Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

You have good points, but you can say that about ANY other team in the league.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=gabe1984;274262]
1. We traded Champ Bailey, the best cornerback in the league, and a draft pick for Clinton Portis. In my opinion, this was not a good idea because talent like Bailey's is extremely rare, and while Portis is a stud, I can think of a handful of NFL running backs that are close to or of his ability or even better such as LT, LJ, Stephen Jackson, Sean Alexander, Edgerrin James, Frank Gore, Thomas Jones, you could make a case for all those guys. They should have looked at what we already had in Betts, Duckett, and Sellars. Or gone through the draft! What did the colts do when they lost Edge, they got a new RB through the draft![/QUOTE]

Champ had to go. He just didn't want to be here anymore. And we didn't have Duckett then, Betts was (is) injury-prone, and we had just re-signed Sellers a month before we traded for CP. Plus, you can't go into a season with Sellers as the every down back

[QUOTE]2. I'm going to kinda lump the rest of these guys together. Over the last 4 years, we've continually gotten rid of solid NFL players such as Fred Smoot, AP, 56, and I know the these last two may be debatable...Walt Harris and Ryan Clark. Not only have we gotten rid of talent, but it shows that rest of the team that they're not really willing to take care of their own, and it destroys team chemistry and comradery.[/QUOTE]

I'll give you Pierce but Arrington did nothing all year (injured....again) and Smoot has been average at best; not to mention his off the field indiscretions

[QUOTE]3. I know this is also debateable, but bringing in Mark Brunell. We had a young, promising quarter back in Ramsey, and we decided to bring in an old man. Yes, he went went to the playoffs with him, but I don't think he was really key in doing so. Other than that, we've had two losing season with him, and Gibbs's allegiance to him has hurt the team because he kept him Brunell in longer than he should have.[/QUOTE]

Don't feel like beating this Barbaro any longer...(too soon?)

[QUOTE]4. Carlos Rodgers. We had a chance at Ware and Merriman, and we passed up on both of them. Maybe we needed a cornerback, but guess what, maybe we shouldn't have gotten rid of Smoot and Bailey! If we woulda kept them, maybe we would not have drafted Carlos, and we'd a have a pro bowler in either Ware or Merriman, instead of a guy who drops interceptions, and says there's nothing he can do about it when he gets burned for TDs.[/QUOTE]

I'll give Carlos another year before I pass judgement.

[QUOTE]5. I don't think I need to go into detail about the cap situaton, AA, Lloyd, and trading a 3rd rounder for Duckett.[/QUOTE]

Are we hurting cap wise?

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;274265]You have good points, but [I][U][B]you can say that about ANY other team in the league[/B][/U][/I].[/quote]

I partially agree with you on that statement, but I think there's something that should be added at the end. I'm assuming that what you're referring to with the statement "you can say that about ANY other team in the league," is that all other teams go through a period where they make bad personnel decisions? Yes, you can say that, I agree. But I don't think you can say there's another team who has made bad personnel decisions with the longevity that the Redskins have.

Take for example, the Ravens and the Patriots. The Ravens have had a horrible time finding a QB since they've been in Baltimore, that is one area where historically they're made bad personnel decisions. But they've been so good in most other areas that they been a solid football team and have won a superbowl in a very short time, their team is not plagued with bad decisions.

And the Patriots, yes, they let some great players go, like McGuinnest, Branch, Givens, and Ty Law. BUT, they were able to keep them there long enough to win three Superbowls.

The Redskins have nothing show.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

Sure they don't, but aside from anomalies like the Pats, who else can boast that?

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

TAFKAS. Arrington, was a leader on our team and we got rid of him. He brought a fierce presence, a swagger, and was loved by everyone in DC. We should have kept him, IMO.

As far as Champ goes, if he wanted to go that bad, then fine, let him go, but we should have got more for him. We gave him and a draft pick for Portis, if anything they shoulda given us the draft pick, that's just bad negotiating.

Ok, I'll wait another season to pass judement on roders too , but I guess my point is that if we woulda kept smoot, who up to this point has played much better than Carlos, then maybe we coulda got Merriman or Ware in the draft. I don't see Carlos ever being as good as either of them.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;274272]Sure they don't, but aside from anomalies like the Pats, who else can boast that?[/quote]

I'm kinda confused on what you're getting at. I can think of a fair amount of teams in the league that don't have players come an go as much as the Skins do. They stick with their guys, mainly build through the draft, and eventually they click and become contenders. Seattle, Philly, Baltimore, Indiannapolis, Chicago, Carolina, I dunno I think this is a really objective conversation.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

I don't know. I don't see how, after yet another year of Arrington being injured, we can continue to miss him. All the talent in the world, but if he doesn't play who cares?

