Network News

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

What's the Offseason Plan? You Tell Us

As promised, the Jasons have delivered their analysis of what the Redskins might be considering in the 2009 offseason, and how the moves made a year ago by the Ravens, Dolphins and Falcons might be instructive.

Some highlights:

The Ravens believe in drafting linemen the way baseball teams stockpile young pitchers. Baltimore has selected 13 offensive or defensive linemen in the top four rounds since 2000, restocking the team after its 2001 Super Bowl victory. The Redskins have taken just four interior linemen that high in that span. ...

Said Eric DeCosta, the Ravens' director of college scouting:

"Some people think you've got to have big-money guys at all the sexy positions -- running back and quarterback and wide receiver -- and take care of that first. We kind of look at it differently."

Also:

Parcells immediately tried to replenish his lines. Of Miami's nine draft picks in April, six were offensive or defensive linemen. ... Parcells quickly soured on defensive lineman Jason Taylor, 34.

The Redskins, of course, dealt a second-round selection in the 2009 draft and a sixth-round pick in 2010 for Taylor.

In the wake of the inauguration, we're all about building a consensus here ... so what do you think? Look at the video below to hear Mike Wise's take, and fire up your webcam to respond. Or comment below in traditional, keyboard-based form.

And if that's not enough for you, join the Jasons for a chat at 12:30 today.

The conversation on this topic started here Monday, but let's keep it going. There's obviously a lot to discuss.

By Jon DeNunzio  |  January 20, 2009; 11:05 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Redskins Pass on Local Pass Rusher
Next: Another Look at Team Building

Comments

sign ron meeks.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 20, 2009 11:29 PM | Report abuse

Ok.
So take a look at the Ravens draft history over the last few years Here.
They draft linemen, all right. And wide receivers. And everything works great on defense.
But look at the offensive talent they've managed to identify and accumulate! Well, let's just say "draft", 'cause I don't recognize many of those names.
So if the blueprint is to "get a couple of hall of famers and surround them with good talent", well I'm for it!
But if drafting 27 offensive players since 2004 gets you all the way to #18 in offense, then maybe the occasional free agent isn't such a bad idea. Because in heaven, your team's defense is the Ravens of the last few years, but in hell, your the Ravens are your offense.

Posted by: daggar | January 21, 2009 12:50 AM | Report abuse

They really now have no choice but to draft interior linemen on the offensive line. Albeit the favorite in the Superbowl has an offensive line that was patched together this year with free agents and lower round draft picks (2nd in the league in sacks allowed). Still it was enough to get them where they are now ... but not without a concussion or 2 for their starting QB.

The big problem at those positions for the Redskins is age and injury. It makes no sense for them to go any other way at this point.

On defense its not quite the same. But its getting there. The line and linebacking positions need replenishment. If they trade Rogers they will again need to replenish the backfield. Clearly losing Sean Taylor hurt but they don't have more than one true cover corner and he is aging.

A lot of bad FA decisions. Poor trades involving draft picks. Its had its toll. Now its time to hunker down and do it right even if it hurts for a year or two.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 12:57 AM | Report abuse

This is the best part of JLC's latest story:

"When you look at who really plays, we're an old team, man, with a lot of guys who are always hurt taking up a lot of cap space."

This annonymous 'Skins player surely couldn't be talking about Shawn Springs could they?

Posted by: Poopy_McPoop | January 21, 2009 2:13 AM | Report abuse

dagger wrote: Because in heaven, your team's defense is the Ravens of the last few years, but in hell, your the Ravens are your offense."

What he said....

Posted by: Samson151 | January 21, 2009 2:32 AM | Report abuse

I think it all depends on who's on the board when the Skins pick comes up. Obviously, offesive line is a key position to address, but if there's a run on tackles early and we may be able to get someone outside the top five at that position, and a top outside linebacker is available that could take our defense to another level is available, I think we'd have to take him. We could address the offensive line with out next pick, taking the best available player, and nuture him.

Though I don't think this is likely, I think this is the one scenario that could sway the Redskins from taking an offensive tackle with their number one pick. It's the position that will have an immediate impact and is a long term investment. It's not a sexy pick, but it's a smart pick, and smart picks win championships.

Hail to the Redskins!

Posted by: brocknbone33 | January 21, 2009 2:55 AM | Report abuse

The only way to make a team motivated to perform is to know that the best player will play. Not the highest draft choice, the priciest free agent, or the designated starter you have committed yourself to. Know that if you do the best, you will play. Then you are motivated to do your best.

Jason Campbell should only be the starter if he is the best quarterback. Do people think he is so fragile that if you don't commit to him that he will collapse in a heap, unable to take the pressure of competition? Let the players have a fair and equal chance to start, in open competition. And once a starter is chosen, let it be clear that it will last as long as he remains the best option, not indefinitely.

Campbell will never be the best he can be while being protected in a bubble so that Todd Collins and Colt Brennan are artificially prevented from ascending to the starting position. Campbell knows he has to play utterly abysmally for God only knows how many games (years?) to lose the starting position. Is that going to make anyone play their best?

Posted by: shane2229 | January 21, 2009 3:05 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry, but Vinny C. has proven himself to be an idiot. I believe he will draft a corner, a running back, a quarterback, and maybe one lineman with our last pick just to make it look like he grasps the concept of how to build a team. He's so completely married to his idea that drafting the "best" player available is the right way to go, that I can't make myself believe that he will even have any linemen, on either side of the ball, anywhere near the top half of his player list.

I was born a Skins fan, and will go to my grave a Skins fan, but I've become resigned to the fact that we will continue to be a mediocre team with absolutely no chance of making a run at the Lombardi trophy for at least another 10 years. And that's only if we get rid of Vinny.

Posted by: Filodough | January 21, 2009 3:34 AM | Report abuse

The Redskins need to decide whether they're going to blow this up this year or next year.

The defense has the guys who could become cap casualties - Taylor, Griffin, Washington, and Springs. These guys had their moments last year and proved when healthy that they are still the best at their posistions. However, they also proved that you can't depend on them to stay healthy.

The problem is that there is no one on the roster that can replace them. Evans is a unrestricted free agent. Lorenzo Alexander is the only other DT under contract. Blades is not a replacement for Washington. And no other corner can play effectively in the slot. So if you cut costs with the old guys, you then have to use your savings to sign four defensive starters.

I suspect the 'skins will fix some contracts, draft a DT in round 1, start Rinehart at LG, draft a tackle in the 3rd and roll the dice with injuries for one more year; barely making or missing the playoffs.

Posted by: bangkokben | January 21, 2009 7:10 AM | Report abuse

The Redskins need to decide whether they're going to blow this up this year or next year.

The defense has the guys who could become cap casualties - Taylor, Griffin, Washington, and Springs. These guys had their moments last year and proved when healthy that they are still the best at their posistions. However, they also proved that you can't depend on them to stay healthy.

The problem is that there is no one on the roster that can replace them. Evans is a unrestricted free agent. Lorenzo Alexander is the only other DT under contract. Blades is not a replacement for Washington. And no other corner can play effectively in the slot. So if you cut costs with the old guys, you then have to use your savings to sign four defensive starters.

I suspect the 'skins will fix some contracts, draft a DT in round 1, start Rinehart at LG, draft a tackle in the 3rd and roll the dice with injuries for one more year; barely making or missing the playoffs.

Posted by: bangkokben | January 21, 2009 7:14 AM | Report abuse

The Ravens believe in drafting linemen the way baseball teams stockpile young pitchers. Baltimore has selected 13 offensive or defensive linemen in the top four rounds since 2000, restocking the team after its 2001 Super Bowl victory. The Redskins have taken just four interior linemen that high in that span. ...


and that has gotten them a winning record every other year since their superbowl....

And of the 13 high draft picks they only hit on 1 deffensive and 4 offensive linemen,which by anyones standard is the easiest of the positions to draft..

And not 1 good wideout,running back,cornerback,a average tightend,a great saftey,and the qb remains to be seen.

So when they go 5 and 11 again don't be surprised

Posted by: jumbo5383 | January 21, 2009 7:39 AM | Report abuse

And their o-line didn't look to good last week

Posted by: jumbo5383 | January 21, 2009 7:41 AM | Report abuse

best of all, the Ravens.

I like the Ravens and all but come on. How many SB have they played in? If JLC statement had said the Pats I could go with that.

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | January 21, 2009 7:48 AM | Report abuse

And does anyone remember which THREE draft pick the Ravens gave up for Willis Mcgahee when they then gave him
$40.1 million dollar contract.

Posted by: jumbo5383 | January 21, 2009 7:57 AM | Report abuse

What a depressing article. We sucked before, we suck now, and we'll continue to suck again.

Posted by: peterandmeredith | January 21, 2009 8:16 AM | Report abuse

Wow JL! You must've really had a boner on writing this article.

You got to dump on Vinny and gush over your favorite team at the same time!

Other than that most of your points are valid. Vinny sucks, Danny is ruining the franchise.

Posted by: Predator48 | January 21, 2009 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Here's what I think the Skins need to do:
1. Since Dan doesn't seem to be able to part ways with Vinny at least hire on a proven Scout/Consultant who can evaluate talent better.
2. Draft the best available OT at the 13th pick or either trade it for two lower picks perhaps a 2nd and 3rd. Cut Jansen.
3. Make sure the "red shirt" draft class of '08 knows the playbook. Then play them. Put Kelly at the #1WR Put Thomas at the #2WR and put Moss in the slot (i.e Wes Welker)
4. Explore possible trades to get two decent draft picks: perhaps can't catch the ball if it hits me in the chest Rodgers or even Ladell Betts if necessary.
5. Do not resign Jason Taylor, unless he is willing to renegotiate his contract.
6. Do not sign Jason Campbell to a contract ext until 6 games into the season. Quietly open up the QB competition in Training Camp and see what the others can do.
6. Do not Suggs or Haynesworth we just don't have the cap room for either. See#1 before acquiring any additional players...

anyone agree?

Posted by: snowbill27 | January 21, 2009 8:20 AM | Report abuse

Did anyone else see that Dallas was interested in signing Ray Lewis as a FA this off season? I'm not happy with the prospects of playing against Lewis twice... or maybe three times in a season...

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 8:27 AM | Report abuse

Did anyone else see that Dallas was interested in signing Ray Lewis as a FA this off season? I'm not happy with the prospects of playing against Lewis twice... or maybe three times in a season...

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 8:27 AM |

nagoose,

Dallas is crumbling and Lewis is not the same player when he does not have a great NT playing in front of him.

Dallas has no great NT, Lewis would be a fool to go there with the crap going on in that locker room.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 21, 2009 8:35 AM | Report abuse

Here's what I think the Skins need to do:
1. Since Dan doesn't seem to be able to part ways with Vinny at least hire on a proven Scout/Consultant who can evaluate talent better.

They already did this Morroco Brown, now they need to give him some say.

2. Draft the best available OT at the 13th pick or either trade it for two lower picks perhaps a 2nd and 3rd. Cut Jansen.

Agree on OT or trade down if all the OT are gone. Although if Raji is there he is hard to pass over.

It's cheaper to keep jansen as a backup and cut him next year.

3. Make sure the "red shirt" draft class of '08 knows the playbook. Then play them. Put Kelly at the #1WR Put Thomas at the #2WR and put Moss in the slot (i.e Wes Welker)

Agree on letting the young guys play.

4. Explore possible trades to get two decent draft picks: perhaps can't catch the ball if it hits me in the chest Rodgers or even Ladell Betts if necessary.

Not sure you would get any value for either of them.

5. Do not resign Jason Taylor, unless he is willing to renegotiate his contract.

I would not resign him at all, but if you can get him for 2mil I guess it would be OK.

6. Do not sign Jason Campbell to a contract ext until 6 games into the season. Quietly open up the QB competition in Training Camp and see what the others can do.

I agree I'm still not sold on JC.

6. Do not Suggs or Haynesworth we just don't have the cap room for either. See#1 before acquiring any additional players...

I agree we don't want either of these guys for obvious reasons.

anyone agree?

Posted by: snowbill27 | January 21, 2009 8:20 AM |

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 21, 2009 8:40 AM | Report abuse

The Ravens just draft well, period.

Yes, they have lineman.

But over the years, they have also drafted or brought in: Derrick Mason, Ed Reed, Odalius Thomas, Bart Scott, Joe Flacco, Suggs, Chris McCalister, Todd Heap, Jim Leonard, Samari Rolle, Kawanaki--skill guys who fit what they do and help their scheme.

And of course, they do have some bombs like Boller, McGahee, Mark Clayton.

Ozzie Newsome is what they got to make their talent so good.

The Redskins?: all we got is the witless Wizards of Oz.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 8:50 AM | Report abuse

say what you will about Ray Lewis, but the guy can still hit, and in my opinion, he's the type of guy who can fix Dallas' main problem: leadership...

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 8:51 AM | Report abuse

If we did not have LFB I would want us to go after Lewis but I don't think we can afford it nor do I see him able to switch to OLB

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 8:52 AM | Report abuse


3. Make sure the "red shirt" draft class of '08 knows the playbook. Then play them. Put Kelly at the #1WR Put Thomas at the #2WR and put Moss in the slot (i.e Wes Welker)

Agree on letting the young guys play.

I'm sure it will go really well with two starting recievers that have a total of 11 catches.


5. Do not resign Jason Taylor, unless he is willing to renegotiate his contract.

I would not resign him at all, but if you can get him for 2mil I guess it would be OK.

This point makes no sense because he is under contract through next year.

6. Do not sign Jason Campbell to a contract ext until 6 games into the season. Quietly open up the QB competition in Training Camp and see what the others can do.

I agree I'm still not sold on JC.

There is no other option on teh team for QB. Unless you are going to use the 13th pick to draft a qb you better sign him soon or he will become very expensive when you get around to it.

