Jason La Canfora overreacting to Heyer Experiment; how to possibly use an extra pick

[Art]

If Campbell was hurt as bad as it looked. You'd all be saying the same things. Heyer MIGHT be a long term solution. But, if he's starting at LT next game, and gets that huge amount of playing time the starters do in the 3rd preseason game. Expect sacks. He's young, and needs time.

We could all go McMetal and cry on our keyboards about one guys blogs. Or we could admit to ourselves that this is a real concern.

Or we could remember Chris Samuels exists and there is no such thing as a "real concern" for a player you won't see again until next August. Samuels is well paid and consistently among the game's most resected players at his position. He's rarely out of the lineup, having not missed a game for three years.

Most teams don't keep in reserve a high number of backup Pro Bowlers behind their starting left tackle Pro Bowler. They may have a guy like Jason Fabini or Todd Wade who are aging, former starters at the tackle spot, who can come in -- though both those guys are right tackles more than left at this point -- and some mix of young prospects to try the role. Heyer is the latter and presents nothing of a concern as the greatest concern you actually appear to have is worrying over something that didn't happen.

Campbell didn't get seriously injured. On his eighth pass, Heyer got off balance to the outside and missed an assignment that got Campbell hit. It happens. Jansen missed a sweeping rush last week. Campbell could have gotten hurt on it. He didn't then either.

It's ok.

[Art]

Break down Heyer's play yourself and tell me what you come up with.

Against the Steelers:

1. Run play in the hole between Pucillo and Heyer. Heyer blocks down in tandem with Pucillo against the end. No real opinion as to good or bad job.

2. Campbell fumble. Heyer in good position against DE, but, the fumble makes it hard to evaluate what could have happened.

3. Heyer matched against a LB on a third and long. He keeps in front of Harrison and keeps Campbell clean on the first down pass. More pressure came from the other side late. Generally a good play for Heyer.

4. Sweep to the far side. Heyer blocks down against DE and has good push, but, the end is trying to pursue. Heyer maintains contact across the offensive formation.

5. Matched alone against DE and stones him on a Moss dropped pass. Very strong pass protection.

6. Tough matchup. Steelers have end and two backers loaded on Heyer's side. Makes the right read and takes the furthest outside rusher, a LB No. 51. Stays in front of faster man and avoids hold on a spin move. Campbell has tons of time, has no one open on a deep drop, is able to drift right and step a few times before crossing pass to ARE. Nice protection.

7. With TE next to him, he ends up having no one to block on timing pass to the sideline to Moss.

8. Fake toss to Heyer's side. Heyer has LB and absorbs hit, but holds ground. Play is a roll out well away from him so Heyer doesn't have any impact. The good part is Heyer stays engaged with his block even as Jason is turning the corner on the roll.

9. WR screen to the opposite side. Heyer looks confused. Hitches as an end flashes by him but does nothing on a play that ends as soon as the ball is caught by Moss.

10. Cut off by the NFL Network. Can't see.

11. First play of the second drive. Combination block on a run play to his side. He slips into second level and pops Foote. Play stopped at point. Betts cuts back. You'd like to see him drive through that type of block so I'll rate it generally a bad one.

12. Quick hitter inside. Heyer shadows end but is not involved in play.

13. Ends up blocking the nose tackle as Steelers are playing games on his side having two backers there pre-snap, then blitz neither but slide the NT to Heyer. Quick pass. Heyer does job, but, again, so fast a play, it's hard to screw up.

14. Run play up Heyer's butt. Heyer and Cooley combo on DE, before Cooley slips into second level. Heyer loses contact and begins blocking NT as man he was blocking makes the stop on a run play. Bad play overall.

15. The killer play. Gets too much outside lean and misses inside assignment. Campbell hurt.

16. Run to the far side. Heyer engages end and blocks across the formation on a short run play away.

17. Double tight end on his side. Run to his side. Gets initial push against 99, but, loses contact and his man helps stop the play. Overall a bad play because of that.

18. Toughest assignment yet. Third and five and the Steelers come right at him. Heyer makes two great blocks. Pushes LB inside, then quickly comes off and takes out another rushing LB. Best play of the night probably.

