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

[onnie007]

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?

Nobody is saying start Golston and Montgomery. We are saying that we are already developing youth at the position and we need to see how they will turn out another year in the system. We don't need a log jam of young players on the DL. Okoye or Branch would still be behind Golston and Montgomer anyways cause rooks don't play much under GW. So which ever DT you draft and give 15 million in guaranteed would be our 5th DT and won't even see the field cause we are still evaluating Golston and Montgomery. And they won't be getting many reps either and will ultimately just be stealing Golston and Montgomery's reps. This is why Gibbs is not looking to draft a DT at No. 6. It will be a skill player and the best one at No. 6 on defense will probably be Landry. We are not set at the safety position and it would be a great move. We still need to see if Stoutmire will play like he has in the past with us and whether PP can come back from his knee surgery. If neither pan out, our young player that is in development is Reed Doughty. Okay, I love they guy but...c'mon. He is another Matt Bowen at best. Landry smart addition for the future at the position and may even be a great playmaker come week 7 if Stoutmire and/ or PP don't play even better than they did were in top form.

[Veretax]

That is interesting, if true it would add creedance for taking landry. Or a Defensive End to groom

[onnie007]

Counter thoughts.

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

Exactly my point! :applause:

[RedzoneHunter]

I see too many people wanting to grab Landry with the #6, but that is a reach and a 1/2. He's not that good in coverage. Yeah, he did alright in college, but we're talking about the big time now, there's a huge difference. Last year we had no safeties on the roster that could play center field, including Sean Taylor, who was toast in almost every single game. Bottom line: we had no ball hawk in the secondary.

If we are going to draft a safety in this draft, we better turn our eyes towards Reggie Nelson, who is a great ball hawk. If we are foolish enough to reach for Landry, we will still have the same problem we had last year and that will be a huge mistake.

We don't need a Ryan Clark type, we need an Ed Reed or a Troy Pom..whateverhisnameis in Pittsburgh.

[Die Hard]

If Gibbs drafts Landry.... and after spending top 10 picks on Landry, Taylor, Rogers... and investing heavy monies in Shawn Springs and Fred Smoot....

If our pass defense isn't ranked in the top 3 in the NFL.... I'm going to hurt somebody. Going to be hard to do without a pass rush... but hey, I'll give people the benefit of the doubt until the results are in.

Of course, having a top 3 pass defense in the NFL isn't going to anesthetize the sting of watching teams carve us up on the ground. Again, I'm going to have to hurt somebody.

[KTrainSkinsFan]

I think this post is absolutely correct. It's clear the FO and coaches are not interested in getting big name DLine help. Personally, I value their opinion (on the Redskins) much more than anyone here.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Nobody is saying start Golston and Montgomery. We are saying that we are already developing youth at the position and we need to see how they will turn out another year in the system. We don't need a log jam of young players on the DL. Okoye or Branch would still be behind Golston and Montgomer anyways cause rooks don't play much under GW. So which ever DT you draft and give 15 million in guaranteed would be our 5th DT and won't even see the field cause we are still evaluating Golston and Montgomery. And they won't be getting many reps either and will ultimately just be stealing Golston and Montgomery's reps. This is why Gibbs is not looking to draft a DT at No. 6. It will be a skill player and the best one at No. 6 on defense will probably be Landry. We are not set at the safety position and it would be a great move. We still need to see if Stoutmire will play like he has in the past with us and whether PP can come back from his knee surgery. If neither pan out, our young player that is in development is Reed Doughty. Okay, I love they guy but...c'mon. He is another Matt Bowen at best. Landry smart addition for the future at the position and may even be a great playmaker come week 7 if Stoutmire and/ or PP don't play even better than they did were in top form.

but you just contradicted yourself. now we have a logjam of people at saftey, and landry wouldnt even start, so that doesnt solve anything. we have stoutmire, prioleau, fox, doughty, taylor, and landry if we take him. taylor starts, doughty is ST only, now we have 4 other safties. seems kinda stupid, when we only have 4 DTs, 2 5th and 6th round rooks, an aging griffin and a 90% finished salavea. and drafting landry doesnt help stop the run. i find it hard to believe that eating up space in the middle takes a ton of coaching.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Counter thoughts.

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

since when has this coaching staff relied on a rookie to fix what they deem to be a glaring weakness on offense?

were drafting defense, end of story. dont know who it is, but we will. were idiots if we dont.

[RabidFan]

but you just contradicted yourself. now we have a logjam of people at saftey, and landry wouldnt even start, so that doesnt solve anything. we have stoutmire, prioleau, fox, doughty, taylor, and landry if we take him. taylor starts, doughty is ST only, now we have 4 other safties. seems kinda stupid, when we only have 4 DTs, 2 5th and 6th round rooks, an aging griffin and a 90% finished salavea. and drafting landry doesnt help stop the run. i find it hard to believe that eating up space in the middle takes a ton of coaching.

