Trading Up?

[colkurtz]

Agreed, I just hope that:
A) We actually get a DE either at #6 or by trading down, and
B) That he's more bite than bark.

How can it get any worse (????) unless the guy:

1. Holds out for more $$$
2. Gets hurts early

Any of the DL players we are discussing ad nauseum is an improvement. Perhaps not a massive improvement the first season - but the long term upside is big. A real pass rush would be nice for a change!

I'd say Salvea / Wynn / Montgomery / Evans could not get a starting position with ANY team in the NFL. Daniels is freakin' old. I guess Daniel's is not as old a Bruce Smith was [41], but then I digress...................Yet, some here at hR keep saying - "this DL will be fine for ANOTHER season".

[MikeBass]

How can it get any worse (????) unless the guy:

1. Holds out for more $$$
2. Gets hurts early

Any of the DL players we are discussing ad nauseum is an improvment. Perhaps not a massive improvement the first season - but the long term upside is big. A real pass rush would be nice for a change.

I'd say Salvea / Wynn / Montgomery / Evans could not get a starting position with ANY team in the NFL. Daniels is freakin's old. Yet, some here keep saying - "they'll be fine for ANOTHER season".

I do not think that some are saying that at all. I think what some of us are trying to say is that the defensive line is not the only problem and may or may not be the biggest problem and can be addressed just as the biggest, or next to the biggest problem , which would be the intermediate and red-zone passing offense, can be addressed in this years draft.

Although I would be ecstatic if we drafted CJ, I do not think that this is going to be possible and I have stated that. I would be just as happy if we traded down and got Robert Meacham or Dewayne Bowe and picked up a DE in the second or third round and a DT with the later picks.THEN we would've addressed both of our biggest weaknesses in this years draft and still have next years draft picks to further get younger D-linemen. Picking up a DT or DE at #6 would still leave our other huge weakness in place.

Pressure from the D-line is, indeed, a very big part of a successful defense but we should get enough pressure from Carter, a healthy Griff, a heavier Golston, the second or third round pick and our defensive scheme, that consists of aggressive linebacker play (these guys are the biggest part of stopping the run and should've played a major part in blitz packages) and DB play as we did in the the two years before this past one. GW defensive scheme, I do not worry about because he is one of the best, BUT ,he has to have healthy players intact to implement his scheme. We had to deviate from his plans last season and it KILLED us, our DB's was not even in the same area code as the opposing team's receivers when Springs was hurt but with Springs, Smoot, Rogers and Macklin I do not see this happening again and on passing downs, three of these guys are going to be in there together.

If we did not think that our linebacker and DB play was the major part of our defensive scheme, I do not think that we would've given all this attention to these positions this offseason , would not phantom the thought of getting Briggs and STILL would not pull the string unless we we were able to keep Rocky Mac.

[colkurtz]

I do not think that some are saying that at all. I think what some of us are trying to say is that the defensive line is not the only problem and may or may not be the biggest problem and can be addressed just as the biggest, or next to the biggest problem , which would be the intermediate and red-zone passing offense, can be addressed in this years draft.

Although I would be ecstatic if we drafted CJ, I do not think that this is going to be possible and I have stated that. I would be just as happy if we traded down and got Robert Meacham or Dewayne Bowe and picked up a DE in the second or third round and a DT with the later picks.THEN we would've addressed both of our biggest weaknesses in this years draft and still have next years draft picks to further get younger D-linemen. Picking up a DT or DE at #6 would still leave our other huge weakness in place.

Pressure from the D-line is, indeed, a very big part of a successful defense but we should get enough pressure from Carter, a healthy Griff, a heavier Golston, the second or third round pick and our defensive scheme, that consists of aggressive linebacker play (these guys are the biggest part of stopping the run and should've played a major part in blitz packages) and DB play as we did in the the two years before this past one. GW defensive scheme, I do not worry about because he is one of the best, BUT ,he has to have healthy players intact to implement his scheme. We had to deviate from his plans last season and it KILLED us, our DB's was not even in the same area code as the opposing team's receivers when Springs was hurt but with Springs, Smoot, Rogers and Macklin I do not see this happening again and on passing downs, three of these guys are going to be in there together.

If we did not think that our linebacker and DB play was the major part of our defensive scheme, I do not think that we would've given all this attention to these positions this offseason , would not phantom the thought of getting Briggs and STILL would not pull the string unless we we were able to keep Rocky Mac.


Simple put: It's all about the area of highest need and lowest performance.
Statistical analysis and simply by watching the games (end of the season) - our problems are on the defense. The offense equation later in the season is decent or better. We will see the return of our best offensive weapon (Portis) and see how JC performs as a second year pro. Personally I think both will be fine - offense will be top 10 in 2007.

2006 Defense was horrible and getting older on the anchor of our DL. We either fix the anchor issue of the DL or divert ourselves to team positions which are simply FLASH over IMPACT.

[shally]

Simple put: It's all about the area of highest need and lowest performance.
Statistical analysis and simply by watching the games (end of the season) - our problems are on the defense. The offense equation later in the season is decent or better. We will see the return of our best offensive weapon (Portis) and see how JC performs as a second year pro. Personally I think both will be fine - offense will be top 10 in 2007.

2006 Defense was horrible and getting older on the anchor of our DL. We either fix the anchor issue of the DL or divert ourselves to team positions which are simply FLASH over IMPACT.

i agree. it all starts with the big boys upfront on both lines.. fix them and both sides of the ball will be fine.

we are okay on the o line. that leaves the d line for the rest of this off season

[MikeBass]

i agree. it all starts with the big boys upfront on both lines.. fix them and both sides of the ball will be fine.

we are okay on the o line. that leaves the d line for the rest of this off season

And we should just forget about the fact that we can not get the ball in the end zone?

Those big guys, for the most part, are going to be battling each other in the trenches (the unmoveable object vs. the irresistable force) by the time those big fat guys are finish with each other the play should be already made, especially, on running downs. Every now and then you will find a dominant lineman like Reggie White, Julius Peppers or Warren Sapp but ,more often than not, the lineman are at a stalemate and this is when the LB's has to fill the gaps and make tackles and the Db's are going to have to cover their guys. This is what makes a player such as Champ Bailey so valuable and what made us better when Springs was in the lineup.

I love our approach in getting our, more athlethic, LB's and Db's involved in the pass rush. It got us to #5 on defense a couple of years ago without an outstanding D-line and should get us back there again.

[bergiemoore]

And we should just forget about the fact that we can not get the ball in the end zone?

Those big guys, for the most part, are going to be battling each other in the trenches (the unmoveable object vs. the irresistable force) by the time those big fat guys are finish with each other the play should be already made, especially, on running downs. Every now and then you will find a dominant lineman like Reggie White, Julius Peppers or Warren Sapp but ,more often than not, the lineman are at a stalemate and this is when the LB's has to fill the gaps and make tackles and the Db's are going to have to cover their guys. This is what makes a player such as Champ Bailey so valuable and what made us better when Springs was in the lineup.

I love our approach in getting our, more athlethic, LB's and Db's involved in the pass rush. It got us to #5 on defense a couple of years ago without an outstanding D-line and should get us back there again.

There's a lot of wiggle room down in those trenches. If you have guys getting blown off the ball on running plays, then you have OLinemen laying blocks on your LBs, which we saw last year. It's impossible to get out DBs and LBs involved in the pass rush if there are OLinemen free to block them. We need to have the DLine command the double teams.

I don't think that this DLine is the reason our defense went to pot last year, but I do see it as a bigger area of need than any other position at this time. Our DBs and LBs have been upgraded. I believe that with an adequate secondary, GW will return to the blitz happy style of defense that got us to the top 10 ranking. But we still need to have DLinemen to either take on the double teams, or, heaven forbid, get to the QB by themselves.

