Network News

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

Kiper: Shocked if Redskins draft QB at No. 4

ESPN draft analyst Mel Kiper said today that he'd be "shocked" if the Redskins selected a quarterback with the No. 4 pick of this month's draft.

"You don't bring in Donovan McNabb, I think, not to commit to him," Kiper said on a conference call with reporters. "He's 33 years old, you can commit to him for three or four years."

Kiper's latest mock draft has the Redskins selecting Oklahoma State tackle Russell Okung in the first round, a pick he thinks is essential if the team wants to get full value out of McNabb. 
"When you commit three or four years to McNabb, you better have some offensive line," Kiper said. 'This is arguably the worst offensive line in the NFL. You better use that fourth pick on an offensive tackle because you don't pick again until the fourth round. That's the problem when you give up these draft choices.Now all of a sudden, yeah, you've made the move for McNabb, you hope to get three, four, five years out of this guy. Bottom line is you better protect him or you won't get a year out of him. He'll get hit too much in the pocket. He won't be able to get the ball enough to Devin Thomas, Fred Davis to develop the young standouts."

Kiper said the bigger problem with the Redskins is their propensity to get rid of draft picks, thus limiting their maneuverability.

"The Redskins have to have -- they've boxed themselves into a corner really. Because when you make the trades that they make and you give up draft choices like they did in the supplemental draft last year giving up that early third round pick -- they didn't know it was going to be an early third; it turned out to be an early third. When you do that, you eliminate your chances of getting a quarterback.

"You eliminated your chances last year [on] Mark Sanchez. They didn't have enough to offer. That was the problem."

Kiper has Oklahoma's Sam Bradford as the draft's top overall pick, even though reports out of St. Louis indicate the Rams have made no decisions.

Kiper also again defended his draft-board placement of Jimmy Clausen ahead of Bradford. With the exception of a brief period in February, Kiper has consistently had Clausen rated higher.
"You got to commit to something," Kiper said. "You gotta stay with it."

He said there's no hidden agenda; simply his opinion.

"I have no other reason to go with Jimmy Clausen ... it has nothing to do with anything other than how he performs and how he plays."

Kiper said he likes Clausen's arm, his size, his experience under center and discredits questions about his maturity.

"The people that don't like him can't give me a reason why they don't," Kiper said.

By Rick Maese  |  April 7, 2010; 12:38 PM ET
 | Tags: Mel Kiper Redskins, Redskins Donovan McNabb, Redskins NFL draft, Redskins Russel Okung  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Haynesworth to skip Redskins voluntary workouts, attend mandatory sessions
Next: Shanahan: McNabb 'probably can play as long as he wants to play'

Comments

1st and goal Washington Redskins!

How I miss hearing Frank says that

Posted by: noonefromtampa | April 7, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

"The people that don't like him can't give me a reason why they don't," Kiper said.

------------------------------------------
How about, "Can't lead his team to victory"?

Posted by: RedSkinHead | April 7, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Hasn't Campbell learned most of the playbooks in the league by now?

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 12:54 PM

Seen them, yes. Learned them, no.

Posted by: League-Source | April 7, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

So true just dont like the guy. Wait maybe its cause he had a top ten recruiting class every year at ND and still could not win anything. Losing to Syracuse and Uconn in back to back years is not what you want to see out of a top qb prospect at a major school.

Posted by: Stu27 | April 7, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Ah, the Kiped Piper changes his tune, how lovely.

Duh, Mel....

Posted by: Anonynonandon | April 7, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Ahhh... Frank could be sunny... and Sonny could be frank... but neither could be Sam?

Posted by: bschaef12 | April 7, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I miss

Touchdown! Washington Redskins.


a lot more.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | April 7, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Quick stat:

In games in 2009 where Campbell had a 90+ QB rating, the Skins were 2-7.

In games in 2008 where Campbell had a 90+ QB rating, the Skins were 5-1.

In games in 2009 where Donovan had a 90+ QB rating, the iggles were 7-1.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

As mentioned on the last thread, I would like us to trade Albert for Nnamdi Asoumgha.

Mostly because I'd like to hear
Sam Huff try to pronounce Nnamdi Asoumgha

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Hasn't Campbell learned most of the playbooks in the league by now?
Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 12:54 PM

Seen them, yes. Learned them, no.

Posted by: League-Source | April 7, 2010 12:58 PM |

Excellent evaluation! LOL!

