Om Field: The Offseason Chronicles - Snowed Again

March 2, 2009

So I'm sitting home today, drafting a piece about the gaping hole the Redskins have at SAM linebacker (hey, it snowed), when I get word they have just released DE Jason Taylor.

Sometimes this computer thing, for all its convenience, leaves me cold. It would have been far more satisfying to rip a piece of paper from a typewriter, crumple it theatrically and bank it off the file cabinet into the wastebasket.

Here's what I was going to say:

The tea leaves were all pointing toward the Redskins drafting a strong-side linebacker with their first round (#13 overall) draft pick in April ... and looking to land a mid-level veteran free agent as well. Teams with playoff pretentions don't start rookies at key positions unless they absolutely have to, and given Jason Taylor was a light DE to begin with, the need for a steady presence off his hip to hold the point against the run was that much more pronounced.

Figured them to draft SAM at #13, plug the free agent into the starting lineup and hope the rook developed quickly enough to take the job from him by midseason.

Now, who knows? With holes at both SAM and left defensive end ...

CLICK HERE to read more

"The suggestion out there is they let him go because he didn't want to honor the workout clause in his contract. I don't buy it. If the team had seriously wanted Taylor on the field this season, he'd still be here."

100% agree with this. Yet people are pissed at Taylor for losing those picks he didn't offer Miami.

:hysterical:Last paragraph was hilarious:applause:

Yes, loved that last paragraph.

Wouldn't it just make more sense to bulk Buzbee up and put him at OG?

The drafted Davis because he could be a play maker in this offense. Put him at the OL and you lose that.

Wouldn't it just make more sense to bulk Buzbee up and put him at OG?

The drafted Davis because he could be a play maker in this offense. Put him at the OL and you lose that.

Not necessarily. Guy who passes me info on occasion says the league is considering making guard-eligible plays, well, eligible. Ups to the Skins for being cutting-edge.

Not necessarily. Guy who passes me info on occasion says the league is considering making guard-eligible plays, well, eligible. Ups to the Skins for being cutting-edge.

I see. Then that makes more sense. In that case we should strongly consider it.

I was just joking.

I see. Then that makes more sense. In that case we should strongly consider it.

I was just joking.

Yo tambien.

Dude....wondering this afternoon when I read the news if it would give you wordus interruptus on a new piece.

Funny, I have been thinking that #13 spot was going OT even before the AH deal. Now I really think it! I figured with AH in the house the team would go OT at #13 and C/G in the 3rd while bringing in somebody like Crowell to play SAM.

But I like the Davis at G idea.

I agree OT is the other obvious target, Neophyte. Particularly so given this draft class is apparently deep at the position. I just think Cerrato is being truthful when he says he doesn't favor taking OL at the top of the draft as a general rule. I think he's convinced the way to go is look for value in round 2, 3 and 4, and hope to get lucky on the occasional low-rounder or UDFA to fill out the depth chart.

And now with two positions on D in unambiguous need of new starters (push comes to shove, we could end up surviving one more year with the Jansen/Heyer hybrid at RT), I think it's even more likely the team will go defense with their top pick. Whether it's at DE or SAM will probably come down to how they grade out whoever falls to #13 (or wherever they end up making their first pick).

Of course, something else could happen today that would change everything again.

I agree that the workout clause issue is a flimsy pretense for cutting Taylor.. I mean really?!? That's why you cut the guy? There's got to be more to it than that.

This morning, Sportstalk 980 said there was also some kind of dispute over a $500K performance bonus involved. Still doesn't add up for me. Half a million is walking-around money for NFL owners.

And now with two positions on D in unambiguous need of new starters (push comes to shove, we could end up surviving one more year with the Jansen/Heyer hybrid at RT), I think it's even more likely the team will go defense with their top pick. Whether it's at DE or SAM will probably come down to how they grade out whoever falls to #13 (or wherever they end up making their first pick).

Ugh. We need to do more than survive. Keeping things the same seems like a step backward to me (if you're not moving forward, you're falling behind). And our offense was our problem last year, not our defense. Nevertheless, I fully expect them to use the 13th pick to address DE or SAM, with the possibility of a trade down for an extra pick.

I just think Cerrato is being truthful when he says he doesn't favor taking OL at the top of the draft as a general rule. I think he's convinced the way to go is look for value in round 2, 3 and 4, and hope to get lucky on the occasional low-rounder or UDFA to fill out the depth chart.

FWIW, of the 15 modern era offensive tackles in the Hall of Fame, 12 were taken in either the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd round of the draft. (The outlyers = Roosevelt Brown, picked in the 27th(!) round, Stan Jones in the 5th, and Lou Groza got a call while in the Army from Paul Brown, his Ohio State coach, asking him to join a new team in Cleveland.)

Bob Brown, Ron Mix, Anthony Munoz, Jim Parker, Ron Yary, Gary Zimmerman... all 1st round picks. The really good ones, you know right away they're good.

China,

Ugh is right. I continue to maintain that the years of neglect to the lines is not a 1-year fix; we're looking at a minimum of 2, maybe 3. Doesn't mean the team can't compete during that time though. It just means they're going to need their QB position to be something more than just adequate, and big (healthy) years from their stars to make up the difference.