[MikeBass]

There's a lot of wiggle room down in those trenches. If you have guys getting blown off the ball on running plays, then you have OLinemen laying blocks on your LBs, which we saw last year. It's impossible to get out DBs and LBs involved in the pass rush if there are OLinemen free to block them. We need to have the DLine command the double teams.

I don't think that this DLine is the reason our defense went to pot last year, but I do see it as a bigger area of need than any other position at this time. Our DBs and LBs have been upgraded. I believe that with an adequate secondary, GW will return to the blitz happy style of defense that got us to the top 10 ranking. But we still need to have DLinemen to either take on the double teams, or, heaven forbid, get to the QB by themselves.


I am not disagreeing with this, last year WAS a debacle. The first couple of games we had to resort to starting a 5th and 6th round, rookie D-linemen and experience prevailed.

Carter had to adjust to the DE position again after playing LB in San Fran and after he did, I still say that he played just as good as any DE in foootball at the end of the season. Griff and big Joe played but they were not healthy.

I do not worry about this defense this coming season

[James F. Quinn]

I do not worry about this defense this coming season
I worry about any unit that has been on an express train heading south for three years straight.

I see a very ordinary defensive backfield with one aging/injury-prone good CB, one regressing no-longer-sure thing safety, and a bunch of rookies, journeymen, and returnees from IR.

I see an LB corps with one VG SLB returning from some significant injuries and surgeries, an upgrade at MLB and a relatively unproven MLB.

I see a DL that was among the worst in the league in sacks and yards yielded, and no significant moves to bring in more talent, thus far.

Maybe everyone will come back better than new, rejuvenated, and all the questionmarks and wannabees will have career years. I sure hope so.

But right now, I think I have good reasons to be worried.

[colkurtz]

I worry about any unit that has been on an express train heading south for three years straight.

I see a very ordinary defensive backfield with one aging/injury-prone good CB, one regressing no-longer-sure thing safety, and a bunch of rookies, journeymen, and returnees from IR.

I see an LB corps with one VG SLB returning from some significant injuries and surgeries, an upgrade at MLB and a relatively unproven MLB.

I see a DL that was among the worst in the league in sacks and yards yielded, and no significant moves to bring in more talent, thus far.

Maybe everyone will come back better than new, rejuvenated, and all the questionmarks and wannabees will have career years. I sure hope so.

But right now, I think I have good reasons to be worried.

Spot on. We were average for red zone TD production (without Portis!). Yet, last in the NFL in sacks and turnovers (often related to QB pressure). Where do you put your highest draft pick? To me it's obvious - and to the rest of the NFL also.

[lmbree]

is ST the regressing safety you are talking about? Let me just say on his behalf, that if you had your top 2 of all time back there last year, you would be talking about rough years when the team gets 19 sacks.

The team has a lot of holes and a lot of questions. They need a pass rush, then need fletcher to be solid, they need the corners to play well. Indy had no dbacks, lost their best one this year, couldn't stop the run. The bears had no qb and lost their best dlineman. Every team has question marks. If the team comes together and we don't get a ton of injuries I think we have as much of a chance as anyone in the NFC.

[MikeBass]

I worry about any unit that has been on an express train heading south for three years straight.

I see a very ordinary defensive backfield with one aging/injury-prone good CB, one regressing no-longer-sure thing safety, and a bunch of rookies, journeymen, and returnees from IR.

I see an LB corps with one VG SLB returning from some significant injuries and surgeries, an upgrade at MLB and a relatively unproven MLB.

I see a DL that was among the worst in the league in sacks and yards yielded, and no significant moves to bring in more talent, thus far.

Maybe everyone will come back better than new, rejuvenated, and all the questionmarks and wannabees will have career years. I sure hope so.

But right now, I think I have good reasons to be worried.

Good Gawd!!!

With this assessment EVERYONE here should hope that we can get CJ AND a few more offensive players and hope that we can outscore everyone that we play by scoring 30 points per game. If we have nothing on defense, as suggested here, a college player or 2 will not be too much help anyway.

I do not think that the team is that bad and I am looking for a playoff run this season.

[skinfan43]

Good Gawd!!!

With this assessment EVERYONE here should hope that we can get CJ AND a few more offensive players and hope that we can outscore everyone that we play by scoring 30 points per game. If we have nothing on defense, as suggested here, a college player or 2 will not be too much help anyway.

I do not think that the team is that bad and I am looking for a playoff run this season.
I am looking for a playoff run EVERY season;)
However our defense WAS that bad last season, and by halftime vs. the Dolphins in September we should pretty much see if this season will look any different.
We MUST address the Dline, hopefully with both of the high round picks we get from trading down.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

I am looking for a playoff run EVERY season;)
However our defense WAS that bad last season, and by halftime vs. the Dolphins in September we should pretty much see if this season will look any different.
We MUST address the Dline, hopefully with both of the high round picks we get from trading down.
Our defense wasn't THAAAAT bad...it was only the worst in the NFL...

[skinfan43]

Our defense wasn't THAAAAT bad...it was only the worst in the NFL...
Yeah, i heard something that sounded like we had the fewest sacks in the entire history of the NFL or something. And something like we gave up the most plays of 40 or more yards last season, over two per game or something.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Yeah, i heard something that sounded like we had the fewest sacks in the entire history of the NFL or something. And something like we gave up the most plays of 40 or more yards last season, over two per game or something.
Fewest turnovers in history, and last in sacks in the NFL by a mile. Good times!

[skinfan43]

Fewest turnovers in history, and last in sacks in the NFL by a mile. Good times!
Ah, it was the fewest turnovers in the entire history of the entire NFL... to go along with the fewest sacks in the league, to go along with the fewest sacks in the entire history of the Washington Redskins. Right on, right on!

[MikeBass]

I am looking for a playoff run EVERY season;)
However our defense WAS that bad last season, and by halftime vs. the Dolphins in September we should pretty much see if this season will look any different.
We MUST address the Dline, hopefully with both of the high round picks we get from trading down.

I am not worried about the defense, at all. My concerns lies with our young QB and how he is going to perform.

Believe me, if we address the d-line one time with our trade down pick the other one will not be a D-lineman.

[MikeBass]

Our defense wasn't THAAAAT bad...it was only the worst in the NFL...

Rest assured, we have the players and the coaches in place to rebound from a injury ladened season. This is one unit that you do not have to worry about as far as repeating that performance.

What amazes me is that this is the unit that carried the team in the previous two seasons and, all of a sudden, the fandom wants to hang them because they was hurt.

I guess Janet put it best when she wrote the song "What have you done for me lately".

[skinfan43]

Rest assured, we have the players and the coaches in place to rebound from a injury ladened season. This is one unit that you do not have to worry about as far as repeating that performance.

What amazes me is that this is the unit that carried the team in the previous two seasons and, all of a sudden, the fandom wants to hang them because they was hurt.

I guess Janet put it best when she wrote the song "What have you done for me lately".
No, we were pissed because they were the worst D in the entire NFL, and one of the worst in the history of the Redskins organization.
That was NOT the unit that we saw the previous two years, and I think it's unwise to feel completely confident about them at this point. But more power to you if you are.
I saw the offense making good strides the final 6 games, but not the D at all.
Seems that the defense is of far more concern than the offense at this point, especially with Portis coming back strong.

[MikeBass]

No, we were pissed because they were the worst D in the entire NFL, and one of the worst in the history of the Redskins organization.
That was NOT the unit that we saw the previous two years, and I think it's unwise to feel completely confident about them at this point. But more power to you if you are.
I saw the offense making good strides the final 6 games, but not the D at all.
Seems that the defense is of far more concern than the offense at this point, especially with Portis coming back strong.

Believe me, I was not skinning and grinning at the way that we played last season either but I can not put it all on the defensive line. Our D-line was not one of the best when we were the #5 defense in the league but we were more aggressive with our DB's,in fact, Springs was our co-leader in sacks that year. Doing what it takes to get us back to #5 would be alright with me.

