Network News

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

Rogers, McIntosh situations could be addressed soon [UPDATED]

Almost midway through their 13 planned organized team activities, players and coaches return to Redskins Park today for the first of three practice sessions scheduled for this week. Media is allowed to attend Wednesday's practice.

It's a busy month for the Redskins, with four final OTA dates scheduled
for next week and then their final minicamp spread over three days the
following week, June 16-18.

There could also be some action away from the field. While first-round
draft pick Trent Williams probably won't sign until closer to training
camp and Donovan McNabb isn't expected to negotiate an extension until
summer at the earliest, there should be some movement soon regarding
cornerback Carlos Rogers and linebacker Rocky McIntosh.

Rogers and McIntosh are two of 37 restricted free agents who have yet to
sign their tenders. Each has had to sign waivers to participate in the
team's offseason activities. The league-run nfllabor.com had a pretty
informative post this weekend that explains what happens next for unsigned players such as Rogers
and McIntosh. Here's a brief excerpt:

If a player does not sign by June 1, the original club can
extend the qualifying offer and thereby retain exclusive rights to the
player.

If the original qualifying offer is greater than 110 percent of the
player's 2009 base salary and the player does not sign that contract
by June 15, the team can substitute the June 1 tender with a new June
15th tender of 110 percent of the RFA's 2009 base salary and continue
to retain exclusive rights to the player. If the player does not sign
by Week 10, he cannot play in 2010.

**Cornerback Carlos Rogers confirmed via text message that he will sign his one-year, $1.54 million tender offer and practice, for the start of training camp, on Thursday.

By Rick Maese  |  June 1, 2010; 6:00 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Johnson ready to play -- on the field, and in video games
Next: Chris Cooley's football camp is this weekend

Comments

Hey, RI. Redskins will sign FS O.J Atogwe tomorrow. book it. He becomes a free agent tomorrow and played under Jim Haslett with the rams, causes turnovers, and will move laron to SS forever. he knows Jim's defense.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/14972/rams-exec-explains-atogwe-tender

that was about two months ago. the draft is now over and as it stands of now O.J will not sign with the rams, making him a free agent.

Posted by: nfcBEaST | June 1, 2010 6:14 AM | Report abuse

Redskins will go 9-7 this year book it. They will win 5 more games because last year they lost 5 games by 3 points or less. You gotta believe that D-Mac and shanahan will make the team at least a field goal better.

Also when Favre played for the lowly jets, they went from 4-12 to 9-7. And that was with Mangini. D-Mac will do the same.

Posted by: nfcBEaST | June 1, 2010 6:16 AM | Report abuse

Redskins will go 9-7 this year book it. They will win 5 more games because last year they lost 5 games by 3 points or less. You gotta believe that D-Mac and shanahan will make the team at least a field goal better.

Also when Favre played for the lowly jets, they went from 4-12 to 9-7. And that was with Mangini. D-Mac will do the same.


Posted by: nfcBEaST | June 1, 2010 6:16 AM


You make a valid point there, but it's not so cut and dry...this team has paper thin depth on defense and on the O-line--and if we get hit with injuries we're in big trouble. I think coaching and improved QB play are huge for us, but I doubt we get carried very far with those two things alone.

Hopefully, we make a run at Atogwe...I think he'll be a huge help both for 2010 and for the long haul. God knows we need a playmaker in the secondary and Atogwe would certainly fit the bill.

Not necessarily saying I don't see your 9-7 prediction coming to fruition...I just think that's a best case scenario and a lot of things would have to break right for us to see that kind of immediate improvement.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 6:27 AM | Report abuse

Is this thing on?

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 7:18 AM | Report abuse

Agree with brownwood. 9-7 is not out of the question but we play the AFC South and NFC North this season, two tough divisions with no gimmie games(even Detroit they beat us last season).

Posted by: Original_etrod | June 1, 2010 7:21 AM | Report abuse

You make a valid point there, but it's not so cut and dry...this team has paper thin depth on defense and on the O-line--and if we get hit with injuries we're in big trouble. I think coaching and improved QB play are huge for us, but I doubt we get carried very far with those two things alone.

Hopefully, we make a run at Atogwe...I think he'll be a huge help both for 2010 and for the long haul. God knows we need a playmaker in the secondary and Atogwe would certainly fit the bill.

Not necessarily saying I don't see your 9-7 prediction coming to fruition...I just think that's a best case scenario and a lot of things would have to break right for us to see that kind of immediate improvement.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 6:27 AM
------------------------------------------
I don't know if I would categorize the depth on defense as paper thin. They've brought in some veterans that have contributed with other teams and I think the secondary has some great young players that are developing. Maybe I would say the depth on defense is "unproven" at this point in the season.

Now, on the offensive line, I would say "paper thin" is entirely accurate. We know about the depth we have and what we know is pretty scary. The team has got to go out there and get at least one more offensive tackle with some playing time. I'm not buying into Hicks as a starter, Heyer was too shakey last season, and the cast of characters behind those guys wouldn't strike fear into a high school defense.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | June 1, 2010 7:41 AM | Report abuse

Wishful thinking but, I liked Capers coming out of collage, I hope he makes the team and beats out Hicks. That would be to young bucks starting on the line for a long time.

Posted by: 2ndtierfan | June 1, 2010 7:48 AM | Report abuse

RSH, I like the veteran depth on the D-line, but that's about it. The secondary has no playmakers (unless you wanna count DHall), and most of the LBs don't look like a good fit for the 3-4 (damn near everyone except Orakpo). I'd be stunned (and pleasantly surprised) if this unit doesn't take a step back this season.

