Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

hey, quick note... if wynn or daniels or whoever sign as 1year vet min deals (with 40k or less signing bonus), they should only count 460k against the cap, regardless of whether their nfl experience minimum salary (what they actually get paid) is 460k or 780k or whatever.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

Look at it this way. I heard the Cowpukes are 22 under right now but haven't really picked up anyone. Seeing how most of the good FA are gone they'll not be able to do much even with all of that money.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

some ex-vp of green bay was just on saying how earned incentives count when earned (ie, if haynesworth get 3mill for 8 sacks in 2009... if he gets the 8th sack in game 3, that 3mill cap hit happens immediately, (not in 2010 as per usual) and if the team goes over cap because of it, they can get docked draft picks and fined.

so, that means we've got to carry enough cap room to cover any incentives written into current contracts for the 2009 season, just in case...

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

Didn't know that... good thing to keep in mind although I wonder if/when that kind of situation arises does the franchise have a bit of time to get back under the cap through some other means?

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Schneed10;535372]
I think you're doing a little talking out of turn when you say our cap space is tight. It's clear your knowledge of the cap is limited. Consider attempting to learn about it more and ask more questions. Otherwise please don't tell me space is tight.[/quote]

i didnt mean to speak out of turn and i certainly didnt mean to disrespect you or the hard work youve done to give us cap data. i dont claim to be a master of the cap, but i just go by what i read. it just seems were threading the needle, so to speak. last year we had enough space to waste on jason taylor. this year, im nervous. we seem to have a lot of needs and not enough cap space or draft picks to address those needs. a week ago, we supposedly had 12M in cap space and there were still plenty of quality FAs out there. this week... it just seems like things are less optomistic. atleast to me.

again, sorry if i spoke out of turn, but im worried about our team now.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;535484]i didnt mean to speak out of turn and i certainly didnt mean to disrespect you or the hard work youve done to give us cap data. i dont claim to be a master of the cap, but i just go by what i read. it just seems were threading the needle, so to speak. last year we had enough space to waste on jason taylor. this year, im nervous. we seem to have a lot of needs and not enough cap space or draft picks to address those needs. a week ago, we supposedly had 12M in cap space and there were still plenty of quality FAs out there. this week... it just seems like things are less optomistic. atleast to me.

again, sorry if i spoke out of turn, but im worried about our team now.[/quote]

I'm concerned about a couple holes too. As each day goes by the cap becomes less of a concern and the fact that there are no quality free agents to be had becomes a greater concern.

Our DE situation will be filled by stopgaps at best. I'm assuming our RT spot will be filled by a rookie, who may be very talented, but would still be a rookie. And our LB situation isn't strong, Fletcher is still great but Blades and McIntosh leave a lot to be desired.

Now we still finished 4th with that defense last year, and we'll have Haynesworth who should help in terms of getting to the QB and causing turnovers. So I feel like we'll be alright on D, but it's the offense that's always the concern. It was miserable in the second half of last year. We're counting on a return to form from Randy Thomas, that we'll come up with something worth a crap at RT, that Dockery can seamlessly move into our scheme, that the young WRs will step up, and most importantly that Jason Campbell takes another step forward.

It's funny, of all the moves we made, there's one thing above all else that will determine our fate this year: Zorn's ability to get essentially the same group of players to play much better. This year is about Zorn and Campbell more than anyone else, regardless of $100 million contracts.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Schneed10;535495]I'm concerned about a couple holes too. As each day goes by the cap becomes less of a concern and the fact that there are no quality free agents to be had becomes a greater concern.

Our DE situation will be filled by stopgaps at best. I'm assuming our RT spot will be filled by a rookie, who may be very talented, but would still be a rookie. And our LB situation isn't strong, Fletcher is still great but Blades and McIntosh leave a lot to be desired.

Now we still finished 4th with that defense last year, and we'll have Haynesworth who should help in terms of getting to the QB and causing turnovers. So I feel like we'll be alright on D, but it's the offense that's always the concern. It was miserable in the second half of last year. We're counting on a return to form from Randy Thomas, that we'll come up with something worth a crap at RT, that Dockery can seamlessly move into our scheme, that the young WRs will step up, and most importantly that Jason Campbell takes another step forward.