[urobm]

Yeah, i heard something that sounded like we had the fewest sacks in the entire history of the NFL or something. And something like we gave up the most plays of 40 or more yards last season, over two per game or something.


Yeah, simply embarassing, it would seem as though the obvious direction in the draft would be DL!!!!! I dont think anything the FO does could suprise me. I wouldnt suprise me if we drafted Adrian Petersen (LOL).

[MikeBass]

Yeah, simply embarassing, it would seem as though the obvious direction in the draft would be DL!!!!! I dont think anything the FO does could suprise me. I wouldnt suprise me if we drafted Adrian Petersen (LOL).

Honestly, do you think that the D-line should have been covering receivers downfield?

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Rest assured, we have the players and the coaches in place to rebound from a injury ladened season. This is one unit that you do not have to worry about as far as repeating that performance.

What amazes me is that this is the unit that carried the team in the previous two seasons and, all of a sudden, the fandom wants to hang them because they was hurt.

I guess Janet put it best when she wrote the song "What have you done for me lately".
Once again, injuries were not a factor in the d-line's bad play last year.

[MikeBass]

Once again, injuries were not a factor in the d-line's bad play last year.

When you had to start a 5th and 6th round pick in the first few games, injuries was definitely a factor.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

When you had to start a 5th and 6th round pick in the first few games, injuries was definitely a factor.
Would you care to show me which defensive linemen had their season killed by injuries last year?
The fact that Golston was starting doesn't prove anything, aside from the fact that the other DT, aside from Griff, suck.

[MikeBass]

Would you care to show me which defensive linemen had their season killed by injuries last year?
The fact that Golston was starting doesn't prove anything, aside from the fact that the other DT, aside from Griff, suck.

Big Joe played injured all year, he played but he played hurt. Heck if Griff and big Joe were the only 2, THAT was half of the starting line which produced the #5 defense line in the league.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Big Joe played injured all year, he played but he played hurt. Heck if Griff and big Joe were the only 2, THAT was half of the starting line which produced the #5 defense line in the league.
So the excuse for having the worst defensive line in football was the fact that 32 year old Joe Salave'a, the perennial Pro-Bowler, missed 3 games and played hurt in some of the other ones? That's ridiculous. This is football, not the World Series Of Poker.

[MikeBass]

So the excuse for having the worst defensive line in football was the fact that 32 year old Joe Salave'a, the perennial Pro-Bowler, missed 3 games and played hurt in some of the other ones? That's ridiculous. This is football, not the World Series Of Poker.

So since this is football are you supposed to play just as efffective on one leg as you would 2?

[SpicyMcHaggis]

So since this is football are you supposed to play just as efffective on one leg as you would 2?
No, but you can't tell me that a whole unit was "plagued" by injuries when a mediocre 32 year old defensive tackle missed 3 games and played hurt for large parts of the season. Having a unit plagued by injuries means having to play a WR as CB because you are out of bodies (for example). Or losing a starting safety for the season on the first play of the season, and then your starting cornerback for large parts of the season.

[Inuyasha]

Lets not forget tho our bad offense made the defense stay on the field longer so both sides are were at fault last year.......

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Lets not forget tho our bad offense made the defense stay on the field longer so both sides are were at fault last year.......
Not really true. Our O TOP per game was 29:59. The extra second, on average, per game that the D was on the field could not have made that much of a difference.

The biggest problem for the D was not getting off the field on third down.

[shally]

Not really true. Our O TOP per game was 29:59. The extra second, on average, per game that the D was on the field could not have made that much of a difference.

The biggest problem for the D was not getting off the field on third down.

unless the opponents scored a TD on 3rd down...:rolleyes:

[akhhorus]

Not really true. Our O TOP per game was 29:59. The extra second, on average, per game that the D was on the field could not have made that much of a difference.

The biggest problem for the D was not getting off the field on third down.

The offense was also 12th in NFL. So that argument just doesn't hold water.

[dj_stouty]

The offense was also 12th in NFL. So that argument just doesn't hold water.

I agree, especially since the defense couldn't get any turnovers (gifts) for that offense to benefit from. This offense did it all on their own.

[techskinsfan]

the biggest problem was the d not being able to get off the field on 3rd down...a pass rush could solve that problem

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Going back to the original topic for a second, Peter King talks about a possible scenario of us trading up to 4 to get Johnson. He seems to be saying contrary to what others are suggesting, the Bucs would not jump at CJ and would shop him. The thing that doesn't make a lot of sense to me though is why would the Skins do this? Under that scenario (barring another team with a relatively high pick moving into #4), CJ would be available at 6 anyway because TB would go D and I think it is unlikely Arizona would take a receiver.

Just thought this article may spark up the trade up discussion a little bit especially if it means we could get CJ at 4 instead of 2.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/04/22/mmqb/2.html

[sgurg]

Going back to the original topic for a second, Peter King talks about a possible scenario of us trading up to 4 to get Johnson. He seems to be saying contrary to what others are suggesting, the Bucs would not jump at CJ and would shop him. The thing that doesn't make a lot of sense to me though is why would the Skins do this? Under that scenario (barring another team with a relatively high pick moving into #4), CJ would be available at 6 anyway because TB would go D and I think it is unlikely Arizona would take a receiver.

Just thought this article may spark up the trade up discussion a little bit especially if it means we could get CJ at 4 instead of 2.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/04/22/mmqb/2.html

PFT is reporting that the Broncos have offered Detroit their first-round, second-round, and third-round pick in the 2007 draft and their first-rounder in 2008 for the No. 2 spot - contingent upon CJ not going #1 to Oak.

So it's looking more unlikely that CJ falls past the #2 pick.

[skinsfan36]

i think the raiders will take johnson so im not even paying any attention to this anymore. and the offense was 12th last year as akh said and they had a 1st year starter the last half although if u minus the jax game campbell when campbell was in the offense was lightyears better.

[bgforever]

i think the raiders will take johnson so im not even paying any attention to this anymore. and the offense was 12th last year as akh said and they had a 1st year starter the last half although if u minus the jax game campbell when campbell was in the offense was lightyears better.

The only other possible choice is Russell or Quinn, but that doesn't jive exactly right, when CJ is on the table and you picking #1. The Raiders will have an offense weapon for years to come or a franchise QB. I'm still sticking with CJ to Oakland.

[Red Bear]

i think the raiders will take johnson so im not even paying any attention to this anymore. and the offense was 12th last year as akh said and they had a 1st year starter the last half although if u minus the jax game campbell when campbell was in the offense was lightyears better.

you dont have to pay attention, but you should. PFT also is saying they hear the raiders are expected to strike a deal with jamarcus russell by saturday. also akh failed to mention the running game being ranked so high may have skewed the overall rank of our offense. on the other hand our passing game left more to be desired. altho our passing did improve with campbell you can also argue it improved with campbell due to the late season improvement in our run game alleviating some of the pressure. our passing game was ranked 21st in the NFL last year out of 32 teams, thats far from impressive. our rushing game was 4th, and even that fell short of the goal of 2500+ total rushing yards that byner wanted. im not saying i advocate trading up for johnson, but the raiders taking johnson is not a done deal and that the week leading up to the draft is not the week to ignore if youve been following the rumors and projections thus far. you can say what you want about our offense last year tho(portis hurt, new offense, breaking in young qb) the bottomline is 12th isnt anything special and i dont know why you or anyone else would be happy with it. sure you can project improvement with a healthy portis, familiarity with the offense, and campbells development; but none of those are guaranteed

[MikeBass]

you dont have to pay attention, but you should. PFT also is saying they hear the raiders are expected to strike a deal with jamarcus russell by saturday. also akh failed to mention the running game being ranked so high may have skewed the overall rank of our offense. on the other hand our passing game left more to be desired. altho our passing did improve with campbell you can also argue it improved with campbell due to the late season improvement in our run game alleviating some of the pressure. our passing game was ranked 21st in the NFL last year out of 32 teams, thats far from impressive. our rushing game was 4th, and even that fell short of the goal of 2500+ total rushing yards that byner wanted. im not saying i advocate trading up for johnson, but the raiders taking johnson is not a done deal and that the week leading up to the draft is not the week to ignore if youve been following the rumors and projections thus far. you can say what you want about our offense last year tho(portis hurt, new offense, breaking in young qb) the bottomline is 12th isnt anything special and i dont know why you or anyone else would be happy with it. sure you can project improvement with a healthy portis, familiarity with the offense, and campbells development; but none of those are guaranteed

EXACTAMUNDO!!