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

He's Jeff George in a linebacker suit

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=TAFKAS;274276]I don't know. I don't see how, after yet another year of Arrington being injured, we can continue to miss him. All the talent in the world, but if he doesn't play who cares?[/quote]

Yeah, I'll agree with you on that it doesn't matter if he's not playing. But if we're trying to stay away from guys who are easily injured, why sign a bunch of older defensive lineman and a CB in springs who is injury prone. I just don't get it, and I think I'm not going to try to, lol.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

I think they thought they were just a few pieces away from winning it all.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;273884]I still don't see how Russell's stock has risen so high..[/quote]

Because Quinn's has fallen...at least in my eyes.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=Buster;274298]Because Quinn's has fallen...at least in my eyes.[/quote]Quinn's down now because of the Sugar Bowl performance combined with the fact that he spent most of the year as the consensus no. 1 pick. Theres little doubt in my mind that if the Raiders keep the first pick it will be Brady Quinn. Russell will go somewhere between 3 and 9 overall.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;274321]Quinn's down now because of the Sugar Bowl performance combined with the fact that he spent most of the year as the consensus no. 1 pick. Theres little doubt in my mind that if the Raiders keep the first pick it will be Brady Quinn. Russell will go somewhere between 3 and 9 overall.[/QUOTE]

I can't see Russell dropping out of the top 5. Oakland, Cleveland, Tampa, and Detroit all need a QB. Cleveland (Frye), Tampa (Simms), and Detroit (Kitna) could all survive without a new QB, but my guess is that one of them will grab whichever QB Oakland doesn't take.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;274326]I can't see Russell dropping out of the top 5. Oakland, Cleveland, Tampa, and Detroit all need a QB. Cleveland (Frye), Tampa (Simms), and Detroit (Kitna) could all survive without a new QB, but my guess is that one of them will grab whichever QB Oakland doesn't take.[/quote]If Calvin Johnson goes to TB and Cleveland opts for Peterson, I could see it happening. I actually don't think Peterson is going to be that good at the pro level, but the Browns have certainly made worse decisions, thats for sure.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

I think Russell would be a bad pick for the Raiders....which is exactly why I think they'll take him

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;274219]I am somewhere in between Grim21 and GTripp. I think the Redskins have done a pretty decent job of scouting free agents (e.g., Washington, Griffin, Springs, Daniels, Coles/Moss, Portis, Rabach, Thomas, ARE). Those guys far outnumber the Lloyds and AAs.

On the other hand, they have overpaid for their free agents. They've given them fat contracts (e.g., AAs being the richest for ANY safety in the history of the league). They've also overpaid to acquire them (e.g., 3rd rounder for Brunell, 3rd and 4th rounders for Lloyd, 3rd rounder for Duckett).

Then there is the whole matter of the draft. Cooley was an excellent find int he 3rd round, Taylor had a bad 2006 campaign but should be stud, Golston is an oustanding find when you consider he was a 6th rounder, Campbell looks very promising and may prove to be worth more than we gave up to get him, and it is still too early to judge Rocky McIntosh. But, Rogers was perhaps a big mistake (especially considering Ware and Merriman were on the board).[/quote]

Agree. It's ok to pick up some FA's and not everyone of them is going to pan out 100% of the time. That's ok. What's not ok is to mortgage our future by freely giving our draft picks away while "overpaying" every free agent on the market.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=gabe1984;274273]TAFKAS. Arrington, was a leader on our team and we got rid of him. He brought a fierce presence, a swagger, and was loved by everyone in DC. We should have kept him, IMO.

As far as Champ goes, if he wanted to go that bad, then fine, let him go, but we should have got more for him. We gave him and a draft pick for Portis, if anything they shoulda given us the draft pick, that's just bad negotiating.

Ok, I'll wait another season to pass judement on roders too , but I guess my point is that if we woulda kept smoot, who up to this point has played much better than Carlos, then maybe we coulda got Merriman or Ware in the draft. I don't see Carlos ever being as good as either of them.[/QUOTE]




When it comes to the Champ Bailey deal, I honestly feel we were fortunate to be able to work a deal for him at all. It's not often a team can work a major trade for a player in the last year of his contract, about to enter free agency. Bailey was going to leave the team anyway, so I'm not convinced the results of that deal was a bad one.

I like Alan Branch at #6 if he's still available when we pick. Despite the fact we need help in other areas, a player of his stature at that position are not always available. We can certainly use his abilities in the front four because I'm convinced that's where it all starts-up front. We can't fix everything at once. but Branch is a good place to start.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

Can someone explain to me, in the context of what we all observed last year, why we need to draft a defensive tackle? Won't opposing teams just coninue to run over Carter and Holdman? If he is rookie of the year he might, might get 10 sacks. Defensive tackle is not the problem. If Greg Williams thinks it is, then he is the problem.

I'm not saying that we couldn't improve there, but we couldn't possibly improve there as much as we could at DE, CB, or LB which were all terribly suspect last season. This is something that Casserly would have done.

I want to be on the record early and often as being in absolute metaphysical opposition to this pick.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;274519]Can someone explain to me, in the context of what we all observed last year, why we need to draft a defensive tackle? Won't opposing teams just coninue to run over Carter and Holdman? If he is rookie of the year he might, might get 10 sacks. Defensive tackle is not the problem. If Greg Williams thinks it is, then he is the problem.