Agreed on the O-line, though. Hicks is a nice piece to have in reserve to bolster your overall depth but I think of him as a jack of all trades and a master of none. If he's our starting RT, we're in trouble. Hopefully someone solid comes available in this next wave of cuts--I'd hate to have to settle for Flozell Adams but right now I'd take him for a year if it means Heyer goes to the bench and stays there.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 7:59 AM | Report abuse

...this team has paper thin depth on defense and on the O-line--and if we get hit with injuries we're in big trouble.

Posted by: brownwood26


FYI (Linemen currently on roster):

Offensive Linemen:

Rabach, Casey C
Cook, Erik C/G
Montgomery, Will C/G
Williams, Edwin C/G
Dockery, Derrick G
Fanaika, Paul G
Lichtensteiger, Kory G
Hicks, Artis G/T
Rinehart, Chad G/T
Williams, Mike G/T
Capers, Selvish OT
Heyer, Stephon OT
Oldenburg, Clint OT
Robinson, William OT


Defensive Linemen:

Carriker, Adam DE
Daniels, Phillip DE
Jackson, Rob DE
Scott, Darrion DE
Holliday, Vonnie DL
Holmes, Antoine DL
Jacobs, Trey DL
Peterson, Greg DL
Golston, Kedric DT
Haynesworth, Albert DT
Bryant, Anthony NT
Green, Howard NT
Kemoeatu, Maake NT


Of course more than half those guys won't be on the roster when the season starts (aka camp fodder) but to say they have "paper thin depth" is a little miscalculated.

If anything, they have more concerns at the safety position than they do along the offensive or defensive line.

Getting O.J Atogwe would be a great move. They would get a proven FS instead of having to worry about playing guys with little experience (Moore, Horton).

Posted by: RedDMV | June 1, 2010 8:17 AM | Report abuse

The O-line is better now than it was at any point last year (except when Samuels was healthy). I can live with Hicks at RT just simply because he's better than Heyer.
I'm not sure I'd say it's 'paper thin' though. I think a lot of this line's problem last year was scheme and the way they were coached-up. Heyer is a better back-up at tackle then anyone we had last year, and I like him in that role cause he can play LT and RT. The guards should be better too, I think big Mike will be a decent starter, and Chad R. will be a decent backup (if he stays healthy).
The big thing I wanna see this year is all of these young players stepping up. Defense it's Landry, Horton, Tryon, Barnes, cause our secondary will be in trouble if they don't. Offense it's Thomas, Kelley, Davis, Rhinehart, Capers, and Williams. All of these players were drafted by us, with most going in the first 3 rounds, we have to keep and play all of them just to see what we have there and if they step up.

Posted by: monk811 | June 1, 2010 8:20 AM | Report abuse

What I think some here are overlooking here is that I said DEPTH...meaning, if we lose a starter or two, how does our lineup look? If we lose Trent Williams and/or Casey Rabach this season (knock on wood), our O-line is straight garbage. We have a starting 5 that is no better than average to begin with...if we suffer a couple injuries, this thing could get ugly in a hurry.

That said, I think Shanahan wouldn't let it get as bad as it was last year. He should be able to scheme around it and get more out of what's here than Zorn ever could. But that's still going to set us back considerably--especially when we've got a schedule that's fairly tough.

Hopefully I'm wrong and there's a couple undrafted guys that distinguish themselves or the guys we got in the 7th round step up sooner rather than later. I just think it'll be a couple years before that line starts to look good enough to withstand a bout of injuries.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 8:37 AM | Report abuse

We have alot of unproven talent which equates to lack of depth. The only way to see if they can play is if someone goes down and they step in and don't miss a beat. I believe we all don't want that to happen over a long period of time. With only 5 to 7 picks this year the new regime had their hands tied with trying to get young talented players for the future. All these players in camp will fall by the wayside after camp and are here to make us competitive this year until we can have room to manuever next year barring any last minute hiccups. 7 or 8 wins is a definite. 9 to 10 wins is great coaching, great execution by the players with little to no injuries, and some other teams blunders. That schedule didn't do us any justice either and that was the fourth place NFC East schedule!!!! Damn, This league is competitive!!!

Posted by: Hackersk | June 1, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

What happened to Levi Jones? I haven't heard anything about him all off-season.

Why didn't he get resigned?

He's at least better than Heyer, right?

Posted by: Original_etrod | June 1, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

What happened to Levi Jones? I haven't heard anything about him all off-season.

Why didn't he get resigned?

He's at least better than Heyer, right?

Posted by: Original_etrod | June 1, 2010 8:46 AM
===========================================

I would agree he maybe still out there, or did he finally retire? Whatever the case he probably wanted more than we were willing to pay, or isn't athletic enough for Shanny's system.

Posted by: Hackersk | June 1, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

"If the original qualifying offer is greater than 110 percent of the
player's 2009 base salary and the player does not sign that contract
by June 15, the team can substitute the June 1 tender with a new June
15th tender of 110 percent of the RFA's 2009 base salary and continue
to retain exclusive rights to the player. If the player does not sign
by Week 10, he cannot play in 2010."

Lost in the legalese is whether or not if Rocky McIntosh and Carlos Rogers are deserving of the paydays they wish for.

And to be honest, it's kinda moot as the team hasn't really brought in players capable of usuring whatever roles J Haslett has for them in the new D.

So CR and Rock will get some kind of payday.