Our rushing game did well from the twenty to the twenty which bloated our offensive rank but we could not seal the deal and get the needed TD's.

Actually, Brunnell's passer rating was 13th in the league which caused some bloat also but his passes was not for many yards and his and Campbells' numbers were similar but the TD production was not there.

[akhhorus]

you dont have to pay attention, but you should. PFT also is saying they hear the raiders are expected to strike a deal with jamarcus russell by saturday. also akh failed to mention the running game being ranked so high may have skewed the overall rank of our offense. on the other hand our passing game left more to be desired. altho our passing did improve with campbell you can also argue it improved with campbell due to the late season improvement in our run game alleviating some of the pressure. our passing game was ranked 21st in the NFL last year out of 32 teams, thats far from impressive. our rushing game was 4th, and even that fell short of the goal of 2500+ total rushing yards that byner wanted.

Yes, we were 21st in passing and 4th in rushing. But so what? The passing game clearly improved under Campbell(and with Moss far from 100%). That doesn't change the fact that our defense(and defensive line) is still in need of help. Drafting Johnson(or any offensive player) is moronic anyway you slice it unless the skins are going to spring some DL signings right before the draft.

[Red Bear]

Yes, we were 21st in passing and 4th in rushing. But so what? The passing game clearly improved under Campbell(and with Moss far from 100%). That doesn't change the fact that our defense(and defensive line) is still in need of help. Drafting Johnson(or any offensive player) is moronic anyway you slice it unless the skins are going to spring some DL signings right before the draft.

I said the passing game improved under campbell, especially because he has the arm to throw downfield and make certain throws brunell cant make anymore. And i clearly stated i wasnt advocating trading up to draft johnson, i was stating how our offense ranking 12th last year can be deceiving and that johnson to the raiders isnt a gauranteed thing. personally im for drafting defensive line as its our biggest weakness on defense, and i believe i stated that earlier in this thread. so what are you debating when we pretty much agree?

[akhhorus]

I said the passing game improved under campbell, especially because he has the arm to throw downfield and make certain throws brunell cant make anymore. And i clearly stated i wasnt advocating trading up to draft johnson, i was stating how our offense ranking 12th last year can be deceiving and that johnson to the raiders isnt a gauranteed thing. personally im for drafting defensive line as its our biggest weakness on defense, and i believe i stated that earlier in this thread. so what are you debating when we pretty much agree?

That part of the message wasn't meant for you.

[Red Bear]

That part of the message wasn't meant for you.

ahhh, mustve been for the biggest overlooker of our dline and biggest Cj supporter on the board, mike bass

[MikeBass]

ahhh, mustve been for the biggest overlooker of our dline and biggest Cj supporter on the board, mike bass

You got that right and the draft will prove that MB knew a li'l something.

[Red Bear]

You got that right and the draft will prove that MB knew a li'l something.

i never said you didnt know anything, just stated the obvious for this discussion. as far as i know every prediction and bit of speculation in this thread could be wrong, even my own

[MikeBass]

I said the passing game improved under campbell, especially because he has the arm to throw downfield and make certain throws brunell cant make anymore. And i clearly stated i wasnt advocating trading up to draft johnson, i was stating how our offense ranking 12th last year can be deceiving and that johnson to the raiders isnt a gauranteed thing. personally im for drafting defensive line as its our biggest weakness on defense, and i believe i stated that earlier in this thread. so what are you debating when we pretty much agree?

Player Att Comp Yds Comp % -Yds/Att -TD TD % INT INT % Long Sack/Lost Rating
Mark Brunell 260 162 1789 62.3 6.9 8 3.1 4 1.5 74 12/92 86.5
Jason Campbell 207 110 1297 53.1 6.3 10 4.8 6 2.9 66 7/55 76.5

Stats look quite similar to me and Brunell happened to have lead in yard per attempt

[akhhorus]

Player Att Comp Yds Comp % -Yds/Att -TD TD % INT INT % Long Sack/Lost Rating
Mark Brunell 260 162 1789 62.3 6.9 8 3.1 4 1.5 74 12/92 86.5
Jason Campbell 207 110 1297 53.1 6.3 10 4.8 6 2.9 66 7/55 76.5

Stats look quite similar to me and Brunell happened to have lead in yard per attempt

OMG, why don't we trade up for JaMarcus Russell then :rolleyes:

Campbell also didn't have Portis. But what stands out is that Campbell had more TD passes in significantly less attempts. Brunell did average 18.3 points as the starter, while Campbell averaged 20.3 points as the starter and Brunell scored 6 points against Philly and New York combined, while Campbell scored 47 also stands out.

[MikeBass]

OMG, why don't we trade up for JaMarcus Russell then :rolleyes:

Campbell also didn't have Portis. But what stands out is that Campbell had more TD passes in significantly less attempts. Brunell did average 18.3 points as the starter, while Campbell averaged 20.3 points as the starter and Brunell scored 6 points against Philly and New York combined, while Campbell scored 47 also stands out.

Yeah, but we continue to say that the O-line got better during the year once they learned Saunders' 3000 page play book. Who knows what Brunell could've done with better line play?

The fact, still, remains neither QB play was not that impressive and will not be without better targets but we will get one. Believe me

[akhhorus]

Yeah, but we continue to say that the O-line got better during the year once they learned Saunders' 3000 page play book. Who knows what Brunell could've done with better line play?

He had good Line play in 06, Campbell didn't receive any better.

The fact, still, remains neither QB play was not that impressive and will not be without better targets but we will get one. Believe me

Why? Because the ghost of Don Coryell is possessing you? The Skins have a ton of weapons(when healthy) with Portis, Betts, Moss, Cooley, ARE and Lloyd(in theory). They can't play with 5 footballs at a time. And we still do have two massive holes at DT and DE.

If you want to cut a love songs CD to Calvin Johnson, knock yourself out. But thinking that we're any better with him? No way.

[Red Bear]

OMG, why don't we trade up for JaMarcus Russell then :rolleyes:

Campbell also didn't have Portis. But what stands out is that Campbell had more TD passes in significantly less attempts. Brunell did average 18.3 points as the starter, while Campbell averaged 20.3 points as the starter and Brunell scored 6 points against Philly and New York combined, while Campbell scored 47 also stands out.

these are much better stats to compare QBs with than solely yards per attempt. i cant wait to see campbell vs dallas. production clearly went up with campbell in the game over brunell. and the difference in yards per attempt is so miniscule its not even a full yard. also brunell had worked with the starting WR group all year and offseason

[MikeBass]

He had good Line play in 06, Campbell didn't receive any better.



Why? Because the ghost of Don Coryell is possessing you? The Skins have a ton of weapons(when healthy) with Portis, Betts, Moss, Cooley, ARE and Lloyd(in theory). They can't play with 5 footballs at a time. And we still do have two massive holes at DT and DE.

If you want to cut a love songs CD to Calvin Johnson, knock yourself out. But thinking that we're any better with him? No way.

I'll leave that to Chris Paul but I, honestly, hope that everyone here will not be too upset when our first round pick is called and will root for our new wide-out this coming season.

