Somebody please try to convince me that the FO has a plan.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by GMScud

I just have my fingers crossed big time that Kelly and Thomas don't turn into Rod Gardner and Cliff Russell.

Damn it...me too...way to kill my hopes. LOL.

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

So you're basing this on this year alone that the FO office doesn't have a long term strategy? Ok let's take a look at the team's lack of long term strategy:

- Jason Campbell - drafted by the team, now a good starter
- Chris Cooley - drafted by the team - developed into a damn good player
- Derrick Dockery - drafted by the team - we lost him, but got him back
- Laron Landry - drafted by the team - became a starter almost immediately
- Rocky McIntosh - drafted by the team - became a starter eventually
- Chris Samuels - drafted by the team - Pro Bowl tackle
- Carlos Rogers - drafted by the team - became a solid starter
- Golston & Montgomery - drafted by the team - solid backups
- 2008 Draft Picks
* Kelly/Thomas - potential replacements for our 30something wideouts
* Davis - Can/will become a compliment to our Pro Bowl TE
*Horton - a diamond in the rough who became an immediate starter
*Brennan - potential solid back up, could become a starter some day

While the Redskins have made terrible moves in the past by giving away draft picks in the past, they have drafted and developed players as well. And last year we drafted 5 potential starters, so if that's not "future planning" I don't know what is then.

I think you are seeing thru the b&g glasses. Yes, we have had some good draft picks over the last 5 years. We have some talent. I love some of our picks. We miss on some but so does everyone. We just don't have enough picks. You make a list of our core guys, w/ most i really like but w/ some who haven't done jack. We're talking philosophy not a few good draft picks.

Since you want to compare though lets compare a team or two that i mentioned...

SD: Rivers, sproles, Cromartie, Vincent Jackson, Merriman, Michael Turner (no longer there), good oline, good dline, Gates, Castillo

That was w/out doing research.

We don't have as much talent as you might think. I like our guys too but at this moment we don't have the talent that alot of the upper tier teams do.

Bottom line, building thru the draft is a proven winner. Not building thru the draft is not a proven winner. Until i see otherwise I'll have a problem w/ throwing away draft picks.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by redsk1

I think you are seeing thru the b&g glasses. Yes, we have had some good draft picks over the last 5 years. We have some talent. I love some of our picks. We miss on some but so does everyone. We just don't have enough picks. You make a list of our core guys, w/ most i really like but w/ some who haven't done jack. We're talking philosophy not a few good draft picks.

Since you want to compare though lets compare a team or two that i mentioned...

SD: Rivers, sproles, Cromartie, Vincent Jackson, Merriman, Michael Turner (no longer there), good oline, good dline, Gates, Castillo

That was w/out doing research.

We don't have as much talent as you might think. I like our guys too but at this moment we don't have the talent that alot of the upper tier teams do.

Bottom line, building thru the draft is a proven winner. Not building thru the draft is not a proven winner. Until i see otherwise I'll have a problem w/ throwing away draft picks.

It was pretty obvious that it was w/out research, and I'm thinking it doesn't really prove much. At least I don't understand the point you are trying to prove and how the list you made proves, especially when the list that was written "through B&G glasses" certainly proves that we have used the draft to a certain degree and Ruhskins added a note on each player as to why he is on the list. Maybe you could expand on the one team you listed and say how that disproves Ruhskins point?

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

It was pretty obvious that it was w/out research, and I'm thinking it doesn't really prove much. At least I don't understand the point you are trying to prove and how the list you made proves, especially when the list that was written "through B&G glasses" certainly proves that we have used the draft to a certain degree and Ruhskins added a note on each player as to why he is on the list. Maybe you could expand on the one team you listed and say how that disproves Ruhskins point?

Look just trying to make a point to compare a team that has been successful over the last few years consistently who has gotten there by using the draft wisely vs the skins who haven't been ones to use the draft to the full extent and who have been wasteful w/ picks.

