Network News

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

Another Look at Team Building

By now, you've read our story about the Redskins' approach to building and rebuilding through the draft and weighed in. Now, let's further refine the comparisons and look at the Redskins vs. the final four teams in the NFL playoffs this season.

The Skins have drafted just 14 linemen* (offensive and defensive, accounting for nine of 22 total starting positions) since 2000, over nine drafts. In that span, the Baltimore Ravens have taken 25 linemen, Philly 31, Pittsburgh 25 and Arizona (not an elite franchise but one that's in the Super Bowl on a roster built almost exclusively through the draft) 27. The decade's three-time Super Bowl winner, New England has taken, 22.

The Redskins have used just four picks in the top four rounds on a lineman of any sort. Yes, that's correct: Chris Samuels in 2000, Michael Moore in 2000, Derrick Dockery in 2003 and Chad Rinehart in 2008. Teams that are winning in January, or that win regularly, frequently use three or more picks in the top four rounds on linemen in a single draft, and repeat the process year after year. And these are teams that already have strong lines; they just realize you have to always be replenishing.

New England has taken 13 linemen in the first four rounds this decade, as have Baltimore and Pittsburgh. Philly has selected 18 and Arizona has taken 17. All of those teams have selected at least three times as many of those players as Washington. (Overall, the Redskins have drafted 19 fewer total players than, say, the Ravens this decade. Baltimore has accrued 23 compensatory picks since 2002 alone, most in the NFL, often in the fourth round, including four extra picks in each of the last three drafts. The Redskins have gotten only five comp picks in that span.)

Also, the Redskins have not selected more than one lineman in the first four rounds of any draft since 2000, and they have selected a lineman of any sort in the first four rounds just twice over the past eight drafts. Philly has selected at least two linemen in the first four rounds in five of the last six drafts (they took three last year). Arizona has taken six that high in the last three years alone. From 2000-2005, New England took 12 that high. In Miami, Bill Parcells took six linemen in his first nine picks, and found a nice defensive end from Hampton in the third round.

While the Redskins have not drafted a single lineman in the first four rounds in six of the last nine drafts, Baltimore, Philly, Pitt, New England and Arizona have combined to do so three times in that span. That's 45 combined drafts for those other teams, and Baltimore in 2000, New England in 2008 and 2006 are the only times it didn't happen at least once per draft.

And, finally, let's talk quality, because that's what ultimately matters. These teams were reworking on the fly. Baltimore has completely remade its offensive line from 2006 (when it went 13-3) through the draft and constantly refueled a dominant defense with nary a free agent signing. Pittsburgh has remade its right side of the line and replaced star guard Alan Faneca through the draft. The Steelers don't do free agency.

The Steelers found Casey Hampton and LaMarr Woodley (drafted as an end, converted to 3-4 LB), and Max Starks and Brett Keisel and Willie Colon in the draft. The Ravens got Terrell Suggs (drafted as end, converted to 3-4 LB) and Jarrett Johnson (end, converted to 3-4 LB) as well as Haloti Ngata and Casey Rabach and Anthony Weaver and Ben Grubbs and Marshal Yanda and Jason Brown. New England found its stud D line through the draft in that span - Richard Seymour and Vince Wilfolk and Ty Warren - and the nucleus of the offensive line that helped make Tom Brady so good (Mankins and Light and Kaczur). The Eagles reloaded with Corey Simon, Jerome McDougle and Derrick Burgess early in decade, and then Shawn Andrews, Trent Cole (LB converted to DE) and Brodrick Bunkley and Chris Gocong (drafted as DE, convert to OLB). They, too, have remade three-fifths of the offensive line through the draft since 2004.

As for Arizona, the Cardinals this decade have drafted linemen Leonard Davis, Kyle Vanden Bosch, Darnell Dockett, Calvin Pace, Antonio Smith, Levi Brown, Taitusi Lutui. If you want to know how that organization rose, look at how they got Larry Fitzgerald, Karlos Dansby and Darnell Dockett with its first three picks in the 2004 draft. That'll do it.

*Here are the 14 linemen they've taken since 2000:

2000
1st rd - T Chris Samuels - Perennial Pro Bowler taken 3rd overall
4th rd -OL Michael Moore - 5 games with Skins, 8 NFL games
7th rd - DL Del Cowsette - 32 NFL games - 0 starts

2001
6th rd - DT Mario Monds - 7 NFL games - 0 starts

2002
6th rd - T Reggie Coleman - 0 NFL games
7th rd - DE Greg Scott - 3 NFL games, 2 with Skins

2003
3rd rd - G Derrick Dockery - 4 yr starter for Skins, signed with Buffalo '06

2004
5th rd - OL Mark Wilson - 2 NFL games, 1 start with Skins
6th rd - OL Jim Molinaro - 15 NFL games (special teams)

2005 -None

2006
5th rd - DT Anthony Montgomery - 35 NFL games, 22 starts
6th rd - DT Kedric Golston - 44 NFL games, 25 starts
7th rd - Kili Lefotu - 0 NFL games

2007 -None

2008
3rd rd - OL Chad Rinehart - No snaps on offense
7th rd - DE Rob Jackson - 3 NFL games

By Jason La Canfora  |  January 22, 2009; 9:01 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: What's the Offseason Plan? You Tell Us
Next: Bruce Allen Rumors

Comments

more linemen talk?

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 9:16 AM | Report abuse

I think we get it. Also, for what I've read and heard, the Skins get it as well. We'll see if they execute what should be an obivious strategy.

Posted by: TWISI | January 22, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

"We'll see if they execute what should be an obivious strategy.

Posted by: TWISI"

It was obvious last year. You seem pretty optimistic.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 9:30 AM | Report abuse

No, the Skins don't "get it". The answer is not to use their paltry four picks this year on linemen. It's that you build through the draft, and you start with the lines.

The Skins are already behind the eight ball this year because they've given their picks away for a handful of beans. They CANNOT fix their problems this year. If the Skins use all four picks on linemen, we'll all cheer -- and they still won't "get it".

They need a long-term vision. They need a plan to achieve that vision. And they need to stick to it. We all know they need to replace all five starting offensive linemen over the next three years. And all four starting defensive linemen. No one believe any of those nine players will be here three years from now -- except maybe as veteran backups.

So that's nine starting positions to fill. We have four picks this year, and if we're lucky one of them will turn into an immediate starter. That means in the next two years they need to find eight starting linemen. And NONE of them can be expensive 29-year-old free agents. They need to be draft picks -- young and cheap -- who can be developed. Where's the plan for that?

To get those eight linemen, it means NO free agent receivers. No splashy signings. No contract extensions for old players. No trading draft picks at all. Because the draft is a crap shoot, you need to use at least 16 picks to get 8 starters. That means locking Danny and Vinny in a closet for two years (by "in a closet" I don't mean to imply that the only reason Vinny remains with the team is because he's Danny's secret lover... but I'm not saying he isn't, either...).

All of the Skins draft picks and cap room over the next three years need to be devoted to filling those nine positions. If that means that our crying needs at linebacker go unfilled, SO BE IT. If that means we have crappy kickers, punters, kick returners, punt returners -- SO BE IT.

Do the Skins "get" that? Hell no. Vinny's a buffoon but even he can hear the laughter around the league. He knows he has to draft linemen. But will he stick with it for three years? Will Danny suffer through it? No chance. Not a single chance in hell.

Posted by: diesel_skins_ | January 22, 2009 9:30 AM | Report abuse

We'll see if they execute what should be an obivious strategy.

Posted by: TWISI | January 22, 2009 9:19 AM
===========================================
I'm sure they'll take it out behind the building and shoot it dead.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

...but Vinny takes the best player available.

Posted by: Smiley2 | January 22, 2009 9:38 AM | Report abuse

At this point, I'd like to hear something about what the potential of an uncapped year would mean to the Skins. I think we all get the point -- we need to draft and develop young linemen on both sides of the ball.

Posted by: davidmistretta | January 22, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse

Why is it that GMs are defined by either the "best player available" or "fills the need" strategy?

It seems to me that the best strategy would be to try to fill your most pressing need in the first two rounds (unless some crazy talented guy falls in your lap), and the next five pick the best player available (because that is the real crap shoot)...

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Just as you don't know whether competition will spark Campbell to the next level, you also don't know if that competition will crush Campbell into becoming the next JP Losman.

On top of that, the simple fact is that providing an open competition between Campbell/Collins/Brennan significantly cuts the snaps between the starting QB and his top offensive teammates (my guess is probably a cut of greater than 50% of the snaps). And this is with an offense that was largely out of sync outside of Moss and Cooley. Is it worth it? My opinion is that it's not. Campbell has improved every year he's been in the league in nearly every single offensive statistic (yards, completions, completion percentage, interceptions, fumbles, rushing yards, TD/INT ratio, and passer rating). Cutting his snaps would only be a detriment to his desired improvement going into next season.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 10:34 PM | Report abuse

If a little competition is going to crush your quarterback, maybe you shouldn't have a ming vase playing the position.

Basically what you're saying is that your backup QBs should be a couple of potted plants, wearing low numbers, who can't, never will, and shouldn't ever aspire to playing in the league.

And if your QB gets hurt?

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

"The answer is not to use their paltry four picks this year on linemen. It's that you build through the draft, and you start with the lines"

First you say NOT to use the 4 picks on the line, then you say that you start with the lines? I'm confused.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Talk about something but the obvious???? Not a chance La Crapora must squeal in delight like the little piggy he is when he gets to pile on negative posts about the FO which we all know anway

Posted by: drewkinnear | January 22, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

i realize there's not alot going on with the skins right now, but this blog just about made my head explode - all JLC did was provide the exact same stats over and over. whether its "since 2004," "since 2000," "this decade," "6 of the last 9 drafts," its still basically talking about the same, or overlapping, time periods. ENOUGH ALREADY. we get it.

The fact that the Arizona Cardinals, who by all appearances are a "fluke" post-season contender this year, drafted the most linemen of the teams being discussed since 2000 doesnt prove anything. This year, Arizona JUST won its first 3 playoff games this decade after drafting all these linemen. so if we just started drafting linemen like AZ, maybe in 8 years we could have a fluke superbowl appearance too? NO

AZ has had a weak offensive line for YEARS. even this year, their line isnt all that good. AZ is in the superbowl because they have two of the top 10 receivers in football catching passes from a MVP QB... it has nothing to do with drafting linement.

what JLC is ignoring here is that it doesnt necessarily matter what positions a team drafts - the teams that have been perennial contenders the past decade(New England, Philly, Pittsburg, and Indy are the only ones that come to mind)

1) For the most part, keep their draft picks.
2) Draft WELL
3) Have a stud QB and brilliant HC.

The skins havent really done any of THOSE things in recent memory.

Posted by: talkshowhost | January 22, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

so if we just started drafting linemen like AZ, maybe in 8 years we could have a fluke superbowl appearance too? NO


I'll take it. Because doing it the way the Skins have been doing it for 8 years hasn't even netted a fluke conference championship appearance.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 22, 2009 9:55 AM | Report abuse

i think JLC is callin it like it is. make what you want of the stats but our lack of a draft strategy speaks volumes about the organization. it has to be a 2-3 year rebuilding and shedding of dead weight to get anywhere.

Posted by: dadanimal | January 22, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Yeah we need to draft linemen from time to time! DUH? I still like guys like Golston, Monty, Evans and Lorenzo. I could see them being part of the Line rotation many seasons.

Why is this video still up? I thought this was a new post?

Posted by: matthewvickers | January 22, 2009 9:57 AM | Report abuse

nagoose,

When we talk about draft philosophy in terms of BAP vs DFN we are "usually" only talking about the first pick I think.

I would say most GM's change their strategy later in the draft, my gut tells me if they go BAP early they then go DFN late and vice versa. There needs to be balance to ones strategy and each off season we should change it depending on the current roster.

If you have a strong team with set starters at all 24 spots then by all means draft for talent first over need.

The skins last season went into the draft thinking they had 22 positions set, the biggest hole was the P, we had a stopgap at Saftey which we would look for a prospect to replace ST21 as best we could.

Was that assessment correct?
To me the answer is somewhere between maybe and no.

But thats what they thought. So they went BAP (according to their chart which they picked up from NFL.com) with 6 of their top picks and filled what holes they saw late, which is why Horton and Moore were probably or most productive picks, as they were the low risk high reward replacements for ST.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 10:02 AM | Report abuse

diesel_skins_ just put it in great perspective.

Vinny & Danny are so far from understanding the big picture and being capable of dedication to an actual GOOD plan that it hurts.

"oh this year we're not signing big free agents"

"oh this year we're keeping our (measly 4) draft picks"

"oh this year we're taking best available"

NONE of these things amount to a real plan that will bring sustained success. They're just worthless crumbs tossed to fans who convince themselves that success is just around the corner.

Posted by: smutsboy | January 22, 2009 10:06 AM | Report abuse

I think Goldy and Monty would be great in a rotation same with our current set of Ends if we can keep them on the cheap, but don't see either as every down linemen, If we eventually get 2 young big nasties on the chart overtop of them I would love to see them rotated in on a steady pace and maybe in a rare 4 DT set *used from time to time to tire out OT's who are not used to going up against someone with an extra 40-50 lb's.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

I've been thinking the Redskins should not make a huge Free Agent signing i.e. Haynesworth, Peppers, J. Gross, but more like a second tier big name for second tier type Free Agent money........i.e. Suggs, Dansby......However I was doing a little reading and saw that last spring Arizona franchised him and then gave him the $8 mil 1 year tender. When I think of 8 million a season that seems like "big splash" free agent money so to speak......Is Dansby worth that much to us ?
I was thinking more like a Shawn Barber mid level signing type. Not $8 mill.

Posted by: slipperyrichard | January 22, 2009 10:10 AM | Report abuse

The bucs have roughly 42 million in cap space, and the Chiefs, have roughly 35-40, million.

There is just no chance that the redskins are in the market for ANY of the top tier guys. They just don't have the space to compete....which is a good thing.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 10:16 AM | Report abuse

If a little competition is going to crush your quarterback, maybe you shouldn't have a ming vase playing the position.

Basically what you're saying is that your backup QBs should be a couple of potted plants, wearing low numbers, who can't, never will, and shouldn't ever aspire to playing in the league.

And if your QB gets hurt?

Posted by: SMACK1

----

No, your back-up QBs should be QBs that are ready to step in at any given moment. What they shouldn't be are players that threaten another player's ability to concentrate on the task that's at hand. Campbell needs to work on beating his opponent, not his teammate.

And you ignored the fact that a QB competition significantly cuts the snaps the "starter" would have with his top offense. That is no small matter.

