sovine08"

What, and Tom Brady's and Peyton Manning's are?

Since when is it more difficult to find competent a supporting cast than it is to find an elite QB?

Posted by: psps23 | March 10, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

A quarterback is only as good as the offensive line in front of him. Kerry Collins is not that good, but his numbers behind the Titans' line suggest otherwise.
____
I guess the same could be said for Todd Collins in 2007 he isn't very good.. but his the numbers 4 wins ,106 QB rating and voted offensive player of the month for December behind the Redskin OL suggest otherwise.. Wait what's that.. it was the SAME OL that Campbell lost his last 4 games.. and pretty much the same OL Campbell went 8-8 this year...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

"Well that applies to pretty much every QB in the league."

No, it doesn't. Certain QBs cannot actually read defenses. That's why you get QBs like Romo and Delhomme dropping 5 and 6 INTs in certain games, regardless of what their supporting cast looks like. Other QBs, like Travaris Jackson, simply aren't accurate enough to beat an NFL defense.

It takes certain aspects of a QB's game to be successful in the NFL. Campbell has them.

Posted by: psps23 | March 10, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

"it was the SAME OL that Campbell lost his last 4 games.. and pretty much the same OL Campbell went 8-8 this year..."

Pretty sure Randy Thomas came back and the line got healthy for the playoff push.

Posted by: GreenTerror23 | March 10, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Well, we've officially bottomed out.

We need to shut down and re-tool.

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 10, 2009 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Rypien11 I with you there. The JC talk is so stupid it's numbing.

Posted by: TWISI | March 10, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Beep beep

Posted by: TWISI | March 10, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Since when is it more difficult to find competent a supporting cast than it is to find an elite QB?
____
I didn't say it was easy finding either.. But I hope you aren't saying Campbell is as good as Manning or Bradey if he just their OL in front of him. What I am saying is we shouldn't settle at QB we have and assume we can make him good enough by building a great team around him. the Skins should look to improve EVERY POSITON and that includes QB.. and if there is a better one sitting on the bench.. find out. Because a good team makes a QB better and a good QB makes a team better...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

psp I don't agree that JC has the "certain aspects" of a successful (successful to me means winning) QB. I don't see him hitting guys in tight spaces. In fact, he won't throw the ball if a guy is slightly covered. Sometimes you have to make plays. Plus, a QB can make his offensive line look better by making quicker decisions.

I find it funny that the only examples given for JC beating a blitz was what he did against the woeful defenses of the 0-16 Lions and the Saints.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 10, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

I don't get it...

Why not come out and just plainly state:

"You know, I don't like the guy. I don't know why, but there is just something about him that I do not like."

The whole "last four games in '07" argument is weak and putrid. I don't understand why is it so hard to get the reason why Collins had success: He had something close to 10 years to familiarize himself with that 700 pages of blunder, Campbell was only in his second season - isn't it obvious which QB would put up the better numbers??? AND add to the fact that there wasn't any tape on Collins from this decade. When there was - he was exposed.

I'm not 100% sold on Campbell either. But I'm sure as hell ain't sold on Brennan, and I never bought the Collins brand. If the line holds up for him, and his receivers step up, then rate him. If it's all on Campbell I'm sure fans will have no trouble figuring it out - the knowledgeable ones.

Anyway the season goes for Campbell and the Redskins, they'll have an ultimatum at the end of the season.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 10, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

The whole "last four games in '07" argument is weak and putrid. I don't understand why is it so hard to get the reason why Collins had success: He had something close to 10 years to familiarize himself with that 700 pages of blunder, Campbell was only in his second season - isn't it obvious which QB would put up the better numbers???
________
If it was so obvious which QB would put up better numbers then why wasn't Collins the starting QB that year and Campbell sitting on the bench until he learned the play book? Are you saying Gibbs was that dumb? Or could it me more than that. That Campbell didn't step up like he needed to and Collins, even being TEN YEARS from taking a snap had more skill went given the chance and PROVED IT! We seem to be stuck in well don't judge Campbell until the line gets better and his WR's get better.. Ever think a it is a BETTER QB that makes the line look better and the WR'S look better. I say give ALL the QB's a shot of winning the starting job and let the BEST MAN WIN!

Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse

NFC East Standings
NFC East Division
Team W L T Pct
xyz-New York 12 4 0 .750
x-Philadelphia 9 6 1 .594
Dallas 9 7 0 .563
Washington 8 8 0 .500

Posted by: mntb316 | March 10, 2009 12:03 PM | Report abuse

sovine: "Yes it is. Campbell playing not to lose is a problem"

In some ways, sure. But if you accept the dictum that most NFL games are lost by one team more than one by the other (sometimes called the Parcells rule), then it's a perfectly reasonable strategy to play it safe and wait for the other guy to make a mistake.

The Skins flaw last year was they didn't create enough mistakes for the other team. INTs, fumbles, that sort of thing.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Scuse me, that should read, 'lost by one team more than won by the other'.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 10, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

it's a perfectly reasonable strategy to play it safe and wait for the other guy to make a mistake.
____
Sorry but I can't buy your arguement. First while playing it safe and not losing the game may work against some teams (bad ones)it won't work against good teams. Because good teams don't turn the ball over... that's why they are good. Also it's puts a lot of pressure on your defense.. not scoring and expecting them every week to shut the other team down and getting turnovers to win. If the offense goes 3 and out to often because they play afraid to make a mistake the defense will wear out. There are always exceptions but in general show me an offense that can move the ball consistantly, score points and control the clock and I'll show you a winning team.. even if they have a turnover now and then.. Knute Rockne never said... "Let's not lose one for the Gipper."

Posted by: sovine08 | March 10, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company