Listen, i like our picks over the last few years. I really think Kelly/Davis/Thomas can do some good things for us soon. We've made some good choices.

Just think what the Skins could be w/ a combination of full drafts plus the ability to get a good FA when necessary. We have all of the assets but we don't have a long term plan.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by redsk1

I think you are seeing thru the b&g glasses. Yes, we have had some good draft picks over the last 5 years. We have some talent. I love some of our picks. We miss on some but so does everyone. We just don't have enough picks. You make a list of our core guys, w/ most i really like but w/ some who haven't done jack. We're talking philosophy not a few good draft picks.

Since you want to compare though lets compare a team or two that i mentioned...

SD: Rivers, sproles, Cromartie, Vincent Jackson, Merriman, Michael Turner (no longer there), good oline, good dline, Gates, Castillo

That was w/out doing research.

We don't have as much talent as you might think. I like our guys too but at this moment we don't have the talent that alot of the upper tier teams do.

Bottom line, building thru the draft is a proven winner. Not building thru the draft is not a proven winner. Until i see otherwise I'll have a problem w/ throwing away draft picks.

What's your point here?

By the way, Vincent Jackson, the late 2nd round pick...had 3 catches his rookie season

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What's your point here?

By the way, Vincent Jackson, the late 2nd round pick...had 3 catches his rookie season

My post was in response to someone saying b/c we have drafted JC, LL, CC, Horton, and others that we have a long term plan. I was simply making a point that we have no long term plan. Just cause we drafted some guys here and there doesn't make it a long term plan.

I also made the point that we don't have as much talent as many think we do.

I think you missed my point.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by redsk1

The FO really doesn't have long term strategy. We have, count them 4 picks in the draft this year. Let's take for example some random top performing, consistent teams in the NFL and determine how many picks they have:

Pitts: 8 1.32, 2.32, 3.32, 4.32, 5.32, 6.32, 7.17 (From TB), 7.32
Indy: 7 1.27, 2.29, 3.28, 4.27, 5.29, 6.28, 7.28
SD: 6 1.16, 3.14, 4.13, 5.12, 6.16, 7.15
Philly: 11 1.21, 1.28 (From CAR), 2.21, 3.21, 4.21, 5.5 (From CLE), 5.17 (From NYJ), 5.21, 6.21, 6.22 (From MIN), 7.21
Tenn: 6 1.30, 2.30, 3.30, 4.30, 6.30, 7.30
NE: 1.23, 2.2 (From KC), 2.15 (From SD), 2.26, 3.25, 4.24, 5.23, 6.26, 7.26

We have the lowest amount of picks in the NFL at 4. NO has 4 too. Cleveland has 5. You may say we have a different philosophy. Until I see our team as a consistent winner under said philosophy I will tell you it doesn't work. When we start being a consistently good team, i'll change my tune.

What else is there to say? We have some good talent but also have more gaps than draft picks.

The only draft pick we're really missing from this years draft that is the result of a questionable move is the 2nd for Taylor. If Taylor had performed as most expected he would have, he would have been well worth the pick.

We lost our 4th rounder because we traded for Kendall 2 years ago - trading a 4th round pick, two years in advance, for a consistent starter and a guy who was the 2nd best lineman on the team for 2 years was a solid move.

Trading our 7th round pick for James last year was an extremely good move as well. getting a young former first round DE for a 7th round pick was a low risk/high reward move that just didnt work out. ,most of the time, guys drafted in the 5th-7th rounds dont make active rosters and fairly often, they dont even make practice squads.

You criticize the FO and say they dont have a plan because we only have 4 picks this year - well we had 10 picks last year. Save Philly, thats more than any of the teams you mention have this year. Having draft picks doesnt mean anything - its how a team uses them. We did an excellent job in the draft last year (we didnt need starters, we needed backups, special teamers, and future starters). Morocco Brown is by all appearances extremely adept at finding "hidden gems" in the lower rounds and in undrafted players - look at how many of our undrafted practice squad players were signed to other teams active rosters last year for proof. I'm confident we'll select good players this year too.