Fox or Stout would be cut if we drafted Landry....point blank.

[D-Day]

since when has this coaching staff relied on a rookie to fix what they deem to be a glaring weakness on offense?

were drafting defense, end of story. dont know who it is, but we will. were idiots if we dont.

I responded to this

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.

with my quote.

Quote:

Originally Posted by D-Day

Counter thoughts.

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

Who is talking about offense? If we are the only one I can think that was counted on was Cooley but I could be wrong as I was in Iraq his rookie year.

***EDIT: If you are referring to Campbell then he was a 2nd year player with a year of learning the system last year. Also don't forget how the brought him into the system slowly, he was given more pass paterns as the games went by and he was allowed to go further down field each game as he proved to the coaches he wouldn't make the stupid mistakes.

[Die Hard]

since when has this coaching staff relied on a rookie to fix what they deem to be a glaring weakness on offense?

were drafting defense, end of story. dont know who it is, but we will. were idiots if we dont.

The fact that Gibbs/Williams won't use rookies to upgrade either of the units isn't an indictment of the players... it's an indictment of the coaches.

Apparently, Gibbs would rather lose with Mark Brunell than go with a young guy and take his chances.

What happens to the Titans last year if Jeff Fischer would have stayed with Collins?

[Veretax]

but you just contradicted yourself. now we have a logjam of people at saftey, and landry wouldnt even start, so that doesnt solve anything. we have stoutmire, prioleau, fox, doughty, taylor, and landry if we take him. taylor starts, doughty is ST only, now we have 4 other safties. seems kinda stupid, when we only have 4 DTs, 2 5th and 6th round rooks, an aging griffin and a 90% finished salavea. and drafting landry doesnt help stop the run. i find it hard to believe that eating up space in the middle takes a ton of coaching.

Easy Solution, draft CJ

QUinn might not be a bad pro QB, he didn't have the greatest or most consistent run game at ND.

[ThomasRoane]

I think you're on to something there. I hadn't paid enough attention to notice the 3 man fronts. I'd be curious to see how many times we actually only rushed 3 vs 4. I still don't like the depth we have there. And I'd at least like to see us get some FA's for depth on the d-line.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Nobody is saying start Golston and Montgomery. We are saying that we are already developing youth at the position and we need to see how they will turn out another year in the system. We don't need a log jam of young players on the DL. Okoye or Branch would still be behind Golston and Montgomer anyways cause rooks don't play much under GW. So which ever DT you draft and give 15 million in guaranteed would be our 5th DT and won't even see the field cause we are still evaluating Golston and Montgomery. And they won't be getting many reps either and will ultimately just be stealing Golston and Montgomery's reps. This is why Gibbs is not looking to draft a DT at No. 6. It will be a skill player and the best one at No. 6 on defense will probably be Landry. We are not set at the safety position and it would be a great move. We still need to see if Stoutmire will play like he has in the past with us and whether PP can come back from his knee surgery. If neither pan out, our young player that is in development is Reed Doughty. Okay, I love they guy but...c'mon. He is another Matt Bowen at best. Landry smart addition for the future at the position and may even be a great playmaker come week 7 if Stoutmire and/ or PP don't play even better than they did were in top form.

A 5-11 team does not spend a #6 pick on a player who is going to be third on the draft chart unless that player is a QB. If we draft Landry and Stoutmire starts in front of him, someone needs to be fired.

[CaptChaos86]

Ive never really thought of it like that. And that actually makes alot of sense. Maybe we can get back to the true scheme and put some heat on the QB.

[nightbird]

Counter thoughts.

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

We had no one penciled in to start at free safety before we drafted ST.

When smoot left, we drafted Carlos. I know walt harris began the year at corner, but carlos was drafted to start.

After Lavar left, we ignored free agent outside linebackers (posey doesn't really count he never played), then we traded up for Rocky.

This front office has always kept me guessing, so I'm not saying I know what they're up to.

But it could be they realize that coming in and starting on the D-line as a rookie is a lot easier than starting at linebacker or corner.

Thus, they'll bring in veterans where experience is needed and plan on plugging in a rookie into the DL rotation.

