Redskins Cut Jon Jansen

[PulpExposure]

The proof will be on the record this year. You say this was a GREAT MOVE for all kinds of reasons. I say it was CRAP not only releasing JJ but having no real answer to the OL situation overall and the RT position in particular.

If you are right I will eat crow. But if I am RIGHT you and a few other posters, the apologists, will have to swallow it rather raw.

So let me see if I understand what you're saying here.

If the Redskins' offensive line isn't any good this year at the RT spot, you were right, and the Redskins should have kept Jansen? Even when he was by far the weakest lineman on the team last year?

Even when the only position Jansen would play was backup at center and guard?

I'm not sure I understand your position, because you're now conflating 2 issues: the Redskins not having picked up someone in the draft (although whom would you have gotten?), or in free agency (again, whom would you have gotten), with releasing Jansen. Can you elaborate exactly what situation will have the "apologists" eating crow?

[Kilmer72]

Even when the only position Jansen would play was backup at center and guard?

It is hard to say that is what most likely would have happened. I think they just wanted the younger guys (which we did indeed need to get younger) to get more reps that Jon would have gotten. Jon might just not have been a good fit for the west coast or maybe he might have played way better this year. It is all hard to say. He might have a great year for the Lions. Who knows? I believe Buges would have rather have had Jansen in there. They might have gotten rid of him so he is not temped to have an older vet there when we need youth. We can only speculate. He is gone now so it doesn't really matter.

[Deadskins]

My point is that the MOVE shows a lack of vision and long term planning.

And your point is incorrect. The move shows both vision and long term planning. Keeping Jansen, when he would have contributed nothing, taken a roster spot and reps away from younger players, cost a signing bonus this year, and dead cap space next year would have shown a lack of vision and planning.

Just because they did not address the RT position to your satisfaction this off-season (though we still don't know how Heyer, Bridges, and Williams will pan out this season) does not necessarily mean that they don't have a plan to address it more in the future. Besides, signing Bridges and Williams did address the position this off-season, though you fail to acknowledge it. You can't make every move every year.

[PulpExposure]

Even when the only position Jansen would play was backup at center and guard?

It is hard to say that is what most likely would have happened. I think they just wanted the younger guys (which we did indeed need to get younger) to get more reps that Jon would have gotten. Jon might just not have been a good fit for the west coast or maybe he might have played way better this year. It is all hard to say. He might have a great year for the Lions. Who knows? I believe Buges would have rather have had Jansen in there. They might have gotten rid of him so he is not temped to have an older vet there when we need youth. We can only speculate. He is gone now so it doesn't really matter.

The other thing is that he's not really in a position in Detroit to start. He's in a "competition" with last years #1 draft choice, Gosder Cherilius, at RT. Obviously the Lions won't be challenging for the Super Bowl next year, so it makes sense to let the young guy play. Of course, this IS the Lions we're talking about...

[yupchagee]

Your point about freeing up a roster spot for younger talent has some validity but not much when you consider that they usually keep 10 O-linemen. We don't have that many talented youngsters to keep around anyway.

It is unlikely that we will keep 10 unless we start the season with several O-linemen having minor injuries. 8-9 is more common.

[Californiaskin]

wow this threads still drawing this much ire.....Hey guys......FYI......Jansen was/is not going to contribute to our or anyones championship........take the cap hit now and cya.........we hold on to so many old broke down vets for ever.......williams/bridges is an upgrade! quit with all the heart/crying for fricken tired ass old broke down jon two thumbs jansen..........turn the page already....we ARE better w/o his dead weight

[SkinsFreak]

Even when the only position Jansen would play was backup at center and guard?

It is hard to say that is what most likely would have happened. I think they just wanted the younger guys (which we did indeed need to get younger) to get more reps that Jon would have gotten. Jon might just not have been a good fit for the west coast or maybe he might have played way better this year. It is all hard to say. He might have a great year for the Lions. Who knows? I believe Buges would have rather have had Jansen in there. They might have gotten rid of him so he is not temped to have an older vet there when we need youth. We can only speculate. He is gone now so it doesn't really matter.

The other thing is that he's not really in a position in Detroit to start. He's in a "competition" with last years #1 draft choice, Gosder Cherilius, at RT. Obviously the Lions won't be challenging for the Super Bowl next year, so it makes sense to let the young guy play. Of course, this IS the Lions we're talking about...

