Gibbs does not believe the Dline is a problem (theory)

[D-Day]

I have thought about our possible #6 selection (if we can't trade out) and I have come to the conclusion that we will probably not pick a DL at the number 6 position. The following are the reasons I believe it too be true.

1. I don't believe the coaches think that the DL was the problem last year.

1a. Gibbs said in a earlier offseason article (which I can't find for the life of me) that they had reviewed the tapes and determined the problems with the D. We went out and signed CB's, Safeties, and LB's. Nothing on the DL.

1b. In the email I posted in the Philip Daniels email thread, PD stated the following.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?S=71&F=1348#S=71&F=1348&T=384128

A lot of people are complaining about our pass rush and they really don't know the game or our scheme. Because our secondary was so depleted last season, we went to a lot of 3 man rushes and the odds of 3 men beating 5-7 men is highly unlikely. Reason we rushed so much 3 man was to help our secondary out which even dropping 8 for coverage didn't help the group we had back there. Just think about the games when we rushed 4 up front (Carolina, Jacksonville, New Orleans). All wins and where we got our sacks. From what I am told by the coaches, we are changing the way we do things this year so hopefully they stick to the game plan so we can get after them up front. You mentioned Seattle and again we had a 4 man front all the time and a good one at that. A lot more go into the pass rush then just looking at stats so this year at the game, pay attention to us up front and it will tell you a big story. Thanks for supporting us and being a die hard Redskin Fan.

Check out the bolded areas and too me it says the skins run D was hurt last year by the secondary and trying to help them out. This also explains why they played so well with springs healthy. I think we all remember the discussions last year after the "leak" that pointed out that GW allowed the dline to actually attack (Carter said that in a interview that he was finally being allowed som freedom and not being forced into doing nothing but stunts and gimicks) and then walla AC started to take off and LB's also started to get some pressure.

2. Trade rumors and such. Bly, Samuels, Briggs and insert name trades all have somethings in common. A = Not on the offense and B = Back seven playmakers. If Joe and the staff thought the Dline was the problem I think it would have been addressed with a vet (as is the norm). Instead they are reportedly trying to trade for vets in the Back seven. These trades really don't make a whole lot of sense to us (by a large margin) football ignorant fans. But if they feel the DL is not the problem then they make a whole lotta sense.

3. We know with Gibbs a few thinks are true, you can't believe what he says to the press and you have to try and piece the truth togeather by reading between the lines.

4. From an article a while back

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301871.html

He's going to be a real good football player," Gibbs said of the Redskins' potential selection. "At six, we're trying to pick a player almost irregardless of what position he plays, is a player who is going to make a real impact, go to Pro Bowls for you."

To me that means they may be looking for the BPA so if we go D, which I think we may. Now from all reports the skins are not too enamored with any DL players at the #6 position.

I think if we do pick at 6 we will take Landry to solidify our secondary and give us a true cover FS to compliment Shawn and the CB's. this will set the secondary for the next three years at least with all young starters. So maybe we are looking at a player or two on the DL for the #6 pick, but it just doesn't appear that way to me with the evidence listed above.

For the record I am not for or against DL or Landry at #6 and thanks for reading my novel.

[Chump Bailey]

Good stuff D-Day and I think you're right. It just makes for a even more exciting draft I think in that regard, though I for one hope we do get a DL.

[Critz1407]

I like your post and I believe that it has some merrit. The only problem is our Dline is aging, and are not able to comeback from injuries as well, since our dline is always injured I would think they would look to add some young depth to mold into the dline player they want. I think Laundry would be sick, and I wouldn't mind if we drafted him, but I really think we should go for a impact Dlinemen.

[portis&taylor]

I really think Landry is our boy

[Hokieskins1]

good post... you really thought that out

[glikster04]

real good view on that. thats interesting and i think you may be on to something...

[TK]

Knowing that GW builds his D from the outside in, meaning Safeties then CB's then LB's & lastly D Line, I really wouldn't be surprised to see this happen. Following that train of thought, if Landry happens to fall to us, he's ours. However, he'll need to change his last name. It just won't look right on the back of a Skins jersey.

That said, we also signed Stoutmire, & Smoot for the backfield, which would still leave the possibility of moving up & taking CJ. However, that still leaves a position open for competition at Safety. Right now you have Sean Taylor and then there is everyone else. Is Pierson a full time starter opposite of Taylor? We, as fans, would like to think so, but until Training Camp & PreSeason games, no one really knows.

[Mr. S]

I really think Landry is our boy

I know you seem somewhat bias'd, but I am starting to think that as well. Gibbs tends to like safer picks, and right now, the top 3-5 d-line are kinda risky. Branch and Anderson seem risky, Carriker and Okoye seem to be workout wonders. Gaines Adams is the only one I feel worth drafting, but he would be like having another Carter, and Williams wants his run stopper type DE's.

