The Crisis of our Lines is Exaggerated

[Going Commando]

Entirely too much emphasis is placed on linemen on these boards, and entirely too much is made of the deficiencies of the Redskin's defensive and offensive lines. The people who push for the team to revamp their lines need to better understand the scheme that the team runs and when they do, they will see that the Redskins already have strong to elite players at the critical positions.

And while yes, you need to be competent in these units, contrary to the oft-quoted cliche "games are won in the trenches", they aren't the most important positions these days. This is not true, games are won by brilliant Quarterback play. Offensive lines are made good by good Quarterbacks and good coaches, and defensive line dominance requires effective coverage to negate the rapid paced passing game that is the staple of today's NFL.

John Clayton wrote a pretty good article about this and it should be read:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=3375024

Pass protection is important, but good offensive line play is just as much a product of good coaching than it is having elite players. The only slot on the line where you have to have a special athlete now is at LT, and they are rare, but the Redskins already have one. This is because they cover the right handed qb's back and they have to be fast enough to keep up with the fast edge rushers. Other than that, having elite players at the other spots is just nice a bonus, not essential. A sterling example of how an offensive line can be dominant through superior coaching and scheme without spectacular athletes is the New England Patriots' line. They were the best offensive line in the league pass protecting and run blocking until they had a fluke performance in the superbowl, and they even got by with the fairly unathletic Matt Light at tackle.

The Redskins have one of the best OLine coaches in the league and have had consistently superior lines for the entire decade. Even with the catastrophic injuries the team sustained last year they still ranked in the top half of the league. The line will be fine unless Chris Samuels gets hurt--but this isn't a unique situation to the Redskins. Every team's offense gets derailed once it loses it's left tackle (look at how bad the Rams were last year), and there is nothing that can be done about it.

4-3 defensive linemen are overated too, especially at the tackle position. dominant dt's are nice, but not necessarry. Guys play in a rotation so much now a days that superior coaching and a solid but not spectacular set can be very effective. Exhibit A is the fantastic Seattle Seahawks defensive lineplay. They run a very effective rotation that involves only one great pass rusher in Patrick Kerney, and then they blitz with julian peterson. The Seahawks offer a model of how a 4-3 defensive line can be great with only a single powerful pass rushing defensive end and a good rotation.

For everyone forecasting doom, like the Seahawks, the Redskins have a very effective deffensive line rotation right now. Andre Carter fulfills the everydown edge rush role, and Marcus Washington and Chris Wilson more than provide an effective passing down rush on the other side that Julian Peterson and Daryl Tapp set the model for in Seattle. I would argue that the Redskins even have superior talent in their DT rotation, they just need to become more effective at collapsing the pocket from the inside. Contrary to the popular sentiment, the Redskins do not have to add an elite pass rushing end unless Carter is shown the door. Pure passrushers and sacks are vastly overrated, especially in the 4-3 system. Also, we do not run a predominantly Cover 2 defense, we can't afford to field two smallish, pass-rushing defensive ends like the Colts do. The end who plays opposite Carter must "maintain his contain" as they say--he has to hold the edge against the run instead of bursting inside because the back seven already has to overadjust against the run to make up for Carter's defficiencies.

Far more worrisome than Philip Daniels' age is London Fletcher's, he is a far more significant part of the defense than the linemen. The MLB does a lot in this scheme, and his leadership, ability to cover the middle, and shed blocks and stop the run is rare. Hopefully H.B. Blades can replace him.

Thus, the dire necessity to address the lines and find their replacements is completely overblown. The most important contingency, upon which the Redskins becoming a contender hinges, is whether Jason Campbell becomes a great Quarterback. This is why drafting receivers made so much sense. If they pan out and provide the weapons that will significantly help Campbell develop, this draft was an absolute coup. Peyton Manning's development sure benefited from the talent at the skill positions that surrounded him. And unless the Redskins drastically change their scheme (unlikely), they will continue to enjoy very good offensive line play until Samuels retires, and with a special MLB the defense will remain dominant as well.

