Network News

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

Wednesday Roundup and Reading List

The offensive line continues to be the topic du jour and Rick Maese writes about the unit's slow progress and injuries.

Among others, Derrick Dockery and Phillip Daniels are taking the long view:

"It's a work in progress," Dockery told Maese. "You just don't come together overnight."

As for whether the offensive line's struggles are more indicative of problems there or of the defense's superiority, Daniels said, "I don't expect them to come out here and look like the number one offense against us. Who does?"


If you're wondering which Redskins player is nearly fluent in French, Tracee Hamilton has the answer.

We'll be trying something a little different up here later this morning. If you want to keep an eye on Twitter without committing to it or prefer to keep one eye there and the other one here, we'll have a post that streams the Twitter feed of Skins writers, with me adding retweets/observations from others. All you have to do is keep hitting refresh. And, of course, we'll have blog updates. There's no truth to the rumor that we're merely trying to lighten chRis larRy's workload with this experiment.

By Cindy Boren  |  August 5, 2009; 5:44 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: No Inquiries About Levi Jones
Next: Quick Take on Mike Williams

Comments

Which came first, the chicken or the beep beep?

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 6:07 AM | Report abuse

There's no truth to the rumor that we're merely trying to lighten chRis larRy's workload with this experiment.

By Cindy Boren | August 5, 2009;

chrIs LaRry's workload? That's an oxymoron. When you think of ChrIs larrY, it's more about his playload than his "workload." Workload is for the likes of learnedhand or pdiddy.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 6:14 AM | Report abuse

Good comment by Daniels:

As for whether the offensive line's struggles are more indicative of problems there or of the defense's superiority, Daniels said, ""I don't expect them to come out here and look like the number one offense against us. Who does?"

Posted by: RedCherokee | August 5, 2009 6:30 AM | Report abuse

"On offense, the team brought back Dockery but parted ways with veterans Jon Jansen and Pete Kendall, making a leap of faith."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/04/AR2009080402820_3.html?sid=ST2009080403125

Wrong metaphor. A leap of faith is when you convert from, say, Methodist to Episcopalian. This is termed "a youth movement."

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 6:33 AM | Report abuse

Wrong metaphor. A leap of faith is when you convert from, say, Methodist to Episcopalian. This is termed "a youth movement."

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 6:33 AM


If they were replacing those guys with Heyer and Rinehart, I'd buy that. But I would hardly call Dockery, Williams, and Bridges "a youth movement".

Posted by: brownwood26 | August 5, 2009 6:39 AM | Report abuse

If they were replacing those guys with Heyer and Rinehart, I'd buy that. But I would hardly call Dockery, Williams, and Bridges "a youth movement".

Posted by: brownwood26 | August 5, 2009 6:39 AM

Kendall, 36 - Dockery, 29
Jansen, 33 - Heyer, 25

Younger by an average of 7.5 years = Youth movement

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Younger by an average of 7.5 years = Youth movement

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 7:01 AM

At two whole positions. I wouldn't call that a movement.

That's like saying the linebackers are undergoing a youth movement because Orakpo is younger than Marcus Washington.

But now I'm guilty of the semantics garbage you like to perpetrate...bottom line is that the Skins didn't get rid of Jansen and Kendall because they wanted to get younger there. They just didn't think they could do the job anymore.

Posted by: brownwood26 | August 5, 2009 7:10 AM | Report abuse

I would tend to disagree with you on this point Brownwood. I believe 2/5 of the line going younger is certainly the beginning of a youth movement. They got rid of those 2 guys because they couldn't do the job any longer because they are too old. As you say, splitting hairs, semantics, maps...

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:26 AM | Report abuse

talent_evaluator

"Successful teams keep up a continuous flow of good, big, highly drafted linemen. The key reason why this team is not successful is because it does not."


The subject was Joe Bugel's effectiveness as an offensive line coach.

And I mean no disrespect at all towards Joe Bugel, a guy I admire as a person and coach.

Yes: the FO brings in the talent, and the coaches 'coaches' it up.

And having never sat in a draft discussion room with NFL FO types, it would be hard to speculate about just how decisions are made.

Sure, Buges is in a situation where he being handed scrap players and undrafted types offseason after offseason with the occasional drafted linemen thrown in for good measure.

But I stand by the post: another season of shaky offensive line play should force the team to take a cold look at J Buges and treat him much in the same blunt way players get treated when it appears the game has passed them by.

The NFL is a business for the players and the coaches.

And if a guy can't advocate on draft day for the type of guys he wants or polish up the undrafted gems he winds up with, maybe he should move on.

We all have to retire at some point, you know.

Posted by: MistaMoe | August 5, 2009 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: alex35332 | August 5, 2009 7:37 AM | Report abuse

time to man up here on RI. Who among us could just drop and do 60 push ups like buges did??

I consider myself in pretty good shape, at the gym 3 day's a week, but I'm not sure that I could........

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | August 5, 2009 7:37 AM | Report abuse

I would tend to disagree with you on this point Brownwood. I believe 2/5 of the line going younger is certainly the beginning of a youth movement. They got rid of those 2 guys because they couldn't do the job any longer because they are too old. As you say, splitting hairs, semantics, maps...

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:26 AM


But "youth movement" says to me you're putting in younger guys who lack experience but have an upside. I associate that term with taking your lumps today in the name of being really good there tomorrow. You can't say that about anyone on the Redskins line, save for Heyer.

Say what you will about the likes of Dockery, Bridges, and Williams...those guys are nothing more than stop-gaps.

Besides, the Redskins seldom have enough draft picks to have have a true "youth movement".

Posted by: brownwood26 | August 5, 2009 7:37 AM | Report abuse

I believe that the Skins believe Rinehart fits that description Brownwood.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:40 AM | Report abuse

Why is everybody so down on the play of the OL. It hasn't even been a week, we haven't even played a preseason game yet. The Offense always takes a bit longer to get on the same page then the defense does. Given them time to get together as a unit.

Posted by: nemesis_1981 | August 5, 2009 7:42 AM | Report abuse

I heard a piece on the radio the other day that was talking about how most teams that are considered among the tops in the league are building more through free agency than drafting. The Patriots, Steelers, and Giants have many more free agents on the roster at the start of the season than homegrown draft picks. The Skins had far more last year than any of those teams and are on course to have even more this year. I guess their goes that theory that winners in this league build through the draft. (of course this discussion didn't take into account starter ratios but...) The Colts were more in line with where we were at.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:44 AM | Report abuse

I heard a piece on the radio the other day that was talking about how most teams that are considered among the tops in the league are building more through free agency than drafting. The Patriots, Steelers, and Giants have many more free agents on the roster at the start of the season than homegrown draft picks. The Skins had far more last year than any of those teams and are on course to have even more this year. I guess their goes that theory that winners in this league build through the draft. (of course this discussion didn't take into account starter ratios but...) The Colts were more in line with where we were at.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:44 AM | Report abuse

I heard a piece on the radio the other day that was talking about how most teams that are considered among the tops in the league are building more through free agency than drafting. The Patriots, Steelers, and Giants have many more free agents on the roster at the start of the season than homegrown draft picks. The Skins had far more last year than any of those teams and are on course to have even more this year. I guess their goes that theory that winners in this league build through the draft. (of course this discussion didn't take into account starter ratios but...) The Colts were more in line with where we were at.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:44 AM | Report abuse

Sorry about the triple post, I don't know why it does that some times.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:45 AM | Report abuse

brownwood26,
I have to side with TE on this one. I think the Redskins did want to get younger and healthier on the offensive line. I applaud that. I applaud signing Dockery and I am still a little on the fence about Bridges, but philosophically, I thought they were steps in the right direction. I am not sure they went far enough. The team has to look at a guy like Randy Thomas and ask themselves if there is enough left in the tank to get them through another season. It sounds like Thomas is not back fully from injury, but this sounds like a broken record with the older guys: they are never fully back so they don't play at a high level and thus it is hard to evaluate them. I think this made evaluating Jansen so difficult. Was it him slowing down because of age, or was he not totally rehabilitated? I think the final outcome is a guy who has had such an injury history is a liability regardless of potential and the team should get someone healthier... and younger.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | August 5, 2009 7:49 AM | Report abuse

talent_evaluator

"Successful teams keep up a continuous flow of good, big, highly drafted linemen. The key reason why this team is not successful is because it does not."


blah, blah, blah...

