Addressing the LB position
 

The LB position, particularly OLB, is a big area of need for the Redskins. We currently are limited to 4 draft picks, and aside from cutting Marcus and [URL="http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Redskins_Re_sign_Fincher_32862.jsp"]re-signing Fincher[/URL] (a net loss in my opinion), we have not been active whatsoever.

Here's how it would go down ideally for me: I'd like to make a modest play for one of the three OLB's available in FA (Crowell, June, Keiaho). Then I'd trade out of the 13th pick, and take one of the three USC LBs, preferrably Maualuga, and still get a good tackle.

Play GM (or whatever Vinny's title is). How would you fill our linebacking needs?

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

damn it, i started one too. my bad

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=Ruhskins;535640]damn it, i started one too. my bad[/quote]

Beat ya to it by one minute. ;)

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GMScud;535642]Beat ya to it by one minute. ;)[/quote]

I know, that's what I get for trying to be too efficient and include the "2009" in the thread topic. LOL.

Here's the JLC story about the Skins wanting to sign MW...

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2009/03/redskins_want_to_re-signb_marc.html]Re-signing Marcus Washington a Possibility - Redskins Insider[/url]

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GMScud;535638]The LB position, particularly OLB, is a big area of need for the Redskins. We currently are limited to 4 draft picks, and aside from cutting Marcus and [URL="http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Redskins_Re_sign_Fincher_32862.jsp"]re-signing Fincher[/URL] (a net loss in my opinion), we have not been active whatsoever.

Here's how it would go down ideally for me: I'd like to make a modest play for one of the three OLB's available in FA (Crowell, June, Keiaho). Then I'd trade out of the 13th pick, and take one of the three USC LBs, preferrably Maualuga, and still get a good tackle.

Play GM (or whatever Vinny's title is). How would you fill our linebacking needs?[/quote]I no longer want Crowell because I've realized that he would just block Blades.

1) I would bring Marcus back if I could get him at the vet min. He would instantly be re-inserted at SLB, and would force Rocky to the bench.

2) One of our first two draft picks is going to be an undersized college defensive end who would play WLB in our scheme. This player would be predominantly a pass rusher for us who has better scheme flexibility than Blades or Rocky. The pick must show some degree of coverage ability, and should have the ability to drop down to LE in the dime defense.

3) HB Blades would play nearly 50-50 with Marcus, who would be the de-facto starter.

4) Rocky and Fletch handle special teams and backup duties. Should Rocky ever get the defense on straight and/or put his knee troubles in the past, I would use him to take some of Fletch's reps in an attempt to keep him healthier later in the season.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535648]I no longer want Crowell because I've realized that he would just block Blades.

1) I would bring Marcus back if I could get him at the vet min. He would instantly be re-inserted at SLB, and would force Rocky to the bench.

2) One of our first two draft picks is going to be an undersized college defensive end who would play WLB in our scheme. This player would be predominantly a pass rusher for us who has better scheme flexibility than Blades or Rocky. The pick must show some degree of coverage ability, and should have the ability to drop down to LE in the dime defense.

3) HB Blades would play nearly 50-50 with Marcus, who would be the de-facto starter.

4) Rocky and Fletch handle special teams and backup duties. Should Rocky ever get the defense on straight and/or put his knee troubles in the past, I would use him to take some of Fletch's reps in an attempt to keep him healthier later in the season.[/quote]

We should most definately go get Crowell...Trade down in the first and take a (1st) DE Tyson Jackson & (2nd) Ebon Britton...Marcus Freeman or Mckenzie in the 3rd

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=ChickenMonkey;535658]We should most definately go get Crowell...Trade down in the first and take a (1st) DE Tyson Jackson & (2nd) Ebon Britton...Marcus Freeman or Mckenzie in the 3rd[/quote]You do know trading down doesn't get you picks, though. You're entitled to trade down as far as you want to, but if you want [I]picks[/I] then [B]someone else needs to trade up.[/B]

Basically, we can't make second round projections for picks we don't and won't have. It sort of changes the long term plan when you think about it that way, doesn't it?

