Wright and Holdman Reportedly On Their Way Out

Defensewins · 02-23-2007, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Yeah, the signing of Fletcher gives us a great LB situation. In fact the biggest questionmark would have to be Fletcher, and the guy's a proven vet.

My other concern is #99. I am not yet convinced he is an everydown DE. He is not stout agains the run. I think alot of our problems against the run was in part to do with #99.
Gibbs defenses in the 80's & early 90's did alot of situation substitutions with great results.
Guys like DE's Marcus Koch & Todd Liebenstein, DT Darryl Grant and LB Rich Milot played on first down and obvious run plays.
LB Monte Coleman, DT Jumpy Geathers, etc. played on obvious pass plays. We had the personell at DE in 2006 to do a rotation, I am not sure why dictator Williams did not rotate them? I would have used Renaldo Wynn and Phillip Daniels on 1st down and obvious run plays. Andre Carter and Demtric Evans on 3rd and long and obvious pass plays. I know Daniels is usually our sack leader but he is also stout against the run and we had no other DE strong against the run but Daniels and Wynn. So by defalt they are the run stoppers. Obviusly you adjust your pattern depending on who you are playing and theri tendancies. This also keeps everyone fresh.

GTripp0012 · 02-23-2007, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defensewins

My other concern is #99. I am not yet convinced he is an everydown DE. He is tiny. I think alot of our problems against the run was in part to do with #99.

I agree. It's usually not a good idea to have a starter on the defensive line with a glaring weakness against either the run or the pass.

I do think that we can build around his pass rushing skill though.

Defensewins · 02-23-2007, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I agree. It's usually not a good idea to have a starter on the defensive line with a glaring weakness against either the run or the pass.

I do think that we can build around his pass rushing skill though.

I would not use #99 on 1st down against a strong running team. Save him for 3rd and long.

Beemnseven · 02-23-2007, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Bring Rocky off the bench then? Wright wasn't great but letting him go doesn't help (along with Vincent) doesn't help our depth issues in the secondary.

Good point. Vincent and Wright both gone? Springs likely gone? Who does that leave?

I know this had to happen, and it's probably a good thing since none of these guys worked for our secondary. I hope the front office has some good ideas for replacing these guys. Besides Clements, who sounds more and more like a lost cause for the Redskins with every article I read, who else is out there?

Defensewins · 02-23-2007, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Bring Rocky off the bench then? Wright wasn't great but letting him go doesn't help (along with Vincent) doesn't help our depth issues in the secondary.

Rocky off the bench? Not necessarily. Let Rocky and Lemar fight out in trainning camp. You could find their strength and weakness' and sub them according to situation on the field.
I agree with your concern about depth in the secondary. I might have kept Vincent despite his age, the guy was producing. We could have used him as a back up. Wright is not producing.
I think we will keep Springs.

GTripp0012 · 02-23-2007, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defensewins

I would not use #99 on 1st down against a strong running team. Save him for 3rd and long.

I don't think we can afford to use him as a situaitonal pass rushed. We'd be too predictable.

I don't think we should ever have signed him, but now that we have him, we have to use him, at least on most downs.

Manusky91 · 02-23-2007, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theJBexperience

Aside from constantly getting run over and not making tackles.

True, he was too light to make the tackles that our LBs should have made, but at least he wasn't getting beat deep all the time.

gabe1984 · 02-23-2007, 02:23 PM

I just bought a new Holdman jersey, this sucks.

Defensewins · 02-23-2007, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't think we can afford to use him as a situaitonal pass rushed. We'd be too predictable.

I don't think we should ever have signed him, but now that we have him, we have to use him, at least on most downs.

In humble my opinion that is a recipe for failure. Let the front office get the players and let the coaches decide who plays. What a player makes should never influence their playing time and the coaches should not judge them by income. They should earn their PT.
Look at the SS position. in 2006 we had the highest paid SS in the league on the bench and two lesser paid players playing in front of him. That was strictly out of merit. If you start sending the message to the players that you will start because of your high salary, players will get lazy and underperform.

Regarding being to predictable, when an offense is in 3rd and 10 or longer, that is already predictable. If they chance a run they most likely will not make a first down. I like those odds.

EXoffender · 02-23-2007, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defensewins

My other concern is #99. I am not yet convinced he is an everydown DE. He is not stout agains the run. I think alot of our problems against the run was in part to do with #99....

I think I get what you're saying. The makeup of our DL isn't great. Griffin and Golston are both pass-rushinng DTs. We need someone on the DL who demands a double team. Improved play at MLB is also needed.

Alvin#40 · 02-23-2007, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

No big surprise here.

A note on Rocky, I've heard that Lindsey may have been responsible for keeping him off the field last year. Look for him to play a much bigger role this year.

First time I've seen "this year". Crap, I'm getting anxious already!

RMSkins · 02-23-2007, 08:00 PM

This isn't a big surprise although I wouldn't mind keeping Wright as depth.

JGisLordOfTheRings · 02-23-2007, 10:37 PM

letting Wright go was DUMB. Ya, okay, he isnt great and we all know that but WTF! Vincents gone and he was all that either but, the whole ****ing issue last year was depth. Did they not learn a ****ing thing? OBV NOT! So dumb, its not hard. You keep em both on as depth a restructure contracts if nesscessary. This is the kinda shit that makes me SICK!

EARTHQUAKE2689 · 02-24-2007, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

According to The Washington Post, the Redskins are not interested in retaining CB Kenny Wright or LB Warrick Holdman

Complain

yes

02-23-2007, 02:23 PM	#38
gabe1984 Special Teams Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 372	Re: Wright and Holdman Reportedly On Their Way Out I just bought a new Holdman jersey, this sucks. __________________ In the Land of the Blind the man with one eye is king, but today in the Land of the Skunks, THE MAN WITH HALF A NOSE IS KING!!!!!

02-23-2007, 08:00 PM	#42
RMSkins The Starter Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Harrisburg, PA Age: 36 Posts: 1,066	Re: Wright and Holdman Reportedly On Their Way Out This isn't a big surprise although I wouldn't mind keeping Wright as depth.

02-23-2007, 10:37 PM	#43
JGisLordOfTheRings Playmaker Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Richmond VA Age: 38 Posts: 2,583	Re: Wright and Holdman Reportedly On Their Way Out letting Wright go was DUMB. Ya, okay, he isnt great and we all know that but WTF! Vincents gone and he was all that either but, the whole **ing issue last year was depth. Did they not learn a ing thing? OBV NOT! So dumb, its not hard. You keep em both on as depth a restructure contracts if nesscessary. This is the kinda shit that makes me SICK! __________________ The redskins pocket is like my love life.....nonexistent and disappointing. -OnceWeWereKings**

Wright and Holdman Reportedly On Their Way Out

Locker Room Main Forum