That's exactly right, Pulp. There are even concerns in Detroit about Jansen's role...

Jansen's arrival raises questions Lions Football
Veteran tackle's role to be determined

Jansen was always a tough, durable player. He set a U-M record with 50 straight starts, then started every game his first five years in the NFL.

But he missed the 2004 season with a torn Achilles, and he battled with injuries the next four years, too -- broken thumbs, torn calf, broken leg and dislocated ankle, sprained knee.

He lost the starting right tackle job last year. Though he ended the season as a starter, the Redskins still had other plans. Having tried him at guard briefly last year, they tried him at center in minicamp earlier this month.

Redskins coach Jim Zorn told the Washington Times that Jansen remained a solid run-blocker but struggled in pass protection.

"Throughout the off-season, the minicamp and the first (organized team activities), I wanted to solidify the position, and there just wasn't any change in Jon," Zorn told the Times. "You don't throw on every down, but you have to be able to pass-block. It wasn't easy for me to say that to Jon, and I know it wasn't easy to hear."

Ideally, Jansen will push Gosder Cherilus, last year's first-round pick, for the starting job at right tackle. Cherilus improved as last season went on and has a lot of potential, but he isn't a polished product. Competition can't hurt.

Jansen might just give the Lions an upgrade over George Foster in the veteran depth department.

But there are other offensive tackles in the mix, and the Lions haven't made a strong commitment to Jansen -- reportedly signing him to only the veteran minimum, $845,000.

[SkinsFreak]

You really should stop...

Make me.

OMG! How old are you?

Dude, you're so hell bent on trashing the front office that you can't even see things in an analytical perspective. The front office didn't make the decision to release Jansen. You do realize that, don't you? Zorn, Buges and the offensive coaches made this decision. The front office and the owner simply backed up and obliged the desires of the coaching staff.

Common sense tells most that perhaps the primary reason for Jansen's release was that he wasn't performing even at an adequate level and the team sees better talent in other players at the position. You know, because the coaches are the ones actually watching and studying the workouts, practices and game tapes?

[fastwb]

As to the reasons it was a smart move:

He would actually be a much smaller cap hit next year and doesn't really save us much of anything from a cap perspective. Besides who knows what's up with the cap next year anyway. There may not even be one and if there is it ought to be higher so this move has no real bearing on the cap.

As to paying big bucks to a back-up, when has that been a problem for Danny boy? He spent big money and a draft pick for T.J. Duckett and he never even stepped on the field, nevermind that he really wasn't needed anyway with Betts and Cartwright backing up Portis.

Your point about freeing up a roster spot for younger talent has some validity but not much when you consider that they usually keep 10 O-linemen. We don't have that many talented youngsters to keep around anyway.

Lets just face it. This is another one of those WTF moves by the FO that just happens to have the added twist in the gut of screwing over a fan favorite player regardless of what y'all think of his current ability.

This just sucks. Plain and simple.

Actually, you're wrong on each count.

1. We are saving more than $1 million on next year's cap by making the move now. The fact that the cap will go up, only means there will be even more room to sign more FA's. There will be a cap in 2010. You can bet on that.

OK, I don't pretend to know the cap situation down to the dollar but my point is that this was not a cap move. There are no significant cap issues here unless you look at the cap hit the teams is taking for releasing him versus what his cap implications would have been to keep him. Oh and there better be a cap in 2010 b/c if there isn't it means we're looking at another strike because the negotiations with the Union tanked.

2. I didn't say pay big bucks for a backup. I said pay a roster bonus to a backup (who, according to the coaches, would not be seeing the field anyway). Past mistakes only prove that the FO is learning and not making the same error.

OK, bottom line here, Snyder doesn't pinch pennies unless its a cap issue. The FO is trying to be more prudent in how they spend his money but I just don't see money being a factor in this decision.

3. You can't know about the young guys we have right now, because they haven't played yet. But Jansen would be taking practice reps away from their development, so your point there is incorrect as well.

