moondog

Members
  • Content count

    5,041
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

About moondog

  • Rank
    The Playmaker
  • Birthday 02/10/1989

Contact Methods

  • Redskins Fan Since
    Since birth
  • Favorite Redskin
    Sean Taylor
  • Location
    Pensacola
  • Interests
    Winning
  • Occupation
    AF
  1. We have three very good receivers and two very good tight ends. Thus we are unlikely to see many formations with more than three receivers and if we do have spread formations it likely will still be three receivers and then tight ends to keep the best players on the field. If one of our too three receivers got hurt I don't think we'd see a ton of grant or quick but likely our game plan would change to feature the tight ends more. It's just about utilizing your best players. Realistically the only time we should see receivers outside of Pryor Doctson and crowder is if one of them needs a breather.
  2. If everyone is healthy then we should almost never go more than three receivers on the field with Reed and Davis being better than our #4 receiver. But I get your point if someone gets hurt. I can't stand Ryan grant but I think he's the most obvious choice of who would fill in at slot since he apparently "knows" the position (or how to fall down at every spot on the field). But more to the point if Crowder was hurt the offense would certainly change and instead of someone filling his role we would just shift to feature Doctson Pryor and Reed more and we'd probably see a lot more two receiver two tight end looks til he came back.
  3. I like the idea of harvey-clemons too. I've heard a little positive news about him. Likely a ps squad guy at least best but great size with room to add weight to play nickel or dime linebacker. Nicholson has very good size for a safety too. People can look at this like too many dbs all they want. I'm just glad we finally have depth. If our fourth and fifth corners are moreau and Dunbar that's excellent. We actually have quality DEPTH at corner, safety, tight end, dline, linebackers (especially outside backers), qb and rb. Some will disagree about all of these - dline may only have one stud and he's a rookie but nearly everyone has experience and are not just castoffs. I know people hate on Compton but if he or foster are backups they are at least quality backups albeit not what you want at starter. These couple groups could upgrade the starters but you're not gonna be stacked at every position. Point is, we have quality DEPTH and can survive injuries.
  4. I wouldn't say it's much of a slight. We finished with about the 18th or 19th best record last year. So it's not like they dropped us twenty spots and winning one more than half your games in two years doesn't earn you much respect. The eagles jumping that high is pretty crazy but I'd say nothing else as far as east teams is too nuts. I feel very positive about the off-season but until we pump out a double digits win season or take a game or two in the playoffs no one is going to believe and that's truly how it should be.
  5. We are very clearly committed to finding and keeping a hybrid player that can cover tight ends and rb's. Cravens, Harvey-Clemons and Marley. A couple others that are hybrid types as well. Can't say I'm against either.
  6. Those two things plus history. Even just going off last year - the Cowboys and Giants were the top two teams in the division (barf) and I would say the Giants got better again this offseason - their offense will be tough to stop unless Eli completely implodes. It would be tough to argue the Cowboys got better after all they lost (defensive secondary and offensive line) but they did pick up some good backend players in the draft. Bottom line though is that the Redskins have not given the media any reason to trust them in a long, long time. We STILL have not gone to the playoffs in consecutive seasons in over 25 years and we JUST came off our second straight winning campaign for the first time in that same timeframe...and even that has somewhat of an asterisk given that we only won 8 games. Winning season, yes, but we technically only won half our games and lost at the end in a play-in game. We got better this offseason for sure and our defense is finally starting to look like it COULD at least be respectable but other teams in our division got better as well and it was already the best division in football record-wise last year. No one is going to respect the Redskins in the media or around the league until they show several years of continued success and actually prove themselves a threat in the postseason (i.e. win a couple playoff games...and not Mark Brunell vs. the Bucs style either). As much as it pains me to say it we need to stop saying the media disrespects us or doesn't show us this so-called "deserved" respect. What we have earned is zero trust or belief...that does not come with 17 wins over 32 games with 0 playoff victories in two seasons and really being an afterthought for the better part of the past 25+ years. We are on our way and I think can all be proud of the past couple years and continued improvement but we are a long way still from earning trust/respect on a national level.