[akhhorus]

I'll leave that to Chris Paul but I, honestly, hope that everyone here will not be too upset when our first round pick is called and will root for our new wide-out this coming season.

You do realize that there's almost a 0% chance of Johnson being there at 6 considering how much the Bucs love him, and that the chance we take him if he's there is equally as low, right?

[MikeBass]

You do realize that there's almost a 0% chance of Johnson being there at 6 considering how much the Bucs love him, and that the chance we take him if he's there is equally as low, right?

I am almost sure that we will not get Johnson but I am just as positive that we will pick a receiver in the first round.

[MikeBass]

these are much better stats to compare QBs with than solely yards per attempt. i cant wait to see campbell vs dallas. production clearly went up with campbell in the game over brunell. and the difference in yards per attempt is so miniscule its not even a full yard. also brunell had worked with the starting WR group all year and offseason

My point was the stats were virtually the same when you all was saying that we did SO much better and got the ball down field more when Campbell was at the helm and that was not true. The running game was much more improved because of the line play but the passing game stayed, virtually, the same.

[akhhorus]

I am almost sure that we will not get Johnson but I am just as positive that we will pick a receiver in the first round.

And what would lead you to think that at all? All this talk about DTs, DEs and FSs is all some giant smokescreen to obscure our desire for Dwayne Bowe? LOL.

[MikeBass]

And what would lead you to think that at all? All this talk about DTs, DEs and FSs is all some giant smokescreen to obscure our desire for Dwayne Bowe? LOL.

We only have a few days left

[akhhorus]

We only have a few days left

And that makes no sense....

[skinsfan36]

this drafting another 1st round reciever thing wont happen cj is the only one possible. ok so
campbell threw to bowe at a workout
campbell threw to ginn at a workout
adrian peterson visited redskins park
brady quinn visited redskins park
jamarcus russel visited redskins park

does this mean we will draft any of them if anything the FO is doing there homework if these guys become free agents. we will not draft them,bank on it

[urobm]

Would you care to show me which defensive linemen had their season killed by injuries last year?
The fact that Golston was starting doesn't prove anything, aside from the fact that the other DT, aside from Griff, suck.


Exactly, there were no other DTs aside from Griff that couldvr done anything to help. Golston played suprisingly well, which was way more than we expected of him.

[urobm]

the biggest problem was the d not being able to get off the field on 3rd down...a pass rush could solve that problem


They stayed on the field way too long. A pass rush would make the whole defense better. When you compare the 2 years prior to last year, the personnel was somewhat different and here was allot more cohesiveness. Then when you bring different personnel and try to bring the house to apply pressure because the front 4 cant do it, what do you expect to happen. I think it showed that having a Super Bowl team on paper means nothing. It all starts with defense, but you cant just plug people in and assume it will work.

[James F. Quinn]

I'll leave that to Chris Paul but I, honestly, hope that everyone here will not be too upset when our first round pick is called and will root for our new wide-out this coming season.

MB, I always root for whomever's in the B&G. Heck, I rooted for Adam Archuletta!

We're just chatting about what moves make the most sense.

You may be right about CJ at 6, although I keep seeing Al Saunder's face as he watches a rookie trying to master his offense on the run. Or CJ sitting on the bench for large chunks of offensive time after making rookie mistakes.

And the defense may be, as you say, just fine as is, although I keep seeing Joe Gibbs' face as the other team marches up and down on us for scores/yardage all season. And opposing QBs sitting in the pocket going through their progressions all game long.

I'm such a worry-wart.



Maybe we need another poll.

[James F. Quinn]

You do realize that there's almost a 0% chance of Johnson being there at 6 considering how much the Bucs love him, and that the chance we take him if he's there is equally as low, right?

Don't forget Detriot. You know Matt Millen and WRs! LOL

[James F. Quinn]

this drafting another 1st round reciever thing wont happen cj is the only one possible. ok so
campbell threw to bowe at a workout
campbell threw to ginn at a workout
adrian peterson visited redskins park
brady quinn visited redskins park
jamarcus russel visited redskins park

does this mean we will draft any of them if anything the FO is doing there homework if these guys become free agents. we will not draft them,bank on it

The odd thing is that NONE of them had any known contact with Kevin Bacon.

[Brokenstriker]

ok ... that was funny

:lol1:

[SkinsfaninNJ]

I think we go D in the first because we have to, but I have to agree with MB on one thing. I think if Gibbs could swing it, he would most definitely get a new #2 receiver. I just don't think he believes in Lloyd enough and he prefers ARE in the slot. I base this opinion (and it is only that) on things that I have read this offseason.

But, I just don't think Gibbs is going to able to swing it, because other than CJ, no one else would be much of an upgrade over what we currently have. I can't see us giving up what we it would take to move up, and I don't think the "best player in the draft" makes it to pick 6.

[Redskin4Life]

I think we go D in the first because we have to, but I have to agree with MB on one thing. I think if Gibbs could swing it, he would most definitely get a new #2 receiver. I just don't think he believes in Lloyd enough and he prefers ARE in the slot. I base this opinion (and it is only that) on things that I have read this offseason.

But, I just don't think Gibbs is going to able to swing it, because other than CJ, no one else would be much of an upgrade over what we currently have. I can't see us giving up what we it would take to move up, and I don't think the "best player in the draft" makes it to pick 6.
I wholeheartedly disagree with this sentiment... I think Coach has no problems with Lloyd, otherwise you wouldn't have seen them pay the bonus. I think the level of productivity the WHOLE OFFENSE UNIT showed last year was poor and the passing attack was non-existent all last year. Even the all world Calvin Johnson would have done NOTHING in our offense last year, IMO. I think things will be different with a year under the system, a QB that can throw farther than 10 yrds and TWO solid running backs ready to go.

I really think all of this CJ stuff is smoke to make the guys in front of us move up instead of dropping back (make their intentions known of who they like)... giving us more teams to trade back with. We're probably telling teams that just cause we dropped back doesn't mean we're done trading down again or back up.

I really think we're looking to add a tremendous amount of talent on the D side of the ball (mostly to the line). All of the talk about CJ and Landry makes me think that if you want these guys, you better take them before the teams that we flushed out in the media get them.

With "interest" in Landry, a team like Minnesota will have to trade up with us just to get him... either away from ATL (or another franchise) or even us. With TB now openly trying to get the #2 for CJ, we know what other teams will draft.... CLE - QB or Peterson, DET - Adams, ARI - Thomas. That'll leave a good majority of the big name DLinemen for us to pick from...

[urobm]

We only have a few days left


No way that happens, the only reciever that could make us neglect drafting defense is Cj, and thakfully we dont have the ammo to go after him.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this sentiment... I think Coach has no problems with Lloyd, otherwise you wouldn't have seen them pay the bonus. I think the level of productivity the WHOLE OFFENSE UNIT showed last year was poor and the passing attack was non-existent all last year. Even the all world Calvin Johnson would have done NOTHING in our offense last year, IMO. I think things will be different with a year under the system, a QB that can throw farther than 10 yrds and TWO solid running backs ready to go.

I really think all of this CJ stuff is smoke to make the guys in front of us move up instead of dropping back (make their intentions known of who they like)... giving us more teams to trade back with. We're probably telling teams that just cause we dropped back doesn't mean we're done trading down again or back up.

I really think we're looking to add a tremendous amount of talent on the D side of the ball (mostly to the line). All of the talk about CJ and Landry makes me think that if you want these guys, you better take them before the teams that we flushed out in the media get them.

With "interest" in Landry, a team like Minnesota will have to trade up with us just to get him... either away from ATL (or another franchise) or even us. With TB now openly trying to get the #2 for CJ, we know what other teams will draft.... CLE - QB or Peterson, DET - Adams, ARI - Thomas. That'll leave a good majority of the big name DLinemen for us to pick from...
I cannot believe you choose to disagree with me. That's just sad. OK, I'm kidding.

