maskedsuperstar Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 I, for one, completely agree with the majority of this board in that we NEED to address the O-Line this April. I don't, however, feel it needs to be addressed in Round #1 or our main priority in the coming draft. We've got to get deeper, get younger and build for the future - yes. We've got a few offensive linemen we haven't seen much of yet in Batiste, Clark, Geisinger and Rinehart - who may be solid or even exceptional - we don't know yet. Many were very, very high on Rinehart in particular. I also think Heyer will be very solid at RT with time. In my opinion, this issue can be addressed in later rounds to avoid spending millions of dollars in guaranteed money on an offensive lineman who may or may not pan out.Best player available in Round #1, build for depth later. I'm in the minority on this one, I know.. but to me this makes a lot of sense. :2cents: But many on this board think that a player has to be drafted in the 1st or 2nd round, to be any good. Take a look at the Giants OL. 2 UDFA, 5th, 3rd, and a 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Eat crow? Both stopping the run and and pass rush are important. But stopping the run is more important. Don't talk about the Eagles. They were 5-5-1 and led the league in sacks. Crow? Key word is in bold. Where are they at now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 You also never want to show your cards in terms of what positions you'll be targeting during the draft. If we are looking to trade up/down, we want that pick to seem as valuable as possible. Also, we don't want to seem desperate for Oher (for example) if someone at 11 is dangling their pick to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 I think he thinks Stephon Heyer is solid, Jon Jansen will be sitting on the bench, and they resign Kendall while continuing to develop Rhinehart. The lack of depth has not escaped his notice though. And yes, WE NEED A PASS RUSH. :thumbsup: to Zorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Come on guys, he cant come out and say the offensive line sucks. Get a grip.And in his defense, when our line is healthy and playing like they CAN, they are solid. For some reason they just seem like they arent trying half the time. And of course, some one is always hurt and our depth is terrible. This is true which is why Zorn should have said something obvious like "the Offensive Line had it's good and bad moments and we're evaluating that to see where we can get stronger so most of the moments will be good". Instead, we're all saying "WTF" and shaking our heads and he comes off as sounding like an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Pretty solid O-line?Is he on drugs? He was sugar coating it. "Solid" doesn't necessarily mean great. Of course if he said they were terrible then certain people, maybe you, maybe not, would be clamoring about Zorn throwing players under the bus. The important thing to take away, instead of nitpicking just for something to complain about, is that Zorn and his staff do realize the needs on the OL and DL and will probably look to address those needs as best as possible. I really like that Zorn said if they drafted OL high he would start right away. Rinehart, Heyer, and 1st/2nd rounder on the OL next season would be nice, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 I said crow as in making noise, not as in eating crow.The Eagles were leading in sacks, but did you check out how they ranked in stopping the run? Yup, they were right up there, too. So no, you don't have to choose between stopping the run and rushing the passer. Contrary to a myth that could only be perpetuated by the braintrust of ExtremeSkins, you can do both. Who said you are forced to choose? Of course you can be great at both. The things is, not many teams are great at both, simply because DL who are good at both aren't a common commodity. Typically if you go for a speedy pass rush DE, you are giving up a little in run protection, and vice versa if you have a big, run-stop DE (like we had with Daniels). It also comes down to philosophy and scheme. Some teams have defenses which stress stopping the run first, others are about constant pressure to the QB. Both systems have had success in the NFL, both are proven. And yes, the Eagles are doing great right now in large part due to their DL. However, while DL is certainly important, let's not act as if DL is THE most important part of the D. Each position is important, and the key is to have great talent that makes up for weaknesses. Some do this with DL, others LBers, others secondary. Minnesotta has a heck of a DL, but it didn't get them far into the playoffs this year, or any other year recently. Dallas was #1 in sacks, yet still had a bad pass defense. DL is again, very important, and I do hope we address pass rush better in the offseason because that could raise our D to elite. I'm simply using Minnesotta and Dallas as an example of why other positions on the field shouldn't be so undervalued in an attempt to look at one singular area and claim that is how you succeed. Football is a team sport. I've seen people on here basically saying all of this, that typically if a team focuses on stopping the run they are giving up a little in pass rush, and vice versa. I have yet to see someone claim that a team can only be succesful in either pass rush or run stop, not both. Maybe before you go trashing all of ES you could try and actually understand peoples points instead of just oversimplifying/manipulating their points to make it easier for you to argue rather than try and understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texasthunder Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 He seems to be saying the "media correct" things without tipping off his hand. We will be entering FA soon, followed by the draft, no sense in letting other teams know "exactly" what our plans are. I do like the idea that they are bringing in some kickers as competition. Wouldn't it be