  7. I'm thinking more along the lines of James Harrison...
  8. Ah. Clearly I have become lackluster in following the offseason. I suck. Thanks fir the update on both. I was thinking we signed Garvin for two years last year and obviously was not tracking on Daniels. Well, here's to hoping spaight improves.
  9. Not sure if people are writing him off or forgetting about Stephen Daniels from bc. Low draft pick for sure but I haven't seen anything more than a good physique from spaight. His play hasn't matched. Daniels was a thumper and looks like more of a two down player but with additions of guys like Cravens and the hyphen from this draft we have multiple tweeters to play in nickel or dime anyway. He backup battle for the couple inside linebacker spots will certainly be interesting. Garvin is a good ST player but I'm betting they go younger/cheaper for a guy not expected to see time on defense.
  10. Is the guy's name really fish???
  11. Just saying, we've played him several times since he's been in the league with the Texans/Cardinals and he is obnoxious and constantly recognizable on the field talking ****, in people's faces after the play, etc. and I've rarely seen his play back it up. Credit where it's due for looking up the numbers, I'm speaking purely my opinion from the several times I've seen him play against us and a few other teams. Will gladly eat crow if he turns out to be a stud at free safety for us, but I don't see it happening.
  12. I hope you're right. I've always viewed Swearinger as a bigger but damn near identical player as Cravens. Not a crazy athlete, more of a just a good football player but also miscast as a free safety. I've always seen him as the ideal "tweener" player between linebacker and safety - a perfect nickel player and guy to fill that "Tyrann Mathieu" role - but not an every down free safety....maybe an every down strong safety. Basically I view us as having two excellent playmaking tweener types without a true safety at either position. I think Arizona had such a star studded and complete defense across the board it breeds the perfect storm for a tweener kind of guy to just run free and make plays due to the people around him. Again, with such a weak d-line, it allows teams to run all day on us and be in favorable 2nd and 3rd downs and pass/play-action situations. This, to me, more than anything negates having a strong group of pass rushers (I believe we do) and a decent or maybe even strong secondary (I think they're better than most believe they are but due to the aforementioned reasons they look worse than they are). At absolute best I think we are just as well off on the dline as last year, which is to say we suck, at least against the run. To me, I think we've made a slight regression.
  13. The post directly above yours by submitted is spot on as is the one below by morneblade. I fear brown will be minimized by how bad our line is. He is a sideline to sideline player but if the dline gets blown up like last year and the year before he's not really the type to run through guards. It's mostly the same for any linebacker. Hell I think we'd be surprised at how good Compton and foster would look behind the Giants line from last year. Ill echo that you address holes, at least the big ones and especially at the most crucial positions in free agency so you're not forced to pick needs in the draft. And that's not even accounting for injuries. How's our line look with an injury to McClain or McGee? Hankins should be signed AND we should bring in some picks hopefully at dline depending on how the draft works out. And I know everyone gets spun up about free agents but I don't see swearinger as some great player for us. I think he'll be an average starter that we will grow tired of due to attitude and unsportsmanlike conduct penalties.
  14. You don't have to fill every need but our defense has been dreadful for years now. They are one of, if not the worst run defense in the league over the last two years. And really the only position you can even argue we've gotten better at is safety. At best, the defensive line is as good as last year's, which is to say it's horrible. We have a damn good offense so yes it is worth aggressively addressing the defensive line to help out the offense. There are good players on the line in the draft and we damn well better come away with some. But that doesn't mean you don't try to bring in the player in free agency that is the absolute best combo of youth and stopping the run available. Reduce dhalls salary or cut him and you have the money for Hankins. It's really that simple. Signing cousins would do it to. A defensive line of Hankins McGee and McClain starting with Ioannidis Lanier and a couple rookies that are up and coming is perfect. Especially if Hankins is on a one year deal and the rookies are ready after this year to start.