It's a nice suggestion and all, but we want to hear what your going to do with the Redskins picks, not with someone elses draft.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GMScud;535638]The LB position, particularly OLB, is a big area of need for the Redskins. We currently are limited to 4 draft picks, and aside from cutting Marcus and [URL="http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Redskins_Re_sign_Fincher_32862.jsp"]re-signing Fincher[/URL] (a net loss in my opinion), we have not been active whatsoever.

Here's how it would go down ideally for me: I'd like to make a modest play for one of the three OLB's available in FA (Crowell, June, Keiaho). Then I'd trade out of the 13th pick, and take one of the three USC LBs, preferrably Maualuga, and still get a good tackle.

Play GM (or whatever Vinny's title is). How would you fill our linebacking needs?[/quote]


I like your plan although Maualuga probably wont be there if we trade down - he might not even be there at 13. If we want him, we need to take him at 13.

If I were senior executive vice president of football and Snydersuckingup relations, id address the LB position this way:

-Attempt to sign Washington to a deal close to the vet minimum.
-Sign Matt Sinclair
-Use our natural 1st round pick on Michael Oher and use our 3rd round pick to draft the best available LB, hopefully Marcus Freeman from Ohio state or Aaron Maybin from Penn state.

In camp, Fincher and Sinclair would fight for a roster spot.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535660]You do know trading down doesn't get you picks, though. You're entitled to trade down as far as you want to, but if you want [I]picks[/I] then [B]someone else needs to trade up.[/B]

Basically, we can't make second round projections for picks we don't and won't have. It sort of changes the long term plan when you think about it that way, doesn't it?

It's a nice suggestion and all, but we want to hear what your going to do with the Redskins picks, not with someone elses draft.[/quote]

well-said. while its not a given that we can trade down, i think we could probably find a partner if we wanted to move down badly enough. I think the dilema is going to be: do we trade down and take two lesser-caliber players or keep the pick and draft a stud. If Oher or Maualuga is there at 13, it would be really hard for me to trade down. yes, we dont have a lot of picks, but id rather have one stud to lock down a position for a long time than 2 or 3 average players who are nominal starters/backups. There are plenty of those type of guys available in free agency every year.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;535661]I like your plan although Maualuga probably wont be there if we trade down - he might not even be there at 13. If we want him, we need to take him at 13.

If I were senior executive vice president of football and Snydersuckingup relations, id address the LB position this way:

-Attempt to sign Washington to a deal close to the vet minimum.
-Sign Matt Sinclair
-Use our natural 1st round pick on Michael Oher and use our 3rd round pick to draft the best available LB, hopefully Marcus Freeman from Ohio state or [B]Aaron Maybin from Penn state[/B].

In camp, Fincher and Sinclair would fight for a roster spot.[/quote]

I know this dude has dropped from the top 10, but 3rd round? I haven't heard anything to indicate his stock at this point would put him in the 2nd even.

A guy I like a lot who Kiper says is likely a high 2nd rounder is Clint STintim of Virginia. If he or the guy English from N. Illinois happen to fall to the 3rd they would be a relative bargain (at this point, I know a lot can happen between now & then, pro days, etc.).

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GMScud;535638]The LB position, particularly OLB, is a big area of need for the Redskins. We currently are limited to 4 draft picks, and aside [B]from cutting Marcus and [/B][URL="http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Redskins_Re_sign_Fincher_32862.jsp"][B]re-signing Fincher[/B][/URL] (a net loss in my opinion), we have not been active whatsoever.

Here's how it would go down ideally for me: I'd like to make a modest play for one of the three OLB's available in FA (Crowell, June, Keiaho). Then I'd trade out of the 13th pick, and take one of the three USC LBs, preferrably Maualuga, and still get a good tackle.

