skinny21

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I too have no idea what’s going on there, but I love the energy and excitement

12 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I guess Nabers hasn't been told who the Giants QB is yet (and I LOVE Nabers, so pissed off he landed in NY). 

In his defense, it’s possible the Giants don’t know who the Giants’ QB is yet… 😁

4 minutes ago, AlwaysBeRedskins2Me said:

I know Tress Way is a great guy. Great teammate. Great holder on FGS. However should we consider bringing in competition? I know that sounds crazy but his all pro season was 5 years ago. And last season he was 27th in the NFL in yards per punt. That's abysmal. Flipping the field is critical, at times. Especially backed up in your own territory. And the NFL is filled with punters with monster legs. Much stronger than Tress's apparently. Just saying 🤷

Competition is almost never a bad idea.  I think Tress just had a down year, but you never know…

I hope he sticks (and bounces back) and gets to fill in his captain “C” (which I never knew about until his jersey announcement on Command Center).

Here’s hoping Sinnot can be our Jason Witten (82)…

3 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

Nice pull on the shoulder... likely just draft paranoia.

 

FTR I am not disputing that the league has universally switched to rotating out defensive players notably the DL. Again what I am disputing is that our top players are out of shape or otherwise unable to perform to expectations in just 5.5 minutes of full bore strenuous activity, very liberally spread across 3 hours.  I still contend I will take Allen at 95% than Potatoe' at 100% ICE COLD. That clear backup guy coming in ice cold better be damn ready to get attacked by OCs searching for weak links, and outperform Allen.  If I am an OL or OC I am thrilled Allen and Payne are on the bench. Until we got Newton, at least.

 

If the modern day DCs going to a scrub backups in the 3rd series was a game changer, backup DL would have higher PFF grades than the starters, right?? Finally we have stats on this ****. The backup laden defense collectively also posting better stats than the starters. Lets see them.

 

I bet some here may recall hearing pass rushers subbed out annoyed because they had been setting up an OL and on the bench, their plan neutered.

 

A coach knows who has a high motor laced on Sudafed and a guy that is out of shape. . Sub accordingly.  Here are 2 motors from back in the day.

A few points…

It’s not about being out of shape, it’s about preserving their bodies so they can maintain a high level of play.  Maybe it would be helpful to look at it like MLB pitchers on a pitch count - it’s not because they can’t possibly pitch the whole game.

It’s not about 1 game, it’s the full season of wear and tear.

The backups won’t perform better than the starters, because the idea is having a temporary drop off in play (though ideally you have quality backups to minimize that drop off) so that the starters can better maintain their high level of play.  And yes, OCs will try to take advantage, but DCs will also try to account for that.

As to the time they’re out there (your 5.5 minutes), I feel like you’re looking at it (too simplistically) as pure energy expenditure, when in reality it’s more like doing your max weight for squats.  It’s a lot easier to recover from aerobic than anaerobic, relatively speaking.

Don’t know if this helps, but I randomly saw the interview with Ekler on Command Center, and he talked about being fresher as part of a RBBC.  Said everyone, even practice squad players’ legs are worn out by the end of the season - months of weights and practice take their toll, and that’s magnified when adding game reps… and that’s even further magnified when you’re in the trenches.

I’m not going to assume all coaches inherently now what’s best, and I absolutely applaud you questioning accepted wisdom, but it’s worth considering that this is a collective of strength trainers, position coaches, QC assistants, analytics, nutritionists, the DC, game film, watching practices, etc, arriving at this conclusion.  And it’s worth noting that the entire league (and FBS) uses and values DL rotation.

There’s a part of me that wishes we’d just signed Allegretti to a 1 year deal, essentially leaving an opening for Stromberg (or possibly Coleman) to take over at some point this year or next, but 1) it’s quite possible that security is a big part of why he signed here, and 2) if he loses the starting job next year, he’d be a fairly highly paid backup (not egregiously so though), and then carries a dead cap of 2m in ‘26.

Maybe it’ll turn out that I’m under-appreciating our DEs, but I wish we had a high quality edge rusher that could really challenge our tackles.  Of course our DTs (and blitzing from our backers, etc) should be good preparation for our IOL.  I know Howell had his own issues, but the number of times he faced pressure from multiple areas was highly problematic.

If I had to guess the floor of this unit compared with last year - moderate step down from Leno to Lucas, small step up from Charles to Allegretti, moderate step up from Gates/Larsen to Biadasz.  And then I’d grant them 1) a small step up for (what I presume will be) a more balanced offense, and 2) a small step up from Howell’s slower post-snap reads and EB’s (seeming) lack of catering to personnel to the Daniels/Kingsbury combo.  Here’s hoping we exceed that floor though.