ironic if D. Brooks has managed to work out his problems and returned as competition for Plack? :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel2 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Pretty solid O-line?Is he on drugs? Its solid but old. I hope they go defensive line, Tackle, in the first and third rounds and deal with the offensive line in the '10 draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunken Master III Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Its solid but old. I hope they go defensive line, Tackle, in the first and third rounds and deal with the offensive line in the '10 draft. The Skins definitely need to go after an impact DT. If Rey Mauluga is availabe, that is who we should pick though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Zorn discussed his thoughts on the Redskins’ offensive and defensive lines, but emphasized the evaluation was still in the early stages.“We have a solid offensive line, but we’re always looking to build,” With statements like this you can tell that th "evaluation process was still in the early stages". Our offensive line is crap and old. Statements like this also scare me as a forshadowing of sorts that the line will be neglected yet again in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbill1952 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 But many on this board think that a player has to be drafted in the 1st or 2nd round, to be any good. Take a look at the Giants OL. 2 UDFA, 5th, 3rd, and a 2nd.You think the Giants have a good OL? I know a guy who thinks his wife is pretty. You're both wrong.History is clear. No OL drafted by the Skins past the third round has ever played a down for the Skins. Are there UDFA's. 5th, 6th and 7th round picks out there who could be an All-Pro? Maybe. How many seasons do you want to keep betting you're going to find them? I thought Crummey was a good find, but if you don't put him on the active 53 man roster, then somebody else will get him. And Heyer is an NFL linemen who was a UDFA. He's not any good, but he's better than when he got here. Do you think he'd be here if he wasn't from Maryland? The point is, if you select an OL in the first or second round, he'll be starting before the year ends. If we had the picks, we could draft OL in the 4th rounds or later. But the odds say you're not going to see them in a Redskin uniform playing in anything but exhibition games. With 106 Division I teams you have approximately 530 first string college OL. The scouts give them all grades. (Grab the ESPN Insider for about 30 bucks a year and you can see all of the linemen and how they're rated.) After the first 20, they lump them all together because you only have NFL talent in the first two rounds. Maybe a thrid round pick will play. Everybody else is practice squad fodder. Do you HAVE to draft in the first two rounds? Only if you want them playing within the first season and then for the next 5 to 10 years after. I'm sure we can sign all sorts of practice squad guys tomorrow. But if you want an OL to make a difference you draft them in the first two rounds. Anything else is a project, at best. We have enough projects. Time for an OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zCommander Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 With statements like this you can tell that th "evaluation process was still in the early stages". Our offensive line is crap and old. Statements like this also scare me as a forshadowing of sorts that the line will be neglected yet again in the draft. I guess you missed the part where Zorn said BUT we are always looking to BUILD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 I guess you missed the part where Zorn said BUT we are always looking to BUILD. No I got that, just when coupled with the rest of the statement it loses the sincerity (s/p) behind it. I dont trust Zorn or Vinny enough to have a good feeling about us building either line. I want to have faith, but from my vantage point it isn't looking good. I realize my opinion isn't worth anything, Im just calling them like I see em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bikie Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 ];6052493']Of course we have a Strong Offensive line.When they're completely healthy. I mean' date=' they were fine in the first half of the season. Portis was running buck wild, and Campbell had time to throw. Now we need a line thats even better than that one. Upgrade it. Draft Michael Oher and watch him anchor the Right Tackle spot until Samuels calls it quits.[/quote'] exactly... the line was solid, but it was also old... and old players in the league have historically started off strong and then their bodies catch up with them... we had the oldest line in the league and paid for it in the second half of the season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NastyBoy Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Pretty solid O-line?Is he on drugs? Probably. And good ones, too! Come on now........did you really expect him to air all the dirty laundry simply because he was asked a question? None of the FA personnel, nor the coaching staff are going to tip their hand and let us, or anyone else competing for available talent know what we're up to. The teams that really exposed us were Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New York, and Dallas. Those are some of the best pass rushing defenses in the league, and the beating they put on us definitely left a sour taste, but I don't think we're as bad as some would like to think. Uh huh.........and those are the types of teams we're gonna need to handle if we're ever to make a serious run at the playoffs, let alone going deep in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Who said you are forced to choose? Of course you can be great at both. The things is, not many teams are great at both, simply because DL who are good at both aren't a common commodity. Typically if you go for a speedy pass rush DE, you are giving up a