Stormy

Just now, BayouBrave86 said:

It’s just hilarious and really sad that this team didn’t learn from having Kyle, McVay, McDaniel, Slowik, and LaFleur in the building. The blueprint is right there to be successful in the new age NFL and they go and hire a retread. It absolutely is uninspired. 

Those guys were all here under, hired by, a “retread” Mike Shanahan. If Quinn builds a similarly admirable coaching staff, we will greatly benefit from it. He’s much more likely to build an elite staff than some wet behind the years hot shot OC/DC is, so let’s see the staff he builds. 

I’ll support it, and hope that it leads to an elite staff being hired, but it sure seems like we settled after not being able to reel in our top choice(s). All that said, it’s likely a vast upgrade to Rivera, and I’m pretty sure he can put together a staff that can instantly rival that of any NFC East team (been many years since that was the case). 

I’m the outlier here, but Anthony Weaver has really grown on me, and gives off incredible organizational and leader or men vibes. From the clips I’ve seen of him, he really grasps the cohesion needed from the top down to make a franchise successful, having learned it from the inside of the franchise that has had staying power like few others (Baltimore).

I like the idea of giving him his shot, and pairing him with an innovative young OC candidate along the lines of Klint Kubiak, and allowing this whole young group to grow together. Super high risk, but potentially extremely high reward. The exact opposite of the try retread Quinn, and see if he’s somehow evolved, approach. 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

A combination of a young Russell Wilson and Jalen Hurts. I’d take him in a second, size be damned. Of course this is only if we had a new staff that could properly utilize him, as the current staff would ruin him. 

59 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

That’s exactly the 2 guys Gibbs reminds me of too. A team that landed Young with pick 1.1 and Gibbs at 2.1 (doubt he lasts to Rd2) would potentially transform their offense overnight. 

36 minutes ago, Daniel.redskins said:

Overall uninspiring draft.  Going into the draft I felt our biggest needs were lb / safety hybrid , WR2, and offensive line depth.  Should have just taken Hamilton at 11 and then get a bigger framed WR in the second.  I feel like we over thought the draft.  

I don’t think so, even though I started the draft with that same impression. Even if we had drafted a big impact player like Hamilton at 11, we still wouldn’t have a true FS on the roster. Likewise the WR we landed at 47 would likely not have been near the caliber of Dotson, especially given how quickly the top 5/6WRs flew off the board, and the drop off in quality after the top 8 or so. 

More importantly, we would not have added the 3rd and 4th which allowed us to majorly upgrade and deepen our RB room, and which landed us a talented young QB to develop for when Wentz is no longer around. Since our 2nd rounder would have been spent on a lesser WR2, we also wouldn’t have been able to land a DT to strengthen our paper thin depth at the position.

Those 3 developments are going to greatly outweigh the impact of just adding Hamilton I think. I completely understand the frustration of bypassing an “elite” player, and am equally troubled by the asset mismanagement, and the occasional perceived lack of value in the timing of certain picks. However, at the end of the draft I’d much rather have Dotson, Matthis, Robinson and Howell on board rather than just Hamilton and a second round WR, which is really what that trade amounts to. 

30 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

Jesus. Not again. If the guy isnt in our future plans trade him. This crap is really getting old. 

Only this team could find a way to neither sign him or trade him, while simultaneously letting 2/4 of their DL depth walk out the door the previous offseason.

A good team would have already traded him for a 2nd rounder and extended his replacement at a bargain, whereas we’ll likely lose all of the above for nothing and then burn a draft pick that could have been used elsewhere on their replacements. Our mismanagement is historic and somehow transcends regime changes. 

36 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

We've got to go BPA now.  I want Lloyd or Jordan Davis personally, but could see the value in taking one of the OLs or DBs too.

You don’t see anyway they still take a guy like Willis and let him sit a good portion of the year behind Wentz? If not, they are starting all over again with no QB next year, probably coming off another 7 win season. I would definitely favor some foresight here over another year of kicking the QB can down the road. 

I like Howell’s mobility, toughness, and the fact that he’s tough to bring down… that stiff arm he thew to buy himself time to get a pass off was reminiscent of a smaller Josh Allen. I think he settled in pretty well after the fumble, but would like to have seen him look downfield more often. A lot of check downs and off schedule runs just don’t showcase his skills enough in my opinion. 
 

