Network News

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

Edwards: Offensive line must be Shanahan's priority

Earlier this year, I spoke with Herman Edwards, former coach in Kansas City and with the New York Jets, and we talked about rebuilding. At the time, Jim Zorn was on the hot seat, and Edwards was pointing out that the team had put itself in a hole because philosophically, it kept plugging leaks, rather than building any sort of foundation.

"It don't matter who the coach is," Edwards said back in October. "Right, wrong or indifferent, you're not gonna win the NFC East this way. You just can't."

So with Mike Shanahan on board, I was curious to hear Edwards' thoughts now. Turns out, one man can make a difference -- if that one man can change the team's personnel philosophy. Edwards thinks Shanahan will take a methodical approach to building a roster that suits his system.

"I think Mike's going to be realistic, and I think ownership has to be realistic also," said Edwards, an analyst for ESPN. "I think they've got some pieces obviously, especially defensively. They held up pretty well on that side. ... But offensively, he's going to look at this offensive line. That's the first thing he'll look at. Mike understands as well as anyone, that you can have a great quarterback, but if you want a chance to play good football, you've got to have a good offensive line."

Can you hear the angels singing?

OK, more from Edwards: "The next thing for him will be: Is the quarterback he has
there now, is that his guy? That'll be interesting."

I noted to Edwards that the Redskins hold the fourth overall pick in the draft, and that barring a rule change, Shanahan can only select one quarterback or one offensive linemen with that pick, not both.

"He understands that whoever is playing behind center, he knows no matter what happens, he's going to have to run the ball to protect him. And to do that, you've got to have an offensive line," Edwards said. "That's the right way to go. Because at the end of the day, that's the foundation of your football team, your offensive line. And then from there, you can always go get a receiver -- there's always going to be a receiver out there, always a runner out there. Quarterback is hard to find. And offensive linemen who fit your system, they're also hard to find. But when you find those five guys, if they can stay healthy, you've got a chance."

Which is something the Redskins haven't really had in a long time.

By Rick Maese  |  January 8, 2010; 10:47 AM ET
Categories:  Mike Shanahan  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Hit the links: Redskins-Broncos trades; Brees speaks out
Next: Shanahan to meet with assistants again Monday

Comments

Make it so, number one!

Posted by: gringoinmiami | January 8, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

The name should stay but I would be all for new uniforms, are uniforms are boring.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 8, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

HELLO! you have to improve the offensive line to WIN THE GAME!

Posted by: moseley_brian | January 8, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Repost:

His coverage skills are at least equal to Landry's, but he's a more sound tackler. He gets into the backfield around the LOS, he's physical, and he's shown a knck for playmaking and being around the ball.

He's had way fewer starts than Landry, so I think there's still a well of untapped potential for us to see. And he seems to be much more of a consummate team/coach guy than Landry.

Like I said, I don't think Landry's a bum, and I don't want to trade him b/c of one "bad" season.

I want to trade him b/c this team needs draft picks, and when I look at the roster, I see depth at the safety position and Landry is really the only guy who could fetch some decent picks in a trade.

Posted by: p1funk


So Landry isn't physical? That's probably the problem with him, he'd rather use strength rather than technique to make a play. That can be coached up with the right defensive coordinator, secondary coach, and safeties coach.

"...he seems to be much more of a consummate team/coach guy than Landry."

What are you basing this on? Because Landry celebrates after a tackle that still resulted in the first down?

All that stuff you named about Horton, Landry does the same thing. I think among Redskins fans, Horton is still "eating" off that New Orleans game from his rookie season. I think fans also have a tendency to vastly overrate players on the roster.

Horton is good. Yes, but to trade a guy who you spent the number six pick on, to trade a guy who may have some holes in his game but who can get coached up or may figure it out for himself would be a HUGE mistake.

What if that second pick you trade Landry for is a bust, and Landry goes to another team, matures, and becomes an all-pro for the next decade? I don't know about you, but I think I'll experiencing symptoms like uncontrollable crying and frequent vomiting.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 8, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Moe,

I have a list of QBs they just aren't hitting the draft until nexy year. I don't like these QBs in this draft. I think we should build the line this year and look out for draft steals in positions of need.


My list includes Christian Ponder. I really think he's going to be a great WCO QB. He has a quick release, makes quick decisions, and is deadly accurate on quick passes. He is the opposite of JC. He lacks arm strength and mobility though. He is the true anti JC.

I'd also rather have Jake Locker or Pat Devlin more than anyone in this draft.

We could also give a few undrafted guys a look this year. I'd like to see Kafka from Northwestern.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 8, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 8, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

trade down, trade down, trade down

Posted by: CBT2 | January 8, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

trade down, trade down, trade down Posted by: CBT2

2nd that emotion! Trade Down and gather additional picks. I'm gonna preach it from the mountaintop:

TRADE DOWN AND GATHER ADDITIONAL PICKS! Get 2 or 3 O Lineman for the price of 1 instead of the other way around.

Show that you learned something after all these years.

Posted by: dovelevine | January 8, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

What is Randy Thomas' contract situation? Clearly we need to draft or find via FA the long term answer at RG, but do not discount him being a good stopgap measure in 2010. I understand that he's had three season enders, but a broken leg and two torn triceps...seems freakish more than injury proned. I bet he is working his tail off to make an impact next season.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse
It's my understanding that RT is signed through 2013. And I agree that the injuries themselves are not career-threatening. But remember he also had a neck injury, that could threaten his career. I don't think we can count on RT, but we need to include him as a possibility for 2010.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Trading down requires someone willing to trade up, which I think is pretty rare historically at the #4 spot.

Take Okung (or Berry if Okung is gone) and you get a legitimate prospect to fill a need.

Posted by: swowra | January 8, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

trade down, trade down, trade down Posted by: CBT2

2nd that emotion! Trade Down and gather additional picks. I'm gonna preach it from the mountaintop:

TRADE DOWN AND GATHER ADDITIONAL PICKS! Get 2 or 3 O Lineman for the price of 1 instead of the other way around.

Show that you learned something after all these years.

Posted by: dovelevine | January 8, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse
When you have the chance to get the best LT in the draft, take him! That's what I've learned from watching Chris Samuels.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

agreed CBT2.. Trade down for multiple OLine guys..like Skins did in 81 for May and Grimm.
JC remains the question.. I think Zorn's opinion (carefully veiled on his way out) will be considered given his reputation as the top QB Coach in the league.
If, Shanny decides JC will "never get it" and Skins trade down, for Oline depth, can they still get a Restricted Free Agent QB like Kyle Orton? Compensation picks come from current year or next year?
Kyles 4th Qtr ==================================

trade down, trade down, trade down Posted by: CBT2

2nd that emotion! Trade Down and gather additional picks. I'm gonna preach it from the mountaintop:

TRADE DOWN AND GATHER ADDITIONAL PICKS! Get 2 or 3 O Lineman for the price of 1 instead of the other way around.

Show that you learned something after all these years.

Posted by: dovelevine | January 8, 2010 11:07 AM

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

A lot of peeps must be off work today. Must've saw the two hour school delay and said: "F_ck it" kept the children out of school and stayed home with them.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 8, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

What if that second pick you trade Landry for is a bust, and Landry goes to another team, matures, and becomes an all-pro for the next decade? I don't know about you, but I think I'll experiencing symptoms like uncontrollable crying and frequent vomiting.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 8, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

I suppose this could happen. So could alien abduction, pigs flying and winning the lottery.

Dude's a disappointment on the fast track to being an all out bust. His apologists always say the same thing- "he's a freak, a great athlete" Really? I'm not sure who clocked him at 4.4, but he is routinely outrun by WR's and RB's. And yes he is a me-first kinda guy by most accounts. Maybe he will go elsewhere and succeed, but it doesn't look likely to happen here...what could've been if 21 hadn't been senselessly murdered.

I'd take a 2nd round pick in a NY minute if some team were foolish enough to offer it.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

So according to Herm Edwards, most of RI Nation has more "football smarts" than Vinny the Rat. Since we have been saying o-line for at least 2-3 years.

With all the underclassmen declaring early, there are at least 6-8 OTs that will go in the first 45 picks.