It's funny, of all the moves we made, there's one thing above all else that will determine our fate this year: Zorn's ability to get essentially the same group of players to play much better. [B]This year is about Zorn and Campbell more than anyone else, regardless of $100 million contracts[/B].[/quote]

Definitely agree with that point. It's all on Zorn to get this offense up to speed, and then it's up to JC to take another step forward. I'm really not overly concerned about the defense, the offense on the other hand needs to put up some points.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=That Guy;535463]some ex-vp of green bay was just on saying how earned incentives count when earned (ie, if haynesworth get 3mill for 8 sacks in 2009... if he gets the 8th sack in game 3, that 3mill cap hit happens immediately, (not in 2010 as per usual) and if the team goes over cap because of it, they can get docked draft picks and fined.

so, that means we've got to carry enough cap room to cover any incentives written into current contracts for the 2009 season, just in case...[/quote]

And now that there are no longer any free agents worth a darn out there, we're at the point where you might as well just carry plenty of extra space into the season for things like this.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Mattyk72;535497]Definitely agree with that point. It's all on Zorn to get this offense up to speed, and then it's up to JC to take another step forward. I'm really not overly concerned about the defense, the offense on the other hand needs to put up some points.[/quote]

Yeah, and as I think about it, I think I'm looking for JC to make the leap this year. If he doesn't and he performs at a level consistent with last year, then I'd be ready to begin the search anew for a franchise QB.

Hasselbeck took two years in Seattle, we should see Campbell turn into something like that by the end of this season. If not, then QB's got to go. Three years as a starter (two under Zorn) is enough time to prove yourself, at the end of that time it should be known whether you have "it" or not.

He made big improvements last year when he had a line playing well in front of him, so I've got a certain level of confidence he'll take another step up (we just have to protect him!).

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

My gut (which seems to grow larger with each passing day) tells me we may not address RT at all in FA or with a significant draft pick. I think our line will stay very much like it is and Heyer or Jansen will likely start opening day. I think our first two picks will be DE and LB, but not necessarily in that order. I know i have no facts to base this on, other than comments from the park about Heyer and Jansen competing for the RT starting spot and the fact we are sitting on our hands and not doing much of anything to address DE and LB, other than offering (likely) vet min contracts to Daniels and Wynn.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;535503]My gut (which seems to grow larger with each passing day) tells me we may not address RT at all in FA or with a significant draft pick. I think our line will stay very much like it is and Heyer or Jansen will likely start opening day. I think our first two picks will be DE and LB, but not necessarily in that order. I know i have no facts to base this on, other than comments from the park about Heyer and Jansen competing for the RT starting spot and the fact we are sitting on our hands and not doing much of anything to address DE and LB, other than offering (likely) vet min contracts to Daniels and Wynn.[/quote]

I hope not, because that would mean an epic failure of an attempt at protecting JC adequately. Of course if we get a stud pass rusher out of that deal then I'd complain a lot less. If Vinny doesn't go RT at 13 then he BETTER hit and hit big on whatever he does choose.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;535444]Look at it this way. I heard the Cowpukes are 22 under right now but haven't really picked up anyone. Seeing how most of the good FA are gone they'll not be able to do much even with all of that money.[/quote]

they just signed the DE from SD - Olshansky(sp?), but it looks like they didn't try to re-sign Canty to save space for Ware. Maybe that's their plan, but WAre's agent is holding off to see what happens w/the cba next year.

Haynesworths' deal definitely jacked up what JJ will have to offer Ware.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Schneed10;535504]I hope not, because that would mean an epic failure of an attempt at protecting JC adequately. Of course if we get a stud pass rusher out of that deal then I'd complain a lot less. If Vinny doesn't go RT at 13 then he BETTER hit and hit big on whatever he does choose.[/quote]

I'm personally hoping for a stud LT with the 13th pick, but I could see the logic behind addressing the defensive holes on our team this year.

1) If Stephon Heyer does have the ability to be a long-term solution at RT, it would be a better use of our resources.
2) Right now, weve got a great defense and an offense that - theoretically should be much better its 2nd year, especially if last years 2nd rounders step up.
3) If we did get Ray Maualuga at 13 and he becomes the next Ray Lewis as many predict, then he would have more of an impact on our defense than any RT could have on our offense.

I guess it comes down to: do we want to put all our eggs in one basket and have a the most dominant defense in the NFL while having an average offense (Ravens) OR do we want to have a great defense and a slightly above-average offense (Titans)?