6. Do not Suggs or Haynesworth we just don't have the cap room for either. See#1 before acquiring any additional players...

I agree we don't want either of these guys for obvious reasons.

Obvious reason being that they are 2 of the top 7 pass rushers in the NFL? Who woudl ever want that? Or is it the fact adding them would improve current players like Taylors performance?

Posted by: Pleepleus | January 21, 2009 8:55 AM | Report abuse

snowbill27 as far as the #13 pick goes, I would draft the best available tackle, either defense or offense. I'd let Taylor walk. I'd sign JC to a new contract during the offseason. I'd do this because at worst JC is an average QB that won't lose games for you. At best he continues to develop into a top 10 QB.

Posted by: TWISI | January 21, 2009 8:56 AM | Report abuse

say what you will about Ray Lewis, but the guy can still hit, and in my opinion, he's the type of guy who can fix Dallas' main problem: leadership...

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 8:51 AM | Report abuse

I'm sure that adding Ray Lewis to a locker room that is out of hand will change the locker rooms attitude...

Posted by: Pleepleus | January 21, 2009 8:56 AM | Report abuse

why should we look at the revanes when they are not the ones in the Super Bowl?

We should be lookng at the Cardinals and Steelers......

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Pleep,
Of all the guys who might throw TO against the lockers; are you saying Lewis isn't the one to once and forall shut him up? I think you definitely want a Defensive guy to do it, TO is scared of hard hitters (anyone remember him short arming a bunch of sure catches because of fear of Sean Taylor?)... Plus didn't Lewis kill/stab a guy?

It's probably a moot point anyway because I don't see Baltimore letting him go, he's too important to their identity...

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 9:02 AM | Report abuse

as far as the #13 pick goes, I would draft the best available tackle, either defense or offense. I'd let Taylor walk. I'd sign JC to a new contract during the offseason. I'd do this because at worst JC is an average QB that won't lose games for you. At best he continues to develop into a top 10 QB.

Re: True but what if he is really not going to get this West Coast offense, which I might remind you the #1 asset a QB needs to have is a quick release, enough said. So you sign JC to a long term deal and he never gets it with that style offense, now you basically have to fire JZ and change your offensive philosophy? Right?
Don't get me wrong I like JC but you have to make sure everything is on the same page before you commit long-term, I think that's what a lot of other teams with GM do much better than the Skins. I.E. we picked up Clinton Portis, who really didn't fit Joe Gibbs style of running at the time, right?

Posted by: snowbill27 | January 21, 2009 9:07 AM | Report abuse

"Some people think you've got to have big-money guys at all the sexy positions -- running back and quarterback and wide receiver -- and take care of that first. We kind of look at it differently."

Traded 3 picks for McGahee

Used 3 First rounders on Flacco, as well as Boller, and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they trade up to select Flacco?

Saying. Doing.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 9:07 AM | Report abuse

I said this yesterday: If Ray Lewis signs with the girls, then TO will not be on the team when the season starts.

Posted by: Original_etrod | January 21, 2009 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Good morning! The Jasons will be chatting at 12:30 today. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/01/20/DI2009012003228.html

Posted by: Cindy Boren | January 21, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

The Redskins are not going to win the super bowl until they commit to running the team the right way. Lousy drafts, mismanagement of picks/trades, an afterthought HC who did better than expected..the list goes on and on.
The Skins need a real GM and scout team, an owner who stays out of the freakin' way, young talent, etc...etc....etc.....watch out for the cheifs next year while the skins eek their way to another 8-8 record.
if the skins are committed to Zorn, WCO a QB better suited to the scheme would be better, Campbell was drafted for an entirely different offense...the whole thing is completely stupid

Posted by: fullonfully | January 21, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

snowbill27 I'd argue that the first 8 games of this past year shows that JC can be effective in the WCO. It was the first year in the system, but when he had protection, and an effective running game, he was making good decision and getting the ball to the right guys. Plus JC has improved every year since he started. Do you see the state of QB play in the NFL? IF JC walks and Colt plays like a 6th round draft pick, then the Skins will be looking at another 3-4 years before they can have any consistent play at QB. The skins will really be the new "Lions" of the NFL>

Posted by: TWISI | January 21, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

"if the skins are committed to Zorn, WCO a QB better suited to the scheme would be better, Campbell was drafted for an entirely different offense...the whole thing is completely stupid"

Actually the smallest amount of research would have shown that JCamp played in a WCO his senior year at Auburn, and did so with outstanding results. I believe they were undefeated that year, 13-0.

QB is not one of the problems with this team.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 9:18 AM | Report abuse

"Some people think you've got to have big-money guys at all the sexy positions -- running back and quarterback and wide receiver -- and take care of that first. We kind of look at it differently."

Traded 3 picks for McGahee

Used 3 First rounders on Flacco, as well as Boller, and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they trade up to select Flacco?

Saying. Doing.


Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 9:07 AM | Report abuse


Lets not for get the first round studs Travis Taylor,and Mark Clayton..and third round gems such as Cris Redmond

Posted by: jumbo5383 | January 21, 2009 9:22 AM | Report abuse

jumbo, thats kind of my point. He can claim that the team doesn't do something, however their history proves him wrong.

Furthermore, for what the past 6, 8, years now, the offense has stunk, and this team has been wholly reliant on the defense to get them wins. So despite what he's saying, he has spent MULTIPLE picks on offense but with little success...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

"We should be lookng at the Cardinals and Steelers......"

Yes! Russ Grimm, HC! Dude turned around Cards horrendous O line in 1.5 years. I mean they protect Kurt Warner, fer cryin out loud....dude hasn't laterally moved since 99.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

"So despite what he's saying, he has spent MULTIPLE picks on offense but with little success...

Posted by: BeantownGreg"

It's all relative. He never said they never use picks or spend money at the sexy positions, just that they take care of the other guys first.

Compare the resources allocated to the lines vs. sexy positions of the Ravens to that of the lines vs. sexy positions of the Redskins. My guess is you'll see a much higher percentage of resources going to the lines for the Ravens than you will from the Redskins (which is why they can still be successful despite the lack of success they've had at acquiring "sexy" positions).

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 9:37 AM | Report abuse

The Redskins are not going to win the super bowl until they commit to running the team the right way. Lousy drafts, mismanagement of picks/trades, an afterthought HC who did better than expected..the list goes on and on.
The Skins need a real GM and scout team, an owner who stays out of the freakin' way, young talent, etc...etc....etc.....watch out for the cheifs next year while the skins eek their way to another 8-8 record.
if the skins are committed to Zorn, WCO a QB better suited to the scheme would be better, Campbell was drafted for an entirely different offense...the whole thing is completely stupid

Posted by: fullonfully

I disagree about the drafting... I think we're somewhere in the middle of the pack as far as that goes. I think it's a little too soon to see what the '08 redshirt class will do, and I think we have a lot of potential there; and for the number of picks we have had, we have seen some pretty good talent...

We've traded away a lot of picks, the Jason Taylor trade turned out terrible, I thought, at the time, it would've been a good move, so I won't condemn it... but there have been other moves like the signing of restricted FAs for a number of years that cost us many picks, giving up a 2nd rounder in addition to Champ Bailey for CP... things like that have cost us dearly in the long run...

A real GM would be nice and a non meddlesome owner would be even better... but that's not what we have. Synder bought the team, and he seemingly has the right to be involved in the ways he sees fit... It seems like the grass is always greener in dealing with GMs, they are always the first blamed/run out of town. I think the fact is that an average GM is right about 50% of the time...

I think you're right about Campbell... he's a square peg that we're trying to fit in a round hole. I think it's crucial that this year/off season that Zorn decides if it's better to start over with a new QB or to further shape Campbell into the mold of a WCO QB (if possible)...

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

"why should we look at the revanes when they are not the ones in the Super Bowl?

We should be lookng at the Cardinals and Steelers......

Posted by: 4thFloor"

Because the Ravens have a young and inexperienced head coach, a young and inexperienced QB, and turned around from a bad 6-10 campaign to go 11-5 the next year.

The Steelers hardly mirror our situation. Cardinals...maybe. But only if Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly turn into Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

"We should be lookng at the Cardinals and Steelers......"

Yes! Russ Grimm, HC! Dude turned around Cards horrendous O line in 1.5 years. I mean they protect Kurt Warner, fer cryin out loud....dude hasn't laterally moved since 99.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 9:28 AM

Exactomondo.

Also, what are the 2 things those teams have in common?

Grimm and Whisenhunt...........

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

psp, agree to disagree...I don't think its all relative.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

If anything we need more sexy positions. I say draft the no 1 cheer leader for the team with our first pick.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Is this O line D line dead horse ever going to rest in peace?

Posted by: Gweez | January 21, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

"which I might remind you the #1 asset a QB needs to have is a quick release, enough said.

Posted by: snowbill27"

Really? The #1 asset? Not decision-making ability, ability to read the defense, ability to remain calm and poised and not get flustered? A quick release is more important than these things?

I beg to differ. Significantly.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

its all "all relative"....

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Because the Ravens have a young and inexperienced head coach, a young and inexperienced QB, and turned around from a bad 6-10 campaign to go 11-5 the next year.

The Steelers hardly mirror our situation. Cardinals...maybe. But only if Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly turn into Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 9:40 AM

Remember Dave Wandstat (sp?) the up and coming coach of the Bears in the late 90s who went 13-3 n his 1st year as a head coach???

How great is he now and how many Super Bowls has he won since?

(The point is being a one year wonder is a dime a dozen. Doing it year over year s something else.)

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

think it's crucial that this year/off season that Zorn decides if it's better to start over with a new QB or to further shape Campbell into the mold of a WCO QB (if possible)...

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 9:40 AM

Zoren has stated several times that he has been impressed and enthused about JC development. Zorn has already stated that JC is the starter. The one benfit of the doubt that I'll give Zorn is on the play of the QBs.

Posted by: TWISI | January 21, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

You can't take this guy seriously when he writes this in his article:

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

Oh my! What a crime? He giggled??? We should cut him now. We can't have that type of player in the locker room. Just tragic.

Posted by: pmd231 | January 21, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

chrislarry

Yeah, let's look at the cards, stillers, iggles, ravens, pats: teams that put players on the field who either fit what they do well or are young, fast and versitile.

During a second look at the card v. iggles, I was amazed at how each team's scheme had players who fit what they do.

The Skins brought in a coach who wants to pass with o-lineman who are suited for run blocking.

The passing coach likes the ball to go short so the small receivers get yards after the catch which they don't get as the big q-back performs best when he's slinging the ball up into the center of the field.

The running back likes the stretch play. The guards like to pull, trap, and sweep.

Again: Jasno's analysis should be that the parts the Skins have on offense don't fit what they like to do.

And that the same guys who put together the matchless puzzle called the Skins offense are about to start tinkering with it all over again.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Is this O line D line dead horse ever going to rest in peace?

Posted by: Gweez

It will when we start drafting some that can play.

Posted by: Predator48 | January 21, 2009 9:48 AM | Report abuse

I think that you have to work on the offensive and defensive lines, first and foremost. Not one-year fixes, but guys you can build around.

Posted by: wp11239 | January 21, 2009 9:49 AM | Report abuse

I thought the no 1 asset a QB needs is to have the ability to breath and stuff.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

"The Skins brought in a coach who wants to pass with o-lineman who are suited for run blocking"

mo, did you watch the first 8 games? How were they winning those games?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

"Youth will be served!"

Posted by: Keyskonnection | January 21, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

"(The point is being a one year wonder is a dime a dozen. Doing it year over year s something else.)

Posted by: 4thFloor"

That's true, but aren't the Ravens pretty good at this also? They do have 6 winning seasons since 2000 and a Super Bowl ring. It's not exactly average production they're throwing out there.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Zoren has stated several times that he has been impressed and enthused about JC development. Zorn has already stated that JC is the starter. The one benfit of the doubt that I'll give Zorn is on the play of the QBs.

Posted by: TWISI

That's my point... Campbell can be further developed into a WC QB under Zorn's scheme... but Zorn has to decide is it worth the effort to teach Campbell to release the ball quicker, or draft a QB that already has the mechanics that he's looking for. I've said it a number of times, Campbell is definitely an NFL calibur QB, I just don't know if he fits in here with the type of WCO that Zorn wants to run.

If Campbell fails, then Zorn should be held accountable too since this is his decision.

Posted by: nagoose | January 21, 2009 9:55 AM | Report abuse

I was glad to hear Sherman Smith say that the identity of the offense is as a run first team because the passing offense is still in it's infancy. Hopefully, that means the return of the offense from the first part of last year.

Posted by: TWISI | January 21, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Is this O line D line dead horse ever going to rest in peace?

Posted by: Gweez

It will when we start drafting some that can play.

Posted by: Predator48 | January 21, 2009 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Wow that poor horse. His suffering has just started. (BTW I was referring to the posts not the comments.)

Posted by: Gweez | January 21, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

By the cycle of the NFL tells us that 2 out of the 3 teams beibg showed as an example in the aticle done by the 'Jasons' will not be over .500 next year.

Again, if a team hasn't won the SB, why should we follow their lead?

Who wants to be like the Eagles who have went to 5 NFC Championship games and lost 4 of them plus the SB they went to?

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Mista...I agree. Today's coaching profession (across all sports) is filled with guys who have "systems" and hardly waver from their "beliefs" and "methods". This is bad coaching, bad management, bad leadership. Without going off the rails I would suggest this ill invades other aspects of society as well.

Good coaches (managers/leaders/ blah blah blah)are pragmatists above all else, not ideologues. They shape plans to situation, personnel, conditions..yadda x 3.

Zorn should have looked in the fridge and said "what can I make outta this" not planed a trip to the farmers market 6 states away....

