The 2017 FA Thread - OP Updated with Signings (Sundberg, Galette, VD, Hood re-signed) *** Terrell McClain, Stacy McGee, DJ Swearinger, Terrelle Pryor, Chris Carter, Brian Quick, ZACH BROWN(!!)***

[Bonez3]

Did Ihenacho ever play 1 down for the Skins. I swear, all I ever seen from him was twitter posts. I can't remember 1 play he made in his time here. I'd take Tanard Jackson over him any day of the week.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

Anyone is possible. We bulked up Keds last year to play nose after 0 tackles in 2015 IIRC. Wow that crashed and burned fast. It's no surprise to me a guy that beefed up blew a knee. For the love of the game someone please tell me he is not our solution again this season.  This is what our 3-4 NT search has evolved to.

For whatever it's worth, Manusky didn't mention Ked as a possibility at nose.  He mentioned a few other guys I haven't heard off (j/k, but barely), but not Ked. 

 

That gives me some hope.  Ked is a coaches favorite because he's an effort guy who'll do whatever you ask him to at 100% effort.  But hes physically limited.  

 

He doesn't deserve the hate he gets from fans.  Good guy. Met him several times. 

 

8 hours ago, dyst said:

Us fans should only worry about losing 4 players. Kirk, Reed, Trent and Norman. Everyone else can go if need be.

I think there are more than that.  Crowder, Long, Moses, scherff, Vernon, Kerrigan all are strong starters as well.  Pryor also, though he hasn't played yet.

 

Team last year was a player or two on dline, and a safety (and a d-coordinator who wasn't the village idiot) away from an 11 win team.  They won 8 games, and should have won Detroit and Cincy minus completely awful, horrendous defense, and a kicker who missed a chip-shot field goal in OT.

 

They were not as far away as people think because of the way yet folded like a cheap suit down the stretch.  But they weren't that far away from being very good.

13 hours ago, Morneblade said:

 

I'm sure he's going to run the 3-4, even though he does have some experience in the 4-3, from everything he has said. I like Reddick as well, but for a different reason. Even though he was a 4-3 DL, he's played in the secondary (I think in HS) and is much better in coverage than you would think. What little I saw in the Sr. Bowl drills, he was lights out in coverage. Right now, we don't have a LB that is even average in coverage, so that sold me, outside of all the other stuff he brings.

 

To you last question? No, I don't. I think we're just going to throw cheap bodies at the position, which is why Randy Holt are going back and forth about why even bother running a 3-4 then? LB's are different, DE's are very different. DT's are different. And, it's easier to get 4-3 pieces than 3-4, especially the NT. 325 pound big men that can move and have agility is very hard to find. 290 pound guys are a lot easier to find. But good luck finding a 290 pound dude than can take a Center and a guard, and maybe even get chipped and not get blown backwards. The just don't make them. And Ziggy Hood is essentially that, and why we got gash up the middle, and everywhere else honestly.

 

It's just frustrating. And yes, we're in that base package a little less than 30% of the time. So, if that is the case, why even bother? Just get THOSE pieces.

 

I'm just venting right now SiP, I'll try not to hijack this anymore.

Munusky said aid they were running the three for in base in his interview with Cooley and Kevin last week.  Said he liked the flexibility, and allowed the DC to be creative and bring pressure from everywhere.  But you've got to have the pieces to run it.

 

i personally like the 3-4, but if you don't have a nose who can stand his ground and a kick-ass safety, it's useless.

 

weve had neither since we switched to the 3-4. (Combined with two of the worst DCs in the history of the league.) hence the atrocious defense's we put out there.

 

 

13 hours ago, Morneblade said:

 

I went back to our last year in a 4-3, the 4-12 Zorn team. I would kill for that D right now.

18th in points

10th in total yards

4.0 rush against ave.

33% to score against

19 passing TD's and 10 rushing TD's given up.

 

Even being dead last in forced TO's, can you imagine how many more games we would wind with this? And this was with Blache as DC.

 

That was an awful read-react Blache defense that was putrid in every way.  I'd take those numbers, but they are misleading.  And that style of defense was absolutely painful to watch.