The way i see it, this team is really two years away from being able to fill all its holes - no matter what Vinny does, we're going to be somewhat thin at 2 of our three main areas of need (DE, LB, OT) when the 2009 season starts. However, if we make the right choices at hit big at 13 like you say, whatever needs arent addressed this year can be addresssed in the 2010 draft - assuming we dont trade more picks away of course.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Schneed10;535504]I hope not, because that would mean an epic failure of an attempt at protecting JC adequately. Of course if we get a stud pass rusher out of that deal then I'd complain a lot less. If Vinny doesn't go RT at 13 then he BETTER hit and hit big on whatever he does choose.[/quote]

I think that's the most important thing, if we're going to take a RT, he's gotta be ready to play. If he can't step right in and make Heyer a backup, this year will look a lot like the end of last season. Jason barely had time to finish his dropback a lot of times before he was getting smothered. This team needs to get better protecting the Q and that's gotta come from the O Line.

I would even go so far as to say that if we take a 1st round tackle, maybe he should move Chris Samuels. I think that would sure up the line a whole lot if the rook could be close to what Samuels was, that'd a huge upgrade to the line.

I also think that bringing back Dockery will really help the O Line, but C, RG, and RT are all still a concern. We have to go for one of those high in this year's draft, IMHO.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=jdlea;535524]I think that's the most important thing, if we're going to take a RT, he's gotta be ready to play. If he can't step right in and make Heyer a backup, this year will look a lot like the end of last season. Jason barely had time to finish his dropback a lot of times before he was getting smothered. This team needs to get better protecting the Q and that's gotta come from the O Line.

I would even go so far as to say that if we take a 1st round tackle, maybe he should move Chris Samuels. I think that would sure up the line a whole lot if the rook could be close to what Samuels was, that'd a huge upgrade to the line.

I also think that bringing back Dockery will really help the O Line, but C, RG, and RT are all still a concern. We have to go for one of those high in this year's draft, IMHO.[/quote]

Just to play devils advocate, i think the interior of our line was far weaker than the OT positions last year. Weve already upgraded there by getting Dock. Heyer never got much of a chance to play RT, so if he's on one end and Samuels is on the other, then our OL should be significantly better than it was last year. I'm not saying RT isnt a glaring weakness, but just pointing out that we've already put ourselves in a position where JC should have better protection (assuming everyone stays healthy).

That said, I agree with you that any OT we take needs to be able to start this year. If we take Oher, he has he potential to start at LT immediately for us, moving Samuels to RT... if that happened, our line would be pretty dominant if Thomas can hold it together one more year.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;535533]Just to play devils advocate, i think the interior of our line was far weaker than the OT positions last year. Weve already upgraded there by getting Dock. Heyer never got much of a chance to play RT, so if he's on one end and Samuels is on the other, then our OL should be significantly better than it was last year. I'm not saying RT isnt a glaring weakness, but just pointing out that we've already put ourselves in a position where JC should have better protection (assuming everyone stays healthy).

That said, I agree with you that any OT we take needs to be able to start this year. If we take Oher, he has he potential to start at LT immediately for us, moving Samuels to RT... if that happened, our line would be pretty dominant if Thomas can hold it together one more year.[/quote]

For the record, I do agree with this assertion, but there isn't an interior lineman I would take at 13. We could move out, but I don't feel like dealing with trade scenarios right now. I believe that might be the best option, but operating under the assumption we pick at 13, I don't think there's any C I would take that high (ever), but there could be a great T on the board when we come up, so I'd go that direction.

EDIT: In looking at it we could get the 22 and the 54 from Minnesota based on points (we'd be giving away 10). Where (according to Todd McShay) we could go Mack, Unger, Britton, or Meredith. (I'd probably go with Mack) and then in the 2nd round hope that one of the other 3 fall to you. I really can't see any of the other 3 making it to 54, though, so we'd have to with a lesser T, if we took one.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Mattyk72;535497]Definitely agree with that point. It's all on Zorn to get this offense up to speed, and then it's up to JC to take another step forward. I'm really not overly concerned about the defense, the offense on the other hand needs to put up some points.[/quote]It's because of this that I'm more worried about the defense than the offense. The stars are in place on offense, we just needed to plug in the gaps and add depth. Right now, Haynesworth is the entire front seven on defense (whether Fletch can remain a factor I think is dependent on the big guy in front of him). We lost two of our most talented players on defense, two of our biggest stars made cap casulties, and even at age 31, Washington was no slouch himself either.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

I hate our current options at RT. Heyer has a lot to prove and Jansen's best days are behind him.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

Yeah, but I actually think the bigger issue at tackle is that we're even more heavily reliant on Samuels now than we were at this time last year, and he's going to be 32 before the season. If we land one of the big four, we have a guy who could theoretically handle the LT position for 2-3 weeks if Samuels is hurt.