Regarding the Coleman pick, seems like the upside is there to become a decent, or even pretty good tackle, and a pretty good to very good G.  But I’d also say the floor matters as well.  My guess is it’s swing tackle and next man up at G, which is valuable, even if it would be far less than we’re hoping for.

As to the philosophy of the pick, along with not addressing OT in the 2nd, I think it’s fair to guess they probably had a grouping of guys at the spot and figured one or more would fall to 67 - some combo of Fisher/Paul/Rosengarten/Suamataia/Coleman/Wallace/Amegadjie/Foster/etc.  If that is indeed the case, I think it bolsters the logic of selecting Sainristil and Sinnot.  And frankly, even if we’d landed any of those guys in the 2nd, or even traded up for an OT, I still would be nervous about our tackle situation.

Zooming out even further, I expected a draft focused on helping Daniels.  I was imagining drafting at least one tackle and maybe a 2nd (possibly more of a G/T), a receiver or two (particularly given the depth of the position), maybe/probably a TE, maybe a back, and maybe another IOL.

In hindsight though, they…

1) brought back Lucas, which at minimum solves the swing tackle spot, though obviously he’ll compete for the starting gig.

2) signed Allegretti - competition for LG (with Deiter, Stromberg, Paul, Daniels, etc.)

3) signed Deiter - G/C depth (and competition at LG)

4) did a nice job addressing TE with Ertz/Sinnot

5) solidly addressed slot receiver with Crowder/McCaffrey

6) added Ekler, who, while aging, is still (IMO) a quality 3rd down back

7) drafted Coleman

😎signed Biadasz, who is a clear step up from our centers from last year

Nothing new there of course, but I thought it worth noting because while it’s not at all a finished product, it certainly appears that they brought in some solid competition (and therefore depth) and some pretty decent pass catchers.  Additionally, there’s some versatility as well - they can get a bit creative with how they use Sinnot, McCaffrey and Ekler, and they can shuffle the olineman a bit as needed.

All told, in terms of supporting Daniels, I believe they’ve hit on some key areas that typically help young qbs - 

1) improving the IOL to prevent some of the quick, in-your-face pressure

2) will be a bit better able to run the ball (and will almost certainly be a lot more balanced than we saw last year)

3) have an OC that is both creative and will cater to his qb to some extent.  Being a former qb himself, along with adding Brian Johnson, David Blough and Mariota to the mix should help as well.

4) added some qb friendly pass catchers, particularly safety valve types in Ekler, Ertz, Sinnot, Crowder and McCaffrey.

5) majorly overhauled the defense, and did so in a way that seems to really fit what Whitt is going for.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s not all rainbows and potty-trained puppies.  Our tackle position is pretty dang scary still, we really need Dotson to step up big time, there’s a lot of cooks in the kitchen on offense (and likely a lot of voices in Daniels’ ear), and it’s hard to be optimistic about Daniels protecting himself.  I’m also nervous that Daniels is stepping into a situation where he’s learning a new system (see LSU in ‘22) and, relatively speaking, is going to be playing with an inferior oline and wr group than he’s used to.  I do think we’ve made some solid strides in the right direction though, and barring a career ending injury (knock on wood), I expect a bright future for Daniels as they continue making strides in his supporting cast.

Would be ironic if Quinn/Whitt resuscitated Davis and St Juste as it would kind of save that draft class’ grade (along with Forrest and Cosmi).  All 3 defensive guys seem like they could be good fits, and landing 4 starter caliber players is typically seen as a success. Of course, I could just as easily envision Davis serving solely as a part timer, and Forrest/St Juste challenge - and quite possibly lose out to - Martin and Davis/Forbes/our UDFAs.

When considering the offseason moves on offense, I have to remind myself we brought back Lucas and Crowder too.  Not world beaters obviously, but pretty solid players, especially serving as placeholders for Coleman/McCaffrey.

31 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

I hate that he went to the Cowboys.  Wish it could have been anywhere else.  The Cowboys get these guys and max out their talent.

 

I'm worried about DeJean too.  I thought the trade down was a good idea in real time, but the more I think about it, the less I like it.  Part of me feels like staying at 40 and picking him ourselves is a better outcome than what we ended up with.  And if you change the picks in the third round to Beebe at 67 and Corum or Haynes or Zinter at 78, then I like that class better than our real one.