19. Interesting play. Collins passes and has all day but somehow Heyer never finds anyone to block. Steelers only rush three. Heyer has 92, who fakes coming in but drops back, leaving Heyer alone. Good recognition on assignment but no physical contact.

20. Toss sweep to the far side. Heyer gets immediate into 99, but, never controls him. He pursues the whole way with Heyer on him and makes the stop. Again, bad play in the running game for Heyer.

21. Touchdown to Lloyd. Heyer owns rushing backer pushing him well beyond the play.

I will break down more later. One thing this is showing me is I was incorrect about my initial impression that he has done well in the running game. He's generally failing there. His man is involved in plays even away from the point of attack. But, he's generally very strong in pass protection.

[RIDETHEWALRUS]

Art, you put in a lot of work there and I agree that Heyer has some potential. However you seem to miss the point JLC made. It is simply having him protect JC's blindside is extraordinarily risky.

The kid wasn't drafted for a reason. He has so far given up 3 sacks in 2 games. One was a crushing hit on Campbell that made me nervous. Another nearly ended JC's season. Our running game has been abysmal in the preseason and while there is more to it than Heyer, but he is a serious liability.

[TheLongshot]

Art, you put in a lot of work there and I agree that Heyer has some potential. However you seem to miss the point JLC made. It is simply having him protect JC's blindside is extraordinarily risky.

The kid wasn't drafted for a reason. He has so far given up 3 sacks in 2 games. One was a crushing hit on Campbell that made me nervous. Another nearly ended JC's season. Our running game has been abysmal in the preseason and while there is more to it than Heyer, but he is a serious liability.

What he doesn't answer and what you haven't answered is, who on this team is going to be better at this position RIGHT NOW? Fact is, Heyer is there not because he's a young guy who needs work, but because he's the best option. You don't work with the first team without earning it as a rookie.

You work with what you have, not what you wish you had.

Jason

[Art]

Art, you put in a lot of work there and I agree that Heyer has some potential. However you seem to miss the point JLC made. It is simply having him protect JC's blindside is extraordinarily risky.

The kid wasn't drafted for a reason. He has so far given up 3 sacks in 2 games. One was a crushing hit on Campbell that made me nervous. Another nearly ended JC's season. Our running game has been abysmal in the preseason and while there is more to it than Heyer, but he is a serious liability.

No, he hasn't given up three sacks in two games. That's fiction. Jason's point is what teams used middle round picks on is backups to Pro Bowl left tackles. We used middle picks on that, but Wilson didn't work out. We've tried a couple other guys there too, but they haven't. We're probably hoping someone does. Heyer had a ton of starting experience at a local university. He got hurt. He went undrafted. He may be someone we cut tomorrow. He may be our future starting left tackle.

Scroll through backup left tackles for me in the league. Tell me which team is not making an extraordinary risk. How about that? Teams don't stack great players up on the offensive line. They either stack future prospects or former, low-cost starters. Our depth has a number of former starters who are cheap and on the tail end of their careers, and Heyer. Obviously if Samuels is gone for the year, we are in trouble. Most teams are when their stud players at those positions go down.

[trez]

Canfora ignores the fact that Jansen would probably struggle making the transition to guard, just like Todd Wade is.

[Art]

What he doesn't answer and what you haven't answered is, who on this team is going to be better at this position RIGHT NOW? Fact is, Heyer is there not because he's a young guy who needs work, but because he's the best option. You don't work with the first team without earning it as a rookie.

You work with what you have, not what you wish you had.

Jason

It's not just what you have. It's what would anyone expect to have. If not Heyer, who would be satisfactory for Jason or anyone here to play the preseason and only the preseason when Samuels isn't hurt? Any names? What player do you put there. Who did we not get we could have. If Heyer was drafted last year and cut this year and he was here would he be better because he was once drafted?

He's an Undrafted Free Agent rookie. He's obviously not the most NFL ready player on our roster. No rookie, even of the highest pedigree, is. Maybe we could have found a guy we liked three years ago who never played in the NFL and we could have him around. I just don't understand who you expect to have in reserve for your Top 5 left tackle who never misses time.

