Do we really need to draft a DT? (long and with stats)

[#98QBKiller]

With all of the talk on Extremeskins about how bad we need to draft a DT in order to stop the run, I've compiled some stats to find out if our DTs are doing as poorly as one would perceive, I'm going to focus on teams that primarily use the 4-3, just like us.

Keep in mind that over half of the top 10 teams against the run use the 3-4 defense or a hybrid 3-4/4-3 like Miami uses.

The top ten teams against the run in the 2006 season were (in order):

Minnesota

Baltimore

Pittsburgh

Jacksonville

New England

Chicago

San Diego

Miami

Atlanta

Dallas

Let's take a look at some of the higher rated DTs on teams that play the 4-3 and see how their performance compares to that of the 'skins DTs.

Minnesota (1st against the run):

Pat Williams 6-3, 317 lbs. 37 tackles, 1 sack

Kevin Williams 6-5, 304lbs. 28 tackles, 5 sacks

Jacksonville (4th against the run):

John Henderson 6-7, 325lbs. 38 tackles, 3.5 sacks

Marcus Stroud 6-6, 306lbs. 19 tackles, 2.5 sacks (11 games)

31 tackles, 1 sack (2005 stats)

Chicago (6th against the run):

Tank Johnson 6-3, 300 lbs. 22 tackles, 3.5 sacks (14 games)

Tommie Harris 6-3, 300 lbs. 22 tackles, 5 sacks (12 games)

Alfonso Boone 6-4, 318 lbs. 22 tackles, 2 sacks (12 games)

Miami (3-4/4-3 hybrid, 8th against the run)

Vonnie Holiday 6-5, 288 lbs. 46 tackles, 7 sacks

Keith Traylor 6-2, 337 lbs. 27 tackles, 4 sacks (14 games)

Atlanta (9th against the run):

Grady Jackson 6-2, 345 lbs. 29 tackles, 0 sacks

Rod Coleman 6-2, 285 lbs 20 tackles, 6 sacks (In 15 games)

Johnathan Babineaux 6-2, 286 lbs. 23 tackles, 1 sack

Now, let's look at what the Redskins DTs did (27th against the run last season):

Kedric Golston 6-4, 292 lbs. 33 tackles, .5 sacks

Cornelius Griffin 6-3, 310 lbs. 39 tackles, 1 sack (In 13 games)

Looking at the stats we can see that Golston and Griffin (individually) had more tackles than

Kevin Williams (Minn.)

Tank Johnson (Chi.)

Tommie Harris

Alfonso Boone

Keith Traylor (Mi)

Grady Jackson (Atl)

Rod Coleman

Johnathan Babineaux

So why were we unable to stop the run? Was it poor LB play? Many of the above teams have some of the top LBs in the NFL including: Zach Thomas, Brian Urlacher, and Keith Brooking.

Some of the 3-4 teams also have top LBs including: Ray Lewis, Shawne Merriman, Demarcus Ware, Tedy Bruschi, Junior Seau and Adalius Thomas.

So what was it then? Why were we so bad against the run? Was it scheme? Was it LB play or do you still think it was an issue of DT talent?

*Edited to make it easier on the eyes

[bowhunter]

Nice post! It's neat to actually see the stats vs our perception of what our DT's do. I'm thinkin maybe it was LB play as well. Especially our undersized MLB. Let's hope that Fletcher slows down some of that leak.

[illone]

We still need to draft a DT. Assuming Griff and Salave'a stay healthy this year, and maybe even next, what else do we have besides Golston, again assuming he remains healthy and can improve on last season?

We either need to overpay some free agent next season, or draft a young player this season so he can begin learning the system.

[CutTHROAT]

NICE post man.. I think it was our LB play. Holdman and Marshall didnt do a good job at run support. Fletcher at middle and Marshall or McIntosh at weakside will improve things. If anything we need to upgrade the DE spot or SS (Adams, Anderson or Landry).

