Randy Thomas placed on IR

[freddyg12]

Redskins Insider

too bad he couldn't make it back

[BDBohnzie]

That's a shame...but it's for the best, and it gets another veteran OL back into the mix.

[MTK]

Losing Thomas really hurt the running game this season. You really have to wonder what could have been had our OL been intact and healthy all year.

[GoSkins!]

That sucks.

[Redskin Warrior]

I wonder who they will sign putting him on IR obviously was a move to make more room for the roster.

[skinsWill]

yeah was really hoping he would come back and contribute for the playoff push

[skinsWill]

Originally Posted by Redskin Warrior

I wonder who they will sign putting him on IR obviously was a move to make more room for the roster.

Rick DeMulling

[firstdown]

He was just on the radio and really thought going into the game against the Bears that he was ready to play. He said that he had regained most of his strength before the injuy occured. When he started the game he found that holding off the big D linemen that his arm started giving him trouble so he came out of the game. He met with the coaching staff and they just decided it was better to put him on IR.

[FRPLG]

Gotta give them all props for the way the handled this. They gave it a shot and it didn't work out but they tried. At least it isn't a "loss" at this point. We haven't had him all year.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Losing Thomas really hurt the running game this season. You really have to wonder what could have been had our OL been intact and healthy all year.

First, props to Randy for trying. He is one of my favorites and I hope he comes back strong next year.

Second - given the age of our line, I think that any expectation that it would be "intact and healthy" all year would be unreasonable.

IMHO - To expect success from our line this year, the staff needed to have quality depth (not pro bowl depth, but solid starter depth) to cover for at least two long term injuries. I do not believe it did. It brought in retreads who have no future here and expected a committment to exellence from them. As has been shown, not gonna happen.

I am not sure whether the problem lays in talent aquisition (i.e. - we want a player but haven't been able to get him), the inability to coach'em up (we got someone with talent but just can't get them up to snuff), or the inability to judge ability (we thought he had talent but, instead, he's just a turnstile with legs). For whatever reason, we have had a number of young lineman through and none have stuck.

I keep harping on it, we have not developed good talent to back up our quality starters. As such, the O-line is and will be (for the forseeable future) the main thing holding this team back. It is unconscienable that THIS staff - which built championships founded in solid line play - failed on this fundamental aspect.

[MTK]

I dunno, I think it's tough to expect two long term injuries along the line and have enough starting quality depth for that. And I think under the circumstances Fabini, Wade, and Heyer have filled in admirably. There's almost always going to be a dropoff in production when going from a starting OL to a backup, and when you have two key guys out, that only compounds the issue.

If we had managed to pull out some of those very winnable close games and were sitting at 8-5 right now I doubt we would be hearing many complaints regarding the OL depth.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

First, props to Randy for trying. He is one of my favorites and I hope he comes back strong next year.

Second - given the age of our line, I think that any expectation that it would be "intact and healthy" all year would be unreasonable.

IMHO - To expect success from our line this year, the staff needed to have quality depth (not pro bowl depth, but solid starter depth) to cover for at least two long term injuries. I do not believe it did. It brought in retreads who have no future here and expected a committment to exellence from them. As has been shown, not gonna happen.

I am not sure whether the problem lays in talent aquisition (i.e. - we want a player but haven't been able to get him), the inability to coach'em up (we got someone with talent but just can't get them up to snuff), or the inability to judge ability (we thought he had talent but, instead, he's just a turnstile with legs). For whatever reason, we have had a number of young lineman through and none have stuck.

I keep harping on it, we have not developed good talent to back up our quality starters. As such, the O-line is and will be (for the forseeable future) the main thing holding this team back. It is unconscienable that THIS staff - which built championships founded in solid line play - failed on this fundamental aspect.

I'll agree w/ you on virtually all points, but I think given the circumstance that you have to give the front office & coaching staff credit for how they handled the o line THIS year. Of course, some of the poor personel decisions that led to dead cap space impacted our ability to get quality depth. In addition, if we'd have been able to sign dock before he hit the market, it would've helped too.