Trading down would be nice, but I don't see a team with a must have need trading up to us. Unless, SF really wants Clausen, he is still on the board and they trade up for him.

Posted by: noonefromtampa | January 8, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

i dont understand what the fascination with berry is...he plays SS and we have doughty, horton, and landry (who should be playing SS instead of FS)

if okung isn't there, trade back...if the trade back option isn't available then the skins take the best player available at a position of need warranting the fourth pick overall

Posted by: AhsanFamily | January 8, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Thanks Fredie, good point about the neck injury on RT. And I totally agree that you MUST TAKE OKUNG if he's there. I think Berry is a great talent but you have to think need as well as ability. Okung is a slam dunk not only in terms of filling our biggest need but is arguably one of the top 5 overall talents in this draft too.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

sf got burned with alex smith, they're not trading up to get another qb....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | January 8, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

How about trading Moss for Marshall straight up. Denver is looking to get rid of him. If Shanny likes him, that might make sense. I'm not crazy about Marshall's attitude, but he's a great wr.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse


Tell Denver if they throw in a 7th round pick we will do the deal

Posted by: alex35332

Unless you are trading with the Raiders, both teams need to benefit. Moss isn't close to the receiver Marshall is. Denver would want us to send a draft pick


Posted by: 1965skinsfan | January 8, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse
But Denver is trying to get rid of him, and SMoss would be good for a year or two. I think they may take someone as opposed to getting nothing.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

i dont understand what the fascination with berry is...he plays SS and we have doughty, horton, and landry (who should be playing SS instead of FS)


Posted by: AhsanFamily | January 8, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

I thought Berry played FS. And the fascination with him is that he has good cover skills and is a ball hawk.

Dude is real good, if you want a player in the mold of an Ed Reed than you would take Berry.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | January 8, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

"i dont understand what the fascination with berry is...he plays SS and we have doughty, horton, and landry (who should be playing SS instead of FS)"

I stand corrected, AshanFamily! Berry does play SS. My bad-- for some reason, I assumed he was a FS. I watched him play a couple games this year and was impressed with his power and ball hawking skills (that head-on collision with Tebow was great). Maybe he can switch to FS, but we have so many other needs, safety is pretty low on the list.

Posted by: swowra | January 8, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I like trading down if RO is gone (and assuming of course we have a suitor). Must tender JC to ensure he doesn't walk without compensation and must get Okung. If Shanny and Allen get those two things done, I will be thrilled.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

You trade down guys crack me up you act like it's just that easy, like you don't need a trade partner willing to move up into the 4th spot, and pay alot of money to who ever they pick.

Mr. Goodell this is Mike Shannahan we would like to trade down from our pick make that happen please.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 8, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

i dont understand what the fascination with berry is...he plays SS and we have doughty, horton, and landry (who should be playing SS instead of FS)

-When you watch him play you see why there is a fascination, this guy has it. He wil be a stud at whatever saftey position they play him at unlike LL who is strictly a SS.

Posted by: Stu27 | January 8, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Christian Ponder. I really think he's going to be a great WCO QB. He has a quick release, makes quick decisions, and is deadly accurate on quick passes. He is the opposite of JC. He lacks arm strength and mobility though. He is the true anti JC.

===================================================

the skins already have a qb with all the attributes that you have mentioned and his name is colt brennan!!!!

after watching last night's bcs game it looks like colt mccoy is seriously hurt... bradford=frail= 1 hit away from having a career end before it starts... clausen= bad toe= no mobility... mccoy= hurt... tony pike= perfect but injury prone... sooooooooooooo, don't draft a qb w/ a history of injury problems with the 4th pick!!! the last time the skins drafted a qb that high he was beat out by some 7th rounder who ended up playing for 15 yrs in the nfl who left dc after he ran his head into a wall to celebrate a td!!! don't let history repeat itself!!!

okung or a trade sounds good to me...

Posted by: jimmy_the_crickett | January 8, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Way too early to comapre Bery to Reed. But he's apparently fast and quick enough to play CB. Sure, he's good. Sure, safeties are important. But you know what's more important? The guy protecting your QB's blindside. WAY more.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

its cool, yea he does play SS although i have seen him play FS at times, i just think taking berry is a luxury pick rather than a need pick

Posted by: AhsanFamily | January 8, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Hypothetical situation of the day:

Shanahan decides the only way the team is going to get to the next level is by doing a total re-tooling of the offensive line to exclusion of other roles. He re-signs Campbell thinking he won't focus on a new QB for at least another year. He re-signs Portis thinking he won't be bothered searching for a running back and will just make do with what he has. There are minimal changes in personnel on defense. Then he drafts heavily on the offensive line using maybe four picks. He signs a couple of free agent offensive linemen.

So, the question is, how would this team do next year if Shanahan went "all in" on the offensive line?

Posted by: RedSkinHead | January 8, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

I don't understand the fascination with Marshall. Shanahan was going to dump him because of poor attitude.

I'd rather have MK & DT as the WR with Moss in the slot taking ARE's place.

I think a quick slant to Moss with a safety trying to cover could be a great matchup for us.

We have a pretty decent receiving corps with MK, DT, Moss, MM and CC, FD. If the QB has time to get them the ball.

The question is the evaluation Shananhan puts on Campbell. Does he think he can be effective with a rebuit oline.

Posted by: noonefromtampa | January 8, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Tony Scheffler, #88Tightend, Denver Broncos
Height: 6-5 Weight: 250Draft: 2006 - 2nd round (29th pick) by the Denver Broncos.
The only logic I can see in acquiring him is to use him as one of the smaller athletic lineman Shanahan wants.

Posted by: abxinc | January 8, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

You trade down guys crack me up you act like it's just that easy, like you don't need a trade partner willing to move up into the 4th spot, and pay alot of money to who ever they pick.

Mr. Goodell this is Mike Shannahan we would like to trade down from our pick make that happen please.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 8, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse
Yeah, I agree, Flounder. The only way someone would trade up to #4 is if they want a particular guy, say Clausen, or Suh, or McCoy or Okung, who slips to the 4th slot, and they are afraid that either the Skins or Chief's will take that guy with the 4th or 5th selection. And if it's Okung, then we should take him, unless the other team is willing to part with the ranch, like a 1st and 2nd and 5th.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

"So, the question is, how would this team do next year if Shanahan went "all in" on the offensive line?" -- RedSkinHead

8-8(-ish). I think it might take the better part of the first season to get the Shanahan program working, even with an improved o-line. Recall the first season of St. Joe.

Posted by: manlius1 | January 8, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

i dont understand what the fascination with berry is...he plays SS and we have doughty, horton, and landry (who should be playing SS instead of FS)

-When you watch him play you see why there is a fascination, this guy has it. He wil be a stud at whatever saftey position they play him at unlike LL who is strictly a SS.

Posted by: Stu27 | January 8, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

hey stu...ive seen him play...hes definitely great...i guess my words were taken out of context...just wondering what the fascination is with drafting berry when the skins dont have the luxury to make that type of pick at this point

Posted by: AhsanFamily | January 8, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

its cool, yea he does play SS although i have seen him play FS at times, i just think taking berry is a luxury pick rather than a need pick

Posted by: AhsanFamily | January 8, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Agree with this under Monte the safties have a lot more coverage assignments, think a college tampa 2.

I like most skins fans have a unhealthy obsession with the saftey position

Posted by: Stu27 | January 8, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Is it possible that some team would give us a 1st round pick for Campbel, thinking he's better than the QBs in the draft?

If that happened we could go QB #4 and still get one of the top 4 LT's.

If the rumor of Shanahan wanting to "raise" his own young QB is correct, I could see him going for this. I could even see him maybe letting JC go for just a 2nd round pick and hoping to get 2 OL's in the 2nd round, if he wants his own QB that badly.

My preference remains to keep JC and rebuild the line. I wouldn't be surprised if the top 4 qb in this draft all turn out worse than JC, O-lines being equal. His attitude, toughness, and chemistry with our players are real benefits that many here are undervaluing.