[StepyagameuP]

Ive been thinking the same thing. The truth most likely is that Williams/Gibbs are probably convinced that Fletcher, Washington, McIntosh/Marshall will make our d-line that much better. Consider how more natural Fletcher is at Middle LB and also a vocal leader that can call a correct play and most of all be in position to make tackles.... Our secondary is looking more and more like our strong point on D now, followed by LB Corps and finally D-Line. Its how Williams D Scheme is structured. IMO though, it is a little bit too much of a gamble by our organization if they end up passing on D-line in the 1st round and up being wrong.

Trading down and grabbing D-line in 2nd and WR in 1st rd = I am also cool with but thats a whole different conversation.

[RIDETHEWALRUS]

Stats at DT do not tell the whole story. A D that is ranked so low against the run versus one ranked high is going to naturally have more tackles among the DTs because they will get more opportunities because they are not causing 3 and outs.

What stood out most noticeably to me is that each of those top teams had a big anchor on the line (someone 315 lbs or above). I have been in the Okoye boat in the DT debate for a while because I believe he will be better in the long run, but seeing the presence of massive guys on all of the top teams indicates Branch might well be the better short term solution.

We clearly have a need at DT, I think it can be addressed with a big guy like Harrell or Tyler. Let Golston rotate and eventually supplant Griffin when he gets too older.

[thinker]

The telling statistic, I think isn't really tackles. In our scheme the linemen are supposed to take up space, tie up the linemen and allow the lb's to crash the line and make the tackles. Even tackles stats by the lb's are deceptive. Because teams ran so effectively against us they generally had more plays - hence we would have more tackles than a defense that forced lots fo 3 & outs. The telling data is where our defensive players were tackling runners - it was often downfield past the line of scrimmage. A 5 yard pick up on a run on 1st down is a failure by the defense but shows up as a tackle. Also our dline did NOT do very well at keeping linemen from getting past them and getting up into the lb's - so our safeties and cbs were going to have lots of tackles too - but further downfield than we'd want. So while you have posed a very interesting theory I think you draw the wrong conclusion.

Our run defense sucked last year fundamentally because of bad line play that allowed blockers and runners to get past them and our poor lb play wasn't nearly enough to compensate for a weak line. I have burned into my memroy the way too frequent occurence of Carter rushing way upfield, Griffin getting blocked to the inside a fullback/te/guard getting past the line and getting contact on Marshal and/or Holdman and Rogers (who was palying 10 yards off the receiver) with his back turned to the play and guys just plain running free in our secondary.

You have to remember that EVERY single play that doesn't result in a touchdown results in a defensive tackle by someone.

[Tay]

The best DT's in the league don't neccessarily have the most tackles and sacks. What we need is moreso a NT. His role will be to occupy blockers so that the rest of the defense can be freed to do their job. The best case would be having someone who could occupy multiple blockers and beat multiple blocker, but the DT's you listed are considered run stuffers because there is no getting around them or taking them out the play w/ one blocker

[scskin]

You must have missed the video on NFL.com( or NFL Network ) that showed our D Line getting absolutely owned. The O Line was able to get to the second level and LB's never had a chance to make the play. Those stats don't tell the whole story. Teams that are able to occupy blockers have a better chance at run stopping. These teams are good at it. We are not. We do need a space eater badly.

[Peregrine]

What we know is that with what we had last year, we were unable to stop the run and rush the passer. You established that our DTs had as many tackles as a few of the other succesful teams. Unfortunately, we were 5-11 and managed few sacks and turnovers so the point is moot.

We dont really need anyone at ANY position. Do we need a QB, RB, WR, TE, OLinemen, LBer, CB, S, K, P? No, actually, you could make the case on one stat, for any of them. But our greatest position of need is DLine.

Your stats also show that, our DTs had 1.5 sacks(as compared with the worst other duo having 6).