Tell me, how many incumbent QBs have ended up playing better because of competition? I can think of one - Drew Brees. And Drew Brees significantly improved when he moved on to a different team where he was the man. I can also list off several that got worse -- Byron Leftwich, JP Losman, Derek Anderson, Chad Pennington, Drew Bledsoe, Kurt Warner (got worse as the incumbent with both the Rams and the Giants, his successes came as the "back-up" competitor), this list goes on. Do you think that's a coincidence? Do you think all these guys were destined to fail? I don't. Chad Pennington and Kurt Warner are evidence of that. It's a significant mental block, as well as a technical block (lower number of practice reps) that almost always harms the incumbent.

Basically what you're saying is that every QB should have an open competition put up against him to get the best out of their play. Why is it that teams don't do this often?

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

I am inclined to agree Richard. I would cap our FA spending before the draft at 10 million. spend on the draft and keep a chunk of change for a late off season signing in case of injuries or whathaveyou.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

As I was sitting at my computer trying to get some work done I was disturbed by this loud ongoing noise, I thought it was some construction being done outside my building so I got up to go look out the window to see what it was, and to my suprise it was not anyone doing construction but JLC outside beating a dead horse.


We get it already

Posted by: GreatOne1 | January 22, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Basically what you're saying is that every QB should have an open competition put up against him to get the best out of their play. Why is it that teams don't do this often?

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

For the most part, it's probably a financial reality, although I do like your Freudian interpretation. There are certain players who have earned the type of bubble wrap and styrofoam peanut approach you endorse here. Campbell isn't one of them.

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 10:25 AM | Report abuse

I heard both Zorn and Vinny mention that protecting the passer and having a better rush is of primary concern. So yeah, they get it. Yeah they too can see an obious need. Will they do what is necessary over the next few years to address those needs will determine if the Skins will be successful going forward. My guess is the OL will be address because if nothing else, Zorn wants his offense to succeed.

Posted by: TWISI | January 22, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I am as big a JLC supporter as anyone, First amendment and all, but that was just funny stuff GreatOne.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

FYI stand by for an important announcement about a lesser known "holiday" tomorrow.

According to my 2009 calendar tomorrow is National Pie Day, please celebrate accordingly.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Jason.

I am a college professor, with a Ph.D. from an Ivy League school, and I teach social science.

THIS IS A GARBAGE ANALYSIS, for which you would have gotten an "F" in my class.

(1) The Redskins strategy since 2000 was building through FA more than the draft. So of course other teams have more draft-pick linemen then the Redskins. Other teams also have more draft-picks at pretty much every other position.

(2) You've selected the four conference finalists as your comparator group. I would be willing to bet that if you look at teams that did horribly, you'll find similar figures. Look at the whole league, not just the four finalist teams.

I'll give you an example. Let me pick two random teams: The St. Louis Rams and the Detroit Lions. The Rams drafted fifteen linemen in rounds 1-4 over since 2000. The Detroit Lions took 12. You could reach the conclusion that because the Redskins took only four (cited in the blog above), they're avoiding the garbage strategy used by the Lions and Rams. Just because you noticed that Baltimore, New England, and Philadelphia drafted 13 doesn't mean squat.

If you want to reach the conclusion you've reached -- that the Skins should build by drafting linemen -- that's fine. It might be the right argument. But I don't believe it because your conclusion is based on garbage analysis. There's data that can be used to support or refute what you want to say, and you've ignored it.

Posted by: online360 | January 22, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

how would you be able to obtain a list of holidays, both tradtional or widely celebrated and those that aren't?

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

"Teams that are winning in January, or that win regularly, frequently use three or more picks in the top four rounds on linemen in a single draft, and repeat the process year after year. And these are teams that already have strong lines; they just realize you have to always be replenishing. "

Patriots have draftd three linemen in the first four rounds once since 2000, never once more than three.

Giants have drafted three linemen in the first four rounds once since 2000, never once more than three.

Steelers haven't drafted three in the first four rounds at all since 2000.

Eagles have drafted three linemen in the first four rounds twice since 2000, never once more than three.

Ravens have drafted three linemen in the first four rounds once since 2000, never once more than three.

The Cardinals (who are suddenly a franchise to admire?) have drafted three linemen in the first four rounds twice since 2000, never once more than three.

The Colts haven't drafted three linemen in the first four rounds at all since 2000.

The Panthers haven't drafted three linemen in the first four rounds at all since 2000.

Tampa Bay has drafted three linement in the first four rounds once since 2000, never once more than three.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Why discount the undrafted free agent linemen (e.g. Heyer or Buzbee) or all the free agent signings (e.g. Kendall, Rabach, Thomas, Fabini, Geisinger, Carter, Griffin, Alexander, Daniels, and Taylor)?

The Skins philosophy (since the 70s) has been to primarily build through free agency and trades; by signing proven veterans and not by selecting unproven, expensive high draft picks...

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

There are certain players who have earned the type of bubble wrap and styrofoam peanut approach you endorse here. Campbell isn't one of them.

Posted by: SMACK1

----

Which certain players have? Do either of these names qualify?

David Garrard
Jay Cutler

Campbell has started 1 less game than Cutler in his career, had a 1.3 difference in passer rating, and unlike Cutler, he has improved every year he's been in the league in nearly every offensive category. Would you advocate Denver bringing in someone to challenge Cutler for his starting spot?

How about David Garrard, who finished the season with worse offensive statistics than Campbell? Should a QB be brought in to challenge him as well?

Just trying to get a range on where you draw the line.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

While I'm at it... let's study how those 1980s Redskins were built through the draft.

You want to know how many linemen were drafted in the top four rounds by the Redskins from 1971-1982? FOUR. How'd that help us?

Posted by: online360 | January 22, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

AZ built through the draft?
QB Kurt Warner, HB Edge, FB Terrell Smith, LT Gandy, C Sendlein -- undrafted.

5 out of 11 on offense, with your QB, HB, and LT free agents. I'd say that those are the 3 premier positions, but maybe I'm wrong?

Rackers was a FA acquistion (6-6 from 40-49 this year!). Punter Graham a pickup during the season!!

Defense: RE Laboy, DT Robinson, CB Hood, LB Okeafor FA or trades


Alex, I think you're correct in how the draft went. The Redskins do have a strategy, they have a vision, and they stuck to it in the 08 draft. Perhaps to their detriment.

Arguing that they DON'T have a vision, or a strategy is silly since it's demonstrably untrue (i.e. Vinny & Danny stuck to their guns even though it led them to pick 2 WR and a TE they didn't need).

Arguing it's the WRONG strategy makes a little more sense. Yes, you can point to teams like ARI and BAL and say it's a successful strategy, although I would not use ARI as an exemplar here. PHI? They were beat by the Redskins twice!

You can make a case Washington is a better team, it's just that Philly has two outstanding players, Westbrook and McNabb, and if either of them have an off day (or half) the Iggles lose.

NWE is a much better example, even though they had a down year. The Betheard Redskins had the same formula: Draft linemen, pick up the occasional FA lineman like Jim Lachey, and get your skill positions through FA/trades. Or so we think... but what happened when that great early 80's class of linemen retired?

Honestly, if there was a reliable, proven formula for success in the NFL, why wouldn't everyone use it?

More likely, every once in awhile you get really lucky and have a great couple of years that carry you for a decade or so.


Posted by: dpc2003 | January 22, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

"The Washington Redskin doesn't need draft linemen. Vinny Cerrato will maked there draft debacled." - Emmitt Smith

http://www.walterfootball.com/emmitt.php

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 22, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

how would you be able to obtain a list of holidays, both traditional or widely celebrated and those that aren't?

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

I got a calendar (a simple lifestyle 2009) calendar, where the profits go to poor people in Appalachia.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Baltimore has also drafted more punters in the first four rounds than the Redskins have since 2000.

And looking at the draft histories, it appears they've drafted more WR and QB busts in the first four rounds than the Redskins have since 2000.

The Truth is also curious as to why the fourth round and 2000 are the cutoffs for this?

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

From PFT,

HERM OUT, SHANAHAN IN?
Posted by Mike Florio on January 22, 2009, 9:31 a.m. EST
As Chiefs coach Herm Edwards continues to slowly twist in the wind, we’re hearing stronger indications that he won’t be twisting much longer.

Though it’s hardly a surprise, the signs currently are pointing at Edwards being fired with one year left on his contract.

Then the question becomes identifying the next head coach. And, inexplicably, a name gaining traction via rumors and reports that have been sent to us by readers is former Broncos coach Mike Shanahan.

On the surface, Shanahan and G.M. Scott Pioli don’t really fit, assuming that Shanahan aspires to run the show in the same way he ran it in Denver.

But there’s always a chance that Shanahan has reflected on his ultimate failure in Denver, and that he has realized that his errors in personnel, both with free agency and the draft, placed far more pressure on him as a coach. And maybe he has decided that he’d rather let an established personnel exec call the shots and just focus on coaching the team.

Then again, maybe Shanahan simply will say whatever he has to say and do whatever he has to do to get his foot in the door, and then he’ll worry about trying to take the place over.

Regardless, we expect something to start happening soon in Kansas City.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Emmitt's best stuff comes when he just makes up names for people.

Tom Grady be the best.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

After the 5th rounds ... 23 draft picks ... 4 lineman ... 17 compensatory picks ... all of this is too mathy for me.

Posted by: dcsween | January 22, 2009 10:56 AM | Report abuse

How about David Garrard, who finished the season with worse offensive statistics than Campbell? Should a QB be brought in to challenge him as well?

Just trying to get a range on where you draw the line.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Theoretically, your backup center should be able to snap competently, your backup kicker should be able to make a 40-yarder, and your backup QB should be able to win games in this league.

I'm not saying Judas should be your backup, but an NFL team should have options at its most critical position. You're flying down the road with no seatbelts, no airbags, and no insurance.

Campbell hasn't earned absolute power, Garrard hasn't, and look how well it's working out for Romo. If we had a Matt Cassel on the team, I'd kill Romo myself.

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Truth,

2000 is the cut off because thats the first draft of Vinny and Snyder, JLC only bashes this regime none before them. Even though the Turner years were terrible.

If we had a true inside beat reporter we would be hearing about what the Skins will do this offseason, not what they have done for the last 8 years.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

"If we had a Matt Cassel on the team, I'd kill Romo myself.

Posted by: SMACK1 "

so if Matt Cassel was on the Redskins you would murder the Dallas starting QB, Tony Romo?

Why? That just sounds like a bad idea all around.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Thanks flounder, now what is so significant about the 4th round?

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Killing Romo never sounds like a bad idea.

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Flounder,
Though I agree that the N.O.R.V. years sucked (save the BJohnson year with 4000+ yards and Davis the Dozer.) I think a part of why we are starting at 2000 is that it was Vinny Danny year 1 + we have no players on the roster that were here before then.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

"and your backup QB should be able to win games in this league."

smack, Todd Collins has done just that, or am I missing something?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

By the way, there is a LOT of gloom and doom around here. Is it warranted?

The Redskins have a very good defense. They were 2 plays away from winning 10 games (STL and SFO) and making the playoffs. In both those plays, a more experienced FS might have made the difference: I am a CH fan, but you can't allow those long lollipop passes down the middle to let a team into FG range.

Why isn't this a matter of small improvements? I can point to a BUNCH of teams that have had lots and lots of high draft choices over the years, and over the years, they've sucked and sucked and sucked.

The Redskins are not that far away.

Posted by: dpc2003 | January 22, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Depends on if you can get away with it or not.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

The main thing that everyone in Redskins Nation (from the owner, all the way down to the fans) has to realize is this:

WE ARE NOT JUST ONE OR TWO PLAYERS AWAY FROM BEING SUPER BOWL CONTENDERS!!!

This has been the prevailing thinking every since Dan Snyder bought the team. This is why we have vastly overspent for free agents and given away draft choices for mediocre performers. This team is not even close to being a Super Bowl contender and the sooner we all admit that, the sooner we can start building for the future!!

Posted by: paulstutz14 | January 22, 2009 11:06 AM | Report abuse

+++I think we get it. Also, for what I've read and heard, the Skins get it as well. We'll see if they execute what should be an obivious strategy.

Posted by: TWISI+++

Please share what you've read and heard that the Redskins "get" it. Because I missed it.

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 11:06 AM | Report abuse

There is just no chance that the redskins are in the market for ANY of the top tier guys. They just don't have the space to compete....which is a good thing.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 10:16 AM | Report abuse

The 'Skins can create enough cap room by cutting guys and/or restructuring contracts. I'm not arguing that they should or should not go after a big-ticket free agent or two, I'm just sayin' . . . .

Posted by: rbpalmer | January 22, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

dpc,

We were a few plays away from losing some of the games we won, this team is not a playoff caliber team no matter how you spin it.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

++AZ has had a weak offensive line for YEARS. even this year, their line isnt all that good. AZ is in the superbowl because they have two of the top 10 receivers in football catching passes from a MVP QB... it has nothing to do with drafting linement.+++

What? You think Deuce Lutui and Levi Brown came in a Cracker Jack box?

What helped MAKE those receivers top ten receivers is (1) a revitalized running game behind Edge James--not great, but one you must respect--and the fact that their Big, Slow, Immobile QB has time to get the ball to his receivers.

Anyone who thinks teams win WITHOUT top notch lines should follow Another sport.

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

"and look how well it's working out for Romo. If we had a Matt Cassel on the team, I'd kill Romo myself.

Posted by: SMACK1"

The question isn't 'is your backup QB good enough', it's 'will the competition make your incumbent QB better'.

Do you think bringing in someone else will make Tony Romo a better QB? I don't.

Yes, if either of those teams had a stud QB waiting in the wings, I'd advocate a QB competition. But neither do. And you shouldn't create a QB competition just for the sake of it, especially with guys as promising as Romo and Campbell.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

what JLC is ignoring here is that it doesnt necessarily matter what positions a team drafts - the teams that have been perennial contenders the past decade(New England, Philly, Pittsburg, and Indy are the only ones that come to mind)

1) For the most part, keep their draft picks.
2) Draft WELL
3) Have a stud QB and brilliant HC.

The skins havent really done any of THOSE things in recent memory.

Posted by: talkshowhost | January 22, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Well said, TSH. Let's stay medium, folks. It's not about "all or nothing". We should not go out and draft 4 linemen with our 4 picks. We have to look at the entire 53-man roster, and make smart selections.

I'm in fovor of trading back from #13 if we have that option. But that may not be an option.

First of all, we need to resign our significant FA's in the next month. We need to be smart about selecting free agents next month.