[TheLongshot]

Scroll through backup left tackles for me in the league. Tell me which team is not making an extraordinary risk. How about that? Teams don't stack great players up on the offensive line. They either stack future prospects or former, low-cost starters. Our depth has a number of former starters who are cheap and on the tail end of their careers, and Heyer. Obviously if Samuels is gone for the year, we are in trouble. Most teams are when their stud players at those positions go down.

I did that with the Chicago Bears in another thread. What they had was:

* A former starting Tackle.

* A career backup guard who has started 20 games (most of them last season)

and a bunch of practice squad guys and rookie free agents.

How is that any better than what we have?

Jason

[zoony]

With all of JLC's inside sources, one would think he could at least name a player that should take Heyer's place. Unfortunately he doesn't do that. The problem with Canfora is that he really knows nothing beyond what all of us know. He just happens to sit at Redskins Park from time to time.

So Heyer missed a block, and the DE took a low shot at Campbell and almost ended his season. What if Jansen's missed block last week had resulted in the same? Would JLC be saying that the Jansen experiment should be over?

Canfora's writing just leaves a lot to be desired. I doubt he'll have this gig much longer.

DING!

[TheLongshot]

It's not just what you have. It's what would anyone expect to have.

What I meant was a healthy Samuels, which the coaching staff would rather have as well.

You are right, tho. Likely unless we had a starter in reserve, a lot of people would be saying the same thing. Well, fans tend to perceive high draft picks differently from RFA, even tho we are all talking about rookies who have never played an NFL down, so maybe fans would perceive a higher draft pick as "safer", even if the player isn't.

The good thing about all of this play is that at least we can see his play against front line starters and say that he's mostly doing the job, so that we know at least one guy on the bench has potential. The general assumption of the board is that our backups suck, whether or not they actually do.

Jason

[milliondollarslim]

they should put JLC on soccer.

[Walking Deadman]

Jesus,

Jansen stepping on Thomas' foot leading to a big sack on Campbell in Tenn. could have knocked out JC for the season for all we know and yet keeping him at RT wouldn't have been a big mistake .

Except for that play Heyer looked pretty good for his status right now.

He's not Joe Thomas, he's a unsigned rookie FA with no NFL experience except for last week and the scrimmage vs. Baltimore.

Yet, he still did enough in camp to earn a starting spot over Fabini.

Maybe it was an experiment to gauge young potential talent or Fabini was sooooo bad that Heyer out played him. Maybe it was a little of both.

I love how people play the "it's going to fail" card for everything.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Here is my question: Why are we never prepared?

I've repeated this so often that I am boring myself, but the team is fine 1-22; the team is terrible 23 to 53. Hence, no one can ever get injured.

Look, I understand that losing a left tackle is one of those blows that really really hurts, particularly when you have a pretty good left tackle in Samuels. But surely there has to be a better contingency plan than the undrafted rookie.

I should also point out that I have nothing against Hayer. In three years, he might be a solid starter. But I think we are doing him and - more importantly - Jason a huge disservice by having him out there in the first quarters of games. You can evaluate him just as well against second teamers. And you don't have to make him a target of idiot fans like me.

I am just defuddled because I was told by an expert that we had great depth on the offensive line this year. And apparently, we got nothin'. What happened to Fabini? The guy has played a zillion years at tackle. Did he die and no one told me?

[zoony]

LKB,

If you're gonna ask the question "why are we NEVER prepared"... the honest thing to do would be to go thru our roster position by position and examine depth. Then compare that to other teams in the NFC.

Because at several positions we are extremely deep. Moreso than any of our competitors.

In the salary cap era, you can't be deep everywhere.

And it should be noted, I usually enjoy your posts, even though I don't always agree. You have a very cynical yet entertaining style. But on this one, you just sound like a hater. You're doing yourself a disservice, and taking credibility away from some of your other views, which are 100%correct. Such as your hatred for Snyder :laugh:

[Art]

Lombardi,

Utterly ridiculous commentary.

The team, if things go well, will play exactly five offensive linemen.

The team, if things go well, will play exactly five corners.

The team, if things go well, will play exactly 8 defensive linemen.

The team, if things go well, will play exactly 4 (or 5 and reverse teh corner number) safeties.

The team, if things go well, will play exactly three running backs.

The team, if things go well, will play exactly three tight ends.

You getting the point?

