I think we have depth

[newskinsowner]

I've heard a few reports about us not having OL depth and i just dont see where they get their info from because i see differently.

Take a look at who is comming off the bench.

M.Wilson- Tackle

L. Friedman-Guard\Center

C.Raymer- Center

R. Brown- Guard\Tackle (may push for starting spot)

J. Molinaro- Tackle\Guard

E. Albright- Center

P. Elisara- Tackle

It may not be a name brand group but 3 of these guys started at some point last year. And Freidman took over for larry moore in '03 at center. With Wilson and Molinaro comming into their second year i think they will have a better understanding of the snap counts, audible, and adjustments. I really like our big uglies this year because most can play multiple posistions and if a starter goes down this year (god forbid) i dont feel that the season will go down the drain with it.

Actually i would love to see this group jell because they will be very important to the growth and development of J. Campbell in Joe Gibbs offense this preseason.

What do you guys think?

[[[ghost]]]

not bad, i just hope we dont have to resort to our depth, and that our o-line can stay healthy all year long.

[Skeletor The Invincible]

Only in dreams.

Or should I say nightmares.

[RDSKNfaithfull]

Don't want to see any of them forced to duty. We can't live without any starter we have on our line with the exception of Dockery maybe.

[Beaudry]

Our center and guard depth is good enough, but if we lose Jansen or Samuels we are in trouble. Brown is the best of the bunch at tackle, and he is a huge liability at that position.

Of course, how many teams have real "depth" along the OL?

[Westbrook36]

Since when is being able to list names on a 53 man roster qualify as "depth".

Every team in the league can name their backups across the board.

[Chachie]

Originally posted by RDSKNfaithfull

Don't want to see any of them forced to duty. We can't live without any starter we have on our line with the exception of Dockery maybe.

Which actually means we do NOT have o-line depth.

[Chachie]

Originally posted by Westbrook36

Since when is being able to list names on a 53 man roster qualify as "depth".

Every team in the league can name their backups across the board.

I see you're back! I THOUGHT you had been a little to agreeable as of late.

[Art]

We have good depth in terms of having experienced players capable of stepping in and playing with Raymer, Friedman and Brown, though only two are likely to make the roster. The key, though, to depth for us is whether Wilson or Molinaro really can step up and be capable for us if needed.

In all though, we certainly have solid depth having the experience of starting players there, though, all three are on the way down in their careers, so, you'd only want to count on them for a short period.

[newskinsowner]

Originally posted by Westbrook36

Since when is being able to list names on a 53 man roster qualify as "depth".

Every team in the league can name their backups across the board.

It qualifies as depth if your starters from last year are your backups this year.

:eaglesuck

[Mr. S]

not many teams can claim to have a guy that can start for any other team as a backup on their team. I wouldnt say we had depth in that sense, but neither do many other teams. However, we have 2 starters from our line last year as backups now, which is pretty good, as they were in the same scheme and whatnot.

[NYSkins1]

Originally posted by newskinsowner

It qualifies as depth if your starters from last year are your backups this year.

:eaglesuck

I disagree. In certain cases, yes, but we're talking about the weak link of our team last year. You're talking about Cory Raymer, who, while he is a decent center, isn't quite what we need to maintain a line. The three people who started last year (With the exception of Raymer, who started because of a lack of talent at the position) started because of injuries. That's not depth.

[TheLongshot]

It is slightly better than last year (having Raymer or Friedman as backups at C, Wilson or Molinaro having an additional year to get up to speed.), but I wouldn't say we have great depth on the OL. Things would be very dicey if one of our tackles went down, since Ray Brown is only adequite, and Wilson and Molinaro are inexperienced and unproven.

Course, I don't know too many teams that would feel confident in losing a starting OT. Finding a good one is tough and expensive.

Jason

[G-Prime]

Originally posted by RDSKNfaithfull

Don't want to see any of them forced to duty. We can't live without any starter we have on our line with the exception of Dockery maybe.