The current lineup just offers Heyer and Jansen as bookends should Samuels get hurt. That, is the disaster.

We need to grab an LT prospect to give the line some depth, if nothing else.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

Alfred Fincher is back (not sure for how much though)

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Mattyk72;535537]I hate our current options at RT. Heyer has a lot to prove and Jansen's best days are behind him.[/quote]

Do you hate our options at RDE and SLB more or less? How would you prioritize these needs, both at who we have penciled in as starters and in terms of depth?

This is how i Prioritize our needs:

[U]Need for an immediate upgrade at the starting position[/U]
1. SLB (Blades is not, and never will be, starting SLB material)
2. OT (Heyer is a better RT than Blades is an SLB IMO)
3. DE (who do we have? Rob Jackson? Chris Wilson? This would be #1 if not for the fact that Haynesworth instantly makes whoever lines up at DE better)

[U]Need for an upgraded depth[/U]

2. OT - Heyer and Jansen provide adequate depth if someone else were starting... but we're completely screwed if Samuels goes down.
1. LB - I cant name a single LB on our roster other than McIntosh, Fletch, and Blades - thats scary. (EDIT: Looks like Finch is back)
3. DE - Wilson and Jackson are what you expect a team to have as depth. If we bring back Daniels and Wynn as expected, we have even more depth here, but no true starter.

If we bring back Washington at the vet minimum, then we clearly need to take an OT with the first pick. However, if we dont, then i think SLB is a more pressing need. The question then becomes, would a 3rd round LB be better than a 3rd round OT - 99% of the time, id say yes. So the next question becomes, who has the most potential to provide the biggest immediate and long-term impact of the players available at 13? Someone like Oher or someone like Maualuga?

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

To update the Fincher signing...

[url=http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Redskins_Re_sign_Fincher_32862.jsp]Redskins Re-sign Fincher[/url]

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;535551]Do you hate our options at RDE and SLB more or less? How would you prioritize these needs, both at who we have penciled in as starters and in terms of depth?

This is how i Prioritize our needs:

[U]Need for an immediate upgrade at the starting position[/U]
1. SLB (Blades is not, and never will be, starting SLB material)
2. OT (Heyer is a better RT than Blades is an SLB IMO)
3. DE (who do we have? Rob Jackson? Chris Wilson? This would be #1 if not for the fact that Haynesworth instantly makes whoever lines up at DE better)

[U]Need for an upgraded depth[/U]

2. OT - Heyer and Jansen provide adequate depth if someone else were starting... but we're completely screwed if Samuels goes down.
1. LB - I cant name a single LB on our roster other than McIntosh, Fletch, and Blades - thats scary. (EDIT: Looks like Finch is back)
3. DE - Wilson and Jackson are what you expect a team to have as depth. If we bring back Daniels and Wynn as expected, we have even more depth here, but no true starter.

If we bring back Washington at the vet minimum, then we clearly need to take an OT with the first pick. However, if we dont, then i think SLB is a more pressing need. The question then becomes, would a 3rd round LB be better than a 3rd round OT - 99% of the time, id say yes. So the next question becomes, who has the most potential to provide the biggest immediate and long-term impact of the players available at 13? Someone like Oher or someone like Maualuga?[/quote]No reason to trash Blades who has done nothing in the NFL except put together a pair of excellent seasons off the bench, and can probably start in the NFL at any position.

I agree with your assessment of our needs though. But the reason isn't because Blades is camp fodder. It's because even as our 2nd best LB, Blades doesn't help answer the question "who is going to get to the quarterback".

We had Jason Taylor. We let him go. Now we need to replace him, but the FA market is simply too light on players who can do that.

Thankfully the draft is deep, but we're probably going to have to move up from the third round to take advantage of that. One name: Cody Brown from Connecticut (I like how they're UConn in basketball, but not in any other sport).