[onnie007]

IMO it had alot to do with LB play. We weren't getting production from two-thirds of our LB unit. Marshall and Holdman could not get off of blocks. Don't get me started on Kenny Wright, Mike Rumph, Springs' injuries, Rogers lackluster play & Ade Jimoh being as to cover No. 2 recievers (he's better at special teams ). So yeah, I think there were other factors in our poor run D but I am content that we brought the right group of vets to address these problems. I think Landry has the best chance to make an immediate impact.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

Nice post, but I'm still convinced that we need a DT, DE, SS and later CB, MLB of the future.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

With all of the talk on Extremeskins about how bad we need to draft a DT in order to stop the run, I've compiled some stats to find out if our DTs are doing as poorly as one would perceive, I'm going to focus on teams that primarily use the 4-3, just like us.

Keep in mind that over half of the top 10 teams against the run use the 3-4 defense or a hybrid 3-4/4-3 like Miami uses.

The top ten teams against the run in the 2006 season were (in order):

Minnesota

Baltimore

Pittsburgh

Jacksonville

New England

Chicago

San Diego

Miami

Atlanta

Dallas

Let's take a look at some of the higher rated DTs on teams that play the 4-3 and see how their performance compares to that of the 'skins DTs.

Minnesota (1st against the run):

Pat Williams 6-3, 317 lbs. 37 tackles, 1 sack

Kevin Williams 6-5, 304lbs. 28 tackles, 5 sacks

Jacksonville (4th against the run):

John Henderson 6-7, 325lbs. 38 tackles, 3.5 sacks

Marcus Stroud 6-6, 306lbs. 19 tackles, 2.5 sacks (11 games)

31 tackles, 1 sack (2005 stats)

Chicago (6th against the run):

Tank Johnson 6-3, 300 lbs. 22 tackles, 3.5 sacks (14 games)

Tommie Harris 6-3, 300 lbs. 22 tackles, 5 sacks (12 games)

Alfonso Boone 6-4, 318 lbs. 22 tackles, 2 sacks (12 games)

Miami (3-4/4-3 hybrid, 8th against the run)

Vonnie Holiday 6-5, 288 lbs. 46 tackles, 7 sacks

Keith Traylor 6-2, 337 lbs. 27 tackles, 4 sacks (14 games)

Atlanta (9th against the run):

Grady Jackson 6-2, 345 lbs. 29 tackles, 0 sacks

Rod Coleman 6-2, 285 lbs 20 tackles, 6 sacks (In 15 games)

Johnathan Babineaux 6-2, 286 lbs. 23 tackles, 1 sack

Now, let's look at what the Redskins DTs did (27th against the run last season):

Kedric Golston 6-4, 292 lbs. 33 tackles, .5 sacks

Cornelius Griffin 6-3, 310 lbs. 39 tackles, 1 sack (In 13 games)

Looking at the stats we can see that Golston and Griffin (individually) had more tackles than

Kevin Williams (Minn.)

Tank Johnson (Chi.)

Tommie Harris

Alfonso Boone

Keith Traylor (Mi)

Grady Jackson (Atl)

Rod Coleman

Johnathan Babineaux

So why were we unable to stop the run? Was it poor LB play? Many of the above teams have some of the top LBs in the NFL including: Zach Thomas, Brian Urlacher, and Keith Brooking.

Some of the 3-4 teams also have top LBs including: Ray Lewis, Shawne Merriman, Demarcus Ware, Tedy Bruschi, Junior Seau and Adalius Thomas.

So what was it then? Why were we so bad against the run? Was it scheme? Was it LB play or do you still think it was an issue of DT talent?

*Edited to make it easier on the eyes

ok first of all, lets take out the 3-4 teams because its a totally different defense than what we run. so eliminate mia/nwe/pitt/SD/dal.

so that leaves us with 5 teams that run 4-3, and lets take a look at their DTs.

minny has two guys around 315 occupying the middle, plus they had a sick LB in napolean harris in the middle.

jax probably has the best DT tandem in henderson/stroud, and henderson is pushing 340.

atlanta has a great end in john abraham, and they have grady jackson, who im not mistaken is around 350.

baltimore has hali ngata who weighs around 340 if i remember, coupled with their great LBers

and now you have the bears, who do have two smaller tackles, but they have urlacher and no one we have comes close to his skill.