I'm not saying that we couldn't improve there, but we couldn't possibly improve there as much as we could at DE, CB, or LB which were all terribly suspect last season. This is something that Casserly would have done.[/QUOTE]

I know DTs aren't the sexiest players on the field - they are lucky to get more than 4 sacks in a season, they rarely intercept passes, and they had a spectacular season if they have 70+ tackles. BUT, defenses start with great lines and lines are anchored by good DTs. I could care less about how many sacks a DT gets. I want a guy who draws double teams and frees up the DEs to do their work and stuffs the run up the gut. The ONLY guy on our line to draw double teams last season was Carter.

Our DTs are awful or injury prone. We got NO push up the middle, allowing perfect pockets to form for opposing QBs and rushers to run all over us (not just to the left). Griffin is the only player who can be counted on when healthy, and that is a rarity. Golston is a great player [U]for a 6th round pick[/U], but if you are going to bank on his development then you are setting yourself up for disappointment. Salave'a has been injury prone the past two seasons and has never been more than an overachieving mediocre DT. And it's pretty hard to evaluate Montgomery when he doesn't see the field. So, I like Branch at #6.

But because, as you noted, we have so many holes, trading down to get more picks (if possible) is the best thing. I'd like to see us fill two holes on defense. But because I doubt we'll be able to trade down at #6, I want Branch.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=70Chip;274519]Can someone explain to me, in the context of what we all observed last year, why we need to draft a defensive tackle? Won't opposing teams just coninue to run over Carter and Holdman? If he is rookie of the year he might, might get 10 sacks. Defensive tackle is not the problem. If Greg Williams thinks it is, then he is the problem.

I'm not saying that we couldn't improve there, but we couldn't possibly improve there as much as we could at DE, CB, or LB which were all terribly suspect last season. This is something that Casserly would have done.

I want to be on the record early and often as being in absolute metaphysical opposition to this pick.[/quote]The key is not to consider the draft a quick fix. We aren't looking to use the sixth pick on a boom or bust prospect who is being brought in to save the Redskins next year.

I think we can both agree that the pick should probably be spent on the DL. Addressing why it would be better spent at Tackle then End is a bit more complicated. The most obvious reason would be that we just spent a boatload of money on a pass rusher in Andre Carter, who ideally will be our starting end for years to come. It makes little sense to draft his replacement one year after signing him. The guy is 27.

Perhaps you were thinking we draft a bookend for Carter. Someone who is more stout against the run. We could take Jamaal Anderson at 6 this season and start him accross from Carter (or have him compete with Wynn/Daniels). But a year from now, we are looking at maybe Griffin being cut, Saleve'as contract not being extended, and the top two DTs on the roster being Golston and Montgomery, a pair of late round 3rd year players. It seems like we'd have to make a big FA signing to be competitive, and we won't have the cap room in 2008 to do that. We have no talent in the middle whatsoever. Additionally, you run the risk of Carter having another sub par season, getting cut, and the only guy on the line at that point who is any good is Anderson. He has no tackle help and no bookend. And the only thing we can do about it is spend ANOTHER 1st rounder on the best available rush end in 2008.

But lets say we take Branch this year. A year from now, we opt not to extend Saleve'a's contract and for sake of cap room we release Griffin. Now we have a bona fide No. 1 tackle in the middle of the line who is only 23 years old (which assumes he pans out). We have Golston, a third year player, who can start at the 2nd tackle. We have Montgomery on the roster and we can get a 4th DT through FA without investing a lot of cap space. This team still sports Carter at an end, and while Wynn and probably Daniels will be gone by this point, you have Demetic Evans who can start in a pinch and you can spend a day one pick on a stronger, anchoring DE to compliment Carter. Because of the nature of this player, this could be something like a 3rd rounder. Even if Carter doesn't pan out for us, we can still cut him, and spend the 2008 pick on the best availiable DE, and be certainly no worse off than we would be with Anderson at DE. But because of the big money investment in Carter, I want to see one more year of him before I go back and pick at his position.

Longtimefan said it better than I possibly could have:
[quote=Longtimefan;274503]I like Alan Branch at #6 if he's still available when we pick. Despite the fact we need help in other areas, a player of his stature at that position are not always available. We can certainly use his abilities in the front four because I'm convinced that's where it all starts-up front. [B]We can't fix everything at once. but Branch is a good place to start.[/B][/quote]

The simple response to your question is because DT is going to be a bigger problem than DE very soon if we don't address it right now. One pick can put us in a great situation for the future at the DT position.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;274536]The key is not to consider the draft a quick fix. We aren't looking to use the sixth pick on a boom or bust prospect who is being brought in to save the Redskins next year.

I think we can both agree that the pick should probably be spent on the DL. Addressing why it would be better spent at Tackle then End is a bit more complicated. The most obvious reason would be that we just spent a boatload of money on a pass rusher in Andre Carter, who ideally will be our starting end for years to come. It makes little sense to draft his replacement one year after signing him. The guy is 27.