Zorn deserves more time, but I fundamentally believe he is a "my way or the highway" type. I mean he is a Dr. Laura fan....

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

"Who wants to be like the Eagles who have went to 5 NFC Championship games and lost 4 of them plus the SB they went to?"

I would glady have the Skins be a winning team that at least has the CHANCE to be successful in the postseason, instead of constantly talking about the draft and FA.

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 21, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

I think first order of business is to give JC a contract extension. I'm not talking tony romo extension. But a little something wouldnt hurt maybe a 2 year extension. We give outrageous extensions to less productive players such as Lloyd, archuleta, randle el to name a few. You cant have your qb thinking about his status for 2010 while he is getting ready for the upcoming season. QB is a totally different animal than DE or WR. QB has to have confidence that this is their team. I think it would be a big mistake not to extend him. 2nd thing we need to do is resign DHall, its not to often that a playmaker of his caliber falls in your lap. 3rd thing cut some vets to get cap space such as washington, springs, taylor, and maybe even jansen if the cap penalty isnt too big. I'm a big griffin fan and if we can restructure his contract to keep him here. 4th thing we need to be a player in free agency maybe 1 or 2 significant additions such as Julius Peppers, Haynesworth, B Scott, Suggs, Gross, Sproles. 5th thing address the OLine and Dline in the draft. With the 13th pick if we cant draft a player that will be an immediate impact. Then find a suitor to receive additional picks. We need to focus on certain positions in the draft nothing else (T, G, C, DT, DE, OLB). If we draft another skilled position im going to jump out of a window. Championhips are won in the trenches and if we thought CP did a great job this year can you imagine if he had more holes to run through. Scary thought. 6 and final thing Open Competitions at Oline, Dline, TE, WR, LB, DB. Lets see who really wants it.

Posted by: rcarter51 | January 21, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

"

"Who wants to be like the Eagles who have went to 5 NFC Championship games and lost 4 of them plus the SB they went to?"

I would glady have the Skins be a winning team that at least has the CHANCE to be successful in the postseason, instead of constantly talking about the draft and FA.

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 21, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse"

Could not agree more Yoder-lay. You gotta be in it to win it. Its Tom Toolery to scoff at teams like eagles/ravens b/c they don't win enough...while we exist in a never ending circular firing squad existence.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

http://www.bnd.com/rams/story/624366.html

Sounds like a Catholic Gibbs to me........

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 10:28 AM | Report abuse

"Who wants to be like the Eagles who have went to 5 NFC Championship games and lost 4 of them plus the SB they went to?"

I think the point is to build a team that competes and is in the playoffs regulary. Not build a team that cant get over the hump. The Eagles, Ravens, Steelers fit this bill.

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | January 21, 2009 10:28 AM | Report abuse

"All I read was how Vinny was going to do the right thing and build through the draft," an NFC executive said. "How do you build through the draft when you trade half your picks for guys at the end of their career? So what's the plan there? Is there a plan there? From the outside it's hard to see one."

Best line from the big bashing article/Ravens love fest. While its all sadly true and frustrating to read this was the best line. Vinny totally fumbled the best opportunity to really fix this team. 2 lineman (3rd and 7th rounds) out of 10 picks, a ton of perimeter selections that may or may not be great one day, and then the traded of 2 picks this year with one already being gone for guys that at the end of their careers was just pitiful. Now our lines that were aging are old, and in need of total overhaul and the replacements aren't here and the resources aren't available to get em. Well done Vinny.

Two years from now there is still hope though. Not trading away a good young corner in Rogers to keep an old injury prone one in Springs is a absolute must. Resigning Hall and some reasonable signings of under 30 guys here and there (LB, a guard, a DE like Canty, a DT not named Albert), and the drafting of a legit speed back in the 3rd round like Clemson's James Davis or Wyoming's Devin Moore and a draft of 3 lineman will help and not giving away anything else from next year's draft. No chasing receivers or corners or freaking tight ends or qbs. JC is not elite but he is absolutely above average, give him a line and see what he can do.

Then after next year you can shed some of the Jansen, Thomas, Portis type contracts and go from there.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

best of all, the Ravens.

I like the Ravens and all but come on. How many SB have they played in? If JLC statement had said the Pats I could go with that.

JM220

why should we look at the revanes when they are not the ones in the Super Bowl?

We should be lookng at the Cardinals and Steelers......

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 9:00 AM


The print version of the newspaper has a graphic with the article that shows the (1)the number of linemen among total draft picks by several teams and (2) the number of lineman among total draft picks in rounds 1-4 by those same teams - including the Super Bowl participants and the Pats - between 2000 and 2008. The Redskins are significantly off the pace percentage wise. Since 2000, the Skins have drafted 4 linemen in 25 picks (17%) in the first four rounds. The team with the next fewest linemen drafted in Rounds 1-4 in that same period is the Chargers with 8 of 36 (22.2%). Also glaring: the Skins had the fewest number of picks in round 1-4 over that period (25). By comparison, the Titans at the top end had 48 picks in that period and the Dolphins in the low end had 30 picks.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 21, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

What a depressing article. We sucked before, we suck now, and we'll continue to suck again.

Posted by: peterandmeredith | January 21, 2009 8:16 AM

But if our mascot was a vacuum cleaner, we'd be awesome. Washington Hoovers? Washington Dysons?

Posted by: dcsween | January 21, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

I think Dan Snyder should hire a well respected GM with an eye for talent in both players, and coaches. Someone who knows how to build a winning franchise. I don't see Cerrato as someone with those qualifications.

Posted by: skyerocket1969 | January 21, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

"Who wants to be like the Eagles who have went to 5 NFC Championship games and lost 4 of them plus the SB they went to?

Posted by: 4thFloor"

Not trying to get all philosophical here, but winning a championship doesn't come about from some set design that only a select few have figured out (the select few being the winners). IMO, among the chief components are circumstance, chance, luck, and environment. Circumstance, chance, and luck cannot be controlled. What can be controlled is environment (by environment I mean how the team runs itself). The Eagles have consistently put themselves in a position to be contenders for the Super Bowl throughout this decade. Same with a number of other teams, such as the Colts, Patriots, and Steelers. Sometimes they get lucky (like the Colts getting to face Rex Grossman in the Super Bowl), and sometimes they get unlucky (like the Patriots losing Brady for the season). Are the Steelers a better built team than the Patriots this season? I'd argue no, but they happened to run into great luck in comparison to the Patriots.

All you can ask of your team is to provide an environment that puts you in the best possible position to win a Super Bowl. The Eagles have done a great job of that this decade. They haven't won one, which is disappointing, but their chances of getting there next year are greater than a majority of the league because of the environment their FO provides. So to answer your question, I think there are a lot of teams that would like to be the Eagles, having a legitimate shot to win the big one on any given season.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

I want to see some research on the FA acquisitions made by the top tier teams as well. FA can help a team drastically, but it has to be done the right way. Of course it all depends on the situation of the team, whether they're in the "1 player away" mold or "building a foundation". Hopefully the FO finally realizes that we're the latter, not the former.

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 21, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Couple of quick points I like to make.

First a couple of thins I thought I would never see in my life time

A black man become president

the Cardinals in the super bowl


Now that GW Bush is gone maybe Zorn can spend some time on getting creative with his play calling instead of riding bikes with Curious George

Posted by: GreatOne1 | January 21, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Chris Larry - Who would you rather be a fan of:

The Eagles of the past year or The Giants of the past 5 years?

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 11:06 AM | Report abuse

I meant 5 years....

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

IMO, among the chief components are circumstance, chance, luck, and environment. Circumstance, chance, and luck cannot be controlled. What can be controlled is environment (by environment I mean how the team runs itself). The Eagles have consistently put themselves in a position to be contenders for the Super Bowl throughout this decade.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 10:47 AM |

See 12:06 pm. Same question for you......

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 11:09 AM | Report abuse

The point I am making about the Eagles is they aren't good enough to get pass a certain point. They keep hitting a brick wall. Consistently.

They will never win the SB with Reid and McNabb together.

They have reached maximum potential. So why stay with a formaula that only gets you to see the peak of the mountain top, but never actually reaches it?

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

"The Eagles have consistently put themselves in a position to be contenders for the Super Bowl throughout this decade"

Someone should bring up what kind of offense they run......nevermind...just gives me a headache.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Spend the draft picks on the O and D lines, with a mid-round pick or two reserved for linebackers we think can play (not special teams guys).

Re-sign Jas. Campbell. He's proven to be at least adequate and continues to flash the potential to be very good. The folks who say he hasn't shown enough have a point, but we have too much invested in him not to give him the best possible shot at success, which means patience and fixing the O-line issues. Colt isn't ready and I don't think he's a guy who benefits from being thrown to the wolves. We need to develop him in camps and preseason action a la Mark Rypien.

Finally, as part of Campbell's new deal, we need him to understand that he is expected to constantly hound our "red shirt" (I like that one) wide receivers and get them up to speed. He should barely give them a moment's peace all off season. It should be Moss at 1, Kelly at 2, and Randel El in the slot next year, with Thomas spelling (and preparing to replace) Moss and getting some snaps in the slot as well.

Posted by: LiberalMike | January 21, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

See 12:06 pm. Same question for you......

Posted by: 4thFloor

-----

I would rather be the Giants. They're a better run organization lately. That doesn't mean the Eagles are a poorly run organization, though.

Posted by: psps23 | January 21, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

beantown

They ran the ball at the season's start, and when teams came at the Skins with eight man fronts and run blitzs, they exposed the Skins weaknesses for all to see.

That's why they went from 6-2 to 2-6.

If the Skins are to be a running team , they need variation in their running attack.

C'mon, they were a left-handed running team that zone-blocked and ran the draw on 3rd down as a distraction.

They ran the stretch effectively to the left behind Kendall and Samuels.

Jansen gave them some push on the right, but teams exploited his pass blocking issues and sent linebackers in the gap between him and Thomas on run downs.

They were easy to scout and scheme against, and Zorn couldn't draw up anything that would stop it as the passing game didn't make any team get out of stop the run-oriented fronts.

It also didn't help that Portis wore down as the season progressed.

The offense failed because Randle El wasn't enough of a threat opposite Moss, and teams rolled their coverage to his way to shut down him or Cooley.

It was all very plain for anyone to see.

Moe hopes Zorn gives Thomas an honest shot at beating out Randle El and uses Fred Davis underneath with Cooley crossing to give JC some 'tools' to get the ball to.

Otherwise next season will look like the last.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

They have reached maximum potential. So why stay with a formaula that only gets you to see the peak of the mountain top, but never actually reaches it?

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 11:13 AM

I can understand what you're saying. Kind of like the definition of insanity, but I assume the logic of those who are on the other side of your argument is that you must have a chance, a real chance to compete for super bowls. Even if it means playing for the right to go (one game away from SB) several times but failing in all except one, which still didn't bring home the 'ship.

I don't know... it sort of does seem foolish to debate the success of the Eagles, they've obviously been one of the beeter teams over the last decade. Winning seasons, conference championship appearences, super bowl appearence - boatloads more than what I can say about the Washington Redskins.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

the majority of "what the Redskins might be considering in the 2009 offseason," article is devoted to other teams?

Do we really need that much ink devoted to other teams?

And when it does finally get to the skins its a classic J Ca Ca hatchet job.

J Ca Ca must really hate his life.

Posted by: IHateJLC | January 21, 2009 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Rather than writing writing about how well the Ravens--or any other team for that matter--drafts, Moe endorses hiring away some team's clever young personnel guy.

I mean, am I the only one amazed the Skins didn't reach out to grab Scott Pioli became availiable?

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 11:43 AM | Report abuse

"Chris Larry - Who would you rather be a fan of:

The Eagles of the past year or The Giants of the past 5 years?"

Giants obviously, but that is a false construct. The compare/contrast is/was to the Skins. 100 out of 100 times I'd rather have had the last 10 years of Eagles than Skins. Again you have to be in it, to win it. I'd much rather get my soul crushed by at least playing for the big prize than the infinite loop of ineptitude that Skins have been on.

Call me crazy but I will take more winning, not less.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

ESPN has Oher rated as their number 23 prospect. Scout.com has Oher rated as their number 1 prospect.

If a top Four or Five OLine prospect is expected to fall into the twenties & Raji is gone before #13, the best thing that could happen would be for Detroit to want to jump to our draft position; trading picks with Detroit. Brokering a deal and/or swapping #13 for Det's #20 could yield a third round (#65) and a sixth round (#161). That's two additional picks, which would seem to be an almost great fortune.

DET Picks Rd, Pick, (Trade Value)
Rd. 1 Pick 1 (3,000)
Rd. 1 Pick 20 (850)* swap w/ skins #13
Rd. 2 Pick 33 (580)
Rd. 3 Pick 65 (265)* to skins
Rd. 3 Pick 82 (180)
Rd. 5 Pick 129 (43)
Rd. 6 Pick 161 (27)* to skins
Rd. 7 Pick 179 (20)

Wash Picks Rd, Pick, (Trade Value)
Rd. 1 Pick 13 (1150) *[swap 4 Rd. 1 Pick 20(850)
Rd. 3 Pick 80 (190) *[add Rd. 3 Pick 65 (265)]
Rd. 5 Pick 142 (35)
Rd. 6 Pick 173 (22) *[add Rd. 6 Pick 161 (27)]

If only Detroit wanted to make a deal...

Posted by: matthewvickers | January 21, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

ur crazy...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

the majority of "what the Redskins might be considering in the 2009 offseason," article is devoted to other teams?

Do we really need that much ink devoted to other teams?

And when it does finally get to the skins its a classic J Ca Ca hatchet job.

J Ca Ca must really hate his life.

