Warrick Holdman

JankySpanky80 · 04-18-2006, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Our pro bowler is Marcus Washington. The SLB spot doesn't have to be as good as it was when Lavar played. As an offense, it's impossible to pick on a single linebacker spot. You can run at a weak defensive end. You can throw at a weak corner. But offensively, there's no way to isolate a weak LB, in the run game at least. The system should account for the back out of backfield plays.

I know Washington is our pro bowler. What i was saying was bringing in another probowler. (which arrington is the only one left on the free agent market), but that would be stupid. I understand the SLB doesn't have to be that good. I was basically stating that someone will step up and everyone should really stop bashing this position. Holdman probably had an off year and learning a new system doesn't help. He probably should of signed with 2 years ago before he signed with Clevland. He would of been in alot better shape than he is now. After Holdman we are left with 3 guys who are unproven in the nfl to play that position. Somebody will step up and make plays. That is all i was basically saying.and people will still fear playing the Washington Defense.

GoSkins! · 04-18-2006, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JankySpanky80

i was just throwing it out there, but i don't think it will happen and i don't want it to happen.

Sorry, I didn't see that you were a new guy. Search "Question 3". My post was just a bit of a joke...

RedskinPete · 04-19-2006, 12:44 AM

I thought Holdman had a so so season but Arrington was not much better. If you throw in what both were getting payed Arrington should have been the best D player in 05 but he wasn't. With a year under his belt I hope he will get his act together! I can see now that the 2nd round pick will be a CB,OL or a DL not a LB!

GTripp0012 · 04-19-2006, 01:21 AM

My best guess at the 2nd round pick (252 hours before the draft):

1. Linebacker
2. Offensive Line
3. Tight End
4. Defensive Tackle
5. Safety

724Skinsfan · 04-19-2006, 10:26 AM

Since he apparently signed for the vet minimum I think it was an okay move. To me there were times where he seemed so slow getting to the ball. Hopefully he'll produce when called upon. Still not overly optimistic about his production but we'll see.

memphisskin · 04-19-2006, 11:26 AM

Yeah, Holdman didn't make many spectacular plays but that's what Washington is for. For the vet minimum, we couldn't have done any better, especially since he's familiar with the scheme and played pretty good last year. Solid but not spectacular, he just fits and plays hard. And I think our d did pretty good with him in there last year for LA.

That Guy · 04-19-2006, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

My best guess at the 2nd round pick (252 hours before the draft):

1. Linebacker
2. Offensive Line
3. Tight End
4. Defensive Tackle
5. Safety

my guess (on what they'll do, not what i'd do) would be:

1. LB
2. CB
3. TE
4. OL
5. other

they've brought in a lot of high LBs and a few high CBs, one high TE and that's it so far... well, besides the scrubs.

Schneed10 · 04-19-2006, 12:12 PM

I'd still grab a good CB if we get a shot at one. I've harped on this a lot, but I still think we're best suited by taking Springs' eventual replacement if a talented guy is on the board at #53.

JoeRedskin · 04-19-2006, 12:23 PM

I think their signings have really positioned themselves well. They can grab the best cb, lb, or dl available. I think that between clemons/ mccune/ holdman, a starter or solid platoon will emerge. Really, other than the WLB spot, we are just choosing for depth.

MTK · 04-19-2006, 12:28 PM

I'd have no problem going with a CB at #53, guess it all depends on who's available there.

I still think LB is the more immediate need and we're leaning that way just from the talk coming out of Redskins Park.

That Guy · 04-19-2006, 12:44 PM

they've brought in:
LB: D'Qwell, T Howard, D Ryans, ?? (think i'm forgetting someone)
CB: A Cromartie, K Jennings, G Mcpherson (3rd round guy)
TE: Fasano

If they could trade down and get jon alston (smart/fast LB) and G Mcpherson (fast CB), I'd be pretty happy with that. getting a top tier OG would be great too.

jermus22 · 04-19-2006, 02:04 PM

Although Holdman was by no means great last year, his re-signing provides tremendous flexibility for the draft. We now at least have a veteran presence with starter capability, and if he shows significant improvement, we might even move Marshall back outside and have Holdman in the middle. With Clemons and Campbell in relief, McCune can effectively be groomed for the future.
LB is no longer a pressing need; we can concentrate on adding depth at any of the following positions: CB, S, TE, OT, LB, or DT. And we can also look at potential candidates to challenge for K and P. I think the Holdman signing as clearly added to our options.

jermus22 · 04-19-2006, 02:06 PM

Something else to consider (I'll probably draw a lot of fire for this): we might be able to trade down for a later second round pick or even into the third round to increase our prospects for next year's draft. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it's just a thought. We are in fairly good shape with the team we have now, but I doubt our management wants to trade down any further.