I'm confident in Buges' ability to develop the talent available and they will get their chance regardless of their spot on the depth chart. That's just it. Whoever is playing better will get the most reps. If that was Jansen then so be it. If not, then fine but I still don't see how he's gotten a full chance to prove where he stands this year. That's my beef with how this is playing out. If they felt that he couldn't hack it anymore based on last season then fine release him before free agency and be done. THAT would have been the best they could do for him if they really cared. This fly him in to tell him face-to-face thing is window dressing. I just don't buy that they are making this decision based on practices in shorts in May. Its another half-baked move by the FO that really makes it hard for me to have any faith in them knowing what they're doing.

And 4. (since you added that one) No we didn't screw Jansen over. They offered him a chance to retire a Redskin, but he wanted to keep playing, so less than 24 hours later, he has a new job playing for his home team, with an excellent chance to be the starter. Plus they told him face to face, giving him the respect he was due as a fan favorite, and workhorse he has been for this team.

OK I'm done on this one. I'm a Redskin fan as in fanatic. I'm emotional about my team and care about its players, particularly the ones who have made significant long-term contributions. Jansen has done that and I think he deserved better than he got. So I'm back to my bottom line: this just sucks.

[DEHog]

As to the reasons it was a smart move:

He would actually be a much smaller cap hit next year and doesn't really save us much of anything from a cap perspective. Besides who knows what's up with the cap next year anyway. There may not even be one and if there is it ought to be higher so this move has no real bearing on the cap.

As to paying big bucks to a back-up, when has that been a problem for Danny boy? He spent big money and a draft pick for T.J. Duckett and he never even stepped on the field, nevermind that he really wasn't needed anyway with Betts and Cartwright backing up Portis.

Your point about freeing up a roster spot for younger talent has some validity but not much when you consider that they usually keep 10 O-linemen. We don't have that many talented youngsters to keep around anyway.

Lets just face it. This is another one of those WTF moves by the FO that just happens to have the added twist in the gut of screwing over a fan favorite player regardless of what y'all think of his current ability.

This just sucks. Plain and simple.

Actually, you're wrong on each count.

1. We are saving more than $1 million on next year's cap by making the move now. The fact that the cap will go up, only means there will be even more room to sign more FA's. There will be a cap in 2010. You can bet on that.

OK, I don't pretend to know the cap situation down to the dollar but my point is that this was not a cap move. There are no significant cap issues here unless you look at the cap hit the teams is taking for releasing him versus what his cap implications would have been to keep him. Oh and there better be a cap in 2010 b/c if there isn't it means we're looking at another strike because the negotiations with the Union tanked.

2. I didn't say pay big bucks for a backup. I said pay a roster bonus to a backup (who, according to the coaches, would not be seeing the field anyway). Past mistakes only prove that the FO is learning and not making the same error.

OK, bottom line here, Snyder doesn't pinch pennies unless its a cap issue. The FO is trying to be more prudent in how they spend his money but I just don't see money being a factor in this decision.

3. You can't know about the young guys we have right now, because they haven't played yet. But Jansen would be taking practice reps away from their development, so your point there is incorrect as well.

I'm confident in Buges' ability to develop the talent available and they will get their chance regardless of their spot on the depth chart. That's just it. Whoever is playing better will get the most reps. If that was Jansen then so be it. If not, then fine but I still don't see how he's gotten a full chance to prove where he stands this year. That's my beef with how this is playing out. If they felt that he couldn't hack it anymore based on last season then fine release him before free agency and be done. THAT would have been the best they could do for him if they really cared. This fly him in to tell him face-to-face thing is window dressing. I just don't buy that they are making this decision based on practices in shorts in May. Its another half-baked move by the FO that really makes it hard for me to have any faith in them knowing what they're doing.

And 4. (since you added that one) No we didn't screw Jansen over. They offered him a chance to retire a Redskin, but he wanted to keep playing, so less than 24 hours later, he has a new job playing for his home team, with an excellent chance to be the starter. Plus they told him face to face, giving him the respect he was due as a fan favorite, and workhorse he has been for this team.

OK I'm done on this one. I'm a Redskin fan as in fanatic. I'm emotional about my team and care about its players, particularly the ones who have made significant long-term contributions. Jansen has done that and I think he deserved better than he got. So I'm back to my bottom line: this just sucks.

What were the Skins suppose to do??? Look I’m as critical of this FO as anyone and I really don’t see what is so bad here…it happens...and guess what it going to happen with Samuels…Portis…Moss etc… So get use to it. What did you what…for them to let him play until he thought he was done?? They gave him an opportunity to retire a Redskin when he refused they wished him well… If you want to fault them for not properly addressing the positioning the offseason than maybe you have an argument. The FO is guilty of a lot of wrongdoing this ain’t one of them IMO.

