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

I think it's funny how timid Mel Kiper usually is with his draft grades (he hardly ever gives a team a A) but he gave us a solid B+ this year. Only Dallas (B+ I hate to say it, but they had a heck of a draft.), Kansas City (a well deserved, and very rare A.), and Cleveland (B+) matched or surpassed our grade.

Kiper's opinion isn't the be all end all, but it's nice to see a third party praise the Redskins' shrewd drafting.

Washington Redskins: GRADE: B+
They traded out of the first round and still were able to get three offensive weapons in the second round: wide receivers Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly and tight end Fred Davis. Chad Rinehart is a versatile offensive lineman who can play guard or tackle. In the sixth round, Georgia Tech's Durant Brooks was the first -- and only -- punter drafted. He has a strong leg and should compete for the starting job (30 of his 65 punts were 50 yards or longer). Hawaii QB Colt Brennan went in the sixth round. He isn't very big, but he has some ability. What hurt Brennan was his performance in the Sugar Bowl and the Senior Bowl practices, and the system he played in, which allowed him to put up big numbers. Safety Christopher Horton will be a good backup and special teams player. The only thing the Redskins didn't get was a pass-rushing defensive end.

We still need a defensive end obviously, but it looks like the Redskins just didn't see one that fit our needs. Great draft all around though, I was mad at first when they Skins drafted Durant Brooks with other needs on the board, but he punts like he's on Tecmo Bowl.

The Redskins managed to draft three first-round prospects in the second round. That means one of two things. Either the draft class was weak at the top or the Redskins knew what they were doing. I'll give the Skins the benefit of the doubt here and say that only Kansas City could also make that claim, but they actually had multiple first round picks. Nobody beat the Redskins on draft value as far as I'm concerned.

I'm holdign my judgment until the season gets underway and we see what these guys actually are made of.

The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one, and we failed to address our needs on the O and D lines and at LB.

I have always thought it made sense to take the best player available with the first pick, but after that you have to fill your own holes, the Skins did not.

The Redskins did fill the holes on the team. WR was a huge glaring need... and with the history of receivers in the draft, combined with the fact most WR prospects need about two years to blossom (and our WR's are getting old.) we made great picks for planning ahead.

A lot of people are bagging on the Fred Davis pick, but I like it a lot. TE isn't really an area of need, but a two TE set, a set where ey is in the backfield... there's a lot of possibilities for getting yardage there. Davis isn't a great blocker, but they say he's technically sound in that department... you can build strength on a young player and he may become a solid blocker as well as a good receiving threat.

We also got depth on the line, and depth at safety two other needs on the team.

It's true no defensive linemen were drafted early, but the Redskins simply didn't see one that met our needs.

Skinsfan55 wrote:The Redskins did fill the holes on the team. WR was a huge glaring need... and with the history of receivers in the draft, combined with the fact most WR prospects need about two years to blossom (and our WR's are getting old.) we made great picks for planning ahead.

A lot of people are bagging on the Fred Davis pick, but I like it a lot. TE isn't really an area of need, but a two TE set, a set where ey is in the backfield... there's a lot of possibilities for getting yardage there. Davis isn't a great blocker, but they say he's technically sound in that department... you can build strength on a young player and he may become a solid blocker as well as a good receiving threat.

We also got depth on the line, and depth at safety two other needs on the team.

It's true no defensive linemen were drafted early, but the Redskins simply didn't see one that met our needs.

yea, i mean its not like any of our wr's would start on every team. They wouldn't. I also agree about Davis, that is a great pick. It will really cause problems for other teams in two TE sets. All of this is going to open up a lot for CP and LB

"The Redskins managed to draft three first-round prospects in the second round. "

I kind of hate these statements. Really you're either a first rounder or not.

That said, it does seem like a lot of teams panicked late in the first round and started reaching for offensive linemen.

riggofan wrote:"The Redskins managed to draft three first-round prospects in the second round. "

I kind of hate these statements. Really you're either a first rounder or not.

That said, it does seem like a lot of teams panicked late in the first round and started reaching for offensive linemen.

If you're worth first round money, you're a first round prospect.
If you're worth first round money, and the Redskins draft you in the second round because you are still there that doesn't mean you're no longer worth first round money. It just means you aren't getting first round money.

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one

Disagree completely.