Agreed.. Depth? Yeah we got it, but none of it is what I would call worry free..

[newskinsowner]

Originally posted by NYSkins1

I disagree. In certain cases, yes, but we're talking about the weak link of our team last year. You're talking about Cory Raymer, who, while he is a decent center, isn't quite what we need to maintain a line. The three people who started last year (With the exception of Raymer, who started because of a lack of talent at the position) started because of injuries. That's not depth.

Depth is defined as a proven veteran who can come off the bench and provide solid (not exceptional) play for a certain amount of games (think ryan clark here) people are thinking depth is defined as a notch below a starter. Who has that in this league nowaday? Didnt Cory start at San Diego a couple years ago and last year for us? Wasn't Ray Brown a starter at Detriot and San Fran? I'm pretty sure Lenny Friedman knows about the zone blocking scheme being implemented comming from the broncos.

No they arent the second comming of the hogs or will dominate the line of scrimmage like KC but i'm pretty sure they will be adequete enough to provide solid play in the second year under Buges tutelage.

[scottb]

Gotta agree wih NYSkins. Based upon their poor performance of the line last year, it hard to convince folks that the backups of a weak line constitute real depth. I personally believe that the line will improve dramatically this year (barring significant injuries) and the depth will be adequate. I hope they prove me right. But until they do, their poor rep is their current calling card.

[Art]

Originally posted by scottb

Gotta agree wih NYSkins. Based upon their poor performance of the line last year, it hard to convince folks that the backups of a weak line constitute real depth. I personally believe that the line will improve dramatically this year (barring significant injuries) and the depth will be adequate. I hope they prove me right. But until they do, their poor rep is their current calling card.

Just so I'm clear, then, good depth is having Pro Bowl players in reserve?

Are you people nuts sometimes? The Redskins have three guys who are starting level players currently in reserve. They aren't great players anymore, though Brown used to be a pretty damn fine player. They are still guys who can play in the NFL, who know how to play in the NFL and who've started in the systems we're running.

Now, I believe at least one of these guys if not two will be gone by the season start as I suspect we may want to go younger and more unproven for depth here, but with greater upside. In any case, depth is measured by having precisely the type of players we have on the roster.

It is not measured by the impossible standard of having an elite player sitting there waiting to come in. I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept. No team has depth able to suffer multiple injuries that remove key starters from any spot for a whole year.

In such cases you need to be lucky and have someone unexpected step up. No one would have thought we had ANY depth at all at linebacker last year, but, when Barrow and Arrington went down, we had good play from Marshall and very good play from Pierce.

Suddenly a position lacking in depth had great depth because they stepped up and played better than they'd proven they could as they'd not had a chance. Depth in such cases is speculative. You hope it'll work out, but you can't know how it will work out.

Guys like Raymer and Brown are longtime starters in the league. They represent something you know. It is no longer something you want to count on for 16 games, but, over a short period, this is exactly the type of player you can win with and survive with.

Or, put another way, find me how many teams in the league have guys who started 14 or more games last year in reserve on the offensive line AND guys who've started the majority of their careers when healthy. Who DOES have depth if we do not?

If the guys who worry over our line depth are basically saying that NO ONE in football has depth on the line, you're wrong, but at least you're consistent.

[OldTownFan]

The redskins have much more depth this season than last.

Our offensive line which was greatly disabled by Jansen's injury is much more deep this season. Our defensive line I think is roughly the same, which sort of worries me. our linebackers are very deep and cover a wide array of athletes, current pro bowler, former pro bowlers, free agents, draft picks, etc. We are thin possibly at cornerback, depending upon when Rogers can return, and how he fares this season, I'm sure he's going to see playing time, but as has already been pointed out, Williams doesn't exactly throw the rookies in there to sink or swim.

[Westbrook36]

Well, I screwed that up.