[SkinsFreak]

The proof will be on the record this year. You say this was a GREAT MOVE for all kinds of reasons. I say it was CRAP not only releasing JJ but having no real answer to the OL situation overall and the RT position in particular.

If you are right I will eat crow. But if I am RIGHT you and a few other posters, the apologists, will have to swallow it rather raw.

So let me see if I understand what you're saying here.

If the Redskins' offensive line isn't any good this year at the RT spot, you were right, and the Redskins should have kept Jansen? Even when he was by far the weakest lineman on the team last year?

Even when the only position Jansen would play was backup at center and guard?

I'm not sure I understand your position, because you're now conflating 2 issues: the Redskins not having picked up someone in the draft (although whom would you have gotten?), or in free agency (again, whom would you have gotten), with releasing Jansen. Can you elaborate exactly what situation will have the "apologists" eating crow?

But Pulp... don't you get it?

If you agree or are indifferent about a decision made by the coaching staff, that confirms you are an apologist for the owner and the front office.

As a matter of fact, if you support ANY move or decision made by the team, from here on out, no matter what, you are an apologist. It's ONLY if you have nothing to contribute other than the same old regurgitation of whining and complaining about past mistakes... over and over and over again, will you then not be deemed an apologist.

I hope this clears it up for everyone.

[SkinsFreak]

What were the Skins suppose to do??? Look I’m as critical of this FO as anyone and I really don’t see what is so bad here…it happens...and guess what it going to happen with Samuels…Portis…Moss etc… So get use to it. What did you what…for them to let him play until he thought he was done?? They gave him an opportunity to retire a Redskin when he refused they wished him well… If you want to fault them for not properly addressing the positioning the offseason than maybe you have an argument. The FO is guilty of a lot of wrongdoing this ain’t one of them IMO.

Totally agree, DE.

[fastwb]

What were the Skins suppose to do??? Look I’m as critical of this FO as anyone and I really don’t see what is so bad here…it happens...and guess what it going to happen with Samuels…Portis…Moss etc… So get use to it. What did you what…for them to let him play until he thought he was done?? They gave him an opportunity to retire a Redskin when he refused they wished him well… If you want to fault them for not properly addressing the positioning the offseason than maybe you have an argument. The FO is guilty of a lot of wrongdoing this ain’t one of them IMO.

Everybody's got an opinion. I don't know if my emotions will ever allow me to"get use to it" even if I wanted to. That's what's nice about being a fan. You don't have to be reasonalbe about everything. That's not to say I can't see and understand reason. I don't think they gave Jansen a real shot at proving he was better than he was down the stretch last year and I don't think they gained anything significant by not giving him that chance. That's my opinion.

[CanesSkins26]

As to the reasons it was a smart move:

He would actually be a much smaller cap hit next year and doesn't really save us much of anything from a cap perspective. Besides who knows what's up with the cap next year anyway. There may not even be one and if there is it ought to be higher so this move has no real bearing on the cap.

As to paying big bucks to a back-up, when has that been a problem for Danny boy? He spent big money and a draft pick for T.J. Duckett and he never even stepped on the field, nevermind that he really wasn't needed anyway with Betts and Cartwright backing up Portis.

Your point about freeing up a roster spot for younger talent has some validity but not much when you consider that they usually keep 10 O-linemen. We don't have that many talented youngsters to keep around anyway.

Lets just face it. This is another one of those WTF moves by the FO that just happens to have the added twist in the gut of screwing over a fan favorite player regardless of what y'all think of his current ability.

This just sucks. Plain and simple.

Actually, you're wrong on each count.

1. We are saving more than $1 million on next year's cap by making the move now. The fact that the cap will go up, only means there will be even more room to sign more FA's. There will be a cap in 2010. You can bet on that.

OK, I don't pretend to know the cap situation down to the dollar but my point is that this was not a cap move. There are no significant cap issues here unless you look at the cap hit the teams is taking for releasing him versus what his cap implications would have been to keep him. Oh and there better be a cap in 2010 b/c if there isn't it means we're looking at another strike because the negotiations with the Union tanked.