Landry is a safer pick instead. I hope we trade down, but if we don't, I believe Landry is our guy.

[chipwhich]

Yeah but understand, there are no d-lineman either franchised or free agents that would upgrade us that much. So of course there was no big trade rumor for a d lineman. Nobody was there that was deserving of it.

[Loxley]

I keep reading that this draft is loaded with D-line depth so I guess your line of thinking is we get another Golston-type player on day 2. Its a refreshing way of looking at things for sure, well thought out and thank you for sharing.

I just wish April 28th would hurry up and get here now!

[Tarheel_Skin]

3. We know with Gibbs a few thinks are true, you can't believe what he says to the press and you have to try and piece the truth togeather by reading between the lines.

Nice post, I like #3 especially!!:applause:

[onnie007]

I agree with you completely. Especially on #4. Our FO is not impressed with the kids in this draft at the DL this. Just because Adams, Anderson, Branch, Okoye are the best the college ranks have to offer, doesn't mean we have to draft them so high and pay them elite-player money. I think thats the problem. I think they will see what happens on draft day and we can draft down, we will. If we can't then we will draft the best player available and that just may be Laron Landry. They see Adams as a liability against the run and just a 3rd down situational type rusher so they are not willing to pay a situational player 15 million in guaranteed money and I don't blame them. Detriot needs him so let them have him. CJ, Peterson, Russell, Landry, Thomas are the elite players in this draft and should be worth the money that will spent on the top 5 picks. If one of them slips to us then we will draft them per our needs or look to trade down per someone else's needs should it be Quinn, Russell or Thomas. I mean Shawn Merriman was drafted at No. 12 the year he came out and he was a beast and people knew he was a beast. He didn't sneak up on anybody. Adams has not proven that he is nearly as good a Shawn and I just think that they don't see the value of the No. 6 matching the value of these DL players in this draft. So best case scenario is that we draft down on draft day and pick up a DL. There are no 1st round playmakers at the LB position so that isn't even in consideration. That leaves the secondary and their is only one person worth drafting at No. 6 and that is Landry. I wish people would discuss more about what we could do with our 2nd day picks. Marques Colston (Hofstra), Tom Brady (Michigan), Antoine Bethea (Howard), etc. should be good lessons that there are gems that can play the game of football irrespective of where they went to school or where you were on the depth chart. There are some good LBs from Hampton in this draft, and a CB from Howard. There could be a decent OG out there and even another Golston type in the later rounds, we just need to find them. I am really intrigued by that 370 lb junior college DT Walter Thomas but I'm afraid someone might pick him up in the 4th but if he is there for us in the 5th, he is definitely worth drafting as a future run stopper. Don't be fooled, he was suppose to play D-IA ball but his academics was an issue. Anyways, after our 1st round pick, we still have 4 meaningful picks (players) to add to our team and I think there are some gems at the LB, DL & WR positions in there. I just hope the FO is doing their homework on players available in those rounds like I'm sure New England and Indianapolis are doing.

[BLEED-B&G]

Great post D-Day....really makes me re-evaluate my stance on six....

I do however think you have to take Daniels remarks with a grain of salt, while I do see the secondary causing some of the D-Line woes....they weren't exactly a sack machine in 05 either when our secondary was top notch; we had a very low sack total that year as well when our D-Line was Overachieving...

Either way I hope he is right and we are all wrong and the D-Line comes back with a vengence this year....only time will tell

great post

[Skinsinparadise]

Good post. And I agree with those thoughts. In the prior two seasons when we had an elite Defense -- we didn't have any sack artists on the D line. If I recall year one Shawn Springs lead the team in sacks. It was the same DL lineup we have now. And we've upgraded it with a pass rusher in Carter and a young DT Goldston and maybe even Montgomry helps this year. So its not a position that has been ignored as many on the board like to say.

Having an elite cover type safety would arguably be the perfect complement to Taylor

Look at the NY Giants they didn't have a great D for the last couple of years and have THREE stud Des and a decent DT this year. But their secondary is a mess.

[909997]

thats not true how many times did we see thisteam blitz and not even get close to the qb

[onnie007]

I like your post and I believe that it has some merrit. The only problem is our Dline is aging, and are not able to comeback from injuries as well, since our dline is always injured I would think they would look to add some young depth to mold into the dline player they want. I think Laundry would be sick, and I wouldn't mind if we drafted him, but I really think we should go for a impact Dlinemen.

I hear you but who is to say we wouldn't draft a DL next year and pick up one in free agency. We get to start over with a full draft next year and could easily draft one next year. Like D-Day said, I don't think the FO sees the DL as big as a problem as most people think it is. We have DL right now and Golston and Montgomery (our draft picks from last year) are our DL from tommorrow. I think this year will be very important for them because we will see what kind of players they will be after a year under Greg Blache's tutelage. If they improve and exceed expectations then the focus will go to the DE position in next year's draft or offseason FA aquisitions.