But, like anyone else, I'm at a loss when it comes to figuring out why they deserve it.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

I'd be in favor of bringing in Atogwe...other than that, I got nothing....go celts..

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | June 1, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Yes, Levi Jones is still an unrestricted free agent. It is my understanding that we offered him a one-year contract, he wanted a two-year contract. Neither party has budged since then.

Posted by: frediefritz | June 1, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

9-7?

Hmmm. I get the upgrade. Shanahan is probably 4 wins better than Zorn, but the OL is still an issue and the schedule is otherworldly tough. 6 games vs NFC east, always tough. We had no wins in the division last year and McNabb has a losing record against the division over the last few years.

We also play NFC North, GB and Minn are both very tough -- and Chi isn't going to be a pushover. And we play the AFC South, with Indy plus 3 other capable teams in Tenn, Jax, and the Texans.

Also, may want to look at who Trent Wiliams will be handling. osi, cole and ware in the division. Dwight Freeney, Julius Peppers, Mario Williams and Jared Allen outside the division.

At a glance, we could play 9-10 games against teams in the top 10 in the league. A vastly improved Skins team, even one that might be close to a top 10 team in the league ... could go 7-9.

9-7? I'm not booking it.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

I'd be happy with Heyer backing up tackle for a game or 2, but you're right about this one, we would be in trouble if Williams went down any longer. But I think we'd be ok with guard and center. If Rabach goes down, we have Montgomery or Williams that could step in, and I really thing big Chad can come back from injury and add depth to our tackles.

I'm not really looking for too much this year, if we go 8-8 I'd be happy. I just want the coaches to figure out who can play in their scheme and who can't, cause next year we have all our draft picks but 1, and free agency should be a lot better, so more holes should be filled, not patched up like this year.

Posted by: monk811 | June 1, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

He's at least better than Heyer, right?

Posted by: Original_etrod | June 1, 2010 8:46 AM


So is Terry Fox and Chris Samuels in a wheelchair...but I digress.

I think he priced himself out of a job if I'm not mistaken...dude thinks he's an elite OT and the rest of the league disagrees. When reality sets in, he'll probably get a gig...maybe even here. I'd much rather have Jones than Flozell...or the clusterf*ck of mediocrity known as the Hicks/Heyer competition.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

red

Posted by: RedDMV | June 1, 2010 8:17 AM

Solid post.

That's the kind of stuff we should get from whomever is submitting the threads.

Good work.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Yes, Levi Jones is still an unrestricted free agent. It is my understanding that we offered him a one-year contract, he wanted a two-year contract. Neither party has budged since then.

Posted by: frediefritz | June 1, 2010 9:05 AM

and the other 31 teams have shown zero interest..

Posted by: Diesel44 | June 1, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

I'm not really looking for too much this year, if we go 8-8 I'd be happy. I just want the coaches to figure out who can play in their scheme and who can't, cause next year we have all our draft picks but 1, and free agency should be a lot better, so more holes should be filled, not patched up like this year.

Posted by: monk811 | June 1, 2010 9:06 AM


Exactly right...2010 is a stepping stone season, IMO. With a robust FA market slated for 2011 and more ammo going into the draft (as of today, at least), all we should hope for this year is a competitive team that's not an outright embarrassment like the 2009 squad. Anything beyond that is gravy. If the ball bounces our way in a couple of areas, we should be a legit title contender by 2012.

Skins, Wiz, and Caps all championship teams come 2012. Book it!

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

"What I think some here are overlooking here is that I said DEPTH...meaning, if we lose a starter or two, how does our lineup look? If we lose Trent Williams and/or Casey Rabach this season (knock on wood), our O-line is straight garbage."

@brownwood

I dont care how much depth you have. Any team that loses two starters on the offensive line is in trouble. No one has All-Pro depth sitting on the bench. If you have a guy or two who can sub for a minor injury for a game or two and perform adequately, then you have a precious commodity. Depth is realative. If no one is hurt, you got lots of depth. If two guys get hurt, you have none. Whether your the Colts or the Lions, its the same everywhre.

Posted by: jmurray019 | June 1, 2010 9:21 AM | Report abuse

"Levi Jones is still an unrestricted free agent. It is my understanding that we offered him a one-year contract, he wanted a two-year contract."


Nothing speaks volumes like how the new FO team has handled Levi Jones and the other vet linemen types who came to D.C. this past Spring looking for a payday.

Remember how folks aped that Pashos, Clifton, and Jones should've been signed, given the redskins' poor offensive line play in 2009?

Well, Shanallen gave them all a cookie, sent them out the door, and drafted Williams, Capers, and Cook.

Vinny Cerrato would've shown the vets the money, not drafted the young'ns, and the team would still be building a line for the future.

Yes, the o-line is still thin in terms of depth.

But it's better to be moving in the right direction.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

I dont care how much depth you have. Any team that loses two starters on the offensive line is in trouble. No one has All-Pro depth sitting on the bench. If you have a guy or two who can sub for a minor injury for a game or two and perform adequately, then you have a precious commodity. Depth is realative. If no one is hurt, you got lots of depth. If two guys get hurt, you have none. Whether your the Colts or the Lions, its the same everywhre.

Posted by: jmurray019 | June 1, 2010 9:21 AM


I get that...but if you have guys that are good bench/rotation guys like MWilliams and Artis Hicks in your starting lineup, it stands to reason your actual bench guys are even worse. That ain't good. I like the left side of our line for the most part but not upgrading RG and RT hurts, whether we sustain injuries there or not.