The offensive line is largely starter oriented. We are as well prepared a just about anyone along the offensive line. We have a batch of former starters who aren't very good, but, have started and thus can likely be acceptable fill in players. We have one younger guy you might be able to develop.

There are certainly some teams more prepared along the offensive line as we will be more prepared in a few years as we start projecting the retirement of some of our current starters. We have extensive depth in the secondary. We have an ok starter in reserve at backer and at least one positive looking young prospect. We have several former starters and young players on the defensive line in a pretty deep rotation.

No team has depth everywhere. If we get hit in the wrong spot, we're doomed. Most teams are. We're prepared to play the season with Chris Samuels, and, still appear set for that prep. We're far better positioned at left tackle than we are at starting QB at the moment. At left tackle we have a top five player. At QB we have an unproven young player. Maybe we should upgrade there too?

And, here's a secret you haven't figured out.

Every team tends to start the players they believe are their best ones. Every team thinks it has a drop off if a starter gets hurt. All of them. Like us, every team would feel some discomfort if one of their top players goes out. If the Colts lose Freeney or Harrison or Manning, how do you think they'd feel? If the Bears lost Urlacher? If we lose one of our legitimate Pro Bowl guys, it's a safe bet the guy we have in reserve isn't as good.

Sorry you think asking why that is is at all poignant. It's not.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

LKB,

If you're gonna ask the question "why are we NEVER prepared"... the honest thing to do would be to go thru our roster position by position and examine depth. Then compare that to other teams in the NFC.

Because at several positions we are extremely deep. Moreso than any of our competitors.

In the salary cap era, you can't be deep everywhere.

And it should be noted, I usually enjoy your posts, even though I rarely agree. You have a very cynical yet entertaining style. But on this one, you just sound like a hater.

We have depth at safety, and I think we are kind of okay at linebacker. On offense, I once thought we had depth at QB, but Brunell has looked like Mel Brooks' 2000-Year-Old Man so far. I still think he will be okay. And we have running backs bumping into each other.

We got nothin' on O-line, d-line, or WR. This is a little scary because we also had nothin' at O-line, D-line, or WR last year.

Also, I am upset because I was lied to. I was told we had great depth on the O-line and we currently have a rookie left tackle and no left guard.

Lies make Baby Jesus cry.

[zoony]

We have depth at safety' date=' and I think we are kind of okay at linebacker. On offense, I once thought we had depth at QB, but Brunell has looked like Mel Brooks' 2000-Year-Old Man so far. I still think he will be okay. And we have running backs bumping into each other.

We got nothin' on O-line, d-line, or WR. This is a little scary because we also had nothin' at O-line, D-line, or WR last year.

Also, I am upset because I was lied to. I was told we had great depth on the O-line and we currently have a rookie left tackle and no left guard.

Lies make Baby Jesus cry.[/quote']

WR and Oline are my only concerns as far as depth goes.

Dline is a lot better than everyone thinks. But I don't have the energy to have that discussion right now.

[Vinnick]

You hope for the best, and plan for the worst. I seems we have some at least average talent behind the starting OL. But, if Fabini is healthy, I'd like to see him start these next two games. I'd even be open to thinking about (when #60 is ready), for Wade at RT, and Jansen at LG. Samuels injury still worries me. Heyer starting after 2 weeks, still worries me.

I'm just a fan who wants his team to do well, but is concerned with a few spots on the team.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

No team has depth everywhere. If we get hit in the wrong spot, we're doomed. Most teams are. We're prepared to play the season with Chris Samuels, and, still appear set for that prep. We're far better positioned at left tackle than we are at starting QB at the moment. At left tackle we have a top five player. At QB we have an unproven young player. Maybe we should upgrade there too?

The Redskins have done a remarkable job of passing off every failure to bad luck and not poor planning. Fabini was supposed to be a guy who could step in and be a starter in an emergency. You told me that much three months ago. Well, it's an emergency and apparently he can't. Because we got a UFA out there.

The key to our line was supposed to be the flexibility of the unit. We were supposed to have a bunch of vets who could play a bunch of positions adequately. Three weeks into this experiement, that plan seems to be in tatters. Wade is struggling at left guard, Fabini can't beat out a UFA, Pucillo looks sketchy, and even Jansen may have lost a step.