I think based off of this week of practices and the game, Willis improved his stock the most, with modest upticks for Strong, Ridder and Howell, and perhaps a slight down arrow for Pickett who just doesn’t look the part of QB1 right now. Just my l take. 
 

I think I would probably prefer one of Willis, Howell or Corral for our offense and behind our current line. 

7 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Howell just had a great throw velocity wise down the middle of the field. Touch behind but catchable and dropped. 
 

Howell didn’t feel the pressure coming behind him fumbled while his arm was beginning his throwing motion. 
 

Oy.

He looks very out of sync to me. Looked uncomfortable under center, holding the ball too long, and then not feeling the pressure behind him. Hard to draw many conclusions from an exhibition possession, but has done himself no favors so far. 
 

On the other hand, Willis looked much more in command than I expected. One poor sling on a Hail Mary, and a little too quick to bail after his first read (though to be fair he has little protection) but lots of positives. Elusive, explosive, big arm, big play ability when pocket collapses, made a couple of good throws on outs and on the move. He helped himself a bunch in my opinion. 
 

Fields wasn’t my top choice, but I would have loved to grab him. He is improving of late, and to my eye already looks 1000% better than any prospect we’ve drafted at the QB position in the last 2 decades. 

UVA’s Armstrong has a lot of attributes I like. He’s accurate, throws with anticipation, has good touch on the deep ball, a quick release, moves around the pocket well, is mobile, tough, a gamer, and has decent size. I’m not sure yet how the UVA offense he plays in may mask his deficiencies or slow his transition to the NFL, but I think this guy could do a ton of damage in a Scott Turner offense. 
 

All that said, he’s not in the conversation at our #1 pick, and we need to take a franchise QB with our first pick. Also, he would have far lesser supporting cast at the skill positions here, and much less creativity from the OC. so we’d likely waste his talents. 

19 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If they are at 19, I think there is a good chance they trade back if they hopefully find a trading partner.

 

Moehrig IMO is the best coverage FS in the draft, J. Holland IMO being the next best coverage guy.  High floor player.   He's not my top desire at 19 but he likely would be the best free safety we've had since Sean.   He's decent against the run, too.

 

My impression watching him was the dude is special at anticipating in the pass game.  His instincts and thereby I presume preperation look excellent.  He seems to be right on top of so many passing plays.  He finds himself around the ball in the passing game and running game.  That would be quite a change from our free safeties who seem to be often a beat behind. 

 

We gave up among the highest rate in the league of big plays in the passing game last year even though overall they did well against the pass.  He'd IMO help put a stop to teams successfully going deep. 

 

I'd be jazzed to get him even though I have some players I like more. 

Thanks SIP. In the event of a trade down I’d be much happier with that outcome. I do like Moehrig, but I don’t love him like I wanted to. Like most I’ve wanted to fill that FS void for the past decade, and he undoubtedly would be the best chance we’ve had to do that in a long time. I do think he’s well prepared, high character, intuitive and a good upgrade at the position. All of that would help improve our defense, but I don’t see him as a big difference maker on the back end. He just doesn’t pop for me when I watch him. Does he for you? 
 

Despite the great PD numbers and solid INT rate, he seems like a well rounded safety who isn’t really elite at anything (solid tackler who isn’t a big hitter, solid but not great athleticism, gets into position to defend passes but not a true ballhawk etc)... So, I’d be happy with him, but not to the degree I would be with adding our LT/QB of the future, or with adding a dynamic playmaker on either side of the ball like I perceive JOK to be. 
 

I definitely prefer Moehrig to AVT being the only one of our targets to fall to us at 19 barring a trade back partner. The truth is, we are going to get better and deeper with most any of these options. I just think there is an opportunity or two to hit a home run here rather than just a single or double. Moehrig is the double to me!

4 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

JOK is a terrible pick. He’s a tweener that doesn’t have any real position: too small to play linebacker, not instinctive enough to play DB. He’s a luxury pick when a hybrid type is all you’re really missing. We have gaping holes at QB, LT, S, and traditional LB. JOK satisfies none of that.

I disagree. You may be overlooking the emergence of roving LB/S hybrids across the best defenses in the NFL, and the annual carving up of our defense by opposing TEs and RBs becoming receivers out of the backfield. This was happening to our otherwise stellar defense up to and including the last game of 2020.
 

JOK is a versatile playmaker who can solve those issues, while adding additional value as a blitzer and TFL guy against the run. Grab a MLB to pair with him in round 3 (Werner/Barnes) to help address our runstopping/fits issues and this defense is dramatically improved.

