Page 2 of 5
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:18 am
by ArlingtonSkinsFan
fredp45 wrote:Offensive Lines take awhile to gel. It isn't like DL where agression, speed and athletic ability shows well from the start. We're adding Dockery back after a few years, 3 of the others have played very well for us for a few years. Heyer started last year as our RT until he got hurt... I agree with Bugel, let's NOT panic... and definetly let's not trade anyone away as all you get is a castoff. Keep our picks and take a Tackle with the 1st rounder, guard with the 2nd rounder and center with the 4th rounder.
How I see our line this year -- with some -- glass is half full thinking:
LT -- Samuels is a Pro-Bowler and in great shape this year.
LG -- Dockery will be fine, and played pretty well next to Sameuls the first stint with us. Also in good shape.
C -- Rabach is a good center. Not a huge guy but a smart signal caller who plays hurt.
RG -- Thomas, who has injury issues so if he can't play, Bridges who has started a bunch of games. I think Bridges has a nasty streak too.
RT -- Heyer will be fine with time.
As subs we have...
Reinhart for LG
Will Montgomery for Center
Williams as Heyer's backup
Devin Clark
If our starters stay healthy and are given time to gel, we'll be fine. They could be a pretty good line actually.
There are so many rediculous assumptions in there. To say "Heyer will be fine with time" is just blind optimism. I disagree with that. You also fail to address age. Rabach, Samuels, and Thomas are all ancient. And knowing the backups by name because you closely follow this team doesn't mean they are sufficient as depth. Those are all unproven, raw players, and probably would all get manhandled by ANY DLine in our division, if they should have to step in.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:22 am
by SkinsFTW
VetSkinsFan wrote:The O-line wil be adequate barring any injuries and we have a few back ups that can come in and play.
Thats the whole problem. Those guys will never go 10 games without 2-3 of them missing multiple games. And every team has backups that can come in and play. Doesn't mean they are any good. A lot of our backups from the past few years were unsigned FA's that no other team wanted. Thank god for Samuels, but even he has been getting knocked out of games.
Maybe a team like the Vikings will take Todd Collins for one of their OL starters, or even a good backup. With even a decent QB like Collins the Vikings would contend for the NFC Title. And he isn't going to play here anyway. If Campbell sucks what would be the point in not giving Brennan and/or Daniels a shot?
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:31 am
by sch1977
cowboys-suck wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote:cowboys-suck wrote:I'm with you "gregory smith" about time for OL chemistry to work and think something should be done now. And someone in Denver agrees with me about Portis and his injuries or he would still be playing there. At this point in his career I don't think any other team would pick him up as their primary rusher. I think Betts would be decent with some playing time.
The Portis deal had much more to do with the fact that Denver got such a ridiculously lopsided deal that they couldn't say no. Elite CB are much harder to find than the third best RB in your division (which CP was at that time), then you get the sucker to throw in a very high 2nd round pick and you just can't pass that up!
But back on subject. I think they should keep their eye open to all way to better the team. Our OL was no where near as bad as people make it out to be. Heck they were better than the Steelers and Cardinals OL and both of those teams did OK! But I must say, they way Orakpo is abusing Samuals in camp scares me. I just hope our OL hasn't all fallen off the same cliff at the same time. The odds of that happening are slim, so lets hope our pass rush is just that improved.
You can't trade your most important player on O to get help at OL. Most would argue that that guy is CP or Samuals, but I would argue it is Moss. Whenever Moss is 100% healthy defenses have to back off. They can't stack 8 or 9 in the box to stop CP and they can't blitz every down. Moss wasn't healthy for the rest of the season after the Detroit game when he pulled his hammy. Yes, he played, but he wasn't anywhere near 100% and the Defenses played the Skins like they no longer had a deep threat. Which they did and didn't. Tana could no longer punk DBs and Campbell NEVER looked at D Thomas, so they effectively had no deep threat.
that's right, a lopsided deal. Portis was injured and Denver knew he would never be 100% again. CP has proved they were right.
I couldn't disagree more. When the trade was made, I was upset (like most probably) that we included a draft pick with the deal. However, CP is the best back we have had in DC since Riggo and is a major reason we have even been competitive the last several years! Bailey was the best corner in the game at the time of the trade, and for years afterward. BUT, with the rule changes involving what the CB can and can't do, the "shut down" corner that every team coveted became a thing of the past. Ask Denver how their RB situation has panned out since trading CP! Bottom line for me is this: I am glad we have had CP over the years as he has kept our offense formidable.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:34 am
by cowboys-suck
SkinsFTW wrote:cowboys-suck wrote:Deadskins wrote:cowboys-suck wrote:anyone think Chase Daniel will see some play time? I think he will and quite frankly, I'd love to see what he can do. He had a record filled college career.