It seems from reading guys like JLC, Wash. Times writers and national media people that Snyder and Gibbs, but particularly Snyder, covet CJ. I mean absolutely covet this guy. I don't think they covet him because they are happy with our WR situation currently.

Now, will they have enough assets and guts to move up and get him. I hope not. But, there is also this prevailing feeling that none of the defensive players other than Landry and Adams are worth a top ten pick. If we can't move back because of no trade partner, and have no desire to select a guy not worthy of the #6 pick, to you put the package together to go get CJ?

Again, I hope not, but I don't buy this loving CJ thing as smoke. I think it is quite genuine, and they would select him in a minute at #6 if he were there.

[CNYSkinFan]

All this posting about trading up and it just can not happen.

The only way we could trade up is to #2 to get CJ. Raiders would have to pick Russell (not a lock) and then it would cost us 1000 points according to the draft value chart to move from 6 to 2.

That is the equivalent of a mid first round pick this year.

Perhaps if we offered Springs, the #6, next year's 1st, and next year's 2nd we may be able to get into the discussion theoretically. But consider this:

If you assume the future picks are at mid level & devalue them that would mean Detroit would have to value Springs, an aging injury proned corner, worht a low 2nd rounr pick this year. I don't see anyone giving up a 2nd round for Springs...period.

Detroit needs to get better THIS year. Millen is not about to trade for future picks and an old corner.

We have nothing else to offer to sweeten the pot. Lloyd is damaged goods, and we need Betts for next year.

Detroit may not take CJ at #2, but SOMEONE will.

[skinsfan36]

All this posting about trading up and it just can not happen.

The only way we could trade up is to #2 to get CJ. Raiders would have to pick Russell (not a lock) and then it would cost us 1000 points according to the draft value chart to move from 6 to 2.

That is the equivalent of a mid first round pick this year.

Perhaps if we offered Springs, the #6, next year's 1st, and next year's 2nd we may be able to get into the discussion theoretically. But consider this:

If you assume the future picks are at mid level & devalue them that would mean Detroit would have to value Springs, an aging injury proned corner, worht a low 2nd rounr pick this year. I don't see anyone giving up a 2nd round for Springs...period.

Detroit needs to get better THIS year. Millen is not about to trade for future picks and an old corner.

We have nothing else to offer to sweeten the pot. Lloyd is damaged goods, and we need Betts for next year.

Detroit may not take CJ at #2, but SOMEONE will.
totally agree man its not going to happen

[shally]

All this posting about trading up and it just can not happen.

The only way we could trade up is to #2 to get CJ. Raiders would have to pick Russell (not a lock) and then it would cost us 1000 points according to the draft value chart to move from 6 to 2.

That is the equivalent of a mid first round pick this year.

Perhaps if we offered Springs, the #6, next year's 1st, and next year's 2nd we may be able to get into the discussion theoretically. But consider this:

If you assume the future picks are at mid level & devalue them that would mean Detroit would have to value Springs, an aging injury proned corner, worht a low 2nd rounr pick this year. I don't see anyone giving up a 2nd round for Springs...period.

Detroit needs to get better THIS year. Millen is not about to trade for future picks and an old corner.

We have nothing else to offer to sweeten the pot. Lloyd is damaged goods, and we need Betts for next year.

Detroit may not take CJ at #2, but SOMEONE will.


detroit is getting desperate to move out of the number 2 spot.. millen is capable of anything

[SpicyMcHaggis]

totally agree man its not going to happen
Thank god..

[MikeBass]

All this posting about trading up and it just can not happen.

The only way we could trade up is to #2 to get CJ. Raiders would have to pick Russell (not a lock) and then it would cost us 1000 points according to the draft value chart to move from 6 to 2.
That is the equivalent of a mid first round pick this year.

Perhaps if we offered Springs, the #6, next year's 1st, and next year's 2nd we may be able to get into the discussion theoretically. But consider this:

If you assume the future picks are at mid level & devalue them that would mean Detroit would have to value Springs, an aging injury proned corner, worht a low 2nd rounr pick this year. I don't see anyone giving up a 2nd round for Springs...period.

Detroit needs to get better THIS year. Millen is not about to trade for future picks and an old corner.

We have nothing else to offer to sweeten the pot. Lloyd is damaged goods, and we need Betts for next year.

Detroit may not take CJ at #2, but SOMEONE will.

If there was any way that we could haggle a deal to get CJ there is not a way in Hades that that points mess will come into play.

[akhhorus]

If there was any way that we could haggle a deal to get CJ there is not a way in Hades that that points mess will come into play.

Except that it will. Honestly, if you're the GM of Detroit or Oakland, would you only take the #6 and a future first? Thats ridiculous. Thats basically all the skins have to offer.

[MikeBass]

Except that it will. Honestly, if you're the GM of Detroit or Oakland, would you only take the #6 and a future first? Thats ridiculous. Thats basically all the skins have to offer.

Exactly who composited this "value board" and how much credence does it have in the actual draft?

[akhhorus]

Exactly who composited this "value board" and how much credence does it have in the actual draft?

Jimmy Johnson(and an assistant of his) and a lot. Jerry Jones was railing against it the other day, and it does have ton of influence. Now teams don't slavishly follow it exactly, but it is the guide for trades on draft day.

[MikeBass]

Jimmy Johnson(and an assistant of his) and a lot. Jerry Jones was railing against it the other day, and it does have ton of influence. Now teams don't slavishly follow it exactly, but it is the guide for trades on draft day.

I figured that it was some made up type of system that was not sanctioned.

Basically, teams are going to make their decisions from their own negotiations.

[akhhorus]

I figured that it was some made up type of system that was not sanctioned.

Basically, teams are going to make their decisions from their own negotiations.

Yes, but the the value chart is the guide for relative values of each pick. There are trades that are high and low of the what the charts say, but they don't vary too much. I'm sorry your attempt to discredit CNY's post failed lol. Just deal with it: We're not getting Johnson.

[skinsfaninva]

Jimmy Johnson(and an assistant of his) and a lot. Jerry Jones was railing against it the other day, and it does have ton of influence. Now teams don't slavishly follow it exactly, but it is the guide for trades on draft day.

I heard on the radio today also that the value chart holds even less influence at the top of the draft, i.e. top 2 picks, due to the difference in the money in the contracts that the top 2 picks receive compared to even the #4 overall pick.

[akhhorus]

I heard on the radio today also that the value chart holds even less influence at the top of the draft, i.e. top 2 picks, due to the difference in the money in the contracts that the top 2 picks receive compared to even the #4 overall pick.

If the team is cheap, yeah it definitely would. I don't think either of the top two teams are cheap this year(or of any of the top 4).

[MikeBass]

Yes, but the the value chart is the guide for relative values of each pick. There are trades that are high and low of the what the charts say, but they don't vary too much. I'm sorry your attempt to discredit CNY's post failed lol. Just deal with it: We're not getting Johnson.

discredit his post?..That's ridiculous

It baffles me that I have stuck by my guns and responded to every post directed towards me without me thinking that I was being dicredited but when I ask a question I am discrediting someone

[akhhorus]

discredit his post?..That's ridiculous

It baffles me that I have stuck by my guns and responded to every post directed towards me without me thinking that I was being dicredited but when I ask a question I am discrediting someone

You've responded, often without answers. And you only asked about the value chart to see if you could question the validity of the chart to attack his post about how it was infeasible for the skins to deal up for Johnson.

[MikeBass]

You've responded, often without answers. And you only asked about the value chart to see if you could question the validity of the chart to attack his post about how it was infeasible for the skins to deal up for Johnson.

It really seems that you give the same sort of critique to everyone who disagrees with you. Honestly man, it can not be that serious. I try to teach my kids to not "throw rocks" at stuff that is really not there.

[urobm]

Exactly who composited this "value board" and how much credence does it have in the actual draft?