Posted by: REXskins | January 8, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Hypothetical situation of the day:

Shanahan decides the only way the team is going to get to the next level is by doing a total re-tooling of the offensive line to exclusion of other roles. He re-signs Campbell thinking he won't focus on a new QB for at least another year. He re-signs Portis thinking he won't be bothered searching for a running back and will just make do with what he has. There are minimal changes in personnel on defense. Then he drafts heavily on the offensive line using maybe four picks. He signs a couple of free agent offensive linemen.

So, the question is, how would this team do next year if Shanahan went "all in" on the offensive line?

Posted by: RedSkinHead | January 8, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

I'd be OK with this, with the caveat that Portis has something left in the tank; 2) Betts is able to come back from major knee surgery and/or we either re-sign Ganther; 3) The #4 pick is RUSSELL OKUNG.

If nothing else you'd probably get your answer on JC. If it didn't work and we go 4-12 again, then at least we can get Mark Ingram next year

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Just read a rumor that the Bucs are interested in trading up from #3 to #1 to grab Suh.

Posted by: swowra | January 8, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

I think the draft pick compensation you REX
it depends on the dollar offer JC gets as a REstricted Free Agent.. I beleive 2.5 Mil per year offer warrants a 1st and 3rd? Then it scales down.. 900k per is a 3rd only.. somewhere in those ballparks..
Snyder couldnt get a 2nd for JC last March and JC stats have declined since, especially the situational QB rating.
I dont think a 1st round pick compensation will happen.
====================================
Is it possible that some team would give us a 1st round pick for Campbel, thinking he's better than the QBs in the draft?

If that happened we could go QB #4 and still get one of the top 4 LT's.

If the rumor of Shanahan wanting to "raise" his own young QB is correct, I could see him going for this. I could even see him maybe letting JC go for just a 2nd round pick and hoping to get 2 OL's in the 2nd round, if he wants his own QB that badly.

My preference remains to keep JC and rebuild the line. I wouldn't be surprised if the top 4 qb in this draft all turn out worse than JC, O-lines being equal. His attitude, toughness, and chemistry with our players are real benefits that many here are undervaluing.

Posted by: REXskins | January 8, 2010 11:40 AM

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

hey stu...ive seen him play...hes definitely great...i guess my words were taken out of context...just wondering what the fascination is with drafting berry when the skins dont have the luxury to make that type of pick at this point

Posted by: AhsanFamily | January 8, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

The thing is the defense gets burnt in coverage a lot. Think about how many games we win if the defense could just get that last stop or not get burnt 9 times a game. If they did that we beat NO, DAL, KC, SD, PHI, DET, and CAR. We would be in the playoffs. This year's draft is loaded with tackles. Only one of them is an elite prospect. If Detroit takes Okung at #2 then why take the next tackle at #4 when we could get a similar prospect all the way down in the 2nd round? Why not get a safety that may be the next Ed Reed and get your similar left tackle too? It's all about blancing need Vs. BPA. Free safety is a need. So is running back, right tackle, and right guard. Trying to fill all the holes this year is silly. We need to relaize this is a 2-3 year rebuild and build with quality instead of quantity. If you really think about this draft and next year's draft as 1 draft and you lump all our needs together it makes sense to take Berry at #4 overall.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 8, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

If nothing else you'd probably get your answer on JC. If it didn't work and we go 4-12 again, then at least we can get Mark Ingram next year

Posted by: Notorious_LMG
--------------------------

The answer on JC historically has been that whenever the o-line plays well, he looks like a franchise QB. That's the main reason I'm still behind keeping him.

First 6 games of last season, nobody was calling for his head. Then the o-line crashed.

The few times this year when the o-line really stepped up, like against the saints, you saw JC kick a$$.

It's a testament to his toughness actually, that he's able to respond so quickly from one game where he's under constant pressure, to another where he's not, and immediately show results rather than think he's still under pressure and play frightened.

Posted by: REXskins | January 8, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

I don't understand the fascination with Marshall. Shanahan was going to dump him because of poor attitude.

I'd rather have MK & DT as the WR with Moss in the slot taking ARE's place.

I think a quick slant to Moss with a safety trying to cover could be a great matchup for us.

We have a pretty decent receiving corps with MK, DT, Moss, MM and CC, FD. If the QB has time to get them the ball.

The question is the evaluation Shananhan puts on Campbell. Does he think he can be effective with a rebuit oline.

Posted by: noonefromtampa | January 8, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse
The story about Shanny getting rid of Marshall is just that, a story. I don't know if it's true. But I am willing to let Shanny make that decision. IF he is OK with Marshall's attitude, then I am fascinated by him.

26 yr old vs. Moss 31 at start of season, size 6-4 230 vs 5-10 200, speed about the same, hands comparable.

Can you imagine DT and BM at wideouts, with 2 TE's, or MK and MM.

Just saying it could be powerful, and who knows BM better than Shanny. I'll go with his judgment on attitude.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Not sure if anyone has said this before, but I'm thinking Josh Cribbs is gonna be a Redskin next season. Not that we really need him but he is a DC native, he is sick of not getting paid enough, and Dan Snyder loves to overpay in the FA. We'll see.

Posted by: joshgrzymkowski | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Redskinhead..
cant imagine you can resign Campbell to just one year as an open market Free Agent.. Too late for an extension, now. .. And I cant imagine Snyder and the Skins want to recommit to JC for another 3-4 years.
==============================
Hypothetical situation of the day:

Shanahan decides the only way the team is going to get to the next level is by doing a total re-tooling of the offensive line to exclusion of other roles. He re-signs Campbell thinking he won't focus on a new QB for at least another year. He re-signs Portis thinking he won't be bothered searching for a running back and will just make do with what he has. There are minimal changes in personnel on defense. Then he drafts heavily on the offensive line using maybe four picks. He signs a couple of free agent offensive linemen.

So, the question is, how would this team do next year if Shanahan went "all in" on the offensive line?

Posted by: RedSkinHead | January 8, 2010 11:35 AM

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

To bad Herman Edwards didn't he heed is his own advice...twice. Reid why not get perspectives from folks who know how to win.

Posted by: clark202 | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Excuse me, to correct my last comment, I'm pretty sure Cribbs isn't a FA next year, but he does want to be traded.

Posted by: joshgrzymkowski | January 8, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

fred, someone posted an ESPN link the other day regarding Shanny dumping BM....

No thanks, just stop with that ridiculous line of thinking....

Thats EXACTLY what this team needs is to use draft picks/cap space on a new WR....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | January 8, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Just read a rumor that the Bucs are interested in trading up from #3 to #1 to grab Suh.

Posted by: swowra | January 8, 2010 11:44 AM
==================================
Interesting if true,
Wonder how many draft plans changed last night after watching the fragility of McCoy.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

trade down, trade down, trade down Posted by: CBT2

2nd that emotion! Trade Down and gather additional picks. I'm gonna preach it from the mountaintop:

TRADE DOWN AND GATHER ADDITIONAL PICKS! Get 2 or 3 O Lineman for the price of 1 instead of the other way around.

Show that you learned something after all these years.

Posted by: dovelevine | January 8, 2010 11:07 AM

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse
_________

First, I don't agree that you trade down if you have the chance to get the next Chris Samuels at #4. A 10-year, 6 pro bowl, all-pro LT is really hard to find outside of round 1 of the draft. Second, it takes two to tango. Unless there's some uber-stud that slips a bit, it doesn't seem likely that anyone will want to pay the price to trade that high. If we can't get a worthy LT at #4 and someone wants that pick, then I agree that you trade down. Just my opinion.

Posted by: skinsfan713 | January 8, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Not sure if anyone has said this before, but I'm thinking Josh Cribbs is gonna be a Redskin next season. Not that we really need him but he is a DC native, he is sick of not getting paid enough, and Dan Snyder loves to overpay in the FA. We'll see.

Posted by: joshgrzymkowski | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM |

Snyder wont be making the choices so Cribbs will not be a Skin.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 8, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

who cares about the uniforms fix the o-line!! zorn has a reputation as a top QB coach in the league? what league? zorn is not a top anything in any league he is an azz-hole of a coach horrible play caller mediocre qb when he played mediocre qb coach and just plain weak.