so, we have 5 4-3 defenses, four of which have a one huge fatty or in minnys case two pretty big DTs in the middle (both of minnys starters are bigger than our biggest DT, and thats Mont). thats not a coincidence. we dont have the LBers to make up for the lack of size in the DT spot, and thats normal, not everyone is urlacher. we got fletcher who is a tackle machine, but my friend who is a diehard bills fan said that fletcher was most productive when he had sam adams in front of him when williams was the HC, and sam adams is 350lb, so that also speaks volumes for the impact a huge DT has.

and bringing up tackles is a silly stat, because the DTs job is not to make tackles, that is the LBers job. and our lbs had a ton of tackles, they just made them 5 yards down the field all the time, or just missed them completely. im not saying our LB was good, it was far from it. but no matter who we have at LB currently, they will be ineffective without a big DT in the middle. we need a DT to occupy to blockers, which makes space for the LBs and creates single coverage for golston/griff and carter to get to the QB. we NEED a DT, and big one, stat!

[21Knock_U_Out]

I would agree, that is why I wasnt so upset with the Briggs rumors.Many plays did I see Holdman & Marshall , either being manhandled , missing tackles ,or just not making it to the play.I also believe Gibbs has evaluated the films and WILL make the best decision on what we need.

[skinsn24]

John Henderson 6-7, 325lbs. 38 tackles, 3.5 sacks

Marcus Stroud 6-6, 306lbs. 19 tackles, 2.5 sacks (11 games)

31 tackles, 1 sack (2005 stats)

Tank Johnson 6-3, 300 lbs. 22 tackles, 3.5 sacks (14 games)

Tommie Harris 6-3, 300 lbs. 22 tackles, 5 sacks (12 games)

Vonnie Holiday 6-5, 288 lbs. 46 tackles, 7 sacks

Keith Traylor 6-2, 337 lbs. 27 tackles, 4 sacks (14 games)

Grady Jackson 6-2, 345 lbs. 29 tackles, 0 sacks

Rod Coleman 6-2, 285 lbs 20 tackles, 6 sacks (In 15 games)

So what was it then? Why were we so bad against the run? Was it scheme? Was it LB play or do you still think it was an issue of DT talent?

What you have done here is actually provide a perfect reason for NEEDING Great DTs. The stats of a running stopping DT dont matter. There job is to eat up blockers so that the LBS can make tackles.

Take a look at Briggs or Urlachers tackle numbers (and how many plays they played, as a bad defense has to have more tackles)

What you did was show that almost all of the top run stopping teams had ELITE defensive tackles.

That seems to be the one common thing amoung all those teams. I mean just look at the names that I bolded. These guys are all high draft picks or pretty big stars in the league.

So to answer you question, based on your study, YES a stellar defense tackle is needed to be a good run stopping team.

[skinsn24]

and bringing up tackles is a silly stat, because the DTs job is not to make tackles, that is the LBers job. and our lbs had a ton of tackles, they just made them 5 yards down the field all the time, or just missed them completely. im not saying our LB was good, it was far from it. but no matter who we have at LB currently, they will be ineffective without a big DT in the middle. we need a DT to occupy to blockers, which makes space for the LBs and creates single coverage for golston/griff and carter to get to the QB. we NEED a DT, and big one, stat!

Yup, this study showed nothing except that fact that all the good run D teams had elite defensive tackles or very good denfensive tackles.

It was funny, when i was reading it, i thought it was actually an arguement FOR drafting a tackle.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

What you have done here is actually provide a perfect reason for NEEDING Great DTs. The stats of a running stopping DT dont matter. There job is to eat up blockers so that the LBS can make tackles.

Take a look at Briggs or Urlachers tackle numbers (and how many plays they played, as a bad defense has to have more tackles)

What you did was show that almost all of the top run stopping teams had ELITE defensive tackles.

That seems to be the one common thing amoung all those teams. I mean just look at the names that I bolded. These guys are all high draft picks or pretty big stars in the league.