Santana Moss is getting older (29 in June), and extremely injury prone.

We needed at least 1 wide receiver, and in reality, 2 wide receivers. Because you know Santana is going to get hurt again at some point.

PulpExposure wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one

Disagree completely.

Santana Moss is getting older (29 in June), and extremely injury prone.

We needed at least 1 wide receiver, and in reality, 2 wide receivers. Because you know Santana is going to get hurt again at some point.

Am I the only one who isn't sold on Randle El as a slot receiver?

GSPODS wrote:

riggofan wrote:"The Redskins managed to draft three first-round prospects in the second round. "

I kind of hate these statements. Really you're either a first rounder or not.

That said, it does seem like a lot of teams panicked late in the first round and started reaching for offensive linemen.

If you're worth first round money, you're a first round prospect.
If you're worth first round money, and the Redskins draft you in the second round because you are still there that doesn't mean you're no longer worth first round money. It just means you aren't getting first round money.

When all is said and done, it remains that the Skins drafted two top WR prospects in the draft, the top TE prospect, a QB of starter potential, an OL who's a legit prospect, and one of the best punter prospects in draft history. No to mention a couple of needed DBs. Now, that's incredible-- especially when we had only one first round pick and that was in the middle of the round.

crazyhorse1 wrote:

GSPODS wrote:

riggofan wrote:"The Redskins managed to draft three first-round prospects in the second round. "

I kind of hate these statements. Really you're either a first rounder or not.

That said, it does seem like a lot of teams panicked late in the first round and started reaching for offensive linemen.

If you're worth first round money, you're a first round prospect.
If you're worth first round money, and the Redskins draft you in the second round because you are still there that doesn't mean you're no longer worth first round money. It just means you aren't getting first round money.

When all is said and done, it remains that the Skins drafted two top WR prospects in the draft, the top TE prospect, a QB of starter potential, an OL who's a legit prospect, and one of the best punter prospects in draft history. No to mention a couple of needed DBs. Now, that's incredible-- especially when we had only one first round pick and that was in the middle of the round.

Holy Crap! The glass is half full after all!

IF we don't get at least 4 (or even 5) starters out of this draft, I will be very surprised. I would also not be surprised to see Colt groomed to improve his talent, and then parlayed into a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick (ala Ron Wolfe) in the future. (The league is peppered with former GB backups, and Zorn knows how to do it. )

I actually think 7 out of the 9 picks have a very good chance of making the team. I'd say that is a successful draft.

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one, and we failed to address our needs on the O and D lines and at LB.

I have always thought it made sense to take the best player available with the first pick, but after that you have to fill your own holes, the Skins did not.

If you really think about it...the philosophy followed by the best draft teams is exactly the opposite.

With your first pick (a high #1) you take a player that fills a need. In the top 10, you may have 3 DE's, 2 RB's 2 OL's 1 DT and 2 QB's rated as the best 10 players in the draft. If you really need a QB, you don't take the DE that might be higher on everyone's board, you take the player you need...the QB. With later round picks, you take the best player available (within reason). This is not like selecting furniture.....I need a sofa and a chair and a coffee table and a lamp......because there is no guarantee that the player you pick is going to work out.

But all of it is speculation, and you really don't know how successful any draft was until after a year or two, and you can evaluate the players that actually make the roster and contribute.

On the surface, the Redskins did very well....and by picking 2 WR's, the Skins doubled their chances that one of them will become that starter that they need, and if we're super lucky, both will make the team and be contributors in clearly the weakest area of the team last year. The Punter was a great pick because the guy is a beast of a kicker. Colt Brennan was a great pick because he cost us nothing and could be that sleeper that can excel in a WC offense coached by one of the best QB coaches, Zorn....and we don't need a QB that has immediate starter potential. What a luxury to have a young QB that is accurate and smart, has good fundamentals and broke tons of NCAA records, and get him with a 6th round pick?

Let's keep in mind something here.....JC didn't produce last year, and our career backup came in and played circles around him. JC is going to have to produce this year, because potential doesn't feed the bull dog, and he's going into his 4th season as a Redskin.

Last year, we went 8 1/2 games into the season without a TD to a WR. That was a joke. Collins came in and threw 2 TD's in 4 1/2 minutes. JC doesn't have 2 more years to "learn". He needs to step up and produce this year or we'll be looking at a change.....mark my words here....if Zorn can't get JC producing quickly, he'll turn to someone that can produce.

