For your consideration: Eric Steinbach, All-American LG, Iowa

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

I've posted about Eric Steinbach elsewhere, but I thought I'd make it a thread to generate more comment.

Steinbach is my top realistic pick for the Redskins in the 2003 draft. Kiper has him listed as the top guard in the draft, and numerous others also highly rate him. What's unusual is that the top-rated guard is a left guard, when most top college guards are right guards. With the Redskins facing a primary LG weakness, it would be great to draft such a highly touted player who already knows that position, instead of hoping to move a RG to that position or drafting a lower-rated natural LG.

I realize that players can change positions, but I don't have any confidence in Helton's ability to help a player make the change. So it would be great to start with a player experienced and proven at LG.

Steinbach may or may not be worth a #13 pick in the draft, which is high for a guard. Probably if I were the Skins picking at 13, I'd trade down, especially if no guard had been taken yet. It would be great to pick up an extra #2 or #3 pick and still get Steinbach.

Steinbach made first-team AP All-American, making him (I believe) one of the top two guards in the nation. He was also the Big 10 offensive lineman of the year. According to his bio, he's an honor student, so he's a got some smarts and dedication as well as strength.

Here would be my dream scenario for the Skins offseason:

1. Re-sign Daryl Gardener, Powell, Tre Johnson, Thompson, Wuerffel
   
2. Extend Champ and Smoot
   
3. Sign Peerless Price as free agent WR (4 years)
   
4. Sign Ray Brown as free agent guard (1 year)
   
5. Sign one DT, one DE free agent (Sam Adams if affordable)
   
6. Trade down from #13 to #22 in first round, pick up third round (#22) pick
   
7. Trade our 2nd round pick (#13) and our 4th round pick (#13) for #1 pick in 2nd round
   
8. Draft as follows:
   [/list=1]
   • 1st round (#22): Eric Steinbach, LG
     
   • 2nd round (#1): Boss Bailey, LB (convert to FS)
     
   • 3rd round (#13): best center or guard available
     
   • 3rd round (#22): best QB available (Grossman?)
     
   • 6th round: kicker
     
   • 7th round: punter
     

With FOUR young WRs (Gardner, Thompson, McCants, Russell), I don't buy the argument that we need to draft another young WR. We would need a very high pick to get impact at WR, and we have too many other holes. Price can make a big impact by himself. Gardner, Thompson and McCants should be more productive in their second year with Spurrier. Russell is a nice wildcard with speed. And Royal should provide a pass-catching boost at TE.

What Ramsey needs more than anything is a dominant OL, to provide protection and to help the running game balance. My OL plan provides great depth, youth and experience on the interior OL. We'd plan to start Ray Brown at LG, Moore at center and Tre at RG. Steinbach would push for playing time/starting position at LG. If he earns the start, Brown can rotate with Tre or back up Tre at RG -- protecting against Tre's injury risk. The other OL picked in the draft would be groomed to be the eventual starter at center or RG. And with all this depth and quality on the OL, the team would have insurance against injury, strong protection for Ramsey, and an inside/short-yardage rushing game that was missing in 2002.

On defense, Boss Bailey could start immediately at FS. Terrell becomes a backup behind Bailey and Ohalete. This solves the major existing weakness on defense, and also allows Terrell to concentrate on special-teams coverage, where he's done well.

Our two free-agent pickups at DT and DE provide depth for a DL that includes all-pro-quality Gardener, plus Wynn, Powell, Smith and Jackson (returning from injury).

If our 2nd pick in the third round is used for a QB (Grossman?), we're set at #3 QB. Otherwise we'd need to find a free-agent #3 QB.

Finally, drafting a kicker and punter in the final rounds allows us to go to camp with some promising prospects. I'd also recommend trying to acquire the best free-agent kicker and punter available. These are important spots that need to be fixed.

I'd try Watson at PR, where his quick feet would be useful. I'd try McCants and Betts at KR.

In the 2004 draft, I'd concentrate on the DL at the top of the draft, assuming we get the production we expected from the existing WR corps (including Price). That should round out a very strong roster and support a good playoff run in 2004.

Thoughts?