So to answer you question, based on your study, YES a stellar defense tackle is needed to be a good run stopping team.

exactly. id love to see our DTs with 0 tackles all season, id be a happy guy. their job is just to manhandle the oline and let the LBs hit people like the dickens, make good tackles, and force fumbles. the majority of the run stuffing teams have a fatso in the middle, which we do not. for the millionth time i will state that when williams had success in buffalo, he had sam adams up the middle who weighed in at 350lb, and this was coincidentally (not really) when fletcher was at his peak. you put a big man in front of your LBs, your LBs shine.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Yup, this study showed nothing except that fact that all the good run D teams had elite defensive tackles or very good denfensive tackles.

It was funny, when i was reading it, i thought it was actually an arguement FOR drafting a tackle.

haha i know. he was using tackles as a stat, which is pretty pointless considering most lineman never tackle anyone unless its some huge pile on. the bears are lucky because both of their ends are so good that they force everyone inside, and urlacher just creams them. we dont have the luxury of having urlacher, so our DTs need to step up more. besides, the bears defense is all about pressure from the ends, so the lineman are more concerned with double teaming the ends and leaving the tackles alone. williams doesnt rush ends, which is why phillip daniels still has a job.

[e16bball]

First of all, thank you for putting in a lot of work on this post. I don't agree with it, but it's just nice to see a poster put some effort in his threads.

Now on to the bad stuff. I'm sorry if this echoes a lot of the earlier posts, but I had to skip through them down to the bottom to write this as quickly as I possibly could.

It's extremely ironic to me that you cited such players as Kevin Williams, Pat Williams, Marcus Stroud, John Henderson, etc. in a post that says we DON'T need a DT. Those players are absolutely and 100% the reason their teams have great run defenses, and yet you say the fact they had no more tackles than our DTs (who anchored a very below-average run defense) means that we shouldn't worry about getting a player of their quality???

We are in agreement that Minnesota and Jacksonville are great cases to look at in terms of whether we should try to obtain a stud DT; the problem is, they are clear examples of why you NEED stud DTs to stop the run if you don't have elite LBs. The LB corps in Minnesota and Jacksonville are, putting it kindly, mediocre at best. Especially last season when the Jags didn't have Mike Peterson. But they ranked first and fourth in the league (and Jax would have been higher had Stroud not missed a few games). Minnesota gave up an incredible 61.6 yards/game on an even more incredible 2.8 YPC. With who at LB? E.J. Henderson, Napoleon Harris and Ben Leber. Not exactly household names. But they had Phat Pat and Kevin Williams anchoring the line, and they absolutely shut teams down.

As far as I'm concerned, it couldn't be any more clear that a stud DT is CRUCIAL to stopping the run. Whether they accumulate lots of tackles, on the other hand, isn't that important, as I suppose you showed. But their presence and the havoc they wreak that doesn't show up in the stat sheet is what makes the difference.

[21Knock_U_Out]

haha i know. he was using tackles as a stat, which is pretty pointless considering most lineman never tackle anyone unless its some huge pile on. the bears are lucky because both of their ends are so good that they force everyone inside, and urlacher just creams them. we dont have the luxury of having urlacher, so our DTs need to step up more. besides, the bears defense is all about pressure from the ends, so the lineman are more concerned with double teaming the ends and leaving the tackles alone. williams doesnt rush ends, which is why phillip daniels still has a job.

In 05 Griffin had 35 tackles and Salavea had 31.In 04 Griffin had 56 tackles.Our run D was really good both years.Dosnt look like they were just pluggin up holes.

[skinsn24]

First of all, thank you for putting in a lot of work on this post. I don't agree with it, but it's just nice to see a poster put some effort in his threads.

Now on to the bad stuff. I'm sorry if this echoes a lot of the earlier posts, but I had to skip through them down to the bottom to write this as quickly as I possibly could.

It's extremely ironic to me that you cited such players as Kevin Williams, Pat Williams, Marcus Stroud, John Henderson, etc. in a post that says we DON'T need a DT. Those players are absolutely and 100% the reason their teams have great run defenses, and yet you say the fact they had no more tackles than our DTs (who anchored a very below-average run defense) means that we shouldn't worry about getting a player of their quality???

