DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday

[CRedskinsRule]

Dianna Marie Russini ‏@NBCdianna 20m
Per sources: San Francisco reached out to DeSean Jackson while he was at dinner with Redskins. They want him to visit. #Redskins #49ers

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Dianna Marie Russini ‏@NBCdianna 20m
Per sources: San Francisco reached out to DeSean Jackson while he was at dinner with Redskins. They want him to visit. #Redskins #49ers

But... Did he agree?

[takethecake]

I'm becoming more and more convinced that the eagles releasing DJax was 80% $$$-related, and 20% chip kelly trying to send a message (while also realizing that there are a lot of talented receivers in this year's draft). The "gang ties" are loose at best, and just seem like a smoke screen for the eagles' questionable decision to let him go.

It really comes down to - does he make our offense significantly better? Yes, I think he does. Will we have to mitigate attitude problems? Possibly, but I have confidence in our locker room. It will be about the $$ for DJax - if we can get him at a reasonable rate, I think we absolutely need to sign him - never give up a chance to take a division rival's pro bowl player in his prime. But if the $$$ is too much, and there's a real risk we could hurt our future cap situation, like I said above - lots of talented receivers in this year's draft.

[Skinzman]

Im curious as to what lineman we arent going to land this year if we sign DeSean? The cap will continue to rise each of the next few years, so if we see an OL we want next year, we will still be able to sign them. Plus, if we do get a player that helps there, we have people to cut there that already make a fair amount of money.

There isnt much left of this FA crop, some role players and depth and thats about it. Plus we would have to backload the contract since we are limited cap space now, so cutting him down the road wont be that hard unless BA loses his mind and guarantees way to much.

I would prefer a short contract, but its not the end of our chances to have a good OLine next year if we do sign him long term.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Im curious as to what lineman we arent going to land this year if we sign DeSean? The cap will continue to rise each of the next few years, so if we see an OL we want next year, we will still be able to sign them. Plus, if we do get a player that helps there, we have people to cut there that already make a fair amount of money.

There isnt much left of this FA crop, some role players and depth and thats about it. Plus we would have to backload the contract since we are limited cap space now, so cutting him down the road wont be that hard unless BA loses his mind and guarantees way to much.

I would prefer a short contract, but its not the end of our chances to have a good OLine next year if we do sign him long term.

I agree, FWIW.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Im curious as to what lineman we arent going to land this year if we sign DeSean? The cap will continue to rise each of the next few years, so if we see an OL we want next year, we will still be able to sign them. Plus, if we do get a player that helps there, we have people to cut there that already make a fair amount of money.

There isnt much left of this FA crop, some role players and depth and thats about it. Plus we would have to backload the contract since we are limited cap space now, so cutting him down the road wont be that hard unless BA loses his mind and guarantees way to much.

I would prefer a short contract, but its not the end of our chances to have a good OLine next year if we do sign him long term.

I'm curious as to why it has to be either or. We've signed two OL in free agency and will probably draft one in the 2nd or 3rd round regardless of Jackson.

The relentless obsession with offensive linemen in the absence of actual thought is mind blowing sometimes. We've got 4 young OL on the roster battling for starting positions (Hurt, Gettis, LeRibius, Compton), 4 holdover starters (Williams, Lichtenstieger, Chester, Polumbus), 2 free agent signees (Lauvoa, McGlynn) and 6 draft picks to address it and people are STILL bitching about addressing the offensive line? Unreal.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Im curious as to what lineman we arent going to land this year if we sign DeSean? The cap will continue to rise each of the next few years, so if we see an OL we want next year, we will still be able to sign them. Plus, if we do get a player that helps there, we have people to cut there that already make a fair amount of money.

There isnt much left of this FA crop, some role players and depth and thats about it. Plus we would have to backload the contract since we are limited cap space now, so cutting him down the road wont be that hard unless BA loses his mind and guarantees way to much.

I would prefer a short contract, but its not the end of our chances to have a good OLine next year if we do sign him long term.

Don't know if you're really responding to my post or not, but what I was saying is that I wish we would have signed some of the great FA O-linemen available(Asamoah, Beadles, Collins, Schwartz, Penn; that level of linemen), and not even pursued Jackson.

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I'm curious as to why it has to be either or. We've signed two OL in free agency and will probably draft one in the 2nd or 3rd round regardless of Jackson.

The relentless obsession with offensive linemen in the absence of actual thought is mind blowing sometimes. We've got 4 young OL on the roster battling for starting positions (Hurt, Gettis, LeRibius, Compton), 4 holdover starters (Williams, Lichtenstieger, Chester, Polumbus), 2 free agent signees (Lauvoa, McGlynn) and 6 draft picks to address it and people are STILL bitching about addressing the offensive line? Unreal.

