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

Before you say im crazy , which believe me I realize this a longshot pick, just hear me out. Lets say the draft goes like this (which is very possible}
raiders-russell
lions-quin
browns -Anderson
Bucs- Adams
Cards-Thomas

Ok now were on the clock Now before everyone jumps out and says BRANCH!..Lets Analyze this for a second. I know everyone(scouts) is gaga over him yet USC and OHIO ST didnt have any problems marching up and down on his defense(Matter of fact did Branch even play in those two games? food for thought)
since 2002 these are DT's taken in the first 15 picks -1st round
Ryan sims-kc
john hendrerson-Jaguars
D robertson-jets
wendell braynt-arizona
Jonathan sullivan-NO
K williams-Minny
J Kennedy -rams
w. Joseph-Giants
AND TOMMIE HARRIS-BEARS--I highlight him because hes clearly the cream of this mediocore crop. Hes a great player..But Dt's do not translate well in this NFL they tend to drift towards mediocority with spurts of greatness..lets face it its not a High Impact position..much risk occasional reward
Now lets look at WR'S in the first 15 picks -1st round- since-2002
Braylon Edwards-browns
T williamson-minny
mike williams-det
charles rogers-det
andre johnson-Texans
Larry fitzgerald-ari
Roy williams- det
Lee evans-Buff
Donte stallworth-Philly
Out of the 9, 3 are bona fide studs Fitz, Roy Will, and Andre Johnson and the rest pretty damn good ,some entering into that next level next year ....Rogers and Mike williams being busts...Less Risk much Higher reward
LETS FACE IT WR Scores TDS!!..Who would you rather have Moss or Griffin?...My point exactly....Cut B-loyd now end the misery and the bad reminders from last year..Clear up some space and Give Campbell his much needed STUD WR.....Its possible my friends.....Dont count on it BUT count it out either

Well, choosing between Moss or Griffin is hardly the point. But since you asked - Griffin is more important to this football team than Moss. If Moss gets injured, we theoretically have the players to fill in (I appreciate that may be a stretch given this season's performance). If Griffin gets injured (and he does often), then we have nobody who can come close to filling the void he leaves. He's 30+, he's wearing down, and he's the only sure thing we've got on the d-line at the moment.

A bona fide difference maker on the d-line would make the whole defence better. I don't see that another mega bucks wide receiver is going to improve our offence to the same extent. If our football team was coming off a Superbowl with no major holes and space under the cap, then I'd say go for the best player you can find, regardless of position. But this team has holes to be filled, and I just don't think trying to shoehorn another wide receiver into the mix is going to help.

There's no such thing as a sure thing in the draft, and we may bust again with a defensive lineman, but I'd rather we tried to fix the problems that we have, rather than creating new ones by trying to find a way to keep four very well paid wide receivers happy (on a supposedly run-first football team).

But I don't think you're crazy.

While it's possible Johnson will be there. I don't think he will be. With that said and just for fun, let's say he is available at #6. I think Calvin Johnson is a terrific talent who would be hard to pass on, but if a team picking behind us made an offer that would be hard to refuse.
Ex. #7 pick along with a 2nd or perhaps a 3rd and 4th rounder might do it. That way the Skin's could get more help for the defense which is where we need it most.
If nobody gave us a package that knocked our socks off then Johnson is a nice consolation prize.

Uk I pretty much agree with everything you said ...Im not saying your wrong..I just making an agruement for a not so talked about option. I think its an option the skins cant ignore......Look at what Burress brings to the Jints on the field--missmatch deluxe(yes I would never want him-off the field hes a mess). wr's are diffrence makers.. .....but im with you the defense almost made me cry in frustration this year

MEZZSKIN wrote:Ok now were on the clock Now before everyone jumps out and says BRANCH!..Lets Analyze this for a second. I know everyone(scouts) is gaga over him yet USC and OHIO ST didnt have any problems marching up and down on his defense(Matter of fact did Branch even play in those two games?

I like Branch, but I'm not "gaga" over the Skins drafting him. I'd be happy drafting him but not unhappy if the other pick makes sense. But we should think about that two teams ran over his entire D, 11 guys, as food for thought to skip him? I don't really follow that logic.

Uk I pretty much agree with everything you said ...Im not saying your wrong..I just making an agruement for a not so talked about option. I think its an option the skins cant ignore......Look at what Burress brings to the Jints on the field--missmatch deluxe(yes I would never want him-off the field hes a mess). wr's are diffrence makers.. .....but im with you the defense almost made me cry in frustration this year

Kazoo what was trying to say..Did he make one impact play in those two games?..Ohio st and USC ran there offense completely unimpeded..If he cant make a big play against USC Or Ohio St you would feel confident he will make a diffrence in Texas Stadium , The LiNC oR THE MEADOWLANDS?....he was non existent ..Film doesnt lie

We do not need talented players or talented playmakers we need players who make the rest of the people around them better.