We are in agreement that Minnesota and Jacksonville are great cases to look at in terms of whether we should try to obtain a stud DT; the problem is, they are clear examples of why you NEED stud DTs to stop the run if you don't have elite LBs. The LB corps in Minnesota and Jacksonville are, putting it kindly, mediocre at best. Especially last season when the Jags didn't have Mike Peterson. But they ranked first and fourth in the league (and Jax would have been higher had Stroud not missed a few games). Minnesota gave up an incredible 61.6 yards/game on an even more incredible 2.8 YPC. With who at LB? E.J. Henderson, Napoleon Harris and Ben Leber. Not exactly household names. But they had Phat Pat and Kevin Williams anchoring the line, and they absolutely shut teams down.

As far as I'm concerned, it couldn't be any more clear that a stud DT is CRUCIAL to stopping the run. Whether they accumulate lots of tackles, on the other hand, isn't that important, as I suppose you showed. But their presence and the havoc they wreak that doesn't show up in the stat sheet is what makes the difference.

Nice post:applause: Join the draft a fatty club!

[skinsman4u]

To answer your question up front I would say not necessarily, but do we need to shore up our Defensive Line? Yes we do need to shore it up and here's why:

Which way do I believe we'll go, first off? I think we'll go with a skill position.

But if we keep our current DL a lot of things will happen and the 07 season will be painful. Because one thing that won’t happen and that is we won’t be going to the Super Bowl.

Daniels was hard pressed to lead the team in sacks in 2005 and had to come on late in the season and still only finished with 8 sacks. Not good when other teams DEs are pushing 50% higher and in some cases more; however he did play most of 2006 with a sprained wrist, sprained ankle and slipped to 3 sacks. That's little or no production.

He turned 34 in March and may not make it (be cut). Oh Phill's a Redskin and I support him, but he is not a high profile DE that a team would keep around at age 34, Dan we'll probably be bring his file to you toward end of preseason or before to give him time to fit in somewhere else. BLUFF on Daniels is that he'll probably be gone. Yes we drafted DL last year but only Golston has shown promise so far.

Griifin battled chronic hip problems the last two years and wasn't close to the force he was in 2004. Sixth-round pick Golston was a pleasant surprise as a rookie. Carter was a bust, yes we can kid our self and that’s not true all we want, but yes he was a bust for 30 million last year. He only finished strong with four sacks in the last five games. That's not a 30 million dollar production.

Wynn who'll be 33 this year can't stick as a back up at the rate he's paid but will be a note worthy reserve with a restructured contract. Salave'a is 32 and was beaten out by Golston and also could be gone, but is not exactly a dumb move to bring to camp. Hate to sound like a lawyer but that's my entry argument Is this the DL that's going to take us to the Super Bowl or are they really in our future--at all? Yes I’m a Redskin fan and will die with our team! But we’re simply not going to make it with the holes we have not only on the defensive line but all over the place.

Our MLB will be greatly occupied. But look at the benefits of having a MLB that has the freedom to go sideline- to -sideline and use a comparison analyses with the Texans #1 pick last year and what it did for a little known MLB. What it did was enable him to have 112+ solos and lead the NFL in tackles. Is the Texans MLB better than Fletcher? If the Texans MLB is better than Fletcher its not because of something Fletcher is missing. What happens when our MLB has OG and centers in his face all day? We're talking about 9 solos for Fletcher a game. That's a production worth 25 million, but he must have a supporting cast.

Hey I love big Joe but he's already proven that he's not the big body 2 gap DT that occupy blocks and clog the middle and keep our MLB free to go sideline-to-sideline. Some peolpe may argue that our production was down due to a lack of coverage. "Yeeeaah" they go hand in hand but if you have a pass rush you can get a way with average DBs. Example: You can't play the Cover2 with out a pass rush because there are holes in that scheme of pass coverage.