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Keim just now on Sheehan's show.    He knows they dig Fields, he's in play but they don't want to give up a lot for him.  they think he has a chance he falls close to their pick.

 

They like:

Koramoah

Moehrig -- more in a trade down but won't rule it out at 19 

Fields

Vera-Tucker

Darrisaw

I like most of those guys too, but what worries me is that 3/5 of those are gone with our pick, leaving us to choose between the least appealing options; Moehrig and Vera-Tucker.

I like Moehrig, but he’s a reach at 19, isn’t a dynamic playmaker at safety, and is just slightly better overall than a slew of FS types available in rounds 2-4. I like Vera-Tucker too, but taking another OG with a first round pick is likely the smallest impact you could make on a roster already loaded with OGs. 
 

Both would be solid enough picks, and potential starters early in their careers, but it would definitely be the most modest use of our first rounder possible on a team that is just a couple of dynamic pieces away from being special. 
 

Here’s hoping Darrisaw or JOK fall to us, that we can move up slightly to grab Fields without mortgaging the future, that they can find a trade partner to add picks. I’d even prefer they attempt a slight trade back and then roll the dice on adding a playmaker like Harris or one of the Moores rather than settling on another Tackle destined to move to a crowded Guard position. 

43 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

@Stormy in my mind if our mindset is to ignore the QB position unless Lance or Fields fall within striking distance, and look to next year’s draft for a QB (and possibly trading future draft capital) ... I’m hoping for:

 

1: LT

2: WR

3: LB

3: OG

4: TE

5: RB

 

if you hit on these picks, you set yourself

up nicely on offense long term, and you free up picks in 2022 and 2023 to trade for a QB ... and you’re set at your highest price positions (OL, Edge, CB, WR) ... areas you’d presumably want to spend early draft capital on or have to spend huge $$ in free agency. Holes will obviously emerge. But you’ll have cap space and big positions on rookie deals to fill holes next year and go all in on QB with draft capital and a nearly complete team.

 

Extend Allen and Payne and let Scherff walk next off season and with LT, and RG in this draft plus Charles and Ismael from last year on rookie deals. 

That’s a blueprint for good roster management, which I think will prevail over taking the big swing for a potential superstar skill position player in round 1 this year. There’s likely no one we could draft in round 1 this year who could make the instant splash of Harris, but it’s probably wise for the present/future to land an LT on a rookie contract if we can. Darrisaw is my hope if we go this route. 

1 hour ago, Die Hard said:

Najee Harris in first.

Elijah Moore in 2nd.

Tremble in 3rd.

Werner in 3rd.

 

Fill the rest of the holes through free agency next year.

 

And go all in (trading future draft capital on vet/draft pick) next year on Qb.

That’s an interesting take that runs against the prevailing wisdom. Those top 3 picks would dramatically transform our offense (though I have a feeling Moore is gone before our second pick, but maybe R. Moore instead?). It seems much more likely that they try to bolster the OL and upgrade the LB corps early, but I think your approach is really intriguing. 
 

Who could keep up with an offense that featured McLaurin, Samuels, Moore, Gibson, Harris, Thomas/Tremble? The versatility, depth and big play ability would rival any team in the NFL. That said, you’d enter 2022 still needing that QB of the future, and with a dramatically depleted OL that has 3 pieces likely leaving with no proven replacements, and the defense another year older with only modest assets added (I think Werner is gone well before our 2nd 3rd rounder, but we’ll see). 
 

I like the vision and the possibilities, but I don’t think it’s the tact they are likely to take. Good post.

1 hour ago, Die Hard said:

You take Najee Harris..... you've now made both McKissic and Barber completely expendible. And SO cheap!

 

You have 2 backs that would complement each other perfect..... and can fit any need and opens the offense completely against any defensive strengths. No dropoff. And they won't need to be over-worked.

It was definitely apparent how 1 dimensional this offense became last year when Gibson was out with his injury. Harris and Gibson would be our Hunt and Chubb and would instantly give us one of the most explosive and versatile backfields in the entire NFL. That said, with there being no smoke in the area, and the stated needs and focus we’ve had at other positions (LT, LB, FS), I seriously doubt Harris Is in the mix at 19.  I wish he was. 

7 hours ago, PartyPosse said:

I still don’t love the drafting of Gibson. With too many other holes needing filling I don’t see his particular style of hybrid play helping out much. Prove me wrong Antonio.

