Pedro Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks Leigh Torrance really did improve. When he first came in he didn't seam to even be in camera shot when the ball was on his side of the field. By the end he was in on a gang tackle or at least within touching distance on most plays on his side. Doesn't matter how good your starters are if your nickle backs can't cover, as our new receiving corps will show this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 The Redskins would not have drafted Tryon in Round 4 if the team was entirely comfortable with Torrance and Co. as the #4 and #5 corners. If Torrance was really pushing for the #3 job this season or more down the road, I doubt the pick would have been made when it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 The Redskins would not have drafted Tryon in Round 4 if the team was entirely comfortable with Torrance and Co. as the #4 and #5 corners. If Torrance was really pushing for the #3 job this season or more down the road, I doubt the pick would have been made when it was. Not so. We're 1 injury, even after Carlos returns, from Leigh playing #3. Again. We will have that injury which means we need a couple of guys behind Leigh to go with the 3 ahead of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 I am not in the Torrance camp as you can tell. He still has to show me a lot to believe he is more than a placeholder until a better talent comes along. One thing to keep in mind is Torrance was a Williams' guy, so I don't know how he is being viewed by the current staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walking Deadman Posted July 8, 2008 Author Share Posted July 8, 2008 I like Torrence, but again I see him as a #3/#4 guy not a #1/#2 (maybe a #2 in a pinch like in the Chi. game- and he did well there, it was Eubanks that got routinely burned). Tryon is there for a few reasons IMO: 1. Rogers is a ?- nobody knows what he'll be capable of until he's out there. CBs, require cuts and lateral movement which all can be hindered. He may not be fully 100% (if ever) until 2009. Tryon is there to add depth if CR struggles. 2. Current CB health- Springs and Smoot have had injury issues and we need guys to plug in that could start or be a solid nickle. 3. The Future- Springs probably won't be back in 2009. Rogers is a ? again. Tryon could be developed into a #2 and could play well with Rogers and Smoot in a starting rotation. Of, course I still argue that we need to find a #1 corner if Springs isn't back in 2009 (either draft a 1st rounder or sign a FA) 4. Competition and depth- Tryon, Westbrook and Torrence are all fighting for a roster spot. That only means that these three guys have to get better and play better if they want a job. We keep the best two and the loser might make the PS. Competition is usally a good thing for young players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Something was missign for joe in his second stint ... not sure about the regular season but i saw a stat the other day during the replay of the seattle wildcard game that put JG teams at 17-0 when they have a lead in the second half. He didn't just forget how to put the hammer down on teams his second time around ... what was he missing? The dominant o-line, the special teams? The D?? The play calling? Anyway, I really like the OP's assesment. I'm pretty stoked that JZ is not a push over and that he is earning the respect of the players, I'm just worried that he has waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much on his plate this first year with regards to responsibility. Which would be ironic considering we did think there were too many coaches the past 2 seasons In terms of something not clicking, I have a feeling that Grilliams could not make the 2nd half adjustments that Petitbone could make. Offenses adjusted to his D and would shred it in the 2nd half A few examples, just from this season The first Giants loss The game against Arizona that was almost blown The 2nd Eagles game (granted part of it was ST getting injured) The Dallas TO game (3 TD passes given up in the 2nd half) Going back to 2005 The 3 game losing streak of Tampa-Oakland-San Diego, all games where the D could not drop the hammer to finish it off And in 2004, that final Dallas loss :doh: Richie Petitbone's defenses laid the hammer and were like Mariano Riveria in the playoffs. Gibbs offenses would then wear out an opposing D, tired from their O going 3 and out all the time, and run out the clock That is just my own theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley4President Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 In terms of something not clicking, I have a feeling that Grilliams could not make the 2nd half adjustments that Petitbone could make. Offenses adjusted to his D and would shred it in the 2nd half I agree, but I think another big part of the defense's struggles in the second half was the fact that the offense couldn't keep them off the field. When we got conservative in the second half it was 3-and-out after 3-and-out, and we just kept giving the opposing offense shots to score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joespn Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Nice observations. I really think our offensive line (if it stays healthy) could have a chance to be one of the best in the league. Our stretch run at the end of last season was done with the patchwork O-Line. With hopefully a healthy Jansen and Thomas back we could be dominate. And a dominating O-Line will win you a super bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.