2. I didn't say pay big bucks for a backup. I said pay a roster bonus to a backup (who, according to the coaches, would not be seeing the field anyway). Past mistakes only prove that the FO is learning and not making the same error.

OK, bottom line here, Snyder doesn't pinch pennies unless its a cap issue. The FO is trying to be more prudent in how they spend his money but I just don't see money being a factor in this decision.

3. You can't know about the young guys we have right now, because they haven't played yet. But Jansen would be taking practice reps away from their development, so your point there is incorrect as well.

I'm confident in Buges' ability to develop the talent available and they will get their chance regardless of their spot on the depth chart. That's just it. Whoever is playing better will get the most reps. If that was Jansen then so be it. If not, then fine but I still don't see how he's gotten a full chance to prove where he stands this year. That's my beef with how this is playing out. If they felt that he couldn't hack it anymore based on last season then fine release him before free agency and be done. THAT would have been the best they could do for him if they really cared. This fly him in to tell him face-to-face thing is window dressing. I just don't buy that they are making this decision based on practices in shorts in May. Its another half-baked move by the FO that really makes it hard for me to have any faith in them knowing what they're doing.

And 4. (since you added that one) No we didn't screw Jansen over. They offered him a chance to retire a Redskin, but he wanted to keep playing, so less than 24 hours later, he has a new job playing for his home team, with an excellent chance to be the starter. Plus they told him face to face, giving him the respect he was due as a fan favorite, and workhorse he has been for this team.

OK I'm done on this one. I'm a Redskin fan as in fanatic. I'm emotional about my team and care about its players, particularly the ones who have made significant long-term contributions. Jansen has done that and I think he deserved better than he got. So I'm back to my bottom line: this just sucks.

What were the Skins suppose to do??? Look I’m as critical of this FO as anyone and I really don’t see what is so bad here…it happens...and guess what it going to happen with Samuels…Portis…Moss etc… So get use to it. What did you what…for them to let him play until he thought he was done?? They gave him an opportunity to retire a Redskin when he refused they wished him well… If you want to fault them for not properly addressing the positioning the offseason than maybe you have an argument. The FO is guilty of a lot of wrongdoing this ain’t one of them IMO.

The decision to cut Jansen was fine. He was terrible last season and deserved to go. What isn't fine is what the Skins have done to address the RT spot. Bridges, Williams, and Heyer is a joke at RT. Between those three there is 13 years of NFL experience and in none of those seasons have any of these guys started a full 16 games.

[SkinsJock]

... It's ONLY if you have nothing to contribute other than the same old regurgitation of whining and complaining about past mistakes ... over and over and over again, will you then not be deemed an apologist.
I hope this clears it up for everyone.

no worries Speaking only for myself, I will in future only pick on the "future mistakes" as "past mistakes" are obviously not helping the cause

This does bring an interesting thought though - I thought a mistake could only be in the past as you would not know it was a mistake until after you've made it

WAIT - I've got it - we can just assume that from now on, the next "mistake" these 2 bozos make will be their first mistake because they haven't made any in the past - there, that makes me feel a lot better - for a while there I thought that we had concerns with not getting this offensive line together this year but I see now that was not worth worrying about.
thanks so much for clearing that up for us all

[Deadskins]

... It's ONLY if you have nothing to contribute other than the same old regurgitation of whining and complaining about past mistakes ... over and over and over again, will you then not be deemed an apologist.
I hope this clears it up for everyone.

no worries Speaking only for myself, I will in future only pick on the "future mistakes" as "past mistakes" are obviously not helping the cause

This does bring an interesting thought though - I thought a mistake could only be in the past as you would not know it was a mistake until after you've made it

WAIT - I've got it - we can just assume that from now on, the next "mistake" these 2 bozos make will be their first mistake because they haven't made any in the past - there, that makes me feel a lot better - for a while there I thought that we had concerns with not getting this offensive line together this year but I see now that was not worth worrying about.
thanks so much for clearing that up for us all

Yeah, that's what I'm reading that everybody here is writing, "The FO has never made any mistakes."

[SkinsJock]

We can debate a lot of things about Jansen and how it was handled - my biggest issue is this offense needs to be younger and have the ability to both pass the ball when we want to and run the ball when we want to. I think that we saw what was needed and I'm just a little concerned about these guys managing us through that rebuilding the next few years.