little in run protection, and vice versa if you have a big, run-stop DE (like we had with Daniels). It also comes down to philosophy and scheme. Some teams have defenses which stress stopping the run first, others are about constant pressure to the QB. Both systems have had success in the NFL, both are proven. How about a philosophy and scheme that stresses both? And yes, the Eagles are doing great right now in large part due to their DL. However, while DL is certainly important, let's not act as if DL is THE most important part of the D. Each position is important, and the key is to have great talent that makes up for weaknesses. Some do this with DL, others LBers, others secondary. Minnesotta has a heck of a DL, but it didn't get them far into the playoffs this year, or any other year recently. Dallas was #1 in sacks, yet still had a bad pass defense. DL is again, very important, and I do hope we address pass rush better in the offseason because that could raise our D to elite. I'm simply using Minnesotta and Dallas as an example of why other positions on the field shouldn't be so undervalued in an attempt to look at one singular area and claim that is how you succeed. Football is a team sport. This was the first year in a while that Minnesota had a DL worth a damn. You can talk about how great they were at stopping the run last year all you want, but it wasn't until they acquired a legitimate pass rusher in Jared Allen that their entire defense improved. That's why a one-dimensional defensive line who can only do one or the other sucks ass. Sure you have the occasional outlier such as the Washington Redskins, but they are the exception, not the norm. I've seen people on here basically saying all of this, that typically if a team focuses on stopping the run they are giving up a little in pass rush, and vice versa. I have yet to see someone claim that a team can only be succesful in either pass rush or run stop, not both. Maybe before you go trashing all of ES you could try and actually understand peoples points instead of just oversimplifying/manipulating their points to make it easier for you to argue rather than try and understand. The person I just replied to, maskedsuperstar, has made several posts pertaining to the Eagles talking about how a pass rush is overrated and that our scheme focuses on stopping the run. You are on record as saying our philosophy is to stop the run. You can have a a philosophy to do BOTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 How in the hell can Zorn call our OL solid?Well, they weren't bad the first half of the season..... Maybe this is the Seattle version of the phrase "They fought their guts out!"....... I dunno.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 You think the Giants have a good OL? I know a guy who thinks his wife is pretty. You're both wrong. It wasn't my post but to defend it, many media types including John Madden say the Giants have the best O line in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 It wasn't my post but to defend it, many media types including John Madden say the Giants have the best O line in football. The Giants have a good offensive line. There's no way you could both protect Manning and run block like they do and not. The ONLY reason (I know I'm going out on a limb here) that wildbill made such a RIDICULOUS statement is that the Giants having a good offensive line without a bunch of first rounders counters his position that you must draft offensive line early and often to be successful. Literally, that's the only reason I could accept when I thought about it. It's the same bizarre fixation that has caused him to blame the offensive line EVERY SINGLE YEAR for the QB's woes in DC. As if the line was 'old' in 2005 compared to now. He has no credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 How about a philosophy and scheme that stresses both? If you have the personnel to do both well, sure. This was the first year in a while that Minnesota had a DL worth a damn. You can talk about how great they were at stopping the run last year all you want, but it wasn't until they acquired a legitimate pass rusher in Jared Allen that their entire defense improved. That's why a one-dimensional defensive line who can only do one or the other sucks ass. Sure you have the occasional outlier such as the Washington Redskins, but they are the exception, not the norm. One dimensional? I just looked it up and they were 8th in the NFL in sacks with 38 last year. That's pretty good for a one-dimensional line. As an aside, I don't know why people are making a big deal about Zorn saying the OL is solid. I think that is an honest assessment of the line. A bad line doesn't create a 1400+ rusher, unless the back is Barry Sanders. It also has been said that the line wasn't quite as bad at pass protecting as a lot of people assumed during the season. That being said, teams don't settle for "solid". They want great, dominating lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 I hope that we also use FA to address the OL/DL issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da#1skinsfan Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Pretty solid O-line?Is he on drugs? Nobody was crying about the o-line when we were 6-2 and Campbell was throwing 0 picks and Portis ran over everyone. Hes right, we do have a solid o-line. The problem is they are all old and they breakdown midway through the year. What he said was spot on...we have a great oline, for 8 games, then they get worn down, injuries happen, and we're screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 And there it is. The O-line will not be addressed again this offseason. Look for them to draft a WR or a saftie at the #13 spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbowman Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 And there it is. The O-line will not be addressed again this offseason. Look for them to draft a WR or a saftie at the #13 spot. I'm betting LB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.