After all, what really matters is what 5 OL & 4 DL we put on the field, not how many were draft picks. The core of the team, and the success of the team, will be determined in the trenches. No question about it.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 22, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

+++WE ARE NOT JUST ONE OR TWO PLAYERS AWAY FROM BEING SUPER BOWL CONTENDERS!!!


Posted by: paulstutz14 ++

True that. Th Redskins ARE one or two FO excutive away from being Super Bowl Contenderss.

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Paul,
dude, shouting will not make your point any more convincing. You say they are not Super Bowl contenders, yet they beat the team that went to the NFC Championship game not once but twice.

Rather than exclamation points, why not illuminate us all with some true facts?

Posted by: dpc2003 | January 22, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

rb, the skins put themselves in a bad situation by doing some of the restructuring previously. They will if they cut JTay, Springs, MWash, and Griff, be 20 million under the cap. Enough to sign a couple of 2nd tier guys, as well as Dhall.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

And I add, they beat the NFC representative to the Super Bowl as well.

Posted by: dpc2003 | January 22, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Or as they are sometimes known, "executives"

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"and your backup QB should be able to win games in this league."

smack, Todd Collins has done just that, or am I missing something?


Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

He's missing something, the Rosetta Stone offense that only he knew how to execute or defend. But when JC was hurt, and Todd did well, how did JC react? Did he regress, or did he watch, learn and step up? Or did he do neither?

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

cork, how is pitts line??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

smack considering that JC missed the rest of the year when he was hurt, the next time JC played football, he improved, just as he's done every year.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 11:18 AM | Report abuse

"and look how well it's working out for Romo. If we had a Matt Cassel on the team, I'd kill Romo myself.

Posted by: SMACK1"

The question isn't 'is your backup QB good enough', it's 'will the competition make your incumbent QB better'.

Do you think bringing in someone else will make Tony Romo a better QB? I don't.

Yes, if either of those teams had a stud QB waiting in the wings, I'd advocate a QB competition. But neither do. And you shouldn't create a QB competition just for the sake of it, especially with guys as promising as Romo and Campbell.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Campbell and Romo are different animals. Romo would benefit from a thorough ass whooping, hopefully by me. Campbell would not, and anyway, I don't think I could take JC.

Campbell would benefit more from true competition, I think, because he hasn't reached his full potential. Romo would benefit from a pair of cement shoes, because he has reached his.

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

The Cardinals are about $40 million under the cap....depressing

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 22, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Greg,
I heard yesterday Pitt was favored by 6 or something like that on Rome, and that Vegas was saying there are 10 teams they like better than AZ.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 11:21 AM | Report abuse

can not believe people are still sweatin' Todd Collins...

he was the flavor of the month, nothing more nothing less.

he was a HUGE benefactor of playing in the same system for 15 years, or something like that. sadly, JC will never know that kind of consistency...

once he had a few games under his belt for the first time since 1997 - he had his skirt lifted and was exposed by the seahawks, who made him throw in areas that he could not. why couldn't he throw in those areas? arm strength & the fact that he's just not that good.

but you'll always have your Toddeses & Toddisms.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 11:21 AM | Report abuse

I'm one who does not believe you have to draft the big guys in the first few rounds. I think there are quality big guys later down in the draft and in free agency. They might not be day one starters, but if you make a commitment to developing those young goliaths, the dividends are there.

I do have a problem with a team who hangs onto other teams' aging castoffs as suitable fill-ins for injuries. Fabini is one such player. He consumed practice time and valuable game day experience that someone like Rhinehart desperately needed. Yes, Rhinehart is still rough around the edges but how do you polish those edges if the guy doesn't play? Not only must Washington find brutes in the lower rounds, but they also must find creative ways to get those young guys playing experience. Use them as tightends in jumbo packages. Have them periodically spell the starters when the team is up. Use them on special teams. Not only will they be investing in a young guy's abilitites, they will also be giving a veteran less opportunity to be injured.

On the d-line I think the players they have picked up don't fit the scheme. Guys like Jason Taylor, Andre Carter nad Chris Wilson are just too small for end in a 4-3 alignment. More bulk on the d-line will mean better run stuffing, and if the front four are big and strong enough to occupy five, six, or even seven blockers, then that leaves the linebackers to blitz unevaded to the quarterback. Think about a starting front four that consists of Evans, Golston, Griffin, and Montgomery. Daniels, Alexander, and a couple more 300+ pounders could round out the rotation. I would mix all of them up on the line every play to keep the offensive lineman guessing. Occasionally I would send another body or two as blitzers. I would substitute frequently to keep players fresh and I would have at least one guy at all times bull rushing to collapse the pocket.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | January 22, 2009 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Enough with the uncapped year. You guys are clowns. Do a little research.

The uncapped year DOES NOT HELP THE SKINS.

#1: Look at the rules: only players with more than 6 years experience will be eligible for free agency. So young free agents won't be free. Do the Skins really want to stock up on the Bruce Smiths, Deion Sanders, and Jason Taylors of the NFL?

#2: Each team would be allowed to restrict two eligible free agents with "franchise" or "transition" player tags, rather than one.

So in an uncapped year, the good young players WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE. See #1 and #2 above. Try this exercise: make a list of the top 2010 free agents (link here: http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features/freeagents/fa.php?option=By+Team&y=2010) you'd like to snatch up in an uncapped year. Then cross off the ones with less than 6 years experience. Then cross off the ones likely to be protected by their teams. Not much left, is there?

And the Skins may not have the money to be a player anyway. The best case scenario for the Skins is they can press the reset button on their disastrous "cash solves cap" strategy. But that's only if they still have the cash to do it. After burning through hundreds of millions in his failed Six Flags venture, and wasting countless more on bad AM radio stations, crappy hamburgers, and cult movies, he isn't the big-spending billionaire he used to be.

(One other rule won't apply to the Skins: the top eight playoff finishers from the previous season would be allowed to sign free agents only at the rate at which they lose them.)

Posted by: diesel_skins_ | January 22, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

RedDMV = racist against Todd Collins

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

In a perfect world this is what happens (in my opinion)...

We let Taylor, Jansen, Daniels, Griffin go...sorry guys. Next year Washington and Carter go to...

Get one BIG FA...Haynesworth...he can be had and demands a double team every snap, when's the last time we had that??? ANd acouple of decent backups - OLB, OL.

Draft BJ Raji (if he falls to us at 13). OUr interior line is now STOUT!

Trade Rogers for the Lion's 2nd round pick, #33, and pick Tyson Jackson, a huge run-stopping DE that can move inside on third down and collapse the pocket, along with Haynesworth and Raji.

Now lock up Hall at one CB, Smoot at the other spot, Springs at FS and let Landry move up to the line and do what he does best.

In the 3rd round get G Anthony Parker from Tenn...now the line is Samuels, PArker, Rabach, Thomas, and Rhinehart (he needs to start - sink or swim). Heyer is the back-up.

LB Washington - Fletcher - McIntosh...

WR Moss, ARE (in slot), Kelly on the other side, Rogers the 4th WR. Trash needs to be gone. Also, get Sellers more involved in the O.

Davis has to mature, he will be a great 2nd TE, maybe this year, maybe next. WR/TE need a year or two to develop, look at Roddy White. Who wanted him 2 years ago? Who wouldn't take him now?

next draft we need a OLB/CB/game breaking RB as top Priority...

Posted by: damynke | January 22, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Flound, of which games are you speaking?

When I say a play away from winning, I mean that in general terms, the Redskins won the game except where it counted, on the scoreboard. They moved the ball on offense, they contained the other team most of the game, and were ahead on the scoreboard late in the game. Then they gave up a big play and lost.

That's what I mean by a "play away".

Posted by: dpc2003 | January 22, 2009 11:25 AM | Report abuse

The Cardinals are about $40 million under the cap....depressing

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 22, 2009 11:20 AM

really? 'cause i thought they were undecided on Anquan Boldin.

what is his situation anyway? he's still under contract right? with a threat like that, or threats like those - Fitz being the other - why wouldn't you give long term deals to BOTH of them?

the colts did it with wayne and harrison.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

DPC

Sure they beat the Eagles twice and the Cardinals...But they lost to Cincy and St Louis.

The team finished 2-6 over the last 8 games largely because of older players breaking down and injuries exposing a lack of depth at key positions (oline for example).

We cannot try to say that things are just fine. The FO made very smart moves by trading down and getting three 2 round picks. Then used them all on receivers who, frankly, don't seem to have it. Now we again have very few draft picks. Not much cap room and a need to find replacements for the entire O Line and someone D-linemen who can generate a pass rush....

I hate to think back on all the draft picks GIVEN away (a second round pick for CP -- AND Champ Bailey, a third for Brunell who was going to be cut, a second or a third for BLloyd, a second for JT this year and a 4th next). It has been disastrous...

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 22, 2009 11:30 AM | Report abuse

diesel_skins_,

You're missing the biggest factor of the uncapped year. The Skins can unload all their unfriendly, aging contracts that wouldn't normally be cuttable due to cap hits. Think Jansen, Randle El, Randy Thomas, Rabach, Carter, Griffin (if he's not already cut), Washington (same), etc.

Unless there's a rule for that as well...

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

SMACK, looks like we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think Campbell will show the most improvement by giving him the maximum number of reps possible with Moss/Thomas/Kelly in this relatively new offense for more than one year. Opening up a competition would only hinder that aspect of his development.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 11:33 AM | Report abuse

dpc,

Sorry not literally with one play but they could have very easly lost the Cle., NO and Seattle games.

If you really think this team is on the verge of something you know very little about football.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 11:35 AM | Report abuse

I think the skins should use the uncapped year to dump salary, not splurge on free agents. Sadly, that will not happen.

Posted by: Original_etrod | January 22, 2009 11:35 AM | Report abuse

TheTruth11 = 'tarded little twit boy

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 11:36 AM | Report abuse

wow Red, didn't know you thought mental retardation was something to laugh about.

Stay classy!

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Jason.

I am a college professor, with a Ph.D. from an Ivy League school, and I teach social science.

THIS IS A GARBAGE ANALYSIS, for which you would have gotten an "F" in my class.

(1) The Redskins strategy since 2000 was building through FA more than the draft. So of course other teams have more draft-pick linemen then the Redskins. Other teams also have more draft-picks at pretty much every other position.

(2) You've selected the four conference finalists as your comparator group. I would be willing to bet that if you look at teams that did horribly, you'll find similar figures. Look at the whole league, not just the four finalist teams.

I'll give you an example. Let me pick two random teams: The St. Louis Rams and the Detroit Lions. The Rams drafted fifteen linemen in rounds 1-4 over since 2000. The Detroit Lions took 12. You could reach the conclusion that because the Redskins took only four (cited in the blog above), they're avoiding the garbage strategy used by the Lions and Rams. Just because you noticed that Baltimore, New England, and Philadelphia drafted 13 doesn't mean squat.

If you want to reach the conclusion you've reached -- that the Skins should build by drafting linemen -- that's fine. It might be the right argument. But I don't believe it because your conclusion is based on garbage analysis. There's data that can be used to support or refute what you want to say, and you've ignored it.


Posted by: online360 |


Great Post 360 ... the data shall set you free...

Posted by: bobeaston | January 22, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

"Teams that are winning in January, or that win regularly, frequently use three or more picks in the top four rounds on linemen in a single draft, and repeat the process year after year. And these are teams that already have strong lines; they just realize you have to always be replenishing. "


does no one care that JLC completely lied with this sentence?

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

does no one care that JLC completely lied with this sentence?

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:40 AM |

He's lied here before to make his dumb points, does'nt surprise me that he'd do it again.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

"(2) You've selected the four conference finalists as your comparator group. I would be willing to bet that if you look at teams that did horribly, you'll find similar figures."

Posted by: online360

While I agree with your calls for a full league-wide analysis, this is a flawed argument.

You may find that "teams that did horribly" had similar strategies to the 4 conference finalists, but what you won't find are teams among the 4 conference finalists that had similar strategies to the Redskins.

In that sense, his comparison is valid. He never said 'all teams that use this strategy did well', he said 'all teams that did well used this strategy'. Big difference.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 11:49 AM | Report abuse

+++I think we get it. Also, for what I've read and heard, the Skins get it as well. We'll see if they execute what should be an obivious strategy.

Posted by: TWISI+++

Please share what you've read and heard that the Redskins "get" it. Because I missed it.

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 11:06 AM

I'll get some links up so you can be enlightened later. Appearently today is hell day at my office.

Posted by: TWISI | January 22, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

"Posted by: damynke | January 22, 2009 11:24 AM"

no, just no

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

The Cardinals are about $40 million under the cap....depressing

Posted by: carocanesfan

Yeah, but they also have a ton of FAs that they'll have to lock up... Boldin, Warner, Dansby... not to mention since they're in the Superbowl other players under contract will want more money... trust me the 40M will go fast...

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

SMACK, looks like we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think Campbell will show the most improvement by giving him the maximum number of reps possible with Moss/Thomas/Kelly in this relatively new offense for more than one year. Opening up a competition would only hinder that aspect of his development.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Alrighty psps, of course I see your point about reps. But competition drives success, from the plains of the Serengeti to landing on the moon. It's all about needing to stay ahead of somebody. Thanks for keeping it civil, as always.

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

The Skin's problem is not what positions they draft or how many FA they bring in. It is the EVALUATION OF TALENT.

The 2004 FA class was a great success, they did well and the skins have played well, not great but well with them.

But since then the ability to evaluate talent in the draft and through FA is non-existent.

You don't need 10 draft picks if you find 4 picks that can start. Why waste $4 million on a FA that is at the end of his career when you can spend $5 million on a player on the upside?

You can build through the draft and you can build through FA.

The key is to figure out what your teams wants to do on offense and defense, then stick with it. Then go out and get talented players (draft or FA) that fit your schemes and build that way.

See New England. See Pittsburgh (maybe the best at getting players that fit the mold of what they need). See Indy.

Posted by: damynke | January 22, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Psps23, actually that's what I meant by "pressing reset". They can dump fat contracts by cutting aging, ineffective players that they're stuck with because of poor cap management. I thought that was kinda obvious.

But that doesn't really improve the Skins. If you cut Jansen, Griffin, Washington, Carter, Samuels, Taylor, and Springs, you've slashed the payroll -- but who do you replace them with? OK, for some of them you could replace them with a one-legged man and get the same production, but they are certainly better than the guy behind them on the depth chart. Other than them, the only guys you can cut and make a real impact are Moss and Portis.

So the cap year gets rid of the self-inflicted wound from restructuring Samuels, Jansen, etc. But if you're not in the market to replace them with good young talent, well, we're still stuck in the mud.