Good Post! I completely agree!

RayNAustin wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one, and we failed to address our needs on the O and D lines and at LB.

I have always thought it made sense to take the best player available with the first pick, but after that you have to fill your own holes, the Skins did not.

If you really think about it...the philosophy followed by the best draft teams is exactly the opposite.

With your first pick (a high #1) you take a player that fills a need. In the top 10, you may have 3 DE's, 2 RB's 2 OL's 1 DT and 2 QB's rated as the best 10 players in the draft. If you really need a QB, you don't take the DE that might be higher on everyone's board, you take the player you need...the QB. With later round picks, you take the best player available (within reason). This is not like selecting furniture.....I need a sofa and a chair and a coffee table and a lamp......because there is no guarantee that the player you pick is going to work out.

But all of it is speculation, and you really don't know how successful any draft was until after a year or two, and you can evaluate the players that actually make the roster and contribute.

On the surface, the Redskins did very well....and by picking 2 WR's, the Skins doubled their chances that one of them will become that starter that they need, and if we're super lucky, both will make the team and be contributors in clearly the weakest area of the team last year. The Punter was a great pick because the guy is a beast of a kicker. Colt Brennan was a great pick because he cost us nothing and could be that sleeper that can excel in a WC offense coached by one of the best QB coaches, Zorn....and we don't need a QB that has immediate starter potential. What a luxury to have a young QB that is accurate and smart, has good fundamentals and broke tons of NCAA records, and get him with a 6th round pick?

Let's keep in mind something here.....JC didn't produce last year, and our career backup came in and played circles around him. JC is going to have to produce this year, because potential doesn't feed the bull dog, and he's going into his 4th season as a Redskin.

Last year, we went 8 1/2 games into the season without a TD to a WR. That was a joke. Collins came in and threw 2 TD's in 4 1/2 minutes. JC doesn't have 2 more years to "learn". He needs to step up and produce this year or we'll be looking at a change.....mark my words here....if Zorn can't get JC producing quickly, he'll turn to someone that can produce.

Awesome post that has zero context. I agree that JC didn't produce much, but he didn't have much of a chance. If you recall, there weren't the same 5 offensive lineman play and two consecutive weeks in the 1st half of the season. This affects the run game AND (egads!!) the passing game. It's not that simple or we'd be out there doing it.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one, and we failed to address our needs on the O and D lines and at LB.

I have always thought it made sense to take the best player available with the first pick, but after that you have to fill your own holes, the Skins did not.

If you really think about it...the philosophy followed by the best draft teams is exactly the opposite.

With your first pick (a high #1) you take a player that fills a need. In the top 10, you may have 3 DE's, 2 RB's 2 OL's 1 DT and 2 QB's rated as the best 10 players in the draft. If you really need a QB, you don't take the DE that might be higher on everyone's board, you take the player you need...the QB. With later round picks, you take the best player available (within reason). This is not like selecting furniture.....I need a sofa and a chair and a coffee table and a lamp......because there is no guarantee that the player you pick is going to work out.

But all of it is speculation, and you really don't know how successful any draft was until after a year or two, and you can evaluate the players that actually make the roster and contribute.

On the surface, the Redskins did very well....and by picking 2 WR's, the Skins doubled their chances that one of them will become that starter that they need, and if we're super lucky, both will make the team and be contributors in clearly the weakest area of the team last year. The Punter was a great pick because the guy is a beast of a kicker. Colt Brennan was a great pick because he cost us nothing and could be that sleeper that can excel in a WC offense coached by one of the best QB coaches, Zorn....and we don't need a QB that has immediate starter potential. What a luxury to have a young QB that is accurate and smart, has good fundamentals and broke tons of NCAA records, and get him with a 6th round pick?

Let's keep in mind something here.....JC didn't produce last year, and our career backup came in and played circles around him. JC is going to have to produce this year, because potential doesn't feed the bull dog, and he's going into his 4th season as a Redskin.

Last year, we went 8 1/2 games into the season without a TD to a WR. That was a joke. Collins came in and threw 2 TD's in 4 1/2 minutes. JC doesn't have 2 more years to "learn". He needs to step up and produce this year or we'll be looking at a change.....mark my words here....if Zorn can't get JC producing quickly, he'll turn to someone that can produce.