Posted by: IHateJLC | January 21, 2009 11:35 AM |

JLC has no contact with the people in charge of the Skins, so it's hard for him to get any information.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 21, 2009 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Mista...I would argue we have that young personel guy on the staff now...Morroco Brown. I think he is of this ilk. To me the GM type dudes are getting younger, hungrier and smarter. Sort of like what happen in Baseball about 8-10 years ago.

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 11:49 AM | Report abuse

crazy right....

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

didn't you say to call you crazy?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 11:53 AM | Report abuse

matthewvickers I've been saying for awhile that Detroit is the best chance for the skins to trade down, or to deal Rogers. The skins could flip flop the #13 with #20 and trade Rogers for the #33. I'm not saying they should trade Rogers, but if rumors abound that the Skins and Lions are talking, watch out. Detroit will come out of the draft with 3 players in the first 33 picks regardless. And Skins will be.....

Posted by: TWISI | January 21, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

I am both often crazy AND right...I know its a gift....

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Us bashing Andy Reid and McNabb saying they haven't/can't/won't win the big one is pretty humorous. They have dominated the division this decade and have been to 4 NFC Championships and a Super Bowl. Whoever said it above is absolutely right, championships are a unique mix of circumstances and are rare. Quality teams, good organizations and sound decision making giving you an opportunity to have a shot at a championship is what we should expect from the Skins and what the Eagles have had. Our problem is we continuously build hoping for that unique set of circumstances, if all our old guys just stay healthy we'll have a shot, or we're one big signing away and that big signing or trade means we ignore young depth at other spots and over and over again we fail to even contend for our division much less a championship. I for one would kill to hit the "wall" that Reid and McNabb supposedly can't get past.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Here is a rumor flying, The Cowgirls are trying to lure Ray lewis, they also are maybe looking at bart scott and Terrell suggs to come with him.

What do Redskins fans think about the Cowgirls trying to make either the ray lewis acquisition or all three of them, and does this affect us?

Posted by: GreatOne1 | January 21, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

the majority of "what the Redskins might be considering in the 2009 offseason," article is devoted to other teams?

Do we really need that much ink devoted to other teams?

And when it does finally get to the skins its a classic J Ca Ca hatchet job.

J Ca Ca must really hate his life.

Posted by: IHateJLC

Mr. IhateJLC,

You show your pedigree of ignorance to a marked degree. The best way to highlight differences between the Redskins and other organizations is to compare and contrast. He does this by going into a deep analysis of three other successful organizations. The method is valid. What pollyanna stuff were you expecting him to write that so disappointed you? Most other people's fantasies about this team have been eroded over the course of this season. I am glad that you still have kept all of yours.

Posted by: driley | January 21, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

great, I'm ok with Dallas going after rayray, he's still a good player, but his best days are behind him. This is EXACTLY the type of move that I'd prefer the team NOT make. Older player, who will play well for a year, but then as history has taught us will most likely fall off.

If they sign ray-ray, and suggs, I bet they don't have the money to resign Ware, when he comes due.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

The point I am making about the Eagles is they aren't good enough to get pass a certain point. They keep hitting a brick wall. Consistently.

They will never win the SB with Reid and McNabb together.

They have reached maximum potential. So why stay with a formaula that only gets you to see the peak of the mountain top, but never actually reaches it?

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

"The Eagles have consistently put themselves in a position to be contenders for the Super Bowl throughout this decade"

Someone should bring up what kind of offense they run......nevermind...just gives me a headache.....


Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 11:13 AM

Both of these are actually testaments to McNabb and Reid. They have done with mirrors because the WRs over their sustained run of success have been average at best. The one year they had a big time receiver they made the SB but came up short against the Pats.

Beantown, its the players not the scheme or the weather. SF is in California but
it is not the most temperate climate. I think Montana and Rice could have won a few championships if they played in Philly. It's not a coincidence that the most successful teams in the SB era have the many HOFs. The Skins are the one anomaly.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 21, 2009 12:12 PM | Report abuse

"The Eagles have consistently put themselves in a position to be contenders for the Super Bowl throughout this decade"

Someone should bring up what kind of offense they run......nevermind...just gives me a headache.....


Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 11:13 AM

The real question is how many Superbowls have they won with their offense.......

What was your point again?

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 12:14 PM | Report abuse

4th, essentially, he believes the WCO can only be successful on the WC, i.e., it can't work in cold weather.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 21, 2009 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Agree on the HOFers theory and SB winners. You just can't win with one great QB/RB and everyone else average.....

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 12:17 PM | Report abuse

lh, I believe the wco can be successful anywhere...and that the weather on the east coast wouldn't have any bearing on it.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

I think we should go to the Run & Shoot

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 12:22 PM | Report abuse

I prefer the shoot, and run myself.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I don't know....Do we really trust this group with draft picks? Last year they went 1 for 10? I'm not sure they would know how to handle a full compliment of picks. Its like buying a 16 year-old who finally got his driver's license after 3 failed tests a Ferrari. Its like giving Barney Fife a fully loaded machine gun. Its like giving Michael Vick a gift certificate to Petsmart. Its like giving Fred Davis a prescription for sleeping pills. Its like....... you fill in the rest.

Posted by: hamptonpirates89 | January 21, 2009 12:26 PM | Report abuse

I live in the Dallas area. All of the talk about Ray Ray and others is just fluff by the National media. The local media reports constantly the the Boys have almost 10 mil in cap room right now and have a couple of their own to sign including Demarcus Ware which they are saying will be the largest contract ever to date for someone in his position. Jerry Jones has repeatedly said that they will not be players in the signing of any big name free agents this offseason.

Posted by: bigfish761 | January 21, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I think we should just go the shoot, and start with Vinny.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

If you shoot first there's no reason to run.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 21, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

The offseason plan is a failure before it gets started. With the ineptitude of the front office and their "proven" failures at making picks how could you possibly think different.

Posted by: jmh764 | January 21, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I think MistaMoe nailed it the other day when he questioned why the Redskins have to be boxed into a "WCO" system at all.

It should be an offense that throws short, medium and long, uses formations with 1 TE, sometimes 2 TEs, runs the ball as its first priority, and runs effectively.

WCO, run & shoot, fun & gun (or as Buddy Ryan called it, "chuck & duck"), Marty Ball; those are all labels, and I can't imagine why any coach would want to be constrained by that.

The idea is to get into the end zone often, and to that end, it should be about calling the right play at the right time, and the labels be damned.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 21, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

"It should be an offense that throws short, medium and long, uses formations with 1 TE, sometimes 2 TEs, runs the ball as its first priority, and runs effectively"

Did you not see just what you described above, during the first 8 games??

That describes them pretty much spot on.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

I agree Mr. Skin (run & shoot was a joke by the way...)

Game planning schemes per talent and opponent rulz

Having a "Scheme Philosophy" drulz

Posted by: chrislarry | January 21, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Oher is playin in the Senior Bowl

There's usually an update on the practices later in the day.

Yesterday, I saw--an liked--Victor Harris/VaTech.

There are some strong wlbs on the North team.

Today, the Madden GM is checking out o-lineman from the South team.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Wasn't the original argument "up here" because someone said that the WCO "would never work in the NFC East?" I thinnk that the Eagles have shown over the past Andy Reid years that it does work in the NFC East, although it hasn't won any super bowls lateley....

Posted by: dlhaze1 | January 21, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

moe, check out profootballweekly, and walterfootball, they're pretty good about updates from the senior bowl....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 12:39 PM | Report abuse

dl yes it was, and despite the eagles winning 4 NFC championships, people still think it wont/can't work.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

The Cardinals are in the Super Bowl because they got hot at the right time. That's the great thing about this league. And that's what Redskins fans should bear in mind. If this bloody team could just start getting itself into the playoffs consistently, anything can (and usually does) happen.

JLC's argument re other teams having success this yearand the suggestion that the Redskins copy their "blueprint" is dubious, at best.

As for the Redskins emulating the Ravens, Falcons, Phins, etc.... As with every NFL season, there were teams this year that surprised, but this league being what it is, that's no guarantee it carries over into next season.

The Falcons, Phins and/or Ravens may be 5-11 or 6-10 next year. And it wouldn't surprise me a bit.

There's just no telling.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | January 21, 2009 12:47 PM | Report abuse

bigfish

The Cowboys' evil ways have caught up to them

If I'm Ray Lewis--or any of the big name free agents on a winning team-- I have to ask myself why leave where I am to go to:

Washington--FO issues
Lions--issues on top of issues
Jets--impatience issues and annoying media
Raiders--Al Davis on cloud 9 issues
Green Bay--can't get over Farve issues
Kansas City--where is it on the map issues
Cleveland--Mangenius issues
Nawlins--all offense all day issues
Cee Hawks--ugly uniform issues
Bears--too damn cold issues
Vikings--no q-back issues (see DC)

With all that being said, if I'm a money player who wants to win next year, I go to:

Miami
San Fran
Philly
Arizona
San Diego
Pittsburgh
Balmer
Tampa Bay
Carolina

Ray Ray's staying home, bro'. Dallas is a nut town with an over rated football team.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"They always try to patch it together for one
Continually replenishing the lines, regardless of the depth and talent at those positions, must be the centerpiece of any viable offseason plan, NFL executives say, because linemen tend to wear down quickly, and cost-effective replacements are available in the middle rounds of the draft."

Addressing what may like be erroneous conclusions made either by "the Jasons" or by "NFL executives" or by sources inside Redskins park.

Looking AGAIN at recent drafts under Gibbs 2.0 and this year under Zorn, the focus will be on
"interior lineman" and the middle rounds of the draft.

LET'S look at the totals for the Redskins:
(OUT OF 34 TOTAL PICKS,
7 interior linemen selected,
[20.5% of all picks.]
2 in the first 3 rounds. )
[28.5% in the first 3 rounds]

2008 DRAFT (10 picks)
Round 3 Chad Rhinehart, OT, Northern Iowa.
Round 7 Rob Jackson, DE, Kansas State

2007 DRAFT (5 picks)
Undrafted Stephon Heyer, OT, Maryland Terps.

2006 DRAFT (6 picks)
Round 5 Anthony Montgomery, DT, Minnesota
Round 6 Kedrick Golston, DT, Georgia Bulldogs
Round 7 Kili Lefotu, OG, Arizona

2005 DRAFT (6 picks)

2004 DRAFT (4 picks)
Round 5 Mark Wilson Offensive Tackle, California
Round 6 Jim Molinaro Offensive Tackle Notre Dame

2003 DRAFT (3 picks)
Round 3 Derrick Dockery, OG, Texas

_______________________________________________

NOW let's compare this to the Ravens:
(OUT OF 53 TOTAL PICKS,
16 interior linemen selected,
[30.1 % of all picks]
7 in the first 3 rounds,
[43.75% in the first 3 rounds]. )

2008 (10 picks total)
Round 3 Oniel Cousins OG, Texas El-Paso
Round 4 David Hale OT, Weber State

2007 (7 picks total)
Round 1 Ben Grubbs, OG, Auburn
Round 3 Marshal Yanda OT, iowa
Undrafted Jared Gaither OT, Maryland Terps

2006 (10 picks total)
Round 1 Haloti Ngata, DT, Oregon
Round 2 Chris Chester, C, Oklahoma

2005 (7 picks total)
Round 2 Adam Terry, OT, Syracuse
Round 4 Jason Brown, C, North Carolina

2004 (7 picks total)
Round 2 Dwan Edwards DT, Oregon State
Round 7 Brian Rimpf OT, East Carolina

2003 (12 picks total)
Round 4 Jaret Johnson DE, Alabama
Round 5 Aubrayo Franklin DT, Tennessee
Round 5 Tony Pashos, OT, Illinois
Round 7 Mike Mabry, C, Central Florida

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

All those who say the WCO doesn't work in cold weather need to remember that it originated in Cincinnati, not San Fran.

Posted by: Predator48 | January 21, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse

lh, I believe the wco can be successful anywhere...and that the weather on the east coast wouldn't have any bearing on it.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 12:18 PM

Bean, my bad. I thought you were the person I was going back and forth with on whether the WCO can be successful in the east.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 21, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

All those who say the WCO doesn't work in cold weather need to remember that it originated in Cincinnati, not San Fran.

Posted by: Predator48 | January 21, 2009 12:55 PM


Somebody read The Blind Side. Most of us weren't alive or conscious of football at that level when Walsh was an assistant in Cincinnati to have any memory that it originated there.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 21, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

lh, probably was corky, he's opposed to it in the east, thinks it wont work.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Analysis of the Redskins vs. Ravens drafts.

1. The Ravens had at least twice as many picks.
In 2008 they had 5 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2007 they had 3 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2006 they had 3 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2005 they had 3 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2004 they had 2 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2003 they had 3 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.

Of these picks 6 were 1st rounders.
The Ravens had 19 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.

Almost half of the interior linemen selected
were in the 1st 3 rounds. A direct
contradiction to the statement made about
finding them in the "middle rounds".

In the case of the Redskins:

In 2008 they had 4 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2007 they had 1 pick in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2006 they had 1 pick in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2005 they had 2 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2004 they had 2 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
In 2003 they had 2 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.

For a total of 12 picks in the 1st 3 rounds,
7 less than the Ravens. Of these 4 were 1st
round picks. 30% of the interior linemen
selected were in the upper rounds.

Conclusions: The draft is hit or miss. More
so than free agency? Because of
age, guaranteed bonuses and the propensity
to "stop working" if you've already been
paid, free agency can at times be just as
risky.

The draft and free agency are fraught with
risk for the Redskins because of their
apparent inability (incompetence?) when it
comes to picking and choosing players. This
year coaches opinions were less relevant.
The owner has the GM title with little to
no experience in this area other than as a
fan much like the posters here on RI. Because
of that his approach has been to try to
lure big named free agents with gaudy stats
as opposed to talented "character/team"
players preferred by old-school coaches like
Greg Blache, Greg Williams, and Joe Gibbs.



Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Proposed solution.

The Redskins need to select fewer, younger free
agents. They need to focus on obtaining players
like a Bart Scott as opposed to a Terrell Suggs.

They need to draft more and "free agent" less.
They need to (as suggested by the Jasons) hire
a personnel guy with multiple superbowl
credentials to do the drafting. They need to rely
on the excellent coaching staff when selecting
Free Agents.

They need to trade for and stock pile more
draft picks. Mostly in the UPPER 3 ROUNDS
because that is where the Ravens and most
other teams have the most success.

Free agents should be selected by the coaching
staff. They should be age 28 or under when
signed.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 21, 2009 1:32 PM | Report abuse

In the next month before FA begins, we have a chance to sign our FA's. We should begin to hear players resigned. Here's my list of priorities:

Most important: Jason Campbell, D Hall, Montgomery, Golston, Evans, Red Snapper, and Alfred Fincher.

Second priority: Khary Campbell, Reed Doughty, Mike Green, Justin Geisinger, and Shaun Suisham.

I would release Washington, Taylor & Springs to free up cap space.

Only after we get these guys signed can we address FA needs against our cap space.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 21, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

I can't count ... :)

REDSKINS:

(OUT OF 34 TOTAL PICKS,
9 interior linemen selected,
[26.4% of all picks]
[22.2% in the upper 3 rounds].

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

who cares what the ravens, eagles, and giants, or the patriots have done? yes, they have outstanding people running their organizations (although I heard they slack off in Philly now and then - not the best evaluators of talent, letting go of or passing on certain players, etc.).

we have snyder and cerrato. why are we comparing the 'skins front office to those who are known for having exceptional personnel running their teams.

it's sort of talking about who the 'skins should pick - i'm not knockin it, it is sort of fun to play GM but it just seems like wasted breath, time, and energy to research and discuss prospects that will be overlooked, whether intentionally or unintentionally by cerrato & co.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

it's sort of talking about who the 'skins should pick - i'm not knockin it, it is sort of fun to play GM but it just seems like wasted breath, time, and energy to research and discuss prospects that will be overlooked, whether intentionally or unintentionally by cerrato & co.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 1:47 PM
===========================================
At least it's sort of fun.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 21, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

For those of us who want to discuss scheme issues:

There's nothing wrong with the WCO.

Joe Montana, Brett Favre, Steve Young, and multiple other qbs all used some variety of it to success.

And that's the issue: will Zorn build on what he believes in by varying his scheme to fit the personnel he has or stay stuck in basic WCO principles.

What was apparent in the final games of the season was that he was trying to create a system where plays where being designed to meet a specific player's talents--something that goes against WCO principles which teach reading progresses.

The rigid belief in WCO is why the rookies couldn't get on the field. In Philly, Reid designed plays just for Jackson. It seems that Devin Thomas would've benefited from the same kind of thinking, his conditioning issues notwithstanding

It would help the younger players grow if they knew that every weekend, they had a set of 5-10 plays where they were the 1st or second option on a playcall.

He used several different formations against the Niners and Eagles because the Ravens and Steelers and Giants punched his offense in the mouth, and he had to change.

Hopefully, it leads to change we can believe in.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

"Free agents should be selected by the coaching
staff. They should be age 28 or under when
signed."

They probably should also be "serious injury" free. As should ALL DRAFT PICKS.

Character is something only the coaching staff can judge. Not Snyder and Cerrato.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse


Keeping in mind he MOCKS are always wrong on who got what, just about EVERY one I've looked at has FOUR offensive tackles coming off the board before the 13th pick in the first round.

With THAT thought in mind, I'd be inclined to seek a trading partner and move down, rather than risk grabbing the FIFTH best player at one position.

This doesn't mean abandoning the OLINE. It means focusing on trying to get people like Duke Robinson of Okla, and Mack, the center from Cal. (I dont' know if they are the best guard and C available, but then neither does Vinny in all likelihood.)

If they skins can't move back, my inclination would be to pick Rey Mauauluga, if he's available, or the BEST non-skill position player on the board. This would include CB (but not safety, RB, WR or QB).

Since apparently Vinny won't be replaced before the draft, this should be his absolute last best chance (Well, THAT should have been years ago, but Snyder is making the call.)

He made TEN picks last year and produced one starter. I'm afraid the odds of getting one or more starters in '09, with only four picks (now) is unlikely.

IF two of the receievrs from '08 produce in 09, if Rinehart gets significant minutes, and if the safetis he drafted keep on keepin'on...if he brings in a couple of not-too-expensive but good FAs, andif two of hisdraftees start, I'd have some hope he's on the Casserly learning curve.

Anyone who EXPECTS that, and wants his critics to shut up and go away, either works for the Redskins or is seriously delusional.


Posted by: TheCork | January 21, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Finally,

If they were 28 Jason Taylor and Shawn Springs should be considered better "character" players than an Arrington of Champ Bailey.

I bet if you look at the amount of time Champ has been on the field for Denver compared to Springs you find that they are pretty close to equal.

That is why you would keep a Taylor and Springs for another year (Attempting to sign them for less.) Griffin, Washington, Daniels, Kendall, perhaps even Thomas, may end up as cap casualties.

Jensen, Samuels, Carter, may be cap disasters if released.

They need to sign guys like Evans, Alexander, etc. and Hall.

I guess you trade Rogers (Smoot if you can?), Doughty? for draft picks.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

I hope our WCO one day resembles Philly's cause watching a bunch of passes 10 yards or less is incredibly lame and boring. If we are gonna be 8-8 or worse at least be entertaining. At the same time I hope we don't lose our identity as a running team. Reid does 60/40 pass to run ratio most of the time. I'd rather be 50/50 or 60/40.

If the offense sucks we can blame that on Vinny too since it was obviously his idea being with SF back in the 90s.

Posted by: JasonLaTempleton | January 21, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"Free agents should be selected by the coaching
staff. They should be age 28 or under when
signed. "

You fix the OL, get the kind of depth the Eagles have and I believe you will get everything you desire and then some with the current set of skill players. No radical changes (other than to the OL) required.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

+++I mean, am I the only one amazed the Skins didn't reach out to grab Scott Pioli became availiable?

Posted by: MistaMoe +++

Are you saying you are amazed Dan Snyder kept Vinny Cerrato and didn't seek to replace him with Scott Pioli?

Let's put it this way. If you plan to start a card game with everyone who is amazed at that, better make it Solitare,

Posted by: TheCork | January 21, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

"I hope our WCO one day resembles Philly's cause watching a bunch of passes 10 yards or less is incredibly lame and boring. If we are gonna be 8-8 or worse at least be entertaining.
Posted by: JasonLaTempleton | January 21, 2009"

You fix the OL, get the kind of depth the Eagles have and I believe you will get everything you desire and then some with the current set of skill players. No radical changes (other than to the OL) required.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

"Are you saying you are amazed Dan Snyder kept Vinny Cerrato and didn't seek to replace him with Scott Pioli?"

Rather doubt that Pioli would ever consider featuring a framed photo of Snyder's 'rents on his desk.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse


+++I think we should go to the Run & Shoot

Posted by: chrislarry |+++

Skins already have a variation of that offense. It's called the "Run and Shoot Yourself in the Foot" offense.

Posted by: TheCork | January 21, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Do you really think Kelley can start over Thomas? i mean he couldn't get on the field i understand he had injuries but he caught how many? Let's get serious if we don't improve the O line, get Kid&Play(Thomas,Kelley) to take their jobs seriously, and JC to "take charge" then Johnny Unitas wouldn't help us, there's a kid at Fla.A&M by the last name of Parrish 6-7 340, 1st team black college all-american off. tackle might be a project but then again he might be worth a look as a free agent bottom line we need to explore all options.

Posted by: dargregmag | January 21, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Jasonlatemp

I think our WCO will work once the lg/lt and rt issues are resolved--I mean, if you ever see a Skins game in replay, watch how other teams d-ends and tweener backers out speed Jansen and Samuels/Kendall.

It would also help if Zorn let JC work out of the shotgun more often, too. If you ever notice, McNabb is. So are Manning, Rivers, Big Ben, and Farve in his prime.

But the shotgun goes against WCO principles? Will Zorn change here? Hope so.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

That is why you would keep a Taylor and Springs for another year (Attempting to sign them for less.) Griffin, Washington, Daniels, Kendall, perhaps even Thomas, may end up as cap casualties.

Jensen, Samuels, Carter, may be cap disasters if released.

They need to sign guys like Evans, Alexander, etc. and Hall.

I guess you trade Rogers (Smoot if you can?), Doughty? for draft picks.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Peri, I would keep Taylor and Springs ONLY if they agree to lower salaries (possibly with performance bonuses attached). I would be inclined to keep Griffin also. And would want to see Daniels in preseason to see if he can be a go.

Jansen, Thomas and Carter would be cap disasters, so they need to stay another year.

I think Washinton's body has left him unfortunately. Kendall played all 16 games, taking Wed. off each week. I may resign him, but with lower base and performance bonuses.

Posted by: frediefritz | January 21, 2009 2:18 PM | Report abuse

cork

If Danny isn't willing to bring in people other than himself and Vinny to rebuild this Redskins team, it's going to be a long decade ahead of us.

8-8 might be something to hope for in a couple of years.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

+++ll those who say the WCO doesn't work in cold weather need to remember that it originated in Cincinnati, not San Fran.

Posted by: Predator48+++


That's quite a juggernaut the Bengals have going there. And if thats' th case, why didn't they call it the "Middle of the Country" offense?


Posted by: TheCork | January 21, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Because as you know Cork Persons in Ohio consider Cincinnati on the West Coast and Cleveland on the East Coast.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

cork you're missing the point.....re: the WCO....It has, and it can work in the northeast, despite your assertions to the contrary.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Our WCO will work once they stop calling it the WCO.

(LH - I am one of the peeps that don't believe in the WCO in the NFC East. The only time the WCO is succesful is with a bunch of HOFers or a new coach using it with the prior coaches players in the new coaches 1st season. See Tampa Bay....)

The NFL has evolved rapidily recently. Vinny hasn't caught up yet. I thought the Gmen did, but they were exposed after Plax f'd it up........

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

That's quite a juggernaut the Bengals have going there. And if thats' th case, why didn't they call it the "Middle of the Country" offense?


Posted by: TheCork | January 21, 2009 2:20 PM

Because a writer once confused Walsh's System with Don Coryell's system.

True Story. And the name stuck!

F WCO.

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

"The only time the WCO is succesful is with a bunch of HOFers or a new coach using it"

So who is making the HOF off the philly team.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

The most absurd thing I have read online in many years is how this article paints the Ravens as the team everyone should emulate in order to have a great offense!

Ravens offense? Are you kidding me?

The Ravens' offense has been horrible for over a decade.
They had a new QB and a new coach in 2008 and the league will adjust to both of them next year.

Yes, the Redskins (well, Vinny) suck at putting together a solid team... but we sure as hell should NOT try to be like the inconsistent Ravens offense!

Posted by: jgarrisn | January 21, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

So who is making the HOF off the philly team.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 2:43 PM

Easiest answer in the WORLD.

Maybe, just MAYBE Dawkins.

That's it buddy. Don't try to name any one from the offense.......

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Sucessful = SB Championship

Posted by: 4thFloor | January 21, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

4th, you wrote:

"The only time the WCO is succesful is with a bunch of HOFers or a new coach using it"

Philly has been very successful running this offense, so I'm asking you to answer your own question. Who from Philly is making the HOF??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

F an offensive scheme.

F a defensive scheme.

Line up. Hit the bama in the mouthpiece across from you, outsmart him, dominate him, play with intensity.

Block, run the ball, throw the ball, and tackle.

Mad crazy simple.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Who from Philly is making the HOF??

Posted by: BeantownGreg
I will field this. McNabb, Westbrook, Dawkens (maybe) and some of the CB's from the 4 year run like Vincent are a maybe.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

McNabb, Westbrook, Runyan, Tra Thomas, Dawkins, and Vincent all have a realistic shot at the hall.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

zj, if it was the "Hall of Good", then Runyan, Dawk, and Thomas would probably make it, but while good players in their own right, they were never the most DOMINANT at their position....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 3:20 PM | Report abuse

I would love Tra' to get in, Temple Alum, but no chance.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

its not always the "most dominant" at their position, it is often the consistently good to great for many years. Which is how Art Monk finally got in, and Andre Tippet and Gary Zimmerman last year as well. And Runyan certainly fits that bill, Tra, prolly not so much. I think it is more of the "most dominant" for a time or consistently great over a long time but doesn't have to be both.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Mr. IhateJLC,

You show your pedigree of ignorance to a marked degree. The best way to highlight differences between the Redskins and other organizations is to compare and contrast. He does this by going into a deep analysis of three other successful organizations. The method is valid. What pollyanna stuff were you expecting him to write that so disappointed you? Most other people's fantasies about this team have been eroded over the course of this season. I am glad that you still have kept all of yours.

so three-fifths of an article supposedly about what the Skins are going to do in 2009 should be about other teams? Questioning this shows MY ignorance? I'd say your response shows your short-sightedness and refusal to believe that J Ca Ca isn't biased against the Skins.

Posted by: IHateJLC | January 21, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

zj, for a number of years, Tippett was the most dominant as his position, so agree to disagree....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Hey guys, the WCO or any other scheme won't work if there's no blocking, creative playcalling, etc..

The low scoring and dull games will continue for as long as the basics go unaddressed by the FO.

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

zj, for a number of years, Tippett was the most dominant as his position, so agree to disagree....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

what's new? you always disagree, fine what a bout Zimmerman? and Monk? and Warren Moon? even Darrel Green (sacrilege I know)? Marcus Allen? Jim Kelly? all great players but also several of their contemporaries you would want ahead of them at any given point in their careers. That's just to name some of the top of my head....