Posted by: diesel_skins_ | January 22, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

dpc,

We were a few plays away from losing some of the games we won, this team is not a playoff caliber team no matter how you spin it.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

This team is in the middle of the pack. We need to improve our OL in particular. But middle-of-the-pack teams can win the Super Bowl. The Iggles and Cardinals were both middle of the pack. They were not "playoff caliber" teams, but they were the only two teams from the NFC that had a chance at the SB. The difference between "middle-of-the-pack" and "dominant" is not all that much. And teams can step up in one or two years.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 22, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

nagoose,

but the fact remains the Cards do have $40 million to resign their big players. We haven't had the cap space to resign players like Antonio Pierce, Dockery, Champ, Ryan Clark, etc...

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 22, 2009 11:59 AM | Report abuse

"But if you're not in the market to replace them with good young talent, well, we're still stuck in the mud."

Posted by: diesel_skins_

I'd say we're stuck in the mud right now. After purging the cap assassins, it'll be more like we've pulled ourselves out of the mud and dusted ourselves off, primed to get back into the race.

Getting the cap under control is step 1. Can't get the talented, young roster until that happens. The uncapped year is a good thing for the Skins.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 12:01 PM | Report abuse

OK, so the plan for this year is: #1 draft 3 back-up centers and use he fourth pick to trade to get Leigh Torrence back or maybe a gigantic 5'10" receiver and always make sure your hindsight is always 20/20.

Posted by: LarryBud | January 22, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

wow Red, didn't know you thought mental retardation was something to laugh about.

Stay classy!

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 11:38 AM

Hey d-bag, did I attach a "LOL" to that equation? yeah, i didn't think so.

you are terrible at reading comprehension.

matter of fact you're just terrible and annoying.

i'd never laugh about mental retardation, but i'll LMAO about little pathetic monkey turds like you.

stay lame, TT!

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, but they also have a ton of FAs that they'll have to lock up... Boldin, Warner, Dansby... not to mention since they're in the Superbowl other players under contract will want more money... trust me the 40M will go fast...

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 11:52 AM

not if they budget the cap right, and don't give inflated contracts and bonuses - Warner will probaly only resign for a 1 or 2 year deal.

at some point you have to put the jacuzzi kid in there.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 22, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

No, the Skins don't "get it". The answer is not to use their paltry four picks this year on linemen. It's that you build through the draft, and you start with the lines.

COULDNT AGREE MORE. I am a New Englander who is a skins die hard, and I watch the local team do it the right way all day long. The reason Tom Brady is good is bc he has ALL DAY to throw the ball, not bc he is Jesus Christ!!! We need to work on the o line as the main priority. I would draft o line and pick up young d w/ upside potential in FA . Next year, same thing, this is a three year process at best!

Posted by: jefferboy | January 22, 2009 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Truth, technically he called you a "tard". You'll only be a retard if you do it again.

Posted by: Original_etrod | January 22, 2009 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, but they also have a ton of FAs that they'll have to lock up... Boldin, Warner, Dansby... not to mention since they're in the Superbowl other players under contract will want more money... trust me the 40M will go fast...

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 11:52 AM

not if they budget the cap right, and don't give inflated contracts and bonuses - Warner will probaly only resign for a 1 or 2 year deal.

at some point you have to put the jacuzzi kid in there.

Posted by: RedDMV
I agree, I think Warner will probably sign a deal akin to the one Derek Alexander got... Boldin and Dansby will get big time contracts... then you have to look at the Adrian Wilsons and the likes that they'll want to keep around... and keep around happy...

nagoose,

but the fact remains the Cards do have $40 million to resign their big players. We haven't had the cap space to resign players like Antonio Pierce, Dockery, Champ, Ryan Clark, etc...

Posted by: carocanesfan
I think the Giants signed Antonio Pierce to a larger contract than we felt he deserved... same with Dockery... we traded Champ away (but you have to figure we could've signed him long term... if we were inclined based on the amount of money we've thrown at CP)... we could've signed Clark too, but we wanted Archelleta instead (for a bucket full of more money)...

I think we have had the money, it's just the value we place on home grown guys more than anything else...

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

OK, so seriously, I'm no fan of Danny, Vinny or the FO in general, but this series of "analyses" are the example of what happens when reporters become pundits. It's easy to hypothesize from the cheaps and use statistics that support only your hypothesis.

We will analyze only the first 4 picks as if the rest of the draft doesn't count not to mention undrafted free agents or free agency?

Not that the Skins have done much better with those areas but good journalism does not cherry pick stats to support an already assumed conclusion.

All teams have hits and misses in the draft and the Skins have more misses than hits. But you can't tell me that this time last year anyone would have painted the Ravens or Cardinals out to be draft experts.

There's more to building a team than draft picks.

It may be that the Skins are operating from an out-dated personnel paradigm, one that they inherited from Gibbs/Bethard/Casserly and maybe even George Allen that said get vets first, because when you look at the free agent signings of veteran lineman you get a whole different picture of this argument.

1. Andre Carter
2. Cornelius Griffin
3. Randy Thomas
4. Casey Rabach
5. Pete Kendall
6. (for better or worse) Jason Taylor

Hanging on to:

1. Samuels
2. Jansen
3. Demetric Evans

Is the veteran Free Agent strategy out-dated? Maybe. But it was once considered the Redskins Way.

Those traditions are going to be hard to break.

Posted by: LarryBud | January 22, 2009 12:23 PM | Report abuse

I should also mention that the Vet FA Strategy once took us to a total of 5 Superbowls. Granted, that was with Cooke as owner and with Bethard, Casserly and Gibbs running things.

Posted by: LarryBud | January 22, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Seems to me that Zorn is coaching toward the future. He wont let rookies in if they dont know the system. They need to take time to learn and develop. He's not adjusting his system to the players he has available (its argueable that he did this early in the season).

Then theres Barron Vincento de Cerrato. He's looking to win now/building for the future. Why to win now? For one, he's got this little midget riding up on his shoulders throwing money at things in the world he doesnt understand (not that Vinny is innocent in this). Then he's still trading pickS for aging veterans and at the same time drafting for BPA like he wants to build a contender. YOU CANT HAVE BOTH!!!

So you have Zorn who seems to want to build and develop. Wont throw rookies into the fire to sink/swim and Cerrato with his "I dont know what the heck to do with Snyder up top pulling my eyebrows like steering wheels to direct the FO in the direction of some new shiny fantasy football toy and the fans constantly throwing me under the bus".

NO one knows what they're doing at Redskins Park (except maybe Blache and some assistants/some of the players) ... maybe they can get lucky like Arizona... maybe not.

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | January 22, 2009 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Seems to me that Zorn is coaching toward the future. He wont let rookies in if they dont know the system. They need to take time to learn and develop. He's not adjusting his system to the players he has available (its argueable that he did this early in the season).

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz

Wouldn't this imply that Zorn is trying to win right now -- not playing the rookies?

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah, and Zorn will be gone after next year more than likely if he doesnt get this team to the post season. So he'd be better served to adjust play calling to the players he has and throw some young guys in there and let them learn on the fly. Its risky, but you might as well try 'cause if next year doesnt work, you might be gone. Zorns stuck between a rock and a midget. Its a tough place to be. Sink or swim JZ.

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | January 22, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Hello is anyone home ?

Posted by: slipperyrichard | January 22, 2009 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't this imply that Zorn is trying to win right now -- not playing the rookies?

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

I see your point. Zorn and Cerrato are confused. But if he wanted to win now, I would think he at least try throwing a rookie/younger guy in (see if he can spark something) when a vet is obviously struggling vs staying w/the vet. Seems Zorns thought is: the rookie isnt ready yet, but will be down the road.

The whole process of learning a new offense has stiffled this offense yet again.

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | January 22, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Mel has us taking Orakpo - but having the big 3 OTs gone before us.

Posted by: Rypien11 | January 22, 2009 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Mel drinks his own pee.

Posted by: Original_etrod | January 22, 2009 12:47 PM | Report abuse

You'll only be a retard if you do it again. Posted by: Original_etrod

hee hee lol...

-drive by

Posted by: dealer1 | January 22, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Mel drinks everyone's pee.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I wanted to touch on the Dansby LB thing, I have always felt like the Skins should not use a pick on a LB because the O-Line is much more of a pressing need......we def do need a OLB or 2 but I really think that LB's and RB's are the most talently abundant positions in the NFL, so why use a high pick on one or spend a lot of FA $$ on one. I have said that a modest upper-mid level signing of a 25-27 yr old LB thru FA would work wonders for us. And Dansby was a name that I floated.....but after hearing about the $8 mil tender that AZ gave him last spring I am thinking NO THANKS ! I watched him play in the Philly game and I thought he did average/respectable but I did not watch the whole game. I really think $8 mil a season is just too much. Anyone care to share ? Maybe there is a better OLB we can get via F.A. for around $5-6 mill ?

Posted by: slipperyrichard | January 22, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

The whole, "not playing the rookies" thing for me was just inconceivable. Kelly was a healthy scratch for what the last 3 games, Rhinehardt was a healthy scratch for the same, roughly, Jackson not getting more time....just makes no sense...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I totally agree Beantown-G, now we go into the draft and Free Agency period that much more blind as to what we are working with looking FORWARD......WTF is up with these guys in Redskin Land ??

Posted by: slipperyrichard | January 22, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

The funny part about all this: the Skins seem to agree that (a) they need to draft for need along the lines and don't have the luxury of the BPA, (b) no more aging star free agents, (c) get rid of bloated restructured contracts for guys past their prime. But aren't a, b, and c the direct result of the strategies that got Vinny promoted three times? And if they acknowledge the abject failure of a, b, and c, how in the world can they avoid hanging this around the neck of Vinny?

I know, I know: nothing's ever Vinny's fault. He's only been in charge one year. The other 8 years he was, uhh, umm, playing racquetball? It was Gibbs, I mean Spurrier, I mean Schotty's fault. Or maybe Norvs. Casserly's? John Cooke? I can't follow the blame tree. But until Danny realizes that Danny (Vinny's just a puppet) has failed, we're never going to change.

Posted by: diesel_skins_ | January 22, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Neither the drafting of linemen or sexy skill players will over come constant coaching turnover.

Jasno is correct to point out that the Skins haven't replenished their front lines.

But for me, the constant scheme changes have hurt as well.

The offense is nothing but a bunch of leftover guys who don't really seem coordinated together all that well.

And who's to blame: the egotistical coaches and the FO.

If Marty was willing, he'd be coaching now, and in my opinion, he was the only coach the Skins really needed.

The reach to Spurrier,Gibbs, and Zorn all came about because the FO got into a pissing contest with Marty's ego.

Hopefully, Zorn will hang around and finish whatever it is he's trying to start.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Oh heck - let's just do what George Allen did - trade 68 draft picks for the entire offensive line of, oh, say the Eagles. That worked - it got them to a Super Bowl - didn't it? didn't it?

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | January 22, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I find it hilarious how many of you think drafting along the lines is some kind of 20/20 hindsight. No, everyone knew it at the time. For YEARS everyone has said, "OK, you temporarily patched a hole with Stubblefield (or Griffin, or Taylor...), but when are you going to draft and develop the young talent on both sides of the ball to succeed?" And it never happened.

And then you're shocked that the Skins can't win in December.

You don't know much about football.

Posted by: diesel_skins_ | January 22, 2009 1:04 PM | Report abuse

The whole, "not playing the rookies" thing for me was just inconceivable. Kelly was a healthy scratch for what the last 3 games, Rhinehardt was a healthy scratch for the same, roughly, Jackson not getting more time....just makes no sense...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I totally agree Beantown-G, now we go into the draft and Free Agency period that much more blind as to what we are working with looking FORWARD......WTF is up with these guys in Redskin Land ??

Posted by: slipperyrichard | January 22, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

My sentiments exactly. I can see why they didnt do so with the OL, but WR??? Were 11 and 12 that brain dead on the playbook?

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | January 22, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Would you rather have David Brent, Michael Scott, or Vinny Ceratto running the Washington Redskins.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Im not sure about Dansby. 8 million seems a lot to a guy I dont know much about. Im curious as well about some cheaper SLB's that may be on the FA radar. Suggs shouldnt be on this radar. Comes from a 3/4 and has an injury problem. Everytime I see Suggs playing, he's in a 3 point stance rushing the passer. So im not sure hes really even a LB, just a small DE. I wonder how much the other FA LB from baltimore might go for (B Scott). Any ideas?

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | January 22, 2009 1:13 PM | Report abuse

the offseason plan should be signing ernie grunfeld, the wizards gm, as the redskins gm...superbowl in 3 years guaranteed

Posted by: jasonma1 | January 22, 2009 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Where do you guys get your salary cap stats? According to ESPN: The Cardinals are 28.9 million dollars under the 2009 salary cap -- third worst in the NFL. The Skins are 4.9 million over, but will have plenty of cap room after cutting unproductive/aging players and restructuring contracts.

Would you really prefer an owner that subverts their team by purposely not spending all the money available under the salary cap on players?

I certainly wouldn't...

BTW -- The Cardinals made the playoffs this year because of their offensive line, QB, and WRs. The offensive coaching was pretty good too... However, the last time they made the playoffs was in 1998!

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

"You don't know much about football.

Posted by: diesel_skins_ "


I love how everyone here says "You don't know football".

Please oh God of Football, preach to us.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I want to sign him, but of course I'm biased when it comes to this as I watched him destroy people in college.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=5558

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 22, 2009 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Sounds so easy. Except many forget that Tennessee and Arizona, for example, have been on a treadmill, where they draft a lineman, develop him, see him start a season or two, then see him leave via free-agency.

Building your lines thru the draft is a never-ending process where you must draft replacements to take the place of players who leave in free-agency.

And don't forget, players taken in the 1st and 2nd round make big bucks. You better be right or your tieing your money up in young players who don't pan out.

Have you forgotten Andre Johnson, 1996 1st round OT out of Penn State who never played? Or Bobby Wilson, 1991 1st round DT who had back problems and never ended up playing much?

That's why the Skins have tried to sign 1st time free agents who are proven commodities.

You can find good players in later rounds:

Mark Schlereth, 1989 10th round G out of Idaho, or
Ed Simmons, 1987 6th round OT out of Eastern Washington.

Waht the Skins wouldn't give to find an Ed Simmons and Mark Schlereth in the upcoming draft!

So, we still need a general manager and scouting department who can do more than say "Yessir Danny Boy, great idea!"

Posted by: rb-freedom-for-all | January 22, 2009 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't this imply that Zorn is trying to win right now -- not playing the rookies?