Posted by: wathu19 | January 8, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

I absolutley see them signing JC to a 3 year deal. First off, he's cheap. Secondly, it allows them to fix our biggest needs first. They can concentrate on getting a free safety and fixing the line. This continuity will lead us to an improvement next year. Then if they take a QB next year in year 1 of JC's contract they can let him ride the bench while the rebuild continues. By year 3 of JC's contract the young buck should be ready to start. Then you let JC walk and start the young buck. Said young buck gets to start his career behind a great line, with 2 years of NFL coaching, experienced receivers, and a good running game. That's exactly how it should be done. That's how you develop a franchise QB.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 8, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

To bad Herman Edwards didn't he heed is his own advice...twice. Reid why not get perspectives from folks who know how to win.

Posted by: clark202 | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse


I agree. We probably should do the opposite of what Edwards says.

Posted by: Redskins001 | January 8, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Just read a rumor that the Bucs are interested in trading up from #3 to #1 to grab Suh.

Posted by: swowra | January 8, 2010 11:44 AM
==================================

They could not afford Cowher so I don't see them trading up, they also like McCoy and Berry very much.

Posted by: noonefromtampa | January 8, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

wathu19
not sure what the uniforms have to do with Zorn.. But, yeah.. he was terrible as a Head Coach.. Couldnt lead, motivate or discipline with respect.. In over his head.. As many on this board said 2 years ago when he was hired.
But, he is considered in the top 5 of NFL QB Coaches. So his "exit" opinion of JC will carry some weight from someone coaching JC for the last 2 years. Shanahan is too smart to ignore that input.
===================================


who cares about the uniforms fix the o-line!! zorn has a reputation as a top QB coach in the league? what league? zorn is not a top anything in any league he is an azz-hole of a coach horrible play caller mediocre qb when he played mediocre qb coach and just plain weak.

Posted by: wathu19 | January 8, 2010 11:56 AM

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

>Trade down!

BTW I'm not just talking about the first round. You can trade down in any round and gain an additional pick. Look at the Pats the last few years. They do it in every round. We need lots of bodies. Some don't pan out. Invest in quantity as well as quality. We've got lots of holes to fill. We aint 1 player away.

Posted by: dovelevine | January 8, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Not sure if anyone has said this before, but I'm thinking Josh Cribbs is gonna be a Redskin next season. Not that we really need him but he is a DC native, he is sick of not getting paid enough, and Dan Snyder loves to overpay in the FA. We'll see.

Posted by: joshgrzymkowski

I've read that story before, and it doesn't end well. See, e.g., Randle-El, Antwaan for details.

Posted by: Kenbeatrizz | January 8, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Not sure if anyone has said this before, but I'm thinking Josh Cribbs is gonna be a Redskin next season. Not that we really need him but he is a DC native, he is sick of not getting paid enough, and Dan Snyder loves to overpay in the FA. We'll see.

Posted by: joshgrzymkowski | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM |

Snyder wont be making the choices so Cribbs will not be a Skin.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 8, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Brought this up earlier, apparently people think ARE is better then him and were just fine with the return situation... Not me however im all bout him.

Posted by: Stu27 | January 8, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

remember how JC reacted when Snyder was chasing Cutler and trying to trade him.. He demanded to be traded if Cutler was obtained (most QBs would be confident of competing for their jobs). He showed more fire in that scenario then he did on the field this whole season.
Do you think he would now sit on the bench..? No, he would be disruptive.

If no better offer then a 3rd round compensation as a Restricted Free AGent, the Skins might, then, resign him to 3 yr deal...And could trade him thereafter at anytime.
===================================

I absolutley see them signing JC to a 3 year deal. First off, he's cheap. Secondly, it allows them to fix our biggest needs first. They can concentrate on getting a free safety and fixing the line. This continuity will lead us to an improvement next year. Then if they take a QB next year in year 1 of JC's contract they can let him ride the bench while the rebuild continues. By year 3 of JC's contract the young buck should be ready to start. Then you let JC walk and start the young buck. Said young buck gets to start his career behind a great line, with 2 years of NFL coaching, experienced receivers, and a good running game. That's exactly how it should be done. That's how you develop a franchise QB.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | January 8, 2010 11:57 AM

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Shanahan is going to draft a quarterback, but it's not going to be with the #4 pick.

I bet he does what Parcells did in Miami, taking a LT and then taking Henne in Round 2.

Posted by: leopard09 | January 8, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Couple of assumptions out there...

1) JC would WANT to re-sing with the Redskins...
He probably is the best QB available in the free agent market, believe it or not. (and if we don't re-sign him, what then? who is the QB for opening day??? seriously...some rookie? Colt?)

2) Someone will be willing to trade for the 4th spot in the draft...
Sounds great in principle, but it ain't that easy and you have to have a buyer, in addition to wanting to sell. Don't really see it happening.

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 8, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Not sure if anyone has said this before, but I'm thinking Josh Cribbs is gonna be a Redskin next season. Not that we really need him but he is a DC native, he is sick of not getting paid enough, and Dan Snyder loves to overpay in the FA. We'll see.

Posted by: joshgrzymkowski | January 8, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

I'd love to see Cribbs here too, but it's not going to happen. First of all, Cribbs isn't a free agent, so the Browns would have to trade him, which they are unlikely to do since he's their best player, and since trading him would set a bad precedent for any future Brownie who is unhappy with his contract. Second, don't take Cribbs' statements that he's unlikely to play for Cleveland again at face value. The two sides are involved in renegotiating the remaining years on Cribbs' contract, and there's likely to be a lot of posturing going on.

Posted by: rbpalmer | January 8, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I know Cribbs was a longshot, but ARE is going way south in terms of returns. I think he's doing OK as slot, but I agree that Moss should be moved to slot. Also, what's wrong with our uniforms? Besides, it's just a uniform!

Posted by: joshgrzymkowski | January 8, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

He would have to resign with the Skins if the Skins match any Offers. That is the "Restricted" part of RFA.
If he accepts a 900K per year level Offer and the Skins dont match. The Skins get a 3rd rounder. But why would he accept that when it is far less than what he is earning now.. ? And Snyder turned down 3rd round offers for JC last March. So he/Allen will definitely match at that level.
If JC receives a 2.5 Mil or more Offer per year from another team.... Skins dont match and get 1st round compensation.
===================================


Couple of assumptions out there...

1) JC would WANT to re-sing with the Redskins...
He probably is the best QB available in the free agent market, believe it or not. (and if we don't re-sign him, what then? who is the QB for opening day??? seriously...some rookie? Colt?)

2) Someone will be willing to trade for the 4th spot in the draft...
Sounds great in principle, but it ain't that easy and you have to have a buyer, in addition to wanting to sell. Don't really see it happening.

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 8, 2010 12:12 PM |

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | January 8, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Few other thoughts...

1) CC47 is my favorite player but of the Redskins that are potential trade bait, he's probably the only with any value... Sleepy seems to have stepped it up. Just a thought....

2) Trading for Brandon Marshall is retarded. He is a problem in the locker room and off the field. Every time I turn around, BM is in the news about something, and it's not flattering. Don't need that here.

3) Other names thrown out for trade bait:
- CP - wouldn't get a 5th rounder for him. Seriously, though I think it's pretty clear he and JC won't be in the same huddle ever again....

- Moss - only the 'Skins would give up more than a 5th for him. Love him. Great player, but has played his best football

And I mean it about JC, just like it takes two to tango in a trade, he has to WANT to sign here. Think how he must feel after the offseason treatment, the treatment from the fans, and now the players (CC/CP). And we DO NOT have someone better to put behind center right now...

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 8, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Bucs still owe Gruden $5M for next season, we got them of the hook for Allen.

They had the 3rd lowest payroll total in whole league. They made #1 profit like $68M.

They (Glazers) bought ManU and the interest debt is sucking the life out of them. They dumped best player for cash.

Posted by: noonefromtampa | January 8, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

"...he seems to be much more of a consummate team/coach guy than Landry."

What are you basing this on? Because Landry celebrates after a tackle that still resulted in the first down?

All that stuff you named about Horton, Landry does the same thing. I think among Redskins fans, Horton is still "eating" off that New Orleans game from his rookie season. I think fans also have a tendency to vastly overrate players on the roster.

Horton is good. Yes, but to trade a guy who you spent the number six pick on, to trade a guy who may have some holes in his game but who can get coached up or may figure it out for himself would be a HUGE mistake.