 

ive said this a million times, it's not the scheme or system.  Either can work and be outstanding.  It's about getting the right coaches to coach the scheme, and the players that fit the scheme.  

 

Haslett was a 4-3 guy, and not one of his assistants had ever coached a 3-4. Joe Barry was just an idiot.  Hopefully Munusky is better. 

[justice98]

3 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

That was an awful read-react Blache defense that was putrid in every way.  I'd take those numbers, but they are misleading.  And that style of defense was absolutely painful to watch.

 

 

I never understood that mentality. Frustrating might be a more apt description, because they were adequate, albeit unspectacular in just about every area. If that was putrid in every way, what would you call what we've been watching since?  We've had subsequent defenses give up 30 a game.  If those Blatche defenses had any offensive help at all, it woulda won a bunch more games.  

 

I actually give Blatche credit because they were probably better than they should have been from a talent standpoint.  Not like we were stacked defensively with studs and great athletes.  We werent sitting on a goldmine and he was the one holding us back.  Can you take what you have and get the most out of it, and I think he did that.  Subsequent DCs haven't been capable of that.

[moondog]

13 hours ago, fordranger76 said:

I dunno. Not sure I would be comfortable having Pryor, Logan, and Hankins all on one year rentals just to push forward for the year. So say they ball out and they are all gone the following year? So you are basically renting them for a season. On one player sure that makes sense but 3? That would not be a good way to build a team. You would be right back where you started this year with even less depth than before. And on the back end of that say we sign all 3 on LTD then we for sure would not have enough for the O-line and Cousins. Just not possible. Whole right side gone with nothing to replace them with. 

 

If we do not sign Swearinger then we rely on Blackmon and Hall for our safeties along with Cravens and who knows how he will work out. You are seriously comfortable with this? One is on his last legs and the other only continues to regress. Cravens has potential but he could be a mess back there. We just don't know yet. Not sure how that is going to help the defense in any way shape or form. So we cure the run but now they just gash us over the top? Not sure what that would be accomplishing at all really. 

 

I understand the importance of stopping the run I really do but you have to do it wise and with depth for a few years and not one year rentals. If McClain and McGee provide at least serviceable depth and Swearinger is young enough to continue to improve I just don't see how they won't work.  And as for rookies we need help not only on the line but linebackers and corners. Norman is a stud no doubt but corner 2 and the nickle are big time questions marks. If we ignore the Breeland regression then we literally have one guy that can sure fire cover. Again we can stop the run in your scenario but who cares when people are just passing all day?

 

To clarify on the contracts, I'm definitely imagining Hankins on more than a one year deal - guy has been a stud for a couple years now and is the youngest of the bunch (25 I believe). I think he's asking for $10M a year which is absolutely ludicrous but I think that's merely a starting point. Additionally, I fully understand your issue with multiple one year deals but it's not as if you would be re-signing all of them next year. Perhaps one...or two at most. We have done an outstanding job at managing the cap the past several years and certainly have room. Also, the key here is building through the draft. As I mentioned, this year has been pegged as one that is deep along the defensive line. 

 

As for the safeties - you're right, DHall is a question mark, and Blackmon has played admirably but is certainly not getting younger. This is a question of prioritizing the front 7 vs the defensive backfield, which I think the majority of anyone would agree that stopping the run comes before stopping the pass. Not to mention that this team has been built for years with the intent to rush the passer and create turnovers. The key to that is to stop the run on early downs, force 2nd/3rd and longs and rush the passer. Kerrigan/Gallette/Smith/Murphy. Need I say more? Gallette, while certainly a question mark, is a luxury. We proved last year the other three can get after it and create plenty of pressure. Especially if afforded more obvious passing downs. I would say your concern for Cravens is a bit irrational - sure it's not an absolute guarantee he'll be a beast but his overall role from last year will not be significantly different - he was great for us in that role last year but even then it was near unanimous that he was playing out of position. I'd say it's fair to trust that he will be at a minimum an above average SS - a sure tackler that is not afraid to stick his nose in the run game and can also cover backs and tight ends. 