Yet, they were able to make the deal for Kendall & sign a couple vets, plus they've developed Heyer. That's all they could do given the cap situation.

They could've drafted an o-linemen instead of Palmer, Sartz or Blades, but maybe they thought none of the players available by then would make the team over a free agent vet. Go back to the 04 draft; Gibbs drafted Wilson & Molinaro in the 5th & 6th rounds. Good idea, bad outcome. Neither player is still w/the team. If at least one of those guys had developed it could've been a big help.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I dunno, I think it's tough to expect two long term injuries along the line and have enough starting quality depth for that. And I think under the circumstances Fabini, Wade, and Heyer have filled in admirably. There's almost always going to be a dropoff in production when going from a starting OL to a backup, and when you have two key guys out, that only compounds the issue.

If we had managed to pull out some of those very winnable close games and were sitting at 8-5 right now I doubt we would be hearing many complaints regarding the OL depth.

My point is that with the age and injury history of this particular line, it is not unreasonable to expect two (or even three) long term injuries. Maybe not season enders but ones that require a shuffling. Samuels has a history of injury, Jansen (though playing through stuff) has been injured on an off for a couple of years, same with RT and Rabach. As you get older, you get more brittle - particularly in a place as nasty as the O-line (I'm a former lineman, for play to play contact it is the most physically demanding position).

You say if we pull out close games - no bitching, fair enough. But we lost a couple of those games due to poor line-play. (4th and a foot anyone?). So my response is: where is the talent to step in and get me that extra yard, cause if we had had that than we ARE 8-5 right now.

I understand it is difficult to maintain depth, and I agree that Kendall and Heyer seem like good pickups in the short term (hopefully long term for Heyer). Fabini not so much, Wade I give a pass b/c everyone seemed to like him and say he was better than Jansen. I thought going in that tackle would be okay, but (and this is a big but) we had nothing for the interior (we still dont).

Ask yourself this, going into the season who was going to be the left tackle if
Samuels went done? No plan as far as I can tell. Clearly, we had an "experiment" in Wade to replace Dock. Not a lot of long term planning on the line.

My only real point is that this is an old line - a quality line when fully healthy -and that has to be a consideration when looking at who to aquire and what positions to fill.

blah blah blah - just preaching to the choir I know.

[Bill B]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

I'll agree w/ you on virtually all points, but I think given the circumstance that you have to give the front office & coaching staff credit for how they handled the o line THIS year. Of course, some of the poor personel decisions that led to dead cap space impacted our ability to get quality depth. In addition, if we'd have been able to sign dock before he hit the market, it would've helped too.

Yet, they were able to make the deal for Kendall & sign a couple vets, plus they've developed Heyer. That's all they could do given the cap situation.

They could've drafted an o-linemen instead of Palmer, Sartz or Blades, but maybe they thought none of the players available by then would make the team over a free agent vet. Go back to the 04 draft; Gibbs drafted Wilson & Molinaro in the 5th & 6th rounds. Good idea, bad outcome. Neither player is still w/the team. If at least one of those guys had developed it could've been a big help.

Freddy - you hit it with the misses on Wilson and Molinaro - I thought one of those guys would pull through just on athletic ability but it didn't happen. Also, when I watch the draft it drives me crazy when the Skins make a selection and they don't address a huge need but picked the best player they thought at the time was available. I know that sometimes you can't fill all your needs at draft time, but when the Skins needed a offensive lineman and picked Palmer, Sartz and Blades like you mentioned I was diappointed (although I think Blades was a steal). Maybe the Skins can luck out and pick up some lineman next draft - just no more trading picks away (unless it is to trade down and get additional picks!).

[freddyg12]

Since Gibbs' arrival, the team does seem to acquire positions in bunches; draft 2 o-linemen, get 2 free agent wr's, draft 3 LBs.

I think it's obvious to everyone that O line has to be worth at least 2 draft picks this draft, and maybe that's even 2 first day picks.