In pre-season, maybe. No way does he see the field this regular season. Colt also had a record setting college career, and is a year further developed than Chase. Only if all three (JC, TC, and CB) go down would we ever see Chase, and probably not even then.
I don't know...I saw somewhere that he is expected to compete for playing time in his rookie year.
Yeah, he will compete for playing time, on the practice squad.
we shall see
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:09 am
by HEROHAMO
Getting rid of Portis would hurt this team just as much as a weak O line.
A good running game helps any Qb. So to trade away Portis is not a good idea. Failure would be assured.
If we are to trade one of our players we have to weigh out the positives and negatives.
If we let go of Portis we lose a solid running game. Betts is not sufficient.
Santana Moss? I do not think we would get a top notch lineman. Maybe a solid performer for Moss. Plus Moss is getting older so I do not know how much value he has.
Andre Carter??? Are you kidding me? We get nothing for him. I like him but his production has been low.
These are the players who teams might give us a decent to top notch lineman.
Laron Landry, he is young and it is obvious he is getting better every year. Losing Landry would hurt but our defense is solid enough to recover from losing him. So gaining a solid line might be worth losing Landry. I hate to say that. We also have a solid Chris Horton and a very good secondary to make up for losing Landry. So gaining a Pro Bowler for Landry might be worth it.
Chris
ey, he is a beloved player. All feelings aside we must detach emotions. Losing Chris
ey and gaining a Pro Bowl lineman might be worth it. We have a young Fred Davis who may become good.
If I am going to even fathom the thought of any trading these two? It would have to be a very good player to add to the Oline.
I would propose a deal to give away either Landry or
ey to the Vikings for Steve Hutchinson Pro Bowl right guard.
Lets not kid ourselves though. Our front office would just mess up a trade and give away draft picks.
Real problem has been we do not have football minds running the show. All though Snyder and Cerratto have shown improvement in the past two years.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:53 am
by Irn-Bru
ArlingtonSkinsFan wrote:You also fail to address age. Rabach, Samuels, and Thomas are all ancient.
31 is ancient?
And knowing the backups by name because you closely follow this team doesn't mean they are sufficient as depth. Those are all unproven, raw players,
Two of the backups he's mentioned are former starters in the league.
and probably would all get manhandled by ANY DLine in our division, if they should have to step in.
You simply don't know that.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:55 am
by gregory smith
I think the running game is every bit as much about the OL as it is the running back. Even Portis can't get it done with a weak OL. You can win a superbowl with a good running back, good quarterback, and a great offensive line, but I don't think you will ever get there with an OL that leads the league in sacks allowed regardless of the running back. I don't know who to trade, all I know is we need to make a move now, then continue to address the issue come draft time.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:17 am
by Deadskins
gregory smith wrote:but I don't think you will ever get there with an OL that leads the league in sacks allowed regardless of the running back.
Remind me again who won the SB last year. No reason to trade away our future on a chance we might win right now. Those are the kind of deals that have kept us down for so long.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:34 am
by SkinsJock
ARE YOU KIDDING ME
I am one that is very concerned about what we saw offensively last year. I think and hope that the plan here is to stay the course and address what needs to be addressed as we move ahead. I certainly hope that we have learned from the mistakes of the past when some may have felt we were only a player or 2 away from being a good team.
This team needs to make the best effort it can to put the best combinations on the field this year with what we have now - we might be very surprised by what happens but I am fairly sure we will be very disapointed again if we trade any of our players or our draft picks for the short term gain.
We have been down that road and it has not worked - we are going to have to continue to hope and pray that this team can be competitive this year but we should not be trading any draft picks or potentially good players for any reason.
Many here think the
guys in charge here are on the right track and things are different and that
they have a plan - I have serious doubts about all of that but I do hope that we do not make the same mistakes we used to make.
No matter what happens this year we need
all of our draft picks AND we need
all of the players and coaches that can make this team better again as that is the quickest way to success - our record until now has been mediocre, let's not continue to do that
if we could get anything for V...... no, that's not possible
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:34 am
by Wysocki
Since he's making $100 mill, put Big Al on the O-Line; what the heck - make the whole D-Line play both ways...
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:48 am
by VetSkinsFan
HEROHAMO wrote:Laron Landry, he is young and it is obvious he is getting better every year. Losing Landry would hurt but our defense is solid enough to recover from losing him. So gaining a solid line might be worth losing Landry. I hate to say that. We also have a solid Chris Horton and a very good secondary to make up for losing Landry. So gaining a Pro Bowler for Landry might be worth it.