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

I see your point. Zorn and Cerrato are confused. But if he wanted to win now, I would think he at least try throwing a rookie/younger guy in (see if he can spark something) when a vet is obviously struggling vs staying w/the vet. Seems Zorns thought is: the rookie isnt ready yet, but will be down the road.

The whole process of learning a new offense has stiffled this offense yet again.

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz

If I take a step back and examine the last couple years and the direction we're going; I'd think that Zorn and Cerrato are looking for a balance in winning in the future and winning now.

I'd say out of the players we drafted in '08 that the three second rounders would be the guys that we thought would come in and contribute right away, when we drafted them... However, we didn't see our WR players go down with many nagging hamstring injuries as in 2007... thus our rookies were held behind the projected starters. But I have no doubt in my mind that Thomas and Kelly are better and will prove to be better than the other recievers picked in the 2nd round of '08...

I think Cerrato's master plan would've probably entailed taking Phillip Merling if he fell to us in the 2nd round, but Miami took him just a couple spots ahead of us and we took our top reciever on our board (and I feel that Thomas was definitely worthy of the pick at that postion). I don't think that we thought that Davis would've fallen to us in the 2nd round (and rest of the guys worthy of that pick had too many question marks), so we took the guy we felt was the most talented at that position... and I think that Malcolm Kelly was taken because he was the guy we wanted all along.

I've read in a number of places, esp. on this blog that WRs take at least a year or two to develop... I don't know if I agree with the statement 100% of the time, but if it's true, we could have a pretty devistating recieving corps in two or three years... so although maybe the '08 2nd round draft class didn't help us this year, it could very well help us in the next year or two... so if Zorn/Cerrato were using that logic then they are indeed playing for the future... maybe we're looking at being a contender in a couple years...

The rest of the guys taken in the '08 draft (aside from Horton who is a needle in the haystack) may very well be pretty good depth players, perhaps starters in a pinch... I predict we'll see more of Rhino, next year, with my, expected departure of Kendall... so I think they were looking to the future with that pick too...

I don't think we should condemn our FO for not building for the future. It's really kind of early to see what the Redskins are planning on doing in 2009 and beyond; but our movements in Free Agency/Trades/Draft in the next few months will probably tell us a lot more of what to expect...

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

the offseason plan should be signing ernie grunfeld, the wizards gm, as the redskins gm...superbowl in 3 years guaranteed

Posted by: jasonma1 | January 22, 2009 1:16 PM |

What a great choice he would be the Wizards have won some titles under Ernie, Oh wait no they have'nt and now they are the worst team in the NBA. No Thanks

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 1:25 PM | Report abuse

beantwon

I totally agree. Rookies have to play on a team not headed anywhere.

But hey: again it all goes back to egotistical coaches not wanting to think ahead as it only shine a light on what they've done wrong now.

And who wants to see himself that way?

Andy Reid has planned ahead and put Desean Jackson to work. He already knows what he has in him as a receiver.

Can Zorn say that Thomas and Davis and Rhino?

Not exactly.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Suppose the Mel Kyper mock draft is accurate, then what should the Skins do at #13:

1) Select OT Michael Oher

2) Select SLB Brian Orakpo

3) Trade down for a lower round #1 and #2

4) Trade Rogers for a 2nd round pick and select CB Vontae Davis

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Why does everyone seem to think that we'll find someone who will give us a 2nd for Carlos? I WANT him to stay with us and I think he has played very well this year. But I can't see us getting more than a 3rd for him. Worth it? idk...

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 22, 2009 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Select B.J. Raji, DT from Boston College. Build from the inside out, starting with the defensive line.

Posted by: rb-freedom-for-all | January 22, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

"Select B.J. Raji, DT from Boston College. Build from the inside out, starting with the defensive line."

I would love that pick, but odds are he's not going to be there at 13.

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 22, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Why is he including Baltimore as an example of how to win? They have one SB and it was almost 10 years ago....plus win they did win it it was not because of the offense! In fact, That season they went something like 5 or 6 games without a TD in regular season.

Last time I checked...Baltimore has done nothing to show an example on how to build a Championship team.....

Posted by: leevi98 | January 22, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

if Oher is available we should take him


any of the top 4 OTs, if available, we should draft

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 1:39 PM | Report abuse

According to Mel: Raji was already selected at #12 by Denver...

I think the Skins will only replace Griffin if a better free agent DT (i.e. Haynesworth) is available. I'm not sure if any of the other free agent or draft DTs are better than Griffin or Golston.

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

I just skimmed over the article linked from this post.

It includes such gems as, concerning Fred Davis :

"Davis's maturity was also questioned by some team sources, who noted that he often giggled in meetings."


and he continued on this idea that Devin Thomas is immature and has no work ethic, even though Thomas was praised throughout the season for working hard even when he didn't get things 100%, and Coach Zorn kept putting him on special teams.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

"if Oher is available we should take him


any of the top 4 OTs, if available, we should draft"

My hope is that they are able to trade down and possibly get Loadholt or Mack...both would be a dream.

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 22, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Option #3, trade back.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

A little too much focus on an issue that was out of Vinny's hands until this past season. Youre blaming him for 4-years of Gibb's selections during that span.

The FO is giving all indications they will work on the lines this year, they can't change past mistakes, but only correct them going forward. If they show an unwillingness to continue to address these issues than fine, but again, Vinny has only run the show the last year here....Prior to that is was Marty, Spurrier with input, and then Gibbs as Team President.

Posted by: Oz99 | January 22, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I just skimmed over the article linked from this post.

It includes such gems as, concerning Fred Davis :

"Davis's maturity was also questioned by some team sources, who noted that he often giggled in meetings."


and he continued on this idea that Devin Thomas is immature and has no work ethic, even though Thomas was praised throughout the season for working hard even when he didn't get things 100%, and Coach Zorn kept putting him on special teams.

Posted by: TheTruth11

I agree... the dude was probably "giggling" because he was sitting next to Chris Cooley... the dude is funny as hell...

it also could be twisted another way: that our lockerroom was/is loose and not uptight...

Posted by: nagoose | January 22, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

IF you can find someone to give you a second for Carlos, I'm ok with doing it. That's a huge IF though....but for purposes of this discussion it seems people think this can happen so lets assume it does, then I would hope we trade down a few spots, not to the back of round one, but say from 13 to the 18-22 range and pick up a 3rd or early 4th. Then you take a corner in round 1 (should be a top 3 prospect there) then in round 2 you go oline or dline, round 3 speed RB, then with your other 3rd or 4th plus your 5th and 6th all lines with maybe a LB prospect. All of that depends on what if anything has been done in FA, but if nothing is done, that's the way I would go. IMHO the play of Thomas and Rabach were what dropped of the most. While certainly Jansen's play has dropped off, Heyer has shown he is serviceable and Samuels should be back but sometimes pressure is just going to come from the edges, that is expected to some degree, I thought our biggest problem was up the gut. JC couldn't step up in a pocket ever, some not great DTs had career games against us last year and a strong middle can help your tackles too cause they can let ends go hard around the edges knowing the QB can step up, JC had nowhere to go....

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

if Oher is available we should take him

any of the top 4 OTs, if available, we should draft

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009
1:39 PM
===========================================
Agreed, but what if all four are gone?

WalterFootball has updated their mock draft, and they still have all 4 gone in the first 8 picks, and have us picking Britton. Nothing against Britton, but it seems to me there's a significant drop-off. And there will still be decent prospects at O.T. in the 3rd round (albeit not as good as Britton).
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone believe that we wouldn't be a top flight team if the Danny hadn't let his ego get in the way of Marty (and his ego)???? Seriously....

I know, I know. Crying over spilled milk but still! Longing for Marty ball....lol

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 22, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

"Then you take a corner in round 1 (should be a top 3 prospect there) then in round 2 you go oline or dline, round 3 speed RB, then with your other 3rd or 4th plus your 5th and 6th all lines with maybe a LB prospect"

Wow...quite putrid.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

+++Jason.

I am a college professor, with a Ph.D. from an Ivy League school, and I teach social science….

There's data that can be used to support or refute what you want to say, and you've ignored it.


Posted by: bobeaston+++

Bob—

Probably a good idea you didn’t “credit” the Ivy league School you Ph.D’d at, they might want to recind your doctorate.

Even non-Ph.D possessing BA-owners like me know that “data” are plural.

Hence, “there are data” not “there’s data.”

Afraid I’m gonna have to give you an “F”

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Defensive overhaul:

Release Shawn Springs, Jason Taylor, Marcus Washington, and Fred Smoot.

Sign Julius Peppers, DeAngelo Hall.

Draft BJ Raji and the best "Sam" linebacker you can find in the draft or free-agency.

Figure out if Justin Tryon can play the slot and draft or sign a free agent who can also play the slot and backup at corner.

Offensive overhaul:

Let Pete Kendall go.

Sign Jon Jansen to a much smaller, 1-year contract and let him back up at Guard, Center and Right Tackle or else release him.

Start Rhinehart at LG and Heyer at RT.

Evaluate Randy Thomas's injury status and determine whether he can go another year.

Find the best Guard, Center, and Tackle prospects in the draft, free agency, undrafted free-agents, the practice squad, etc. and develop them.

Find the best backup fullback you can in the draft or free-agency.

Posted by: rb-freedom-for-all | January 22, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

+++Mel drinks everyone's pee.

Posted by: TheTruth11 ++

Professor Easton? As a Ph.D you may be a trifle overeducated to be posting here.


Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

There are also data points

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | January 22, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Cork your an idiot

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

fine bean, I'll bite explain to me how that's putrid? If you trade Carlos you need a starting corner opposite Hall assuming you resign him and that aint Springs or Smoot. So what's your answer go sign an older guy or big money guy? and you don't think the skins could use a LB, Oline and Dlines, and a speed RB?

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:03 PM | Report abuse

++ thetruth11 says, "I love how everyone here says 'You don't know football'. Please oh God of Football, preach to us." ++

You're right. You don't need offensive or defensive linemen to win football games. Quick -- tell us the successful football teams in the entire history of the NFL that had both poor offensive and defensive lines. Come on, "truth". Preach to us.


Posted by: diesel_skins_ | January 22, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Probably a good idea you didn’t “credit” the Ivy league School you Ph.D’d at, they might want to recind your doctorate.

Even non-Ph.D possessing BA-owners like me know that “data” are plural.

Hence, “there are data” not “there’s data.”

Afraid I’m gonna have to give you an “F”

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 1:57 PM
=========================================
Shorter TheCork: "Heavens! A Yale Man!²"

I think the problem Jasno has here is he is trying to make a statistical argument when what is needed is context. (Yes, I did consider ending that sentence before "when".)

If you have an O.L. aged from 25-31 performing at a high level, you're not going to be too worried about drafting linemen.

This was not our situation, and we paid for it. And it was an obvious problem.

Furthemore, back in the 1980s when we had the Hogs, signing quality free agents for your O.L. was not the same deal that it is in these perilous times (c.f. Derrick Dewayne Dockery).

² c.f. Thurston J. Howell, III. For the record, although I live in Columbus, I root for the Bulldogs, not the Buckeyes.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

According to Mel: Raji was already selected at #12 by Denver...

I think the Skins will only replace Griffin if a better free agent DT (i.e. Haynesworth) is available. I'm not sure if any of the other free agent or draft DTs are better than Griffin or Golston.

Posted by: siris

**************************

First, lots of mock drafts show B.J. Raji still on the board. Or, if he's gone, Peria Jerry is good too.

See Pat Kirwin's article on NFL.com:

"Defensive tackles, potential outside linebackers gaining attention"

by Pat Kirwan|NFL.com
Sr Analyst

http://www.nfl.com/seniorbowl/story?id=09000d5d80e4328a&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true


Regarding Oher, see Scott Campbell's story at Redskins.com:

"In Redskins' Draft Process, Character Remains a Priority"

http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/In_Draft_Process__Character_Remains_a_Priority_31420.jsp

Posted by: rb-freedom-for-all | January 22, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Until some other publication reports that the skins are shopping Rogers, that is a non issue. Ok. So right away, you don't need to draft a CB.

A speed back?? Really?? Why so he can get tackled behind the line of scrimmage when the line can't block for him? Where is his speed going to come in handy when someone blows him up 1 step after getting the handoff??

So then you have Portis, Betts, Speed Back, the latter two of which get to split the 2.3 carries that Zorn gave to players not named Portis per game.

The need to trade back, and draft OL/DL/OL. Sign a couple of second tier guys for either the OL/DL to provide depth.

Defensive backfield and RB were not problems on this team. Spending 2 picks out of 4 on them would be INSANE.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Anyone catch the Senior practices?

Yeah, I know, I have no life...

But Andre Caldwell--c, Bama and Michael Oher-t Ole Miss looked very good.

so does
Alphonso Smith-cb Wake Forest
Victor Harris-cb VaTech
Ray Maualuga-lb USC
Raji-dt Boston College
CJ Spiller-rb Clemson
Clay Matthews, jr.-wlb USC
Terry Robiskie, jr-wr Ohio State

and of course, there are others.....

There are a lot of linemen, suggesting that moving down for 13 to get into the 3rd round would be a good idea for the Skins--if they can do it.

Hopefully, there's a willing partner who'll hand the Skins an additional pick in this draft to move up to get a guy they really want.

Moving down and getting an additional pick would allow the Skins to find a starting rt and young interior lineman to groom.

The Skins should or could walk away from this draft with three lineman--one who can start-and a good fast linebacker or cornerback to challenge Smoot or replace Springs.

Again, I said should.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

"even though Thomas was praised throughout the season for working hard even when he didn't get things 100%, and Coach Zorn kept putting him on special teams.

Posted by: TheTruth11"

Actually, I remember a post where Jason Campbell was quoted as saying he went to Devin Thomas to "have a talk" with him regarding being a professional, learning the playbook, how to "get it", etc.

Fred Davis was the one who was known as a hard worker. Malcolm Kelly was the one who was known as the excitable talent, if he could ever get healthy. Devin Thomas was known as the guy who they wished would "get it". At least that's the impression I got.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

carocanesfan
You are probably right. Marty went 8-8 with no Qb (Okay fine Tony Banks was his QB..)