That being the case, the next question is what do we need? Do we need to make our offense better and if so in what area? The WRs, the line, the RBs, the QB? OR do we have needs on defense?

I think that when you look at it from that perspective - you realize that if C Johnson is available at #6, Gibbs will surely consider him - for a millisecond - and he will trade this pick OR he will pick a defensive player.

We do not need Calvin Johnson, even if he becomes the best WR, ever - we need to make our team better.

Jock cant argue with you..But let lets say no one wants to trade ..Do you just pick a defensive player just for the sake of picking defense or do you take the best player available....I think Johnson makes us much better than Branch ever would........that being said....if the DE'S are still there I would go with one of them because that postion translates better in the NFL .Its easier to project.... Dt's just dont provide the impact..Its all draft hype..they very rarely pan out... "If you dont pay attention or study History your doomed to repeat it"......

MEZZSKIN, I agree with you. The addition of Lloyd and El have not stopped opposing defenses from double and triple teaming Moss. A stud like Johnson would free up Moss and add a big target for Campbell. Having a possession receiver like Johnson, who BTW has a rare combination of size AND speed, will help the offense sustain drives. This in turn will help the defense, by keeping them off the field.

I posed this question a while ago and have yet to hear a solid argument on the matter. If we were to select a guy like Branch at DT, what then happens to Griffin, Salave'a, Golston and Montgomery?

Another question for those who want to trade down for more picks. Do you even realize how many defensive players we've drafted in recent years, most who arn't even on the current roster???

Since 2002:
LB Robert McCune
LB Kevin Simon
LB Jarad Newberry
DB Rashad Bauman
S Andre Lott
DE Greg Scott

Add to that, last year we drafted 2 DT's (Golston and Montgomery), 2 LB's (McIntosh and Simon) and a safety (Reed Doughty). That's a lot of picks spent on the defense. And did it help? I let you think about that a while.

We have not drafted a true stud on offense in a very long time. I think Campbell is a stud, but that still remains to be seen. The only other offensive guys we drafted since 2000, who turned out to be worth anything, are Chris Samuals, Derrick Dockery, Ladell Betts and Rock Cartwright. That's it.

Again, I think we'll plug some holes in defense through free agency. Alan Branch alone will not change things on defense. I believe a stud MLB and a stud corner will make a greater impact on defense, both can be found in free agency.

For the record, I like the idea of taking Calvin Johnson if he is there at #6. Think about it; Moss, Johnson, El and ey. Damn, I like the sound of that.

I understand but I do not agree with the thinking that a better offense will overcome a weak defense by keeping it off the field. A great offense can score a lot of points but it is the defense (and special teams) that more often than not determines if you win or lose.

I think you want a good offense, sure, but, you better have a better defense than the team you are playing to ensure success.

Why are the Ravens favored over the Colts? The Colts are a great offense with a defense that despite being the worst against the run in all of the NFL, for the season, somehow managed to stop one of the biggest and best runners in the NFL in L. Johnson last week.

A trivia stat - The number 1 team in the NFL, over the past 10 years, in home victories, is the Ravens - they did not get that good by having a very good offense - it has been rated at or near the bottom.

MEZZSKIN wrote:Kazoo what was trying to say..Did he make one impact play in those two games?..Ohio st and USC ran there offense completely unimpeded..If he cant make a big play against USC Or Ohio St you would feel confident he will make a diffrence in Texas Stadium , The LiNC oR THE MEADOWLANDS?....he was non existent ..Film doesnt lie

Did you watch the games?

On Ohio State the Michigan D and the D line actually played well. Heisman winner Troy Smith was in a zone. He would get off pass after pass just before he got hit and thread a needle. The D kept pasteing him, but he would jump up and do it again. Late in the game they had some stops and the O was coming back. Then Crable has the personal foul when they would have had the chance to take the lead, and instead gave the ball back to Ohio State who went back up by 2 scores, and still just hung on.

They actually held USC to 3 first half points, but the O was three and most of the game and hung them out to dry.

How did Branch do personally? I don't remember. You didn't tell me other then did he "make one impact play?" You just said he was part of a D that got pasted their last two games and you dont' remember an impact play. OK.