Play GM (or whatever Vinny's title is). How would you fill our linebacking needs?[/quote]

I agree, but how many games did MW play last year? What was our w/L w/him in the lineup?

I think he did a lot for the whole unit when healthy, but did we really win more w/him last year?

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;535661]I like your plan although Maualuga probably wont be there if we trade down [B]- he might not even be there at 13. If we want him, we need to take him at 13[/B].

If I were senior executive vice president of football and Snydersuckingup relations, id address the LB position this way:

-Attempt to sign Washington to a deal close to the vet minimum.
-Sign Matt Sinclair
-Use our natural 1st round pick on Michael Oher and use our 3rd round pick to draft the best available LB, hopefully Marcus Freeman from Ohio state or Aaron Maybin from Penn state.

In camp, Fincher and Sinclair would fight for a roster spot.[/quote]

I've seen a few mocks recently that have him in the 20's...

[url=http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/nfldraftscout-RobRang]NFL Draft - CBSSports.com Football[/url]

However he wouldn't be a reach at 13, and I'd be happy taking him there, as long as we find another way to seriously address the tackle position.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

We need to address LB with the 13th pick. For all of our hope to trade down, it takes two teams to trade so spinning our minds around 'trading down' being a solution to any draft questions is just wasting time. If Orapko is there he should be option one, then either Cushing or Rey if Orapko is gone. We can go into next season with Heyer as our starting RT but we can't enter the season with HB Blades as a starting OLB.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=Paintrain;535684]We need to address LB with the 13th pick. For all of our hope to trade down, it takes two teams to trade so spinning our minds around 'trading down' being a solution to any draft questions is just wasting time. If Orapko is there he should be option one, then either Cushing or Rey if Orapko is gone. We can go into next season with Heyer as our starting RT but we can't enter the season with HB Blades as a starting OLB.[/quote]Uh, well, I agree that it's not going to kill us to see what we have in Heyer, but we've seen two abbreviated years of each, and Blades has been much better.

So, from that perspective, I'd say OT is a more pressing need. But the defense in general needs another pass rusher just as bad.

So, long story short, I don't know.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535689]Uh, well, I agree that it's not going to kill us to see what we have in Heyer, but we've seen two abbreviated years of each, and Blades has been much better.

So, from that perspective, I'd say OT is a more pressing need. But the defense in general needs another pass rusher just as bad.

So, long story short, I don't know.[/quote]

You think so? Blades is so overmatched, IMO, at OLB it's not even funny. He can't cover the TE. If I was an offensive coordinator I would be running my offense thru the TE if I saw that matchup.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=Paintrain;535696]You think so? Blades is so overmatched, IMO, at OLB it's not even funny. He can't cover the TE. If I was an offensive coordinator I would be running my offense thru the TE if I saw that matchup.[/quote]Can't cover the TE, or failed to cover Jason Witten on one play last year?

We don't have a linebacker on our team who can consistently cover Witten. I wouldn't worry about that though. Unless we're caught in a bad package, that's a safety's job. Blades has proven to be an excellent short zone defender and a fantastic asset against the run. If he had Rocky's body (minus the knees of course), he'd already be a superstar.

Again, I ultimately agree that if there's a college DE sitting there at 13 like say, Everette Brown who could play WLB for us, we have to pull the trigger. But we'll easily find a spot for Blades on this defense. Heyer, I'm less sure about, because 2009 is a make or break year for him.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

I think we're hurting here more than at any other position, including offensive line. So many questions

1. How much longer can we count on Fletcher in the middle? He's basically been Superman but how close is he to just dropping dramatically in production (and even games played)

2. What are our intentions with Rocky? Assume there's a cap and he becomes a free agent after this upcoming season, are we planning on locking him up long term? And where are we playing him? Right now he's the starting weak-side backer but some would argue that he's better suited for the strong-side

3. Do we give Blades the chance to be the everyday starter at either of the outside spots, or his versatility too valuable and do we keep him as the rotating LB off the bench?

4. Where is our depth? We just signed Fincher and we've also got (for now) Tyson Smith and Matt Sinclair. Smith and Sinclair combined have only slightly more NFL gameday experience than Paintrain. And Fincher only has a bit more than that. Do we need a Cato June type veteran to come in and provide some "experience" a la Randall Godfrey?

5. What about Khary Campbell?

6. Can we afford to pass on a linebacker at #13? I'd say yes, if we had a later first or even a second round pick but right now we don't. So I don't know, it really depends on whether you feel more comfortable with Heyer/Jansen at RT or Blades at either OLB slot.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

The more time goes by, it looks to me Redskins are going to draft LB in 1st round.. Redskins have been emphasizing on search for a RT through free agency, or at least that's what we have heard.. And we haven't heard of any news regarding LB beside re-signing Fincher and MW.. If we haven't found right one yet by the time, we probably will give Heyer a chance.. I just hope we would be able to draft a soon to be star LB or DE who we can depend on for the years to come..

Off the point but; a news that opened my eyes: [URL="http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80f2ef24&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true"]Ravens LB Lewis signs incentive-laden, seven-year contract[/URL]
Granted, he won't be there for 7 years literally but that's still a huge commitment if you ask me.. Especially after shelling out 10 million dollars in first year..

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=SmootSmack;535702]I think we're hurting here more than at any other position, including offensive line. So many questions

1. How much longer can we count on Fletcher in the middle? He's basically been Superman but how close is he to just dropping dramatically in production (and even games played)

2. What are our intentions with Rocky? Assume there's a cap and he becomes a free agent after this upcoming season, are we planning on locking him up long term? And where are we playing him? Right now he's the starting weak-side backer but some would argue that he's better suited for the strong-side

3. Do we give Blades the chance to be the everyday starter at either of the outside spots, or his versatility too valuable and do we keep him as the rotating LB off the bench?

4. Where is our depth? We just signed Fincher and we've also got (for now) Tyson Smith and Matt Sinclair. Smith and Sinclair combined have only slightly more NFL gameday experience than Paintrain. And Fincher only has a bit more than that. Do we need a Cato June type veteran to come in and provide some "experience" a la Randall Godfrey?

5. What about Khary Campbell?

6. Can we afford to pass on a linebacker at #13? I'd say yes, if we had a later first or even a second round pick but right now we don't. So I don't know, it really depends on whether you feel more comfortable with Heyer/Jansen at RT or Blades at either OLB slot.[/quote]1. We can bank on Fletch this year, but it's critical we have a contingency plan in place. I do think Blades is going to step right in for him, which is why I don't think we'll be in the market for Maualuga or for Laurinaitis.

We can't just plug in Blades if he's needed elsewhere. I also don't think you can count on him to replace the leadership of Fletcher as long as he's still on the roster. This is his defense until the day we cut him.

2. I think Rocky has lost his role as a nickel LB for good. I think we'll move him across to SLB, and I don't think he's in the future plans. Of course, a breakout season could mean a franchise tag next year.

3. Well, an impact linebacker from the draft is more of a need than getting Blades on the field, but at the same time, I wouldn't sign anyone to block Blades, and I'd work to get him on the field for 40-50% of snaps from the base 4-3 package, and he's the de-facto nickel linebacker. And, I don't think that Fletch should play 100% of snaps this year. Blades should get a small percentage of his snaps, plus it will work well that way with the whole radio in the helmet thing.

4. Getting an undersized DE in the draft will do wonders for the depth issue, but I'd still float a contract offer at Marcus Washington anyway. No smallish cover-two type OLBs please.