What if that second pick you trade Landry for is a bust, and Landry goes to another team, matures, and becomes an all-pro for the next decade? I don't know about you, but I think I'll experiencing symptoms like uncontrollable crying and frequent vomiting.


Posted by: RedDMV | January 8, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse


I'm basing that on several of his post-game comments when he was asked about whiffed tackles, getting beat in coverage, biting on double-moves, etc.

In his responses he would talk about how someone that he tried to tackle (but missed) was "someone else's guy".

Really? You are a saftey. Your job is to tackle guys when other people can't/don't.

He was unapologetic about biting on double moves talking about he he's always gonna go for the big play.

Not too long after that, we stopped seeing him at FS and starting seeing him more around the line at SS.

What if Landry never matures? What if he's a physically talented bonehead? What if he just decides he's gonna torpedo tackle people no matter what? What if he turns into the 2nd coming of Roy Williams - a guy who got hyped early in his career b/c of big hits, but then couldn't get on the field b/c teams exploited his weaknesses and he never learned? What if we miss this opportunity to get something else back for him and his career slides? In case you didn't notice, he acutally regressed since last year in his capacity as a free safety.


Posted by: p1funk | January 8, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

I thought JC was an unrestricted FA if it's an uncapped year (which it will be). Am I wrong?? Certainly could be...

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 8, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Landry sucks and is a bust.

Sorry guys but it's true. The word is out on him. Look what happend to Roy Williams in Dallas. Dude just disappeared after being a Pro-Bowl safety.

Safeties and fullbacks are a dime a dozen in the NFL, two positions you never take with a top 10 pick. Vinny did it twice and look where they are now.

There's only like 3-4 safeties in the entire league that are any good. After that, nobody.

You NEVER take a safety that high. Ever.

- Ray

Posted by: rmcazz | January 8, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I thought JC was an unrestricted FA if it's an uncapped year (which it will be). Am I wrong?? Certainly could be...

No, restricted.

- Ray

Posted by: rmcazz | January 8, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

What if Landry never matures? What if he's a physically talented bonehead? What if he just decides he's gonna torpedo tackle people no matter what? What if he turns into the 2nd coming of Roy Williams - a guy who got hyped early in his career b/c of big hits, but then couldn't get on the field b/c teams exploited his weaknesses and he never learned? What if we miss this opportunity to get something else back for him and his career slides? In case you didn't notice, he acutally regressed since last year in his capacity as a free safety.

Posted by: p1funk | January 8, 2010 12:21 PM |

I've been saying this same thing. The guy is as bright as a burlap sack. He played for a notoriously undisciplined LSU team and he brought that with him to a game where people are exploiting his stupidity. Cut his a$$ or trade him because he is a tool that thinks he is better than he really is. He's cost us enough games already. If you're going to keep this guy put him back at SS that way his punk a$$ can't hurt us as much. What a friggin' doosh.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | January 8, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I thought JC was an unrestricted FA if it's an uncapped year (which it will be). Am I wrong?? Certainly could be...

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 8, 2010 12:25 PM

If there's no CBA, ie, an uncapped year, he will be an RFA not unrestricted.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 8, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I think before Shanahan drafts a QB, he takes a very close look at Colt Brennan.

I love the way Shanahan approached this, which boils down to "I want to win a Superbowl". Since he's done it 2x, I think he knows what it takes.

A possible 3-year plan
1) Upgrade OL to Shanahan offense (smaller, lighter, quicker). Spend a year getting that down.
2) Decide if Brennan is his QB, if not draft a QB. Add depth to OL, address some defensive issues
3) Get RB to go with his scheme.

The reason I put RB last is that takes less time to develop them than QB or OL. You do the OL first, otherwise your young QB gets the heck beat out of him, and could lose a season due to injury.

Now, it is not cast in stone that the running game he coached in Denver is the one he installs here. If he's a smart guy, he will re-evaluate that as well. Rules changes, personel, and defensive adjustments could limit its effectiveness.

Probably part of the the stretch running game success was the altitude at Mile High. Get those big DT running from sideline to sideline and they're totally gassed by the second half. Here at sea level, it may make more sense to build a smash-mouth system, like the Giants have.

Posted by: dpc2003 | January 8, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

The draft all depends on how picks 1-3 shake out. Allen and Shanny aren't dopes - they could definitely have decided to leak that they're inclined to take Bradford at #4, while they have another plan up their sleeves...same thing as prounouncing confidence in JC -- it certainly doesn't hurt our bargaining position with teams who may want to sign him...

Posted by: mattylight | January 8, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

"In case you didn't notice, he acutally regressed since last year in his capacity as a free safety."

Which also gives him the benefit of knowing he can be a real force in this league. Unlike, say, Malcolm Kelly (who's had one good game in his career), Landry has shown he CAN be a cornerstone defender.

I'm willing to give him one more year under a new system. It's clear he isn't suited for Blache's style, but we don't know what a more creative and aggressive D-coordinator could do with Landry.

Posted by: psps23 | January 8, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

If anybody named Colt is our frnachise QB, I will be sick on myself. The one is a narcisitic, overrated dbag who was kicked out of CU for allegedly raping a girl (which nobody ever talks about); the other seems like a good kid but doesn't have the size, arm or toughness to make it in the NFL- if he took 1/2 the punishment JC did, he'd be dead.

Same name, same NFL future- backup

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to disappoint some of the guys from the take a lineman first, no matter what crowd. However the only two lineman I can remember Shannahan drafting in the first was Ryan Clady and George Foster. Thats not to say he's like a certain executive VP because unlike that certain person he actually drafts OL. Here's a list of Shannahans most recent O-Line.

Ryan Clady - T - 1st Round
Ben Hamilton - G - 4th Round
Casey Weigman - C - FA originally undrafted
Chris Kuper - G - 4th Round
Ryan Harris - T - 3rd Round

Though they struggled last year the fact of the matter is that they were one of the best lines in the league when Shannahan was coaching them. See thats the thing that ticked me off about Vinny. It wasn't that he took Orakpo in the first, it was that after that he took a CB, 2 LB's, and a WR. Then claimed there were no lineman worth drafting.

Hello!?! T.J Lang and John Luigs both have contributed on playoff teams. And both were selected after Barnes.

Personally right now I want to see the team select Bradford first, Mike Iupati (G, Idaho) second, and a tackle they can develop in the fourth. To me that would be a productive draft especially if they could supplement it with veteran free agents.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 8, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Uncapped year -- all players with 6 years or less of experience will be Restricted Free Agents.

It would cost you a 3rd round pick to sign a guy for basically peanuts. I very much doubt that there will be much movement in free agency if 2010 is an uncapped year.

On the other hand, it will be a great opportunity to cut high-priced veterans who aren't peforming without suffering dead money. So there's going to be plenty of 30+ y/o has-beens floating around.

And it will also be a great opportunity to trade value for draft picks: for the usually much smaller guaranteed salary (compared to the signing bonus), a small market team can acquire talent for draft picks.

For example, suppose Shanahan wants to put in a 3-4. AH doesn't really fit as a nose tackle, and he may not fit well as a DE either. So you trade him, eating the $20+M signing bonus, but getting -- for example -- a first rounder this year, and maybe a 1st next year plus other picks.

Posted by: dpc2003 | January 8, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

The draft all depends on how picks 1-3 shake out. Allen and Shanny aren't dopes - they could definitely have decided to leak that they're inclined to take Bradford at #4, while they have another plan up their sleeves...same thing as prounouncing confidence in JC -- it certainly doesn't hurt our bargaining position with teams who may want to sign him...

Posted by: mattylight | January 8, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Good point/God I hope you're right

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Well that's good news... that he's a RFA. He is STILL our best option for next year.

Posted by: carocanesfan | January 8, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

There are many, many NFL players and alum who have SB rings because they played on a team with a top Offensive Line and a middling QB.

How many SB wins are there by teams with a lousy Offensive Line and QB of... any caliber?

Posted by: Redskinrex | January 8, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

First!

Posted by: _Stumped_ | January 8, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Last time i brought up Colts situation at CU i was ripped for dissing on him without knowing what actually happend(duh he was kick out of school for forcing himself on a female student, not much else to be said) but the same people will cite what a cancer Brandon Marshall. dont really get it.