I know having a solid starting 5 and at least two really good backups is a rare treat, but I think we have a long way to go just to have a good line with decent depth. Like I said earlier, this team is a work in progress and I'm not that concerned about it in 2010...so long as we get much better and deeper come 2011.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

I too would like to sign Atogwe, not sure it will happen...

I think Levi would make a good RT for a season and that would give us additional depth on the OL, Hicks backing up is probably not bad.

Brownwood, I think you are right, if we sustain any major injuries with starters it goes downhill quick, especially at LB. However, I am pleased to hear that L. Alexander is being a bad azz at the OLB position. Hope that translates to big games. If he excels way past what we were expecting, does A. Carter become expendable with C. Wilson playing well too?

Posted by: mhartz1 | June 1, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Yes, the o-line is still thin in terms of depth.

But it's better to be moving in the right direction.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 9:28 AM


Amen, Moe.

Just because we don't see the results today, doesn't mean they aren't coming.

I can take a lesser result in 2010 if it's building toward a much better performance in 2011 and beyond. And there's much better opportunity for that improvement with the young players than there is with the old guys looking to get paid.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

So is Terry Fox and Chris Samuels in a wheelchair...but I digress.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

haha. Nice pull but I'd take Heyer in a butt-kicking contest.

Posted by: Original_etrod | June 1, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

This is the most thoughtful, informative, civilized discussion I've seen here in months (not that there's anything wrong with that). Kudos all around.

Posted by: boothintexas | June 1, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

If he excels way past what we were expecting, does A. Carter become expendable with C. Wilson playing well too?

Posted by: mhartz1 | June 1, 2010 9:34 AM


I think Carter is expendable anyway...his first run as a 3-4 LB is exactly what made him a FA in '06. I don't expect much from him this season and I'll be somewhat surprised if he's not dealt to a team needy of a 4-3 DE before Week 1.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

This is the most thoughtful, informative, civilized discussion I've seen here in months (not that there's anything wrong with that). Kudos all around.

Posted by: boothintexas | June 1, 2010 9:50 AM


I'm sure you just jinxed it...here comes the obligatory AH non-update in 3...2...

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse


BOYCOTT $NYDER


Posted by: hessone | June 1, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Yes, the o-line is still thin in terms of depth.

But it's better to be moving in the right direction.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 9:28 AM


Amen, Moe.

Just because we don't see the results today, doesn't mean they aren't coming.

I can take a lesser result in 2010 if it's building toward a much better performance in 2011 and beyond. And there's much better opportunity for that improvement with the young players than there is with the old guys looking to get paid.

Posted by: brownwood26

Thing is, our OL isn't really much younger than it was last year. Williams drops the age quite a bit, but the rest of our projected OL starters are 30-ish and older.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

If our starting OL is T Williams, Dock, Rabach, BMW and Hicks ... the last 4 will be 30, 33, 30 and 32 by the end of the season. I'd hope we'd get younger -- but it doesn't seem like we've made much progress.

We hopefully fixed our biggest position problem on the OL. But the new LT may take a season or two to really develop -- he faces a murderers row this year.

As of now, none of our guys on the OL have me thinking 'Pro Bowl'.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse


Don't forget who owns the team. Folks, prepare for the basement once again. Only the folks in denial think this team will improve with you know who in charge.

BOYCOTT $NYDER,MAYBE YOU'LL WAKE UP BY WEEK 8

Posted by: hessone | June 1, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

"9-7? I'm not booking it.Posted by: zcezcest1"

I think you're wise. New head coach, new offensive and defensive schemes, coming off a miserable season -- that's not a recipe for dramatic improvement, even with McNabb. Brett Favre went to two of the league's better teams after he left Green Bay. Donovan didn't.

Biggest asset for Washington coming into the season: Philly seems to be rebuilding, the Jints have problems on defense (who'd have believed that before last year?), and there's only one real Super Bowl contender in the division, instead of the usual three.

Posted by: Samson151 | June 1, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Thing is, our OL isn't really much younger than it was last year. Williams drops the age quite a bit, but the rest of our projected OL starters are 30-ish and older.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:01 AM

Good point, Zeke. However, the team is backing up the starters with young draft picks, whereas Vinny always backed up the starters with marginal end-of-the-bench talent and past-their-prime 30-somethings. Just having young prospects on the bench at all is an improvement, IMO.

As long as we spend a high pick or two on the O-line next year, I feel good about the direction. Unless of course, a late round pick from this year becomes a solid starter right away...

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Hope they both are kept.

Nah, we've gone past that "parlor anarchism" of Black Flag, Fugazi, et al..There is a fundamental human flaw which allows humes to be herded by idiots to jump off the warcliff like lemmings to the slaughter..Its beyond politics now, people should just enjoy themselves , before the ruling morons pull the Trigger of Doom...

How 'bout them Skins?..

Posted by: frak | June 1, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Thing is, our OL isn't really much younger than it was last year. Williams drops the age quite a bit, but the rest of our projected OL starters are 30-ish and older.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:01 AM

Good point, Zeke. However, the team is backing up the starters with young draft picks, whereas Vinny always backed up the starters with marginal end-of-the-bench talent and past-their-prime 30-somethings. Just having young prospects on the bench at all is an improvement, IMO.

As long as we spend a high pick or two on the O-line next year, I feel good about the direction. Unless of course, a late round pick from this year becomes a solid starter right away...