I think if we had kept Martyball for 3 years and then got Gibbs, joe would have had a roster ready for a SB.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Defensive backfield and RB were not problems on this team. Spending 2 picks out of 4 on them would be INSANE.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

READ THE WHOLE POST MORON. I said IF someone would give a 2 for Carlos and that's a big IF but was and is what a lot of people on here think will happen, and IF we can get a 2 I say do it, you can replace Carlos with a younger guy who maybe can catch as well as cover and would be years away from wanting a payday while still getting a second round pick to draft a young guy for your lines with. A second round guard or center could be a immediate starter so you're saying IF you could trade rogers for Macho Harris and a starter at guard you wouldn't? And in IMHO a home run hitter at RB would help a lot, the coaches JLa talks to apparently think so too. Betts is a nice player with decent hands but he can't take a screen to the house, if you get a guy like James Davis or Devin Moore that can touch the ball 3-5 times a game but has the ability to take one to the house at any time that could help a lot! This team needs explosive playmakers, thanks to last year they aren't drafting WRs or TEs so there is really on one other spot it makes sense to try and add a playmaker.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

and if you trade Carlos and trade back as I said in my post you would spend 2 picks out of 6 not 4......again, read the post moron

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Would you rather have David Brent, Michael Scott, or Vinny Ceratto running the Washington Redskins.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 1:11 PM | Report abuse


Lumberg!

Posted by: Original_etrod | January 22, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

+++
I totally agree Beantown-G, now we go into the draft and Free Agency period that much more blind as to what we are working with looking FORWARD......WTF is up with these guys in Redskin Land ??

Posted by: slipperyrichard | January 22, 2009 12:58 PM+++

Zorn did the right thing by keeping the young rookies on the side line. They need to know that to play, you have to earn it. Even CP needs to know that.

We're the only ones who are blind to what the rookies can and can't do. Zorn and his staff know what the rookies have to do this off season. The only question is if they are up to the task. I pray we have no B Lloyds in the group.

If the Skins bring in FA receivers that will be a tell, but I don't expect that to happen.

Posted by: _Stumped_ | January 22, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

beantown

Again: you're right about moving down to get more linemen out of this draft.

When I watched the Senior Bowl practices, what I noticed was that for both the North and South teams, the offensive lines moved the respective d-lines with not too many problems.

This tells me that if the seniors are that strong, there are even more--or better guys--when you add the juniors to the group.

The Skins should try to leave this draft with three lineman--one dt and two o-linemen types.

Again, I said should.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

The Skins should try to leave this draft with three lineman--one dt and two o-linemen types.

Again, I said should.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

huh weird, lets see, if my post happened, they would leave the draft with a younger signed longer hopefully upgrade over Rogers, a speed back, and either 4 lineman or 3 lineman and a linebacker......gee that sounds so putrid to me....

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

This team needs explosive playmakers, thanks to last year they aren't drafting WRs or TEs so there is really on one other spot it makes sense to try and add a playmaker.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:21 PM
============================================
Jack, we have an offensive line that couldn't keep our QB standing in the face of a two man rush.

Also, they're old, I mean they're distinguished gentlemen.

We're not going to be able to take our 4 draft picks and Carlos Rogers and turn water into wine.

~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

zjfr2 has ideas to get us about 25 draft picks next year

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Bean....can you say owned?

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Honestly, I'm as worried about the kicker and the punter as any of the other positions of need. I guess I'm equally worried about these and a good OL.

How hard is it to find and sign and "average" kicker and punter in the NFL? Not as easy as it seems...I guess.

Posted by: _Stumped_ | January 22, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

zj, wow, full of piss and vinegar there my friend.

Like I said, when ESPN, or SI, or heck, how about the National Inquirer reports that Carlos is on the block, THEN, and only then will that be a reality.

Yup, a 'speed back' is just what this team needs. He can get tackled for a 3 yard loss, then show his speed running back to the bench.
"This team needs explosive playmakers", couldn't agree more, just not sure how the qb is gonna get them the ball when he's concussed on the turf.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

zjfr2 has ideas to get us about 25 draft picks next year

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

yeah 25 or 6, trading Carlos wasn't my idea but if you can get a 2nd I'm fine with it, if not great, keep him. Trading back seems to be also everyone else's favorite idea, why can't you do both? If Carlos can get you a second do it. If you can trade back 5 to 10 spots and pick up a 3rd or 4th do it. Nothing I've said is all that strange, Bean just likes to be an asshat an argue about everything.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

"Bean....can you say owned?"


lol, yeah, you really owned me there, zj, wow...I am soooo owned...you TOTALLY owned me there....man today sucks...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

huh weird, lets see, if my post happened, they would leave the draft with a younger signed longer hopefully upgrade over Rogers, a speed back, and either 4 lineman or 3 lineman and a linebacker......gee that sounds so putrid to me....

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:29 PM
===========================================
I'm sure they could leave the draft with 5 O.L. lineman and a linebacker if they moved all their picks to the 5th through 7th rounds.

I don't see that as being helpful. After the 3rd round, you're hoping to get a guy who can crack an NFL roster.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

its not like I said ignore the lines, I said take 3 to 4 lineman, you have Rhinehart, Heyer, plus 3 to 4 drafted lineman you ought to be pretty freaking good there.....

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

The Steelers don't do free agency.

By Jason La Canfora | January 22, 2009; 9:01 AM ET

How did they get Ryan Clark? Did they draft him from us? Did they trade for him?

Posted by: talent_evaluator | January 22, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

I'm sure they could leave the draft with 5 O.L. lineman and a linebacker if they moved all their picks to the 5th through 7th rounds.

I don't see that as being helpful. After the 3rd round, you're hoping to get a guy who can crack an NFL roster.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

can you people really not read or count? IF you trade Rogers for a second you have a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th (5 picks) if you trade back in the first 5 to 10 spots and pick up a 3rd or 4th (very doable) you have a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd or 4th, 5th, 6th, (6 picks). Fine if you can trade carlos you don't need to pick a corner, you can still trade back and pick up another = 5 picks and tack a speed back along with rebuilding your line some. Do you want me to draw a picture for you too? would that help?

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

sorry that was if you can't trade carlos for a 2....cause anything less than a 2 its not worth it.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

zj, you're owning EVERYONE today....wow...

Yeah, draw me a picture...of you not being a fan any more....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Do you want me to draw a picture for you too? would that help?

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 2:40 PM
============================================
Could you draw a picture of the starters we're going to get with our 4th round and later picks?

I'm for trading back, getting Mack, and hopefully picking up a 2nd or a 3rd. That would let us draft somebody (Skins seem to be thinking linebacker), and one of the O.T.s in the 3rd. I don't know what the odds are of being able to do this, I'm sure it will depend on just who is available when number 13 comes up.

The rest of what your talking about is conflating "picks" with players. I don't see anything realistic in your scenario that affords drafting explosive play makers.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

alex

Yeah, Marty should've stayed and what happened to him is both his and the FO fault.

I think he was the right hire.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

The rest of what your talking about is conflating "picks" with players. I don't see anything realistic in your scenario that affords drafting explosive play makers.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Right cause you can't possibly get a part-time speed back in the 3rd round. Steve Slaton, Tashard Choice, Darren Sproles, Derrick Ward, Michael Turner, Brian Westbrook, Willie Parker, Mewelde Moore, Pierre Thomas, Jerius Norwood, Leon Washington, Fred Jackson, all were taken in the third round or later. So now way that we could find an explosive playmaker at running back in the 3rd round......well, I forgot about Vinny making the picks so maybe not.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 3:02 PM | Report abuse

zj, is RB a strength or weakness on this team currently?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Marty should've stayed

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 2:50 PM

Crying over Marty = Crying over Antonio Pierce = Power Rankings

Posted by: talent_evaluator | January 22, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

I would say its neither, while its certainly not a weakness it sure isn't a strength. CP is a great player, I love him, but the last couple years have proven he's not a full season workhorse anymore and if he's used that way he'll breakdown by December when he's needed the most. Betts is ok, but he doesn't have great vision, rarely gets the tough yard if he's in for the opportunity and has a proven track record of fumble issues often at the worst times and lacks explosion of any kind. Rock is a great story but wouldn't be the third back for many teams in the league, he's a thicker built chad morton. So while not necessarily a weakness, outside of CP nothing special and CP can't be the 25 carry a game guy anymore or it becomes a real weakness real quick. See post 6-2 start. And when you don't have a single rush all year over 35 yards you obviously are missing explosiveness at the position.

If you had a guy whether that be through the draft or FA (Ward, Sproles is too much after his postseason performance)to CP and Betts, and you give CP 15 to 20 carries and the other two 10 to 15 touches along with adding a home run element in the new guy, it becomes an actual strength instead of just not a weakness.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Trading draft picks is a science not an art. Each pick is worth a certain amount of points according to a league sanctioned draft value chart: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670

For instance the 13th pick is worth 1150 points. So a good trade would be the #13 for a lower 1st (#23 == 760pts) and 2nd (#55 == 350)...

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

what would you do with the current roster.

67 Albright, Ethan LS- keep
79 Alexander, Lorenzo DT- Keep
54 Blades, H.B. LB- Keep
5 Brennan, Colt QB- keep
17 Campbell, Jason- Keep resign for 4 years.
99 Carter, Andre DE - keep
31 Cartwright, Rock - Keep
47 Cooley, Chris TE- keep
86 Davis, Fred TE - keep
92 Evans, Demetric DL - keep
59 Fletcher, London LB- Keep
68 Geisinger, Justin OG - keep
64 Golston, Kedric DT - keep
23 Hall, DeAngelo CB - resign
74 Heyer, Stephon OL- keep
48 Horton, Chris S- keep
98 Jackson, Rob DE- keep
12 Kelly, Malcolm WR - keep
30 Landry, LaRon S- keep
52 McIntosh, Rocky LB- keep
94 Montgomery, Anthony DT- keep
41 Moore, Kareem S - keep
89 Moss, Santana WR- keep
1 Plackemeier, Ryan P- keep
26 Portis, Clinton RB- keep
61 Rabach, Casey C- keep
75 Rinehart, Chad OL- Keep
22 Rogers, Carlos CB- Keep
60 Samuels, Chris OT- keep
45 Sellers, Mike FB - Keep
11 Thomas, Devin WR- Keep
77 Thomas, Randy OG- Keep
95 Wilson, Chris DE- keep
87 Yoder, Todd TE- keep
20 Tryon, Justin CB- keep
62 Clark, Devin OL - keep if he cant make the 53 man roster cut.
90 Buzbee, Alex DE- keep if he cant make the 53 man roster cut.
46 Betts, Ladell RB- Trade or keep
24 Springs, Shawn CB- trade or cut
27 Smoot, Fred- trade or keep
15 Collins, Todd QB- Trade
82 Randle El, Antwaan WR- keep or trade for great deal.
76 Jansen, Jon OT- ask to retire or due to contract keep
93 Daniels, Phillip DE- retire or keep
83 Thrash, James WR- retire
96 Griffin, Cornelius DT - cut or trade.
23 Doughty, Reed S- Cut or trade.
66 Kendall, Pete OL - cut or keep at vet min
63 Montgomery, Will OL- cut
78 Batiste, D'Anthony OL- Cut
57 Wallace, Rian LB- cut
53 Washington, Marcus LB- cut
6 Suisham, Shaun K- cut
97 Smith, Tyson LB- cut
58 Sinclair, Matt LB- cut
55 Taylor, Jason LB/DE- cut
69 Fabini, Jason OL- Cut
51 Fincher, Alfred LB- cut
73 Boschetti, Ryan DT- Cut
50 Campbell, Khary LB- cut
25 Green, Mike S - cut

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

zj, much like your lust for the 3-4, your judgement has been clouded by what you WANT to happen.

How about this, how about if the team USES, the assets it currently has. Instead of grinding CP down to a nub, have him carry it 20 times a game, and have Betts carry it 10 times a game. Regardless of what you think of his vision, he was under-utilized.

RB is a position of strength on this team.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Every time I read the Carlos Rogers trade talk I just shake my head. The Skins are the only team that would trade a 2nd rounder for a player of his talent. Even if someone did, then we'd have to rely on Cerratto to draft his replacement. So this is how it would go down. We can trade the #13 to get 2 seconds and then have another for Rogers. Then Vinny can draft 3 corners in the 2nd round and hopefully one will pan out. Groundhog day. And the lines will still suck.

Posted by: JasonLaTempleton | January 22, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

zjrf2

Trading Rogers sounds nice, but not every team is willing to play fantasy football with millions of dollars involved.

And there are young guys like Rogers in this draft who won't cost them picks--so why are us reasonable people's ideas "putrid"?

I'm a guy who thinks it's going to take 2-3 years to correct the issues on the offensive line.

Presently, the Skins have 4 picks.

That's a starting rt, strong back up c/lg type, and dt to replce C Griff.

I'm taking a wlb or c if a quality guy is there.

And that's the issue: I'm talking quality over numbers. Numbers can be achieved through UFA's and FA.

The Redskins must be encouraged to take a slow, methodical way to rebuild their front lines. Rash decisions are why the team is in the position it's in now.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

I found a "metamock" site that compiles what other mock sites pick:

http://www.fantasyfootballjungle.com/y/nfl-draft/teams/index.php?steam=Was

The "meta" position of need looks like OT ... I get the feeling the Skins go for the "best player available" ... maybe a CB or QB or TE.

Posted by: dcsween | January 22, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

... or strong safety ... you can never have enough best players available at strong safety.

Posted by: dcsween | January 22, 2009 3:38 PM | Report abuse

From SI's Don Banks

Pick BJ Raji - The Redskins need talent injections on both lines, and they easily could go for an offensive tackle like Jason Smith of Baylor with this pick. But Raji would also be a nice get for a defensive line that made far too little impact in 2008. Raji is more than just a space-eating run-stuffer. He has surprising agility and has shown the ability to penetrate the backfield and make plays behind the line of scrimmage.

Posted by: skinswest | January 22, 2009 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Yeah cause Betts and Rock would be #2 and #3 for most teams....when I say not Rock I mean even on the roster..and all of this assumes that players are healthy cause when Denver puts 7 backs on IR obviously that's different, all things being healthy..not the Giants, Cowboys, maybe Eagles Betts maybe at 2 but Buckhalter is pretty good not Rock....Not the Falcons, Tampa (Dunn, Cadilac, Graham), Carolina no, or the Saints Betts is not better than Duece or Pierre, Cardinals Betts maybe not Rock but James is fading so maybe Betts for him Arrington Hightower over Rock, Seahawks Betts maybe as 2nd or 3rd behind Morris and pretty even with Jones and ahead of Duckett (although TJ had a much more productive year this year) but not Rock, Niners Betts maybe 2nd over Foster maybe not but not Rock, Rams yes, Chicago yes, Minny no, Detroit yes, Green Bay Betts, Bmore no, Pitt not when Mendenhall is healthy, Cleveland yes, Bengals yes, Houston Betts maybe, Indy no, Jacksonville no, TN no, Buff no, Miami no, NE no, Jets no, Denver Betts maybe but Hall Young Pittman Torrain are unknowns really cause of health, KC Betts only, Oakland no, SD no. Less than half the league would Betts be a backup and not many teams Rock would even be on the roster.....but keep calling it a strength if you want to.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Rogers is going to be very expensive to retain in three years. So, the Skins should consider trading him this year (while he still has value and a cheap salary) if he's only going to be a 3rd CB, who doesn't play special teams and is disgruntled about not starting. Plus an inexpensive replacement, with more upside, might be available in the draft.