Thats my question as well, I am so sick of hearing about this value board.

[akhhorus]

It really seems that you give the same sort of critique to everyone who disagrees with you. Honestly man, it can not be that serious. I try to teach my kids to not "throw rocks" at stuff that is really not there.

Its always funny, when people run out of positions to take, they try to make me the issue lol. I don't say that "thats not an answer" to the vast majority of the people who disagree with me. I say that to the people who are being mealy mouthed and trying to get out of the crap they've said.

You've responded most of the time when questioned by others with "trust me" and sophistry about how we're a WR away from the playoffs(but haven't explained that further) and the Dline/defense is just fine(and that we should just trust you on that). You really go into a pattern here of just repeating the same mantra over and over again even when people brought up good points(which you ignored). And then when the issue of us not having the firepower to deal up for Johnson came up, you immediately start with a weak tact of 'well the value chart isn't valid'. Its patternistic behavior.

I guess the fact that just about everyone on the board has peeked their head in and questioned you means that I'm the problem here lmao.

[MikeBass]

Its always funny, when people run out of positions to take, they try to make me the issue lol. I don't say that "thats not an answer" to the vast majority of the people who disagree with me. I say that to the people who are being mealy mouthed and trying to get out of the crap they've said.

You've responded most of the time when questioned by others with "trust me" and sophistry about how we're a WR away from the playoffs(but haven't explained that further) and the Dline/defense is just fine(and that we should just trust you on that). You really go into a pattern here of just repeating the same mantra over and over again even when people brought up good points(which you ignored). And then when the issue of us not having the firepower to deal up for Johnson came up, you immediately start with a weak tact of 'well the value chart isn't valid'. Its patternistic behavior.

I guess the fact that just about everyone on the board has peeked their head in and questioned you means that I'm the problem here lmao.

If you say so, but I am sure that people who are not the omnipotent one will tell you that I gave them a response other than the type that you posted ...BUT...when you have a rep ...you have a rep

You could not answer the question so you put the other guy in the mix so that HE could join in... but be you

[akhhorus]

If you say so, but I am sure that people who are not the omnipotent one will tell you that I gave them a response other than the type that you posted

Really? Because I've kept up with the thread, whenever someone questions your specific points, you mysteriously ignore the post or retreat back into dogma. Thats not debate.

...BUT...when you have a rep ...you have a rep

I believe you should be more worried about your own rep.

You could not answer the question so you put the other guy in the mix so that HE could join in... but be you

In English next time please.

[redskin_rich]

Lets keep the discussion/argument about the merits or foolishness of trading up to draft CJ. Any personal grievances should be handled via private message.

This thread has gone to almost 600 posts. Usually, we would have closed this and started another as necessary but there has been some good back and forth discussion that we didn't want to interupt. However, this thread has become too cumbersome o read through, so it will be retired soon. I suggest getting in your final points soon.

[RedskinRyan]

Lets keep the discussion/argument about the merits or foolishness of trading up to draft CJ. Any personal grievances should be handled via private message.

This thread has gone to almost 600 posts. Usually, we would have closed this and started another as necessary but there has been some good back and forth discussion that we didn't want to interupt. However, this thread has become too cumbersome o read through, so it will be retired soon. I suggest getting in your final points soon.

thank you

i still say nay to trading up

[bergiemoore]

Lets keep the discussion/argument about the merits or foolishness of trading up to draft CJ. Any personal grievances should be handled via private message.

This thread has gone to almost 600 posts. Usually, we would have closed this and started another as necessary but there has been some good back and forth discussion that we didn't want to interupt. However, this thread has become too cumbersome o read through, so it will be retired soon. I suggest getting in your final points soon.

I've enjoyed the debate.

The Skins need better production out of their WRs, but trading up to grab CJ poses serious problems and questions (not enough ammo, not greatest need, etc.).

Ultimately, I think we should either trade down, or pick with the #6.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

My final comments on this subject are:

1. If Gibbs and Snyder can find a way to get CJ without completely destroying the team/mortgaging the future, I believe they will. Sorry for the reality check, but that is most definitely not a vote of confidence for Lloyd.

2. I really hope they are unsuccessful in getting CJ. I am really starting to like Okoye, because I hope we get back to stopping the run. If you can stop the run, stopping the pass becomes much easier.

[GibbsFan]

It won't happen but we could probably draw even more names to the table by shopping Betts with the 6th pick and we could pick up another back or 2 with the extra picks on down the line. Brian Leonard would be great pick because he would more than likely be solid as a H-B, FB, and TB in short yardage. He runs a little upright sometimes but I'd grab him if he lands in the 2nd round and we were on the clock.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Final comment:

http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/291/justsaynoed4.gif (http://imageshack.us) to Calvin Johnson!!

[James F. Quinn]

It seems from reading guys like JLC, Wash. Times writers and national media people that Snyder and Gibbs, but particularly Snyder, covet CJ. I mean absolutely covet this guy. I don't think they covet him because they are happy with our WR situation currently.


Isn't there some commandment against this? "Thou shalt not covet thy draft's BPA?" LOL

I can understand your beleif in that uniformity of coverage, but I can't help thinking that there could also be a uniformity of smoke and misinformation. Whenever they are in earshot of JLC, Wash. Times writers and national media people, etc., Danny and Gibbs trot out the old talking points.

They are going so far out of their way to emphasize that they are NOT emphasizing DL in the draft, that they convince me more and more that they are.


We all know that Joe Gibbs is very good at not tipping his hand, and Danny is his acolyte in all things Redskin.

(I have to remember to set my alarm for 1145 on Saturday.)

[James F. Quinn]

And then when the issue of us not having the firepower to deal up for Johnson came up, you immediately start with a weak tact of 'well the value chart isn't valid'. Its patternistic behavior.

I guess the fact that just about everyone on the board has peeked their head in and questioned you means that I'm the problem here lmao.

The NFL is the problem. They are grossly ngeligent by not enshrining the Value chart in the CBA and penalizing teams that do not slavishly adhere to it. :)

[James F. Quinn]

Lets keep the discussion/argument about the merits or foolishness of trading up to draft CJ. Any personal grievances should be handled via private message.

This thread has gone to almost 600 posts. Usually, we would have closed this and started another as necessary but there has been some good back and forth discussion that we didn't want to interupt. However, this thread has become too cumbersome o read through, so it will be retired soon. I suggest getting in your final points soon.

Ok. Anyone who gives up future picks to trade up to get CJ is a KaKa Head!

(I'm JFQ and I approve of this message. I thank you.)

[Red Bear]

Lets keep the discussion/argument about the merits or foolishness of trading up to draft CJ. Any personal grievances should be handled via private message.

This thread has gone to almost 600 posts. Usually, we would have closed this and started another as necessary but there has been some good back and forth discussion that we didn't want to interupt. However, this thread has become too cumbersome o read through, so it will be retired soon. I suggest getting in your final points soon.

i never really understood closing one thread just to start a part 2 of it. why not just let the original thread go on and eliminate the need for a second thread? i know i often lose interest in the discussion once the second thread opens and the first is closed. if its too cumbersome to read through now in your opinion, then what makes you think a second thread wont be the same way?

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Isn't there some commandment against this? "Thou shalt not covet thy draft's BPA?" LOL.
The issue is not whether they would like to have CJ. The issue is taking or wanting to take CJ says something about the guys you paid a lot of money to just one offseason ago to play that same position. If the team is looking at ways to, in some manner, mortgage the future to get CJ, then clearly that is an indictment on Lloyd. Now, if you take the position coveting CJ is a smokescreen, then fine. I most definately do not in this instance.

I can understand your beleif in that uniformity of coverage, but I can't help thinking that there could also be a uniformity of smoke and misinformation. Whenever they are in earshot of JLC, Wash. Times writers and national media people, etc., Danny and Gibbs trot out the old talking points.