And on impact play, that's a heavy requirment for a big run stopping DT in the middle. His job is to disrupt, stop the run, and draw double teams. But you want to see him come up with some big sacks over just 2 games against top teams too?

All I'm saying is that is not compelling to me. As I said I'm not one of the ones saying we have to get this guy either. But if arguments are going to be made that two top 5 teams pasteing a D rejects all their players we can find a reason not to draft anyone.

I want Calvin Johnson or Jamaal Anderson.

One could also look at the defensive struggles from another perspective.

We had NO passing game this year, at least not until Brunell was benched. By the time Brunell was benched, we were already out of the playoff picture. I don't care about any slim mathematical playoff chances at that point, we were done, period. At that point, a defense lacks motivation.

We all know what the passing game looked like with Brunell, it was non-existent. Why? Maybe it was Brunell, scared to pass the ball. Maybe it was the fact that Moss was doubled. Or maybe it was because Lloyd, who can make nice catches, simply lacks the speed and size to create separation from the DB's.

We had so many 3 and outs and were not able to sustain drives. This put our defense in a bad position. I think the fatigue and injuries on defense can, in part, be attributed to this. They were simply on the field longer. Not only does this have a physical effect on the defense, it also has mental and emotional effects as well.

What motivation does the defense have when they know the offense, under Brunell, can't do anything?

I'll bet that with a better offense, the defense would be better too. I'll also bet that if we did not replace or add anyone to the current defensive roster, they would statistically finish better next year with a better offense. That's right, I said it. Having a better passing attack, better red zone offense, scoring more points, staying on the field longer, and this same defensive unit would finish the season with better numbers.

Do you really want to spend 3 draft picks in 2 years on a DT??? Maybe a DE, but not a DT. Are we going to cut Griffin, Salave'a, Montgomery or Golston? Why would we? That would again be another waste.

Anyone who has played the game or fully understands a defensive philosophy, knows that a DT is not really a "run stuffer". They are there to get a "body on a body" and fill gaps, with the occasional sack or run stop. The true "run stuffers" are linebackers.

In 2005, most fans wanted a receiver, Mike Williams, with the 1st pick. Then we drafted a DB (Rogers), to help out the defense, and everyone was like, what the hell? With only the loss of one significant player on defense last year (Clark) I'm pretty sure this was the same unit that finished the prior 2005 season with pretty darn good stats. The other losses on defense were to injuries.

Basically, this is a strong draft and we are sitting pretty to draft one of these players

J. Anderson
G. Adams
C. Johnson
A. Branch
G. Dorsey


If Calvin is available, i think you still go D unless most of the linemen are gone and they don't like the ones available. I don't think you trade back because he is a difference maker. This is all pretty futile though because im almost certain TB takes him at 4.

One final thought with respect to taking Johnson over a DT...

I really think Golston showed us a lot last year. I also believe Montgomery will work out fine, as G. Williams likes him. And I believe Griffin and Salave'a, assuming they stay healthy, are still good enough to be starters, and will remain the starters. They both had a pretty good 2005 season to justify that. I'm fairly satisfied with those four guys.

The more I think about it, IMO, drafting a DT with a pick that high would be a huge mistake. I would rather take a stud DE with the 6th pick, and maybe pick up another DT later in the draft.

So for me, it's between a DE and Calvin Johnson, if available. I like Johnson. Too good to pass up, IMO. If you've seen him play, and only if you've ever seen him play, only then will you appreciate why I feel this way about Johnson., with the sixth overall pick.

A) Johnson will never reach it to #6 because there is no way Tampa will pass on him.

B) Since we don't need Johnson, and he's a freaking freak, that would be the perfect time to trade down to like #15 or so and pick up GOOD middle round picks.

Seems to me like the Johnson advocates here are making this into a choice between Johnson and a defensive tackle. Given that choice, I've already said that I'd go with the tackle, but that is not the choice.

Drafting Johnson would deny the possibility of drafting any defensive help in this draft. So, you might not want a tackle: you prefer an end or a middle linebacker, or a corner?

If there are players at those positions worthy of the #6 pick, then pick them. If not, find a way to trade to a position lower in the first round. Heck, I'd prefer them to pick an offensive lineman at #6 if there's a player that justifies it, rather than a wide receiver.

UK Skins Fan wrote:Seems to me like the Johnson advocates here are making this into a choice between Johnson and a defensive tackle. Given that choice, I've already said that I'd go with the tackle, but that is not the choice.

Drafting Johnson would deny the possibility of drafting any defensive help in this draft. So, you might not want a tackle: you prefer an end or a middle linebacker, or a corner?