 

Breeland - he got absolutely abused in the first couple games. That's a fact. He played much better down the stretch and I think even last year when looking at the season as a whole was a solid starting corner. Fuller is only going to be better in the slot. I'm honestly not sure what it will look like behind that - is Toler still under contract? Bottom line, the ONLY player we have acquired on the back end is Swearinger. I think it's complete hyperbole that you talk about having Hankins/Logan stopping the run but now we get "gashed over the top." Stop the run, put them in obvious passing situations. I think you're trying to say that swapping Swearinger for Hall or Blackmon = us getting gashed over the top. I simply disagree. Swearinger is a thumper but you cannot convince me that he is a SIGNIFICANT upgrade over Hall in coverage or Blackmon if Hall gets hurt. And overall, the impact Logan/Hankins would have in stopping the run and putting our pass rushers in good position and therefore our DB's to get turnovers results in a much greater pass defense than the single acquisition of Swearinger, who has never been some stud against the pass, specifically speaking to his play as a FS over the top. 

 

You are not wrong about our inside linebackers. This is an area I feel we have quality depth in spaight, daniels and garvin as well as good special teamers. What we are lacking is a single high quality starter. I would, however, argue that once again we would all be impressed with how much better Compton/Foster would look playing behind two run stuffing/blocker eating studs like Logan/Hankins. They would be running free to the ball carrier as opposed to shedding guards. I'm not saying they'd look great, but that I would expect them to make more plays and contribute. 

 

Finally, I feel you are completely disregarding the draft. We have a full complement plus extra picks. Odds are we come away with a new starter either on the defensive line, linebacking corps (inside) or safety in this draft or the next. So say we grab a quality nose tackle then you let Logan walk next year. It's hypothetical because it has to be but you can't deny that we won't at least come away with a handful of defensive players in the next draft or two. 

 

I would like to submit that in addition to Logan/Hankins, I probably would have gone after Tyson Jackson as well as a strong veteran rotational player. Give me Pryor/Logan/Hankins/Jackson as my FA haul, cut RJF as we did, redo Hall's contract for much less which we will, and sign Cousins to a long term deal. The latter three save us more than enough money to sign the former four players and still have room for the draft picks. You have turned a weakness into a strength (run defense) and in doing so have FINALLY set the defense up to actually accomplish what we've said we've built it to do - rush the passer and force turnovers. We have the pass rushers and an elite corner. Hall, if healthy, is another ball hawk in the secondary, albeit an old one that is certainly diminished but I think serviceable, as is Blackmon. Cravens has a nose for the ball. Breeland is and was still a solid starter last year and I'm not overly worried about him. This is what our defense is designed to do but to make it work stopping the run priority number one. Yet I have still not seen us commit to a defensive line that is even remotely capable of doing so. Have faith in McGee and McClain being an improvement over the debacle of the past several years, but don't be shocked when we give up damn near 5 ypc again. 

[carex]

1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Crowder? Kerrigan?

 

We also had a powderpuff schedule, including a stretch of 6 straight winless teams. These are pretty numbers and all, but that defense was highly overrated.

 

Our D broke at the wrong times back then.  Part of the reason Jason Campbell had so little success is the script always seemed to play out the same way back then.  Skins fall behind by two scores late in the first half/ early second.  Defense stiffens to hold it to that point.  Offense puts together good drive, cuts the lead to one score, we just need the D to keep playing like it was and we're back in it.  Defense gives up long clock killing drive and puts it back up to two scores, we get the  ball back with five minutes left

4 minutes ago, moondog said:

 

I would like to submit that in addition to Logan/Hankins, I probably would have gone after Tyson Jackson as well as a strong veteran rotational player. Give me Pryor/Logan/Hankins/Jackson as my FA haul, cut RJF as we did, redo Hall's contract for much less which we will, and sign Cousins to a long term deal. The latter three save us more than enough money to sign the former four players and still have room for the draft picks. You have turned a weakness into a strength (run defense) and in doing so have FINALLY set the defense up to actually accomplish what we've said we've built it to do - rush the passer and force turnovers. We have the pass rushers and an elite corner. Hall, if healthy, is another ball hawk in the secondary, albeit an old one that is certainly diminished but I think serviceable, as is Blackmon. Cravens has a nose for the ball. Breeland is and was still a solid starter last year and I'm not overly worried about him. This is what our defense is designed to do but to make it work stopping the run priority number one. Yet I have still not seen us commit to a defensive line that is even remotely capable of doing so. Have faith in McGee and McClain being an improvement over the debacle of the past several years, but don't be shocked when we give up damn near 5 ypc again. 