Perhaps you were thinking we draft a bookend for Carter. Someone who is more stout against the run. We could take Jamaal Anderson at 6 this season and start him accross from Carter (or have him compete with Wynn/Daniels). But a year from now, we are looking at maybe Griffin being cut, Saleve'as contract not being extended, and the top two DTs on the roster being Golston and Montgomery, a pair of late round 3rd year players. It seems like we'd have to make a big FA signing to be competitive, and we won't have the cap room in 2008 to do that. We have no talent in the middle whatsoever. Additionally, you run the risk of Carter having another sub par season, getting cut, and the only guy on the line at that point who is any good is Anderson. He has no tackle help and no bookend. And the only thing we can do about it is spend ANOTHER 1st rounder on the best available rush end in 2008.

But lets say we take Branch this year. A year from now, we opt not to extend Saleve'a's contract and for sake of cap room we release Griffin. Now we have a bona fide No. 1 tackle in the middle of the line who is only 23 years old (which assumes he pans out). We have Golston, a third year player, who can start at the 2nd tackle. We have Montgomery on the roster and we can get a 4th DT through FA without investing a lot of cap space. This team still sports Carter at an end, and while Wynn and probably Daniels will be gone by this point, you have Demetic Evans who can start in a pinch and you can spend a day one pick on a stronger, anchoring DE to compliment Carter. Because of the nature of this player, this could be something like a 3rd rounder. Even if Carter doesn't pan out for us, we can still cut him, and spend the 2008 pick on the best availiable DE, and be certainly no worse off than we would be with Anderson at DE. But because of the big money investment in Carter, I want to see one more year of him before I go back and pick at his position.

The simple response to your question is because DT is going to be a bigger problem than DE very soon if we don't address it right now. One pick can put us in a great situation for the future at the DT position.[/quote]


All I can say is WOW! Way to break it down. There was only maybe one point in there I didnt agree with and that was about Wynn and Daniels being gone. I hope they BOTH dont leave....really, I hope niether leave.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=FRPLG;274000]I agree. If we draft Calvin Johnson I will be pissed. WE DO NOT NEED HIM. You don't take a player you don't need with a team that could contend. You take a guy who instantly improve you. I don't care how good he is he will not instantly improve us all that much. When there are other players who are clearly very quality players who can help you then you either trade down or take of the other guys. ANyways I still think CJ doesn't even get close to us. If he does we be trading baby. Someone will want him at 6. I would rather have Anderson but Branch will do if Anderson is gone.[/quote]
I'll be even more pissed if Johnson is there, we settle for Branch, and Johnson ends up being the second coming of Jerry Rice. 6'5" 230 lb receivers with 4.4 speed, 40" vertical, and great hands come along once every 10 years or so. For those who say we don't need a WR, keep telling yourselves that we solved our #2 WR issues with Lloyd and/or ARE. Johnson could make Jason Campbell great the same way a young Randy Moss made Jeff George, Randall Cunningham, and Brad Johnson look pretty damn good in Minnesota once upon a time.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=SouperMeister;274541]I'll be even more pissed if Johnson is there, we settle for Branch, and Johnson ends up being the second coming of Jerry Rice. 6'5" 230 lb receivers with 4.4 speed, 40" vertical, and great hands come along once every 10 years or so. For those who say we don't need a WR, keep telling yourselves that we solved our #2 WR issues with Lloyd and/or ARE. Johnson could make Jason Campbell great the same way a young Randy Moss made Jeff George, Randall Cunningham, and Brad Johnson look pretty damn good in Minnesota once upon a time.[/quote]I don't think we have a great second receiver, but we are deep enough at reciever to warrent passing on a guy like Johnson.

Think of it this way, if we were to take Johnson and he became a great player for us, where do his receptions come from? Moss is better after the catch, so you don't want him taking his receptions. Cooley is a great target and leads all TEs in YAC, so you don't want him taking his balls. So where does Calvin Johnson become a big enough part of the offense to justify the 6th overall pick? We'd have to throw 50-55 times a game to get 30+ completions on a good day. On a day like this, Johnson could touch the ball 7-8 times and not cut in to Moss and Cooley's production. But then we are only running 10-15 times a game...thats not Redskins football.

Alternatively, we can throw 25-30 times a game, run it 35-40 times, and let Randle El have his patented 2-3 catch days and be satisfied with his role as our PR. Then we don't burn the 6th overall pick on improving an adequate situation.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=gabe1984;274282]Yeah, I'll agree with you on that it doesn't matter if he's not playing. But if we're trying to stay away from guys who are easily injured, why sign a bunch of older defensive lineman and a CB in springs who is injury prone. I just don't get it, and I think I'm not going to try to, lol.[/QUOTE]

older d-linemen? Griffin was like 27, Daniels 30, Joe Sal 29, Carter 27. One guy was 30.