That said -- It's true that Rodgers is signed through the 2011 season at a reasonable salary and is a good cover corner. However, he still has trouble covering the double move and often fails to intercept the football. He will not be a starter if both Hall and Springs are retained and the Skins need to improve special teams.

So, I think the Skins will keep him -- at least this year -- if Springs, Hall, and/or Smoot are not retained, and consider trading him if all of them stay. Hall is definitely an upgrade at CB.

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

can everyone please stop acting like I'm advocating trading Carlos, that has been being said on here for days, all I said was IF you could get a 2nd to do it. I don't want to trade him, I don't think anyone will give us a 2nd for him, and I don't think we should give him up for anything less than a 2 or give him up period if the plan is to keep Springs and Smoot as your options other than Hall. This was not my freaking idea, all I was trying to say is if in Madden world like people apparently think this is you could get a 2nd for him then I'm ok with it.....that's all.....and I still say trading back a little and picking up a speed back with that extra pick or signing Ward would add a dimension to this offense that it sorely lacks right now.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

ALLEN TO LAND WITH THE REDSKINS?
Posted by Mike Florio on January 22, 2009, 3:32 p.m.
One of the rumors making the rounds at the Senior Bowl is that former Bucs G.M. Bruce Allen could land with the Washington Redskins.

Allen’s father, George, coached the team from 1971 to 1977. Current owner Dan Snyder, who was five when Allen arrived and 12 when he left, grew up as a Redskins fan.

Currently, Vinny Cerrato is the Executive Vice President of Football Operations for the Redskins, and it’s unknown how Bruce Allen would fit within the current structure.

Earlier this month, the Redskins laid off at least 20 employees.

Posted by: rbruce2 | January 22, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

I'd be happy with either Raji, or with Smith, but in reality, its not going to be enough. Trading back is what I believe is the best way to improve this team.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: rbruce2 | January 22, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

OMFG PLZ!!!!!!!! Allen may not be a Pioli or a Parcels but he's not Vinny, and anybody not Vinny is an upgrade!

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 22, 2009 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Again we see how the analytical posts of the Periculum seem inspire a different way of looking at things ... ITA HAH!, And anyway I hink that was the name of the company that made the Supercar, Fireball XL-5, StingRay, Thunderbirds, and Space 1999 series among others ... I used to like those shows.

Posted by: periculum | January 22, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

If this team was run right in the first place and we had more picks I'd be all for drafting another RB. How sweet would it be to get a Steve Slaton in the 3rd round to take over for CP in a year or 2 when he breaks down.

Please let the Bruce Allen rumors be true. I know they aren't.

Posted by: JasonLaTempleton | January 22, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

"One of the rumors making the rounds at the Senior Bowl is that former Bucs G.M. Bruce Allen could land with the Washington Redskins."

I rather doubt it. Snidely probably wouldn't remember that. The guy worked for the Redskins. When his father pulled the same sort of stunt he pulled on the Rams twice, and the Bears Papa Halas the Redskins actually grabbed their car he was using and stranded him ... I wouldn't trust him ... wouldn't trust his brother the gov'nor and senator for that matter ...

Posted by: periculum | January 22, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

I'd be happy with either Raji, or with Smith, but in reality, its not going to be enough. Trading back is what I believe is the best way to improve this team.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

I like the concept but we don't have Jimmy Johnson making the picks. Afterall last year's trade back doesn't look all that great - maybe they pan out eventually but they sure haven't shown anything yet. Trading back when we got Ramsey didn't work out that great either. I figure at 13 there's less of a chance to get it wrong.

Posted by: skinswest | January 22, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

per PFT

Bruce Allen, former Buc's GM, is rumored to be joining the Redskins FO.

Posted by: Snydersucks | January 22, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

"No, the Skins don't "get it". The answer is not to use their paltry four picks this year on linemen. It's that you build through the draft, and you start with the line

osted by: diesel_skins_ | January 22, 2009"

Yes that IS THE ANSWER, LIKE IT OR NOT. What he isn't showing you is the number of complete failures drafting wide outs in the FIRST and SECOND rounds they've incurred over this period. It has KILLED THEM.

THE OL IS almost COMPLETELY DEPLETED! That's the word Suggs used on Cooley's blog and he was right not just for that moment in time BUT IN GENERAL!!!

They have to use all 4 (well maybe they could draft a kicker) to ensure they get ONE STARTER and cross their fingers hoping they can get one or two more from that set AND the current flop they have in Rhinehart.

Its the price they pay for not drafting these guys all along ... both on offense on defense.

They have done a great job in the defensive backfield. However FATE and not STUPIDITY played its hand when their very best player Sean Taylor was killed.

Its time for sack cloth and ashes ... its time to suck it up with the skill players they have for a time and just draft linemen in the upper rounds.

They have a good receiver in Moss, reasonable running backs in Portis, Betts and the Rock. They have tight ends in Cooley and hopefully one of their crop of draft picks from last year ...

They have defensive backs. They have drafted interior linemen and brought in young FAs at tackle. They can CAREFULLY, sticking to YOUTH, use FA to staunch up the linebacking and DE situation.

But for the OL its time to use the draft. Athletic tackles and center / guards, yes like the Ravens who have drafted THREE centers since 2004 ...

Posted by: periculum | January 22, 2009 4:16 PM | Report abuse

ALLEN TO LAND WITH THE REDSKINS?

Just as long as we don't hire his brother. Not sure that he would get along with some of our players.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

I found a "metamock" site that compiles what other mock sites pick:

Posted by: dcsween | January 22, 2009 3:36 PM

Sween,

Nice find, this. Thanks for sharing it. I wonder if there's a comparable site for free agency? I can't understand all the hullabaloo on the blog about the draft when we haven't seen what the team will do in free agency. I can't understand women, either.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | January 22, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

ALLEN TO LAND WITH THE REDSKINS?

please!

Posted by: _Stumped_ | January 22, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

"I'm for trading back, getting Mack, and hopefully picking up a 2nd or a 3rd. That would let us draft somebody (Skins seem to be thinking linebacker), and one of the O.T.s in the 3rd. I don't know what the odds are of being able to do this, I'm sure it will depend on just who is available when number 13 comes up."

Not this year. They need that starting tackle now. That's where they will use Carlos ... to get a Mack which does make sense. Its going to come down to making a trade to get the picks back they squandered to do what you suggest.

Posted by: periculum | January 22, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I think Vinny and Snyder understand this now, but it takes time to build through the draft. You can't turn it around in just one or two years, especially when previous decisions have cost you draft picks. I think they took receivers last year because they were desperately needed and they hoped to hold a good line together one or two more years.

Posted by: lordtwang | January 22, 2009 4:32 PM | Report abuse

http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Thomas_Eager_to_Prove_His_Worth_31000.jsp

"Devin Thomas heard what the critics were saying.

He heard the comparisons to other rookie wide receivers, from Philadelphia’s DeSean Jackson and Denver’s Eddie Royal, who produced strong seasons last year.

Why wasn’t Thomas, the Redskins’ top pick in the NFL Draft last April, as involved in the Redskins’ offense?

Posed the question, Thomas said he believes that every situation is different for rookies

Jackson and Royal were put in situations where they had to start early in their careers, he said.

Thomas had time to learn and work his way into the lineup behind veteran starters Santana Moss and Antwaan Randle El.

“People are going to make their judgments about me, but it’s a tough learning curve and you have to figure things out,” he said. “My situation was totally different from the other rookies. But I have the offseason to get things right and get ready for next year.

“I’m anxious to take what I learned last year and just hit the ground running.”

Thomas played in all 16 games as a rookie last season, mostly serving as a third receiver, and finished with 15 catches for 120 yards.

He also had a 29-yard touchdown run on a wide receiver reverse in Week 13 against the New York Giants. The play was memorable because Thomas followed blocking by Jason Campbell to the end zone.

Thomas was slowed by a hamstring injury in training camp and missed most of preseason, slowing his progress in Jim Zorn’s offense.

As a result of his absence, Thomas did not get the practice time to fully learn the precision of running the West Coast system.

Zorn encouraged Thomas to focus in on route depths and break points.

By season’s end, Zorn said he developed more trust in Thomas...............

....................................

"

(Click to continue reading rest of the article http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Thomas_Eager_to_Prove_His_Worth_31000.jsp )

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 22, 2009 4:37 PM | Report abuse

You know as much as I wish Thomas produced like Jackson in philly last year. Lets remember Jackson is not going to be producing like that in the next two years. He plays in Philly. No WR stays consistent up there for more than 1 or two seasons.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 22, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse

There's a big new report on ESPN.com

Apparently Jerry Jones eats peanut butter sandwiches, but Tony Romo prefers PBJ.

This is creating major contentious shockwaves throughout the organization. Ed Werder is all over the story, though...

Posted by: p1funk | January 22, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Sucessful = SB Championship

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse


4th, you wrote:

"The only time the WCO is succesful is with a bunch of HOFers or a new coach using it"

Philly has been very successful running this offense, so I'm asking you to answer your own question. Who from Philly is making the HOF??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 2:53 PM

See 2:50pm.

What is success to you?

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 22, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Allen....?

To join the Redskins....?

Was that Bruce Allen or Terry Allen....?

AFLAC!!!!! (Insert cute duck image here)

Moe hopes it's not Terry Allen (memba him???).

He got hurt and missed work.

And because of this, he didn't have cash, which is just as good as money.

(Insert perplexed cute duck image here.)

Yes, that was very not funny.

(Insert image of pissed off Geico caveman in a Redskins jersey walkng away.)

But hey, if the rumors are true about a serious FO guy joining the Skins, the Madden GM will at least stop complaining.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

There's a big new report on ESPN.com

Apparently Jerry Jones eats peanut butter sandwiches, but Tony Romo prefers PBJ.

This is creating major contentious shockwaves throughout the organization. Ed Werder is all over the story, though...

Posted by: p1funk | January 22, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully the salmonella kills 'em both. Care for scallions, lettuce, tomato, and jalapenos on that?

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 22, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

It all comes down to picking players that perform in your teams scheme. It does not matter really if you get those players from FA or the draft or in what percentages. I think we all can agree that top dollars for aging players is almost never warrented. But for the most part, I think it all depends on the circumstances. The draft is hit and miss. You will draft players that are duds no matter who you are. Cerrato notwithstanding, the odds should be considerably better as far as knowing what you get when you use FA. So while you may spend more per player than you would for the draft, you will have fewer busts than you would from the draft. But none of that works if you pick players that can't play or play well in your scheme.

Posted by: amaranthpa | January 22, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Instead of grinding CP down to a nub, have him carry it 20 times a game, and have Betts carry it 10 times a game. Regardless of what you think of his vision, he was under-utilized.

RB is a position of strength on this team.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 3:32 PM

Huh? I know we've had this discussion before but please explain to me again how it helps the team in a game situation to give Betts more touches if he is going to be largely ineffective. You're a stats guy and you never responded when I posted Leon Washington's numbers in comparison to Betts's numbers. The coaches see these guys every day. There's a reason he's not on the field.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 22, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

1st the comparison to the sorry Ravens offense... and now the Cardinals?

We are better than the Cardinals. Period.

If you want to compare our drafting/FA track record to a team like the Patriots, who lost the best QB in the league and still won 11 games with a QB who never started before, then that would be reasonable.

But this BS comparison between us and teams like the Dolphins, Ravens, Jets, Cardinals, etc. is ridiculous. These teams made 2 moves: better QB and better coach. That's why they got better. Trying to somehow say they were making great draft choices and FA acquisitions all along and it's suddenly paying off is too much of a stretch.

Posted by: jgarrisn | January 22, 2009 5:21 PM | Report abuse

learnedhand

Betts is ineffective because he's the kinda guy who has to be grinding 20-25 carries a game. He's Brandon Jacobs-lite.

Rock Cartwright's the 'change of pace' back, not Betts. But he doesn't get a shot at playing like he should.

Plus: the Skins don't run the 'power-o,' fullback lead, traps, and sweeps he excelled at when he was a starter.

They run what Portis likes: Betts doesn't fit the running scheme and would be an okay starter/complimentary guy somewhere else.

He has hands, but Campbell doesn't throw the flare or chek down to hit him in stride to make it a solid addition to the offense.

Hopefully, the Skins find a speed back to compliment Portis, a guy who runs the zone-stretch and draw play well.

Otherwise, it's going to be 'Portis v. the World' again next season.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Larry "Everybody Hates Me" Michael has been singing the praises of USC's inside linebacker Rey Maualuga the past 2 days.

What do you guys think about him? Maualuga - not Michael (I already know what you think of him).

Posted by: Lisa_R | January 22, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

PROGRAMMING NOTE

Caught the Redskins.Com Larry Michael Sprint Studio Please Gawd Don't Let Me Say Anything Critical Noozecast tonight.

Subject: Jim Zorn with Breaking News on hardest working Redskins and what "Stay Medium" means.

But here's the BIG NEWS!!!!

Tomorrow!!! Vinny Cerrato is on the Show saying what he likes at the Senior Bowl!!!

MICHAEL'S OPENING GAMBIT: "Vinny, based on your miserable drafting last year, tells us who the Redskins will be blowing draft picks on this year so we can get an early start trimming our fantasy Rosters."

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

++++Andy Reid has planned ahead and put Desean Jackson to work. He already knows what he has in him as a receiver.

Can Zorn say that Thomas and Davis and Rhino?

Not exactly.

Posted by: MistaMoe++++

Zorn has had these guys in practice practically every day for six months. I think the trouble is he DOES know what he has in them.

Call me a cockeyed optimist, but I don't think Zorn is so dumb as to keep deserving players out of the starting lineup. What, is he afraid he'd hurt James Thrash's feelings?

Everyone deserves a second chance. Presumably, read the riot act, the three receivers will show up in fantastic shape and knowing the playbook in 2009.


Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 6:49 PM | Report abuse

"What do you guys think about him? Maualuga - not Michael (I already know what you think of him).
Posted by: Lisa_R | January 22, 2009"

I'd rather have a couple of the top listed OT's in the meta-Mock draft, that center Mack and instead get an FA like Barton Scott.

They need to focus on the depleted OL. Otherwise, things could get ugly.