 

you can't guarantee that Cousins will sign a LTD, and sadly I'm not sure the numbers he wants will lower his cap hit this year.  So going into free agency with a plan like yours in not the way the FO can work

[fordranger76]

28 minutes ago, moondog said:

Finally, I feel you are completely disregarding the draft. We have a full complement plus extra picks. Odds are we come away with a new starter either on the defensive line, linebacking corps (inside) or safety in this draft or the next. So say we grab a quality nose tackle then you let Logan walk next year. It's hypothetical because it has to be but you can't deny that we won't at least come away with a handful of defensive players in the next draft or two. 

 

I would like to submit that in addition to Logan/Hankins, I probably would have gone after Tyson Jackson as well as a strong veteran rotational player. Give me Pryor/Logan/Hankins/Jackson as my FA haul, cut RJF as we did, redo Hall's contract for much less which we will, and sign Cousins to a long term deal. The latter three save us more than enough money to sign the former four players and still have room for the draft picks. You have turned a weakness into a strength (run defense) and in doing so have FINALLY set the defense up to actually accomplish what we've said we've built it to do - rush the passer and force turnovers. We have the pass rushers and an elite corner. Hall, if healthy, is another ball hawk in the secondary, albeit an old one that is certainly diminished but I think serviceable, as is Blackmon. Cravens has a nose for the ball. Breeland is and was still a solid starter last year and I'm not overly worried about him. This is what our defense is designed to do but to make it work stopping the run priority number one. Yet I have still not seen us commit to a defensive line that is even remotely capable of doing so. Have faith in McGee and McClain being an improvement over the debacle of the past several years, but don't be shocked when we give up damn near 5 ypc again. 

First of all very solid rebuttal. I love seeing people takes explained like that because its a very real discussion and one I very much appreciate. However I still do not agree with you and that is ok. Hopefully I can further clarify my stance so I can put this to bed. In regards to the draft from all reports a true DT will probably not come until 3-4 round this year and most likely will just provide depth. Which to mean means a very real possibility of Safety, Corner, or Inside backer in round 1. Under your scenario we have 2 down players with not much depth on the D-line. That is why I am so skittish on that approach if it were to have happened. I also see McClain and McGee possibly falling into that same trap and I am aware that could cancel itself out and if it does then no matter what they did we would have most likely been screwed either way.

 

I am very very concerned still with that backend we have. I really think that the coaches are not high on Breeland at all at the moment. A few interviews (or 1 lol cant remember) have pointed to that theory from the coaches themselves with hints of corner being a pressing need on this team. Which leads me to believe corner is going to be the pick. I have hopes for Fuller still but he could still go either way unfortunately. Now if we did not sign Swearinger then we go back to Hall and Blackmon back there with zero behind them. Injuries are a very real concern with both of them and that would be leaving us uncomfortably thin. Cravens is the wild card I will grant you that but is still a wild card. I may be over rating Swearinger but I think he is going to be the steal of FA for this team. I also still do not think they are done with this position at all as evidence by the Colt player they were sniffing around with just last week.

 

To close I really am not super high on the McClain and McGee signings to be honest but I do not hate them for the cost. They have a nice upside that has me intrigued. However I really think the team saw them as rotational depth behind a Campbell/Logan starter. The contracts just were not going to work for this team for what they are trying to do. FYI I am still hoping for a Hankins signing at a resonable contract and if that happens it changes the discussion completely. So it does indeed put us in a pickle but I am super stoked about the Swearinger pick up. Again I go back to that line situation for contracts on O and forgot completely about Crowder's coming up too. Just a lot of people that will be signed and I am afraid that the Cousins signing is going to really break the bank. I am talking 25 million plus. I hope I am wrong but I dont think I will be.