[Dirk Diggler]

We have neglected the Dline for far far too long. We have relied on Free agency to fill holes there forever. We have drafted a Dlineman in the first 3 rounds 1 time in the past 8 years. The last time we took a DE or DT before Round 4 was in 97 with Kenard Lang. This is not a joke.

And we wonder why our defense underachieves

[Yomar]

and the only other DLinemen we have drafted since Lang are Cowsette, Scott and Monds.

[Dirk Diggler]

Also, Boss Bailey is a major, major projection to Free safety.

It is far easier to bulk a player up and move him forward (S to LB or OLB to DE) then to move a defensive player backwards. To expect him to make that change over the course of a few years is optimistic. To expect him to be able to start there game 1 is :laugh:

[Art]

I'd be surprised if Steinbach goes in the first round. From what I've seen early on he's a lesser "prospect" than Hutchinson or even Gurode. That's not to say he can't improve his standing, but, at present, he is not considered quite the prospect those two were. Further, he's a tall guy and is pretty light. We certainly need a bit more beef inside. This kid may be able to add it, but, I'd be willing to bet he spends his first three years just adding weight and recovering from injury.

I also wonder if he won't be tried some at left or right tackle given his size and his athletic gifts as a former tight end. I like this pick as a possible move in the second round. But, right now I'm as locked as can be on the defensive line where the team has employed a rent-a-player concept for far too long. We haven't drafted or found any significant lineman on the defensive side of our own. We have done this on the offensive side.

It's time we spent a little effort shoring up the one area of the team that screams old and dangerously thin and that's the defensive line. If we can add a guy like Mo Collins in free agency, we'd basically have four of five starters worth having for the next four or five years. We can't say the same about the defensive line and we CAN say that about every other position.

In my view we should spend all of our picks just getting defensive lineman hoping one or two are stars. But, we won't do that. That we won't is fine. But we can't let another season go by without spending a first round pick on a defensive lineman. There's almost no situation I can envision that would make this necessity less.

The offensive line showed this year just how good it can be once Tre was in there. It's easy to "cover" for one weakness and, very likely, if we JUST resign Tre we'd have NO weakness in the starting group. With just how dominating our line was to finish the year, we should concentrate on helping the defensive line, which was equally fine, but enters the offseason with aging players and free agents and it'll be costly if we do so little in this draft as you suggest ASF.

We've forgotten about the defensive line for far too long. Let's spend a little time fixing it before it kills us.

[Storm]

Re-sign Daryl Gardener, Powell, Tre Johnson, Thompson, Wuerffel

Extend Champ and Smoot

Sign Peerless Price as free agent WR (4 years)

Sign Ray Brown as free agent guard (1 year)

considering we're supposedly only three million under the cap after we cut Davis, where exactly do you plan to get the money to do all this. I wouldnt extend smoot just yet. He has a couple of years left on his contract.

As far as the draft goes, you probably will get more value for your pick if you delay the Guard pick until the second round and use the first rount to fill the holes on our D line. Althouth trading down and picking a guard someplace between 20 and 30 is probably fair game.

Using the fifth and sixth pick on a kicker and punter are a waste, you can probably do as well on the FA market. I would take a shot at linemen, defensive or offensive.

if you assume we make all the trades you want then:

1st round (#22): Best Guard

2nd round (#1): Best DL/ DT or WR

3rd round (#13): Best DL/DT or WR (depending on 2nd round)

3rd round (#22): Safety

6th round: best lineman

7th round: best lineman

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Art

I'd be surprised if Steinbach goes in the first round. From what I've seen early on he's a lesser "prospect" than Hutchinson or even Gurode. That's not to say he can't improve his standing, but, at present, he is not considered quite the prospect those two were. Further, he's a tall guy and is pretty light. We certainly need a bit more beef inside. This kid may be able to add it, but, I'd be willing to bet he spends his first three years just adding weight and recovering from injury.

I also wonder if he won't be tried some at left or right tackle given his size and his athletic gifts as a former tight end. I like this pick as a possible move in the second round.

Art, setting aside our disagreement over draft priorities (OL vs DL), I'd like to understand how you support your argument that Steinbach isn't 1st-round material.

I agree that guards aren't normally big first-rounders, and I'd feel more comfortable with Steinbach (or any guard) taken in the last dozen spots in the first round than #13, which is why I suggest trading down.