 

 

That would have been a heck of a draft.

If our guys work out though (big if obviously), nailing down tackle and TE is much better value IMO, and that’s magnified when you’re fielding a young qb.  

And of course if Sainristil is as good a slot corner as projected, that also allows Martin to move to FS.  I like his chances of success there far more than Butler.

On 5/2/2024 at 8:51 AM, method man said:

I think a number of folks are potentially underrating the contribution Rogers can make. He is another guy who is very smart and gas superior athleticism - him getting carries in 2022 symbolizes that. He got hurt early enough last year that he should be 100% by the time camp starts. With his ex QB brain, he’s probably been taking mental reps too. I think the new coaching staff is going to be surprised learning what they have in him. With Sinnott in fold, what is interesting now are the different skillsets at play and the mixing and matching you can do in 12 personnel

Would be big for us if Rogers can contribute anywhere near what his traits/intangibles suggest is possible.

Dang, just noticed he’s a FA after this year.

Not gonna happen obviously, but I’d love for Way to tell him - “you lead us to the playoffs or get a probowl nod, jersey’s yours”

44 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

Agree but more so to the 4 DBs IMO. Backers sub out quite a bit. Regardless any of those back 7 top draft picks barely able to get on the field yet should be full time players, are absolute disasters of a draft pick. 

 

Just like a top pick in the front 4 that barely sees the field, its simply not wise usage of draft capital. All things equal I think top picks should be focused on full time players.

 

Defenders are being subbed out because the modern day defensive coordinator clearly likes complexity with multiple packages in confusing exotic schemes. Its no surprise we see blown coverages so often. Subs come at a price more than just taking your best players off the field.

Pretty sure subbing is more often about matchups than trying to be exotic.  And I’d think that different packages actually means less info for a player to have learn/retain.

As for Newton (and the philosophy around the pick), the combo of BPA, focusing on beefing up the trenches, being able to play all 3 DTs at the same time (at times), keeping your guys on the line fresh, and succession planning (and really, Allen could be traded as soon as this year) make this a pretty savvy pick, IMO.  I do get your point though, and all things being equal, it makes sense to prefer a player that will be on the field more often.

To me, Sainristil might fit your complaints a bit better (even though I like the pick).  Martin performed well in the slot (and St Juste can play there as well) and is only in his second year, so I can understand it feeling more like “we can find ways to get Sainristil in the game” and “we added depth”.  Of course, if/when Sainristil gets up to speed, I think the plan might be to have Martin play FS and serve as a chess piece type.

As for your point about subbing and energy burned, 1) subs usually occur when an offense subs (and the defense must be given time to sub), and 2) a player that stays in might have to stay in for multiple plays if a team goes to hurry up.  Additionally, I’ll share an anecdote - I had one wrestling match in HS and I was mind-numbingly, could barely stand type of exhausted after the 3 minutes.  Fast forward 30+ years and me out of shape, I’ve never been that exhausted after playing 2 hours of soccer, running my *** off.  It’s just a different animal.

11 hours ago, Conn said:

Tress Way’s been great during our down years. How much does that mean to me? Not that much, hate to say. A Punter can’t make a jersey number “significant” to me. It’s just not possible. Maybe performing at an elite level during a Super Bowl run would do it, I doubt we find out. 
 

Even #5 I still associate more with the horrors of McNabb than I do with Way’s very good punting. 

I’m a big time fan of Tress - one of the rare highlights of the team on the field and on top of that, he’s a genuinely kind, funny dude, and entertaining interviewer that owns a board game company.  

And yet, before the talk started about Daniels’ jersey number, I don’t think I could have told you Way wears #5…

Even worse, my wife bought me his jersey for Xmas, lol.

10 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

I had Sainristil and Sinnott as negligible reaches on my overall slotting.  Where I think there could be some regret is that I had Beebe and Suamataia a fair bit higher than them on my board, and if they hit, then Sainristil and Sinnott need to hit bigger to feel like great value.  Sainristil was pretty risky.  I think there is an outcome where he quickly and significantly outplays his draft slot like Terry McClaurin did.  And I think there is an equally likely outcome where he doesn't really work out because of his size.  IMO Sinnott has a high floor and will probably end up being a good starter, and if he busts, it'll probably be due to injury.

 

I think Coleman was a pretty sizable reach at 67, and that's the Day 2 pick I don't have a ton of confidence in. I think we all see McCaffrey as a reach, but his film, his Senior Bowl week, and his pedigree are good enough to look at him as having the potential to justify his draft range.