Posted by: bones21 | April 7, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

REGARDING HAYNESWORTH.....


Just another leftover mistake from Vinnie

Posted by: rmcpks73 |

No, drafting a lousy punter with a sixth round pick was a "leftover mistake" by the comedy team of Cerrato & Snyder.

The Haynesworth mess is the radioactive remains of a colossal F%$k-up.

Posted by: TheCork | April 7, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

"In games in 2009 where Campbell had a 90+ QB rating, the Skins were 2-7.
In games in 2008 where Campbell had a 90+ QB rating, the Skins were 5-1.
In games in 2009 where Donovan had a 90+ QB rating, the iggles were 7-1.
Posted by: zcezcest1"

If only we could convince the league to just play QBs and let the other players stay on the bench...

Posted by: Samson151 | April 7, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

In games in 2008 where Campbell had a 90+ QB rating, the Skins were 5-1.

In games in 2009 where Donovan had a 90+ QB rating, the iggles were 7-1.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:03 PM

Can you please let JC rest? You have your wish! JC is on his way out, at least let him leave with dignity if that is not too much to ask for.

Posted by: abxinc | April 7, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

No, drafting a lousy punter with a sixth round pick was a "leftover mistake" by the comedy team of Cerrato & Snyder.

The Haynesworth mess is the radioactive remains of a colossal F%$k-up.

Posted by: TheCork

I was in the minority on the Albert signing last year ... said it was too many eggs in too few baskets.

I'm in the minority again, prefer to keep him here. He did make the DL MUCH better in '09.

Its 2010. You need your teams coaches and mgmt to make sure prima donnas are ready to play and play hard. It can be done.

Because like it or not, great talent is often tricky to manage.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Maese, thanks for letting us know what Kiper thinks. That's like finding out I got a freckle on my ass.

Posted by: getitritegov | April 7, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Can you please let JC rest? You have your wish! JC is on his way out, at least let him leave with dignity if that is not too much to ask for.

Posted by: abxinc

Not my wish. I'm in the minority on this one. Would rather have kept Campbell and used the picks on OL (RT this year, C next). Should be good guys available in both drafts at those spots.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

so we didn't NEED to protect some schmo like cambell, orton or the great jimmy clausen; but we need to protect donovan?!?! Kiper is a clown. The o-line is the most glaring hole of this football team and may be the worst in the league (as it stands). Maybe he forgot that vinny was fired and isn't making the personnel decisions anymore?

Posted by: The_Dude_Abides1 | April 7, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

If they don't come out of the first round with a left tackle then I'm gonna start having some serious misgivings about the new MS/BA regime. Nothing else makes sense at this point. Now they can trade down for picks but they still have to get some oline. A QB would be insane.

Posted by: skinswest | April 7, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

"Bottom line is you better protect him or you won't get a year out of him. He'll get hit too much in the pocket."

Whoa. Didn't Mel read some of the bloggas comments. Shanny's coaching will make the line better. McNabb's super quick release will make Heyer and company into Pro Bowl caliber O-linemen.

Posted by: dcwun | April 7, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: BMACattack | April 7, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=5062971

In this post Clayton said that the Skins let Haynesworth know that he was being shopped.

Posted by: TWISI | April 7, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I dare Mike Shanahan to trade Albert Haynesworth! There are two untouchables on this team, and Haynesworth is one of them. Too much financial commitment. All these rumors are just what it is, rumors; Shanahan have a ton of problems on his hands filling the holes we presently have, creating more is simply insane!

Posted by: abxinc | April 7, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

pretty scathing commentary from b. baldinger.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/04/nfl-network-analyst-rips-donovan-mcnabb-says-eagles-should-be-ecstatic/1

Posted by: BMACattack

I'm not crazy about the trade, but at least I know McNabb is good QB.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Gotta say that I love having McNabb and think we got him on the cheap, but only having 1 draft pick in the first three rounds is a killer. Maybe someone is stupid enough (cough, Oakland) to give up a third for Campbell or someone will give up some picks for Haynesworth but it looks like Okung will be the only new Redskin the first 2 days of the draft.

Posted by: DCinSD | April 7, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

"Kiper said the bigger problem with the Redskins is their propensity to get rid of draft picks, thus limiting their maneuverability."


The all-knowing Guru states the obvious.

My questions is, how do you get to make serious coin telling folks what they already know?