I don't profess any personal expertise on Steinbach (have never even seen him play), but Mel Kiper has him as the top guard and the #8 player in the 2003 draft. I don't think he'll go #8, but if he's that good, he's good value in the last dozen spots of the first round.

Steinbach's first-team All-American status means AP thinks he was one of the top two guards in the nation in 2002.

Draftbook likes him too, with Matthew Gambill writing:

12-07-02 No player in the country has risen faster or higher than Eric Steinbach. Entering the season as a possible mid rounder, Steinbach has shown outstanding fundamentals and a fierce blocking style to become the #1 rated guard on my board. At 6'5", 294-pounds, Steinbach has the size and strength, as well as the athleticism teams covet. He has had a problem with nagging injuries, but when at 100% he has the potential to be a dominating performer on the offensive line. Steinbach should be a top 50 pick in April.

10-28-02 Who is the top OG in the draft? Some say Vince Manuwai, others say Derrick Dockery. While both those players are very strong prospects, the one OG who has gone unnoticed is Iowa's Eric Steinbach. The 6'5", 294-pounder is the most fundamentally sound OG prospect I have seen since Steve Hutchinson. Steinbach came to Iowa as a TE, but they soon converted him over to an offensive lineman where he has really flourished. Look for Steinbach to really move up other draft boards in the near future, as he possesses the size, athleticism, strength, and technique to warrant him being a possible first round selection.

I personally like the pick of Steinbach because he's proven at LG, so he doesn't require Helton's "help" moving to LG. Also, as an honors student at Iowa (a good school), he should bring some smarts, dedication and good character to the team.

I've also suggested in this thread that we get Ray Brown as our vet LG. You know my opinion of Brown and the whole worst-to-first-in-sacks-allowed accomplishment of the Lions this year with Brown at LG. (You like to dismiss this, but the math of subtracting Stai and adding Brown had to create *some* part of this result.) My research on Brown shows him as a student of the game and an intense user of film study to prepare for opponents in game. I think he'd be a great starter for as long as we needed, and perhaps more important, a great mentor for our young line -- which would include two draft picks, plus Samuels, Jansen and Moore in my scenario. (In other words, if we can't replace Helton, I'd like a guy like Brown to provide coach-like player leadership.)

So -- setting aside the disagreement on priorities, what do you know about Steinbach that Kiper and Gambill don't know? And what do you think of Ray Brown as LG starter/OL mentor/Tre backup for one year, until Steinbach shows he's ready to start?

[jimster]

We do need to get rid of Stai and need to concentrate on both OL and DL as priorities in the draft.I don't know enough about those types of players in college, but I definitely think we should use our 1st and 2nd round picks on one each OL and DL. If we get somebody like Price at WR we don't need to draft anymore receivers this year,we'll be set with what we have(including Russell coming back). We should also get one more guard in FA(in addition to Tre) and a DE/DT. If we can have kick-*** O-line and D-lines-we should be set.

[Yomar]

as far as guard prospects in the draft the last few years, Steve Hutchinson stands alone, if you could draw up a guard prospect, you would draw Hutchinson.

Last year you had 4 very good guard prospects in Fonoti, Gurode, Simmons (who played Tackle in college) and Bentley (who played cnter in college), and they were all top prospects, but each had his minor flaws and none went before Simmons who was a very late first round pick, and they were all gone by the first fifteen picks in the second round.

This year, you have a similar situation but with Steinbach, Dockery and Manuwai. They each have their minor flaws, but they will all be gone between the late 1st and mid 2nd round. The knock on Steinbach is his durability questions and his lower body strength. He is a good prospect, but he isn't in Hutchinson's class. Last year's mock drafts mostly had three of the four top guys going in the first, but the reality was that only one went and much later than most mock's had the first guard being taken. Its a similar situation this year I think.

[Art]

ASF,

Steinbach isn't first round material because he's a guard and he's not Steve Hutchinson. He's not even Gurode, who wasn't a first-round pick. A guard going in the first would have to be an exceptional player and Hutchinson was that. Hutchinson was identified as a first-round pick after his sophomore year.

I've nothing against Steinbach but he's a guy that "appeared" suddenly when Iowa actually won a few games. That's probably not a slight against him, but, let me assure you, if Iowa is 7-4 this year, we're not talking about a 284-pound guard in the first round.