And we have discussed Springs' 'injury prone' status and I think most agreed that he wasn't not injury prone rather he had one injury that bugged him over a two season period. He had the monkier totally undeserved. And he hadn't exactly missed a whole hell of a lot time for us until the hernia.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=SouperMeister;274541]I'll be even more pissed if Johnson is there, we settle for Branch, and Johnson ends up being the second coming of Jerry Rice. [B]6'5" 230 lb receivers with 4.4 speed, 40" vertical, and great hands come along once every 10 years or so.[/B] [B]For those who say we don't need a WR, keep telling yourselves that we solved our #2 WR issues with Lloyd and/or ARE.[/B] Johnson could make Jason Campbell great the same way a young Randy Moss made Jeff George, Randall Cunningham, and Brad Johnson look pretty damn good in Minnesota once upon a time.[/quote]


2 Good points

1: I totally agree. His measurements and his skills are all there but, we are pretty deep at WR and the frickin D needs Mary Poppins type help.

2: Wha? Lloyd? Yea, ok, he's not all that but ARE is a whole diff story. He's talented in so many areas it's hard to confine him to WR. He throws, he runs, he returns kicks AND he seems to have gelled with the team a little and also seems to enjoy it here (sidenote:for THAT kinda money, I guess he would like it here!)

All in all, the D needs help WAYYYY worse than our receiving corps right now. If we pick him, we should trade for more picks, if we dont, its fine with me.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;274536]The key is not to consider the draft a quick fix. We aren't looking to use the sixth pick on a boom or bust prospect who is being brought in to save the Redskins next year.

I think we can both agree that the pick should probably be spent on the DL. Addressing why it would be better spent at Tackle then End is a bit more complicated. The most obvious reason would be that we just spent a boatload of money on a pass rusher in Andre Carter, who ideally will be our starting end for years to come. It makes little sense to draft his replacement one year after signing him. The guy is 27.

Perhaps you were thinking we draft a bookend for Carter. Someone who is more stout against the run. We could take Jamaal Anderson at 6 this season and start him accross from Carter (or have him compete with Wynn/Daniels). But a year from now, we are looking at maybe Griffin being cut, Saleve'as contract not being extended, and the top two DTs on the roster being Golston and Montgomery, a pair of late round 3rd year players. It seems like we'd have to make a big FA signing to be competitive, and we won't have the cap room in 2008 to do that. We have no talent in the middle whatsoever. Additionally, you run the risk of Carter having another sub par season, getting cut, and the only guy on the line at that point who is any good is Anderson. He has no tackle help and no bookend. And the only thing we can do about it is spend ANOTHER 1st rounder on the best available rush end in 2008.

But lets say we take Branch this year. A year from now, we opt not to extend Saleve'a's contract and for sake of cap room we release Griffin. Now we have a bona fide No. 1 tackle in the middle of the line who is only 23 years old (which assumes he pans out). We have Golston, a third year player, who can start at the 2nd tackle. We have Montgomery on the roster and we can get a 4th DT through FA without investing a lot of cap space. This team still sports Carter at an end, and while Wynn and probably Daniels will be gone by this point, you have Demetic Evans who can start in a pinch and you can spend a day one pick on a stronger, anchoring DE to compliment Carter. Because of the nature of this player, this could be something like a 3rd rounder. Even if Carter doesn't pan out for us, we can still cut him, and spend the 2008 pick on the best availiable DE, and be certainly no worse off than we would be with Anderson at DE. But because of the big money investment in Carter, I want to see one more year of him before I go back and pick at his position.

Longtimefan said it better than I possibly could have:


The simple response to your question is because DT is going to be a bigger problem than DE very soon if we don't address it right now. One pick can put us in a great situation for the future at the DT position.[/quote]


Thanks for the response. I think where I differ fundamentally is that a) I rate Golston and Montgomery higher than most, and b) I rate Carter much lower. I think he is for now and all time a 3rd down player and a liabilty against the run. I didn't see the middle of the line getting overwhelmed as much as I saw Carter and Holdman getting picked on. That could be misperception on my part but I have never thought that Tackle was a weakness for us regardless of who was in the game.

You can say that we will have problems in the future at Tackle if we don't address it now, but we are in horrible shape NOW everywhere else and if we can't get an impact player to YES, "save" the Redskins next year, then I say trade the pick.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;274594]Thanks for the response. I think where I differ fundamentally is that a) I rate Golston and Montgomery higher than most, and b) I rate Carter much lower. I think he is for now and all time a 3rd down player and a liabilty against the run. I didn't see the middle of the line getting overwhelmed as much as I saw Carter and Holdman getting picked on. That could be misperception on my part but I have never thought that Tackle was a weakness for us regardless of who was in the game.

You can say that we will have problems in the future at Tackle if we don't address it now, but we are in horrible shape NOW everywhere else and if we can't get an impact player to YES, "save" the Redskins next year, then I say trade the pick.[/QUOTE]

How can you possibly rank Montgomery higher? He took what, 20 snaps? Also, Carter's success as an outside pass rusher is, in part, contingent on DTs getting an inside push. Third, if you didn't see us getting run on in the middle, go watch the Titans game. Finally, Holdman is not going to even be on the team next season (unless we re-sign him as a FA).

I think you've got a point about a need to fill holes at multiple positions on defense, but I have to disagree about which position is in better shape (DT or DE).

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

I didn't rate Montgomery higher than anyone specific, but his presence and youth add to our strength at tackle, it doesn't detract from it. Everyone acts as though Golston and Montgomery were awful. I thought they played great for rookies. Carter was awful. We can say that a better Tackle will make Carter a better end, but by the same measure we could say that a better end will improve our young tackles.