5. Sign that tender, son.

6. Yes, we can afford to pass at a linebacker at No. 13, and we should if one of the big four tackles there. If we could turn our third round pick into a late second rounder, the draft is deep enough to land a pass-rushing LB there.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

Go with HB, Fletch, and Rocky. HB was a de facto starter for much of last year, and we finished ranked 4th in Defense. Marcus, Philip, Wynn, they are all just stop-gaps til we can address those positions next year. We don't have the picks to do it now. The O was terrible last year, we need multiple O lineman who could potentially start. I'm pretty sure Justin Geisinger started at LT when we were still in the hunt. That never needs to happen again.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

I really like larry English of northern Illinois, he's a great DE, but has never played OLB, but analyst compare him to lamarr woodley and tsuggs, which if I knew I was getting a player like that, I would take him in an instant...clay Matthews as a second rounder is another possibility, but his stock just keeps growing...to b honest though, I'm not really comfortable with moving a college DE to SLB if they hadn't played any LB in college, that's why I would pass on maybin, EBrown, etc. Orakpo I think could do it but he'll be long gone by the time we pick(ditto for curry) sintim I don't like at all plus he's a 3-4 OLB anyway...Cushing is perfect, but gets injured too much, maualugas good, but he's a MLB really not an OLB(still he's really good and is troy polamalu at LB) ...I'm gonna pass on both Ohio state linebackers because I think laurinatis is gonna be a bust and freeman doesn't make plays, like the USC LBs...if the DEs converting to linebacker don't succeed then we can always move them back to DE...Jason Williams of western Illinois is a good sleeper, as is victor butler of Oregon state, and both the Hawaii LBs

If I had to pick my top 3 LBs I would draft it would be:
1 Rey maualuga
2 larry English
3 brian Cushing

Keep in mind, if we don't draft an OLB with our first pick, we can always sign like a crowell and then draft a brandon spikes or a mark herzlech of BC

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535706]1. We can bank on Fletch this year, but it's critical we have a contingency plan in place. I do think Blades is going to step right in for him, which is why I don't think we'll be in the market for Maualuga or for Laurinaitis.[/quote]

I don't think we will be in the market for Laurinaitis either, but I believe (as I believe many others do too) that his best position in the NFL could be at the WILL in a 4-3 (more so than Maualuga), but 13 is a bit high to draft someone and then move them to a new position. Especially when you only have four picks overall

[quote]2. I think Rocky has lost his role as a nickel LB for good. I think we'll move him across to SLB, and I don't think he's in the future plans. Of course, a breakout season could mean a franchise tag next year.[/quote]

I kinda still wish we had gotten DeMeco Ryan that year

[quote]3. Well, an impact linebacker from the draft is more of a need than getting Blades on the field, but at the same time, I wouldn't sign anyone to block Blades, and I'd work to get him on the field for 40-50% of snaps from the base 4-3 package, and he's the de-facto nickel linebacker. And, I don't think that Fletch should play 100% of snaps this year. Blades should get a small percentage of his snaps, plus it will work well that way with the whole radio in the helmet thing.[/quote]

You want a Blades avatar don't you?

[quote]4. Getting an undersized DE in the draft will do wonders for the depth issue, but I'd still float a contract offer at Marcus Washington anyway. No smallish cover-two type OLBs please.[/quote]

What about two-year plea of getting Wilson more playing time at OLB?

[quote]5. Sign that tender, son.[/quote]

Seems convinced still that there is a big market out there for him

[quote]6. Yes, we can afford to pass at a linebacker at No. 13, and we should if one of the big four tackles there. If we could turn our third round pick into a late second rounder, the draft is deep enough to land a pass-rushing LB there.[/quote]

Word

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

Nice thread... I don't think i can really add anything. Just nice.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

What has been said I agree with. Its good to see some people are off the Malauga banwagon, and realize he's a MLB and can't play squat at OLB.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

I don't understand why there is always concern about Cushing's durability, and other than Goat, no one questions the injury issues with Orakpo. He has had numerous injuries in college.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=vallin21;535738]What has been said I agree with. Its good to see some people are off the Malauga banwagon, and realize he's a MLB and can't play squat at OLB.[/quote]