Speaking of the cover 2, I don't think we have the persnnel to play because of other weaknesses as well such as Fletchers ability to cover 30 yards deep middle with a speedster like Berrian out their in Chicago just to name a small measure. Nothing against Fletcher and I'm glad he's here. But it's simply unfair to ask him to do that. There's other reasons why we aren't adept for the Cover2.

But with no one big body to play the 2 gap, what happens is Flecther gets caught in the wash and loss in the spin cycle-literally trying to spin out of blocks to make tackles. Well what happens you end up with a piss poor run defense and you bring the Safety up closer to help in run support and now play action is in effect, and there's open space behind the safeties. Landry can't even cover all day. Give a QB the kind of rush that our current DL provides and the QB will pick any secondary apart. Now we're really in trouble.

We need someone who can occupy multiple blocks and can clog the interior. So that thing about building a lead and forcing teams to play catch up also goes out the window, because teams will be going strait down the field on us. We don’t have the offensive line to go hit for hit against another team’s offensive line that is known as road graters, like NO--or is Bush better than CP?

I would say hell no everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. Our OL is another reason why the upcoming 07 season doesn't spell champions for our Redskins. The OL is another story. But right now red zone efficiency is down and we also don't have the assistanst that can relay to Coach Gibbs what adjustments we need to make to find the crease. It's my opinion that's all. And no I didn't say Coach Suanders is not the answer but he probably needs another set of eyes. Hey! We just can't walk on the field with our weeks game plan and expect magic to happen, we have to have a "knack" to find the crease and make during the game adjustments based on what we see. We haven't been doing that.

CP strait took over the wildcard game in 05. We were on the verge of losing it and barely got away. That may not be dieing but it sure is not living- at least not for a championship. Right now during this draft we don't have the luxury of the good idea fairy. During this draft, or course of action (COA) must be based on a make sense analyses. And right now we're set at our skill positions on Offense. Okay, who isn't set.

So what's the problem?

So if we don't draft at #6 a DL, which I don't think we will, then we must find other was to shore up the DL. One thing about DTs and DEs is that they're hard to find and we do find a good one they're very expensive. So now Fletcher is border line as a free agent bust. I would say 8.5 solos a game and our MLB is where we would like for him to be. With our current DL I don't think he will get there. Will drafting a DL win us a champuionship? Will drafting another skill position win it?

No. Hey draft who you want but just take a good look at how you're going to live with our current DL. Let everybody go on the DL but Griffin and Golston, Daniels is border line, Salavea deserves a new star and Wynn needs to restructure but don't bring to much luggage to camp. As a matter of fact Wynn just start looking at plans to go in another direction. Oh I support you but not for 4.2 million. Again, this is just my opinion and I'm waiting for yours. Nobody really knows which way we're going to go, but if we continue upon current course we wont go anywhere. They hate me? Good!

[skinsn24]

In 05 Griffin had 35 tackles and Salavea had 31.In 04 Griffin had 56 tackles.Our run D was really good both years.Dosnt look like they were just pluggin up holes.

Its ok if a DT makes tackles, the point is, the tackel stat for a DT is not a stat to go by. DT's are not "stat" players. Dont read to much into things. You pointed out a coicidence or maybe a slight correlation but not even close to causation.

The fact that Griffin had 35 tackles and 56, shows that he tackles numbers dont really matter at all as far as indicating our run D.

What can be said is Griffin was more Healthy in those years than in 06

[21Knock_U_Out]

Its ok if a DT makes tackles, the point is, the tackel stat for a DT is not a stat to go by. DT's are not "stat" players. Dont read to much into things. You pointed out a coicidence or maybe a slight correlation but not even close to causation.

The fact that Griffin had 35 tackles and 56, shows that he tackles numbers dont really matter at all as far as indicating our run D.

What can be said is Griffin was more Healthy in those years than in 06

So what is the problem?I know Gibbs will evaluate it and straighten it out.

[skinsman4u]

Rumbling, bumbling, stumbling, disoriented and incoherent I am.