One final thing - overall, theres little difference in talent in players drafted in the 4th round and guys who are undrafted free agents anyways. We have 2 picks in rounds 1-3 and theres a very good chance we can trade down and turn that into 3 or 4 picks. What we do in those rounds will have the most significant impact on the team in 2009. Round 4-undrafted free agents is usually just practice squad/training camp material, so our only having picks in the 5th and 6th rounds shouldnt hurt us much at all.

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

The only draft pick we're really missing from this years draft that is the result of a questionable move is the 2nd for Taylor. If Taylor had performed as most expected he would have, he would have been well worth the pick.

We lost our 4th rounder because we traded for Kendall 2 years ago - trading a 4th round pick, two years in advance, for a consistent starter and a guy who was the 2nd best lineman on the team for 2 years was a solid move.

Trading our 7th round pick for James last year was an extremely good move as well. getting a young former first round DE for a 7th round pick was a low risk/high reward move that just didnt work out. ,most of the time, guys drafted in the 5th-7th rounds dont make active rosters and fairly often, they dont even make practice squads.

You criticize the FO and say they dont have a plan because we only have 4 picks this year - well we had 10 picks last year. Save Philly, thats more than any of the teams you mention have this year. Having draft picks doesnt mean anything - its how a team uses them. We did an excellent job in the draft last year (we didnt need starters, we needed backups, special teamers, and future starters). Morocco Brown is by all appearances extremely adept at finding "hidden gems" in the lower rounds and in undrafted players - look at how many of our undrafted practice squad players were signed to other teams active rosters last year for proof. I'm confident we'll select good players this year too.

One final thing - overall, theres little difference in talent in players drafted in the 4th round and guys who are undrafted free agents anyways. We have 2 picks in rounds 1-3 and theres a very good chance we can trade down and turn that into 3 or 4 picks. What we do in those rounds will have the most significant impact on the team in 2009. Round 4-undrafted free agents is usually just practice squad/training camp material, so our only having picks in the 5th and 6th rounds shouldnt hurt us much at all.

My example was this years draft but the FO has had a long experience of not using the draft to build a team. I bet you if I researched who has had the most picks in the last 5 years we would find the consistently good teams.

I'm not saying that just b/c you have alot of picks automatically means you are going to be successful. I'm just saying our history of not using the draft has produced what? Mediocre football. Holes, gaps, and aging players.

Hey, i'm not saying you should ever trade draft picks. It makes sense sometimes. However we've been less than frugal over DS's tenure w/ the draft.

Yes, we had 10 picks last year. That was great, but again if i do the research we probably have had the fewest picks in the NFL over the last 5-10 years.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by redsk1

My example was this years draft but the FO has had a long experience of not using the draft to build a team. I bet you if I researched who has had the most picks in the last 5 years we would find the consistently good teams.

I'm not saying that just b/c you have alot of picks automatically means you are going to be successful. I'm just saying our history of not using the draft has produced what? Mediocre football. Holes, gaps, and aging players.

Hey, i'm not saying you should ever trade draft picks. It makes sense sometimes. However we've been less than frugal over DS's tenure w/ the draft.

Yes, we had 10 picks last year. That was great, but again if i do the research we probably have had the fewest picks in the NFL over the last 5-10 years.

Last year marked a new beginning for our team. Looking at the past 5 years is not an accurate picture to look at a team unless the front office structure and philosophy has remained the same for that time period. Before last year, the prior 4 years were spent in an effort to build a team that could "win now." We traded draft picks and mortgaged the future becuase Joe Gibbs had a limited window to work with to reach the superbowl. Gibbs failed.

After Gibbs retired, the plan had to change. Because of all the moves we made during Gibbs tenure, we were left with a pretty big hole to dig our way out of: Lots of old, declining players with cap figures making them uncuttable and a lack of draft picks. Its going to take time to dig out of that hole and start building for long-term sucess.