Posted by: periculum | January 22, 2009 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Lisa,

Ray Maualuga will be a good, fast, sturdy NFL middle/strongside backer.

For some other team.

If the Skins take him, it means he's the 13th pick and starting as the strongside backer/middle backer back up.

Adding Maualgua via the draft and Channing Crowder via free agency would not bring a challenge from the Madden GM as it would immediately improve the run support and wlb coverage issues the defense has.

It would also allow Greg Blache to play Fletcher inside with him in a 3-4 blitz package look on passing downs. I'd like to see C Griff or Golston (or FA) play nt in order to complete this scheme idea.

It means the next two Redskins picks hopefully should be to be o-linemen or o-line, d-line.

Again: emphasis on 'should'.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 6:59 PM | Report abuse

+++Until some other publication reports that the skins are shopping Rogers, that is a non issue. Ok. So right away, you don't need to draft a CB.++++---Beantown Greg

Really?

DeAngello Hall, who quit playing for the Raiders is a free agent, who finished a half-season salary drive and is looking for a big payday.

Carlos Rogers is so POed at his handling by the 'skins, he's indicated he wants to leave. If not this year, perhaps next.

Sean Springs, who is a shutdown when healthy, is aging and oft injured. As such, he's grossly overpaid. What to do with him?

Fred Smoot's play tailed off as the season went on.

J.T. Tyron is another fine member of the Draft class of '08

Torrence is a memory and a punchline for the fun bunch here.

Nope. No need for a CB....

Posted by: TheCork | January 22, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Cork

As much as I agree with you, I still feel that was not all that smart to make the young kids sit to make a point.

Guys drafted in rounds 1-3 belong on the field with something to do, even if it means running a clear-out or speed route so Moss/Cooley can work underneath.

Guys make too much money and their contracts are too short to make Lombardi-style 'points' about performance and committment.

Realistically, whatever issues Thomas, Kelly, and Davis had are the FO's fault. After all, isn't it their job to make sure the guys they pay serious money to are ready to do the job they drafted them for?

Do you feel me, bro'?

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

peri

Mack is good. But Andre Cawldwell-c from Bama is, too. He can play c and g.

It's just too bad the Skins don't have the second round pick they gave up for J Taylor.

They could grab a rt and c/g player and start the work of fixing the interior of the o-line.

But they don't have the pick......

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Larry "Everybody Hates Me" Michael has been singing the praises of USC's inside linebacker Rey Maualuga the past 2 days.

What do you guys think about him? Maualuga - not Michael (I already know what you think of him).

Posted by: Lisa_R | January 22, 2009 6:36 PM
=============================================
Maualuga's at the Senior Bowl.

A common criticism of Rey Maualuga is that he is overaggressive. I caught him taking a terrible angle today when the offense ran a burst over the left guard. He has looked like, by far, the most fluid linebacker in individual drills today, but he needs to flash the top-10 talent he has. Being a disappointment at the weigh-in isn't good, and then following that up with a mediocre practice has me worried. All this said, at least he is out here. USC players don't wuss out.

That's from Matt McGuire at the Senior Bowl practices.

I don't think we can afford to use our first round pick on a linebacker.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 7:13 PM | Report abuse

But they don't have the pick......

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 22, 2009 7:12 PM
=============================================
It's a shame we can't be like the Dolphins and have two 2nd round picks......
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 7:24 PM | Report abuse

It's a shame we can't be like the Dolphins and have two 2nd round picks......
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 7:24 PM

This team had 3 2nd rounders last year and you see where that got 'em...what makes you think '09 is going to be any better?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 22, 2009 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Well, it may not be necessary to add my thoughts to what others have expressed so well: the problem with Jason's thesis is garbage in, garbage out.

By looking only at a narrow range of teams, over a narrow span of time, and excluding a number whose experience contradicts his thesis, Jason manages to come to the conclusion he intended to arrive at all along -- that the Skins should be drafting more linemen.

I can tell you this with some certainty: when GMs consistently draft linemen in the first half of the draft, it's because they're more confident about their ability to pick linemen than other positions. What they're doing is reducing the risk of embarrassment in case the pick doesn't pan out.

Puhleeze, you actually used Arizona as a role model? Anything good that happens to the Bidwills is entirely NOT of their making.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 22, 2009 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Not to beat a dead horse, but don't you feel when a team has multiple high to middle 2nd rounders as well as a 3rd rounder, it should be someone who is ready to produce on the field the year they are drafted, with except to the quaterback position. Our draft last year would of set us up nicely for many years if we actually drafted players who played almost every down, say linemen or linebackers. Drafting a 2nd and 3rd receiver as well as a 2nd tight end with these high draft picks does not make sense to me. Seems with these picks you get some one who is talented and takes up snaps, and is not just in on certain packages. It might turn out that all three draft picks turn out to be great, but they are still situational. Fred Davis will have limited touches do to Chris Cooley and devin and Malcom are still going to be 2nd, 3rd or fourth fiddle. To expend high draft picks on situational players to me is not smart. We will be feeling the effects of the 2008 draft for many years for the fact that our high draft picks were not individuals who are in almost every play. If Chad works out, he will be the exception to the early rounds of the 2008 draft.

Posted by: ynotcaruso | January 22, 2009 8:22 PM | Report abuse

I try to blog during the offseason but WHY???

We shoulda done this...we shoulda done that...The Ravens do this, the Steelers do that...fire the coach, owner, "GM"...we did't draft him...Ryan Clark is Ronnie Lott...we've got this many picks...that many picks...Snyder's a rat, azzhole, jackazz,..sell the team...hire Parcells...get Haynesworth...draft this man...cut this man...

I know we have a good time on the blog and I like all the regulars (Nate, ifthedog,chris,Lisa,Diddy,periculum,zf,mista,Red, Flounder, etc.), but let's face it...who really knows???

Wanna know my theory?(Most of which has been said)

1) Lack of talent on offense.
2) Overcommittment to old players, stunting youth movement (A Gibbs moniker)
3) Philosophy that we are "one player away"
4) Christians over football players (Gibbs)
5) Portis runs the team. Will only get worse.
6) Zorn didn't play the rookies. I don't care if they ran the wrong routes. Play em' and I bet Thomas is already better than Thrash, maybe ARE.

HAVING SAID ALL THAT...ADMIT IT SNYDER AND ZORN LOOKED LIKE GENIUSES WHEN WE WERE 6-2.

SICWIDIT'S TAKE!!!

Posted by: rickyroge | January 22, 2009 8:28 PM | Report abuse

This team had 3 2nd rounders last year and you see where that got 'em...what makes you think '09 is going to be any better?

Posted by: brownwood26 | January 22, 2009 8:02 PM
=============================================
Because we don't have ANY 2nd rounders!

Blue Skies, Baybeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 8:56 PM | Report abuse

I try to blog during the offseason but WHY???

We shoulda done this...we shoulda done that...The Ravens do this, the Steelers do that...fire the coach, owner, "GM"...we did't draft him...Ryan Clark is Ronnie Lott...we've got this many picks...that many picks...Snyder's a rat, azzhole, jackazz,..sell the team...hire Parcells...get Haynesworth...draft this man...cut this man...

I know we have a good time on the blog and I like all the regulars (Nate, ifthedog,chris,Lisa,Diddy,periculum,zf,mista,Red, Flounder, etc.), but let's face it...who really knows???

Wanna know my theory?(Most of which has been said)

1) Lack of talent on offense.
2) Overcommittment to old players, stunting youth movement (A Gibbs moniker)
3) Philosophy that we are "one player away"
4) Christians over football players (Gibbs)
5) Portis runs the team. Will only get worse.
6) Zorn didn't play the rookies. I don't care if they ran the wrong routes. Play em' and I bet Thomas is already better than Thrash, maybe ARE.

HAVING SAID ALL THAT...ADMIT IT SNYDER AND ZORN LOOKED LIKE GENIUSES WHEN WE WERE 6-2.

SICWIDIT'S TAKE!!!

Posted by: rickyroge | January 22, 2009 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: rickyroge | January 22, 2009 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Why do I think that had we drafted lineman with the 3 picks in the 2nd round we would be reading an article about how we've only drafted 6 Wr's in that same time span and that often times 4 are on the field at the same time on offense.

Also, I find it funny that whenever we were forced to put in Heyer over the last 2 years we read about how "disastrous" it could be to JC's health but NOW we should put in young lineman and have growing pains.

This organization can't win with reporters like this.

Posted by: 6-2StackMonster | January 22, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

This organization can't win with reporters like this.

Posted by: 6-2StackMonster | January 22, 2009 9:05 PM
============================================
That's right. We need to use our 1st round pick on a new reporter, and the 3rd on a backup reporter.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 9:28 PM | Report abuse

That's right. We need to use our 1st round pick on a new reporter, and the 3rd on a backup reporter.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 22, 2009 9:28 PM | Report abuse
---
I would also like to trade for a few better fans, who don't sell season tickets, who know how and when to cheer loudest (when the D is on the field, 3rd and long, ect).

Posted by: alex35332 | January 23, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Now for the analysis!!
Please pay attention

Vinny and Synder are not the problem.
Yes their track record say they suck. Fine but they are not the problem.

This is how it works. Just like every team they know all the players in the NFL and college.

They sit down with everyone. Scout, medical, coaches.... Front office etc.. then they go over free agents and mark down the top players in college.

When they mark the top college players most NFL teams are similar....example.
When Calvin Jonshon came out he was the best and #1 player on most teams. If he was not #1 he was top 3

So far Vinny and Synder did nothing wrong.

Then they have another board saying what their needs are or who is best available. QB, RB, OT...ect...

This is maybe where you can say they mess up but....Vinny, Zorn and the whole world knows what the Redskins need this year. Its obvious!!! So they know too. There right there on the field everyday.

So this year the board will say: OT, DT, DE,....and so on. (not in order) yall can do that.

Then its combine and inviting players, and evaluating them but Most NFL teams are the same. We know and they know who runs the fastest 40, who jumps the highest, who's the slowest, who has the strongest arm.....

example: We knew just like everyteam Malcom Kelly had knee problems....so did every team in the NFL. But we knew just like every team how much talent the kid had so we took a chance knowing we just picked up another WR-Devin Thomas.

So up till now Vinny and Dan are doing the same thing every team does.

Now its time to draft. Now lets be clear...I don't think we've had great drafts lately.

Let's go back to last year. Our needs were clearly WR. and tall ones right? I hope yall remember that. Our line was ok. Check the stats.

So we addresed that. We went beyond addressing it when we picked up three pass chatching people just to make sure at least one pans out.

So I ask you now is it still Vinny or Synders fault the rokies did not play or produce? They gave our young QB young talented tall receivers to go with our star RB, then drated a OT in the 3 who should have been able to play.

I need someone to please tell me we had a bad draft last year after you saw what happended.

We traded down. Got 2 WR then a OT who then a CB then some more....Horton,.....and so on. The only bad pick was the punter...

So I ask you why did they not play. Think about your anser first. Please don't say they sucked because if we did not pick them another team would have picked them. Most NFL team have the same board. Give and take a couple of spaces. A 3rd OT should have been on the field. With just 13 TD this year in the air our 2WR and 1TE should have played more.

Whos fault is that. Is it Danny and Vinny. So if we bring someone else in...a big name GM what will happen. The same thing. Same process

Posted by: 1skinfan | January 23, 2009 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Now, why would Vinny "You can't just go take a need," Cerato draft a bunch of linemen just because we need them? We don't draft for need remember? Best available player...um, playa. If their draft board ranks a ball boy higher then a DL, we're taking the ball boy. Remember, don't panic, we have a plan.

Posted by: manbrute | January 23, 2009 10:10 AM | Report abuse

manbrute

I agree. But let me ask you a question

Let say Calvin Jonshon is the best available palyer

And you are in charge of New England who would you pick.

Note: you don't need a WR.

I think a team philosophy should change year to year depending on your team and how deep the draft is. Now last year we did need. We went down to get more picks then drafted 2WR and a TE in the 2ond

Then a lineman in the 3rd

Then a CB in the 4th

Then horton and the other safety and so on...who played well.

That was all need. If we wanted the best available last year we would not trade down.

The year we got Sean Taylor that was just best available. S was not a need that year. But are you mad we drafted him?

Posted by: 1skinfan | January 23, 2009 12:26 PM | Report abuse

1skinfan
You can pick situations in any draft where, need worked, where best available worked, where late round gem makes you look like a genius. I agree the draft philosophy should change. I believe you draft according to situation. That is the best way to put it. To say you take the best player available or you draft a need is silly because you do both. My post was aimed at ribbing the Cerato philosophy because he changes his tune to fit whatever poor choice he is trying to defend. Like for instance, he says this..."so you've gotta go with how you have them ranked, how you have them graded, and you can't just go take a need. The way that you can screw up your team is if you go draft a need, you're gonna get a bunch of guys at those positions but you're not gonna be happy with the results." Now, he's talking about his decisions in last years draft, but guess what, we drafted bunch of pass catchers who's results we're not real happy with and weren’t they a "need". I fully understand that hindsight is 20/20 but seriously, didn’t you pause even for a second when they drafted 2 wide receivers and a tight end all in the same round? I drink the Redskins cool aid at times and I tried to get in lock step when they did this. But, honestly in my mind I’m thinking, there's not one defensive linemen out there that we could have taken a chance on drafting with one of those picks?? I’m sorry, I want Vinney to do well, and I want Dan bring us a Super bowl but our drafting has been horrible way more then it has been good and we have had our lions share of really bad free agent signings...this all falls in Vinney lap, period. We hardly ever draft linemen. We always go for the sexy picks. Man, you can't go wrong with lineman, they are cheap and important. Young ones can be ready play earlier then most other positions and with a good line you can make a decent QB look great. (See Rypien 1992) and you dont need to pay a Clinton Portis to run the ball if you have some guys that can domnate the line of scrimmage, you can get a much cheaper back to run behind a good line and still be effective. I bet even Smoot would look better with some studs on the D line. I would feel much better about our team if we had someone that had an REAL eye for linemen in the scouting department and if we had front office that actually wanted to build our Team that way.

Posted by: manbrute | January 23, 2009 1:23 PM | Report abuse

psps23 wrote: "No, your back-up QBs should be QBs that are ready to step in at any given moment."

Exactly right. That's why Todd Collins is Joe Biden -- he can do the job, but at his age, might never again get the chance. Which makes Colt Brenna... Sarah Palin?

Nice to look at, but...

Posted by: Samson151 | January 24, 2009 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Boy Do The Redskins So Need A MANAGER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: cherrywatts42 | January 25, 2009 7:20 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company