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

Cody Brown is someone we spoke to back at the Combine, but as I understand we talked to a lot of linebackers (more so than any other position)

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535555]No reason to trash Blades who has done nothing in the NFL except put together a pair of excellent seasons off the bench, and can probably start in the NFL at any position.[/quote]

great! i'm so glad we finally found our new RT ;)

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535555]No reason to trash Blades who has done nothing in the NFL except put together a pair of excellent seasons off the bench, and can probably start in the NFL at any position.[/quote]

Just for the record, ive got nothing against Blades at all. Hes a great backup for all the positions, but if were talking about him as a starter, i dont like the idea of having two smallish LBs as starters. As long as Fletcher can still play at an exceptionally high level, i think Blades should stay in his intended role as our primary backup MLB and first guy off the bench for any LB who is injured or has to sit out for a bit.

[quote=GTripp0012;535555]I agree with your assessment of our needs though. But the reason isn't because Blades is camp fodder. It's because even as our 2nd best LB, Blades doesn't help answer the question "who is going to get to the quarterback".

We had Jason Taylor. We let him go. Now we need to replace him, but the FA market is simply too light on players who can do that.

Thankfully the draft is deep, but we're probably going to have to move up from the third round to take advantage of that. One name: Cody Brown from Connecticut (I like how they're UConn in basketball, but not in any other sport).[/quote]

Ive heard good things about Brown and youre right about the depth at LB in this years draft. Its probably the deepest position in the draft at its a huge need of ours.

Personally, i hope we bring washington back at a near-vet minimum deal. If we do that, along with bringing back Daniels and maybe Wynn, then we've given us alot of flexibility in what positions we address early in the draft.

Specifically, it would afford us the opportunity to trade down and pick up extra picks, selecting players who dont "HAVE" to start immediately, but who would be expected to contribute significantly by the end of the year and start in 2010. Off the top of my head, if we went OT with a 1st, DE with a 2nd, and LB with a 3rd, we'd have a good chance of getting just that.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

These guys are small?

Blades: 5'10 242
Fletcher: 5'10 245

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Mattyk72;535608]These guys are small?

Blades: 5'10 242
Fletcher: 5'10 245[/quote]

Are you being sarcastic? Ive never heard anyone question the fact that Blades and Fletcher are small. 5'10 is very short for an NFL LB. As a SLB, in passing situations, Blades is generally going to be matched up against TEs, who are almost always 6'2 or taller. And if its a running play, the SLB is going to have to try to get past the block of a 6'2 TE...

From Blades draft profile:

[quote]Size is the glaring weakness in Blades’ game. He lacks ideal height, and even though he is strong and physical, his overall lack of size will lead to him being engulfed by NFL lineman at times. He does not show the ability to drop into coverage on a consistent basis, and his height causes matchup problems.
[/quote]
[url=http://www.footballsfuture.com/2007/prospects/hb_blades.html]H.B. Blades - FootballsFuture.com NFL Draft Profile[/url]

While there are always players like London Fletcher, Darrell Green, and Santana Moss who have athletecism and intensity that helps them compensate for their lack of size, you cant fill your roster with "smurfs" or teams will exploit that. A team can get by with one short corner, one short linebacker, etc, but if they put too many small players on the field at the same time, theyre going to get abused.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Mattyk72;535608]These guys are small?

Blades: 5'10 242
Fletcher: 5'10 245[/quote]

I guess short is the better adjective. There's no denying 5'10" 240+ is a brick sh*thouse, it's just on the shorter side for NFL LBs.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

They're on the short side, sure. But both guys are built like bowling balls and hardly fit the category of small. Fletcher has proven that height is overrated.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Mattyk72;535625]They're on the short side, sure. But both guys are built like bowling balls and hardly fit the category of small. Fletcher has proven that height is overrated.[/quote]

True, but the SLB in particular has to match up against TEs in receiving situations. Blades against Witten, for example, is a mismatch in the Cowboys' favor. The ball just goes up top.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Schneed10;535628]True, but the SLB in particular has to match up against TEs in receiving situations. Blades against Witten, for example, is a mismatch in the Cowboys' favor. The ball just goes up top.[/quote]

Exactly. Now MLB is another matter entirely. Hopefully, we can keep Blades here long enough that he can replace Fletcher when he retires.I love the intensity Blades brings to the game and, as you guys have mentioned, he's a heavy hitter.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;535636]Exactly. Now MLB is another matter entirely. Hopefully, we can keep Blades here long enough that he can replace Fletcher when he retires.I love the intensity Blades brings to the game and, as you guys have mentioned, he's a heavy hitter.[/quote]I've admitted that having two shorter linebackers can create a weakness against the run that becomes relatively easy to scheme against, but the flip side of the coin is the simple one: if they're good, play 'em.