Awesome post that has zero context. I agree that JC didn't produce much, but he didn't have much of a chance. If you recall, there weren't the same 5 offensive lineman play and two consecutive weeks in the 1st half of the season. This affects the run game AND (egads!!) the passing game. It's not that simple or we'd be out there doing it.

I don't agree that the post totally lacks context but it's true that JC's struggles are more properly understood as the team's collective struggles. Moss dropped a couple of sure TD catches, Randle-El was tackled at the 1-yard line on another.
I largely agree with the draft analysis, nicely done.

Kiper's a schmuck.
Only a schmuck would think you can grade a draft the day after the draft.
All anyone can grade the day after the draft is the effort of the team to improve.

Fios wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one, and we failed to address our needs on the O and D lines and at LB.

I have always thought it made sense to take the best player available with the first pick, but after that you have to fill your own holes, the Skins did not.

If you really think about it...the philosophy followed by the best draft teams is exactly the opposite.

With your first pick (a high #1) you take a player that fills a need. In the top 10, you may have 3 DE's, 2 RB's 2 OL's 1 DT and 2 QB's rated as the best 10 players in the draft. If you really need a QB, you don't take the DE that might be higher on everyone's board, you take the player you need...the QB. With later round picks, you take the best player available (within reason). This is not like selecting furniture.....I need a sofa and a chair and a coffee table and a lamp......because there is no guarantee that the player you pick is going to work out.

But all of it is speculation, and you really don't know how successful any draft was until after a year or two, and you can evaluate the players that actually make the roster and contribute.

On the surface, the Redskins did very well....and by picking 2 WR's, the Skins doubled their chances that one of them will become that starter that they need, and if we're super lucky, both will make the team and be contributors in clearly the weakest area of the team last year. The Punter was a great pick because the guy is a beast of a kicker. Colt Brennan was a great pick because he cost us nothing and could be that sleeper that can excel in a WC offense coached by one of the best QB coaches, Zorn....and we don't need a QB that has immediate starter potential. What a luxury to have a young QB that is accurate and smart, has good fundamentals and broke tons of NCAA records, and get him with a 6th round pick?

Let's keep in mind something here.....JC didn't produce last year, and our career backup came in and played circles around him. JC is going to have to produce this year, because potential doesn't feed the bull dog, and he's going into his 4th season as a Redskin.

Last year, we went 8 1/2 games into the season without a TD to a WR. That was a joke. Collins came in and threw 2 TD's in 4 1/2 minutes. JC doesn't have 2 more years to "learn". He needs to step up and produce this year or we'll be looking at a change.....mark my words here....if Zorn can't get JC producing quickly, he'll turn to someone that can produce.

Awesome post that has zero context. I agree that JC didn't produce much, but he didn't have much of a chance. If you recall, there weren't the same 5 offensive lineman play and two consecutive weeks in the 1st half of the season. This affects the run game AND (egads!!) the passing game. It's not that simple or we'd be out there doing it.

I don't agree that the post totally lacks context but it's true that JC's struggles are more properly understood as the team's collective struggles. Moss dropped a couple of sure TD catches, Randle-El was tackled at the 1-yard line on another.
I largely agree with the draft analysis, nicely done.

Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but you understand my point. It's tiresome for people to think that any ONE person's performance can be isolated, ESPECIALLY the QB.

RayNAustin wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one, and we failed to address our needs on the O and D lines and at LB.

I have always thought it made sense to take the best player available with the first pick, but after that you have to fill your own holes, the Skins did not.

If you really think about it...the philosophy followed by the best draft teams is exactly the opposite.

With your first pick (a high #1) you take a player that fills a need. In the top 10, you may have 3 DE's, 2 RB's 2 OL's 1 DT and 2 QB's rated as the best 10 players in the draft. If you really need a QB, you don't take the DE that might be higher on everyone's board, you take the player you need...the QB. With later round picks, you take the best player available (within reason). This is not like selecting furniture.....I need a sofa and a chair and a coffee table and a lamp......because there is no guarantee that the player you pick is going to work out.

But all of it is speculation, and you really don't know how successful any draft was until after a year or two, and you can evaluate the players that actually make the roster and contribute.