Honestly, what are people going by that gives them such unwarranted fear and emphasis on the state of the Redskins' linemen? It certainly isn't based on how the units actually performed last year, since they were statistically very good. Is it the fear that there might be injuries? That isn't enough to justify the criticism because even the magical rookies that people are begging for can get hurt too. Perhaps its that people think, by focusing their critical attention on the lines, they can ignore the truly disturbing contingency at QB the Redskins face.

Here's hoping for the best of luck to JC, the near future of franchise depends on him.

[da#1skinsfan]

It's age man...it has nothing to do with their play today so much as much as it is their age. Injuries and deteriorated play are the concerns, not talent. All of our starters on the o-line are past their prime with the exception being Samuels who is still going strong and Jansen as the question mark. After that, Heyer is our only real prospect. Wade and Fabini are ok fill ins but as we saw last year certainly not rock solid.

Im not crying the sky is falling, im just saying I do see why people make a big deal out of the o-line...d-line I am a bit more comfortable with.

[Taylor 36]

You have to realize how many wanna-be GM's and HC's post on this board. Your facts, knowledge, opinons, etc. mean nothing to them, you see. They are always right in their own minds.

Case in point: Last year at this time, many of the same wanna-bes were ****ing about the lines and exclaimed we would end up with one of, if not the worst defense in the league. Well, after we finished at 8 overall, how many of them do you think came back and admitted that they were assclowns??? That's right. None.

[Tweedr01]

Good post, while I do believe it will be necessary to address the lines, its not as big an issue as its made out to be. Taking the WR, as good as they were projected to be, could help more in the short term needs, as well as grow with JC. We still have great lines, although they are a little older, but they don't need to be replaced just yet. Even if we were to get some young linemen, they would be playing behind our current linemen just for the simple fact the ones we currently have would be better.

[Going Commando]

You have to realize how many wanna-be GM's and HC's post on this board. Your facts, knowledge, opinons, etc. mean nothing to them, you see. They are always right in their own minds.

Case in point: Last year at this time, many of the same wanna-bes were ****ing about the lines and exclaimed we would end up with one of, if not the worst defense in the league. Well, after we finished at 8 overall, how many of them do you think came back and admitted that they were assclowns??? That's right. None.

Atleast last offseason we were coming off of a bad year defensively. Complaints this year are just that much more perplexing.

[Going Commando]

It's age man...it has nothing to do with their play today so much as much as it is their age. Injuries and deteriorated play are the concerns, not talent. All of our starters on the o-line are past their prime with the exception being Samuels who is still going strong and Jansen as the question mark. After that, Heyer is our only real prospect. Wade and Fabini are ok fill ins but as we saw last year certainly not rock solid.

Im not crying the sky is falling, im just saying I do see why people make a big deal out of the o-line...d-line I am a bit more comfortable with.

Having dominant guardplay is nice, but its by no means necessarry in order to have a strong offense. It won't be that hard or take that much time to find competent starters to replace Kendall and Thomas when the time comes, and likely the team will pull guys out of nowhere, place them on a line with solid veteran leadership in Samuels and Rabach, and coach them up fine when the time comes. BTW, Rabach is a good center and is only 30, he has just as much time left as Samuels. RT is a little more important, but only just. I guess it's just a natural uncertainty that accompanies a player who comes back from a season ending injury, but don't forget that Jansen had only missed one regular season game in his career prior to last season. I don't buy that he is injury prone, and he still has enough left in the tank for a few seasons--plenty of time to find his heir.

The only thing that slightly worries me is that the team is going to somehow have to find someone to take over for Samuels. But we saw how well the Colts replaced Tarik Glenn on the fly after his abrupt retirement, so I'm not going to sweat too much over that task, (which is several offseasons down the road anyway).

[Thinking Skins]

I appreciate this analysis. Right or wrong, that was a nice read.

[Audible_Red40]

This was a good read and totally agree. Not claiming to be a know it all, but this, in a nutshell is what I always thought. (About our D-line) Last year, I was high on Chris Wilson and Jamaal Green - who were both on the roster in April. (At least one made it) I am fine with our rotation in this scheme.

The only thing I wish for is getting our O-line younger. And it appears we might be on the way to that.

[Cpt.Chaos47]

When healthy our Oline is one of the best in the league. Granted in the next few years we will need an influx of younger talent, but we are by no means in a crisis situation on either side of the ball. If anything the Offensive Line is the one place where alittle age doesn't mean a drop off in play. Every teams Oline would have struggled last year if they would have had as many injuries as we did. Our biggest problem last year wasn't our defense or even our Oline it was the inability to score points. Our receivers couldn't get in the end zone. Who knows if Thomas, Kelly or Davis will pan out, but we have a better chance with them than we did without them and adding lineman on either side of the ball during the draft wouldn't have produced what we need the most and thats points. I don't know about anybody else, but I could use some nice cushy leads when we win, because while all those close games were fun to watch I practically have a friggin heart attack every week. Lets just hope our lines can stay healthy and I think we'll be fine.

[fansince62]

Entirely too much emphasis is placed on linemen on these boards, and entirely too much is made of the deficiencies of the Redskin's defensive and offensive lines. The people who push for the team to revamp their lines need to better understand the scheme that the team runs and when they do, they will see that the Redskins already have strong to elite players at the critical positions.

And while yes, you need to be competent in these units, contrary to the oft-quoted cliche "games are won in the trenches", they aren't the most important positions these days. This is not true, games are won by brilliant Quarterback play. Offensive lines are made good by good Quarterbacks and good coaches, and defensive line dominance requires effective coverage to negate the rapid paced passing game that is the staple of today's NFL.

John Clayton wrote a pretty good article about this and it should be read:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=3375024

Pass protection is important, but good offensive line play is just as much a product of good coaching than it is having elite players. The only slot on the line where you have to have a special athlete now is at LT, and they are rare, but the Redskins already have one. This is because they cover the right handed qb's back and they have to be fast enough to keep up with the fast edge rushers. Other than that, having elite players at the other spots is just nice a bonus, not essential. A sterling example of how an offensive line can be dominant through superior coaching and scheme without spectacular athletes is the New England Patriots' line. They were the best offensive line in the league pass protecting and run blocking until they had a fluke performance in the superbowl, and they even got by with the fairly unathletic Matt Light at tackle.

The Redskins have one of the best OLine coaches in the league and have had consistently superior lines for the entire decade. Even with the catastrophic injuries the team sustained last year they still ranked in the top half of the league. The line will be fine unless Chris Samuels gets hurt--but this isn't a unique situation to the Redskins. Every team's offense gets derailed once it loses it's left tackle (look at how bad the Rams were last year), and there is nothing that can be done about it.

4-3 defensive linemen are overated too, especially at the tackle position. dominant dt's are nice, but not necessarry. Guys play in a rotation so much now a days that superior coaching and a solid but not spectacular set can be very effective. Exhibit A is the fantastic Seattle Seahawks defensive lineplay. They run a very effective rotation that involves only one great pass rusher in Patrick Kerney, and then they blitz with julian peterson. The Seahawks offer a model of how a 4-3 defensive line can be great with only a single powerful pass rushing defensive end and a good rotation.

For everyone forecasting doom, like the Seahawks, the Redskins have a very effective deffensive line rotation right now. Andre Carter fulfills the everydown edge rush role, and Marcus Washington and Chris Wilson more than provide an effective passing down rush on the other side that Julian Peterson and Daryl Tapp set the model for in Seattle. I would argue that the Redskins even have superior talent in their DT rotation, they just need to become more effective at collapsing the pocket from the inside. Contrary to the popular sentiment, the Redskins do not have to add an elite pass rushing end unless Carter is shown the door. Pure passrushers and sacks are vastly overrated, especially in the 4-3 system. Also, we do not run a predominantly Cover 2 defense, we can't afford to field two smallish, pass-rushing defensive ends like the Colts do. The end who plays opposite Carter must "maintain his contain" as they say--he has to hold the edge against the run instead of bursting inside because the back seven already has to overadjust against the run to make up for Carter's defficiencies.