We have seen this team progress a little differently since Gibbs came back and things seemed to be getting better but I'm not convinced that these 2 have any idea of what they are doing and the recent QB fiascos was an indication IMHO that there is no plan - so while I'm sorry to see Jansen go, I understand that move was made in the best interests of the team both for the long and short term.

The thing that concerns me is that the "word" out of the Redskins camp (and these 2 bozos are in charge of "words" that are passed around) was that Jansen was going to be a big help to us and now he's not we now are hearing all sorts of stuff and it just does not make me feel that these 2 bozos know what they are up to - like the adage - they just throw stuff at the wall and then see what sticks

[Deadskins]

The thing that concerns me is that the "word" out of the Redskins camp (and these 2 bozos are in charge of "words" that are passed around) was that Jansen was going to be a big help to us and now he's not we now are hearing all sorts of stuff and it just does not make me feel that these 2 bozos know what they are up to - like the adage - they just throw stuff at the wall and then see what sticks

Which two guys, Zorn and Buges?

"As we watched minicamp and [organized team activities]," Zorn said, "it became evident for me and talking with [line coach] Joe Bugel and [offensive coordinator] Sherman Lewis that it was best to take him out of the mix. And I couldn’t come to grips with him backing up [other positions] and taking away reps from younger guys.

"He was going to prove to everybody that he could make the Pro Bowl and be an All-Pro player, and that's what we were hoping for as well," Zorn said. "At the minicamp and the OTAs, I didn't see that."

[SkinsFreak]

... It's ONLY if you have nothing to contribute other than the same old regurgitation of whining and complaining about past mistakes ... over and over and over again, will you then not be deemed an apologist.
I hope this clears it up for everyone.

no worries Speaking only for myself, I will in future only pick on the "future mistakes" as "past mistakes" are obviously not helping the cause

This does bring an interesting thought though - I thought a mistake could only be in the past as you would not know it was a mistake until after you've made it

WAIT - I've got it - we can just assume that from now on, the next "mistake" these 2 bozos make will be their first mistake because they haven't made any in the past - there, that makes me feel a lot better - for a while there I thought that we had concerns with not getting this offensive line together this year but I see now that was not worth worrying about.
thanks so much for clearing that up for us all

Everyone recognizes the mistakes of the past, SkinsJock. But some just can't let it go, and therefore they conclude that EVERY decision is a mistake. That's BS. Letting Jansen go was not a mistake, it was for the betterment of the team. Lastly, Zorn and the coaching staff made this decision, so trashing the front office for Jansen's release proves to be misdirected.

[Deadskins]

... It's ONLY if you have nothing to contribute other than the same old regurgitation of whining and complaining about past mistakes ... over and over and over again, will you then not be deemed an apologist.
I hope this clears it up for everyone.

no worries Speaking only for myself, I will in future only pick on the "future mistakes" as "past mistakes" are obviously not helping the cause

This does bring an interesting thought though - I thought a mistake could only be in the past as you would not know it was a mistake until after you've made it

WAIT - I've got it - we can just assume that from now on, the next "mistake" these 2 bozos make will be their first mistake because they haven't made any in the past - there, that makes me feel a lot better - for a while there I thought that we had concerns with not getting this offensive line together this year but I see now that was not worth worrying about.
thanks so much for clearing that up for us all

Everyone recognizes the mistakes of the past, SkinsJock. But some just can't let it go, and therefore they conclude that EVERY decision is a mistake. That's BS. Letting Jansen go was not a mistake, it was for the betterment of the team. Lastly, Zorn and the coaching staff made this decision, so trashing the front office for Jansen's release proves to be misdirected.

Apologist!

I do wish you'd stop apologizing all the time; it gets quite tiresome.

[SkinsFreak]

The decision to cut Jansen was fine. He was terrible last season and deserved to go. What isn't fine is what the Skins have done to address the RT spot. Bridges, Williams, and Heyer is a joke at RT. Between those three there is 13 years of NFL experience and in none of those seasons have any of these guys started a full 16 games.

I completely disagree that Heyer is a "joke" playing the tackle position. He's played pretty damn good for an undrafted player. The fact that the coaches released Jansen offers evidence that perhaps Heyer is even better now and is honing his skills and techniques. Heyer suffered a shoulder injury last year, and save for that incident, my game tapes prove Heyer played pretty damn good and didn't give up a bunch of sacks.