On the surface, the Redskins did very well....and by picking 2 WR's, the Skins doubled their chances that one of them will become that starter that they need, and if we're super lucky, both will make the team and be contributors in clearly the weakest area of the team last year. The Punter was a great pick because the guy is a beast of a kicker. Colt Brennan was a great pick because he cost us nothing and could be that sleeper that can excel in a WC offense coached by one of the best QB coaches, Zorn....and we don't need a QB that has immediate starter potential. What a luxury to have a young QB that is accurate and smart, has good fundamentals and broke tons of NCAA records, and get him with a 6th round pick?

Let's keep in mind something here.....JC didn't produce last year, and our career backup came in and played circles around him. JC is going to have to produce this year, because potential doesn't feed the bull dog, and he's going into his 4th season as a Redskin.

Last year, we went 8 1/2 games into the season without a TD to a WR. That was a joke. Collins came in and threw 2 TD's in 4 1/2 minutes. JC doesn't have 2 more years to "learn". He needs to step up and produce this year or we'll be looking at a change.....mark my words here....if Zorn can't get JC producing quickly, he'll turn to someone that can produce.

I've tried to explain this in previous posts as well. Fans get fixated on one or two positions and cry foul when the team drafts anything else. But the teams known for having the best personnel management draft more for talent than need. After all, if you're counting on rookies to plug an immediate need, you will likely be disappointed.

The theory is, you can't move up and down the draft order at will. Trading up and down is only an option when another team is willing to work with you. Many times, THAT team may not land you EXACTLY where you want to be to get the player you really want. But, it is a "take it or leave it" situation. If you look at the #48 pick, there weren't any suitable DL's available there. Laws went at #47. So you either reach for a lower quality DL with your 2nd round pick OR take the best player available. Now instead of having a DL that we're not sure about, we have a TE who we can work into some packages with ey to really confuse defenses.

Look at Baltimore. They have loads of talent at LB, but they know two of their starting LB's (Lewis and Scott) will be free agents after this season. So they drafted a nice LB, Tavares Gooden from Miami in the 3rd. So instead of trying to plug holes from a sinking ship with their draft picks, they are ahead of the game, drafting talented depth who gives them versatility in game planning and leverage in contract negotiations.

I am hopeful the Skins have finally adopted the pro-active policy of drafting more for talent than need that has made teams like the Patriots and Colts so successful. Maybe they will continue acquiring as many draft picks as possible and plugging the few holes left over with a few smart free agent signings and June 1st cast-offs. Overall, a very good draft and the best draft this organization has had in over 5 years.

I can't say it any better than our DC Greg Blache:

"He actually was in" the war room, Cerrato said of Blache, "and said, 'Hey, take the best guy on the board.' Whenever we've gotten in trouble in the past is when you try to jump to somewhere else to try to satisfy a need."

Exactly.

VetSkinsFan wrote:Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but you understand my point. It's tiresome for people to think that any ONE person's performance can be isolated, ESPECIALLY the QB.

I do and I agree

GSPODS wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one

Disagree completely.

Santana Moss is getting older (29 in June), and extremely injury prone.

We needed at least 1 wide receiver, and in reality, 2 wide receivers. Because you know Santana is going to get hurt again at some point.

Am I the only one who isn't sold on Randle El as a slot receiver?

Nope. He's a mediocre kick returner and a below average NFL receiver. I'm hoping that both Kelly and Thomas can both surpass him on the depth chart sometime this season. ARE's contract is laughable given his production as a Redskin.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

GSPODS wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one

Disagree completely.

Santana Moss is getting older (29 in June), and extremely injury prone.

We needed at least 1 wide receiver, and in reality, 2 wide receivers. Because you know Santana is going to get hurt again at some point.

Am I the only one who isn't sold on Randle El as a slot receiver?

Nope. He's a mediocre kick returner and a below average NFL receiver. I'm hoping that both Kelly and Thomas can both surpass him on the depth chart sometime this season. ARE's contract is laughable given his production as a Redskin.

To me, ARE is somewhere between Brandon Lloyd and Adam Archuleta. He makes more plays than Lloyd ever did but he doesn't seem to fit the system.
Maybe Zorn's offense will change my mind about that. But, as of now, I'm just not seeing it.