And who would step in a FS? Moore, while getting reviews, hasn't shown enough where he can start. We can't drop Springs back there since we don't have him. That would leave a huge hole back there in centerfield.
HEROHAMO wrote:Chris
ey, he is a beloved player. All feelings aside we must detach emotions. Losing Chris
ey and gaining a Pro Bowl lineman might be worth it. We have a young Fred Davis who may become good.
So, trade away our Pro Bowl TE and use who? Fred Davis, who has upside, but hasn't proven himself as an NFL caliber TE? I like what he's shown so far, but it's a huge gamble to rely on Davis and Yoder to take up
ey's slack. If we had a strong corps of WR, then
maybe, but we simply cannot get rid of our best receiver.
PERIOD.
If JC was a true franchise QB and all we needed was a lineman to field a killer offense, then I could possibly see it. Based on last year's performance, we have RB who gets run in to the ground and an anemic passing game. We have high hopes, but we cannot get rid of our current stars in this situation.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:52 am
by Chris Luva Luva
People need to stop overreacting so early into the preseason. Jeez, there will be plenty of time to moan once the games count. Let's see how the chips fall, I think we may be surprised a bit.
The offense is improved this year. We have more depth on the o-line and it should be a bit more productive due to a consecutive year.
The FO decided to address the defense this year, and they did great. They grabbed solid players that we can have playing for years to come if the camp reports are accurate. Next year they will attempt to mimic the success for the offense.
The FO had to make a call and address one group or the other. They felt that the defensive players were more talented than the offensive guys available, I'm ok with that. It's progress....
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:00 am
by VetSkinsFan
I agree CLL.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:38 am
by PulpExposure
Chris Luva Luva wrote:The FO decided to address the defense this year, and they did great. They grabbed solid players that we can have playing for years to come if the camp reports are accurate. Next year they will attempt to mimic the success for the offense.
The FO had to make a call and address one group or the other. They felt that the defensive players were more talented than the offensive guys available, I'm ok with that. It's progress....
That's absolutely right. Solid drafting (Orakpo and Jarmon address our issue at DE for the forseeable future, and Barnes was drafted to serve as the bigger corner we're lacking now that Springs left), gives me a glimmer of hope.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:47 am
by SKINFAN
waht happened to building homegrown talent. We need help but we cannot mortagage the future AGAIN, for a vet O line. We just need to make do with what we have and pick one up on the draft, easier said than done, I know, but we can ill afford the trading of homegrown talent.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:02 am
by El Mexican
You have to take into account that next year this team will have to invest in other areas besides the O-Line.
At first glance, you can't ignore the needs this team has at LB and, quite posibly, a change-of- pace RB. Oh, and if JC does not perform, you're looking at drafting a QB.
I don't see the FO investing heavily on the O-Line through the draft when there are multiple necessities through the roster, in key positions.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:11 am
by Chris Luva Luva
El Mexican wrote:You have to take into account that next year this team will have to invest in other areas besides the O-Line.
At first glance, you can't ignore the needs this team has at LB and, quite posibly, a change-of- pace RB. Oh, and if JC does not perform, you're looking at drafting a QB.
I don't see the FO investing heavily on the O-Line through the draft when there are multiple necessities through the roster, in key positions.
How can you be upset about something that may or may not happen? Your entire post is hypothetical.
1. What need do we have at LB? We're grooming Blades to supplant London. Orakpo is here, Rocky is fine. We have depth... We can get depth in the latter rounds of next years draft AND WE DRAFTED AT LB THIS PREVIOUS YEAR.
2. A change of pace back? WE HAVE TWO OF THEM THIS YEAR!!!
3. JC not doing well? What if he does do well? You can't call it either way until it happens.
El Mexican wrote:I don't see the FO investing heavily on the O-Line through the draft
But you can clearly see JC failing and us drafting a QB.
But you can see us drafting a change of pace back when we have two already that we're trying out.
You can see all this but you can't see us drafting o-line.
El Mexican wrote:when there are multiple necessities through the roster, in key positions.
What you've listed aren't necessities and on top of that they've already been addressed....
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:49 am
by SkinsJock
Chris Luva Luva wrote:People need to stop overreacting so early into the preseason. Jeez, there will be plenty of time to moan once the games count.
Let's see how the chips fall, I think we may be surprised a bit. The offense is improved this year. We have more depth on the o-line and it should be a bit more productive due to a consecutive year.