Last year we had all our starting players coming back, so we cut our older depth players, and replaced them with younger depth players in the draft. As it stands right now, we had 10 draft picks last year and we have 4 this year. So our two-year average for draft picks is currently sitting at 7. Theres a very good chance we trade down for more picks, so that average can be pushed up further.

This offseason, we've already cut every major older veteran that could be cut and replaced them with younger, promising players. We declined to resign a 30year old average Defensive lineman and weve declined to replace Washington by signing a mediocre talent to a long-term contract. We have a need at right tackle, but we declined to sign mediocre-talented RTs. This franchise is being smart and not committing money to unproven, average players. The only three major needs the team has right now on offense and defense are RT, RDE and SLB. We still have the draft and we have the 13th overall pick. That means we will fill one of those vacancies with a star player immediately or trade down and fill two or three of those vacancies with guys who can be solid players. By all accounts, Kareem Moore, Chris Horton, Devin Thomas, Malcom Kelly, and especially Fred Davis, and maybe even Rob Jackson will contribute significantly on offense and defense this year. Tryon is getting really good at special teams. Brennan should suprlant Collins as #2 QB in the next year or two.

Next year will be uncapped so we'll be able to cut older guys like Randy Thomas and hopefully guys like Rinehart will be ready by then. If not, we've got 6 picks already and we should get a Comp pick for Evans. If Daniels and Washington sign with other teams, we may get comp picks for them as well. If we're not one of the top 8 teams in the NFL in 2009, we'll also be able to sign as many FAs as we want without having to worry about the cap.

I am generally a very skeptical person, but everything this franchise is doing shows me its moving in the right direction. This franchise dug itself into a hole that got even worse when Joe Gibbs was here. We "went all in" for Gibbs and the gamble failed. its going to take time to dig ourselves out of it. We just need to show some patience.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

I am one frustrated Redskins fan. Here's what I see.

We've gone back to the same bad habits that have cost us draft picks and cap space and that I believe will surely doom us to continued mediocrity. The Jason Taylor fiasco, another of our customary panic moves, cost us dearly in draft picks. Albert Haynesworth, as great as he is, represents a whopping chunk of our cap space which seems to have precluded our making other FA moves.

Meanwhile, we have holes to fill - big holes. We need a RT, a SLB, a RDE, OL backups, a Kicker, a Punter, a PR, and maybe more. Right now, it looks like we might bring back Daniels and Washington. That's nice, but, at this point in their careers they're only stop-gap solutions.

Even with Haynesworth, this doesn't look to me like a team that is poised to make a playoff run in the tough NFC East. Sure, I wanted Haynesworth, but what do I know? I'm just a dumb fan who loves to watch great football players do their thing in B&G. I don't need to have a plan. But shouldn't the FO have one? If they do, I just can't see it.

If you can detect a plan in all this, clue me in. Also, what do you think the plan should be?

I'm bored today, so I will try (even though I am not a huge Vinny or Danny fan) to convince you that there may be a plan.

Exhibit A: Get younger. Since the start of free agency, the Redskins have released or not retained 35 year old Pete Kendall, 32 year old Marcus Washington, 36 year old Phillip Daniels, 34 year old Jason Taylor and 33 year old Shawn Springs. While Washington, Daniels and Taylor haven't been replaced (yet) chances are we will draft a replacement in the 1st round of the draft. We got 7 years younger at LG with Dockery and 8 years younger at CB with Hall. If we draft DE/OLB at #13, which we absolutely should, that's a significant age difference too. Also, if Heyer gets the start at RT, he's at least 9 years younger than Jansen.