[Westbrook36]

Art, second and third year green reserves can do a poor job as well as players who have proven they will do a poor job when given the chance like Raymer.

Quality reserves are quality players who might be able to start on other teams and have upside.

Players like Scullio, Hicks, and Ephraim.

Edit- A good example is players that have finally got a chance at free agency and quickly got a job and broke the starting line up on another team. Doug Brezinski of the Birds from 2-3 years ago comes to mind.

[Renegade7]

Originally posted by RDSKNfaithfull

Don't want to see any of them forced to duty. We can't live without any starter we have on our line with the exception of Dockery maybe.

In a nutshell we don't have very good depth. Everyone, take a breath, it's true. We don't have very good depth on our o-line. Ya'll saw what happened just losing Jansen. Ray Brown is our only reliable back-up and even he had his moments. Lord have mercy if Raymer ends up back in the starting line-up! :doh:

[RDSKNfaithfull]

Originally posted by Art

Just so I'm clear, then, good depth is having Pro Bowl players in reserve?

Are you people nuts sometimes? The Redskins have three guys who are starting level players currently in reserve. They aren't great players anymore, though Brown used to be a pretty damn fine player. They are still guys who can play in the NFL, who know how to play in the NFL and who've started in the systems we're running.

Now, I believe at least one of these guys if not two will be gone by the season start as I suspect we may want to go younger and more unproven for depth here, but with greater upside. In any case, depth is measured by having precisely the type of players we have on the roster.

It is not measured by the impossible standard of having an elite player sitting there waiting to come in. I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept. No team has depth able to suffer multiple injuries that remove key starters from any spot for a whole year.

In such cases you need to be lucky and have someone unexpected step up. No one would have thought we had ANY depth at all at linebacker last year, but, when Barrow and Arrington went down, we had good play from Marshall and very good play from Pierce.

Suddenly a position lacking in depth had great depth because they stepped up and played better than they'd proven they could as they'd not had a chance. Depth in such cases is speculative. You hope it'll work out, but you can't know how it will work out.

Guys like Raymer and Brown are longtime starters in the league. They represent something you know. It is no longer something you want to count on for 16 games, but, over a short period, this is exactly the type of player you can win with and survive with.

Or, put another way, find me how many teams in the league have guys who started 14 or more games last year in reserve on the offensive line AND guys who've started the majority of their careers when healthy. Who DOES have depth if we do not?

If the guys who worry over our line depth are basically saying that NO ONE in football has depth on the line, you're wrong, but at least you're consistent.

How about having Casey R. as your back up center?

[Art]

WB,

I agree with you, quality reserves are players who might start elsewhere. Players like Raymer, Brown and Friedman who all started elsewhere prior to coming to D.C. Thanks for tipping in for the Skins on this one.

Faithful,

Rabach would be a player along the lines of Pierce perhaps. A reserve who finally got a chance to start and played well enough he wasn't going to leave the lineup, and, he got paid as a free agent due to that play in the contract year. We may have players like that currently in Wilson and Molinaro, but, we won't know until they play, just as a guy like Rabach was unknown until he played.

An unknown doesn't qualify as good depth. He qualifies as hope. All teams have hope for depth. Few teams have starting-level players for it.

[GSF]

We have very good depth on the interior line IMO. The real question mark is the 2 second year tackles. We really don't know what they can do. Hopefully we won't have to find out this year.

[Westbrook36]

Originally posted by Art

WB,

I agree with you, quality reserves are players who might start elsewhere. Players like Raymer, Brown and Friedman who all started elsewhere prior to coming to D.C. Thanks for tipping in for the Skins on this one.

You missed my point, obviously. Brunell started for the Jags prior to coming to D.C. Does he qualify as a "quality reserve player"?

Players who would start elsewhere now, not back in nineteen clickety click when the forward pass was just a gleem in a young man's eye or when Ray Brown first broke into the league.