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

That's quite a juggernaut the Bengals have going there. And if thats' th case, why didn't they call it the "Middle of the Country" offense?


Posted by: TheCork


Come on Cork, you were alive in the 80's weren't you? Who played the 49'ers close in the Super Bowls of '81 and '89?

Bengals may not have been juggernauts during the 80's but they ran the same offense as the '9ers in '80 and an no huddle variant of it in '89. Sam Wyche , head coach of the later team was an assistant to Bill Walsh.

The difference between the two teams during that era was overall talent, mainly on the defensive side.

Had the Paul Brown named Walsh his sucessor when he retired, who knows how history might have named this offense.

Posted by: Predator48 | January 21, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

zj, do you watch football??

Jim Kelly got his team to the Super Bowl 4 years in a row. While they never won, you can't deny how impressive that is.
All those guys you listed, Green, Zimmerman, Monk, Moon, Allen, Kelly, all were consistently some of the top players in the league.

Dawk, Tra, and Runyan, not so much, good players, but thats it....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure the Ravens are the best example of stockpiling linemen. A team would have 32 picks in the first 1-4 rounds allocated to them (excluding trades) so drafting 13 players = using 40.6% of picks on linemen. If you run a 4-3, 9 of your 22 starters are linemen = 40.9% of your starters. It seems like they are just drafting a normal number of linemen. Maybe they are smarter about it than other teams but lets not get carried away here.

Posted by: nycskinsfan | January 21, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Free-agent wideouts: assuming we need to sign at least one FA WR this off-season (to replace ARE or Thrash or both, or to take Kelly's place when he goes on IR again), and if you could chose only between the following two guys, which would you take and why? Both are big, young receivers and former high first round picks (in 2004) who are in need a change of scenery and a chance to start over. Neither is anticipated to command a high-price in free-agency, but both have shown flashes of the talent that made them first round picks in the first place.

Reggie Williams, Jacksonville
or
Michael Clayton, Tampa

Personally, I'd like to get them both and move on from Kelly and ARE, but I realize that isn't very likely to happen.

Posted by: PDXskin | January 21, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

How do we move onto Kelly when we never even moved to him?

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Sorry..
How do we move on* from* Kelly when we never even moved to him?

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

"Some of the top players in the league" and "most dominant" are two extremely different things.....which kinda was my point.....Dawkins has been a top 3 safety for nearly a decade, already said Thomas maybe not so much but Runyan has started 190 consecutive games at tackle most of that in the NFC East and for the last 10 years you could count on one hand the number of RT's you want ahead of him. And I said they had a shot, I never said they were first ballot guys. And I'm sorry, Darrell was a great corner but every year you'd take 3-5 guys ahead of him, Jim Kelly never led the league in passing, never won a super bowl and you would take Marino, Montanna, Young, Elway right away ahead of him and then you might take Boomer, Simms, Moon, Favre all ahead of him to if you're matching up prime years against prime years, Allen..a nice back but hardly the most dominant in his era, he had 1 great season and a collection of others, and Monk is a great consistent receiver but again you said "most dominant" and I doubt that applies, Tippet was great but never led the league in sacks or tackles, Moon same as Kelly. The HOF is about being either dominant Barry Sanders Jim Brown or conssitently great over a long period of time. McNabb, Westbrook, and Dawk no question about it and IMHO Runyan is close to that but probably not, maybe in a really weak year he could sneak in.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse

I think there is way too much comparison to other organizations. Some of it is valid because the skins are very inept in that department, but I think we need to keep in mind that this is a copycat league that changes very quickly. The rams started a trend with there building plan of "we are just going to outscore you and hope our D gets one stop" philosophy and every copied that for a year. Then NE started the "no prima donnas /anyone and everyone is expendable/ give me the cheapest FA vet for bargain price" and that was a fad. Then the Ravens won with their Defense plus the "As long as we dont put Ray and the D in a bad situation we will win offense" and that was a fad. Last year it was the "line up 11 pash rushers and blitz everydown" NYG fad which lead to the big run on pass rushers and OT in the first round of the draft.

Chasing fads doesnt work because the only team that has really dominated for an extended period of time since Free agency are the Patriots.

This whole O-line D-line stuff is silly. They had the #4 D last year with minimal talent on the d-line, they dont have a huge need there. There o-line was consistently in the top tier with Samuels, Jansen and Thomas a couple of years ago, but we saw the same results as last year: A 500 team that might make the playoffs if they get hot.

Chasing Fads isnt going to work. Here is how my offseason plan would work:

#1 accept the fact that this is a 500 at best team with aging vets that isnt going to win the SB next year.

#2 Release as many high priced vets as possible without damaging the cap (ie dont cut Jansen this year)

#3 I agree that Campbell hasnt proved himself to be a top QB, but I personally think he can be if given the right supporting cast. I would assume he will make the jump to an elite level and commit my team to building around him. If he fails, then you have the talent in place and you can go after a Veteran FA in the future.

The biggest holes are offensive line, recievers and the special teams. Since the team already invested in D Thomas and M Kelley, I would give them 2 more years to try and pan out. Therefore there is no short term need at WR. We are stacked at TE so no need to draft there. The oline has major issues and I personally think thats where they need to invest. Im not much for high priced FA, but I think Gross is a steal if he hits the market. I think if we put Gross at LT, move Samuels over to LG, and keep Rabach at C we should be pretty good at running left for a year or two. Obviously RT is a huge issue and thats what I would draft @ #13 if there is still someone worthy of the pick there. If not grab a guard and just leave the big hole at RT for next year (I dont think they are playing for the SB in '09 anyway).

Stay away from all the other high priced FAs and slowly build the team over time. This ship is not gonna get fixed next year

Posted by: stock_wiz456 | January 21, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

but I think Gross is a steal if he hits the market. I think if we put Gross at LT, move Samuels over to LG, and keep Rabach at C we should be pretty good at running left for a year or two. Obviously RT is a huge issue and thats what I would draft @ #13 if there is still someone worthy of the pick there. If not grab a guard and just leave the big hole at RT for next year (I dont think they are playing for the SB in '09 anyway).

Stay away from all the other high priced FAs and slowly build the team over time. This ship is not gonna get fixed next year

Posted by: stock_wiz456 | January 21, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

I'm completely ok with signing Gross, however, if you sign Gross you're moving he or Samuels to RT, you're not putting Samuels at guard. Samuels is a Pro Bowl tackle making top flight money and has never played guard before. Its one thing to keep playing tackle just on the other side, its a totally different thing to move a tackle inside....think Todd Wade. If they sign Gross, the move at #13 is a Raji or Mualuga or trade back but the last thing you need then is a tackle with Gross, Jansen, Heyer, and Samuels all on the roster.

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Dawk, Tra, and Runyan, not so much, good players, but thats it....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 21, 2009 3:50 PM

Maybe by your standards, but I think that Brian Dawkins, assuming that's who you're reffering to, is a HOFer to me. For years I had to watch him terrorize the 'skins, he had that rare and unique combination of speed, power, agility, and instincts. His presence alone made the Eagles defense that much better.

Tra Thomas and Jon Runyan have been beasts for years on the line... are you serious, bean... c'mon man you know this, we all do! Ask probably the 3rd or 4th best DE in NFL history - Michael Strahan, and he'll tell you that Runyan is the best linemen he's ever faced.

Whats up with slighting Dawkins, Runyan, and Thomas. These three guys have been among the top 5-10 players at their respected positions for years now... years.
I know that they're Eagles, but c'mon man -game recognizes game.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Whats up with slighting Dawkins, Runyan, and Thomas. These three guys have been among the top 5-10 players at their respected positions for years now... years.
I know that they're Eagles, but c'mon man -game recognizes game.

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Red....

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Name three safties better than Brian Dawkins over the last 10 years.

Dawkins is on the decline, no doubt about that (but he still was beastin' on the field the last half of the season), but to say that he isn't HOF material or wasn't among the most dominant at safety is straight balderdash.

How many people absolutely DOMINATE their postion anyway? In most seasons isn't there a 1A and 1B at most, if not all positions?

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 4:30 PM | Report abuse

How many people absolutely DOMINATE their postion anyway? In most seasons isn't there a 1A and 1B at most, if not all positions?

Posted by: RedDMV | January 21, 2009 4:30 PM | Report abuse

again, exactly thank you, its not the Hall of Most Dominant....

Posted by: zjfr2 | January 21, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Here is what I would do.

Attempt to trade Vinny to one of the teams in the AFL, UFL. USFL (2011) or UNGL, for a lineman.

Trade Springs for a 2nd day pick if you can't cut.
Trade Griff for 2nd day picks if he can't do it cut him.
Try and re-sign JT for a lower salary, if he wont do it cut or trade.

Re-Negotiate Contracts with 3-4 guys with high caps to free up needed cap space if you can. I would prefer to re-negotiate with Washington with the intent to make him a backup OLB.

Offer Rogers a contract extension for a 5 year deal. Offer Hall a contract for 5 years. Make sure the two are within a few mill of each other.

Offer JC a 3 year extension worth 5-6 Mill a year and an option to re-negotiate at the end of any season where he gets to the pro-bowl or is an all pro.

resign other players as needed (goldy and monty)

look for a trade for Betts for a late 3rd early 4th.

FA: No big names, but big bodies. I would look at younger players on the lines of teams with a glut of talent who are RFA's or whatever. Thinking 1 OT 1 OG 1 C and 1 DT 1 DE, try and keep them under 26 and sign them to modest deals.

Draft. If we can go into the draft with 5-7 picks I stick with what we got, if we still have four I keep our no 1 and trade back our 2nd pick (a third) for some later stuff. I would draft the best talent at our big holes with the no 1, but preferable on the O-Line, however if its clear that the talent at OLB or DT is far greater than that available on OL I would go for it. I use our 2nd pick on O-Line Locked, 3rd on a DT, then grab the BAP with later picks.

Post Draft FA. It would depend on the needs we have still but I would tend to think that we will have a lot of young talent on the lines at this point and start snooping around for HB's and OLB's that were un-drafted or released by other teams.

Finally one thought I have is we always hear that we use BaybeBroWestbrook to emulate his brother in practices, I would ask him to think of switching to RB as a backup, this is one of our last years with him on the P-squad I think.

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 4:36 PM | Report abuse

How do we move on from Kelly when we never even moved to him?

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

My thought is we admit we made a mistake in drafting a guy with chronic knee problems, cut our losses, and find an inexpensive replacement. You are not wed to a draft pick just because we picked him - see the punter from same draft as an example. Although I am sure VinnyDan will not be willing to admit such an error where Kelly is concerned.

Posted by: PDXskin | January 21, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

I agree with RCarter51: "a little something wouldnt hurt maybe a 2 year extension" on JC. But put in there that he has to win the position. I feel Colt coming on...

Also Orakpo or DL if available in 1st...

Posted by: ElYeah | January 21, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Campbell will never be the best he can be while being protected in a bubble so that Todd Collins and Colt Brennan are artificially prevented from ascending to the starting position. Campbell knows he has to play utterly abysmally for God only knows how many games (years?) to lose the starting position. Is that going to make anyone play their best?

Posted by: shane2229 | January 21, 2009 3:05 AM

This may be one of the stupidest posts ever written. I hope I never have this guy or anyone like him working for me. Under this theory I would have to threaten all of my employees with termination and bring in people to challenge them in order for them to do their best work. God forbid I hire people that take pride in their work and WANT to do their best. Athletes would NEVER fit this mold. They don't WANT to win they just want to earn a paycheck.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | January 21, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

So my brother in law was in a VA beach hardware store yesterday and he heard two guys in the aisle next to him talking about what's wrong with the skins.

He said over the shelves "Vinny Cerato." One guy walked around the corner and said "You're absolutely right, he is a big problem. In fact, he's a joke!" My brother in law was shocked because it was Bruce Smith.

Say what you want about how he played for us, but man, can it get any worse?

Posted by: Vinnymustgo | January 21, 2009 6:48 PM | Report abuse

1. Cut jason taylor, griffin, washington, springs, jansen, thrash, and reed doughty.

2. Dont trade rogers this season.

3. Sign Stacy Andrews, Shane Lechler, Leroy Hill, and 1 of rod bironas/mike nugent/shayne graham.

4. Take a run at peppers/suggs/haynesworth and see if they can get 1.

5. Draft a tackle at 13 and guards with the rest of their picks.

Posted by: peteywheatstraw | January 21, 2009 6:50 PM | Report abuse

++++lh, probably was corky, he's opposed to it in the east, thinks it wont work.

Posted by: BeantownGreg+++

True that, and I'm not the Lone Ranger.

Here's my theory. The "Run & Shoot" was a sexy offense. It has a fatal flaw. It can't hold a lead. Run & Shoots don't have TE's. When they get ahead, they can't pound the ball and run the clock. As a result, at one critical time or another, they will get caught and lose because of that.

The so-called WCO (tho it has more bastard Offspring than Sam Malone) contains a flaw that is exposed in the NFC East. When it's cold as hell and the chilly winds blow--like they are likely to during a critical late season and/or playoff game--you need to pound,

It's not that the WCO can't win games, it's that it will shut down at a critical time.

Like all laws, there are exceptions that prove the rule. (Philly ain't one of them.)

If the skins keep it, they may end up just like the Iggles, a team that wins 10-11 games a year, but loses a critical one in the playoffs.

Teams that are built for foul weather, and have the flexibility to open it up again in the SB, have been dominent in the NFC East.

Gibbs and Parcells teams in their prime, the hated 'pokes. They could get points and run the ball down your throat to protect a lead and destroy your will.

I believe that is the essence of football, and if there was a more beautiful Gridiron sight than the "Riggo Drill," I don't know what it is.