According to the Hawkeyes, that's what Steinbach weighs. Of course they also say he's 6-7 so who knows. My understanding on Steinbach is he's not yet beefy enough for guard, though he's supposedly strong. I don't pretend to even START looking at potential players and reading about them until after the Super Bowl, so, take whatever I say here with a serious grain of salt.

[Thinking Skins]

I like the idea of trading down to draft Ol if there are no speedy WR's or top DT's avaliable. In which case, it seems reasonable to draft Steinbach. The main thing that I want to see is the problems of this team being addressed. We have needs at LG, RG, WR (maybe), DT, DE, and FS. I put a maybe beside WR because if the perfect guy falls to us then I say we take him, but if we didnt draft a WR in this draft I wouldnt be mad. However, I would like to see these positions addressed. I also realize that the 5th rounders and below generally have little chance of actually being long term solutions on standard downs, so I would have no problem drafting a player with good special teams talent there either.

But I do not think we need to DRAFT a kicker or a punter and definately not both!

1. Rookie Kickers almost always struggle at times. The last two rookie kickers we had we cut and now one is a pro bowler for the eagles. The other signed with the chargers.

2. We give up on kickers too fast. Is he does struggle, that doesnt mean just cut him. Show some confidence in teh guy, like NE did with Vinateri.

3. There will be planty of kickers avaliable through rookie FA. Just attack that if we need a kicker. Tell me how many kickers in teh league right now actually were drafted? I bet its less than 1/3.

[yank]

Any guard who ends up in the Pro Bowl is by definition first round material. Russ Grimm cost the Redskins an extra first rounder to move up to draft him in the third round. He was a high school QB and a college center who the Skins moved to guard. He was an exceptional talent who dropped to the third round instead of the first round - so much for pre-draft wizardry.

As much as Beathard whiffed on some of his "out of the box" picks, he also hit on some - like Grimm. The Girls drafting Larry Allen from Sonoma State in the second round is also an example of the thinking we need.

Drafting is not an exact science that can be measured by height, weight, 40 times, etc.

Find some big uglies who want to reach down the throat of the guy in front of him and rip his lungs out and we'll have a good draft.

Get me some Russ Grimms - in any round it takes - from the first round on ...

[Art]

Yank,

If Ladell Betts winds up winning the MVP and breaking rushing records every year, that'd be great. It won't mean we didn't probably pick him a round earlier than he probably should have gone. It will have worked out and no one will care.

If Quincy Carter fails in Dallas, everyone will remind Dallas fans of what a terrible blunder it was taking a QB three rounds before he would have gone. And, that's what we're doing of course .

I'm all for getting as many Russ Grimm type players as possible. It's possible Steinbach may wind up grading out and being considered a legitimate first rounder, despite playing a position that is generally going to push you down a round unless you are an exception to the rule.

And, if we take any player before it is generally considered appropriate, it can be considered a bad pick. If it works out, that's great. No one will care. If it doesn't, we'll be harping about taking that light guard who had an injury history too damn early. Perspective I guess .

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by blakman211

But I do not think we need to DRAFT a kicker or a punter and definately not both!

Mark Moseley was the MVP of the first Redskins team ever to win a Super Bowl.

The lack of a dependable kicker arguably single-handedly decimated the $100 million gamble known as the 2000 season, setting in motion the franchise slide that endures today.

The Raiders drafted their current kicker in the first round.

Spending 6th and 7th round picks on a kicker and a punter is not a waste. For the right kicker and punter, it's an absolute bargain.

Spending those picks on other positions is a shot in the dark. At kicker and punter, you know you have two of the best in the country, even if you just get your choices from an online draft board ranking.

If you wait until after the draft, you're standing in line with 31 teams. If you look for a vet free agent, you're sifting through other teams' failures.

It's worth the picks.

[Mad Mike]

Originally posted by Dirk Diggler

We have neglected the Dline for far far too long. We have relied on Free agency to fill holes there forever. We have drafted a Dlineman in the first 3 rounds 1 time in the past 8 years. The last time we took a DE or DT before Round 4 was in 97 with Kenard Lang. This is not a joke.

And we wonder why our defense underachieves

Yeah, It sucks having the #5 defense.:doh:

[Art]

Mike,

Quit being an idiot my friend.