[communion5]

i like this post alot, another thing i have been thinking about with all this draft d-line talk, is line play......

it always seems, that the longer the line stays together (o-line, or d-line) the better they gel, and teams win at the line of scrimmage, right?

so........ give our new guys some time (it will be year number two, both saw playing time last year) and, a healthy Griff, A.C. and Daniels a chance to prove they are worth it, give them a little competition at camp, and maybe we will be okay with d-line next year. who knows, i am just a sucker for giving guys another shot, in that regard, i could probably go into next season happy, without drafting anyone at all.

but if the skins get landry to sure up that secondary....bonus!

then again, what do i know, everytime someone makes a good point, my ears perk up, and i start wagging my tail.

[D-Day]

We had no one penciled in to start at free safety before we drafted ST.

When smoot left, we drafted Carlos. I know walt harris began the year at corner, but carlos was drafted to start.

After Lavar left, we ignored free agent outside linebackers (posey doesn't really count he never played), then we traded up for Rocky.

This front office has always kept me guessing, so I'm not saying I know what they're up to.

But it could be they realize that coming in and starting on the D-line as a rookie is a lot easier than starting at linebacker or corner.

Thus, they'll bring in veterans where experience is needed and plan on plugging in a rookie into the DL rotation.

Yes sir, but as you stated yourself,

Rocky came and we resigned holdman until rocky "learned the system":rolleyes:

Carlos was drafted but Harris was here until he "learned the system":rolleyes:

Taylor was drafted but a vet was still here until he "learned the system":rolleyes:

Gholston (SP) was not suppose to start as Salavea was until he got injured.

I am seeing an ugly little pattern developing.

Trust me I agree that a DL is probably the easiest position to plug in a rookie, but given their history and the endless line of aging (stoutmire), probable injury risk (PP) and never been special teamer (FOX) at safety it is not a stretch to me to see Landry drafted.

We need help in a few places and I would love to see us trade our 6 with the Bengals for justin smith and their #14 I believe and pick up reggie nelson, but I just don't see it happening. I think Landry is their man if he is there. BTW the trade up talk could be to ensure we get landry at 5.

[DCsportsfan53]

I posted this in another thread but I think it really belongs here, in the thread I thought I was posting this in

So far as I can tell, the general consensus is that either Landry or Adams is the best defensive player in this draft. Here's the scouting report on Landry

Strengths: Possesses good height, decent bulk and the frame to get bigger. Shows good fluidity and top-end speed. He consistently gets a quick break on the ball and diagnoses the run very quickly. He shows good toughness and strength in run support, especially for his size. He fills hard and shows adequate power at the point of attack. Sideline-to-sideline playmaker versus the run. He displays better-than-average range in zone coverage and he also can match up one-on-one versus slot receivers in the NFL. He is an instinctive playmaker with adequate-to-good ball skills. He has a good mental capacity and coaches rave about his ability to pick things up quickly. He is a good leader in the secondary and does a great job of getting everyone in position. He has tremendous experience as a four-year starter at the highest collegiate level. He also has been extremely versatile in LSU's secondary throughout his career.

Weaknesses: Lacks ideal bulk. Until he gets bigger he will not be able to match up as easily in-the-box at the NFL level as he has in college. He will misjudge the ball in the air on occasion and he still can improve his recognition skills when playing in deep-middle zone coverage.

Overall: Landry played in all 14 games (10 starts) as a true freshman in 2003 and recorded 80 total tackles, 3.5 tackles for loss, three sacks, two interceptions, four pass breakups, and one blocked kick. He was knocked out of the Arkansas game (11/28) with a concussion. In 2004, Landry started all 12 games finishing the season with 92 total tackles, five tackles for loss, three sacks, four interceptions, six pass breakups, and one forced fumble. He once again started every game (13) in 2005 registering 69 total tackles, four tackles for loss, one sack, three interceptions, and eight pass breakups. In 2006 he started all 13 games, earning first team All-American and first team All-SEC honors (both media and coaches), after collecting 74 tackles, 3.5 tackles for loss, one sack, one forced fumble, one blocked kick, and three interceptions. Over the past four seasons, Landry has seen time at free safety, strong safety, and cornerback.

Landry is as close to the complete package as it gets for a safety prospect coming from the collegiate ranks. He possesses the size, speed, athletic ability, instincts and toughness to step in as an immediate starter in the NFL; he can hold up in the box, in deep-middle zone coverage and one-on-one versus some bigger slot receivers. Landry is the premier safety prospect in the 2007 class and he should come off the board in the top-10 picks of the draft.

I highlighted the points I felt were most relevant. The most important aspect to me is, I keep reading stuff such as "he's the smartest player I've ever coached", "he picks things up quicker than any kid I've coached" and just people generally raving about his understanding of the game, willingness and ability to learn and leadership. Considering the enigma that is Sean Taylor, I think that's exactly the qualities we need in the guy who plays next to him. The 4.4 speed doesn't hurt, either.