Urlacher sucked until they moved him to the middle. There is no guarantee that Maualuga would not be the same.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=53Fan;535741]Urlacher sucked until they moved him to the middle. There is no guarantee that Maualuga would not be the same.[/quote]
I'm not saying he wouldn't but I'd take Cushing before I take Maualuga. Just for the fact that OLB is a need and MLB isn't. I think we can get 2-3 good years out of Fletcher, and for Maualuga to wait until Fletcher retires seems like a waste of a pick. I would trade down and get a 2nd and a late first and draft Alex Mack.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

Oh yeah. I was agreeing with you Vallin. Urlacher could'nt play squat at OLB but is great in the middle. Maualuga may be the same. Too many people are assuming he can play the outside just because he's good in the middle.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535701]Can't cover the TE, or failed to cover Jason Witten on one play last year?

We don't have a linebacker on our team who can consistently cover Witten. I wouldn't worry about that though. Unless we're caught in a bad package, that's a safety's job. Blades has proven to be an excellent short zone defender and a fantastic asset against the run. If he had Rocky's body (minus the knees of course), he'd already be a superstar.

Again, I ultimately agree that if there's a college DE sitting there at 13 like say, Everette Brown who could play WLB for us, we have to pull the trigger. But we'll easily find a spot for Blades on this defense. Heyer, I'm less sure about, because 2009 is a make or break year for him.[/quote]
Well, I'll agree to disagree. I think he can be a very good MLB but I don't think he's going to be a capable OLB over 16 games.

[quote=Larry Michael is Satan]Go with HB, Fletch, and Rocky. HB was a de facto starter for much of last year, and we finished ranked 4th in Defense. Marcus, Philip, Wynn, they are all just stop-gaps til we can address those positions next year. We don't have the picks to do it now. [b]The O was terrible last year, we need multiple O lineman who could potentially start. I'm pretty sure Justin Geisinger started at LT when we were still in the hunt. That never needs to happen again.[/b][/quote]
Man, I swear some of you guys are frustrated OL that never got a crack at the show, LOL. We don't need 'multiple linemen that could potentially start' with our 4 picks. We can go into the season with a starting OL of Samuels, Dockery, Rabach, Thomas and Heyer and it won't be a disaster. Of course we can use depth but we have glaring unfilled postions at DE and OLB that have to be addressed. Our #1 priority is generating a pass rush. You realize that increasing the pass rush increases sacks and turnovers which help the offense, right? You can't address every hole with $7 mill in cap room and 4 draft picks so you address your biggest holes and do your best to fill the rest.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[url=http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/10/burnett-bolts-the-boys-for-the-bolts/]ProFootballTalk.com - BURNETT BOLTS THE ‘BOYS FOR THE BOLTS[/url]

Kevin Burnett signs with the Chargers

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=vallin21;535749]I'm not saying he wouldn't but I'd take Cushing before I take Maualuga. Just for the fact that OLB is a need and MLB isn't. I think we can get 2-3 good years out of Fletcher, and for Maualuga to wait until Fletcher retires seems like a waste of a pick. I would trade down and get a 2nd and a late first and draft Alex Mack.[/quote]

If it was up to me, I would try to make this move.. Although we have pressing need at RT but from what I have seen and heard about Mack, he would be perfect solution for monster NT in 3-4, which is quickly becoming popular in NFL now.. Like Paintrain said, we can do fine with Heyer as our RT.. He does have potentials to be good T, he just needs some experiences (IMO).. I am not saying that he would be a great one, but just good enough to hold the position for several years.. Or at least, just until we have a chance to draft franchise LT and move Samuels to RT..