First, our defense was No. 5. If that is pleasing to you, great. It wasn't to me, because the defense was not a Top 5 defense. But, you're happy about it and great. Now, the players who got us to the point we are presently at are, Bruce Smith, Dan Wilkinson, Ladairus Jackson, Delbert Cowsette, Carl Powell, Daryl Gardener, Renaldo Wynn.

You can throw Bernard Jackson in too I guess.

The bottom line, of this group, you have, in order, one guy who may yet retire, and whether he does or not remains the only player you have that has any ability to generate a pass rush. Another you're about to cut. Another who's injured and won't be ready for camp. Another who's a nice guy to mix in, but, can't possibly be a guy we're building around. A free agent who's undersized for full-time duty inside. A free agent who is splendid, and one wrong twist from ruining us by being out. A solid run stopper.

That's our line.

If you don't see the necessity of adding young players with legitimate pass rushing skills, you're just closing your mind to reality and that's sad.

[Art]

P.S.

Just an interesting side note for you to ponder, Mike.

In order to be a top producing offense, we need Ramsey in there. In the seven games he played substantially (not including his two hail mary games) we averaged 360 yards per game offensively.

If you can allow yourself a rookie mulligan and you except the Green Bay game from the equation as a cold weather aberration, we averaged 381 yards with Ramsey in the game a lot. In the first scenario, we have the No. 8 offense in football. In the second we have the No. 3.

So, essentially, in order to create a top rated offense with our present team, all we need to do is play Ramsey apparently and obviously as this season demonstrated.

In order to make a Top 5 defense, we have to feast on the league's weakest offenses. No one was happy with the No. 10 defense that appeared to be falling down the charts as the season wore on -- shown by averaging 320 yards surrendered over the four-game stretch of the Rams, Cowboys, Giants and Eagles. Then, suddenly, against the the No. 32 and the No. 30 offenses in football we surrender 166 and 186 yards, boost our overall ranking, and suddenly we're set defensively?

Which method of being highly ranked seems more solid? Racking up exceptional defensive production against teams ranked 25 or below in offense? Or, playing Patrick Ramsey? Heading into next season, which one constant appears to be the easiest to get excited about?

Further, Ramsey had his overall production against generally good defenses. Our defense had its best production against generally bad offenses. You can't tell me you don't see this type of stuff. Please don't tell me you don't see it.

[NavyDave]

Good points Art about the D Line.

Another thing is that BDW with his fat body did occupy O linemen for the others to make plays and if he is to be cut as we expect then either we need another guy who can do that or have Marv adjust his scheme/philosophy.

The only guy you can count on at present on the D line is R Wynn back injuries are things that can flare up unexpectedly ask Tracy McGrady so lets not pretend that Gardener can play 19 games next year.

We need to have personnell that can be counted on.

Resigning Tre J is supposedly a priority and if that is the case we can then waive bye bye to Stai and Tre J is our RG or LG with us still needing a young kid to groom at LG.

R Jones is some one I wont count on because I havent see a reason to.

Solid and young O lines and D lines allows us to become creative on both sides of the ball.

[Dirk Diggler]

Art

Thanks for getting my back on Mike's comments - those were my thoughts exactly.

As far as drafting a guard in the first round at the current spot of #13, I am against it. But, if we find ourselves at the end of the first or trading up in the second round, I think Vince Manuwai is our guy. If you read the article below he seems like a really, really nice fit. I was impressed when i read the part about him being able to play in the NFL right out of High School:

Hawaii OG Manuwai’s atypical frame might not hinder pro potential

By Eric Edholm

Dec. 5, 2002

Hawaii OG

Vince Manuwai

Every year it seems that one unknown player flies up NFL draft lists. Either he’s from a remote school or he plays an unheralded position — in Vince Manuwai’s case it’s most likely both. As an offensive guard at the University of Hawaii, Manuwai needs all the promotion he can get.

But Manuwai, 22, had no Times Square billboards, no songs and dances sprung for him from the school’s sports information department (just a Web site: “V-Man” on Hawaii’s athletics site). Manuwai usually lets his play on the field do the talking. But unless you’re into keeping tabulations on “pancake” or “de-cleater” blocks — or if you even know what those are — you might not know much about Hawaii’s gentle giant.

