Do you think WADE will be our starting LG?

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Yeah but those morons clearly don't know how to put together a decent offensive line. You have to wonder how much Wade was affected by the crappy offensive line coaching and the crappy teammates he had around him.

Before he got to Houston, he definitely had to be doing something right to earn a $30 million contract. And that was 2004 dollars.

I think he's a solid player, but the Texans' staff under Capers just had no effing clue about offensive line play.

I agree....One man does not make or break an offensive line. The Texan's O-line was not very good overall, and one man could not be their salvation. Wade is a very solid player who had enjoyed a good career until he was injured. If he can make the transition, which I think he will, our line will not be any worse off.

[FRPLG]

I agree with dmek. I can;t see us paying him that money to be a backup. I am guessing we are comfortable with him at guard and only will mak a move if there is a better option. I happen to think if he stays healthy he will be an overall upgrade over Dock.

[GTripp0012]

I think he is going to be the starting left guard.

Ryan Tucker is good depth, but I would still like to have Tucker and Wade play one tackle each and spend their offseason playing exclusively on one side so that they can balance their weight properly in preperation to be called upon.

RT and LT is very similar to 2B and SS in baseball from what I understand. In the words of Mike Zimmer "both positions are fundamentally similar, but I was a career SS, and when I moved to second base, it felt like I was playing on one leg."

I'd rather have Tucker specialize at LT, Wade at RT, and go out and find a guard. But if you have to have somebody play the interior, Wade's probably the best lineman we have for the job right now.

[jbcjr14]

I think Wade will be the starting guard. He is a big guy and moves better than Doc in space which will be a big plus. The only way I don't see him starting is if we land a free agent guard before the season starts.

[Schneed10]

At this point I'd have to say it's Wade. His height bothers me at that position though. A DT with a strong base and a low center of gravity is going to get leverage on him. Wade's a good athlete, so maybe he can pull it off, but it could be tricky.

Ideally we'd get a G in the 2nd or 3rd round (after trading down) and he could come in and light it up. But that might be wishful thinking. Wade can probably be solid; if anything, he has the mobility that Saunders loves to employ on running plays to the edge.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Ideally we'd get a G in the 2nd or 3rd round (after trading down) and he could come in and light it up. But that might be wishful thinking. Wade can probably be solid; if anything, he has the mobility that Saunders loves to employ on running plays to the edge.

The recurring question is, would it be worth trading down to address other needs if it means losing one of the top draftees available for the D-line?

[#56fanatic]

i believe Wade is a strong candidate to replace Dock. However, someone mentioned it earlier, he is taller than most guards and could get bull rushed by squatier DT's. however, his size and strength will be good in the run game when he is pulling and moving out on sweeps or screens. I trust Buges will get this guy ready to play a new position.

[MTK]

Wade will need to work on his leverage as Buges has already pointed out, but he's only 2 inches taller than Dockery so it's not unheard of for taller guards to be successful.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Wade will need to work on his leverage as Buges has already pointed out, but he's only 2 inches taller than Dockery so it's not unheard of for taller guards to be successful.

Yeah I should clarify myself. Wade is taller, but the key is his center of gravity is so much higher. If you look at Dock, his (ahem) ample midsection and tank-ass helped keep his center of gravity lower to the ground. That's why he was an effective drive-blocker in the run game. He was strong, big, and he stayed low.

Wade is taller and doesn't have the same midsection and ass (I'm feeling a little light in the loafers writing this). He carries a lot of his bulk in his shoulders.

But really, this just means that Wade will be more of a mobile G than Dockery was. Wade's probably not going to be good at lining up and drive-blocking around the goalline or on short yardage. Well maybe he can overcome the center of gravity issue, I dunno, but it will be a challenge for him. But I think he'll be good at pulling and getting out on the edge and lead-blocking on sweeps and whatnot. So that's probably a good thing really, because that's how Saunders likes to run the ball.

As long as the coaches adjust the schemes to take advantage of Wade's skills and don't ask him to do what Dockery was good at, then it'll probably work out decently for us.

[EXoffender]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

As long as the coaches adjust the schemes to take advantage of Wade's skills and don't ask him to do what Dockery was good at, then it'll probably work out decently for us.

Uh yeah. The same way we used Archuleta to his strengths.

[MTK]

Good post Schneed, I agree with what you're saying.

[GoSkins!]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Good post Schneed, I agree with what you're saying.

I agree too, but I would like for anyone who still has the game to go back and look at the first 3rd and 1/2 a yard of the game for the skins. That is a perfect example of just what Dockery was supposedly good at. After watching that, please tell me your thoughts...

[EEich]

Piller is in house for discussions, isn't he?

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by EEich

Piller is in house for discussions, isn't he?

Yep, Piller's in the house for a look. Piller Visits Redskins Park

[MTK]

Yeah it's not like Houston is known for their outstanding offensive lines, that's for sure.