Posted by: MistaMoe | April 7, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Since at least 40% of what PFT posts is total BS, I wouldn't put too much stock in what Florio says. For one thing, I'm not even sure he CAN give any of the money back under the current CBA. My take on it is that the 'Skins are trying to tell the other teams that "yes, he's available, but we're not going to give him away."

Posted by: rbpalmer | April 7, 2010 12:45 PM

If you have money, you can give it back. How would the league or the union enforce any provision that says you can't give it back? WHY would they enforce that type of provision. I'm not saying that Florio knows anything ... I don't think he would say that. He just threw out a theory that makes sense. Whether its BS or a theory or an opinion, whatever. If it makes sense and its simple, then Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanations are usually correct.

Peeps threw out theories, opinions, hunches, vibes, whatever makes sense all the time. For the stuff that really does makes sense, it becomes the 'conventional wisdom.'

In order to get PAID for repeating conventional wisdom, i.e., that stuff that sounds like it makes sense ... like changing your BIG BOARD from having the Skins picking Jimmy Claussen to having the Skins pick Russell Okung, you really have to have a very large helmet of hair.

That said, Big Hair is wrong. Okung will be picked by the Lions.

Posted by: dcsween | April 7, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

No doubt the Skins talent on the OL was pretty poor last year. But what I wonder is this -- why did the OL get beat so often by guys that were unblocked?

Its one thing to see a DE beat his man with a good move or power. But its different when the guy comes in untouched. I never saw a season in which a QB got hit so much by guys coming in untouched as with Campbell last year.

That's not being physically outplayed, that's being mentally outplayed.

I know it seems like a modest hope, but I do hope that some of our OL struggles were due to a bad OL scheme, not just bad talent.
So is that on Bugel, the OC, Rabach, the play caller or Campbell?

Whatever it is, this is something Shanahan can fix.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

The Raiders have strong needs at QB, DT, DE, and S/CB. Skins should offer the following: Campbell, Haynesworth, Carter and Landry, in exchange for Oakland's 1st and 2nd round pick (8th and 39th respectfully). Skins should draft as follows: #4 Okung, #8 E.Berry if available (if not then Iupati OG), #39 (if we get Berry @ #8) Jon Asamoah OG (if we get Iupati @ #8) then either Nate Allen S or Chad Jones S. Note: Oakland has Langston Walker OT 6'8" 366lbs (he is servicable for 2 more years). We can add depth at OLine in later rounds. If Suh drops to #4 we must take him and pick up either Okung, Bulaga, Williams or Davis for the OLine. If this happens we will win the East and make some noise in the playoffs for years to come.

Posted by: changer2 | April 7, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Albert Hayneswroth = Sean Gilbert

Posted by: MistaMoe | April 7, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

so Mel thinks this team has the worst OL in the league, spends draft picks frivolously, and has backed themselves into a corner with this trade.....interesting.......

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | April 7, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Kiper's stating, to me, the obvious but some folks just want to complain when others point this out.

The old 'the emperor's naked but don't say it'.

Maybe they've got a great plan to fix these areas. Let's hope so

But fix it with what is my question.


Posted by: SteveMG | April 7, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

interesting comment on McNabb last season, from footballoutsiders--

"McNabb's problem in 2009 was third down. Overall, Philadelphia's pass DVOA ranked fourth among all teams on first down, 15th on second down, and 22nd on third down. That's actually a good sign that McNabb will play better with the Redskins. Our research has shown that third-down performance is a lot more variable than first- or second-down performance, so when a quarterback struggles on third down in one season, that actually suggests improvement the next year. After all, with basically the same offense, McNabb had the opposite splits in 2008: He was best on third down and worst on first down."

Posted by: Samson151 | April 7, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

I was in the minority on the Albert signing last year ... said it was too many eggs in too few baskets.

I'm in the minority again, prefer to keep him here. He did make the DL MUCH better in '09.

Its 2010. You need your teams coaches and mgmt to make sure prima donnas are ready to play and play hard. It can be done.

Because like it or not, great talent is often tricky to manage.

Posted by: zcezcest1

First of all I respect your opinion. And I was against the price paid for AH last year.

He DID improve the defense when he played. Mostly by freeing Orakpo and Carter to rush.

But it's hard for coaches to influence prima donnas when they are no shows at conditioning sessions and (possibly) a no show at "voluntary" three day camps where they learn the new systems.

I also think Haynesworth isn't a good 3-4 fit. He hates NG, and as a DE, it seems like he's more interested in disrupting than responsibilities.

