The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Countertrey wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Countertrey wrote:What round was Joe Jacoby drafted in?

He wasn't drafted

That's my point.

How did your point pertain to the discussion?

You really couldn't figure that out?

kaz wrote:How did your point pertain to the discussion?

Countertrey wrote:Oh, I don't know... maybe...

kaz wrote:You project a seventh round rookie to be able to "step right in" and start before the first camp? Seriously? If that was the case, why did 32 teams pass on him 6 times?

You offer this rhetoric as though there is some absolute

Where is there any "absolute" in my statement? I knew you were making the Tom Brady argument, I just wanted to hear you say it. You did. If Joe Jacoby did it, then I can't think it's a stretch to say a seventh rounder will "step right in" to replace Heyer opening day is an "absolute." Got it.

Fios wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Countertrey wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Countertrey wrote:What round was Joe Jacoby drafted in?

He wasn't drafted

That's my point.

How did your point pertain to the discussion?

You really couldn't figure that out?

Of course I realized that he was as you are reading what you want me to have said instead of what I actually said. Or you could have read the discussion where I kept repeating I was not challenging it was "possible" only that I found it doubtful to say he "should" be able to step right in. A single name doesn't contradict either what Nik said or what I did, that's why it didn't have anything to do with the discussion.

I'll tell you what Fios, show me ANY quote in the ENTIRE discussion where I said he "can't" step in. If you can't show me that, and you can't because I never meant nor said that, a single name means nothing and a single name doesn't prove he "should" be able to step in, the assertion I challenged. It only proves it's "possible," which I didn't challenge.

Countertrey wrote:What round was Joe Jacoby drafted in?

That's not really a fair comparison though. Compared to 1981, coaches have far more access to information about players. Chances of players slipping through the cracks the way that Jacoby did is far lower now.

I love the hogs as much as the next guy, but those days are gone. New system, new scheme, new type of players. I really don't know what our needs are since we haven't even seen how our players fit the scheme in a game environment. One thing for sure we need OL's. I think this need has been adressed as best as we can in the draft. We will need to wait and see this coming season to see what else we will need. I'm excited. =)

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

1niksder wrote:In September I'll ask you to name one and I'm projecting you'll be able to do it.

I hope you're right!

I hope I'm wrong...

I thought they would make a trade with the Saints for Jammal Brown, but it didn't happen. He lost his starting LOT spot to Bushrod last season and was rumored to be on the trading block, they drafted Charles Brown so now they have 3 LOTs. Baltimore's Jared Gaither also hasn't moved. Either would allow Trent Williams to move to the right side and we would be set for years.

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

1niksder wrote:In September I'll ask you to name one and I'm projecting you'll be able to do it.

I hope you're right!

I hope I'm wrong...

I thought they would make a trade with the Saints for Jammal Brown, but it didn't happen. He lost his starting LOT spot to Bushrod last season and was rumored to be on the trading block, they drafted Charles Brown so now they have 3 LOTs. Baltimore's Jared Gaither also hasn't moved. Either would allow Trent Williams to move to the right side and we would be set for years.

Jammal Brown also played RT for his first season with New Orleans before moving to the left. So, it would give us some flexibility there.

I think that NO is going to hold on to all 3 for now, hoping that someone develops a critical need during preseason... then, they can commit extortion.

Our needs are the same as they were before the draft.

TincoSkin wrote:Our needs are the same as they were before the draft.

?? We picked up a starting LT, built up some LB depth, resolved the Jason Campbell issue, drafted a potential kick and punt returner, and took a shot on a couple of OL youngsters. It looked like a pretty needs-filling draft to most of us here . . .

I'll agree that our major issue remains the O line but I think that anyone that thought the draft or trades OR a combination of both was going to alleviate that issue in the near future was in dreamland - that issue is going to take a little bit of time and I do not think we'll be very happy with the offensive line play until the middle of next season at the earliest - the main concern is not just having a good line but equally as important is to have decent depth - that will take some time

you have to like the fact that Allen and Shanahan showed restraint in not letting players that looked like they might be traded (Haynesworth, Landry or McIntosh) for less than they are worth - Campbell was not going to be a part of this franchise and might have been cut if he had not been picked up by the Raiders - we got something for him and that's one of the better things that has happened recently

we are all playing a waiting game now but the good thing for us is that we have some players that other teams might want AND we are not close to being a competitive team - there are a number of good teams out there (like New Orleans or Baltimore) that might have a need soon and we'll get a lot more from a team if they think any of our players that are worth something will help them make the playoffs - that's what happens when you have savvy NFL guys in charge - they don't trade away good NFL players for less than they are worth to you - DUH


we need to take our time and keep rebuilding this franchise - we are not close to being where we want to be but we now have guys in charge that will not mortgage the future like Cerrato and Snyder did


we do still have a lot of needs but we have added a QB and I think we've got better coaches and will see a bit better utilization of the players and better game planning - we're on the right path and just need to give these guys a chance

H A I L

couldnt agree more.. what we addressed this offseason was a new coaching staff and adding Donavan. as far as the draft goes we got an OT. id like to see him grow into a perenial probowler but only time will tell.. other than that, one draft (with fewer picks than i would have liked, man we have a great history of trading away picks) isnt going to fill our needs. we have so many holes its going to be a couple years before we are whole again.