Posted by: brownwood26

I figured the OL was a 2 year fix minimum. At this point, I'm thinking its 3 years. I wish the 2 degrees (BA and MS) had a greater sense of urgency on that front. Drafted an LT with our top pick was the right thing to do (hope we got the right guy). Of course, I'd have preferred to use our 2nd rounder to get more OL help -- but I'm in the minority up here on that one!!

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

"Thing is, our OL isn't really much younger than it was last year. Williams drops the age quite a bit, but the rest of our projected OL starters are 30-ish and older."


For this year, that's true.

But if out of the mix of Capers, Cook, E. Williams, we find a guy who can start next year, we're moving in the right direction.

Looking ahead, you have to assume left guard--and additional depth--becomes a draft priorities in 2011.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I figured the OL was a 2 year fix minimum. At this point, I'm thinking its 3 years. I wish the 2 degrees (BA and MS) had a greater sense of urgency on that front. Drafted an LT with our top pick was the right thing to do (hope we got the right guy). Of course, I'd have preferred to use our 2nd rounder to get more OL help -- but I'm in the minority up here on that one!!

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:17 AM


Agreed. I wanted to see us spend those first two picks on OL help too, but I've warmed up to the McNabb deal considerably. I can't argue with the logic...if you've got a chance at a Pro-Bowl QB in his prime for less than a 1st rounder, you go for it. Hopefully, the move pays off because the cost will be great if we missed out on a chance to solidify the O-line almost immediately.

But again...with a great FA class expected and close to a full complement of draft picks, the O-line (and the roster as a whole) should improve considerably in 2011.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

I'd have preferred to use our 2nd rounder to get more OL help -- but I'm in the minority up here on that one!!

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

No, I would be with you on that, only if we actually HAD a 2nd rounder. I like that McNabb pickup, but we could have got another tackle to go with Williams. But then all we'd be talking about in here is about Campbell and 'why don't we get an elite quarterback?' They just can't please us can they?

Posted by: monk811 | June 1, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

"Thing is, our OL isn't really much younger than it was last year. Williams drops the age quite a bit, but the rest of our projected OL starters are 30-ish and older."


For this year, that's true.

But if out of the mix of Capers, Cook, E. Williams, we find a guy who can start next year, we're moving in the right direction.

Looking ahead, you have to assume left guard--and additional depth--becomes a draft priorities in 2011.

Posted by: MistaMoe

For an OL, I'd like to see us get to 3 above average starters -- then I'm willing to take shots to fill the other two slots (resurrect BMW, undrafted guy like Heyer, older vet like Hicks). Right now, we've got 1 average starter (Dockery). 1 promising hopeful (TW). 1 not as good as we need (Rabach). 1 mystery (BMW) and 1 stop gap vet (Hicks).

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Listing a bunch of names does not translate into OL depth. When 2/5 of your Oline is backup quality at best your depth is going to be thin. Add to it you are breaking in a rookie with no one else on the roster who can play LT.

Most teams have guys like Hicks and Mike Williams as back ups not starters. If one of Rabach, Dock or Twilliams goes down with an injury it will be disastrous. That is not even taking into account that Twilliams may not be ready to anchor the LT right out of the gate and that Hicks may not be good enough at RT.

This is what happens when management pi$$es away draft picks or uses them to draft 2 wr and a TE with their first 3 picks.

The only positive going into this season in regards to the Oline is that Shanahan does well developing Oline as well as has a scheme that is easy to for them to pick up. Shanahan has a knack for working magic with smaller more athletic offensive linement.

Posted by: srobert1117 | June 1, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

This is what happens when management pi$$es away draft picks or uses them to draft 2 wr and a TE with their first 3 picks.

Absolutely baffling, I mean mind boggling, that 3 years later people are still whining about this.

As I've said countless times, fire up the old time machine, get that flux capacitor revved up, and go back to 2008, and have a re-do on the draft....

let me know how it goes for you....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | June 1, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

I've agreed to disagree with most on the trade for McNabb. Not anti-McNabb -- he's a good QB. I just think OL is easily our biggest issue and the McNabb trade slowed down fixing what is most broken.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"Listing a bunch of names does not translate into OL depth."

True.

So I'll continue the general theme by listing the name of a guy who'll help the offensive line even though he's not 6'6" 310 lbs.:

Donovan McNabb

You have to hope McNabb's decision-making ability is such that it reduces the number of hits and pressures Jason Campbell endured last season behind a line as porous as an oil executive's excuses.

And the better D Mac plays in the passing game, the better the run game becomes.

The run game in D.C. is a strenght that Philly didn't afford McNabb and it should be what the team leans on early on in the season.

McNabb is not the scrambling dervish he was when he first came to Philly, but he can survive the occasional missed tackle by making a play or two with his legs.

And where we'll concede his penchant to underthrow can be unnerving, his deep ball game is strong enough to make team think twice about blitzing--another advantage that'll help the line.

With McNabb, we get more than a guy who's just a name.

We get a star who can still make plays and hopefully improve the play of the line in front of him.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, Beantown, the way the Ravens build their squads makes you want to root for them, they know how to get it done...That and their Roman Gothic style suits my blackheart just fine...

Posted by: frak | June 1, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Been thinking about BMW:
Drafted high in rd 1
he thought he was a stud
made big $$
low character, poor work habits,
ate and "lazied" himself entirelly out of NFL

Last year decided to train, lose weight
tried to get his life straightend out

What do you guys think are the chances BMW
has an even better year this year having learned the hard way how to train, eat, sleep, stay out trouble etc???

