Maske/JLC: Gibbs Hints Redskins Might Trade Up

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by skinsfan242

Can we please get some perspective on this whole thing? Here is what i think is going on. We don't want to stay at the 6th pick period. We haven't found anyone we like there. We like C.J. and he won't be there. So we discussed possibilities with teams because that is what you do. Gibbs has said he has discussed with three teams, two moving up, 1 moving down. They have also discussed the Briggs deal. What does all this tell you. NOTHING. Gibbs said he like a couple players high in the draft, not because he really does, but because he wants to leave the impression they don't just like C.J. He said he has offers so other teams will sweeten their offers. Although they actually offered the 6th for Briggs and the 31st, is it really a bad deal? You have to pay the 6th pick alot of money and he doesn't think anyone there is worth that money. So why not get a 26 year old proven commodity, at a position of weakness. Whether you like it or not, teams know to run to that side because our LB over there stinks, they don't run at Washington, and when Lavar was there they couldn't run there either. Our Dline is a year removed from being really good. At the 31st pick, we are saying we can get a DE in which the drop-off may not be that bad. Plus he will have something to prove.
In my opinion i like what they are doing.
I also like the trade we proposed, if we were to get anything less it would be bad. Would you Rather have Briggs AND Crowder or T. Tyler, or just Amobi.
On a side note, NO WAY IN THE WORLD BETTS IS TRADED, if there is one thing Gibbs loves, it is running the Football, and he knows what Portis and Betts can do togeather.

Paragraph indentations are a wonderful thing my friend. I suggest you look into them.

As far as G-Tripps first long post goes... I really tend to agree with a lot of what you're saying. Granted, your making several assumptions... (That guy pointed to the colts as a retort)... But I think in this style of offense your thinking is on the right track.


Essentially here is what I understood what you were basically saying: In any run based offense where you don't have an MVP at QB, maxamizing your options won't necessarily maximize your success, especially when it comes from neglecting greater needs.

Here is a case where we failed to grasp an immense play-book last season, and all signs probably point to a simplified version this year. Why add more, when if we execute the basic run-first oriented offense, the receivers will be open.

The last thing we need is 3-4 receiver sets where we give ourselves away to the pass. Remember how well the play actions started working last year? It will be finesse once Saunders and Co. begin to master the simple timing of there simple offense, ... once this happens, the final 650 pages begin to unfold and the gadgetry will work. Here's to justified optimism in 07.

Practically same OL, same running backs, same QB, same receivers, same coaches... let's draft a damn d-lineman and forget about our offense for the time being.