I'm also serious when I say his new boat is an issue. He says it will do 155. And he's installing new props to boost it over 180 MPH.

He may be untradable, but if anything approaching a good deal arrives, I'd just as soon he be someone else's problem.

Posted by: TheCork | April 7, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

I'm w/ Baldy on this one, a bit. Mebbe not as harsh in my criticism of McNabb, but in my estimation of how he'll perform in his division.

Posted by: DikShuttle | April 7, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

"I have no other reason to go with Jimmy Clausen ... it has nothing to do with anything other than how he performs and how he plays."

This is an admission by Kiper that he never played football and probably that he's not even that good at Madden.

Kiper is also wrong about the Skins having the worst offensive line. The right answer was the Cheeves. The Skins line became the worst due to injuries to Randy Thomas and Chris Samuels plus shabby depth. Before those two were gone, the line was solidly in the middle of the pack.

The Big Board, like all mock drafts, falls apart if the first pick is wrong and even if they get the first one right (like if Jake Long signs BEFORE the draft), it falls apart by the 3rd or 4th pick. Whoever got Orakpo right at #13 was lucky.

None of these fabulous mockery drafts are going to be close to right ... Skins will find a trade partner for the #4 spot before they have to make it.

Book it.

Posted by: dcsween | April 7, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Dear Eagles fans: Is it wise to eat while watching Donovan Mcnabb on Sunday afternoons? I mean, does he throw up in every game and how often per year? Thanks, Redskins fan.

Posted by: lszovati | April 7, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

moe, SGilbert got the team 2 first round picks, so in that regard, I hope you're right....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | April 7, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

"That said, Big Hair is wrong. Okung will be picked by the Lions.Posted by: dcsween"

I wondered about that possibility. Rumor was that they'd move Jeff Backus inside or failing that, Cherilus to guard. Plus I have a phobia about drafting big interior d-linemen in the top five because the motherfreakers are about as fragile as Wedgewood.

Nonetheless, I think they succumb to the hype and take Suh.

Posted by: Samson151 | April 7, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

"SGilbert got the team 2 first round picks, so in that regard, I hope you're right...."

The league is different now, nobody would do such a thing today.

Posted by: MistaMoe | April 7, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

If I'm DET, I take the best OT I can.

Didn't Stafford have a separated shoulder injury last year and miss some games? DET has got $50million or some such number sunk into the guy. I'd think protecting Stafford would be more critical than a great NT.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Red-

I don't often drink beer but when I do...

Quantity: Keers (Coors) Light
Quality: Guinness

Since I'm know for my sausage: I'll bring those
Since your wife is known for her buns: She can bring those sweet buns
Since you are known for your many rolls: You can bring those

Don't worry about L-S...the only thing he drinks is prune juice and Metamucil

So I'll see you this Sunday morning @ 9:00 am. If I'm late just hang there in your #56 jersey patiently.

Posted by: Diesel44 | April 7, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

The league is different now, nobody would do such a thing today.

Posted by: MistaMoe

Unless you're trading Jay Cutler or Jared Allen.

Posted by: psps23 | April 7, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

""The people that don't like him can't give me a reason why they don't," Kiper said."

I think there are legit reasons for a team to stay away from Clausen, but they have more to do with team approach than his ability. He needs to play in an offense that emphasizes the Patriot-style deep game. He's not a good fit for a WCO, which lot of teams play. You're planning to throw short, you want Bradford, or McCoy, or Pike. You're planning to roll out a lot, you should look at LeFevour.

Posted by: Samson151 | April 7, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Nonetheless, I think they succumb to the hype and take Suh.


Posted by: Samson151 | April 7, 2010 1:37 PM

I paid attention to Suh in a few games last year before I even knew about him. If an interior d linemen stands out to me in a game without me knowing who he is before hand then he is a beast.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | April 7, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

psps23

"Unless you're trading Jay Cutler or Jared Allen."

Point-taken.

Posted by: MistaMoe | April 7, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: noonefromtampa | April 7, 2010 12:55 PM

Even if he was still calling games, you would miss hearing him saying that.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | April 7, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

The Haynesworth mess is the radioactive remains of a colossal F%$k-up.

Posted by: TheCork | April 7, 2010 1:07 PM


I don't agree.