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | June 1, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I've agreed to disagree with most on the trade for McNabb. Not anti-McNabb -- he's a good QB. I just think OL is easily our biggest issue and the McNabb trade slowed down fixing what is most broken.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 10:37 AM


Zeke, I think it was a column by Tom Boswell that brought me around to the other side of that...having a franchise QB covers up a lot of your deficiencies on offense, and thus expedites the rebuilding process. So the thinking is that even though we have a few holes on the O-line, this team and this offense is still better by virtue of adding McNabb.

If you look back to the era of the Hogs, the Skins HAD to have a dominant O-line because the QBs weren't elite. If you would have put an Elway or a Marino behind the Hogs, that team would be unstoppable.

Also, go back and look at the lines Shanahan had with the Broncos. Not a lot of 1st rounders starting...it was a lot of late round picks/undrafted guys. Elway was clearly the driving force of that offense. Not necessarily saying that he'll recreate that success here with McNabb, but I get what the Skins were thinking when they sacrificed another possible lineman for a proven QB.

It's a passing league and we now have a legit QB. The only way we can hate on this move is if McNabb ends up chronically injured or completely ineffective (knock on wood).

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I agree about O-line being our biggest problem coming in to this year, but with the class of free agents (or lack thereof)and drop-off of talent after the elite tackles were drafted, I think we did pretty good for ourselves so far this year. We got a promising rookie, 2 guys later on to develop, and since we probably weren't going to get a starter at right tackle anyway with that 2nd round pick, we got an elite quarterback (love him or hate him) that makes us SOOOOO much better on offense.

Posted by: monk811 | June 1, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Agreed. I wanted to see us spend those first two picks on OL help too, but I've warmed up to the McNabb deal considerably. I can't argue with the logic...if you've got a chance at a Pro-Bowl QB in his prime for less than a 1st rounder, you go for it. Hopefully, the move pays off because the cost will be great if we missed out on a chance to solidify the O-line almost immediately.

But again...with a great FA class expected and close to a full complement of draft picks, the O-line (and the roster as a whole) should improve considerably in 2011.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 10:24 AM

I'm not picking on you Brown, but McNabb will celebrate his 35th birthday in 2011. It's been well-documented that many QBs careers reach their peak at 30+... but still, McNabb's best year was back in 2004 with Terrell Owens. There are no TO's on this team.

If McNabb was 4 or 5 years younger, this rebuilding process (let's call it what it is) would make a lot more sense to me. The Skins have to seriously consider who will QB this team post-McNabb. Shanny is not infallible, he does make bad personnel moves. He only delivered a single playoff victory to the Broncos in the decade after Elway retired, and coached 0.500 ball in his last 3 years there.

Posted by: Alan4 | June 1, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

All the fools who brought 6/04 NAts tix are trying to dump them now that Stras ain't pitching until 6/8....I think I'll just buy a ticket to his 2nd game....

Posted by: 4thFloor | June 1, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

What do you guys think are the chances BMW
has an even better year this year having learned the hard way how to train, eat, sleep, stay out trouble etc???

Posted by: RedskinRay1 | June 1, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse
--------------------------

I think he could be a solid RG, which is what he should have been converted to up front. 1000 bonus points to Vinny for signing him up, but minus several million for not including a 'forget your tackle days' clause in the contract. Zorny gets some credit for not getting him enough RG reps, too.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | June 1, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

alan4

"If McNabb was 4 or 5 years younger, this rebuilding process (let's call it what it is) would make a lot more sense to me."


This takes us back to one of the arguments made before the trade:

Give Jason Campbell a season or two behind and improving line while a rookie quarterback chills and learns from the sideline.

Shanallen didn't take that route, so now we got a vet quarterback.

Yes: it doesn't make sense to rebuild with an older guy.

But now that we have McNabb, there's little to do about it but make the best of it.

However, if Jason Campbell plays well in Oakland.....

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

He only delivered a single playoff victory to the Broncos in the decade after Elway retired, and coached 0.500 ball in his last 3 years there.

Posted by: Alan4 | June 1, 2010 11:01 AM


Duly noted...but I'm sure we can both agree that McNabb is significantly better than anybody Shanahan was starting at QB post-Elway.

And to say "McNabb's best year was back in 2004 with Terrell Owens" undermines what he did as a starter without TO. If you recall, the Iggles won 2 playoff games without TO and McNabb played pretty well without him. He also made 5 Pro-Bowls and 4 other conference championship games without TO on the roster.

Go back and look at Elway's numbers pre-Shanahan. And then look at McNabb's. The numbers are eerily similar. Shanahan will have more work to do to get the supporting cast up to snuff for DMac, but it's not out of the question that he gets it done.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

RSR, disagree with you characterization of BMW.

He was injured rather than low character.

I expect him to have a very good year now that his body has had a chance to catch up to his weight loss.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | June 1, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Shanahan will have more work to do to get the supporting cast up to snuff for DMac, but it's not out of the question that he gets it done.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse
--------------------------

At least he can stop the Big Ten from sending us conference sign-up materials...

Posted by: mattsoundworld | June 1, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

We're not rebuilding...Do any of you bamas listen to our GM Bruce Allen?

Posted by: 4thFloor | June 1, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

"Listing a bunch of names does not translate into OL depth. When 2/5 of your Oline is backup quality at best your depth is going to be thin. Add to it you are breaking in a rookie with no one else on the roster who can play LT."