Far more worrisome than Philip Daniels' age is London Fletcher's, he is a far more significant part of the defense than the linemen. The MLB does a lot in this scheme, and his leadership, ability to cover the middle, and shed blocks and stop the run is rare. Hopefully H.B. Blades can replace him.

Thus, the dire necessity to address the lines and find their replacements is completely overblown. The most important contingency, upon which the Redskins becoming a contender hinges, is whether Jason Campbell becomes a great Quarterback. This is why drafting receivers made so much sense. If they pan out and provide the weapons that will significantly help Campbell develop, this draft was an absolute coup. Peyton Manning's development sure benefited from the talent at the skill positions that surrounded him. And unless the Redskins drastically change their scheme (unlikely), they will continue to enjoy very good offensive line play until Samuels retires, and with a special MLB the defense will remain dominant as well.

Honestly, what are people going by that gives them such unwarranted fear and emphasis on the state of the Redskins' linemen? It certainly isn't based on how the units actually performed last year, since they were statistically very good. Is it the fear that there might be injuries? That isn't enough to justify the criticism because even the magical rookies that people are begging for can get hurt too. Perhaps its that people think, by focusing their critical attention on the lines, they can ignore the truly disturbing contingency at QB the Redskins face.

Here's hoping for the best of luck to JC, the near future of franchise depends on him.

so..when are you going to point to some actual facts and gametime events?

your preoccupation with emotional states is predictable...and totally irrelevent.

work harder next time to structure an argument based on events that happen on the field and actual results...like crushing losses to elite teams and failures against so so teams in the playoffs. it's not a black/white argument like so many knuckleheads are trying to argue. the point being made by some is that there has been no consistent strategy for the lines over the last 10 years. among other things...that's why the team falls apart with the first signiifcant injury. it's mostly patchwork fixes that have resulted in above average play with pronounced swings and an inability to handle the top tier teams when it counts.

you see it otherwise? have at it. self delusion is something one can live with while nevertheless cheering the team on every Sunday. I'm hoping Cerrato is provding the adult supervision, long-term thinking this team needs to sustain excellence over several years. not the let's pray for a four/five game end-of-season run BS that has characterized this team lately. that is what mid-tier...not top tier...teams have to do.

[fansince62]

When healthy our Oline is one of the best in the league. Granted in the next few years we will need an influx of younger talent, but we are by no means in a crisis situation on either side of the ball. If anything the Offensive Line is the one place where alittle age doesn't mean a drop off in play. Every teams Oline would have struggled last year if they would have had as many injuries as we did. Our biggest problem last year wasn't our defense or even our Oline it was the inability to score points. Our receivers couldn't get in the end zone. Who knows if Thomas, Kelly or Davis will pan out, but we have a better chance with them than we did without them and adding lineman on either side of the ball during the draft wouldn't have produced what we need the most and thats points. I don't know about anybody else, but I could use some nice cushy leads when we win, because while all those close games were fun to watch I practically have a friggin heart attack every week. Lets just hope our lines can stay healthy and I think we'll be fine.

what qualifies them as one of the best in the league?

[Burgold]

And while yes, you need to be competent in these units, contrary to the oft-quoted cliche "games are won in the trenches", they aren't the most important positions these days. This is not true, games are won by brilliant Quarterback play. .

The most recent playoffs proved this to be untrue. When we played the Patriots, we laid back and played coverage. Tom Brady managed to obliterate us completing well over 100 percent of his passes. However, when he was faced with a good dline and a mediocre coverage unit against the Giants. Brady twice looked like Danny Weurfal. If a QB keeps getting hit or only his 2 seconds to look, decide, and throw you all but neutralize them. Any of them.

So, having a good OL allows a good qb to exist. In 1991, the fleet footed Mark Rypien who once broke land speed records in the forty (Okay, he was outraced by glaciers) had an MVP season, a Superbowl winning season. He was the best QB in football. The line was nearly perfect that year. Mark never had another season remotely close to it.

All of these things are important.

Last year, we managed to get a whole bunch of third and ones and third and twos. Even ramming a fast 280 lb full back into that line we got no push and were terrible at converting third and fourth downs. The money downs.

Now, the hope is that we are getting guys back from injury and we'll be fine. The worry is how well will they recover, they're older and some of these guys have been prone to injury recently. Jansen especially, but Thomas has also missed huge chunks of playing time. Kendall is a time bomb with bad knees.

So, you may be right... the crisis could be exaggerated, but dealing with a problem before the crisis is an emergency is wiser then waiting until after the season is lost.

Finally, when we played coverage with a four man rush. Too many qbs became probowlers. I think of 2006 when we relied on this defensive line and they could never make a stop. I think of 2007 where too often if they needed to close out the game, they couldn't. This great d... this great d line surrendered how many first half leads?

[BALLz]

I think with Rinehart and possibly Kerry Brown(:fingersx: ) and Heyer already being here we now have solid depth at 3 of the 5 positions and maybe a couple future starters.

[DexterSackMachine]

The most recent playoffs proved this to be untrue. When we played the Patriots, we laid back and played coverage. Tom Brady managed to obliterate us completing well over 100 percent of his passes. However, when he was faced with a good dline and a mediocre coverage unit against the Giants. Brady twice looked like Danny Weurfal. If a QB keeps getting hit or only his 2 seconds to look, decide, and throw you all but neutralize them. Any of them.

The Patriots we played mid-season and the team that showed up at the SuperBowl were two different teams. Those Patriots were outplayed by the likes of the Eagles and the Ravens late in the season. When we played the Patriots, GW made a major mistake in not blitzing at all.

[BALLz]

As far as the DLine is concerned, What the Giants proved was that having a great pass rush was how you beat the Patriots. Thing is, we don't play the Patriots 16 times a year, we don't play them at all this year. If their super pass rushing Dline is the next great thing, how come they didn't go 16-0 in the regular season last year.

[bedlamVR]

It also has to be factored in is the chemistry and the diruption caused by injury that is formed in an offensive line . That is usually why the line is refered to as a unit where as WR's RB's TE are all individuals . The lline ( both lines) cannot opperate as individuals which is what happens when new people are plugged in to fill in for injuries.

Knowing the guy to your left can handle player X in certian situations comes from continual drills and practices so that confidence builds up over time .

You could have a line of Chris Samuels, Andrews, Kreutz, Hutchinson and Jones throw them all together with no time to practice together and although they are all talented individuals they will struggle .

[Sonny Joe Hog]

I think with Rinehart and possibly Kerry Brown(:fingersx: ) and Heyer already being here we now have solid depth at 3 of the 5 positions and maybe a couple future starters.

I also have a good feeling about those three players. I'm hoping they can shore up the OL depth. BTW, I read that the Skins are going to try out Rinehart as a backup C, as well as a G.

We should be OK on the DL. We can emphasize the DL in next year's draft or make a trade for a DL, if necessary.

[Going Commando]

so..when are you going to point to some actual facts and gametime events?

your preoccupation with emotional states is predictable...and totally irrelevent.

work harder next time to structure an argument based on events that happen on the field and actual results...like crushing losses to elite teams and failures against so so teams in the playoffs. it's not a black/white argument like so many knuckleheads are trying to argue. the point being made by some is that there has been no consistent strategy for the lines over the last 10 years. among other things...that's why the team falls apart with the first signiifcant injury. it's mostly patchwork fixes that have resulted in above average play with pronounced swings and an inability to handle the top tier teams when it counts.

you see it otherwise? have at it. self delusion is something one can live with while nevertheless cheering the team on every Sunday. I'm hoping Cerrato is provding the adult supervision, long-term thinking this team needs to sustain excellence over several years. not the let's pray for a four/five game end-of-season run BS that has characterized this team lately. that is what mid-tier...not top tier...teams have to do.