Head coach Jim Zorn acknowledged that Heyer is at the top of the depth chart at this point of the offseason.

He added that Mike Williams, Jeremy Bridges and Devin Clark are also in the mix.

"The position really is open," Zorn said. "If we had to line it up today, Stephon would be our starting right tackle. But I’ve told all of our guys, this position is legitimately open and we’re looking for the right guy there.

Of Heyer’s development, Zorn added: “Stephon has been working his lower body to really be able to set a better anchor. He is trying to bring a punch. He is a guy who just continues to come forward.

"With the decision to move Jon on, it should help Stephon to be more focused in at that position. I’m excited about where he is at. He’ll have all this time through the start of training camp, and then even through training camp, to continue to get better and better.”

Opposite Heyer on the offensive line is Pro Bowl left tackle Chris Samuels.

Samuels said it was "tough" to see Jansen leave the team, but he was supportive of Heyer.

"Stephon is light years away from when he first came to the Redskins," Samuels said. "He has worked hard in the weight room, on his footwork and his leg strength. He has worked hard to become a good football player."

Heyer will most likely be the starter, and I agree with that. Zorn knows this, but saying it's an open competition keeps these guys motivated and playing at the top of their game. It's the right approach.

[SkinsFreak]

Apologist!

I do wish you'd stop apologizing all the time; it gets quite tiresome.

[CanesSkins26]

I completely disagree that Heyer is a "joke" playing the tackle position. He's played pretty damn good for an undrafted player.

I agree that he played well for an undrafted player. However, that doesn't mean that he has played at a starting caliber level, which he has yet to do. Heyer is a nice story because he is a Maryland player and earned a spot on the team despite going undrafted. However, when he has played he has not played at a level worthy of being a starting caliber player. Maybe he has gotten better and will improve this season, however, imo it isn't very smart to go into a season with such a huge question marks at right tackle, especially when the offensive line was such a big problem for us last season.

[SkinsFreak]

I completely disagree that Heyer is a "joke" playing the tackle position. He's played pretty damn good for an undrafted player.

I agree that he played well for an undrafted player. However, that doesn't mean that he has played at a starting caliber level, which he has yet to do. Heyer is a nice story because he is a Maryland player and earned a spot on the team despite going undrafted. However, when he has played he has not played at a level worthy of being a starting caliber player. Maybe he has gotten better and will improve this season, however, imo it isn't very smart to go into a season with such a huge question marks at right tackle, especially when the offensive line was such a big problem for us last season.

Starting caliber? What does that mean? Fact is, Heyer has been a starter and EARNED that spot last year before suffering a shoulder separation. You see, the players might be a question mark to you, but you're not on the field every day with these guys making evaluations. Zorn and Buges are, and by releasing Jansen, it appears they know what they're doing and have a plan based on their evaluations.

Edit: Let me elaborate.

If a back-up player slides into a starting role due to an injury sustained by the 1st string guy, then it might be fair to say that back-up guy isn't a starting caliber player. This happened with Heyer in 2007 as a rookie. Jansen got hurt and Heyer slid into a starting role.

But when a player goes through an entire offseason (mini camps, an entire training camp and all of preseason) and subsequently earns a starting role, that player has then earned the designation of being starting caliber. Heyer did this in 2008. He earned the starting role. He was awarded that position and didn't slide into it due to an injury to another player.

And with the coaches releasing Jansen and Zorn saying Heyer is better, it appears Heyer is going to earn that role again this year. It may be fair to say he hasn't yet reached the elite status for a tackle in this league... that's fair. But to say he's a joke or isn't starter caliber is a blatantly false mischaracterization.

[1niksder]

You really should stop...

Make me.

Nope I need a good laugh every now an then... besides you haven't broken any rules but I could if I wanted to (would go against everything we stand for around here) try that over at ES and see what happens

The FUNDAMENTAL issue is that we did not Draft anybody in support of the RT or much help for the OL for that matter.

By cutting Jansen I'm thinking this is YOUR FUNDAMENTAL issue and not the FUNDAMENTAL issue that you make it out to be.

If he was as bad as you put it, Why was a quality FA or a Rookie from the Draft not signed?