Posted by: srobert1117


It's becoming comical that some people expect each and every guy on the offensive line to be all-pro caliber players.

Like ANY position on a team you're going to have some strong spots and weak ones.

Amazing how people can come to the conclusion that "2/5 of your Oline is backup quality at best" when they haven't seen this group of guys on the field together in this system. When have you seen them play together? How do you know if the Zone Blocking scheme doesn't play to their strengths?

You don't, and neither do I. So let's fall back a little bit on the "It won't work" talk, or the Doomsday scenario.

I don't know if the offensive line is necessarily fixed, but I do think it's gotten better than what it was last season. The way some of you guys carry it, it's like the Redskins have the worst offensive line in the entire league, and there hasn't been, or no hope for any improvement at all.

Posted by: RedDMV | June 1, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Another way to look at the Oline is that its vastly improved as 5/5 of the guys who start this year will be starters vice only 3/5 last year.

Just saying... and having fun flipping it around.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | June 1, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Hey Mr. Mayor,

How about an update on how Selvish Capers is looking in OTA's?

Posted by: bostskin | June 1, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

da mathematician would have to break away from his AH scoop collecting duties to report on Capers.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | June 1, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Today is "get your 'roids up" day...


Posted by: RedDMV | June 1, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

At least he can stop the Big Ten from sending us conference sign-up materials...

Posted by: mattsoundworld | June 1, 2010 11:27 AM


LOL...well played, Matt.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

brownwood26: I don't agree that it is a "passing league". The Saints rushed for over 2000 yards and had 4.5 yards per carry. If you adjust for swing passes, most teams pass/run 50/50.

zeke: I agree that we should have taken an OL with that 2nd pick instead of McNabb, especially since his and JC's stats were very similar and McNabb had WR talent and a better OL.

Posted by: ProfessorWrightBSU | June 1, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

"Major League Baseball inspects players for needle marks on ass-cheeks and small testicles"

That's some funny stuff Red!

Posted by: monk811 | June 1, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Well, tomorrow is press day at the OTA's. Just a suggestion, but an update on how the young OL picks are doing would be welcomed, I'm sure.

Posted by: bostskin | June 1, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I'm a Bee
I'm a Bee
I'm a I'm a Bumble Bee

Posted by: 4thFloor | June 1, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I feel ya bostskin, I'm just saying doesn't expect much form da math wiz not involving ah92 still ain't here, and still doesn't want to play NT.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | June 1, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

I don't agree that it is a "passing league". The Saints rushed for over 2000 yards and had 4.5 yards per carry. If you adjust for swing passes, most teams pass/run 50/50.

Posted by: ProfessorWrightBSU | June 1, 2010 11:42 AM


Are you kidding me with this? That same Saints team you just referenced also happened to have a QB that passed for over 9,400 yards and 68 TDs over the last two seasons. While their improvement in the ground game was a big reason for their rise to a title, I wouldn't exactly call them running team.

Their SB opponent, the Colts, have a guy that passed for over 8,500 yards and 60 TDs over the same span. His Colts offense was 2nd in passing and DEAD LAST in rushing, yet won 14 regular season games and made it to the SB. Not to mention the Pats--who routinely make their way into the NFL elite with the Brady/Moss/Welker tandem in the passing game, despite not having a running game to speak of.

Ditto for the Cardinals and Steelers in '08--if my math is right, they both went to the SB that year.

So yeah...it's a passing league.

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

...Duly noted...but I'm sure we can both agree that McNabb is significantly better than anybody Shanahan was starting at QB post-Elway...

Posted by: brownwood26 | June 1, 2010 11:19 AM

And since my point was that Shanahan is not immune to bad personnel moves, I take your comment as agreement.

It should be noted that those 3 post-Elway QBs were handpicked by Shanahan.

I will concede that McNabb's body of work is superior to any of Shanahan's post-Elway QBs, but I'm still not sold on McNabb-to-the-Skins being such a brilliant personnel move. It smacks more of a "future-is-now" move with a QB whom I believe to be in decline. Sexy, yes. Smart? I'm not convinced.

As a fan, I hope I'm proven wrong.

Posted by: Alan4 | June 1, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

"So yeah...it's a passing league."

It's a passing league to the degree that it's almost killed the need to draft a running back in rounds 1-2.

And if you do draft a back that high, he has to be a versitile player who can also be important to the passing game.

Guys like R Bush, C Johnson, and soon, CJ Spiller are seemingly more important than the pounding, 230 pound back who needs the ball 25-30 times a game to be effective.

Try grinding out a win today, and some team will throw so many bombs to catch up, a defense will feel like it's Bahgdad.

You even wonder if some of the great backs from the past could survive or be as effective in a league where everyone is fast and athletic.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 1, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

OK, I'll save the mayor the trouble. News update: Washington Redskins uber-millionaire Albert Haynesworth is still fat and winded.

How's that RI?

Posted by: bostskin | June 1, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

OK, I'll save the mayor the trouble. News update: Washington Redskins uber-millionaire Albert Haynesworth is still fat and winded.

How's that RI?

Posted by: bostskin | June 1, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Sorry about the double post. RI gave me an error on the first one.

Posted by: bostskin | June 1, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

beeps

Posted by: zcezcest1 | June 1, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

What doesn't get mentioned enough in these posts is that Little Shanny developed the number one passing offense in the league at Houston, basically an unremarkable team. I'm thinking he also figures into the "how many more wins" question/answer.

Posted by: shanks1 | June 1, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Ditto for the Cardinals and Steelers in '08--if my math is right, they both went to the SB that year.