Since you wanted some stats, here are some.

1.) On the claim that our Offensive line has been consistently good.

as per that stats available at:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol.php

Run Blocking Rank / Pass Blocking Rank:

2006: 15th and 6th in the league.

2005: 5th and 16th

A noted improvement from 2004, where we finished 15th and 22nd. This being the year we acquired Rabach, it seems to suggest that effective starting linemen can be gotten pretty easily outside of the draft, and that the "patchwork" method you decry actually works pretty well.

And in 2007, despite sustaining tremendous injury, still 17th and 12th, with third stringers playing in several areas.

2.) As far as the claim that the defense is dominant, it was said elsewhere that the team finished 8th in the NFL last year.

3.) You claim that the team gets derailed after sustaining key injuries. I'll grant that. But I'm going to put the onus on you to provide a recent example of team that hasn't been derailed by sustaining key injuries. You suggest that the game of football isn't the same for everyone, and that every team's neck doesn't hang under that guillotine when it's not true.

4.) I am assuming you're using the Patriots loss to demonstrate how there is a giant gap between the Redskins and the top teams (I could be wrong, but it's the only recent crushing loss that comes to mind). Since you don't say who you mean by the top teams, I'm going to assume you are in fact talking about the Colts and Patriots, and perhaps even the Seahawks since they've beaten us in both playoff games. I'll fully admit that there is a gap between the Redskins and those teams. But it sure as hell isn't due to talent discrepancies between our lines and their's. It's because of the Quarterbacks. You can not honestly expect us to compete against future hall of fame quarterbacks with a Jason Campbell who hadn't even started a full 16 games yet. Even Matt Hasslebeck is a pro-bowl QB, far more than Campbell has even come close to accomplishing. The other team that consistently beats the Redskins? The Donovan McNabb led Eagles (won 9 of 11). Once again, it's the QB. It is the biggest determinant in success. The Giants could have had the most brilliant defensive line in the world and still not accomplished what they did if Eli Manning hadn't gone on a tear and played brilliantly.

If you don't think this is a quarterbacks and coaches game, I strongly suggest you go read the John Clayton article I linked to in the original post. The game has changed a lot since '62.

Your use of condescenion to seem more pursuasive is just as predictable and equally irrelevant.

Perhaps your argument would have been strengthened if you had worked harder and provided some definitions and statistics for your own claims,

[chipwhich]

The article waas discussing building a line for a running game, not building a line....for one.

You win in the trenches, ask any ex football player.

Good teams draft lineman, people who can block, people who can put heat on the QB. Our biggest deficiency on D last year was an inability to get to the qb. On offense, an inability to stop the qb from getting hit.

[mudhog]

so..when are you going to point to some actual facts and gametime events?

your preoccupation with emotional states is predictable...and totally irrelevent.

work harder next time to structure an argument based on events that happen on the field and actual results...like crushing losses to elite teams and failures against so so teams in the playoffs. it's not a black/white argument like so many knuckleheads are trying to argue. the point being made by some is that there has been no consistent strategy for the lines over the last 10 years. among other things...that's why the team falls apart with the first signiifcant injury. it's mostly patchwork fixes that have resulted in above average play with pronounced swings and an inability to handle the top tier teams when it counts.

you see it otherwise? have at it. self delusion is something one can live with while nevertheless cheering the team on every Sunday. I'm hoping Cerrato is provding the adult supervision, long-term thinking this team needs to sustain excellence over several years. not the let's pray for a four/five game end-of-season run BS that has characterized this team lately. that is what mid-tier...not top tier...teams have to do.

Damm Fansince62, you are usually pretty good with your evals. but I think you are wrong here. We didn't fall apart at the first significant injury last year. We had multiple key injuries at many spots and still stayed competitive thru the season. While I'll admit we crapped-out over the whole Dockery mess by not extending him sooner, we had an adequate back-up with Kendall.