Posted by: Stu27 | January 8, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Matty -- yes, there are circumstances where you don't want to run JC down publically.

In fact, I think that covers most forseeable situations. About the only other one I can think of is that you intend to sign him and are trying to get leverage during contract negotiations. Which is short sighted, since all you really do is P.O. the guy.

Much better off saying JC is a good QB, best football ahead of him, has the talent to win a SB, etc. While at the same time saying that he might not fit well with the offense.

One good outcome of that is that 17 gets an offer that beats the Redskins' RFA tender, and WAS is left to console themselves with a 1st round pick.

Posted by: dpc2003 | January 8, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Ryan Clady - T - 1st Round
Ben Hamilton - G - 4th Round
Casey Weigman - C - FA originally undrafted
Chris Kuper - G - 4th Round
Ryan Harris - T - 3rd Round
___________________________

Notice where the franchise LT was drafted. If you want to get one, most likely you'd need to get one early, particularly since out of the final string five OLmen for the Skins, one (Rabbach) actually fits the type desired by Shanny. I'm not sure how else this team will get an elite LT this year without drafting one high in round 1.

Posted by: TWISI | January 8, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

'...if you want a chance to play good football, you've got to have a good offensive line." '

Was that Herman Edwards or Joe Gibbs?

Having a solid offensive line alone doesn't guarantee Super Bowls. But it does guarantee that you'll usually be competitive.

Why the Skins went away from that is a mystery.

Posted by: SteveMG | January 8, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

I spend a lot of time reading these posts, and a little more occasionally writing them.

Thank god we have Allen. Someone who can help evaluate say, Offensive Tackles with our new head coach. The blocking schemes that Shanny has employed over most of his career- so called zone blocking- require a very different set of skills than those required of a more traditional lineman. Since basically only Shanny knows exactly what he is looking for (think quick hips, excellent head, and an absolute buy in for his system) then trying to say that one or the other of the top ten OT's in the draft is impossible. This is why we are paying him the big bucks.

It's not that Okung isn't the best in the draft, he probably is. But is he the best guy for Shanny? As the scouting and recruiting goes on we'll find out.

Then I see a whole lot of talk about QB's. Here's the thing- fans don't support QB's who don't win no matter what the reason, and that is why a lot of people don't support JC whether they admit it or not. We have seen exactly zero plays from JC in Shanny's offense, and not many more plays when he has a totally effective OL for more than say, 1.3 seconds. This just isn't the draft class to go QB shopping unless you want a guiy with more heart than abillity, in which case you draft Tebow and a RIGHT guard. Otherwise love the one ya' got, and take a long hard look at OUR COLT.

Trading down in the draft. If Shanny or Allen know who might be interested then they should shut the flip up and suprise us. We have to respect thier professionalism, thier craftsmanship, and then trust that they will think on thier feet and do the right thing for the team for the long haul. What we won't see is these two guys sitting around letting the draft unfold with a predetermined list of the guys they want. The draft is a constantly changing dynamic that is impossible to predict. So long as thier moves aren't telegraphed across the league until the time comes they have agood chance at success, something Vinny never got.

This will be out first wait and see offseason in a long time. Think Belicheck. Tell us nothing. When the time is right and they pull the trigger don't ask why- instead step back and ask why not?

I think we will see far less personel changes than we are used to, and the names we pick up will work for us instead of names who came for a paycheck and an early ticket to the IR.

Shanny has to start with a clean slate with the guys we got, and lay down the law. Portis needs to grow a pair in practice or get a plane ticket. Cooley needs to do less blogging and more leading. Period, the end.

Posted by: fireballhank | January 8, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

So, how many Super Bowl rings does Herm Edwards have again?

Posted by: eedchic | January 8, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Good post fireballhank. Generally agree with you. And I understand the point you're trying to make on zone blocking, but I disagree that there is any question what LT we should take. The others in the discussion (Campbell, Baluga) don't have half the overall talent of Okung. Barring a major character issue, and I've nothing negative on the kid, there is no chance they shouuld pass on him. But of course the draft is a dynamic entity like yuo said- if a trade is offered, if more information comes in on a player, etc then you need to be able to adapt and react accordingly. And of course you're correct that you must have a "poker face". But at the end of the day, we need RO with the #4. If he's available and we take anyone else, I think it's a mistake.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 8, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

My rant concerns the attitudes of some individuals. Like Matt "Is Shanahan Washed Up" McFarland and Michael "Will Anything Change" Wilbon. What is wrong with you? The Redskins are losers with a loser attitude. So, they bring in a winner with a winner attitude and you guys write the tripe that you wrote? Unbelievable. I can only assume that if they brought in Vince Lombardi in his prime you would have complained about that too.

Speaking of Lombardi, and this relates to the "washed up" posting, he came to the Redskins at the age of 56 after winning two Super Bowls (I'm ignoring NFL championships for sake of argument). At that time the Redskins hadn't had a winning season in 14 years. He changed that because he was a winner and he established a winner attitude that paved the way for the success the Redskins had in the 70s. So, the lesson is winners can take losers and make them into winners well into their 50s and after two Super Bowl wins.

To Wilbon, McFarland, and people like you get out of here with your loser attitude and let us winners go forward with a positive and winning attitude.

Posted by: BetterOffWithFedorov | January 8, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Notice where the franchise LT was drafted. If you want to get one, most likely you'd need to get one early, particularly since out of the final string five OLmen for the Skins, one (Rabbach) actually fits the type desired by Shanny. I'm not sure how else this team will get an elite LT this year without drafting one high in round 1.

Posted by: TWISI | January 8, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Definetely agree about Rabach. It seems like despite the complaints he's been a pretty solid player the last few years. Now he's about to enter a system tailored to his skill set.

Still about the question of drafting a guy like Okung first. Assuming the picks pan out and I believe with Shannahan running the offense they will. Would you rather have a franchise QB and pro bowl guard, or an elite LT and pro bowl guard (Iupati)? I guess the answer depends on how you feel about Jason Campbell.

Of course on a personal note I will not complain if we draft Okung. It's just that I feel that Shannahan can develop Bradford to be a player on par with Phillip Rivers and to me thats the difference between possibly getting to an NFC Championship and winning the Super Bowl. It's nice however to sit back and for once in my life say that I trust the front office to make the right decision.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 8, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm amazed at all of this focus just on JC....where are all the people that had a hard on for Colt last year? And Collins hasn't been mentioned at all either...

Everyone here seems to think that keeping JC to hold the fort while Shanny develops a young draft pick is the only option...

What if...they traded JC, got some extra picks to fix up the line then used Collins as the stop gap and developed Colt?

Collins has proven again and again that he prepares and is ready to play when called on, so if all we need is someone to take a beating in the 2010 season while the line is fixed, why not him?

Colt has showed great promise and would fit well into what Shanny likes in QBs and he hasn't been subjected to the porous line, so he's still a hungry NFL virgin...

I also liked the way Chase threw the ball during pre-season, maybe we could get him back and Marko Mitchell would get some more play, HA!

Bottom line...the QBs in this draft are not all that great and seem to be pretty fragile...so let's not waste a pick and lots of money on someone who will probably be a bust...

So my plan for QB would be:

Trade JC for picks
Use TC and pick up another quality back up QB from free agency
Develop CB
Draft for the OL

Posted by: rot8tor_man | January 8, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

It's nice however to sit back and for once in my life say that I trust the front office to make the right decision.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 8, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

And by right decision I don't necessarily mean a decision that agrees with what I want the team to do.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 8, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

There are many, many NFL players and alum who have SB rings because they played on a team with a top Offensive Line and a middling QB.

How many SB wins are there by teams with a lousy Offensive Line and QB of... any caliber?

Posted by: Redskinrex |


Great point.. Ravens of 2000 win SB with Dilfer! But great D and Great O Line

Take Berry with the 4th and build O Line later in the draft!

Posted by: skinsfanintampa | January 8, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and CB doesn't pan out, then there are plenty of quality QBs coming out next year, but at least our line would be mostly fixed by then...