As for the Tenesse game, which I attended, I don't remember it being fundamentally different than the rest. Carter and Holdman getting overwhelmed.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=70Chip;274594]Thanks for the response. I think where I differ fundamentally is that a) I rate Golston and Montgomery higher than most, and b) I rate Carter much lower. I think he is for now and all time a 3rd down player and a liabilty against the run. I didn't see the middle of the line getting overwhelmed as much as I saw Carter and Holdman getting picked on. That could be misperception on my part but I have never thought that Tackle was a weakness for us regardless of who was in the game.

You can say that we will have problems in the future at Tackle if we don't address it now, but we are in horrible shape NOW everywhere else and if we can't get an impact player to YES, "save" the Redskins next year, then I say trade the pick.[/quote]I'm hoping we can build a DL around Carter that allows him to use his pass rush skills, and can force teams to bounce runs at him outside instead of getting up inside of him. I think the first step is drafting a dominant DT such as Branch (even Okoye might do). Carter can be effective against the run if teams are trying to run outside of him...he's just overmatched against an inside run.

If I am reading you correctly, you think its high time to give up on Carter already. I'm not totally in disagreement. However, it's unreasonable to give up on Lloyd, Archuleta, and Carter one year into each big money deal and expect to have any talent left. We have to find the best way to use these guys we signed. With Lloyd, IMO, thats as little as possible. But with Arch, and more importantly Carter, we have to alter our scheme to make sure we get production out of these guys. Without Carter on the DL in 2008, we are looking at having no talent whatsoever, short of course of anyone we draft this year. So the decision for me comes down to which pick can help us build around Carter the best. To me, thats a no brainer, and its Branch.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;274667]I didn't rate Montgomery higher than anyone specific, but his presence and youth add to our strength at tackle, it doesn't detract from it. Everyone acts as though Golston and Montgomery were awful. I thought they played great for rookies. Carter was awful. We can say that a better Tackle will make Carter a better end, but by the same measure we could say that a better end will improve our young tackles.

As for the Tenesse game, which I attended, I don't remember it being fundamentally different than the rest. Carter and Holdman getting overwhelmed.[/QUOTE]

I thought Golston played very well for a 6th round pick, but I would not trust him to start. As for Montgomery, again we saw so little of the guy (and considering the competition, that says something) that it is hard to evaluate him.

As for Carter, I thought he looked pretty damn good the last 5 games of the season. Four sacks and a lot of pressures and tackles is pretty damn good for any end. And when Griffin was out against Tennessee, we got run at up the gut and not around the edges.

I definately think we need improvement on the edges, but Carter showed enough in the latter part of the season to definately justify his starting position if not his salary. I think just about everyone concedes that we need help in the middle too. I just happen to think that we need more help in the middle than on the edges.

The reason why I think help at DT will have a far greater impact on Carter's performance than another end is based upon Carter's playing style. Carter is not a versatile end who can bull rush and outpower tackles. Carter is a speed rusher who relies on beating tackles by generally trying to go far outside. Outside rushers are generally ineffective if there is no push up the middle from DTs as the QBs can simply step up into a nicely formed pocket. Given that we got virtually no pass rush up the middle, it is not surprising that Carter didn't have a Pro Bowl season. Adding another DE who gets an outside push will not help collapse pockets, it will just push the pocket back inside. Moreover, if we need an upgrade at MLB (which we both think is the case), who is going to help stuff runs in the middle better, a DT or a DE?

Finally, I think that Holdman's departure and, hopefully, Rocky's rise will alleviate some of the problems we have with teams going outside to the left on our defense.

So, while I think you make a lot of good points and certainly agree that we need help at DE, I think we would get more bang for the buck with a DT.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;274674]The reason why I think help at DT will have a far greater impact on Carter's performance than another end is based upon Carter's playing style. Carter is not a versatile end who can bull rush and outpower tackles. Carter is a speed rusher who relies on beating tackles by generally trying to go far outside. Outside rushers are generally ineffective if there is no push up the middle from DTs as the QBs can simply step up into a nicely formed pocket. Given that we got virtually no pass rush up the middle, it is not surprising that Carter didn't have a Pro Bowl season. Adding another DE who gets an outside push will not help collapse pockets, it will just push the pocket back inside. Moreover, if we need an upgrade at MLB (which we both think is the case), who is going to help stuff runs in the middle better, a DT or a DE?[/quote]Great points. I think it goes even further, into our blitz packages. Carter in this defense was useless in our blitz packages. With our weaker DTs, Carter would draw the double teams on the 4 man rush. With 7 guys back in coverage, this was acceptable, but not outstanding as Daniels was the only guy getting pressure on the QB. Now when we brought 5 or 6 guys on a blitz, Carter would not be doubled. However due to the change in assignment, he would in many cases be unable to use his speed rush, and be no more effective in getting to the QB then he was in getting to him with a 4 man rush. With only 5-6 guys in coverage, we would get torched in the secondary. For the first time in three years, our D was best off not blitzing.