Posted by: TheCork | January 21, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse


+++look for a trade for Betts for a late 3rd early 4th.++++--ALEX

Lot of your ideas make sense. But....

Alex, they couldn't get a 3rd or 4th for Betts if they threw in concession rights at FedEx,

Posted by: TheCork | January 21, 2009 7:02 PM | Report abuse

"+++look for a trade for Betts for a late 3rd early 4th.++++--ALEX

Lot of your ideas make sense. But....

Alex, they couldn't get a 3rd or 4th for Betts if they threw in concession rights at FedEx,"

However, good defensive backs are much harder to come by. Rogers, Smoot, and Doughty?

Well, who knows?

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

"Trade Springs for a 2nd day pick if you can't cut.
Trade Griff for 2nd day picks if he can't do it cut him."


HUH??? You'd have to resign them first. No one would take them unless the salaries went way down first.

"Try and re-sign JT for a lower salary, if he wont do it cut or trade."

They can't trade him but they can release him.

"Re-Negotiate Contracts with 3-4 guys with high caps to free up needed cap space if you can. I would prefer to re-negotiate with Washington with the intent to make him a backup OLB."

They have been doing this for too long and it has killed the CAP. They need to release these guys once the CAP is no longer an issue.

"Offer Rogers a contract extension for a 5 year deal. Offer Hall a contract for 5 years. Make sure the two are within a few mill of each other."

Yes, that would make sense ... not 5 years though.

"Offer JC a 3 year extension worth 5-6 Mill a year and an option to re-negotiate at the end of any season where he gets to the pro-bowl or is an all pro."

Hopefully that is what they will do.

Posted by: periculum | January 21, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse

How do we move on from Kelly when we never even moved to him?

Posted by: alex35332 | January 21, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

My thought is we admit we made a mistake in drafting a guy with chronic knee problems, cut our losses, and find an inexpensive replacement. You are not wed to a draft pick just because we picked him - see the punter from same draft as an example. Although I am sure VinnyDan will not be willing to admit such an error where Kelly is concerned.

Posted by: PDXskin | January 21, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

PDX, all due respect but this is way too premature. Even if you were an orthopedic surgeon, you are not positioned to make a judgement on the severity of his knee problems. Now I will grant you that it didn't seem really positive this year, but the fact that team doctors cleared him to play at least part of the season seems to indicate that it's not, at this point, career-threatening. It may turn out to be the case, but we can't give up on him yet. He's 22 and we invested a 2nd round pick in him. Give the kid at least another year before they make such a serious decision on his future in the Burgundy and Gold.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 21, 2009 7:57 PM | Report abuse

He's 22 and we invested a 2nd round pick in him. Give the kid at least another year before they make such a serious decision on his future in the Burgundy and Gold.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 21, 2009 7:57 PM
=========================================
I agree that there's no need to cut him now, LMG. But I am wondering how much due diligence they did on the knee (and of course, wishing they'd picked a lineman last year instead).
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 21, 2009 8:06 PM | Report abuse

TheCork wrote: "He [Cerrato] made TEN picks last year and produced one starter. I'm afraid the odds of getting one or more starters in '09, with only four picks (now) is unlikely."

Gosh, that's not necessarly true. Teams often do better in years when they have fewer picks. Cerrato's best draft (arguably) was '06, the year he garnered 4 regulars with only six picks (rounds 2, 5, 6 and 7). That's a remarkable success rate, especially given the relative low round picks.

He's not the only GM to experience the hit-or-miss nature of the draft. Bill Polian, Ozzie Newsome, Scott Pioli, and most of the most respected GMs have fallen into the same trap.

Plus some organizations (the Pats and Cowboys are examples) put as much or more energy into free agency as the draft. You have to take that into account when judging their success.

By the way, the old saw about how you can't judge the success of a draft until the 3rd year is correct more often than not. It will be some time before we know how Davis, Kelley, Thomas, etc., turn out.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 21, 2009 8:45 PM | Report abuse

He's 22 and we invested a 2nd round pick in him. Give the kid at least another year before they make such a serious decision on his future in the Burgundy and Gold.

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 21, 2009 7:57 PM
=========================================
I agree that there's no need to cut him now, LMG. But I am wondering how much due diligence they did on the knee (and of course, wishing they'd picked a lineman last year instead).
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 21, 2009 8:06 PM | Report abuse

agreed all around

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 21, 2009 9:00 PM | Report abuse

The so-called WCO (tho it has more bastard Offspring than Sam Malone) contains a flaw that is exposed in the NFC East. When it's cold as hell and the chilly winds blow--like they are likely to during a critical late season and/or playoff game--you need to pound,

Please provide an example? I think the 49ers played in a pretty windy stadium. If you have talent on both sides of the ball, you can win. Save for this year, the Eagles' SB quests were stopped some pretty good defenses.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | January 21, 2009 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Any one catch the Senoir Bowl practices?

Moe likes, so far:

Victor Harris-VaTech cb
Alphonso Smith-Wake F cb
Andre Caldwell-Bama c
Larry English- N. Ill wlb
Clay Matthews, jr-USC wlb
Michael Oher-Ole Miss t
Raji- Boston College dt
Ray Mauauluga-USC mlb
Aryes-UTenn dl

In other words: the kind of players at the positions where the Skins have need.

The statements made by all the 'experts' regarding the quality of lineman are true: there are plenty to be had and multiple picks would give a team maybe one kid wo could start and another to use as a solid back up.

Just some observations......

Posted by: MistaMoe | January 21, 2009 9:33 PM | Report abuse

MistaMoe.

Alex Mack, Cal, c-g

Apparently, Raji got fired up upon reading about his duel with Mack the prior day and came out and boosted his own stock. I'm wondering if Raji even be around at 13 at this point.

I'd still love to see the Skins trade down and get Mack. I see Corkie is on that bandwagon, too.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | January 21, 2009 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Campbell will never be the best he can be while being protected in a bubble so that Todd Collins and Colt Brennan are artificially prevented from ascending to the starting position. Campbell knows he has to play utterly abysmally for God only knows how many games (years?) to lose the starting position. Is that going to make anyone play their best?

Posted by: shane2229 | January 21, 2009 3:05 AM

This may be one of the stupidest posts ever written. I hope I never have this guy or anyone like him working for me. Under this theory I would have to threaten all of my employees with termination and bring in people to challenge them in order for them to do their best work. God forbid I hire people that take pride in their work and WANT to do their best. Athletes would NEVER fit this mold. They don't WANT to win they just want to earn a paycheck.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | January 21, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Nah, most of us have written two or three stupider ones than this. I believe the thinking is that although JC wants to be good, maybe that challenge, that little bit of fear will affect him at a cellular level, and make him find something even he didn't know he had. You never know with athletes sometimes.

Posted by: SMACK1 | January 21, 2009 9:56 PM | Report abuse

"Nah, most of us have written two or three stupider ones than this. I believe the thinking is that although JC wants to be good, maybe that challenge, that little bit of fear will affect him at a cellular level, and make him find something even he didn't know he had. You never know with athletes sometimes.

Posted by: SMACK1"

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

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

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

Trade down unless one of the top four OT's falls to 13. I can also see the case for taking Raji if he's around. If neither of those scenarios plays out, I definitely think we need to trade down if we pick up a late 1st/2nd for the 13

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 21, 2009 10:45 PM | Report abuse

Some info on West Coast Offense from Wikipedia

Walsh formulated what has become popularly known as the West Coast Offense during his tenure as assistant coach for the Cincinnati Bengals from 1968-75, while working under the tutelage of mentor Paul Brown. Walsh installed a modified version of this system when he became head coach of the San Francisco 49ers. Walsh's 49ers won three Super Bowls during this period, and as a result, Walsh's version has come to be known as the "West Coast Offense."

Several of Walsh's coordinators went on to successfully implement this system at other teams. George Seifert won two Super Bowls with the 49ers. Mike Shanahan won two Super Bowls with the Denver Broncos. Mike Holmgren won a Super Bowl with the Green Bay Packers and coached in another with the Seattle Seahawks. Holmgren's assistant Jon Gruden went on to win a Super Bowl with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Another key part of the Walsh implementation was "pass first, run later." It was Walsh's intention to gain an early lead by passing the ball, then run the ball on a tired defense late in the game, wearing them down further and running down the clock. The San Francisco 49ers under Walsh often executed this very effectively.

Posted by: lifelongfan | January 22, 2009 12:05 AM | Report abuse

To clarify my earlier post regarding cutting M. Kelly (in addition to ARE) to make room for some FA wideouts with more upside. I would not be opposed to makign the cut Thrash and ARE instead, and keeping Kelly for one more year - I just think we could get more value out of those roster spots with different bodies in at least two them. I personally think Kelly will be a bust due to his knees, but if they wanted to give him another year to prove otherwise, and cut the other two guys now, I could roll with that...

Posted by: PDXskin | January 22, 2009 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Senior Bowl comments - agree that Raji looks like the real deal at DT, but I still think we need to trade back if possible (regardless of who is there at #13) because we have too many needs and not enough picks. I am also a big fan of A. Mack out of Cal(could be a great building block for our new o-line), and would love to see us trade back and get him near the bottom of the first round. Respectable right tackle prospects should be available in the 2nd (if we get one by trading back) or 3rd rounds.

Posted by: PDXskin | January 22, 2009 12:28 AM | Report abuse

The Skins ran a hybrid offense -- WCO passing combined with a Smash Mouth rushing attack...

The problem in executing this strategy occurred when the aging offensive line was injured half way through the season and the backups were ineffective against better defenses. As a result they failed to pass block effectively and became one-dimensional.

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 12:32 AM | Report abuse

The Skins are in good position for this draft. Their top needs are RT, SLB, DT, and OG and the draft is stacked with OT, OLB, OG, C/G, and DTs. The Skins could select a starting OT, DT, or SLB with the 13th pick. Or they could trade back for a lower round 1st and 2nd; then draft a good SLB and OG. The other holes can be filled with free agents or existing players (ie. LG Rhinehart and RT Heyer)

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 12:45 AM | Report abuse

The coaches have seen Kelly practice and think he can contribute as a possession receiver. The fans really haven't seen what he can do yet, since he was basically injured last year and the 1st year coaching staff never had time to "coach him up". He deserves another full year in the system before declaring him a bust.

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Hey Jasnos,

Every coach and GM worth a darn agree on ONE thing: Championship teams begin and end with the "Big Uglies."

A good line can make average recievers, Quarterbacks and running backs great, but great recievers, quarterbacks and running backs will never have great results with a poor line.

Posted by: Redskinrex | January 22, 2009 1:01 AM | Report abuse


Trade down unless one of the top four OT's falls to 13. I can also see the case for taking Raji if he's around. If neither of those scenarios plays out, I definitely think we need to trade down if we pick up a late 1st/2nd for the 13

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | January 21, 2009 10:45 PM | Report abuse

Sounds reasonable, although you'd have to consider the top SLBs (e.g. Aaron Curry or Brian Orakpo) if they are available with the 13th pick. And if not, then the Skins might still be able to target OG Duke Robinson, C/G Alex Mack, OC Max Unger, RT Jamon Meredith, or DT Peria Jerry with the lower 1st round pick.

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 1:07 AM | Report abuse

The Skins should cut Thrash now (saving 945 mil) and bring in a younger special teams specialist. However, both Thomas and Kelly were signed to four year contracts at a reasonable salary. There is no way they get cut before the end of the 2010 training camp, unless they are seriously injured. ARE is signed through 2013 with a 6.7 mil cap hit if released this year. You could attempt to trade him; although I'd keep him (as a #3 slot receiver) if there are no takers.

Posted by: siris | January 22, 2009 1:26 AM | Report abuse

Can't help but notice how many folks on this board are urging the Skins to go with a RT or a defensive lineman with their first round choice. Don't you think that's pretty risky? The success rate of such players isn't very high.

Among OTs, there's often an extended learning curve for the much faster pro game -- less so among run-blocking RTs, but still... When it comes to DTs, it's usually an injury. Lots of promising interior linemen succumb early in their playing life, go through extended rehab, and never really reach their potential.

That's why many GMs would rather lop off a hand than risk drafting one in the first fifteen picks.

Easier to lay back and let lesser-known players develop at the two positions. The numbers do suggest that many OTs and DTs come out of the lower rounds, or even free agency (remember Jacoby?) Stephon Heyer is an example -- he beat Jansen out in camp and did a creditable job at the end of last season.

Now of course, if a Jon Ogden or a Chris Samuel is out there, you suck it up and jump. But those guys come along every few seasons. You're just as likely to be fooled by somebody who jumps out against the background of a weak class. Think Glenn Dorsey. Of course it's too early to judge, but so far he does fit the profile of the high pick who struggles.

Parcells picks linemen in high rounds because he believes in that approach. He's been fooled plenty of times, too. I'm sure he holds his breath on draft day like everybody else.

Whatever the reason, it's considered

Posted by: Samson151 | January 22, 2009 1:42 AM | Report abuse

One other thing: Chad Rinehart looks to me like a center. Teams don't like to draft centers in the early rounds because experience tells them they can pick one up later on and do just fine. Also, pro centers usually are position shifts from college. That means another extended learning curve. Why waste a high pick, they wonder, on somebody who's not going to start for another year or two?

But I'd be tempted to argue the opposite. The acquisition of a really good center is the single fastest way to improve a struggling offensive line. Interior O-line play is mostly technique and toughness, anyway (as opposed to athleticism), and making sure the lineman with his hand on the ball is also calling the right assignments makes a world of difference. Whether it's signing a vet free agent like Mawae or Rabach, or picking up a prodigy like Mangold in the draft, it's a position that should receive a lot more care and attention than it usually receives.