Manuwai’s size and strength gave him an advantage in high school football and track, where he threw discus and shot put, and even basketball, where he was a hulking presence in the paint. What was the secret to his success? Which sport helped train him for the rigors of football’s trench warfare? Why, canoe paddling, of course. Picture this big man not only entering a canoe but also navigating it with precise timing and grace. This supersized seafarer thinks it’s his paddling background that has helped him develop physically the way he has.

“I think it helped me develop, in fact I am pretty sure of it,” Manuwai said, “A lot of what you do in pass blocking is leverage: using your upper body to control the defensive players. With paddling, you have to control the canoe and work rhythmically. It built me up a lot. It’s definitely tougher than it sounds. You wouldn’t believe it.”

Built short by NFL standards and squatty like a World’s Strongest Man competitor — you know, the guys who toss tree trunks like darts and lift the back ends of trucks holding a dozen Caribbean children — Manuwai admits he is somewhat of an odd size for offensive guard, but he also has plenty to say to captious scouts about his ability to get the job done.

“I think (scouts) will see that I can play,” Manuwai said. “I’d like to think I am one of the best pass blockers out there. I play with leverage. When we (face defensive linemen’s) stunts, I face those well. I can also run-block — I can adjust to that. I don’t think (my size) is that big a disadvantage.”

Offensive line coach Mike Cavanugh doesn’t see Manuwai’s size as a problem. “Vince came out of high school at 265 pounds,” Cavanaugh said, “but you were not worried about him (putting on weight). We saw him play football and basketball in high school, and what amazed me was how he possessed that explosive power. He could run and jump so easily, but he could also explode off the line and use his strength.”

Also effusive in his praise of Manuwai is his head coach, June Jones, who knows a thing or two about NFL linemen. He coached for several years in the pros, the last three as the head coach of the Atlanta Falcons.

“(Manuwai) could have made my last Falcons team as an 18-year old freshman,” Jones said. “That’s how good he is.”

Cavanaugh agrees: “I think Vince is the best interior lineman I have coached here — better then the three who have been drafted (Adrian Klemm, Kaulana Noa and Kynan Forney).”

But Manuwai remains a mystery to most people, even football experts, on the Main 48. Despite his stature, he speaks softly and leads by example. Jones says when it’s time to get down to business on the football field, be it game or practice, the players watch Vince — then they know. Large to you and me, Manuwai is certainly not going to wow any NFL types with his numbers. Nowadays, 300 pounds is considered industry-standard for offensive linemen, and height and wingspan are two other heavily coveted traits. Manuwai is listed at 6-2 and 300 pounds, but as his coaches would be quick to remind you, the game is not played out on paper.

“I have heard that (Manuwai might not be big enough) from scouts,” Cavanaugh says. “I just laugh.”

In Pro Football Weekly’s 2002-2003 Pro Prospects Preview, draft expert Joel Buchsbaum says Manuwai is a good brawler with average size. “In terms of measurables, (he) looks like an average prospect on paper. On the field, (he) plays like the best guard in the country. Manuwai is short, has short arms and an average 40 (yard dash) time, but he plays with great leverage and strength. He gets into his blocks quickly … (and) jars defenders with his hand punch.”

Hand punch? Manuwai explains his preferred method of mauling.

“I try to use that to dominate my opponent. I use my punch to get defenders off of me. That’s the biggest thing: push them back. That’s something I think people will see about me on film. I can get guys off of me, out of my area, because I use the (hand punch) as an offensive weapon, a way of keeping their hands down.”

Jones thinks the only thing that will keep Manuwai down right away in the NFL is time.

“He will certainly need time to learn whatever system he is in,” Jones says. “But I don’t see any other reason why he won’t succeed. I coached a lot of good linemen in (the NFL), and Vince is right up there — or has the potential to be right up there — with all of them. He reminds me of (former All-Pro) Chris Hinton with the way he attacks.”

Not a bad compliment. But Vince takes it all in stride.

“I just want to make it (in the NFL) first,” Manwai said. “It takes a lot at the next level. I talk to my friend (San Diego rookie OG) Toniu Fonoti, and he says it’s just so fast in the pros. (Coming from a run-based offense at Nebraska) he has had to adjust a lot to pass blocking, so I hope I might have a leg up there. Anyone can learn how to run-block later.”