 

As for Day 3, Magee is the guy I'm not sold on.  I know our FO has a reputation for excelling at drafting LBers, I just couldn't find enough cut ups to form a strong take on him, and what I did see was not very impressive.  In the end, who is really going to care if he doesn't hit though.  This class is 100% going to be defined by Jayden Daniels.  If he hits, then we'll be competitive at the highest level of the NFL.  If he busts, then we'll be going through turmoil again in a few seasons.

Coleman is going to be interesting for sure.  I’m curious about your lack of confidence though - he seems to have some good things going for him - production, size, athleticism.  

For Sainristil, love everything I’ve heard/seen, but don’t love the value of a slot corner there.  As you suggest, if he’s as good as advertised/expected, don’t think we’ll care about draft slot in the end.

With McCaffrey, I think him being new to the position makes it hard to know where he’s going to end up as a finished product, but his family pedigree suggests we could see a lot of hard work/improvement from him.  His quickness, coupled with solid size (and room to fill out a bit), quality hands, and running ability are a nice baseline of traits.

Surprising how many of these guys are relatively new to their positions, and similar to McCaffrey, the combo of intangibles (earning them captaincies) and high end athleticism ups the chances at seeing a good amount of growth from them.

49 minutes ago, Commander Chaaarmnder said:

I’m hoping that Bobby Wagner has more gas in the tank than everyone thinks, and can turn into a London Fletcher 2.0.

 Wishful thinking?  Probably, but damn that would be cool.

Lead the league in tackles last year, so I’m optimistic about ‘24.  Beyond that?  Who knows… hopefully he’s able to mentor up Davis and/or Magee.

@The Consigliere Regarding Sinnot, had some thoughts I wanted to run by you.  Setting aside his elite explosion and agility scores, good 40 time, 19% market share, leading his team in receiving yards and ypc… I feel like it’s important to consider the TE position itself.  I don’t think it’s a coincidence that most of the top teams have studs at the position (KC, SF, PHI, BAL), and I think there’s a reason Eugen Shen sees the position as an analytic advantage.  The draft also had some quality depth at db and receiver, and while there were some interesting (lower ranked) TEs remaining as well, none in the mold of Sinnot - tons of blocking experience, highly athletic, lines up all over, legitimate receiving chops, a focal point of the offense, durable, and fairly young.  And of course, we have very little at the position and it’s the “security blanket” position for a qb, particularly a young one.  Lastly, and I could be way wrong about this, but it feels like TEs have been going a bit higher recently.

7 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

17-0 until proven otherwise.

 

 

Realtalk, I feel like anywhere between 7-10 and 10-7 is very possible.  Pretty much a perfect bell curve.

 

Like sure, this is an incomplete team, BUT, overall, there's some thing to be optimistic about.  I think our coaching will be much improved, especially on defense, and that should hopefully elevate that side of the ball from...bad...to at least good.  Unit to unit, DT rotation should be good.  Edge rushers are not gonna be elite but should be serviceable.  Linebackers have the potential to surprise us, I am never gonna bet against Bobby Wagner's unit.  Secondary is the iffiest but if there was ever a guy who could turn around that unit it's probably Quinn.

 

Offensively, the biggest hole, aside from the ?? that is QB, is tackles.  But I like our interior OL for the most part, and I like our skill position guys.  Are they elite (outside of maybe Terry)?  No.

 

But like, a lot of our units are now likely "good" even if they aren't great.  So we should be able to score some decent point totals, and if the secondary can hold up (or the DLine can bully opposing Olines) then I feel like we can win some games in a decent fashion.

Yeah, I’m pretty much with you here, though I’d lean towards 6-8 wins as most likely.  This team is going through a sea change though, so I can’t say I’d be shocked by 4 or 5 wins, or by 9 or 10 wins.

Personnel-wise, barring injury, I think the notable (potential/likely) negative changes are Leno to Lucas/Coleman, Curl to Chinn, and Fuller to Forbes (or whoever).

I think the FO has improved the DEs, the DT rotation, RB, IOL, probably TEs, and greatly improved our linebacker group.  QB is the big question mark.

Depth is mostly better across the board.

I believe the top level changes will have the greatest impact - better position coaches, having a clear philosophy, greater maturity/leadership, culture turnaround (yes, I went there, lol).

Not sure about whether our schemes will be improved, but I’m confident we’ll run an offense that is more balanced, caters to personnel better, and overall takes pressure off our young qb.  Defensively, I think we’ll see a lot of improvement in communication and in terms of everyone knowing their role.