Dan T, for the record, I didnt' say I agreed with Vinny. :cool:

Dan T, for the record, I didnt' say I agreed with Vinny. :cool:

I know Om. You are WAY smarter than that. Good piece, BTW...

I was kind of surprised they cut Taylor. I really thought they were serious about trying to make it work with him.

While I acknowledge our glaring needs on offense, I like the idea of trying to turn our very good defense into an elite one, one that creates more turnovers and scores points.

Offensively, there is much to be done. I think bringing Dockery back is a good move. And there are a couple FA linemen out there that could help shore up the position. With increased production from our QB and WRs (and our playcaller), we could have a decent, if not a dominant, offense. That's probably the best we can do, at this point.

Om,

I wrote almost the same exact piece on my blog, which has almost zero following . Rational redskins fans unite.

I was kind of surprised they cut Taylor. I really thought they were serious about trying to make it work with him.

While I acknowledge our glaring needs on offense, I like the idea of trying to turn our very good defense into an elite one, one that creates more turnovers and scores points.

Offensively, there is much to be done. I think bringing Dockery back is a good move. And there are a couple FA linemen out there that could help shore up the position. With increased production from our QB and WRs (and our playcaller), we could have a decent, if not a dominant, offense. That's probably the best we can do, at this point.

Nothing there I disagree with. I'd only underscore the point about needing the QB to step up. I think the Redskins are going to field a competitive team, but without a productive, playmaking season from the QB position, I think we're probably looking at more of the same--just good enough to be in the fray, not good enough to win it.

Om,

I wrote almost the same exact piece on my blog, which has almost zero following . Rational redskins fans unite.

Send me a link, brother. We'll wallow in quiet, underappreciated sagacity together.

Om,

I wrote almost the same exact piece on my blog, which has almost zero following . Rational redskins fans unite.

Exact same piece, huh.

Maybe in the same way this guy was to this guy.

I was kind of surprised they cut Taylor. I really thought they were serious about trying to make it work with him.

From seeing the presser today, it sounds like Taylor has a lot on his mind, and the Skins can't afford to sit on their hands to wait to see if Taylor is going to be fully committed to next season. I can understand that concern, especially when you have other holes to fill. I do wish it was otherwise, because we could use him.

I think we can solve our offensive line RT position by approaching Joe Jacoby's daughter.

Seems like she should be an adult about now, doesn't it?

I agree OT is the other obvious target, Neophyte. Particularly so given this draft class is apparently deep at the position. I just think Cerrato is being truthful when he says he doesn't favor taking OL at the top of the draft as a general rule. I think he's convinced the way to go is look for value in round 2, 3 and 4, and hope to get lucky on the occasional low-rounder or UDFA to fill out the depth chart.

I can see this and if Vinny were Bobby Beathard I could even believe in it but he does not have a great track record of finding the "value" pick in later rounds. We had inside info on Horton as his college coordinator is an ex Skins coach and the FA QB we brought in from Maryland as camp fodder is who found us Heyer. Neither was a Vinny find.

Not saying you are defending him and I am not saying his view is wrong. Just saying I don't think he has the stuff to make his view work regularly enough to make this team good.

And now with two positions on D in unambiguous need of new starters (push comes to shove, we could end up surviving one more year with the Jansen/Heyer hybrid at RT), I think it's even more likely the team will go defense with their top pick. Whether it's at DE or SAM will probably come down to how they grade out whoever falls to #13 (or wherever they end up making their first pick).

Indeed, with two holes on the D now, I think it makes sense. My comment was more having to do with when we all thought Taylor was suiting up for us this year although I can certainly see your argument about him needing a stud SAM off his hip to help hold that corner against the run. That is a point I had not considered.

Part of my problem with thinking this though is the lack of guys who really fit what we need, who grade out that high in the draft and who will be available when we pick at #13.. Curry is a goner early if not #1. Orakpo and Maybin are both undersized to play LDE as neither is any bigger than Taylor. Maybe they make great OLB in a 3-4 but I have serious doubts about converting them to work as a SAM in a 4-3. Maualuga is likely gone in the top 10. Maybe Cushing is around...he would be a nice fit but you have 2 teams ahead of us switching to a 3-4 with a need for LBs and one playing the 3-4 now that may be losing one of their stud LBs to FA (Denver, GB and Bufflo, respectively) so I am thinking that Cushing is likely gone too.

Tyson Jackson is the only guy with the size to play LDE I see lasting past #13 and I think there is a big drop in OLB talent past the guys mentioned. We have already heard folks at Ashburn say that whoever gets picked at #13 has to ready to go cause they will be required to play.

Maybe Vinny tries to drop back and pick up a #2 but that is no sure thing. Of course, if there is but one of the big stud OTs left on the board when we pick trading back might be a serious option. ATL sure wanted Baker last year bad enough to offer good picks to get him.

And granted, I have no more clue about this than anyone else on this board. If I did, I would be working in some teams front office.

Of course, something else could happen today that would change everything again.

Indeed.

:hysterical:Last paragraph was hilarious:applause:

I agree lol :rotflmao: