We've worked on the DL for the past two years

[MrJL]

Yes, but Griffin has never missed more than 3 games in a season. I don't think that missing 2 games last year means that he's done for his career. Not to mention the other 3 talented guys we have in rotation at DT.

I feel like we could use a good DE to replace an aging Daniels more than we can use a DT. I feel like Adams would be the perfect fit there, but at the same time I think strong safety is a bigger need than DE, and Landry is being touted as the best defensive player in the entire draft.

Then if for some odd reason CJ is still there at 6 (won't happen) I say we take him.

Really, I thought Griffin missed four or five last year. Perhaps I was thinking of Salava'e. Or are you sure it's a case of Griffin never missing more than three games consecutively, because I thought he missed a couple games last year, came back to soon, and then had to sit out a few more.

Admittedly I'd rather have a DE. Though as smart as Okoye's supposed to be I wouldn't be surprised if he could be one of those guys who can play multiple line positions.

[#98QBKiller]

Really, I thought Griffin missed four or five last year. Perhaps I was thinking of Salava'e. Or are you sure it's a case of Griffin never missing more than three games consecutively, because I thought he missed a couple games last year, came back to soon, and then had to sit out a few more.

Admittedly I'd rather have a DE. Though as smart as Okoye's supposed to be I wouldn't be surprised if he could be one of those guys who can play multiple line positions.

On NFL.com, it shows that he played in 14 games last year:

http://nfl.com/players/playerpage/187552

I don't know if he started in all of them but he played in all of them. I guess we'll see what happens come draft day. I get the feeling that we'll draft Landry, which is ok by me, but you never know.

[Snagletooth]

I wouldn't mind if our D started looking like the Vikings. They have a real strong foundation on the Interior line. If the DE's ends would have panned out that defense would be championship caliber.

[Hooper]

the Redskins have NOT worked on the DL in the draft, to any great degree since 1997.

and that is one of the reasons why this team has had to spend so much money in free agency, to shore up the line.

go back and look at the major free agent acquisitions through the years and so many have been DL.

Stubblefield. Bruce Smith. Griffin. the trades for disgruntled Sean Gilbert and Dan Wilkinson.

that's MILLIONS of dollars spent and yet NOT ONE of these players made the pro bowl in a Redskins uniform.

if the Redskins had decided to go DL instead of always reaching for the glamor positions this team would have been so much better off.

Couldn't agree more. We have to rethink Vinny's "I don't believe in drafting defensive linemen" philosophy. I mean, I can't even remember the last time we had a killer pass rush from the front four.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

Couldn't agree more. We have to rethink Vinny's "I don't believe in drafting defensive linemen" philosophy. I mean, I can't even remember the last time we had a killer pass rush from the front four.

The last double digit sacker was Bruce Smith, during the Billary days.

[Morneblade]

gap assignments aside. either give him some credit or blame his start on depth.

go take a logic class and get back to me, ...but i doubt you will.

your right, i didnt read your last post. "I'll take living with my father (PH.D in Philophy) as a kid over any junk single course you took in college." maybe its your sentence composition that needs help. i am sure i wasn't the only one confused

If i was condesending, i apologize, nothing was directed at you. but your "go watch some tape" comment was just plain a**hole quality.

Looks like it was directed at me. And pretty much ******* quality. But appology accepted.

but this can go on all day, so i am dropping it. Talk about the skins or find a new thread.

I had been.

the DL was not the worst part of the redskins D last year, yes they were mediocre but not awful

Least sacks in NFL history. Least turnovers in NFL history. 27th againts the run. Thats alot worse than mediocre.

I tend to agree with the original poster. Our D-Line will be alright next year with Golston Montgomery Carter Griffin and Daniels

And whoever said Wynn was done before he got here hasn't paid attention for the last 4 years. He was our only consistent performer on the D Line for at least the first 3 of those years.

The D-line will be bad, just as it was last year,a nd a year added to it will make things worse. As for Wynn. You're right, he's been consistent.

Just in a bad way.

2002 Washington Redskins 16 games 41 tackles 2.5 sacks

2003 Washington Redskins 16 games 29 tackles 2 sacks

2004 Washington Redskins 16 games 37 tackles 3 sacks

2005 Washington Redskins 16 games 30 tackles 0.5 sacks

2006 Washington Redskins 15 games 14 tackles 0.0 sacks

[Chrisbob74]

I'm sure the Redskins FO buy the original argument made here but I don't. The last time the Redskins spent a high draft choice on a DL men was Kenard Lang near 10 years ago! I don;t care how good your DL is, it's never a bad idea to keep drafting linemen high, especially as a 4-3 D will rotate 6 or 7 guys in a game.

I can't help but look at the Redskins teams of old under Gibbs which, while admittedly not always building it through the draft, always had 4 guys named as starters who could do the job and also another 2 or 3 guys who would contribute in the rotation.

Regardless of how many picks the Redskins have in this upcoming draft, I want to see at least 2 (including the #6 or top pick if we trade down) spent on DL. Our DL is old, not very productive and needs an infusion of youth to add to Golston and Monty.

[ceviker]

I am sure someone will say that this thread has already been started, but I couldn't find it.

Anyway, it seems like we have been bringing in DL for the past two years. '05 was Griffin, and last year was Carter, Golston, and Montgomery. If we draft DL at #6 we are going to start looking like the vikings. Lets give the guys we've got the chance to step up. I know some of you will say that last year was their chance, but Golston and Mont. were rooks, Griffin was hurt, and it was Carter's first year as a skin (that, and he did turn it on at the end of the season).

Why draft Branch or Adams just for them to turn out like Dan Wilkinson or Mario Williams.

Either move up to get CJ (god's gift to QB's), or move back and get Landry (the Ham to Sean Taylor's burger)

sorry for the misspellings and if that last analogy was kinda gay.

While I agree that we should trade up to get CJ and if that fails, draft Landry, I don't agree with your reference to Mario Williams. I think Mario played very well last year, esp. considering all the pressure he was faced with and that teams double teamed him. That's a HELLUVA lot to deal with as a rookie, let alone a #1 pick rookie D-lineman.

If the Texans offered us Mario Williams for the #6 pick (assuming there is no chance we can trade up to get CJ), I would do it in a heartbeat. At least we know he can play at the NFL level.

[stp240]

Well its interesting to see the arguments made against the D-line.

Same guys from 05 correct?

Now if were gonna use the excuse for the DB's then why not with the DL? The defensive scheme was different from 05-06. Now with Carter and some rookies it could be argued that our D-line was better talent-wise than it was in 05. Whats the difference? PRODUCTION....now if you look back at the spin moves and freestyle attack on the QB from 05 and then you see the very structured bull rush and stunt plays from 06. There was 2 games this year where the D-line was let loose to rush the qb, that was Carolina and New Orleans....Our best games on defense as a whole, d-line personell is fine with Daniels, Griff, Big Joe and Carter IMO they just need to be used effectively (yall werent complaining in 05)

With that being said, i am not opposed to drafting a D-linemen, i just dont see how so many ppl can be so unfaithful to the guys we have. They have produced in the past.

[SkinsFTW]

No one is saying that DL can do it without LBs and DBs. They can't it's a team game. What we are saying is that no matter how good your LBs and DBs with a porous DL like we had last year your team will suck. As we did.

The 'skins D was good, now it looks like other teams know what we try and do and game plan (successfully too) for it. Add a 2 Gap DT so the run is stuffed and GW's D will have a chance. Add a DE that can stop the run and rush the passer as well as the DT and it will be much harder for teams to game plan (read beat) for GW's D.

As we stand now teams who play us know the pass rush is coming from Carter or a LB/DB. But most teams won't need to worry about our now simplified pass rush because they will be running on us all game. Sure you can say we have upgraded LBs/S (for those who want Landry) to tackle them, but that just stops the 30 yard runs, it won't stop the 5 yard run, 5 yard run, 5 yard run and on and on that kills teams. Tackle machine that Fletcher is he will struggle when he has an OL pancaking him every running play and if it's our safeties making the tackle a first or close to has already been given up.

Even if we had the first pick in the first round we should still be drafting DL (though with a better trade down, possibly multiple times).

Totally agree. If your DL never applies pressure and doesn't get into the backfield, and also gives up 5 yards per carry you need to upgrade. No Safety is going to magically improve the run from 5 to 3 ypc.

Besides, if we draft a Safety with the 6th pick we are basically replacing a guy who would have cost us about 1Mil a year and who started on 2 Top 10 defenses with a rookie 1st rounder 2 years later. And thats after spending 10M on his replacement last year.

Remind you of Pierce at all? These kind of idiotic moves are why we never win anything.