Exhibit B: Build through the draft. I know this is funny to some Redskins fans, but building thru the draft is a long term strategy, not to bear immediate results. Do you want to know why our rookies played like rookies last year? Because they were rookies! If after 3 years, if they mirror '08 production then call them busts. We had 10 draft picks last year, 9 made the team. Yeah the Taylor trade cost us 2 picks but the same people bitching about that now were celebrating the possibilities when we made the trade. Sometimes trades don't work out. Show me a team that's 100% in their trading history.

Exhibit C: Not the 'same old Redskins'. Yep, we spent a ton of money in the first 3 days of free agency. Yep, we got the biggest fish in the pond. Like John Clayton said, since when is adding the best defensive player in the league a negative thing? The media and some fans that just parrot what they hear bemoaned all the money spent on Haynesworth, Hall and Dockery. So we go out and get the best DL in the game. We retain a 25 year old Pro Bowl CB and re-acquire a LG that fills 2 needs (getting younger and more athletic on the OL). Again, tell me how that's a negative. The 'same old Redskins' would have signed Haynesworth, traded this year's #1 and next year's #3 for Julius Peppers, signed Terrell Owens and would be trying to trade for Jay Cutler. That's the 'same old Redskins.'

Do we have a plan? It seems like we do. Will it work? Who knows but rather than listening to the 'same old Redskins detractors' look at the evidence with non biased eyes and decide for yourself.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

The 'same old Redskins' would have signed Haynesworth, traded this year's #1 and next year's #3 for Julius Peppers, signed Terrell Owens and would be trying to trade for Jay Cutler. That's the 'same old Redskins.'

Sorry, Paintrain. The Devil made me do it.

[BDBohnzie]

The free agent acquisition comparison between 2000 and 2009 is getting quite old.

In 2000, Snyder went for broke and signed Sanders, Smith, Carrier and George, respected veterans (well, George maybe not) who were definitely on the down slope of their careers. Carrier and Sanders lasted a season, George 2 games into his 2nd, and Smith lasted 4 years. It was Super Bowl or Bust in 2000, and it fell flat on their faces.

Fast forward to 2009. BHA pretty much sums the portfolio up in his post, but these guys are nowhere near the Georges and Sanderses that Snyder blew money on 9 years ago. The Skins are finally learning from their experience and doing what they can to fill the holes.

And while the Taylor situation is very questionable, I honestly think it will work out in the end. It opened up cap room and allowed the Skins to spread his 8+ million around to more than one player.

Do I have complete faith in the FO? Not really. However, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt.

[CRedskinsRule]

I believe part of the plan is to not let on that there is a plan, thereby confusing the opposition and rendering all their plans moot. Thus the lack of known plan leads directly to the lack of a need for a real plan, hence the best laid plan is no plan at all.

Originally Posted by BA

Aw, Hannibal, is this one of your plans supposed to go down 1, 2, 3? You always forget 4, 5, and 6.

Murdock: Just think, if we get a pardon, we may never have to eat a nuckle sandwich again.
BA: I wouldn't bet on it crazy man! Looks like Hannibal is on the jazz again.
Murdock: No, you tell me, right now you tell me, right in my face you tell me, that you don't have a plan!
Hannibal: Well, I... I was thinking like Berny and George, what are we gonna do, when this thing's over? I mean what are we really qualified to do?
Face: Go after thugs in a park...
Hannibal: And outlawed motorcycle gangs, organized crime figures, why there's a world of slime balls out there.
Murdock: I knew it! I just knew you had a plan!
Hannibal: Comforting, isn't it.
BA: I'll get the van!

Originally Posted by Hannibal

I love it when a plan comes together.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Great post Smoot. It seems alot of people arent happy no matter what the Redskins front office does. We've been hit or miss for many years but lately, we've been hitting alot more than we've been missing. The FO has shown improvement. The FO is showing patience. We appear to be moving in the right direction.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Great post Smoot. It seems alot of people arent happy no matter what the Redskins front office does. We've been hit or miss for many years but lately, we've been hitting alot more than we've been missing. The FO has shown improvement. The FO is showing patience. We appear to be moving in the right direction.

I can dig it.