In the future, never blitzing isn't a realistic option, although we should be less blitz dependant. The D has to find a way to be more effective at getting to the QB, with the Blitz. I believe this starts up front in the middle with the biggest baddest athlete we can find. Alan Branch. If he can beat single blocks and get in the QBs face quickly, our pass D will improve.

The effect a DE has against the pass is overrated. The DTs are closer to the ball. A dominant DT is more valuble against the pass than a dominant DE.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;274681]Great points. I think it goes even further, into our blitz packages. Carter in this defense was useless in our blitz packages. With our weaker DTs, Carter would draw the double teams on the 4 man rush. With 7 guys back in coverage, this was acceptable, but not outstanding as Daniels was the only guy getting pressure on the QB. Now when we brought 5 or 6 guys on a blitz, Carter would not be doubled. However due to the change in assignment, he would in many cases be unable to use his speed rush, and be no more effective in getting to the QB then he was in getting to him with a 4 man rush. With only 5-6 guys in coverage, we would get torched in the secondary. For the first time in three years, our D was best off not blitzing.

In the future, never blitzing isn't a realistic option, although we should be less blitz dependant. The D has to find a way to be more effective at getting to the QB, with the Blitz. I believe this starts up front in the middle with the biggest baddest athlete we can find. Alan Branch. If he can beat single blocks and get in the QBs face quickly, our pass D will improve.

The effect a DE has against the pass is overrated. The DTs are closer to the ball. A dominant DT is more valuble against the pass than a dominant DE.[/QUOTE]

I could not agree more. Excellent post.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;274674]I thought Golston played very well for a 6th round pick, but I would not trust him to start. As for Montgomery, again we saw so little of the guy (and considering the competition, that says something) that it is hard to evaluate him.

As for Carter, I thought he looked pretty damn good the last 5 games of the season. Four sacks and a lot of pressures and tackles is pretty damn good for any end. And when Griffin was out against Tennessee, we got run at up the gut and not around the edges.

I definately think we need improvement on the edges, but Carter showed enough in the latter part of the season to definately justify his starting position if not his salary. I think just about everyone concedes that we need help in the middle too. I just happen to think that we need more help in the middle than on the edges.

The reason why I think help at DT will have a far greater impact on Carter's performance than another end is based upon Carter's playing style. Carter is not a versatile end who can bull rush and outpower tackles. Carter is a speed rusher who relies on beating tackles by generally trying to go far outside. Outside rushers are generally ineffective if there is no push up the middle from DTs as the QBs can simply step up into a nicely formed pocket. Given that we got virtually no pass rush up the middle, it is not surprising that Carter didn't have a Pro Bowl season. Adding another DE who gets an outside push will not help collapse pockets, it will just push the pocket back inside. Moreover, if we need an upgrade at MLB (which we both think is the case), who is going to help stuff runs in the middle better, a DT or a DE?

Finally, I think that Holdman's departure and, hopefully, Rocky's rise will alleviate some of the problems we have with teams going outside to the left on our defense.

So, while I think you make a lot of good points and certainly agree that we need help at DE, I think we would get more bang for the buck with a DT.[/quote]

What you're saying is that while we need help at DE, there isn't going to be any. We have to hope and pray that Carter is better than what he showed last year, that Daniels/Wynn have a season left between them, that Rocky will "rise", and that Branch himself is not a bust. I think the safer play is to trade the pick down and try to improve in other areas of the defense.

Also, I want to be clear that I respect Carter's speed and athleticism and I think he can contribute, it's just that whenever our opponent needed to get something going, they ran right at him with power. They will do so again next year. I think its unrealistic to expect a rookie DT to cover his gap and the LBer's gap and Carter's gap.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;274720]What you're saying is that while we need help at DE, there isn't going to be any. [/QUOTE]

No, I am saying there will be help for the DEs in the form of a DT who can command double-teams and free up guys like Carter. And I think my basic point that we need more help at DT than DE was validated by the fact that when opponents double-teamed our D-linemen, it was Carter (who, of course, plays DE).

[QUOTE=70Chip;274720]We have to hope and pray that Carter is better than what he showed last year, that Daniels/Wynn have a season left between them, that Rocky will "rise", and that Branch himself is not a bust. I think the safer play is to trade the pick down and try to improve in other areas of the defense. [/QUOTE]

We don't have to hope and pray that Carter is any better than what he showed last year. We just have to expect that he will continue to play at the same level that he was playing at for the last 5-6 games (a healthy chunk of the season).

I'd love to trade down. I've been a big fan of doing so. I just don't think it will happen. And barring a trade down, are you hoping and praying that our 2006 5th and 6th round picks blossom into stud DTs or that Griffin is actually BOTH healthy and productive?

And yes, I do have to pray that Rocky will "rise." I think every Redskins fan does. Unless you are prepared to replace the guy (and junk the two second rounders we spent on him) before he's even really seen the field, you'd better hope the guy can play. I don't understand how you have so little faith in Rocky, while you seem to have so much in Montgomery and Golston.