Posted by: rot8tor_man | January 8, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

"All that stuff you named about Horton, Landry does the same thing. I think among Redskins fans, Horton is still "eating" off that New Orleans game from his rookie season. I think fans also have a tendency to vastly overrate players on the roster."

Fans tend to overrate or underrate everything about their home club. Being a fan is not about being objective.

Far as I can see, Horton's a solid tackler who's made himself something of a reputation as a ball hawk. He's got definite weaknesses in coverage, and those are probably not correctable. He just doesn't play as well when he has to go backwards.

IMO a lot of Landry's problems this past season were related to playing out of position and also to his overplaying the run. The Skins didn't do as good a job against the rush and Landry was often out of position in a vain attempt to help.

But he's an athlete the likes of which Horton, Doughty, and Kareem Moore will never be.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 8, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

fireballhank: "This just isn't the draft class to go QB shopping unless you want a guiy with more heart than abillity, in which case you draft Tebow and a RIGHT guard. Otherwise love the one ya' got, and take a long hard look at OUR COLT."

OK, this is what I mean about fans not being objective. There's plenty of talent in this QB class. Todd McShay rated Locker above the others, but acknowledged Locker is something of a project. Clausen is very talented as a pure passer in comparison to, say, Mark Sanchez. Tebow may get a chance with a team that wants to run the wildcat, but there are clear problems with his delivery that probably mean he'll never be a front-line pocket passer in the NFL. Maybe some team can use him in other ways -- like Tennessee with Vince Young or Atlanta when they had Vick -- but that's a big commitment for a team to make to a guy who could easily go down with an injury. And who replaces a QB with such an unusual style?

Colt Brennan is not as good a prospect as Colt McCoy, even a couple seasons into his career. Shanahan worked pretty well with Jake Plummer but Plummer's sidearm delivery and lack of distance were problematic throughout. Anybody notice Brennan has similar problems to Snake?

If he'd had a better year, Jevan Snead might have been a top ten choice. Now he could slide well down in the first round. But he's a better prospect than McCoy or Tebow.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 8, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

I think it's simple.

If Jason is restricted and he get offered the amount of money that warrants a 1st/2nd rd pick, you let him walk.

You take the top pick, trade back no lower than 15ths for that pick and a 3rd (replaces the Jarmon pick up.

1st rd pick (whereever it is) HAS TO BE a Left Tackle or Right Gd ...or a Sign and trade with a team who definitely want's that player...(time to blow smoke like other teams do to us)

2nd round ( If jc is gone)QB, If he is still here, another lineman.

3rd rd..If we have one..FREE SAFETY/qb

4TH rd..(if we had no 3rd)..FREE SAFETY/ or Linebacker for depth

5th round ...hit or miss..OL, or RB (that just crazy fast dude from a small school..hey, it's Shannahan), or LB

6th Rd...FB to replace Sellers (if Shannahan will use FB like that)..hey, I like him, but he's gettin old.., or Corner for depth (again, he can return kicks, superfast, etc)

7th...3rd String qb ..This or the 6th should be used every other year for the Emergency qb. If the 3rd stringer is not picking up the offense AT ALL and is just terrible, replace him , but this pick should be that ATHLETE that is from the small school, or weak confrence, but has a cannon, Michael Vick speed, or has all the measurable, just had speed.

Undrafted...BIG BODY LINEMAN..RIDICULOUSLY STRONG/HUGE DT'S, and THE SUPERFAST little guy, that can flat out run...(Hester, Cribbs, Vick) ,etc...If the Redskins were smart, this is how they would set up their practice squads...duhhhhh...

Personnell that can be moved for picks..Cooley, love him, but Davis is gangsta....Moss, Love him too, but DT/MK/MM are playin ball and he's over 30...see what we can get, see if anyone bites..if they stay , great, if we can get some more picks, TAKE THEM...

Posted by: impervious99 | January 8, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Whoops, forgot Bradford. An accurate passer in a very gimmicky offense that doesn't prepare a QB all that well for the more conservative NFL. Questions about his arm strength bring answers that are all over the place. The docs will end up deciding his fate.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 8, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

impervious: "7th...3rd String qb ..This or the 6th should be used every other year for the Emergency qb. If the 3rd stringer is not picking up the offense AT ALL and is just terrible, replace him , but this pick should be that ATHLETE that is from the small school, or weak confrence, but has a cannon, Michael Vick speed, or has all the measurable, just had speed."

Good luck with the above. Guys like that go a lot higher than 7th. Even Tom Brady doesnt' fit that description.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 8, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Undrafted...BIG BODY LINEMAN..

Posted by: impervious99 | January 8, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

See thats the thing, while your desire to have us draft OL is admirable the fact of the matter is that Shannahans system uses smaller athletic lineman. So if you see a scouting report that says a guy has trouble with footwork and below average athletiscm then simply cross that guy off the list as it's likely that he won't be a Redskin so long as Shannahan's here.

With that said I am withdrawling my support for Iupati (G, Idaho) and pulling for the team to select Vladamir Ducasse (G, UMASS) in the second round. Guy is not only huge but athletic which for OL is the perfect storm. The reason Shannahans lineman are usually barely 300 or under 300 is because those are the guys that are usually athletic, which is obviously the trait that a Shannhan lineman needs more then anything except maybe a strong football IQ.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 8, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

'Shannahans system uses smaller athletic lineman'

I've read that he went to smaller lineman because of the altitude/fatigue problems playing in Denver.

If true, he'll obviously discard it. I would think.

Posted by: SteveMG | January 8, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

No QB would thrive with this OL. Skins must fix that problem first. If the QB play isn't greatly improved, you address that issue next year. Bottom line is we have too many problems to fix in one year. I can promise you QB is not our most glaring need. The OL is and must be fixed this year.

I believe, however, that JC will greatly improve with time to throw. He is more of a 5 to 7 step passer with a big arm. Problem for him is he took three step drops and always threw short patterns. That was by design by the coaching staff to save his life.

FA - RG and C
First round - LT - second most important position on the field. Skins must draft a franchise player here. You won't get one in FA and mostly likely won't get one in later rounds.
Second round - RT
Fourth round - OLB - must get Orakpo full time at DE.
Fifth round - RB
Seventh round - FS

Posted by: afiorillo | January 8, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Herman Edwards? Really??

What, was Rich Kotite not available for comment???

Posted by: filmchis | January 8, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: CapsXXVI
See thats the thing, while your desire to have us draft OL is admirable the fact of the matter is that Shannahans system uses smaller athletic lineman. So if you see a scouting report that says a guy has trouble with footwork and below average athletiscm then simply cross that guy off the list as it's likely that he won't be a Redskin so long as Shannahan's here.
---------------------------------------

I get that, but this is the NFC EAST, not AFC WEST....The eagles do it and they have fairly large lineman avg around 305 with two 315's+ in there. Also, just because of the defensive lines we'll face twice a year, you need some beef because we'll get bullied. Tre Johnson was a big guy, BUT he could move...so it's definitely possible..agreed the draft is not full of them, but If Shannahan wants success he needs FDA approved beef, not salmon...

I dont buy all this wco, longball, smash mouth, etc...all of them are based on the same rules..block, accurate passes, lowest man wins, crisp routes, etc..every player has strengths, but only 40% of the plays require them. Outside of that it's all about winning individual battles on the line.

Posted by: impervious99 | January 8, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

'Shannahans system uses smaller athletic lineman'

I've read that he went to smaller lineman because of the altitude/fatigue problems playing in Denver.

If true, he'll obviously discard it. I would think.

Posted by: SteveMG | January 8, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I doubt it. In a zone blocking scheme quickness and footwork are very important. This is something that guys above 310 either lack or are just average. Heres an entry I found from Wikipedia.

"In a zone blocking scheme, fleet-footedness and athletic ability trump size as desirable qualities in offensive linemen. Coordination and technique matter more than muscle in implementing a successful scheme because defensive linemen are often double-teamed at the point of attack. Creating movement on the defensive line is more important than opening a specific hole in the defense."

On top of that teams like the Texans and Falcons who have used zone blocking in the past built their lines mainly with quick and athletic lineman.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 8, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

'In a zone blocking scheme quickness and footwork '

Yes, but he went with that system to best utilize his smaller lineman. And he went with smaller lineman because of the fatigue problems caused by the high altitude. One follows from the other.

