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

19. Washington Football Team—Christian Darrisaw, T, Virginia Tech

Admirable story. As the 171st-rated offensive tackle coming out of high school, Darrisaw got one major-school offer (Virginia Tech) and took it . . . and started 35 of 36 games in his three-year career with the Hokies, all at left tackle. At 6-5 and 322, Darrisaw is a feisty and battle-tested player who could play in year one on a line that got overrun for 50 sacks in 2020. The left-tackle position allowed 38 sacks/pressures for WFT last year, and with a stationary quarterback for at least one more year in Washington in Ryan Fitzpatrick, the immediate need is there to do better than, say, Cornelius Lucas at left tackle.

riggofan wrote:https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... eter-king/

Peter King in what I assume is his final mock draft before the real deal:

19. Washington Football Team—Christian Darrisaw, T, Virginia Tech

Admirable story. As the 171st-rated offensive tackle coming out of high school, Darrisaw got one major-school offer (Virginia Tech) and took it . . . and started 35 of 36 games in his three-year career with the Hokies, all at left tackle. At 6-5 and 322, Darrisaw is a feisty and battle-tested player who could play in year one on a line that got overrun for 50 sacks in 2020. The left-tackle position allowed 38 sacks/pressures for WFT last year, and with a stationary quarterback for at least one more year in Washington in Ryan Fitzpatrick, the immediate need is there to do better than, say, Cornelius Lucas at left tackle.

I like the "battle-tested player who could play in year one" part.

BossHog wrote:Here's the piece I was talking about...

HISTORY SAYS WASHINGTON SHOULD DRAFT A TACKLE IN FIRST ROUND

Cheers.

Thoughts are welcome and appreciated.

skins fan in indiana wrote:Great article Boss and even thou we traded for Flowers, the pick at #19 still should be the best LT on the board.

So, I hope history holds true!.

riggofan wrote:I've been dying to ask this draft question of some knowledgeable people. Is there a case to be made at 19 for taking the biggest stud RB? I know that position is kind of undervalued these days, but we've also seen how a young, beast running back can impact an offense. I was wondering if drafting a guy like Etienne or Harris there and have him on the rookie contract for five years is maybe more valuable than a linebacker for wins/losses?

Just curious if you had any thoughts. Something I never hear discussed by the radio guys.

I can't wait to see what the team does this year in the draft. Think we'll find out if media and fan perceptions of the team match up to what the coaches believe.

DarthMonk wrote:I honestly consider Antonio Gibson to be a stud.

He’s fast and powerful - he’s got true fire power.

And he was a wide receiver in college - the man can do it all.

riggofan wrote:btw what is the story with WFT only signing ONE undrafted FA this year? That seems really unusual for this team. Is that unusual for most teams?

BossHog wrote:

riggofan wrote:btw what is the story with WFT only signing ONE undrafted FA this year? That seems really unusual for this team. Is that unusual for most teams?

If memory serves me correctly, we only signed four last year.

BossHog wrote:This is a COVID casualty. Because of Covid, teams are only allowed to have a balloon roster of 80 players instead of the old 90 players. So it's harder to just sign a bunch of maybe-guys and then cut them in training camp. It doesn't answer why there was only one, but maybe that's part of the reason.