Yeah, we've addressed the O-line somewhat, but see my post above. None of the "holdover starters" except Williams and Lichtensteiger(at Center) are worth mentioning. Lavuao will merely be a solid starter, while McGlynn is probably pure depth. I too am hoping that some of the young blockers will step up, but it's not certain. We could have signed some of the aforementioned O-linemen and had a great line, but instead we skimped and saved(except for overpaying Lavuao) on the second most important group on the field, and now we're looking at spending that money on a luxury. If this strategy puts W's in the Win-Loss column, I'll be happy; but right now I don't think it's the way to go.

To sum it up: our line will probably be decent next year, but instead of spending money on a luxury WR, we could have spent that money on offensive linemen and had an elite O-line.

[Mechanix544]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

Don't know if you're really responding to my post or not, but what I was saying is that I wish we would have signed some of the great FA O-linemen available(Asamoah, Beadles, Collins, Schwartz, Penn; that level of linemen), and not even pursued Jackson.



Yeah, we've addressed the O-line somewhat, but see my post above. None of the "holdover starters" except Williams and Lichtensteiger(at Center) are worth mentioning. Lavuao will merely be a solid starter, while McGlynn is probably pure depth. I too am hoping that some of the young blockers will step up, but it's not certain. We could have signed some of the aforementioned O-linemen and had a great line, but instead we skimped and saved(except for overpaying Lavuao) on the second most important group on the field, and now we're looking at spending that money on a luxury. If this strategy puts W's in the Win-Loss column, I'll be happy; but right now I don't think it's the way to go.

To sum it up: our line will probably be decent next year, but instead of spending money on a luxury WR, we could have spent that money on offensive linemen and had an elite O-line.

Well, either you could do that, or give RG3 the best trio of wide receivers in the league, with Reed at TE as a cherry on top, and a RB that MUST be accounted for. If the scheme change does anything, it should improve the line at least a little bit from last years disaster. If RG3 has a little more time in the pocket with these WR's, I cannot think of a more explosive possibility in a long time. This could really put our offense over the top, but it could also hamstring the hell out of our cap. I don't think there is much room for middle ground for this move in particular. Its either gonna set the world on fire, or fail miserably. I hope its the former.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

Don't know if you're really responding to my post or not, but what I was saying is that I wish we would have signed some of the great FA O-linemen available(Asamoah, Beadles, Collins, Schwartz, Penn; that level of linemen), and not even pursued Jackson.

Yeah, we've addressed the O-line somewhat, but see my post above. None of the "holdover starters" except Williams and Lichtensteiger(at Center) are worth mentioning. Lavuao will merely be a solid starter, while McGlynn is probably pure depth. I too am hoping that some of the young blockers will step up, but it's not certain. We could have signed some of the aforementioned O-linemen and had a great line, but instead we skimped and saved(except for overpaying Lavuao) on the second most important group on the field, and now we're looking at spending that money on a luxury. If this strategy puts W's in the Win-Loss column, I'll be happy; but right now I don't think it's the way to go.

To sum it up: our line will probably be decent next year, but instead of spending money on a luxury WR, we could have spent that money on offensive linemen and had an elite O-line.

More than any other position group, the OL is about fit and chemistry. You threw a bunch of names out there and sure, they are attractive names but unless they all fit the scheme and profile Gruden is looking for, it could very well be wasted money. No team has an 'elite' offensive line anymore because it's not necessary. Have to have a good to very good OL to be successful. Our group can be good.

What grinds my gears around here is the notion that money/draft picks spent on another position was somehow stolen from the offensive line or that we've ignored that position group which is completely false.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

What grinds my gears around here is the notion that money/draft picks spent on another position was somehow stolen from the offensive line or that we've ignored that position group which is completely false.

my gripe for the OL is that they didnt add a solid RT when there seemed to be a few guys avail for 3-5 mil per.

i guess you could put me in the crowd that thinks that if the skins arent going to save some money and transition 11% of the cap into next year, 8 mil per should have been spent on a FS and RT instead of a WR2.

in terms of team needs, FS and RT were my top 2 priorities and they have not been addressed at all.

either way im happy though. d jax or saving cap space will both benefit the team, just in different ways.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

More than any other position group, the OL is about fit and chemistry. You threw a bunch of names out there and sure, they are attractive names but unless they all fit the scheme and profile Gruden is looking for, it could very well be wasted money. No team has an 'elite' offensive line anymore because it's not necessary. Have to have a good to very good OL to be successful. Our group can be good.

What grinds my gears around here is the notion that money/draft picks spent on another position was somehow stolen from the offensive line or that we've ignored that position group which is completely false.

You made some good points there; nice post.

And I'm not one that thinks the FO ignored the O-line, because they obviously didn't, but I guess I just don't like the fact that they're so willing to spend money at WR, but not O-line. It just doesn't seem right. But your points about chemistry and scheme fit are spot on.