What's the benefit of using smaller lineman if the fatigue/altitude issue is taken out?

If he wants a dominating offensive line, for the NFC East that means big bodies.

We'll see.

Posted by: SteveMG | January 8, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Caps, I'm not speaking of big william perry lineman, or Leanard Davis type lineman, but they have to be atleast 300 across the board based on the D lines we face. Now if you have some VERY STRONG lineman that are 290 than fine, but the average weight of a dlineman is 280 and are swol'up.

And remember we've had issues around the goalline and in short yardage situations when we need to burn clock. What wears out a tired defense???...BIG OLINEMAN LEANING ON THEM IN THE 4TH QTR.. Altitude , no altitude.

So they dont have to be huge, maybe I overdid it a bit, but the LT and interior need's some beef.

Posted by: impervious99 | January 8, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

"And if it's Okung, then we should take him, unless the other team is willing to part with the ranch, like a 1st and 2nd and 5th.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 8, 2010 11:37 AM"

I understand, but I'd do it for a swap of 1sts, a 3rd and a 6th...just to get back to a full draft.

Then try for more trades to acquire picks from there...for this year OR next...build good habits, build by bulk # of picks.

Posted by: ThinkingMan | January 8, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

I absolutley see them signing JC to a 3 year deal. First off, he's cheap. Secondly, it allows them to fix our biggest needs first. They can concentrate on getting a free safety and fixing the line. This continuity will lead us to an improvement next year. Then if they take a QB next year in year 1 of JC's contract they can let him ride the bench while the rebuild continues. By year 3 of JC's contract the young buck should be ready to start. Then you let JC walk and start the young buck. Said young buck gets to start his career behind a great line, with 2 years of NFL coaching, experienced receivers, and a good running game. That's exactly how it should be done. That's how you develop a franchise QB.
Posted by: PAskinsfan17
____
Live through 3 more losing seasons with Campbell?? No thank you. And what rookie QB sits on the bench for 2 years nowadays?
Get rid of Campbell now.. you don't have to use draft the #4 pick for the next QB.. Christian Ponder, Zac Robinson and lot of good QB's that can be gotten later. Skins have Colt now... give him a shot, hey he might even be the QB of the future Shanahan is looking for...

Posted by: sovine08 | January 8, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

I'm amazed at all of this focus just on JC....where are all the people that had a hard on for Colt last year? And Collins hasn't been mentioned at all either...

Everyone here seems to think that keeping JC to hold the fort while Shanny develops a young draft pick is the only option...

What if...they traded JC, got some extra picks to fix up the line then used Collins as the stop gap and developed Colt?

Collins has proven again and again that he prepares and is ready to play when called on, so if all we need is someone to take a beating in the 2010 season while the line is fixed, why not him?

Colt has showed great promise and would fit well into what Shanny likes in QBs and he hasn't been subjected to the porous line, so he's still a hungry NFL virgin...

Bottom line...the QBs in this draft are not all that great and seem to be pretty fragile...so let's not waste a pick and lots of money on someone who will probably be a bust...

So my plan for QB would be:

Trade JC for picks
Use TC and pick up another quality back up QB from free agency
Develop CB
Draft for the OL
Posted by: rot8tor_man
_____
I'm with you... Collins or Colt both could start this year..Besides think Collins is start enough to read defenses and get rid of the ball without being beaten up. Colt may even be a long term answer.. we will never know unless he gets the chance to play. Don't see Chase coming back.. ok for backup but to short to play consistantly. I do know Campbell is NOT the answer and should go....

Posted by: sovine08 | January 8, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Here that MistaMoe? Herm Edwards? CJ Spiller bah!!! Tackle, guard/center and tackle again ... no choice unfortunately ...

Posted by: periculum | January 8, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

trade down, trade down, trade down

Posted by: CBT2 | January 8, 2010 11:03 AM

I like trading down to get more picks, but we NEED a sure thing (as close as you can get a sure thing in the draft, that is) at LT. We can't gamble that the other LT's out there with loads of "potential", but with question marks, like Marylands Campbell's health, will be able to take over the LT spot at a high level of play. Okung is rated just a notch below Suh in value, and is as close to a lock as you can get to a quality LT. If our line was otherwise strong, it might be different, but when Dockery and Rabach are your "anchors", and no offense meant to them, you just can't roll the dice with the LT. The ONLY way I would consider not taking Okung if he were available were if Berry were also there, or if somebody offered us a trade similar to Ditkas gift to us to get Ricky Williams.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 8, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Finally, no one really knows if Campbell is the answer or not. This team and its offense was far too dysfunctional to make any sort of judgement. Particularly given the offensive line. Colt can compete but sticking with what you've got and rebuilding the offensive line ... dispensing with useless bloated salaries (Portoise) is far more important. Campbell is cheap. Colt is cheap. Portoise costs the team big-time!!!

Posted by: periculum | January 8, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

course on a personal note I will not complain if we draft Okung. It's just that I feel that Shannahan can develop Bradford to be a player on par with Phillip Rivers and to me thats the difference between possibly getting to an NFC Championship and winning the Super Bowl. It's nice however to sit back and for once in my life say that I trust the front office to make the right decision.

Posted by: CapsXXVI | January 8, 2010 1:29 PM
Even if you love Bradford, there is the shoulder. An injury history for the throwing shoulder of a QB is just too big of a risk for that # 4 pick, even if he is given a clean bill of health at draft time.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 8, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

understand, but I'd do it for a swap of 1sts, a 3rd and a 6th...just to get back to a full draft.

Then try for more trades to acquire picks from there...for this year OR next...build good habits, build by bulk # of picks.

Posted by: ThinkingMan | January 8, 2010 3:30 PM

No way! The drop off in draft value after the top 5 or so is way to big to take a hit on for just a 3rd rounder, and a 6th is just a crap shoot, even considering the uncertainty of the draft. By grabbing the top LT in the draft with our #1 pick and either one of the top 2 OGs or a top RT prospect with our 2nd rounder, we could actually go into next season with a decent to good O line. Our 4th rounder will be almost like a late 3rd rounder, and we might be able to grab a good speed back or hell, why not another O lineman? Assuming Cooley comes back strong, and the development of the triplet #2s from last year hasn't been a mirage and continues, with Shannahan on board our O should see a very real improvement. If our D doesnt improve a lick I wouldn't complain, but we could always try to find a SAM or FS with our 5th rounder. Now, if Berry is somehow available, that would be hard choice....

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 8, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure about Okung. I get the impression he is more of a 10-12 pick. But he's relatively the consensus OT and likely a top five pick whether or not on merit. He seems a bit slow but faster and better than Oher. What I'd like to see is trading down from a good #4 pick to say 1,2 this year and #1 next year from a good team, (lets say the Jets who's next years 1 could be as good as this year for the Skins, but the Jets would argue otherwise.) Maybe the Jets wouldn't be so prideful but they have Sanchez who was awful this year still they made the playoffs, you got to figure Snyder having Sanchez in that situation would make that trade. I like Bryan Bulaga from Iowa who is bigger and faster than Okung. A lot faster in the 40 (I'm looking forward to the combine to verify) but he's also a brawler considered strong in the run. Some even suggest him at right tackle. My guess is he's not quite as fundamentally sound as Okung but possibly more upside. But Iowa's QB is awful, yet he's made out to be the "Comeback Kid" because the came from behind 8 times and in the 4th quarter 4 times. In part because he was awful and injured. That being said Bulaga could be undervalued and underrated. Giving Stanzi plenty of time for late game, lame duck, hail mary, easy to catch passes for the game winners. And Iowa beat my alma mater Georgia Tech in the bowl game.

They could turn that pick in to a solid 1,2 (hopefully both O-line)this year and more to come

Posted by: chavez66 | January 8, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Bulaga is rated by most as a very good RT prospect. I don't know about straight line speed, but Okung definitely has better athleticism, quickness, and foot/handwork. He's really the top rated LT prospect by far on every draft board. Some say that someone like Campbell or Davis may eventually develop into a better LT because of more "upside", but nobody questions that on day one Okung will be the best LT from this draft class.

Posted by: kenboy1 | January 8, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company