[Morneblade]

3 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Crowder? Kerrigan?

 

We also had a powderpuff schedule, including a stretch of 6 straight winless teams. These are pretty numbers and all, but that defense was highly overrated.

 

That wasn't the point I was trying to make. No, it was not a great defense, but it was worlds better than what we have had since. With a DC that never had a job after that. That's what I'm going after. It wasn't great. it wasn't good. It was pretty "meh". But "meh" would be a huge uptick to what we have had since.

 

2 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

i personally like the 3-4, but if you don't have a nose who can stand his ground and a kick-ass safety, it's useless.

 

weve had neither since we switched to the 3-4. (Combined with two of the worst DCs in the history of the league.) hence the atrocious defense's we put out there.

 

 

That was an awful read-react Blache defense that was putrid in every way.  I'd take those numbers, but they are misleading.  And that style of defense was absolutely painful to watch.

 

ive said this a million times, it's not the scheme or system.  Either can work and be outstanding.  It's about getting the right coaches to coach the scheme, and the players that fit the scheme.  

 

Haslett was a 4-3 guy, and not one of his assistants had ever coached a 3-4. Joe Barry was just an idiot.  Hopefully Munusky is better. 

 

I don't mind the 3-4, but I realize what you need to run it well. The fact that we have made zero effort to get that is what dives me nuts. It's also really hard to find, Which is why I do prefer the 4-3, there are just more of those types of players.

 

I posted Blache's numbers for a reason. Not because they were good. And it was painful (especially at the time) to watch. But now? No, not so much. It would be a big upgrade over what we have now. Compared to Hazlett and Barry have put out, it's the 85' Bears. Ok, maybe not that good, but they also had a terrible Offense to prop up. That team average 16 points a game. The Defense gave up 21 points a game. We averaged 24.8 points a game this year on Offense and gave up 24 on Defense.

 

How painful was it to watch this year, compared to "Blech" and his D? We gave up more yards per play, plays per drive, ToP, and points per drive this year. I would say that this D has been more painful to watch. And let's not get started about 3rd down.

 

I agree, either can scheme can be outstanding. If you have the right coaches and players. We've been piss poor in coaching, and really bad in players for the 3-4. I also really don't see that changing. I like Manusky, but I don't love him. He is not Wade Phillips.

 

I think it's harder to get good 3-4 players as well, there are less of them because the scheme requires them to be more athletic overall. And with the current FO, I don't see them paying for the few people that really stand out in critical positions. I don't see us getting it done with the approach we've been using for 7 years now. And I don't see that approach changing.

[MEANDWARF]

3 hours ago, dyst said:

Crowder is another good one but I've leveled down on Kerrigan. He's good but I don't consider him one of the best at his position.

Kerrigan is our best pass rusher!!!!

Hands Down, End of Story!!!!

[Morneblade]

15 minutes ago, MEANDWARF said:

Kerrigan is our best pass rusher!!!!

Hands Down, End of Story!!!!

 

He might be, but he is not elite by and measure. That's part of the issue.

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, MEANDWARF said:

Kerrigan is our best pass rusher!!!!

Hands Down, End of Story!!!!

That is a pretty low bar to set.

[MEANDWARF]

11 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

That is a pretty low bar to set.

 

#9 in the NFL in sacks!

https://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/player-sacks-and-sack-yards/2016/

[I Love The Skins]

Will Compton might get 10 tackles a game and the fans who haven't seen him play or just care about stats will say he is not bad , but they are mostly all down field and they have no impact on the game..

[fordranger76]

47 minutes ago, MEANDWARF said:

Kerrigan is our best pass rusher!!!!

Hands Down, End of Story!!!!