Now back to those pancake blocks for a second. Manuwai has racked up 53 of them this year — with one game to go — surpassing his mark of 49 last season. One thing scouts like the most about Manuwai is his dominance in both the running and passing games.

“One scout asked me if Vince can line up in a three-point stance and do what he has done as a pass blocker,” Cavanaugh said. “I told the guy I can’t wait to see Vince run-block more often.”

“They throw the ball quite a bit (at Hawaii),” said one NFC scout, “and it has given him a chance to learn pass blocking, which is something a lot of rookies struggle with. It’s a finesse thing. You have to know what angles to take. (Manuwai) does that pretty well. I like him inside, of course, but he might be better-suited for center (in the NFL).”

Jones agrees center might be Manuwai’s future in the NFL, depending on the team’s system. But no matter the position, Manuwai says he’s just happy he’s being looked at as a pro prospect. And despite the fact that interior linemen are often overlooked by the average fan, NFL writers elect at least a half-dozen of them each year to the Pro Bowl, played annually in Honolulu.

“Boy, that would be nice to play in front of family and friends. But one step at a time.”

[MRMADD]

Draftbook:

Steinbach should be a top 50 pick in April.

ASF, I like Steinbach, too, but I don't think he's a first-rounder. Yes, Kiper says he is, but he's the only one. Even your draftbook quote (above) says he's a mid-second-rounder.

There's no way we should be using a first rounder on a guard this year unless it's in the 28-31 range.

I think Manuwai, Steinbach, and Dockery are the top three guards, and I'd be surprised if they all didn't disappear early in the second.

[MRMADD]

Art:

So, essentially, in order to create a top rated offense with our present team, all we need to do is play Ramsey apparently and obviously as this season demonstrated.

Art, you and your sycophants are smokin' crack. How in the world can you conclude that the offense will be top-rated just by playing Ramsey? Here's a news flash: we have been playing Ramsey, and we're not top-rated. We're bottom-rated. You can't just say "We're throwing for lots of yards so we're really good." We don't score many points, so we lose. That's not good.

We have some gaping holes on offense, most noticeably at OG, TE, RB, and WR. Yes, our two-headed monster at RB played well to end the season, but they're hardly dominant. Quick quiz: how many TDs did Betts have all season?

One. Well, two if you're handing out rookie mulligans and want to give him a TD for that end zone fumble when he was stripped by a DE who caught him from behind. Watson had two as well (one rushing, one receiving). It's hard to say that we have the answer there.

Our interior offensive line can't protect Ramsey. Yes, they improved at the end of the year when we feasted on the Cowboys and Texans, but you've got to look at the big picture.

We're stuck with what we've got at TE, apparently, but they have missed a few blocks and dropped a few balls themselves.

Our WRs are not very good. Gardner is certainly capable, and Thompson and McCants played well for the journeymen that they are, but how many teams would swap their top 3 WRs for ours? I can think of maybe three. That's not good.

All in all, this offense deserves its 20th rating. No one will believe that they'll magically become top-rated just by playing Ramsey with a year more experience. Defenses aren't that dumb: they'll know that he's not that mobile and that our interior OL isn't that good and our WRs can't get separation deep -- he's gonna spend another season on his back if he doesn't get some talent around him.

Hey, it's fun to load up on defensive talent, and we do have some holes there, but it's kinda like having two cars:

One is a Ferrari that runs really well but needs a paint job and some new tires (the defense). One is a '73 Chevy Nova that runs like crap (the offense) but has a shiny new paint job (Ramsey) and a killer stereo (Jansen and Samuels).

And you want to spend all your money on the Ferrari? I say it's time to put a new engine in the Nova and get it out on the road and surprise some people.

[Gamebreaker]

ASF,

I agree with alot of what your wrote, except for signing Peerless Price. I don't believe he is the deep threat reciever we need. People look at his frame and automatically think he's a burner, when he isn't. His stats and career show it.

He was very lucky to play with Bledsoe and having Moulds on the other side allowed him to get single coverage for most of the season. Now I'm not calling him Albert Connell, far from it, but his 12 ypc average wasn't there just because Buffalo may have misused him.