I think the "Haynesworth mess" is largely of the redskins making. They have mishandled this opportunity from day one, and continue to make bad decisions on how to get the best production from him. It's not like he's some brat #1 draft pick who is holding out for crazy money and complaining about the scheme he is being asked to play in without ever setting foot on a pro field.

This guy is one of the most feared defensive players in football, a two-time All Pro and the best Defensive Tackle in the game. He received these accolades by being a destructive force, penetrating the backfield and causing mayhem for other teams offense. How many DT's have had 18.5 sacks in 3 years - including last year where we had him playing gap control?

That's where the problem starts. We misrepresented (lied to him) how we were planning to use him to pursued him to sign with us. Then used him incorrectly. WHY? What the hell were we thinking? Why get a destroyer and havoc maker and put him on a leash and tell him to control a single gap in the line? Turn the guy lose already!

We should be building a 4-3 defense AROUND him. Look at the elevated production we got from Carter last year, and do you think it's a coincidence that Orakpo turned in those kind of rookie numbers?

Elite, game changing D linemen do not grow on trees. Why do we continue to jerk him around and poke him with sharp sticks? Why are we switching to a scheme our BEST player doesn't like, and that we don't even have the right personnel for?

Albert claimed that he is training on his own to get back in the kind of shape he was in the last two years in Tennessee - the years he had 14.5 sacks and was All Pro. If that's what he's doing LET HIM! It's only a big deal if we make it one. So why did we make it one?

We all need to CALM DOWN and let this play out a little. If he shows up in shape and starts knocking Guards and Centers on their asses, then shut up, take the leash off and let the guy do what he does best - Destroy the other team. Last year sucked in so many ways - but it's over It's time to hit the re-set button and focus on getting our best players in the best position to make plays and then turn them loose.

Seriously, would have been happy seeing Albert in an Eagles helmet lining up over Rabach twice a year for the next 5 years?

We have a lot of holes on this team. We also have the most dominant DT in football on this team. Let's get him happy and fill the other holes and stop F'ing around.

Posted by: edvar | April 7, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

I'm also serious when I say his new boat is an issue. He says it will do 155. And he's installing new props to boost it over 180 MPH.

He may be untradable, but if anything approaching a good deal arrives, I'd just as soon he be someone else's problem.

Posted by: TheCork | April 7, 2010 1:33 PM

If he stays with the 'Skins he can run that boat on the Chesapeake Bay. If we trade him to Tennessee he's landlocked. He has his choice of several man-made TVA lakes: Cordell Hull Lake, J. Percy Priest Lake -- stuff like that. He hits 185 on those lakes and he's in someone's lake front living room.

I wonder if he thinks that far ahead?

Posted by: League-Source | April 7, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

So, in other words, according to Kiper the Redskins are screwed if Okung is drafted in one the first three picks. One hopes that Shanahallen are on top of this...

Posted by: acoberst1 | April 7, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

"I paid attention to Suh in a few games last year before I even knew about him. If an interior d linemen stands out to me in a game without me knowing who he is before hand then he is a beast."

Suh might just turn into another Glen Dorsey.

Memba him?

Posted by: MistaMoe | April 7, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

"Kiper is also wrong about the Skins having the worst offensive line. The right answer was the Cheeves. The Skins line became the worst due to injuries to Randy Thomas and Chris Samuels plus shabby depth. Before those two were gone, the line was solidly in the middle of the pack."

Not so. They knew both players were vulnerable and took the risk anyway. A foolish one.

Posted by: Samson151 | April 7, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

good point, edvar. it might be the only point.

Posted by: DikShuttle | April 7, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

No doubt the Skins talent on the OL was pretty poor last year. But what I wonder is this -- why did the OL get beat so often by guys that were unblocked?

Its one thing to see a DE beat his man with a good move or power. But its different when the guy comes in untouched. I never saw a season in which a QB got hit so much by guys coming in untouched as with Campbell last year.

That's not being physically outplayed, that's being mentally outplayed.

I know it seems like a modest hope, but I do hope that some of our OL struggles were due to a bad OL scheme, not just bad talent.
So is that on Bugel, the OC, Rabach, the play caller or Campbell?

Whatever it is, this is something Shanahan can fix.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 1:31 PM
------------------------------------------
I read somewhere that they were not often in a situation where they could change the protection schemes at the line. They probably did this at varying times last season because they were starting guys who didn't have all of the protection scheme audibles down. Teams like the GI-ants use overload blitzes a lot and if you can't change protection or the play, someone is coming in clean.