Free Agents linemen were signed just none that were overpaid, so you overlook them, Zorn has said the guys available when they were on the clock weren't the type of guys the wanted. They did pick up undrafted rookie lineman. if they don't work out you won't be able to complain about them throwing away a draft pick so again you overlook them

First off, you're ALWAYS there but that's just you,

This is CRAP. I am reminding everybody that Heyer got hurt last season and if it happens again we are in deep trouble. In fact, pick your spot in the OL for an injury and we are in deep trouble.

How do you know Heyer will even be on the feild and the same thing can be said about Jansen

Zorn was ready to release JJ at the end of last season but was more than likely told that he was stuck with him because.

1.) Didn't have a ANY depth at the RT spot.

2.) Free Agency had to come and go. You, me and JZ all knew your boy ("the Danny") wasn't coming up off any cap space until he had did what he wanted to do once the market opened.

So, now we have depth ???

More depth than they had when the season ended last year, so yeah

Now do we have a brilliant FA to take the spot???

Don't know about brilliant but gotta go with yeah on this one too

Either you are full of it or I missed the headlines.

I'm not full of it, and you have been constantly looking down (to see if that horse would move...you know the dead one) so I'm guessing you missed something

3.) They picked up Williams and Bridges and all of a sudden Jon was a "option" as a backup center.

And you are betting the season on this scenario??? Are you serious???

I'm not really a betting man but this looks better than what he had

4.) Heyer gave JJ a run for the RT spot the past few years even though he came out of college as a LT.

And if the situation is and was so dire, Why was help not brought in to the OL and the RT position before???

Before what? these guys weren't signed AFTER Jon's release, they were signed before. Just as Jon was given every opertunity before he costed more money. Either you are full of it or just pissed that they cut him before paying him his bonus money (meaning something else you won't have to complain about)

If Bats didn't have wings, they would be Rats.

Well I am giving the TWO scenarios which cover the situation 100% , what else do you want?

FACTS something real not a bunch of Ifs

"If" tells us you really don't know what kind of move this is. So why not just say that you have questions about the move, or the timing of it, or the thinking that went into it.

My point is that the MOVE shows a lack of vision and long term planning.

It shows a vision and long term planning, you just don't get it or don't want to get it

IF they had waited to release him they ran the risk of him getting injured and truely paying him to do nothing. (ref: P Dainels 2008 stats vs his 2008 pay). I'm sure Jansen will see plenty of playing time now that he has gone back home (it couldn't have worked any better for him).

True. They should NOT HAVE waited for either if they are that OLD AND USELESS as you establish in your post.

Dainels look very good before he went down last year during OTAs, Jansen hasn't.

uot;]e]There you go with If again... I've had the same Sig for about three years, now I have to come up with something else .

Stupid Front Office. All they have to do is read your signature.

Everyone says they needed to replace the aging members of the O-line, some of them specifically wanted those that took up a lot of cap space or were often injured out ASAP).

We do nothave a Front Office. We have expert CRAPologists. They can manage the money They cannot manage the team.
[/quote]
IMHO they have did a much better job this off-season managing the team and taken a step back as far as cap management goes, this has nothing to do with the Jansen move. Between Jansen and Moss it wasn't a bad cap move though.

Sooner or later you'll stop pissing on every move and there won't be a need for sugar coaters. I must refer to Blow it Up
back in February I blogged that they needed to do it right away, but thought the heavy lifting was at lease a year away. It was well thought out but with no more info than anyone else with a IP address could get. The FO that you disapprove of so much (for mostly things they did in the past) has even more detailed info (I was off on what both AH and JJ would cost), yet they seem to be following a few of the paths that I laid out. Call it what you want, I call it them being a few steps ahead of us and it would be stupid to say they don't have a plan.

Look I got tired of reading your post.

You read So how is it you miss so much?

The proof will be on the record this year. You say this was a GREAT MOVE for all kinds of reasons. I say it was CRAP not only releasing JJ but having no real answer to the OL situation overall and the RT position in particular.

The bottom line is they didn't see JJ as a real answer to the OL situation (they tried him everywhere on the OL)

If you are right I will eat crow. But if I am RIGHT you and a few other posters, the apologists, will have to swallow it rather raw.

I've never been one to say I told you so, and will admit when I wrong.

Time will tell won't it