I completely understand this perception, and see why a significant portion of the fanbase would see the selection of Gibson in the early 3rd this way (hybrid, raw, bigger needs elsewhere, no defined position, lack of sustained production, a perceived reach etc...). However, I see the situation differently, and both get the rationale behind selecting Gibson at pick #66, and am extremely optimistic that his selection is going to pay big dividends on a variety of levels. 

First, what did our braintrust likely think was the greatest addressable deficiency on offense for this team, which could also assist in the development of an unproven young QB who is also learning a new system? Given that we were lacking a 2nd rounder, and that our 1st round selection was already dedicated to the defensive side of the ball, I've got to believe that adding a potential offensive weapon at #66 was paramount. Fixing the pervasive OL issues, which arguably could include LT, LG, OC, RT before the draft, were going to take more time and more picks to show returns, and frankly there was only one "falling" OL available at that pick, who is also a project who doesn't seem to be a good fit for what our new OC/OL coach seem to be wanting from a new OL scheme. 

Meanwhile this offense severely lacked playmakers and speed. Watching the brief preview of Scott Turner's offense at Carolina, he wants guys who can make a cut and go as well as catch the ball out of the backfield, guys who have versatility to lineup at multiple spots, and who are speed threats in space. You can't remake this OL in a year, but you can neutralize opposing pass rushes by disguising your personnel and tendencies, and by giving your QB guys who can do damage in space if he gets the ball out of his hands quickly, which is what Haskins was stellar at with ball distribution at OSU. Then add in the fact that our RB stable, while potentially explosive, consists of a near retirement AP, and a couple of youngsters who may never stay healthy in Guice and Love, and suddenly taking a versatile, fast, tackle breaking machine who can man that position if the other options fall through, or who can also play in the OC's multiple backfield sets with them, makes a lot of sense. 

I think we are going to look back on this pick within a year+ and be very, very happy that we took Gibson at #66. 

I read this article on our draft, and Gibson in particular, yesterday, and could not have been less impressed by the "insiders" observations. I think stevemcqueen summarized it nicely elsewhere, but there is just a bunch of circular reasoning "scoutspeak" in these tidbits, most of which seems to be based in some pretty old school observations and evaluations. I think Gibson's potential versatility is a real evaluation block for these insiders, as opposed to a strength. I think that is going to prove to be a shortsighted perspective of a guy like Gibson, especially if Turner finds ways to get him on the field in advantageous formations, and ways to design getting the ball into his hands with some room to run. 

I look forward to coming back to these evals in a year or so, to see if these guys were prescient or blinded by their biases.

1 hour ago, Peregrine said:

I think the biggest thing that concerns me is that the last time we had a guy like this, super athletic, said to be just a player, but no one was quite sure his position, it was Sua Cravens.  Granted, him being a head case was a part of that, but he still never fit anywhere.  Besides the annoyance of drafting yet another RB when we just drafted Love, and Guice, and already had AP and McCissok on the roster, hes going to have to prove to be a special weapon in short order, or start to show he can be a really good WR before most people are okay with the pick.

I think it was  very different situation with Su'a. To my way of thinking, Cravens was never a hybrid player, he was a 'tweener. He lacked the straight line speed and short area quickness to play safety effectively, and he lacked the size and stacking/shedding ability to play linebacker on passing downs. He was definitely NOT an elite athlete by most metrics at all. Conversely, Gibson is an extraordinary athlete in virtually every measure, in a frame that is built like a truck. He's a hybrid, but he's the anti-Cravens in my opinion. Cravens got by on being instinctive and diagnosing plays quickly as they developed, whereas Gibson is a natural who relies much more on his physical abilities, and is much more raw. 

I'm extremely excited about this kid, much mores than virtually anyone we could have taken at WR or RB late in round 2 or anywhere in round 3. 

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

The odd thing about Cravens was his wasn't really that much of an athlete.  He ran a 4.65 and only benched 16 reps.  But he was a tweener where we didn't quite know what to do with him.

 

Scot admitted that Ryan Kelly was his target not Doctson in the first, and we were able to piece together in the draft thread that in the 2nd round their target was J. Reed but he went just before their pick.  Scot admitted on 980 last week ironically that they didn't do enough homework on either player's personality.  Cravens in particular was one strange dude who probably didn't love football.  I don't know on this front about Gibson one way or another but one difference with Cravens is that Gibson is an athletic freak and Cravens not so much. 