Irn-Bru wrote:

TincoSkin wrote:Our needs are the same as they were before the draft.

?? We picked up a starting LT, built up some LB depth, resolved the Jason Campbell issue, drafted a potential kick and punt returner, and took a shot on a couple of OL youngsters. It looked like a pretty needs-filling draft to most of us here . . .

I think we did fairly well in the draft, but don't think we did enough for the OL. Both Capers and Cook are probable cuts or backups. We should have grabbed Bruce Campbell in the fourth.

Months ago, I said that switching to the 3-4 could cost us an effective OL by siphoning off talent-- and so it has, unless we pick up another FA or two for the OL. I can understand anyone saying our OL hasn't improved. Dockery, Raback, and Mike Williams are a year older, Hicks is not a legitimate starter, and Trent Williams is both a ? and a rookie, which means he has a lot to learn.

If the OL stays the same as it is now, we'll still have the worse OL in our division and one of the worse in football. There will be no big change.

By the way, Bruce Allen made a big deal about how many new OL he drafted, as if what he did was serious-- instead of just two seventh round picks. Who does the guy think he's kidding. This year was pretty much like other years.

The absolute minimum was done for the OL-- a first round pick, this year, being unavoidable/the minimum. Anything less would have been a scandal.

crazyhorse1 wrote:I think we did fairly well in the draft, but don't think we did enough for the OL. Both Capers and Cook are probable cuts or backups. We should have grabbed Bruce Campbell in the fourth.

Yeah, but would you say "our needs are the same as they were before the draft"?

1niksder wrote:

kaz wrote:I hope you're right!

I hope I'm wrong...

What if we compromise. I hope you're right he's good enough, but we don't need him to. Win-win!

Our biggest need? [Fantasy Mode]To win the Superbowl in the Dallas Cow Palace! [/Fantasy Mode]

That would be the Sweetest of all!

Irn-Bru wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:I think we did fairly well in the draft, but don't think we did enough for the OL. Both Capers and Cook are probable cuts or backups. We should have grabbed Bruce Campbell in the fourth.

Yeah, but would you say "our needs are the same as they were before the draft"?

There's a chance we filled our greatest need with Williams, and we got McNabb with the second pick. I doubt we did much else with the draft. Maybe Capers will become a legit backup. But, still, we did OK. About one and a half starters per draft is par for the NFL and we might have gotten our share. I'm counting McNabb as the half pick. The TE might be interesting to follow if he can make it as a FB and Terrence is as fast as Harvin (but too small). He couldn't be worse than ARE as a PR though.

So, my answer to your question is "no." We have fewer needs now than we had before the draft.

Overall, I think Shanahan and Allen have marginally improved the team. We have a slightly better OL, a slightly better QB, much better but not good running backs and a slightly better defense. It will surprise me if Perry works out, but we'll have a stronger DL. I think we'll finish last in our division with about seven wins. We can do better than that if we pick up a good RT and ILB, as well as an outstanding safety.

I also think we could compete for the playoffs if we had gotten Dansby, Marshall, and Pashos. I still don't understand why Shanny and Allen sat on their hands.

drafted a potential kick and punt returner,

Our kick returner should be Thomas and our punt returner should be Buchanan.

Well, what does our 53 man roster look like? This is a guess, and I'm going for roster slots more than who is starting over whom.

QB1: McNabb
QB2: Grossman
QB3: Brennan/other
RB1: Portis
RB2: Johnson/Parker
RB3: Torain/other
FB: Sellers
TE1: ey
TE2: Davis
TE3: Yoder/other
WR1: Moss
WR2: Kelly
WR3: Thomas
WR4: Mitchell/other
Swing: Morris/Aldridge/Austin
LT: Williams
LG: Dockery
C: Rabach
RG: Hicks
RT: Heyer
C2: Montgomery/Cook/Lichtensteiger/E Williams
T3: M Williams
T4: Robinson/Capers/Oldenberg
G3: Rinehart
G4: Montgomery/Cook/Lichtensteiger/E Williams/other
K: Gano/Medlock
P: Bidwell
LS/ST
LE: Haynesworth
NT: Kemoeatu
RE: Carriker
NT2: Green/Bryant/other
DE3: Jarmon
DE4: Daniels/Peterson/other
DL7
SAM: Orapko
MIKE: Fletcher
JACK: McIntosh
WILL: Carter
OLB3: Wilson
OLB4: Alexander/Riley/other
ILB3: Blades
ILB4: Henson/Riley
RCB: Hall
LCB: Rogers
SS: Landry
FS: Moore?
CB3: Buchanon
CB4: Tryon
CB5: Barnes/Westbrook/McCauley
SS2: Doughty
FS2: ?
DB10/LB9: Horton

QB and TE are solid.

D-line looks solid. We might be weak at starting NT, but we make up for it in depth.