Zorn is helping Campbell out a lot by drafting tall receivers that can catch. He throws it high and fast, which is bad for short receivers with questionable hands. There should be a lot more chemistry between the receivers and qb when these two and maybe mix develop.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

Fios wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

Sir_Monk wrote:The problem with Mel Kipers grades, at least for us is I don't think he is taking much into account as to our own needs. We got 3 "weapons" at the WR/TE position when we really needed one, and we failed to address our needs on the O and D lines and at LB.

I have always thought it made sense to take the best player available with the first pick, but after that you have to fill your own holes, the Skins did not.

If you really think about it...the philosophy followed by the best draft teams is exactly the opposite.

With your first pick (a high #1) you take a player that fills a need. In the top 10, you may have 3 DE's, 2 RB's 2 OL's 1 DT and 2 QB's rated as the best 10 players in the draft. If you really need a QB, you don't take the DE that might be higher on everyone's board, you take the player you need...the QB. With later round picks, you take the best player available (within reason). This is not like selecting furniture.....I need a sofa and a chair and a coffee table and a lamp......because there is no guarantee that the player you pick is going to work out.

But all of it is speculation, and you really don't know how successful any draft was until after a year or two, and you can evaluate the players that actually make the roster and contribute.

On the surface, the Redskins did very well....and by picking 2 WR's, the Skins doubled their chances that one of them will become that starter that they need, and if we're super lucky, both will make the team and be contributors in clearly the weakest area of the team last year. The Punter was a great pick because the guy is a beast of a kicker. Colt Brennan was a great pick because he cost us nothing and could be that sleeper that can excel in a WC offense coached by one of the best QB coaches, Zorn....and we don't need a QB that has immediate starter potential. What a luxury to have a young QB that is accurate and smart, has good fundamentals and broke tons of NCAA records, and get him with a 6th round pick?

Let's keep in mind something here.....JC didn't produce last year, and our career backup came in and played circles around him. JC is going to have to produce this year, because potential doesn't feed the bull dog, and he's going into his 4th season as a Redskin.

Last year, we went 8 1/2 games into the season without a TD to a WR. That was a joke. Collins came in and threw 2 TD's in 4 1/2 minutes. JC doesn't have 2 more years to "learn". He needs to step up and produce this year or we'll be looking at a change.....mark my words here....if Zorn can't get JC producing quickly, he'll turn to someone that can produce.

Awesome post that has zero context. I agree that JC didn't produce much, but he didn't have much of a chance. If you recall, there weren't the same 5 offensive lineman play and two consecutive weeks in the 1st half of the season. This affects the run game AND (egads!!) the passing game. It's not that simple or we'd be out there doing it.

I don't agree that the post totally lacks context but it's true that JC's struggles are more properly understood as the team's collective struggles. Moss dropped a couple of sure TD catches, Randle-El was tackled at the 1-yard line on another.
I largely agree with the draft analysis, nicely done.

Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but you understand my point. It's tiresome for people to think that any ONE person's performance can be isolated, ESPECIALLY the QB.

I understand your point too....it was the mantra all last year about how great JC was going to be with just a little more experience, and taller receivers. Many points were valid regarding the injuries to the O-Line and WR's. And we had no tangible way of proving these things one way or the other until the Chicago game.

After 26 minutes of the first half, it was the same old same old, no scoring from the offense. JC goes down, and Collins comes in dead cold, no reps all year and we score a TD in the final 2 minutes of the half, and open the second half wit another score....2 TD's in 4 1/2 minutes. Same O-line, same "short" receivers, same running game, same everything except the QB.

Then the excuse was how Collins knew the offense inside out, but JC had ample time to familiarize himself with the "system". Besides, not being well versed in a system has little to do with overthrowing an open receiver, so that doesn't let JC off the hook. That doesn't explain the many overthrows and under-throws to wide open targets. I don't think anyone can point to an NFL team that has ever gone a full 8 games without a TD pass to a receiver. And I certainly can't understand the mindset that can attribute such an atrocious failure in the passing game to every conceivable position on the field except the guy who THROWS the bloody ball??? I can certainly buy the idea that it was a combination of things, but the QB has to be a big part of the combination.

Tiresome or not, the PASSER has more to do with throwing TD's than anyone else on the field. And in that regard, JC was as bad as a QB could be in 2007, while Collins proved he could throw 2 per game with the same personnel, even under the most horrific conditions as was the case in Seattle. JC never saw that kind of pressure in any game in 2007.

So there is the context.