Still, you can hang a few sacks on protection schemes but there were way too many times when guys were overpowered or outmaneuvered and that falls solely on the shoulders of the blocker. So, they were probably not as bad as they looked but they were still pretty darned bad...

Posted by: RedSkinHead | April 7, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Quantity: Keers (Coors) Light

Posted by: Diesel44 | April 7, 2010 1:42 PM

Red -- See? I told you the dude goes for cheap, generic beer.

Posted by: League-Source | April 7, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Quantity: Keers (Coors) Light

Posted by: Diesel44 | April 7, 2010 1:42 PM

Red -- See? I told you the dude goes for cheap, generic beer.

Posted by: League-Source | April 7, 2010 1:58 PM
------------------------------------------
Cheap but good for you. It's an important part of every breakfast...

Posted by: RedSkinHead | April 7, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

We should keep Big Al and run a 4-4 defense.

Posted by: HokiesSkins | April 7, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

edvar -- I'm close to your position. Shanahan is using Albert to make a point. I think its foolish. Great talent is tough to manage in some cases, but you do it because it is great talent -- and these guys make a huge difference.

Randy Moss, TO, Portis are all on this list -- great talent, but problematic. Each one has been very productive and been key to their teams' success.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

"Kiper is also wrong about the Skins having the worst offensive line. The right answer was the Cheeves. The Skins line became the worst due to injuries to Randy Thomas and Chris Samuels plus shabby depth. Before those two were gone, the line was solidly in the middle of the pack."

++++


Sween, you've been on this blog long enough to remember that last year at this time numerous posters were shouting that we will need an entire new line in 1-2 seasons because:

- Samuels hadn't finished the last three seasons
- Randy Thomas had a plate in his neck
- Jansen was done and Heyer was a scrub

Most predicted that Samuels and Thomas would be done after four games. It was SO OBVIOUS to everyone what was going to happen. So to say the would have been good if they had stayed healthy is nonsense. There was no way they were going to stay healthy, and they made no plans to fix it.

They did have the worst line in football, they new it and did nothing. But if it makes you feel better, we can call it the second worst line in football. Either way it smells the same.

Posted by: edvar | April 7, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Cheap but good for you. It's an important part of every breakfast...

Posted by: RedSkinHead | April 7, 2010 2:00 PM

Life is too short to drink cheap beer, especially Diesel44's. You do the math -- dude was born in 1944 -- living on borrowed time.

Posted by: League-Source | April 7, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

"How about, "Can't lead his team to victory"?

Posted by: RedSkinHead | April 7, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse "

Spoken like someone who never saw ND play. Their defense was utterly abysmal. In his career, Clausen threw for at least 240 yards 18 times, more than 300 yards 10 times, and greater than 400 yards 3 times. He had three-plus touchdowns 10 times, seven of which came in his first 22 starts - his freshman and sophomore seasons. In addition, he had at least one touchdown in 13 consecutive games, at least 246 yards in 13 of his last 15 games, including a current streak of eight straight games. Clausen completed at least 70 percent of his passes nine times (minimum of 18 attempts), including twice with 40-plus passing attempts.

In three of their six losses last season, ND scored 30 or more points. Clausen, in those games, was 78-117 for 1005yds, 10tds and 0ints (average 26-38, 335yds 3.33tds, 0int). Short of him suiting up on defense, I don't know what else he could have done to get more wins.

Posted by: mocoirish | April 7, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

I read somewhere that they were not often in a situation where they could change the protection schemes at the line. They probably did this at varying times last season because they were starting guys who didn't have all of the protection scheme audibles down. Teams like the GI-ants use overload blitzes a lot and if you can't change protection or the play, someone is coming in clean.

Still, you can hang a few sacks on protection schemes but there were way too many times when guys were overpowered or outmaneuvered and that falls solely on the shoulders of the blocker. So, they were probably not as bad as they looked but they were still pretty darned bad...

Posted by: RedSkinHead

No question our OL talent was bad -- and that was the core issue.

But it seemed to me that our scheme failed as well. I did want to understand why so many guys came in that were barely grazed by an OL or simply untouched. Thanks for the insight.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

In games where the QB played well enough to win in 2009, the Redskins were 4-12, so there's your assessment.

In games where the O Line played well enough to win, giving the QB time and opening holes for the running back... Oh, that's right: They had Zero games like that. forget it.

In games where the Coach called wide runs on short yardage, the Skins were 4-12. Food for thought.