While I'll admit the right side of the line was the weak spot after loosing Thomas and Jansen, Heyer was coached up very well by Boss Hog, and shined in more than a few contests.(namely against the Strayhan) Yea, he was completely outclassed by Kearney in the Seattle game. But by the time we played Seattle on that short week, we were pretty much running on fumes as a team.

Besides the reciever threats we collected in the draft, we nailed a very good LT who could and should be Samules replacement when he goes. Rineheart will be coached by argueably one of the best in the buisness under Buges.( who, had no small part in Rinehearts aquisition ) Add to that, Brown at LG and maybe one or two more of the UDFAs we have making the PS, and we have practically a whole future line. I submit that our strategy to keep us competitive was and is our coaching.

I also challenge the notion that a late season run is somehow BS. Why should it mean any less to win later rather than sooner. Seems to me that crapping-out at the end should by all accounts be worse. Gelling at the end of the season to make the playoffs should signal that we have reached a whole new level and are worthy. Any way you look at it though, a win during the regular season is a win none the less. I'm just happy when we are winning! Go Skins!

Hail

[Going Commando]

The most recent playoffs proved this to be untrue. When we played the Patriots, we laid back and played coverage. Tom Brady managed to obliterate us completing well over 100 percent of his passes. However, when he was faced with a good dline and a mediocre coverage unit against the Giants. Brady twice looked like Danny Weurfal. If a QB keeps getting hit or only his 2 seconds to look, decide, and throw you all but neutralize them. Any of them.

The Superbowl did not prove this to be untrue. Even though Tom Brady was getting absolutely hammered all game, it took a completely brilliant play by Eli Manning and a miracle of a catch to win that game. You cannot discount or de-emphasize how good Manning was in that game, because as perfect and dominant as the Giants dline played, they still would have lost that game if Eli hadn't played as well as he did. And despite the incredible heat on him, Tom Brady still completed 60% of his passes for 266 yards and a touchdown. In other words, he was still a dominant enough QB to put them in the position to win the game if Eli Manning hadn't outplayed him in the fourth quarter.

I think of 2007 where too often if they needed to close out the game, they couldn't. This great d... this great d line surrendered how many first half leads?

It can just as easily be argued that it was the offense that sputtered in the second half and lost the games because they couldn't put them away. So often, the offense simply couldn't match the pace of their opponent and stay on the field. Lots of those games ended with a late Jason Campbell interception.

[CG]

I'm only concerned with the fact that we haven't acquired more depth on the interior of the line. Rinehart and all of our UDFAs are tackles with 1 center.

Why no depth at LG where our worst lineman is starting?

[Audible_Red40]

Also before you judge the D-line play, and everybody on the "we need an elitle pass runsher opposite Carter", take a look at this.

It illustrates the scheme played and and the execution.

Patriots had 47 sacks as a team - 14 of the came from their D-line.

Seymore - 1.5

Wilfork - 2

Green - 6.5

Warren - 4

Thus their over-aged LB's had a big impact on their blitzing schemes.

Our D-line had 33 sacks as a team - 21.5 of them came from our D-line.

Carter - 10.5

Wilson - 4

Golston - 1

Daniels - 2.5

Evans - 1

Griffin - 2.5

I know many factors go into this then just sacks from the D-line, but If we execute and cover downfield, we should be ok with our group up front. I've got no problem with who we have, and who might surprise (like Wilson last year).

[AAARedskin]

Assuming that new comers Chad Rinehart and Kerry Brown can make the team, and that they are "decent" O-linemen, I don't think the line is in bad shape. Stephen Heyer would also be a quite capable linemen to insert into the lineup if the injury bug decides to bite the O-line again....

[Sonny Joe Hog]

I'm only concerned with the fact that we haven't acquired more depth on the interior of the line. Rinehart and all of our UDFAs are tackles with 1 center.

Why no depth at LG where our worst lineman is starting?

Rinehart will play G in the pros. Also, I'm high on Kerry Brown who I think should have been drafted. He played LG in college. I believe that Brown will make the team. Let's see what happens in pre-season.

BTW, I think that the man you call our worst lineman is a good football player.