Kerrigan is criminally underrated by our fan base. Kerrigan is currently 12th of the current active sack leaders in the NFL and is 3rd for all time with the Redskins. Still not enough for a lot of fans. Also a nice next gen stat for those that want to roll with that narrative as well. A blurb from nfl.com

 

9) Ryan Kerrigan, Washington Redskins (4.08 average distance to the quarterback)

 

Ryan Kerrigan is the lead dog in a Washington edge group that checked in at the ninth ranked pass rush unit in 2016, per the Next Gen Stats. The veteran edge player and 16th overall pick in the 2011 draft led the team this year with 11 sacks. It was the second-highest total of his career. Kerrigan is the consummate example of the rock in a Washington defense that went through plenty of turnover since his drafting six seasons ago. His presence certainly helps the two younger pass rushers who play alongside him in the rotation. While neither Preston Smith (4.03 pressure score) or Trent Murphy (4.29 pressure score) hit the 300 pass rush attempts minimum to be considered for this list, they registered pressure scores in the 88th and 59th percentile, respectively, among edge rushers this season.

[HTTRDynasty]

Kerrigan is what he is - a solid player who gets sacks against inferior RTs and has the occasional big play. Preston Smith was objectively our best pass rusher last year though according to Next Gen Stats, and that was going up against LTs.

[carex]

54 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

I don't mind the 3-4, but I realize what you need to run it well. The fact that we have made zero effort to get that is what dives me nuts. It's also really hard to find, Which is why I do prefer the 4-3, there are just more of those types of players.

 

 

 

failure is not the same as zero effort

[Morneblade]

I tired to find some real specific stuff on Kerrigan, but I was not successful. I was only able to come up with a couple things. From 2 years ago, from PFF

"Starters: OLB Trent Murphy, DE Chris I. Baker, NT Terrence Knighton, DE Jason Hatcher, OLB Ryan Kerrigan

Rotation: DE Ricky Jean-Francois, DE Stephen Paea, DE Kedric Golston, OLB Preston Smith

Washington’s front is not the stoutest against the run, but they have a number of consistent pass rushers. Ryan Kerrigan and Trent Murphy were not outstanding by any means, but they combined for a +16.7 cumulative pass rush grade. Interior defensive lineman Chris Baker (82.7) and Jason Hatcher (74.6) also pushed the pocket on a consistent basis. The former also played the run well in 2015 (81.7 run defense grade), unlike his teammate, Hatcher (48.4 run defense grade), who’s been a specialist pass rusher for awhile. Jean-Francois and Knighton combined for a +13.8 cumulative run defense grade, giving Washington a pair of stout run defenders. Stephen Paea (75.8) also proved to be a useful free agent addition, despite getting on the field for just 221 snaps. Preston Smith gives Washington some depth on the edge, even if he ultimately ended up with a poor overall grade this season (68.8). He’s flashed serious potential as a pass rusher, finishing the year with eight sacks and 35 combined pressures."

 

Not really about Kerrigan, but Mason Fost was the highest rated defender.

 

Top overall grade: LB Mason Foster, 86.3

 

[Koolblue13]

Yes, Kerrigan is our best pass rusher, who scares nobody. Doesn't cover in space. Is constantly fooled by play action and he doesn't tackle running backs. 

 

But yay, 9th in sacks against bad RTs.

[justice98]

58 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

Kerrigan is what he is - a solid player who gets sacks against inferior RTs and has the occasional big play.Preston Smith was objectively our best pass rusher last year though according to Next Gen Stats, and that was going up against LTs.

 

I am perfectly fine with that.  I dont get all the complaining.  How many 3-4 LOLB are better than him?  Not saying he's the best, but it's not a long list.

[William Barbour]

On 3/18/2017 at 0:19 PM, Koolblue13 said:

Wtf does coach um up mean? Either they're talented and driven enough to play or they're not.

 

Iaoniddias was a late round after thought of a pick, but they never seem to mention him. Only got in the game last year because of injuries. 

 

I don't know where Lanier came from, but they bring him up a lot. 

 

I hope they both work out.

 

Doug Williams actually found Lanier. Fun fact for you new GM search enthusiasts. 