[onnie007]

Yeah but understand, there are no d-lineman either franchised or free agents that would upgrade us that much. So of course there was no big trade rumor for a d lineman. Nobody was there that was deserving of it.

I don't know about all that. You didn't hear any rumors about Snyder calling the Panthers about Kris Jenkins (one of the best DT is all of football). We didn't make a move on Ian Scott from the Chicago bears. There players are there, our FO just doesn't think it will need to be addressed just yet. I believe they think they have 4 solid players at the position and are expecting Montgomery and Golston to challenge the aging veterans for starting positions.

[Hotlanta-skin]

Good post D-Day. I also believe they're going to draft Landry. My main concern is if ST (God forbid) gets injured. Then what? At least if you have Landry, though be it a rookie, you'll be able to use Stoutmire or PP at SS. We'll still draft another DE/DT later or pick up a couple that were undrafted.

[onnie007]

Good post. And I agree with those thoughts. In the prior two seasons when we had an elite Defense -- we didn't have any sack artists on the D line. If I recall year one Shawn Springs lead the team in sacks. It was the same DL lineup we have now. And we've upgraded it with a pass rusher in Carter and a young DT Goldston and maybe even Montgomry helps this year. So its not a position that has been ignored as many on the board like to say.

Having an elite cover type safety would arguably be the perfect complement to Taylor

Look at the NY Giants they didn't have a great D for the last couple of years and have THREE stud Des and a decent DT this year. But their secondary is a mess.

You bring up a great point with the Giants. They are loaded at the DE position. I mean they have stud sack master coming off the bench for crying out loud. But the secondary can't cover anybody with the exception of Gibril Wilson. Great point.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

if williams is planning on applying pressure with our LBs/CBs like he used to with his strange man/zone blitz schemes, then im fine with not drafting a DE. daniels is old and slow, but hes still a mule against the run, and carter is good enough to get the to QB and hes pretty jacked for a 265 DE. but still, if hes concerned about stopping the run, our current DTs do not do that. they are old and slow, and the rookies we have arent proven enough yet to warrant starting golston and mont in the middle. so how do we address this?

[D-Day]

I like your post and I believe that it has some merrit. The only problem is our Dline is aging, and are not able to comeback from injuries as well, since our dline is always injured I would think they would look to add some young depth to mold into the dline player they want. I think Laundry would be sick, and I wouldn't mind if we drafted him, but I really think we should go for a impact Dlinemen.

I agree 100% and that is why I wouldn't mind either or.

[D-Day]

Yeah but understand, there are no d-lineman either franchised or free agents that would upgrade us that much. So of course there was no big trade rumor for a d lineman. Nobody was there that was deserving of it.

justin smith, Freeney, jared allen, and Grant all franchised DE's.

allen is a legal mess though. But the opportunities are there for at least a rumore or two to surface.

[nightbird]

A. "Irregardless" is not a word. C'mon Gibby, I know you were a phys-ed major but geez!

B. I'm perfectly fine with drafting BPA, especially at 6 overall. But it just seems like this franchise takes it a step further than that and purposely avoids D-line in the draft. Like, what if we determine the BPA is Adams, Anderson or Okoye? Will we skip them because we aren't "targeting" the D-line.

C. As per your theory, it may just be that we only focused on the back seven in free agency because we figured all along we'd get a D-lineman from the draft. Maybe not, just a thought. But just because we didn't target D-line in FA doesn't mean we're not looking to upgrade there.

D. Can we just GET ON THE CLOCK ALREADY!?!?!!

[fansince62]

I like your post and I believe that it has some merrit. The only problem is our Dline is aging, and are not able to comeback from injuries as well, since our dline is always injured I would think they would look to add some young depth to mold into the dline player they want. I think Laundry would be sick, and I wouldn't mind if we drafted him, but I really think we should go for a impact Dlinemen.

exactly my thoughts!

[D-Day]

A. "Irregardless" is not a word. C'mon Gibby, I know you were a phys-ed major but geez!

B. I'm perfectly fine with drafting BPA, especially at 6 overall. But it just seems like this franchise takes it a step further than that and purposely avoids D-line in the draft. Like, what if we determine the BPA is Adams, Anderson or Okoye? Will we skip them because we aren't "targeting" the D-line.

C. As per your theory, it may just be that we only focused on the back seven in free agency because we figured all along we'd get a D-lineman from the draft. Maybe not, just a thought. But just because we didn't target D-line in FA doesn't mean we're not looking to upgrade there.

D. Can we just GET ON THE CLOCK ALREADY!?!?!!

Counter thoughts.

Since when has this coaching staff relied on a rookie to fix what they deem to be a glaring weakness.