[BG]

Art and ASF: you guys are both in the right here. There are obvious needs on both sides of the ball. We could see that #5 D slip to #30 if we rest on our laurels this offseason. We need to do some resigning of the players we have, yet we may want to strongly consider drafting a DT or DE in the draft. The De's on the market are going to be way oput of reach as far as $ is concerned. I don't doubt Snyder and Cerrato's ability to find a way to get the $ for a DE but it would be a bad move. There are cost effective solutions to solving the DT problem. Draft, FA and our current roster could solve the issue. DE and safety are not so cut and dry.

The offense I won't go into because there is so much. I don't see the rationale in wasting a first rounder on a 'small' guard when it could yeild us two more picks in the later rounds where could find our next Russ Grimm or Jeff Bostic.

[Gamebreaker]

Originally posted by MRMADD

We have some gaping holes on offense, most noticeably at OG, TE, RB, and WR. Yes, our two-headed monster at RB played well to end the season, but they're hardly dominant. Quick quiz: how many TDs did Betts have all season?

Both players were essentially rookies, you're forgeting that young players usually get better. I can bet that Spurrier goes into TC without adding another RB, and allowing Watson and Betts to fight it out for the starting position. I expect to Betts potential to finally shine and overcome Watson. We'll be fine at RB.

We're stuck with what we've got at TE, apparently, but they have missed a few blocks and dropped a few balls themselves.

We had to deal with Flemister at TE because of injury, he wasn't even considered as a starter until Royals, Rasby, AND Stephens went down to injury. Yes, he was playing behind all 3 by the end of training camp. I think Royals could be our starter, with Rasby and Stephens playing their respective roles as backups. I don't have a clue why Flemister had his contract extended when he showed nothing all season to warrant it.

Our WRs are not very good. Gardner is certainly capable, and Thompson and McCants played well for the journeymen that they are, but how many teams would swap their top 3 WRs for ours? I can think of maybe three. That's not good

I disagree, again this another position with alot of young players. Gardner is the most experienced and he's just going into his third season. Thompson and McCants are hardly journeyman, how did you figure that? Neither have played for anyone but the Redskins. Thompson has been a practice squad player, who just got extended playing time this season, McCants is a raw reciever just in his second season. Their performances this season will only help their development. Have you seen Thompson's stats? They are solid stats for a #2 reciever, and considering how this is his first season getting meaningful playing time, it's not farfetched to think he can't improve. I bet if I compared our top 3 aganist the other Top 3's across the league I would find our guys were most productive than most.

We could use a deep threat with speed, but other than that, the group we have now has serious potential.

[MRMADD]

I used the wrong word, but not for the reason you think. Journeyman seems to imply that they've bounced around from team to team, because it starts with "journey", but that's not what it means. You can stay with the same team you're entire career and still be a journeyman.

The Webster's definition, which I meant, is "an experienced and competent but undistinguished worker." I would argue that they ARE "competent but undistinguished." But you're right: they're not experienced.

Here's what I said:

Our WRs are not very good. Gardner is certainly capable, and Thompson and McCants played well for the journeymen that they are, but how many teams would swap their top 3 WRs for ours? I can think of maybe three. That's not good.

I just think that in Spurrier's offense, we need some game-breaking, field-stretching receivers. What we have are three big, strong, usually sure-handed -- but not particularly fast -- wide receivers. I think we should keep that trio, but augment it with one receiver with game-breaking potential.

Gamebreaker:

I bet if I compared our top 3 aganist the other Top 3's across the league I would find our guys were most productive than most.

I don't have time to do that comparison, but I'll bet they'd be middle-of-the-pack or worse.

Gamebreaker:

We could use a deep threat with speed, but other than that, the group we have now has serious potential.

I agree on the deep threat, but here's my problem with the "potential" argument: we've had great "potential" at WR for years. I just want production for a change. Westbrook was all about potential. Every offseason we'd have to wish and hope he'd live up to his potential. Never happened. Now we've got to wish and hope that Thompson and McCants will develop, and Russell will fulfill his potnetial. I'm tired of wishing and hoping.

Thompson and McCants are keepers, but we really need a burner to stretch defenses. Our WRs could be very good (there goes that "potential" again) if they had a complementary deep threat.