So yeah...it's a passing league.
==================================

The Steelers had the #1 defense and the #20 offense that year.

The Colts and Cardinals (without running games) both lost the superbowl. Using them as arguments is like talking about the Bills, Broncos, and Dolphins of the 80s and early 90's. None of which were winning superbowls.

BTW that Steelers team had 506 passes and 460 runs that year. When you adjust for the 43 passes that were thrown to running backs (Mewelde Moore and Parker) you have balance. NOT PASS HEAVY!

Posted by: ProfessorWrightBSU | June 1, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

I don't think either McIntosh (ouch...Mr. Glass Knees), or Rogars (was that MY man? or...Mr Vaseline hands) are in a solid bargaining position. If they sign, that would be a smart move - this isn't the same team as last year as they could be a part of something that MIGHT just be the start of something good - or...they could end up in Jacksonville, Buffalo, or Seattle, or some other place with equally bright prospects. I can take em or leave em - but I like the chemistry that's starting to occur - they should be in on that.

Posted by: whelms1 | June 1, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

"The Colts and Cardinals (without running games) both lost the superbowl. Using them as arguments is like talking about the Bills, Broncos, and Dolphins of the 80s and early 90's. None of which were winning superbowls." posted by professorwrightbsu

Didn't the Colts outgain the Saints on the ground last February, 99 to 51, averaging 5.2 yards per carry versus NO's 2.83?

And in '09, neither team ran the ball successfully. Pitt finished with 51 yards rushing vs AZ's 33, but the running game was not a factor in the outcome.

Maybe you're thinking of the NY/NE Super Bowl.

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

clowns will be clowns and if shananigan's, aka razor lip, gets these bums to 6-10 he is coach of the year hands down. they aren't paper thin, they are less than that and mcnabb will be getting worked like a speed bag starting with opening night. they just don't have a team, they have some good older players and a couple of young guys that have potential. but overall, they still stink and it will take 4 more drafts to get a core of youth to rebuild from.

Posted by: doyouktt | June 1, 2010 10:51 PM | Report abuse

After such detailed columns requiring at least five minutes every day, Jason Reid must be treated for exhaustion. Is this a fulltime job? I'm jealous...I think my post took more time than his "column."

Posted by: nativedc | June 2, 2010 5:30 AM | Report abuse

Seriously, they must be running a 3 step throw because im not impress with the Offensive linemen they have.

Same team different year.

Be first in line to buy your $10 pizza and $5 beer. lol

Posted by: shamken | June 2, 2010 7:50 AM | Report abuse

Seriously, they must be running a 3 step throw because im not impress with the Offensive linemen they have.

Same team different year.

Be first in line to buy your $10 pizza and $5 beer. lol

Posted by: shamken | June 2, 2010 7:50 AM | Report abuse


Beer is $8 the last time I was at Fed Up. Just another reason to -

BOYCOTT $NYDER OR BUY A 6-PACK FOR $48

STAY AT HOME AND COOK-OUT WITH THE FAMILY,PRICELESS!

Posted by: hessone | June 2, 2010 8:01 AM | Report abuse

9-7? What are you smoking?
4-12 realistically, 5-11 optimist..
O-line still sucks, Andy Reid still laughing hysterically at Allen for taking McSlob off his hands..what is he, about 300 lbs.? He should block for himself..our only proven deep threat is about to be suspended for HGH..season's in the toilet. I hope Jim Zorn is smiling as he cashes his checks this season..
HEY, good luck with the boycott, fatheads..owners get their TV money, you think they care whether you stuff your fat faces with their $8 dogs?

Posted by: markappraiser1 | June 2, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

9-7? What are you smoking?
4-12 realistically, 5-11 optimist..
O-line still sucks, Andy Reid still laughing hysterically at Allen for taking McSlob off his hands..what is he, about 300 lbs.? He should block for himself..our only proven deep threat is about to be suspended for HGH..season's in the toilet. I hope Jim Zorn is smiling as he cashes his checks this season..
HEY, good luck with the boycott, fatheads..owners get their TV money, you think they care whether you stuff your fat faces with their $8 dogs?

Posted by: markappraiser1 | June 2, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

9-7? really?

i think we can all agree that the old adage "on any given sunday..." holds true. therefore, let's make it 16-0.

oops - doc's here and i'm not supposed to be out of my specail room. see you guys la--------------

Posted by: shabbyreader | June 2, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

9-7? really?

i think we can all agree that the old adage "on any given sunday..." holds true. therefore, let's make it 16-0.

oops - doc's here and i'm not supposed to be out of my special room. see you guys la--------------

Posted by: shabbyreader | June 2, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Rogers... Please don't sign!

Posted by: oda155 | June 2, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Hello, summer, good place for shopping, fashion, sexy, personality, maturity, from here to begin. Are you ready?

===== http://www.shoes2.us/ ====

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30

Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $35

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $15

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,A r m a i n i) $15

New era cap $12

accept paypal or credit card and free shipping

====== http://www.shoes2.us/ ====

Posted by: luccitrade | June 2, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

9-7... highly doubt it!! I will never open my big mouth about the Skins in the off season because the season is usually all but over by Oct 31st!!! It's at least a comfort to know that I'm not the only 1 who is drowning in self hate by being a fan of this team!! Misery loves company. Just sit back in the old lazyboy and watch the train wreck this fall. I can't even get mad anymore it's just funny to me now.

Posted by: skins91r | June 2, 2010 11:00 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company