Sorry to echo the sentiments, but well said SiP!

They’ll have one less pair of season ticket holders. We’ve been Touchdown Club members for 11 seasons, and today is the day we decline our renewal and will be letting the client relations people know why. 

Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen’s perpetual dysfunction has people in our section (122) dropping out of our contracts left and right. They have no idea how to build a roster, and no capacity to take the hit necessary in the short term in order to allow for long term success.

An entire F.O. built on hubris, saving face and CYA. When you see how quickly the Eagles, following strong personnel philosophy and process, went from worst to first, and this group is blindly throwing darts at the wall to max out at 7-9 wins... its no longer ok. They can keep this carousel to nowhere going, but they can do it without my money. 

This is a good point. I trust him mainly because he's been in and around the NFL his entire life, knows what good teams look like, and probably knows every personnel guy in the league just through his network.

I trust him to find a GM more than I trust Snyder, who'd have a very limited network. Owners in general don't network with personnel geeks.

And I trust him because he's all we've got, apart from Snyder.

The alternatives are:

1. Dan picks the GM to work for Bruce. That's bad on a lot of levels.

2. Dan fires Bruce and hired one of his close circle to be the president and GM. That's bad too.

I'll take Bruce as president and allow him to pick the GM as the best possible option.

Fair enough on all fronts. He actually is the best of our bad options for landing a credible GM, which is worrisome.

I don't trust Dan to make the hire of a true GM who knows how to put together a roster.  

 

I DO trust Allen to do that.  He knows enough people around the league, I would trust him to make a good hire.  

 

There's no question that the owner sets the tone.  But at some point, after 15 years of mostly losing, I think Dan will eventually figure out that he's part of the problem.

 

I have also said earlier in this thread, (and why I started it) that this team is NOT Dan Snyder's team.  It's Bruce Allen's team.  

 

All of the moves of significance have Allen's fingerprints all over them.  The "Snyder Way" would not have had a slow start to FA, and would probably not have included a trade down and selection of an under-athletic OLB, and 2 OL in the third round.  

 

If Dan was truly the one making the decisions, I have to imagine they would have thrown boatloads of dollars at Jon, and gotten the elder Gruden brother.

 

While I think Dan has culpability, I think his culpability has less to do with choosing players and coaches, and more about coddling certain players because he likes them.  

WR is not even in the top 20 of the issues that this team.

Why would you trust Bruce Allen to hire a competent, outside, independent GM with a pedigree in personnel? Nearly every move he's made since acquiring the formal title of GM has involved either retaining coaches he's close to, hiring coaches based on familiarity over merit, or retaining guys in failed positions throughout the F.O. and staff because he's apparently comfortable with them.

The fact that "he knows enough people around the league" is exactly the problem, and should in no way be comforting. I would like for Bruce to get it right, and have nothing against him personally, but frankly nearly his every move so far smacks of nepotism, good old boy, cronyism over sound philosophy and meritocracy. Worst of all, he apparently doesn't even REALIZE that there is a need for a GM with personnel skills, fresh blood amongst the coaches on the defensive side of the ball, or new eyes running the scouting department. How any of these apparent facts create trust in his ability to hire, or even see the need to hire, the right GM is beyond me. 

27-49 since Allen was hired. It's not easy to get 22 games below .500 in less than 5 seasons. For all Bruce's blame shifting and claims that he had nothing to do with the previous 4 seasons, the dysfunction, drama, poor performance, lack of production from 2015 looks like more of the same from the previous 4 years.

I hear you, Elk, and I like Gruden. I'm just a fan of process, which is to say that I believe that there are empirical methods to building a successful organization. I think that the Redskins of the past 15+ years have largely flouted the idea of trying to follow a sound philosophical process for running a successful FO, and the result has been 8 coaches in 15 years and excess futility.

Fast forward to this coaching search, and I just think they skirted the process in favor of a predetermined outcome. It's hard to imagine that the best candidate for the job just happened to have ties to 3 coaches who just happened to be retained from a 3-13 team, and to the GM conducting the search. Doesn't mean he's not a good hire, it just means that the process was probably a bit stacked to start with. Given how doing things our own way has worked before, I have worries.

Likewise, had Gruden relieved one of the worst DCs of the past decade of his duties, I'd feel a lot better about the new staff, and his judgment.