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=53Fan;535740]I don't understand why there is always concern about Cushing's durability, and other than Goat, no one questions the injury issues with Orakpo. He has had numerous injuries in college.[/quote]

Word. Orakpo missed time the last two seasons w/ a knee injury. If there's a top 10 bust in this year's draft I'd actually point to him cuz whatever abuse his body took the last four year's will be rather gentle to what he's facing.

Cushing has been rated low in durability since the beginning, but honestly I don't think I was injured much after his first year or two of college. That said I think Cushing is a reach at 13... maybe a big reach. He's not an amazing talent from what video of watched (but he did play next to one ;) ) When I watch Cushing I notice he 1) regularly loses his feet at the point of contact so he's using his mass to drag down the smaller running back. He won't be successful in the NFL doing this, especially in the NFC East as Barber and Jacobs will run him over or just shed him aside. 2) If people are worried about Rey's speed than Cushing shouldn't be considered at all. I don't care what the official 40 time is... watching game video Cushing is constantly losing the chase w/ his target but a dive and drag technique saves his ass. Not going to work in the NFL.

Rey on the other hand runs through his tackle. And f the stop watch cuz his closing speed on QBs, RBs and TEs is pretty uncanny.

Maybe Rey is too big a risk to play at OLB in the interim; however that statement just doesn't sound right. He's loaded w/ talent and pure athletic ability and shows a nose for the ball... if he can't be an upgrade for us at either SLB or WLB I'd be shocked.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=SmootSmack;535726]You want a Blades avatar don't you?[/quote]Well, Cooley is in my doghouse right now for fumbling against Cincinnati, so I mean, if you have Summo on speed dial...

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=The Goat;535793]Word. Orakpo missed time the last two seasons w/ a knee injury. If there's a top 10 bust in this year's draft I'd actually point to him cuz whatever abuse his body took the last four year's will be rather gentle to what he's facing.

Cushing has been rated low in durability since the beginning, but honestly I don't think I was injured much after his first year or two of college. That said I think Cushing is a reach at 13... maybe a big reach. He's not an amazing talent from what video of watched (but he did play next to one ;) ) When I watch Cushing I notice he 1) regularly loses his feet at the point of contact so he's using his mass to drag down the smaller running back. He won't be successful in the NFL doing this, especially in the NFC East as Barber and Jacobs will run him over or just shed him aside. 2) If people are worried about Rey's speed than Cushing shouldn't be considered at all. I don't care what the official 40 time is... watching game video Cushing is constantly losing the chase w/ his target but a dive and drag technique saves his ass. Not going to work in the NFL.

Rey on the other hand runs through his tackle. And f the stop watch cuz his closing speed on QBs, RBs and TEs is pretty uncanny.

Maybe Rey is too big a risk to play at OLB in the interim; however that statement just doesn't sound right. He's loaded w/ talent and pure athletic ability and shows a nose for the ball... if he can't be an upgrade for us at either SLB or WLB I'd be shocked.[/quote]

Good post about Cushing/Maualuga. I didn't break down film on either of them, but I watched 3 or 4 USC games last season, and I noticed a lot of Cushing's tackles were from behind, or he was piling on and cleaning up what Maualuga already started. I wonder if Clay Matthews may even be a better prospect. If we're going to draft any of the three USC LBs, it should Maualuga without a doubt.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GMScud;535638]The LB position, particularly OLB, is a big area of need for the Redskins. We currently are limited to 4 draft picks, and aside from cutting Marcus and [URL="http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Redskins_Re_sign_Fincher_32862.jsp"]re-signing Fincher[/URL] (a net loss in my opinion), we have not been active whatsoever.

Here's how it would go down ideally for me: I'd like to make a modest play for one of the three OLB's available in FA (Crowell, June, Keiaho). Then I'd trade out of the 13th pick, and take one of the three USC LBs, preferrably Maualuga, and still get a good tackle.

Play GM (or whatever Vinny's title is). How would you fill our linebacking needs?[/quote]


Washington has missed too many games the last two yrs..draft one of the three studs