They are going so far out of their way to emphasize that they are NOT emphasizing DL in the draft, that they convince me more and more that they are.


We all know that Joe Gibbs is very good at not tipping his hand, and Danny is his acolyte in all things Redskin.

(I have to remember to set my alarm for 1145 on Saturday.)
I disagree about the assertion they are not talking about DL. They liked Okoye and Anderson after the combine, and that has been known for some time. They have also talked up CJ, Russell and Landry. Russell it seems was a story embelished by the agent. I think Landry and CJ is genuine.

I have no idea what they are going to do, but, more than Gibbs and Snyder it seems, I believe the O can be great with Moss, Lloyd, ARE and Cooley as the primary targets.

[redskin_rich]

i never really understood closing one thread just to start a part 2 of it. why not just let the original thread go on and eliminate the need for a second thread? i know i often lose interest in the discussion once the second thread opens and the first is closed. if its too cumbersome to read through now in your opinion, then what makes you think a second thread wont be the same way?
In theory, you should get a condensed thread the second time around, without or with less of the personal arguments that often spark up in the original thread.

[Red Bear]

In theory, you should get a condensed thread the second time around, without or with less of the personal arguments that often spark up in the original thread.

why not just give a warning of some sort to the person/peoples that start a personal argument? Most times it seems people try to make it a personal issue when theyve run out of ideas/facts/theories to support their arguments or when someones proven them wrong and they cant admit to it. I cant remember all the guidelines and rules of the forum and stuff, but is there one that reminds people not to take debate too seriously and turn it into a personal issue? I understand comments made by some to others can be twisted and interpreted as a personal attack on them, when indeed its not and was never intended to be a personal attack. Besides its close enough to draft day that i think archiving this to start a part 2 is pointless unless we actually do trade up once the draft gets here....also, this is not me questioning how the forum gets moderated the way it does, just trying to understand a little more about why. personally i think the board is kept in good order and is not out of control which is part of the reason i chose this redskins message board over others

[redskin_rich]

why not just give a warning of some sort to the person/peoples that start a personal argument? Most times it seems people try to make it a personal issue when theyve run out of ideas/facts/theories to support their arguments or when someones proven them wrong and they cant admit to it. I cant remember all the guidelines and rules of the forum and stuff, but is there one that reminds people not to take debate too seriously and turn it into a personal issue? I understand comments made by some to others can be twisted and interpreted as a personal attack on them, when indeed its not and was never intended to be a personal attack. Besides its close enough to draft day that i think archiving this to start a part 2 is pointless unless we actually do trade up once the draft gets here....also, this is not me questioning how the forum gets moderated the way it does, just trying to understand a little more about why. personally i think the board is kept in good order and is not out of control which is part of the reason i chose this redskins message board over others
This won't get archived and a 2nd thread won't be created because this will die on it's own after Saturday. That was just my way of saying for people to make their points and be done with it.
The problem when threads get this big is people tend to steer them more off topic, whereas less than 100 post threads are usually more focused. This thread has actually stayed on course well and that is why it made it to 600 posts without being shut down and restarted.

[MikeBass]

This won't get archived and a 2nd thread won't be created because this will die on it's own after Saturday. That was just my way of saying for people to make their points and be done with it.
The problem when threads get this big is people tend to steer them more off topic, whereas less than 100 post threads are usually more focused. This thread has actually stayed on course well and that is why it made it to 600 posts without being shut down and restarted.

I agree, this site is well moderated and the posters are usually respectable towards each other. I am in no way an, authority, "brown-noser" but I do want to apologize to the mods, adiminstrators and members of this site for my participation in the back and forth personal, non-productive bantering that I was a part of the other day.

At the same time I would like to let everyone know that I will state my opinion, whether it is pro or con, to the majority's and would like due respect.

I do not feel that I discredited anyones post, but instead, asked a question about something that I felt was a ungoing subject (value points) that I was unclear on and I thought that I went about it the right way by asking where did this come from. Again, if the original poster thought that I meant him any harm by asking, I apologize

[Davis30]

Joe Gibbs acknowledges that the Redskins have talked to two teams about trading up, and hinted Calvin Johnson would be a consideration.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2007/03/trading_up.html?nav=rss_blog

Broncos fan here...so take my opinion for what it's worth ;)

It would take so much to trade up that I just don't think that's the best move.

I think you guys are going to stay put. I think the BPA is going to be Landry which would basically give you guys the best safety tandem in the history of the league.

What's the local buzz on the pick? If Gaines Adams is on the board, is he more likely?

[akhhorus]

Broncos fan here...so take my opinion for what it's worth ;)

It would take so much to trade up that I just don't think that's the best move.

I think you guys are going to stay put. I think the BPA is going to be Landry which would basically give you guys the best safety tandem in the history of the league.

What's the local buzz on the pick? If Gaines Adams is on the board, is he more likely?

Welcome to HR!

And it appears that Okoye is the choice. Adams doesn't seem likely since he's only a one way player.

[urobm]

Welcome to HR!

And it appears that Okoye is the choice. Adams doesn't seem likely since he's only a one way player.


Well dont bet on it yet, I still think Anderson will make a last minute push!!

[Davis30]

Welcome to HR!

And it appears that Okoye is the choice. Adams doesn't seem likely since he's only a one way player.


Thanks.

Okoye is a stud. I don't think you guys could go wrong with either.

Personally, I think that Atlanta is going to be interested in moving up to get Landry, so if Anderson is a viable option, it could be a good way to gain a 3rd at least.

[akhhorus]

Thanks.

Okoye is a stud. I don't think you guys could go wrong with either.

Personally, I think that Atlanta is going to be interested in moving up to get Landry, so if Anderson is a viable option, it could be a good way to gain a 3rd at least.

Yeah, thats a possibility. I think Atlanta is hunting Johnson though.

[Davis30]

Yeah, thats a possibility. I think Atlanta is hunting Johnson though.

I think a lot of people are hunting him for good reason. But the price to go up to 1 or 2 is steep. That extra #2 isn't going to be close to enough. So, if that doesn't happen, they'll be on plan B by the time the Redskins are on the clock.

[shally]

Well dont bet on it yet, I still think Anderson will make a last minute push!!

i would be okay with that, although i would far prefer it come after a trade down to 9-12 range

[shally]

Thanks.

Okoye is a stud. I don't think you guys could go wrong with either.

Personally, I think that Atlanta is going to be interested in moving up to get Landry, so if Anderson is a viable option, it could be a good way to gain a 3rd at least.

welcome !!

hard to say what atlanta will do.. after vick's behavior maybe they are looking to get quinn ????

[Davis30]

welcome !!

hard to say what atlanta will do.. after vick's behavior maybe they are looking to get quinn ????

Didn't think of that. If that's the case, then they are basically admitting that they made a mistake when they traded Schaub. It would probably cost more to move up than they got in the trade.

[akhhorus]

Didn't think of that. If that's the case, then they are basically admitting that they made a mistake when they traded Schaub. It would probably cost more to move up than they got in the trade.

I would agree, but Petrino didn't draft Schaub. And he's not a great fit for Petrino's offense. So, I can see Petrino looking at both Schaub and Ron Mexico and deciding to start again with new QBs.

[Redskin4Life]

I would agree, but Petrino didn't draft Schaub. And he's not a great fit for Petrino's offense. So, I can see Petrino looking at both Schaub and Ron Mexico and deciding to start again with new QBs.
But does Quinn fit Petrino's system either???

[akhhorus]

But does Quinn fit Petrino's system either???

More so than Vick or Schaub. But I think Petrino is setting up Vick for failure this year so he can dump him and go after Brohm.

[Redskin4Life]

More so than Vick or Schaub. But I think Petrino is setting up Vick for failure this year so he can dump him and go after Brohm.
I can see that... Brohm's expected to be a high pick next year.