Posted by: MistaMoe | August 5, 2009 7:29 AM

You got the right train, baby, but the wrong yo-yo, Moe. You should be aiming that at Cork. I never wrote anything as serious as that. I'm just here for your entertainment...

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 7:50 AM | Report abuse

nemesis_1981

"The Offense always takes a bit longer to get on the same page then the defense does."

Yes and no.

Why 'no'?: Given that the skins' offense is in the second year of the same system and that for the most part, the same players are running said system, it should be 'clickin' to a greater degree, shouldn't it?

Why 'yes': Yes, the offense is facing a strong defense every day, something which only highlights its weaknesses.

Give the unit time, and '..it should pull together..' as you say.

Posted by: MistaMoe | August 5, 2009 7:54 AM | Report abuse

talent_evaluator

"...blah, blah, blah..."

I am amazed at your ability to imitate my verbal style in cyberspace.

Posted by: MistaMoe | August 5, 2009 7:57 AM | Report abuse

You're the man, Moe. Maybe I can imitate your verbal style but I can't touch your swagga.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | August 5, 2009 7:59 AM | Report abuse

talent_evaluator

"...but I can't touch your swagga."

I'm closing in on 50, which means my swagga comes from a little blue pill.

Posted by: MistaMoe | August 5, 2009 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Beep Beep

Posted by: torqued21 | August 5, 2009 8:24 AM | Report abuse

I heard a piece on the radio the other day that was talking about how most teams that are considered among the tops in the league are building more through free agency than drafting. The Patriots, Steelers, and Giants have many more free agents on the roster at the start of the season than homegrown draft picks. The Skins had far more last year than any of those teams and are on course to have even more this year. I guess their goes that theory that winners in this league build through the draft. (of course this discussion didn't take into account starter ratios but...) The Colts were more in line with where we were at.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:44 AM | Report abuse

I'm going to respond to the third of three posts, scamp. :)

I think free-agency has changed how teams develop Olineman. Used to be that draftees could be put on the roster and developed over time. Now you can draft someone and sign him for 4 years, but he may only develop in the 3rd or 4th year. Remember Dockery. He began to play immediately, I think, but didn't develop into a stud OG until 4th year, then was lost thru FA to Bills. He didn't work in their system, but I feel good about Buges fitting him back into our system.

I also think that Buges has a good bit of say on what linemen we draft or sign in FA. I suspect that he prefers to sign FA's with 3-4 years of development in weight room and being in NFL for that period to starting with 22 year olds. The exception to that would be a top-rated OT. But the top 4 OT's were gone by pick #13. So Buges probably said that we could get comparables in FA to anyone acquired in 3rd round of draft.

Posted by: frediefritz | August 5, 2009 8:31 AM | Report abuse

"I heard a piece on the radio the other day that was talking about how most teams that are considered among the tops in the league are building more through free agency than drafting. The Patriots, Steelers, and Giants have many more free agents on the roster at the start of the season than homegrown draft picks. The Skins had far more last year than any of those teams and are on course to have even more this year. I guess their goes that theory that winners in this league build through the draft. (of course this discussion didn't take into account starter ratios but...) The Colts were more in line with where we were at.Posted by: scampbell1975"

I think in the modern era FAs you have to judge the team's offseason by looking at combination of draftees and FAs, rather than one or the other. Who you sign in FA clearly influences who you draft, and vice versa.

Posted by: Samson151 | August 5, 2009 8:42 AM | Report abuse

I heard a piece on the radio the other day that was talking about how most teams that are considered among the tops in the league are building more through free agency than drafting. The Patriots, Steelers, and Giants have many more free agents on the roster at the start of the season than homegrown draft picks. The Skins had far more last year than any of those teams and are on course to have even more this year. I guess their goes that theory that winners in this league build through the draft. (of course this discussion didn't take into account starter ratios but...) The Colts were more in line with where we were at.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | August 5, 2009 7:44 AM | Report abuse
_________

Thanks for the intellectually lazy post. It doesn't address the fact that we never have draft picks and thus don't have depth. It doesn't address whether they still have more draft picks on their roster than us. It doesn't address the fact that we usually make a large FA signing as opposed to numerous mid-level signings.

Instead of Albert Haynesworth for $100 mil, I would rather have 4 very good player for $25 mil, for instance. Perhaps two on D line, two on O line.

Posted by: rphilli721 | August 5, 2009 9:31 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company