Games where the offense was a high school version of the west coast offense, the Skins were also 4-12.

Man, seems like they stunk. Not to mention the games the Defense lost (Detroit).

Posted by: Thinker_ | April 7, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Red-

I don't often drink beer but when I do...

Quantity: Keers (Coors) Light
Quality: Guinness

Since I'm know for my sausage: I'll bring those
Since your wife is known for her buns: She can bring those sweet buns
Since you are known for your many rolls: You can bring those

Don't worry about L-S...the only thing he drinks is prune juice and Metamucil

So I'll see you this Sunday morning @ 9:00 am. If I'm late just hang there in your #56 jersey patiently.


Posted by: Diesel44 | April 7, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

LOL. That lot is going to be overflowing, how will you find each other?

Posted by: frediefritz | April 7, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

courtesy beep

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

edvar -- I'm close to your position. Shanahan is using Albert to make a point. I think its foolish. Great talent is tough to manage in some cases, but you do it because it is great talent -- and these guys make a huge difference.

Randy Moss, TO, Portis are all on this list -- great talent, but problematic. Each one has been very productive and been key to their teams' success.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 7, 2010 2:02 PM |

I remember Pat Riley talking about the challenges of coaching superstars after he left coaching the LA Lakers to all those championships. He basically said - Hell yeah you give the elite guys special treatment. Doesn't make it unfair because you also demand more from them. The trick is knowing who the elite guys are, and who is the supporting cast.

If I just handed a 25(?) million dollar check to an elite game changing athlete, I'd be making darn sure that all efforts were aligned to get the maximum production from him and that he was happy. He has a guaranteed contract and all of your money - what else are you gonna do? Bench him? Trade him? Why? You just got him.

Posted by: edvar | April 7, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Elite, game changing D linemen do not grow on trees. Why do we continue to jerk him around and poke him with sharp sticks? Why are we switching to a scheme our BEST player doesn't like, and that we don't even have the right personnel for?

Albert claimed that he is training on his own to get back in the kind of shape he was in the last two years in Tennessee - the years he had 14.5 sacks and was All Pro. If that's what he's doing LET HIM! It's only a big deal if we make it one. So why did we make it one?

We all need to CALM DOWN and let this play out a little. If he shows up in shape and starts knocking Guards and Centers on their asses, then shut up, take the leash off and let the guy do what he does best - Destroy the other team. Last year sucked in so many ways - but it's over It's time to hit the re-set button and focus on getting our best players in the best position to make plays and then turn them loose.

Seriously, would have been happy seeing Albert in an Eagles helmet lining up over Rabach twice a year for the next 5 years?

We have a lot of holes on this team. We also have the most dominant DT in football on this team. Let's get him happy and fill the other holes and stop F'ing around.

Posted by: edvar | April 7, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Concur 100%.

Posted by: frediefritz | April 7, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Okung would appear to be the logical pick; maybe Trent Williams if Okung is taken. There is still a need to replace Heyer as a starter and some depth for injury sake.

Posted by: kahlua87 | April 7, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I hope ShanAllen tricks some teams (umm... let's say Seattle, Buffalo or Oakland) regarding drafting a QB and give away their picks to move down, get additional picks and still have a chance to draft Okung between 6-10. Similar to what happen to Brian "Sack-O" Orakpo. He was projected to be taken at 4 or 5 but slid down to 13th overall.

Man, I hope the Skins have a good smokescreen plan! HTTR!

Posted by: datruth21 | April 7, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Excuse me. Did Kiper say we had "young standouts" playing WR? Huh? Has he watched any Redskins games recently? The only thing that "stands out" is that we wasted high draft picks on immature receivers who can't get open.

Posted by: InTheMiddle | April 7, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

There won't a tackle worth the #4 pick if Detroit takes Okung. Skins might have to select Berry with the 4th pick if they can't trade down.

Posted by: coparker5 | April 7, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

thanks Mel, Draft couldnt be more of crapshoot till you weigh in. Parcells once said, the draft is 50-50.

Here is an interesting article about how often them prognosticator bare out.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2707_The_dismal_mock-draft_scorecard.html

Posted by: gatsu | April 7, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

i just can't believe he called Devin Thomas and Fred Davis standouts

Posted by: goose33 | April 7, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Getting rid of Hertzog was well overdue. He made many mistakes and having met him, I can say he is an arrogant buffoon.

Posted by: TJDemo | April 7, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company