04-19-2006, 12:44 AM	#48
RedskinPete The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Camino,Ca Posts: 1,174	Re: Warrick Holdman I thought Holdman had a so so season but Arrington was not much better. If you throw in what both were getting payed Arrington should have been the best D player in 05 but he wasn't. With a year under his belt I hope he will get his act together! I can see now that the 2nd round pick will be a CB,OL or a DL not a LB!

04-19-2006, 01:21 AM	#49
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Evanston, IL Age: 36 Posts: 15,994	Re: Warrick Holdman My best guess at the 2nd round pick (252 hours before the draft): 1. Linebacker 2. Offensive Line 3. Tight End 4. Defensive Tackle 5. Safety __________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

04-19-2006, 10:26 AM	#50
724Skinsfan Playmaker Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 3,508	Re: Warrick Holdman Since he apparently signed for the vet minimum I think it was an okay move. To me there were times where he seemed so slow getting to the ball. Hopefully he'll produce when called upon. Still not overly optimistic about his production but we'll see. __________________ "I hope I'm getting better. I hope you haven't seen my best." - Jim Zorn

04-19-2006, 11:26 AM	#51
memphisskin Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Nashville, TN Age: 53 Posts: 960	Re: Warrick Holdman Yeah, Holdman didn't make many spectacular plays but that's what Washington is for. For the vet minimum, we couldn't have done any better, especially since he's familiar with the scheme and played pretty good last year. Solid but not spectacular, he just fits and plays hard. And I think our d did pretty good with him in there last year for LA.

04-19-2006, 12:23 PM	#54
JoeRedskin Contains football related knowledge Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Second Star On The Right Age: 62 Posts: 10,401	Re: Warrick Holdman I think their signings have really positioned themselves well. They can grab the best cb, lb, or dl available. I think that between clemons/ mccune/ holdman, a starter or solid platoon will emerge. Really, other than the WLB spot, we are just choosing for depth. __________________ Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go.

04-19-2006, 12:12 PM	#53
Schneed10 A Dude Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 45 Posts: 12,426	Re: Warrick Holdman I'd still grab a good CB if we get a shot at one. I've harped on this a lot, but I still think we're best suited by taking Springs' eventual replacement if a talented guy is on the board at #53. __________________ God made certain people to play football. He was one of them.

04-19-2006, 12:28 PM	#55
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,569	Re: Warrick Holdman I'd have no problem going with a CB at #53, guess it all depends on who's available there. I still think LB is the more immediate need and we're leaning that way just from the talk coming out of Redskins Park.

04-19-2006, 12:44 PM	#56
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,553	Re: Warrick Holdman they've brought in: LB: D'Qwell, T Howard, D Ryans, ?? (think i'm forgetting someone) CB: A Cromartie, K Jennings, G Mcpherson (3rd round guy) TE: Fasano If they could trade down and get jon alston (smart/fast LB) and G Mcpherson (fast CB), I'd be pretty happy with that. getting a top tier OG would be great too.

04-19-2006, 02:04 PM	#57
jermus22 Special Teams Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Frankfort, KY Age: 42 Posts: 336	Re: Warrick Holdman Although Holdman was by no means great last year, his re-signing provides tremendous flexibility for the draft. We now at least have a veteran presence with starter capability, and if he shows significant improvement, we might even move Marshall back outside and have Holdman in the middle. With Clemons and Campbell in relief, McCune can effectively be groomed for the future. LB is no longer a pressing need; we can concentrate on adding depth at any of the following positions: CB, S, TE, OT, LB, or DT. And we can also look at potential candidates to challenge for K and P. I think the Holdman signing as clearly added to our options. __________________ Win it in the trenches.

04-19-2006, 02:06 PM	#58
jermus22 Special Teams Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Frankfort, KY Age: 42 Posts: 336	Re: Warrick Holdman Something else to consider (I'll probably draw a lot of fire for this): we might be able to trade down for a later second round pick or even into the third round to increase our prospects for next year's draft. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it's just a thought. We are in fairly good shape with the team we have now, but I doubt our management wants to trade down any further. __________________ Win it in the trenches.

Warrick Holdman

Locker Room Main Forum