Same thing with TE, but that's another story.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 22, 2009 1:52 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: icetotalpackage | January 22, 2009 7:39 AM | Report abuse

Walter has us taking Matthews with are 3rd round pick that would be a good pick, the guy can play strong side LB.

Washington Redskins: Clay Matthews, OLB, USC
It looks like Marcus Washington is going to be let go for cap reasons. The Redskins will need help at strongside linebacker.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 7:46 AM | Report abuse

I know alot of us would like to move down if all the OT's are taken, but remeber you have to have a willing partner who wants to trade up to 13. The 13th pick gets paid a good amount, not sure how many teams will be interested in moving up to pay that salary.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 7:51 AM | Report abuse

"Another key part of the Walsh implementation was "pass first, run later." It was Walsh's intention to gain an early lead by passing the ball, then run the ball on a tired defense late in the game, wearing them down further and running down the clock. The San Francisco 49ers under Walsh often executed this very effectively"

Corky, I know this isn't your beloved riggo drill, but hopefully you understand the point here right?? I mean, you've heard of Roger Craig before right?? How about Terrell Davis right??

Flound, I'm reading a lot about Phil Loadholt, at the Senior Bowl, he's just throwing cats around.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Flound, I'm reading a lot about Phil Loadholt, at the Senior Bowl, he's just throwing cats around.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 8:07 AM |

He would be good, I don't think he will be there in the 3rd.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 8:14 AM | Report abuse

fl, I'm thinking that he goes late first. 6'8, 343 right tackle, if the Skins can drop back late in the first, they've gotta consider this guy.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 8:17 AM | Report abuse

fl, I'm thinking that he goes late first. 6'8, 343 right tackle, if the Skins can drop back late in the first, they've gotta consider this guy.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 8:17 AM |

I could go for that, again I think they will find it difficult to trade back, Detroit might be a partner after they draft Stafford, they may look to move up to get a franchise LT.

Posted by: Flounder21 | January 22, 2009 8:21 AM | Report abuse

someone's gotta drop, Raji is turning into a hot prospect, and they'll be more, someone will BLOW UP at the combine. Orakpo, Moreno, someone's gonna fall to 13.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 8:25 AM | Report abuse

"The Ravens believe in drafting linemen the way baseball teams stockpile young pitchers. Baltimore has selected 13 offensive or defensive linemen in the top four rounds since 2000, restocking the team after its 2001 Super Bowl victory. The Redskins have taken just four interior linemen that high in that span. ..."

so in the eight drafts since 2000, the Ravens drafted 1.625 linemen in the first four rounds per draft while the Redskins drafted .5 linemen in the first four rounds per draft.

I'm not saying we shouldn't draft linemen or that we've been good at it, but that's really not a huge difference over 8 years. Maybe if it was all in the first round, but that's in the first four rounds?

And why should we look at the Ravens? What did they do so special this offseason? Miami and ATL are the two teams to look at. And maybe the Jets.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 8:27 AM | Report abuse

"Plus didn't Lewis kill/stab a guy?

Posted by: nagoose"


lol

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 8:33 AM | Report abuse

I like Loadholt just cause he's so darn huge

but I heard something about how they're only doing one-on-one drills/plays in all these senior bowl kinda things, and that when he's doing like zone blocking he's not as good.

Not sure if that's a huge deal or not really, I think he'd be a fine RT, but wherever I read\heard that, they made it seem like a big deal

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 8:38 AM | Report abuse

The Ravens play boring, quicksand football. They are not worth emulating. First, find a quarterback who is intelligent enought to make his reads, has an accurate arm, a quick release and is mobile enough to avoid a rush. Second, find receivers who can make plays even when closely guarded, e.g. Larry Fitzgerald. Third, find linebackers and pass rushers who can keep your offense on the field. Fourth, upgrade the kicking game so that long field goals are at least a 50/50 shot and a punter who can put the opposing offense inside the 10 consistently.

Posted by: doolindalton | January 22, 2009 8:48 AM | Report abuse

"The Ravens play boring, quicksand football. They are not worth emulating. First, find a quarterback who is intelligent enought to make his reads, has an accurate arm, a quick release and is mobile enough to avoid a rush. Second, find receivers who can make plays even when closely guarded, e.g. Larry Fitzgerald. Third, find linebackers and pass rushers who can keep your offense on the field. Fourth, upgrade the kicking game so that long field goals are at least a 50/50 shot and a punter who can put the opposing offense inside the 10 consistently."

Are you Vinny Cerrato? You didn't mention OL once....

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 8:52 AM | Report abuse

"so in the eight drafts since 2000, the Ravens drafted 1.625 linemen in the first four rounds per draft while the Redskins drafted .5 linemen in the first four rounds per draft.

I'm not saying we shouldn't draft linemen or that we've been good at it, but that's really not a huge difference over 8 years. Maybe if it was all in the first round, but that's in the first four rounds?

And why should we look at the Ravens? What did they do so special this offseason?"

Posted by: TheTruth11

Umm, that's 3 times as many linemen selected. That's more than a significant difference.

And the Ravens have an inexperienced coach, a young an inexperienced QB, and rebounded from 5-11 last year to go 11-5 this year.

Not really sure why you're complaining.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 8:52 AM | Report abuse

"The Ravens play boring, quicksand football. They are not worth emulating. First, find a quarterback who is intelligent enought to make his reads, has an accurate arm, a quick release and is mobile enough to avoid a rush. Second, find receivers who can make plays even when closely guarded, e.g. Larry Fitzgerald. Third, find linebackers and pass rushers who can keep your offense on the field. Fourth, upgrade the kicking game so that long field goals are at least a 50/50 shot and a punter who can put the opposing offense inside the 10 consistently.

Posted by: doolindalton"

This is a great plan. First, we have to find a QB with Tom Brady's mind and arm along with Michael Vick's legs, find a couple WRs like Larry Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson, find Dwight Freeney and James Harrison to help out our defense, find an in-his-prime Adam Vinatieri to assist the kicking game, and find someway to get another Shane Lechler. Absolutely brilliant.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

psp, if we kept leigh torrence, and marcus mason, we might be able to pull that off via trades.....dang...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | January 22, 2009 9:09 AM | Report abuse

"Umm, that's 3 times as many linemen selected. That's more than a significant difference.

And the Ravens have an inexperienced coach, a young an inexperienced QB, and rebounded from 5-11 last year to go 11-5 this year.

Not really sure why you're complaining.

Posted by: psps23 |"

How about these numbers :

Redskins total draft picks in the first four rounds from 2000-2008 Drafts : 25

Redskins total draft picks in the first four rounds from 2000-2008 Drafts : 40


Redskins frequency : 1 linemen per 3.13 picks
Ravens frequency : 1 linemen per 3.08 picks

I'm just saying, it's not really THAT big of a difference, especially when you consider that this doesn't take into account free agency and trades.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 9:12 AM | Report abuse

truth,

The quote was: "The Ravens believe in drafting linemen the way baseball teams stockpile young pitchers."

The Redskins don't get points for trading away their draft picks in this situation. The Redskins haven't completely neglected the lines, just neglected the age and future of their lines via the draft.

It's a complete difference in philosophy. The Ravens consistently have an influx of young, cheaper linemen selected in higher rounds, while the Redskins have consistently relied on expensive veterans that hold little value in the future.

Posted by: psps23 | January 22, 2009 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Deal with mentally challenged Campbell for this year and get Timmy T. At least our offense would go back to running and who doesnt love a quarterback that runs over people and not around them. But from what I have been seeing and reading, Belichick and Urban Meyer have had discussions about Tebow. I could actually see the Patriots grabbing him and letting him come in on situational downs until Brady winds down in a few years. Belichick was in an article on SI, stating he would be very interested in having Tebow and using him as a dual threat. Not as fast as a Vick or Young, but a more accurate arm than either. And he isnt a cancer in the locker room, a true leader at the QB position.

Without the Gators, I would be bitter like the rest of Redskins Nation.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | January 22, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Tebow's arm is not more accurate than Vick's arm. Sorry.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | January 22, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

"who doesnt love a quarterback that runs over people and not around them"

I would LOVE to see Tebow try to run over someone in the NFL.

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 22, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

You're crazy if you believe that, Vick had a 53% accuracy. That is garbage. Vick was a runner who threw. He was never considered an accurate passer. Look at Vicks college stats on completion percentage and it mirrors his NFL stats, a little higher at 55% against lesser opponents. Compared to Tebows, in a defense oriented conference at 66%. Vick never was a good passer, and highly overrated as a QB in general. You cant even compare the individual quality, one goes and does missionary work in the summer, the other breeds and kills dogs.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | January 22, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Yoder,

I guarantee that after he goes pro, you will see him run someone over in the pros. He plowed LaRon Landry when he was at LSU, and he was a freshman when he did it. Every year I have heard people say he cant do this and he cant do that, but every year I see him put his team on his back when needed and do nothing but make plays. The Redskins are in sore need of playmakers. I went to 5 skins games this year and it was sadly enough at the end of the year,so I got to see the really good games. We need more playmakers on this team. If we are looking for "character", no one coming out next year has more.
I was like this back when Emmitt came out of Florida, I was devastated when he went to the Cowboys, at the time he was my favorite college player, who happened to go to my rival NFL team. Talk about crappy, he always ran over the Redskins.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | January 22, 2009 10:03 AM | Report abuse

If Tebow tries the same crap he does in college in the pros, he'll end up like McGahee in the AFC Championship game.

P.S. I never saw Emmitt run over anyone, just around them.

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 22, 2009 10:24 AM | Report abuse

P.P.S. - I love watching Emmitt on TV

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

Posted by: Yoder-lay-hee-who | January 22, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, Emmitt wasnt a power back, never expected him to run over people. I'll tell you this though, I went to the SEC Championship game, as well as the National Championship game, when he does run over a safety or linebacker, the crowd goes F'n nuts. We havent had any one on offense that can generate momentum throughout the fans and the entire team like that in a long time. We have players that have flashes, a game here and there where we get excited. Then the next game they are a non factor. None of this matters unless we get some sort of line, offensively and defensively.

Last year all that was talked about was upgrading the D-line, so we go out and get a too many ball catchers. This year, we will go get something else we dont need. The sad part is that I almost now expect us to make some major F'up. Where in the past I was always looking forward to a deep playoff run, of course that was a loooong time ago.

Posted by: gatorskinz2000 | January 22, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Crank up Redskins One! Let's go fly around and get us some free agents! Draft picks are no fun and we only have 4 of them anyway. They aren't flashy enough unless they are top 10 picks. We need to have some fun...get some marketable skills players. This is a money-making business afterall first and foremost.

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

SIGH....JLA, seriously! Everyone who reads the post and Insider knows you detest Vinny. Guess what, you know we all detest him too! He does a lousy job, it's clear in his performance, but he's Danny's boy, so we're stuck with him until Danny blows him up. Having said that, what is the point of writing yet another obvious hit piece on Vinny? I realize you think he's a dishonest liar just because he doesn't give you inside scoop into his every though and move - get over it already. You're a reporter, and he sure as hell better not be giving you inside scoop that might undercut his negotiating positions (Ok, ok, you get my point). Instead of writing a hit piece like this where you review other teams that clearly focus on O and D line, and then - expertly - conclude the Skins need to do the same, how about putting some real pressure on him? Look at the Skins picks in the draft and try to get an assessment from your "league sources" about the kinds of players who may/likely should be available, and who those executives would be picking (throw in free agents too for good measure)? That way, when Vinny does otherwise and blows it again, there will be a record of thought to compare his decision making to, and really put the screws to him. Seems like a good assasination plan to me - better than this nonsense, which is getting pretty old. Thanks bro.

Posted by: OldManGibbs | January 22, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Ok, let me get this straight:

Certain folks here are not sold on a QB that has consistently improved since starting; especially going through the first year in a new offensive scheme.

Certain folks here are not sold on Jason Taylor's ability, although he had been playing on basically one leg for most of the season.

Certain folks are upset with the front office because in the past 4 years the Redskins have been to the playoffs twice, and went 3-0 against the NFC Championship Game contestants.

Certain folks here are upset about an aging line not being addressed although that line produced a running back gaining 14-15 hundred yards.

Certain folks here are upset the fact that the secondary is getting older; and yet could possibly have 2 talented corners, and stud nickel back, and a older corner turned saftey to go with a stud free safety, and a (get this now) a gem of a saftey that the FO actually drafted!

If there was something that the few years that Coach Gibbs was here (2nd go around) should have taught all of us is that it eventually pays to be patient and trust the process.

Posted by: Tymmel44 | January 22, 2009 9:09 PM | Report abuse

I agree with snowbill27, with these modifiers: I would let Jason Campbell come in as #1 because he has the tools and he has not had any consistency in terms of offensive systems. I would not sign him long term, however. I'd have Colt McCoy as the #1 back up, because he might be the man. I would also emphasize getting linemen, because that's our weakness. The Skins have never had dominant defensive linemen outside of Manley, Charles Mann and Dave Butz. I would definitely look to trade Rodgers or make him work hard on catching the ball. His drop of a sure touchdown INT in the playoff game against Seattle years ago cost a chance at getting to the SB. And he had a big drop against the Giants last season. I'm sure I'm missing some: he frustrates because he covers well and then blows it, blows game changers. Notice how great DBs, i.e., Ed Reed and Troy of Pittsburgh, never seem to have drops.

We should get linemen in the draft who are athletic and nasty. I'm thinking Kyle Turley, who the Saints got in the 6th round. We should get 3 nasty O and/or D linemen in the draft as well as someone small and fast who can return punts and add speed to the backfield. Someone like Lewis McQuale of Ball State, short but at 184, sturdy enough. He's sure to drop down.

However, after last year, I have no faith in the front office, although the fact that they didn't fire Zorn is an improvement.

Posted by: kirbzone78 | January 26, 2009 6:41 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company