If there are players at those positions worthy of the #6 pick, then pick them. If not, find a way to trade to a position lower in the first round. Heck, I'd prefer them to pick an offensive lineman at #6 if there's a player that justifies it, rather than a wide receiver.

You do realize that the 2 and 3 receivers on this team are brandon lloyd and ARE right?

UK Skins Fan wrote:Seems to me like the Johnson advocates here are making this into a choice between Johnson and a defensive tackle. Given that choice, I've already said that I'd go with the tackle, but that is not the choice.

Drafting Johnson would deny the possibility of drafting any defensive help in this draft. So, you might not want a tackle: you prefer an end or a middle linebacker, or a corner?

If there are players at those positions worthy of the #6 pick, then pick them. If not, find a way to trade to a position lower in the first round. Heck, I'd prefer them to pick an offensive lineman at #6 if there's a player that justifies it, rather than a wide receiver.

Hey, everyone is definately going to have an opinion on the matter. And everybody has good points with their respective opinions.

So how did the Texans fair this year? Passing on Reggie Bush or Vince Young to instead select DE Mario Williams was a brilliant move. Lesson learned by the Texans? You don't pass on offensive firepower like that. Vince Young and the Titans opened a lot of eyes this year. And the Saints? We'll find out today.

What happens if, much like the case with the Texans and Dominick Davis, Santana Moss gets injured and we lose him for a season? Think we will be ok with Lloyd, El, Thrash and Patten? Sorry, but this would concern me, there's no size or speed there.

Jason Campbell is a tall QB. We need a tall receiver to compliment Campbell's size. He currently has to throw the ball down at receivers.

Opposing defenses would have to account for Johnson, with more than one person. They currently can use man-to-man coverage on Lloyd and El, and double / triple team Moss. Johnson is so good, so fast and so big, teams would have to try and double him, opening the door for Moss and Portis' run game.

all great agruements . its a very intersting spot were in All I wanted to do was lay out some draft facts historically and lets debate. Kazoo I think Branch has had great college career but DT's rely on physicality and not technique at college level. Thats why they very very rarely translate well to the pros..DE's much diffrent story...ANd Stud WR Like Calvin Johnson are as close to a lay up offensive upgrade as there ever will be..Im still trying to figure out why people think its such foregone conclusion Johnson wont be there..Tampa loses simeon Rice this year..They need to get young on defense .Its real possibility we will face this dilemma ...

Drafting Calvin Johnson is a ridiculous proposition.

For one, there's no way he is going to slip to the 6th pick.

Plus, there's no way we can allocate sixth overall pick money to the position where we are already paying big money to Moss, Randle-El, Lloyd, AND Patten.

This team needs defense, not another WR. The last thing we need right now is another offensive playmaker. We have plenty of them. It's just a matter of properly using them.

Even if Calvin Johnson (who I realize is a great player) somehow managed to slip to #6, I'd still want the Skins to take Branch or Dorsey or Anderson. We need one of those guys a lot more than we need Johnson.

Dude! That Matt Millen will have Calvin Johnson picked at number two! Unless we trade portis! If that happens then I'm gonna jump off a bridge!

MEZZSKIN wrote:all great agruements . its a very intersting spot were in All I wanted to do was lay out some draft facts historically and lets debate. Kazoo I think Branch has had great college career but DT's rely on physicality and not technique at college level. Thats why they very very rarely translate well to the pros..DE's much diffrent story...ANd Stud WR Like Calvin Johnson are as close to a lay up offensive upgrade as there ever will be..Im still trying to figure out why people think its such foregone conclusion Johnson wont be there..Tampa loses simeon Rice this year..They need to get young on defense .Its real possibility we will face this dilemma ...

I didn't argue for Branch. Just didn't think the argument against him was strong, that's all I said. Kazoo is Kalamazoo, Michigan (where i"m from, not where I live), and I'm a UM alum as well, so I'm pretty familiar with him. I do like Branch, but I want the best player available for the Skins and I consider him only a candidate.

I have to say I'm not really interested in a receiver, though my brother is a GT alum and I've seen Calvin play and since he's a big physical presence I can see the argument for him. I think with a QB who doesn't suck like Brunell and with more experience then JC had this year he will distribute the ball better. I see QB more as the issue this year then the play of the receivers.

As a position with the #6, it seems DE is a bigger benefit. But if the best player available is a DT I don't see we go wrong there. Nothing against Golston, but a DT force with Griffen could open things more for our DEs too.

As good as Johnson may turn out to be, we need DEFENSE!