Aside from thinking that none of the DL prospects are really top 10 worthy (aside from Adams, who's in the mold of Carter. I don't think we need two smallish, pass rush DEs starting.) I also believe that our D line is actually very solid. I'm confident in Golston, Montgomery and Salave'a rotating next to Griffin. I'm confident Carter's back into DE form and has gained chemistry with this group. I'm confident that, of the 3, Daniels, Wynn and Evans, someone will be able to hold down the DE spot opposite Carter. I think GW likes a bigger, run stopping DE on the strong side of the line, anyways. I think last year's troubles had a lot more to do with VERY weak LB play and that GW was unwilling to blitz or bring his pressure packages because he absolutely didn't trust his secondary.

Besides, who exactly do we have starting at SS again? Anyone that inspires confidence in any way? Yeah, I don't think so either. We're down to what, a career special teamer in Fox and a 30 year old coming off an ACL tear in Priouleau. We have depth and starter problems at the safety position and this player would give GW the kind of versatility most DCs can only dream of and considering his tendency towards aggressive defense, that's a good thing. I think he's a perfect fit for our defense, the most likely to contribute in a significant way this upcoming season and his presence would help free ST up to be a playmaker and ST would do the same for him. Unless we decide to trade back and acquire a good deal more players, I think we addressed DL in last year's draft and Landry is the way to go this year.

Safeties are more important than ever before in today's NFL and we have NOTHING next to Taylor. Nothing. I think that it's at least debateable that a starting safety is as big a need as we have on the roster. Having two safeties of this caliber creates SO much opportunity for all the rest of the defensive players because of the range they can cover, their hitting and the intimidation factor. :2cents:

[chiramu]

Great post. Interesting way to look at it and parse through what has happened lately.

GW may be arrogant, but nothing more dangerous than a wounded lion. He is going to look at all the tape and analyze the heck out of every play where we got burned on D. I'm confident they will plug the hole. The big question in my mind is that is one year enough to find all the missing pieces. I think teams have figured out how to beat GW's schemes. And he's going to need to tinker a bit to find the next potent mix of pressure and protection.

[D-Day]

I posted this in another thread but I think it really belongs here, in the thread I thought I was posting this in

He sounds better then I thought,

[SkinsFTW]

The fact that Gibbs/Williams won't use rookies to upgrade either of the units isn't an indictment of the players... it's an indictment of the coaches.

Apparently, Gibbs would rather lose with Mark Brunell than go with a young guy and take his chances.

What happens to the Titans last year if Jeff Fischer would have stayed with Collins?

Been saying this since 2004.

Remember the 1981 Redskins?

They went with a boatload of young guys, then did it again in 1982-1983 and won a few more games than this team and did it for an entire decade.

1981

Mark May

Russ Grimm

Tom Flick

Dexter Manley

Charlie Brown

Darryl Grant

Clint Didier

Vernon Dean was a starter after the 1982 draft.

Darrell Green and Charles Mann both started after the 1982 team won the Super Bowl.

If they could find room for rookies to start on a Super Bowl winning team but they can't find room for one now then maybe we've identified this teams real problem.

The 1983 Redskins went back to the Super Bowl with rookies starting.

Now today, we go 5-11, 10-6 and 6-10 and each year we stick with the oldtimers and routinely trade away chances at drafting rookies.

In comparison between 1981 and 1984 the Redskins drafted 50 players. Yeah there were more rounds but we didn't trade away all the picks as the myth states.

[War Paint]

I remember reading someone's post who said they met Gregg Williams in the parking lot at Fedex right after the Giants game. Gregg Williams apoligized for the poor tackling and said upgrading the secondary and LBs was the #1 priority. He said nothing about the d-line.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

I responded to this

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.

with my quote.

Quote:

Originally Posted by D-Day

Counter thoughts.

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

Who is talking about offense? If we are the only one I can think that was counted on was Cooley but I could be wrong as I was in Iraq his rookie year.

***EDIT: If you are referring to Campbell then he was a 2nd year player with a year of learning the system last year. Also don't forget how the brought him into the system slowly, he was given more pass paterns as the games went by and he was allowed to go further down field each game as he proved to the coaches he wouldn't make the stupid mistakes.

na i was refering to all the CJ lovers who think a rookie on offense will make a much bigger difference than one on defense. i cant remember if youre a cj mancrush poster or not, i didnt think you were though.

[D-Day]

na i was refering to all the CJ lovers who think a rookie on offense will make a much bigger difference than one on defense. i cant remember if youre a cj mancrush poster or not, i didnt think you were though.

Not guilty

I am more on the side that yeah he would be nice if he fell to use or we still had our draft this year, but we def need D with our pick.