The FO decided to address the defense this year, and they did great. They grabbed solid players that we can have playing for years to come if the camp reports are accurate.
Next year they will attempt to mimic the success for the offense.
The FO had to make a call and address one group or the other. They felt that the defensive players were more talented than the offensive guys available, I'm ok with that. It's progress....
totally agree - we all have different thoughts on what may or may not happen here this year but I agree that the best thing to do at this time is to let things play out a little more before we make any decisions on what we have to do - give everybody a chance - this group could surprise us and everybody needs to chill and give the players and coaches here every opportunity to show what the've got
we are no longer considering who to add or what will work best, that time has passed - we are who we are and these guys should be given every support - we will be better off in the long run if we just stay the course and find out how good or bad our situation is
I also agree - It's progress
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:35 pm
by CanesSkins26
How can you be upset about something that may or may not happen? Your entire post is hypothetical.
1. What need do we have at LB? We're grooming Blades to supplant London. Orakpo is here, Rocky is fine. We have depth... We can get depth in the latter rounds of next years draft AND WE DRAFTED AT LB THIS PREVIOUS YEAR.
2. A change of pace back? WE HAVE TWO OF THEM THIS YEAR!!!
3. JC not doing well? What if he does do well? You can't call it either way until it happens.
I might not agree with the specifics that he mentions, but he does make an overall valid point. There have been a lot of comments made on the board about addressing the oline in the draft next year. While a nice thought, very rarely is a team in a position to just be able to focus on one thing. Injuries happen, players retire, players sign elsewhere, etc.
The reality of the situation is that more than likely we are going to have to spend one of our higher draft picks on a qb next year, either because JC didn't step up enough or because he played well but chose to sign elsewhere. Those are both very real possibilities. It's impossible to know what going to happen next year, but it's pretty stupid to assume that we'll just be able to address the oline next year.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:41 pm
by VetSkinsFan
There's a lot of time left between now and JC's FA. For now, I would make situation 1 addressing the oline without worrying about a new QB. Situation 2 addresses the oline WITH worrying about a QB. That's how I would plan.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:55 pm
by brad7686
They could eliminate half their sacks if they could learn how to block against a 3-4 blitz.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:05 pm
by SkinsFreak
Chad Rinehart is working at starting right guard because Randy Thomas is hurt. Don't be misled. Rhinehart is pushing for a starting job, and there are those in the organization who think he can win it. That remains to be seen, of course, but he looks sharp in practice, showing good feet and balance in the face of a pass rush. Rhinehart was a third-round pick a year ago but did not play, so he committed himself to improving in the offseason, jacked up his weigh to 310 pounds and is now pushing Thomas for a starting job. "We had a nice little talk with him at the end of the season," said offensive line coach Joe Bugel. "We said, 'You need to bulk up some more and get more strength.' So he went back to Northern Iowa [where he attended college] and started pounding the weights. He put on about really good 15 pounds and came back a completely different player and person. He has confidence in himself, and he's a warrior. He's a good athlete, and he's very intelligent. He's a good learner."
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:20 pm
by SnyderSucks
SkinsFreak wrote: Chad Rinehart is working at starting right guard because Randy Thomas is hurt. Don't be misled. Rhinehart is pushing for a starting job, and there are those in the organization who think he can win it. That remains to be seen, of course, but he looks sharp in practice, showing good feet and balance in the face of a pass rush. Rhinehart was a third-round pick a year ago but did not play, so he committed himself to improving in the offseason, jacked up his weigh to 310 pounds and is now pushing Thomas for a starting job. "We had a nice little talk with him at the end of the season," said offensive line coach Joe Bugel. "We said, 'You need to bulk up some more and get more strength.' So he went back to Northern Iowa [where he attended college] and started pounding the weights. He put on about really good 15 pounds and came back a completely different player and person. He has confidence in himself, and he's a warrior. He's a good athlete, and he's very intelligent. He's a good learner."
Good Optimistic quote! What's the source? I've been hoping that Rhinehart could somehow win the job and make Thomas solid depth. I'm still kind of hoping that the team gets Runyon or Andrews for additional depth. As last year showed, you can never have too much depth.
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:32 pm
by ArlingtonSkinsFan
I just hope we don't find ourselves midseason saying: "They are who we thought they were! And we let em off the hook!"
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:34 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
CanesSkins26 wrote:but it's pretty stupid to assume that we'll just be able to address the oline next year.
Nobody is saying all of the draft pics are going to the o-line. Come on now...
I'm debating where the focus will be and I believe the offensive line will get more focus next year.