Our WRs and RBs are really weak, but our at least our depth looks good at RB.

Our O line looks ugly. Outside of Hicks, our starters are weak or unproven. If Cook and Capers don't step up and earn their spots, our depth looks bad, too.

Our ILBs could be strong if they can adjust to a 3-4. Our OLBs look very thin. Is Alexander really going to be there?

We are a mess at Safety. I read an item recently about converting one of the CBs to a Free Safety. Maybe that's going to be Barnes. He's a hard hitter, good tackler, he's smart, and he doesn't seem to be doing much for us on the corner. If Barnes adjusted well to the switch we could actually be in good shape for DBs. Our starting corners are weak, but our depth is decent there. Buchanon might beat out either.

And... addressing the debate going on here, I think there's an outside *chance* of Capers beating out Heyer. He's certainly raw, but has some talent. I don't think there's any less of a chance of him doing it vs. Bruce Campbell. He's not quite as athletic, but also not quite as raw. I like taking him in the 7th vs. Campbell in the 4th, though I still think Riley is a bad pick. If we had taken Cam Thomas in the 4th I would feel pretty good about passing on Campbell.

Our front 7 could be very good IF: Kemoeatu comes back strong, Carter and Rocky adjust, and Carter and Orakpo stay healthy.

FireVinny wrote:Well, what does our 53 man roster look like? This is a guess, and I'm going for roster slots more than who is starting over whom.

QB1: McNabb
QB2: Grossman
QB3: Brennan/other
RB1: Portis
RB2: Johnson/Parker
RB3: Torain/other
FB: Sellers
TE1: ey
TE2: Davis
TE3: Yoder/other
WR1: Moss
WR2: Kelly
WR3: Thomas
WR4: Mitchell/other
Swing: Morris/Aldridge/Austin
LT: Williams
LG: Dockery
C: Rabach
RG: Hicks
RT: Heyer
C2: Montgomery/Cook/Lichtensteiger/E Williams
T3: M Williams
T4: Robinson/Capers/Oldenberg
G3: Rinehart
G4: Montgomery/Cook/Lichtensteiger/E Williams/other
K: Gano/Medlock
P: Bidwell
LS/ST
LE: Haynesworth
NT: Kemoeatu
RE: Carriker
NT2: Green/Bryant/other
DE3: Jarmon
DE4: Daniels/Peterson/other
DL7
SAM: Orapko
MIKE: Fletcher
JACK: McIntosh
WILL: Carter
OLB3: Wilson
OLB4: Alexander/Riley/other
ILB3: Blades
ILB4: Henson/Riley
RCB: Hall
LCB: Rogers
SS: Landry
FS: Moore?
CB3: Buchanon
CB4: Tryon
CB5: Barnes/Westbrook/McCauley
SS2: Doughty
FS2: ?
DB10/LB9: Horton

QB and TE are solid.

D-line looks solid. We might be weak at starting NT, but we make up for it in depth.

Our WRs and RBs are really weak, but our at least our depth looks good at RB.

Our O line looks ugly. Outside of Hicks, our starters are weak or unproven. If Cook and Capers don't step up and earn their spots, our depth looks bad, too.

Our ILBs could be strong if they can adjust to a 3-4. Our OLBs look very thin. Is Alexander really going to be there?

We are a mess at Safety. I read an item recently about converting one of the CBs to a Free Safety. Maybe that's going to be Barnes. He's a hard hitter, good tackler, he's smart, and he doesn't seem to be doing much for us on the corner. If Barnes adjusted well to the switch we could actually be in good shape for DBs. Our starting corners are weak, but our depth is decent there. Buchanon might beat out either.

You seem to be suggesting that Hicks is our best OL. DD CR are better. It wouldn't surprise me if Rinehart started ahead of Hicks. I think he's a better fit for zone blocking.

I don't see a "mess" at safety. LL probably starts alongside Doughty or Horton.

PLEASE - stop reminding us that Dockery is one of our better offensive linemen - that's embarrassing

I know he is but that's the reason we have to find some offensive linemen


Dockery is not that good - I'll be happy when every player that started here the past 2 years is replaced and not even able to be a backup

yupchagee wrote:I don't see a "mess" at safety. LL probably starts alongside Doughty or Horton.

None of those three can play free safety.

They're all terrible in deep pass coverage, and Doughty and Horton are pretty average at strong safety, too. Landry has stated flat out that he's switching to SS, where Doughty and Horton played last year. Horton has never played FS, and given his past struggles in pass coverage, I doubt he'd succeed. Doughty was a FS in college, but he was terrible at the position in '07, before switching with Landry.

Three guys at SS and none at FS (apologies to Kareem Moore). That's a mess.

But, sorry, you're right: I was probably overstating Hicks' value... what I should have said is that EVERYONE on our OL is weak or unproven. CR used to be an above average center, but that time has passed.

FireVinny wrote:

yupchagee wrote:I don't see a "mess" at safety. LL probably starts alongside Doughty or Horton.

None of those three can play free safety.

Sharper left here without a contract... I hear he's headed to Ashburn.

Can't confirm it though