I don't know if you have a plan or, if you do, what it entails but I am sure that it prays for a lot too. You've already implied that we need 2 new ends, a linebacker to replace Holdman/Rocky, and have other holes. I have no idea how you plan to fill such holes.

[QUOTE=70Chip;274720]Also, I want to be clear that I respect Carter's speed and athleticism and I think he can contribute, it's just that whenever our opponent needed to get something going, they ran right at him with power. They will do so again next year. I think its unrealistic to expect a rookie DT to cover his gap and the LBer's gap and Carter's gap.[/QUOTE]

While it is definately true that opponents ran left, I don't think Carter is solely to blame. First, Holdman was playing behind him and he....well sucked. Second, opponents were also running away from Marcus Washington (our best defender). Third, Carter really improved the last few games in both pass rushing abilities AND stopping the run.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

Here's who we have at Defensive Tackle:

Griffin
Salavea
Golston
Montgomery
Bosghetti


Here's who have at DE:

Daniels
Wynn
Carter
Evans
Sykes

When I look at that I think it's obvious which area is of greater need even if we assume Carter plays at the maximum of his ability. Of course what we really need is MLB so Marshall can take Holdman's spot and that would make everybody look better so were back to trading the pick as the only sensible thing to do. That I think we agree on.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=70Chip;274720]Also, I want to be clear that I respect Carter's speed and athleticism and I think he can contribute, it's just that whenever our opponent needed to get something going, they ran right at him with power. They will do so again next year. I think its unrealistic to expect a rookie DT to cover his gap and the LBer's gap and Carter's gap.[/quote]It's not about having a rookie DT play a two-gap. First, this is a move being made for the future. Branch would only be a rookie for one season, and hopefully we'd rotate our tackles (and ends) instead of relying on one guy. He would have time to grow into the role playing intitally behind Salevea, and next to one of the game's best DTs when healthy in Griffin, who may not be here in 2008.

We know that Carter was a player designed to improve our pass rush. The downside, of course, is that he is far worse vs. the run than Wynn was. If you run right at him, he can be overpowered at the point of attack. This is not a unique problem in the NFL, it's just unique for the Redskins who had Wynn and Daniels at end prior to this year.

What a dominant DT will do (if successful) is he will force the running back to bounce outside the gap he was shooting at. If we can get opposing runners going laterally, a player like Carter can be very, very good against the run. He's athletic enough to chase the runner down the line of scrimmage and make the tackle. He's just not strong enough to shed the block of a tackle and make the play head on.

Sure the DT doesn't have to do that to be a successful DT, and if the DT fails to get push and the back goes right inside Carter's gap, Carter is the one at fault. However, when you add an unbalanced talent at the end position who is far better at rushing the passer then stopping the run, the scheme has to account for that weak link against the run. We clearly don't have the horses to do that right now, and that's probably because of some pretty mediocre talent at the DT position.

If I didn't think Alan Branch would fix the problem, I wouldn't be pushing to draft him.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=70Chip;274734]Here's who we have at Defensive Tackle:

Griffin
Salavea
Golston
Montgomery
Bosghetti


Here's who have at DE:

Daniels
Wynn
Carter
Evans
Sykes

When I look at that I think it's obvious which area is of greater need even if we assume Carter plays at the maximum of his ability. Of course what we really need is MLB so Marshall can take Holdman's spot and that would make everybody look better so were back to trading the pick as the only sensible thing to do. That I think we agree on.[/quote]Right now, I would analyze this list by saying that the ENTIRE D Line lacks talent. Of the ten, Carter is the most promising guy, while Griffin is the best. But lets look at a very real sitaution that could happen as early as 2008 without naming a 2007 first round pick:

DT:
Golston
Montgomery

DE:
Carter
Evans
Daniels? Maybe?

The point is by 2008 there could be so much turnover, we are talking about our next two years of draft picks and FA signings producing 2 or more starters on the DL. There are no quick fixes. However we have one potential building block, and thats Carter. Not that confidence inspiring, but its something we have to work with. If we go into the 2008 draft with no starting DTs, that could be disaterous.

Thats why we have to put this issue to rest right now, so we can focus on the ends later.

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[quote=FRPLG;274549]older d-linemen? Griffin was like 27, Daniels 30, Joe Sal 29, Carter 27. One guy was 30.

And we have discussed Springs' 'injury prone' status and I think most agreed that he wasn't not injury prone rather he had one injury that bugged him over a two season period. He had the monkier totally undeserved. And he hadn't exactly missed a whole hell of a lot time for us until the hernia.[/quote]

Griffin, Daniels, and Salavea are all over 30. [url=http://www.redskins.com/team/;jsessionid=LJGNNOIIEODF]Washington Redskins[/url]

Re: NFL DRAFT SCOUT 1/30 mock (Alan Branch, DT)
 

[QUOTE=gabe1984;274921]Griffin, Daniels, and Salavea are all over 30. [url=http://www.redskins.com/team/;jsessionid=LJGNNOIIEODF]Washington Redskins[/url][/QUOTE]

I think FRPLG was referring to their age when the Redskins signed them