Our best two LBs are Blades and Fletcher, and even though neither is really a "Blache" linebacker, they are our best players there and should lead our team in PT for LBs this season.

BTW, there's one name on the FA market that I totally missed who could make a nice OLB: Kalimba Edwards. A bit of a bust at DE, but he's a pass rusher who isn't dissimilar to what we lost with Jason Taylor.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535641]...make a nice OLB: Kalimba Edwards. A bit of a bust at DE, but he's a pass rusher who isn't dissimilar to what we lost with Jason Taylor.[/quote]

He played for KC as a DE. Isn't he old (+30yrs) or something? I like his game, good outside speed and is worth a look IMO. I don't know if he can play OLB though?

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535641]I've admitted that having two shorter linebackers can create a weakness against the run that becomes relatively easy to scheme against, but the flip side of the coin is the simple one: if they're good, play 'em.

Our best two LBs are Blades and Fletcher, and even though neither is really a "Blache" linebacker, they are our best players there and should lead our team in PT for LBs this season.

BTW, there's one name on the FA market that I totally missed who could make a nice OLB: Kalimba Edwards. A bit of a bust at DE, but he's a pass rusher who isn't dissimilar to what we lost with Jason Taylor.[/quote]

GT per Blades doesn't switching him to WLB (for the time being) help minimize his shortness since he'll probably get caught in coverage less often? I know we talked about Marcus switching prior to his departure to hide his coverage issues, and because Rocky is probably our best coverage LB anyway, so why not make the same switch if Blades is set to start?

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535641]I've admitted that having two shorter linebackers can create a weakness against the run that becomes relatively easy to scheme against, but the flip side of the coin is the simple one: if they're good, play 'em.

Our best two LBs are Blades and Fletcher, and even though neither is really a "Blache" linebacker, they are our best players there and should lead our team in PT for LBs this season.

BTW, there's one name on the FA market that I totally missed who could make a nice OLB: Kalimba Edwards. A bit of a bust at DE, but he's a pass rusher who isn't dissimilar to what we lost with Jason Taylor.[/quote]


i agree with your philosophy of playing our best 2 guys, but, from my perspective, we need to get better linebackers instead of just playing fletch and blades because theyre all we got... not familiar with edwards. if hes cheap, why not give him a shot to compete for a spot - sign me up.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=The Goat;535721]GT per Blades doesn't switching him to WLB (for the time being) help minimize his shortness since he'll probably get caught in coverage less often? I know we talked about Marcus switching prior to his departure to hide his coverage issues, and because Rocky is probably our best coverage LB anyway, so why not make the same switch if Blades is set to start?[/quote]The reason the Will is a more difficult position than either the Mike or the Sam, at least as I understand NFL defenses, is that the Will is many times more likely to find himself caught in space against a receiver.

Since the Sam always goes to the tight end side, the Will is always responsible for the slant to the isolated receiver, as well as slow developing plays out of the backfield. Rocky was a disaster in this role, for when he was able to diagnose the plays, he tended to not be fast enough to make a difference.

His shortness won't necessarily play better at any position (although you are right about the TE matchup, but remember that in pretty much any scheme except cover two, the strong safety tends to line up to the TE side as well [hense: '[B]strong[/B]'], mitigating the role of the SLB even further).

Grilliams and Blache both are big fans of simplifing the roles of the OLBs against the run. They share the same philosophy: they'd rather see the OLBs take out the lead blocker and open up a clean lane for the MLB to make the play than have the OLB take the blocker head on and try to beat him one on one. It's one of the biggest reasons for Fletcher's success here, I think.

I hope that answered your question. It probably didn't, but maybe there was something valuable in there anyway.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=Hamoskinz;535718]He played for KC as a DE. Isn't he old (+30yrs) or something? I like his game, good outside speed and is worth a look IMO. I don't know if he can play OLB though?[/quote]He's 29 on opening day.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

I should really diagram this defensive crap, because they say a picture is worth 1,000 words. And 1,000 words is worth an hour and a half.

Re: Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535832]I should really diagram this defensive crap, because they say a picture is worth 1,000 words. And 1,000 words is worth an hour and a half.[/quote]

I actually think you gave a very clear explaination of the point. You did pique my curiosity though: Do you think McIntosh is a starting-caliber LB?