This is the most important part of a football team. How did we get here?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

WR and Oline are my only concerns as far as depth goes.

Dline is a lot better than everyone thinks. But I don't have the energy to have that discussion right now.

I don't want to get into either. I think the D-line has "depth" in that we have a lot of interchangeable parts. I don't think we have a lot of "talent" there at any level though.

The O-line (in theory) has a lot of talent. There is not much behind it, I fear.

[RedskinDan0557]

Gibbs called me and apologized for not drafting all number one players. He also said its his fault why we cant have pro bowlers as backups.

I told him to try again next year.

On edit: He also said you don't go to the superbowl with the players you wish you have, but the players you do have.

[Art]

The Redskins have done a remarkable job of passing off every failure to bad luck and not poor planning. Fabini was supposed to be a guy who could step in and be a starter in an emergency. You told me that much three months ago. Well' date=' it's an emergency and apparently he can't. Because we got a UFA out there.

The key to our line was supposed to be the flexibility of the unit. We were supposed to have a bunch of vets who could play a bunch of positions adequately. Three weeks into this experiement, that plan seems to be in tatters. Wade is struggling at left guard, Fabini can't beat out a UFA, Pucillo looks sketchy, and even Jansen may have lost a step.

This is the most important part of a football team. How did we get here?[/quote']

It's the preseason, Lombardi. There's no such thing as an emergency. I happen to hate Fabini, which is well known here for years. I imagine he will start at left tackle during a regular season game if Samuels can't and if Heyer's play drops off from the pretty high level it's been to this point.

The most important part of our football team lost one good young player and responded by bringing in several former starters in the league to improve depth and flexibility. None of the players replacing him are as good as the player they are replacing, and yet, this most important part of the team was very good last year and will be very good this year, barring injury, which, for every team, will have a negative impact on the offensive line.

The surprise for me is Whitaker was cut. I thought that chubby guy had a chance to do some work in there for us. One observation for you though would be to attempt to view through a more equitable lense. Fabini, a former starter at left tackle -- if not a good one -- is brought in in case of injury to protect Samuels. During camp, a young guy you don't expect to be any good, really, comes in, plays with a chip on his shoulder and clearly moves ahead of that vet on the depth chart.

In just about every other city, that's a positive.

And, then when that guy gets on the field and plays pretty well, that's really positive.

Only here, it's not. Why isn't it? Because Jason decided in the first quarter of the first preseason game that if the team made a change along the line he'd write a story and call them desperate and if they didn't, he'd call them stupid, because, for Jason, the story isn't about how they are actually doing, but, rather, what his imagination would allow him to create among the more dim of fans.

If Heyer was sucking it up, I'd be the first to tell you.

Jansen hosed it up the opener and I didn't pretend he played well. Heyer has actually looked reasonably skilled. My expectations for him are pretty low, so, my lense is skewed, most likely, but, you can't actually watch him play by play and come out with a conclusion he's not doing pretty well. Which means those speaking to that effect haven't actually watched.

But, you have already admitted that you haven't, right?

[Art]

You hope for the best, and plan for the worst. I seems we have some at least average talent behind the starting OL. But, if Fabini is healthy, I'd like to see him start these next two games. I'd even be open to thinking about (when #60 is ready), for Wade at RT, and Jansen at LG. Samuels injury still worries me. Heyer starting after 2 weeks, still worries me.

I'm just a fan who wants his team to do well, but is concerned with a few spots on the team.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Fabini got run over and through at guard in the opener. When he last held down left tackle for any length of time, I think he gave up double digit sacks and had double digit penalties. You could LIVE with him at tackle for a few games in the regular season. Nothing more. Heyer actually has upside and seems to be playing to prove himself. Why you'd punish him after solid play is beyond me.

[RedskinDan0557]

Heyer actually has upside and seems to be playing to prove himself. Why you'd punish him after solid play is beyond me.

I agree 100%. He has huge upside and is a pickup that one would think skins fans would be proud of. Keep him in the game and let him continue to prove himself.

edited for clarity

[Vinnick]

Then why is Fabini on the roster? Why not put Wade a LT and Fabini at LG? They aren't interested in seeing any other combinations? Without Samuels in there, its a different OL anyway. Might as well give it a shot. What's the worst that can happen? The QB gets a knee injury?