7 hours ago, sinews said:

The more I learn about this guy, the more I like. Adam Peters definitely has a type and I think what makes him such a good talent evaluator (part of it at least) is that he's perceptive enough to scout intangibles and which of those qualities translates to good football players. Not saying he's perfect–it's one of the most difficult things to do–but I think he's better than most at it.

 

You could sum it up with a Gibbs-ism: "he's super smart." Anyway, just a cool little video here, had no idea he was a dad.

 

 

 

 

Probably gonna sound like an old kermudgin, but I’ll be honest, my first thought after reading your statement was “A baby in college?  That’s not necessarily great…”, but wow, he absolutely lights up talking about her.  Great stuff.

3 hours ago, illone said:

I got the youtube alert when that video went live. 
 

My wife cried like a baby and she isnt even a commanders fan 😂🥲

 

I did too, shhhhh

Had the exact same experience with my wife.  They get me every year, lol

Beyond athletic scores and captaincy, borrowing a term from Hoffman, there’s a lot of position versatility with this group.  I expect we’ll see the most dynamism from Sinnot and McCaffrey, but a lot of these guys can play in different spots.

Random draft factoid - how strange that we drafted 2 owls

I’d be curious to either watch, or see some grades from any games he played against NFL talent over the last two years.  

1 hour ago, MartinC said:

The only way is up from last year in terms of talent and coaching. But there are way too many new parts that have to come together, plus some key missing pieces (OT, possibly CB) for me to think we have a real shot at a division title this year. 

Lot’s of reasons for optimism, but I’m with you - just too many question marks at the moment.  Of course, we damn near made the playoffs under Turner with a broken Wentz and (choose your qualifier) Heinicke at qb, so I’m not going to pretend I have any idea how our season will go (though winning the division sounds pretty laughable).

23 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

We literally had the worst coaching in the NFL last season. No hyperbole - I really believe that especially on defense. Just getting competent coaching on that side of the ball will give us a big lift. That plus having NFL calibre linebackers on the roster. I do worry about where the pass rush is going to come from - it is going to have to be much more schemed than we have seen in the last few years. 

Okay Ron

It was strange to see our D fall off a cliff.  I don’t know what will happen at corner for us.  Hopefully coaching, scheme, competition (and figuring out how to up our pass rush) winds up in decent enough play on the outside.  If so, I can envision a dramatic turnaround.

I mean, I totally understand the sentiment that we “needed” to do everything we could to support and protect our shiny new (rail thin) qb.  I legitimately would have understood if they’d drafted multiple olinemen and pass catchers.  It would have been paying the piper - a tax for our poor efforts of the past.  More than anything else (after replacing our owner), we need a franchise qb, and it’s harder to get a guy to that point when he doesn’t have time to throw, is injured, or his weapons aren’t getting open.

Now, with all of that said, when Newton was announced as our pick, my initial take was “hot damn!”, because I knew the FO was all about adding quality to the team.  That their view wasn’t focused solely on this year, but on a long term plan.  Might bite them in the butt this year, but the future is as bright as it’s been in a long time (IMO).

17 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

But note when the defensive players were drafted, it was less valuable capital:

 

Offense: 2nd pick, 53rd pick, 67th pick, 100th pick (4 of our top 6 picks)

Defense: 36th pick, 50th pick, 139th, 161st, 222nd 

 

If you actually measure the picks by draft capital value, I wouldn't be surprised if the offense has the bulk of the value. Lets be straight, 139th, 161st, and 22nd's are dart throws from 15-20 feet away, 2nd, 53rd, and 67th? Those are dart throws from 5-7 feet away. 

 

To me, they played the board, people are insisting it was a defense heavy draft, but really it was only so on day 3, and on day 3, you are hoping to hit on 1 starter if you're lucky and a reserve for 1 contract. It's the day 1 and day 2 capital that needs to hit and should at least be eventually worth a 2nd contract, and providing some value (especially top 30-50 guys). 

 

 

 

SIP kinda mentioned this, but I think the idea was in context of upping the supporting cast for our young qb (ie he wouldn’t count in the evaluation).  

On the flip side, via FA and the draft, they added 2 TEs, a 3rd down back, a tackle (2 if you count Lucas), a guy to compete at LG, a slot receiver (2 if you count resigning Crowder), and upgraded center.  Would have loved if we’d managed to nail down/solve the tackle spots and add a good #2 receiver, but you can’t do it all in one offseason.

21 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

This suggests our scouts performed pretty well, even if its not a given.