Leonnadis was drafted for depth, but played solid for a Rookie. Basically coaching someone up is bringing out the best of someones strengths. It's a big reason why Spencer Long, Moses, and others can fill in the offensive line and Callahan can make them look solid. I hope we get to the point like that here on the defensive line. 

 

Other good teams do it like Denver, Seattle, even Dallas had some no names excel on their Dline.

 

On 3/18/2017 at 0:46 PM, Morneblade said:

Lanier is a DE in a 3-4

Matt Ioannidis was not even 300 pounds last year, he needs to put some weight on before we can really think about him playing NT.

 

Not in Manusky scheme. Hes going to be hitting gaps and disrupting the backfield. Not just taking up blocks for the Linebackers. 

On 3/18/2017 at 0:59 PM, Jericho said:

 

This. And also the fact Lanier wasn't even drafted. So a late fifth rounder and an UDFA are apparently the "plan" in some fan's eyes

 

Just because they are not a top 25 first rounder doesnt mean they cant be productive. There is a large list of defensive lineman to prove this correct.

1 hour ago, I Love The Skins said:

Will Compton might get 10 tackles a game and the fans who haven't seen him play or just care about stats will say he is not bad , but they are mostly all down field and they have no impact on the game..

This.

 

Most his tackles are late or 5 yards downfield. Teams late in the year were stretching our defense out and forcing our LBs to make tackles in space and pursuit. Which they all suck at.

[JPG]

Theres alot great FA talk going here!!! I feel like I'm reading women argue anout what hair salon is the best to go to. 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

17 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

 

Doug Williams actually found Lanier. Fun fact for you new GM search enthusiasts. 

 

 

I read the story, its a nice one, Lanier wasn't an on the radar player since he played in a smaller school, so his head coach called Doug Williams and said the Redskins should really look at this guy and Doug agreed with the recommendation and subsequently Scot did, too.   Love Doug Williams the player but that story doesn't drive any enthusiasm his way for me in the GM search. 

 

I'd love it it for Lanier to be this stud DE.  Will see.  Until it happens I see him as a wild card but i am jazzed to see what's he got.  

[Morneblade]

11 minutes ago, William Barbour said:

. 

Leonnadis was drafted for depth, but played solid for a Rookie. Basically coaching someone up is bringing out the best of someones strengths. It's a big reason why Spencer Long, Moses, and others can fill in the offensive line and Callahan can make them look solid. I hope we get to the point like that here on the defensive line. 

 

Not in Manusky scheme. Hes going to be hitting gaps and disrupting the backfield. Not just taking up blocks for the Linebackers. 

 

 

 

 

Joe Barry had an attacking 1 gap Scheme. So, if Manusky does that, he will be using the exact same scheme that Joe Barry did. This would not be a change

Some insight:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2017/01/23/a-closer-look-at-what-greg-manuskys-redskins-defense-might-look-like/?utm_term=.0ff07b0eaa0e

 

He also has used a 2 gap scheme in the past.

 

Matt Ioannidis didn't do much last year. He is a project and still is one at this point. He was also 5th round pick. Not that much expected from.

Long was a high 3rd and Moses was a 2nd. More expected from those rounds.

[carex]

6 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

He also has used a 2 gap scheme in the past.

 

Matt Ioannidis didn't do much last year. He is a project and still is one at this point. He was also 5th round pick. Not that much expected from.

Long was a high 3rd and Moses was a 2nd. More expected from those rounds.

 

Both Moses and Long were 3rd rounders

[dyst]

2 hours ago, MEANDWARF said:

Kerrigan is our best pass rusher!!!!

Hands Down, End of Story!!!!

For a while Fred Davis was our best TE, Jason Campbell was our best QB, DHall was our best Corner. Being the best on "this" team doesn't mean anything. If they are one of the best at their position across the league, that's is what I consider "can't lose".

[carex]

3 minutes ago, dyst said:

For a while Fred Davis was our best TE, Jason Campbell was our best QB, DHall was our best Corner. Being the best on "this" team doesn't mean anything. If they are one of the best at their position across the league, that's is what I consider "can't lose".

 

and you're ignoring the stats people put up to show that over all he's in pretty high standing in the league