bubba9497 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=3909849&type=story Click link for entire article FBO: NFC East questions and answers By Bill Barnwell Football Outsiders With the 2008 season in the books, Football Outsiders is going division by division, applying its unique brand of analysis to one key question for each team. Today: the NFC East. Dallas: Can the Cowboys find Romo sits to pee a backup? The 2008 Dallas Cowboys had one major flaw; unfortunately for them, it was a problem severe enough to keep them from making the playoffs. Backup quarterback Brad Johnson was a bad fit stylistically for the offense, and when Tony Romo sits to pee went down with a broken finger, Johnson and the Cowboys' offense could muster only 41 points in three games, including a 34-14 loss to the lowly Rams. Just how bad was Johnson, though? He was one of the worst backup quarterbacks in the history of our advanced DVOA stats (explained here), which we've calculated going back through the 1995 season. Among backup quarterbacks who had 80 dropbacks and weren't rookies lying in wait (such as Alex Smith in 2005), Johnson experienced the third-biggest difference in DVOA between himself and his starting quarterback. While the Cowboys will be priced out of the market for upper-echelon quarterbacks like Kurt Warner and Kerry Collins, there are several options that should provide a better fit than Johnson. If Jeff Garcia doesn't return to Tampa Bay and is willing to serve as Romo sits to pee's backup, he'd be an ideal fit as someone who plays a similar style to Romo sits to pee. The Worst Backup Quarterbacks In DVOA History (1995-2008) Player Year Team Difference Comment Spergon Wynn 2001 MIN -75.1% Averaged 4.3 yards per attempt after a year in Cleveland averaging 3.1 yards per attempt; almost definitely the worst quarterback of the decade Tommy Maddox 2005 PIT -69.3% Dreadful performance in two starts forced Steelers to win three road games to make it to the Super Bowl Brad Johnson 2008 DAL -69.2% Cowboys averaged 13.6 points per game with him as starter, 24.7 with Tony Romo sits to pee Rick Mirer 1997 CHI -68.3% Six picks and no TDs in 103 attempts; was sacked on 13.4 percent of dropbacks as opposed to starter Erik Kramer's 5 percent Gus Frerotte 2002 CIN -58.5% Bright side: His poor performance gave the Bengals the first pick and the chance to take Carson Palmer New York: What should the Giants do with Brandon Jacobs and Derrick Ward? The biggest question facing the Giants this offseason has to do with their cadre of running backs. Both Brandon Jacobs and Derrick Ward are unrestricted free agents, leaving only Ahmad Bradshaw of the vaunted Giants trio of "Earth, Wind and Fire." The Giants placed the franchise tender on Jacobs last week, but could still let him go if they don't come to terms on a long-term contract or find an acceptable offer in trade. Each of them has his own respective strengths and weaknesses. Jacobs is the power back, a mix of speed and size almost impossible to find elsewhere, but he gets banged up and has missed time each of the past three seasons. Ward is a patient runner who's brilliant at reading pulling guards Chris Snee and Rich Seubert on the Giants' toss and off-tackle plays, but his skill set is more easily replaced than that of Jacobs. Ward also broke his leg in 2007. There are 32 instances since 1983 where a team that had a starting running back averaging 4.5 yards per carry or more with 200 carries or more in a given season had a new lead running back the following year. Those new backs, on average, saw their yards per carry decrease by .63 yards in the subsequent season -- a huge fall. When the Giants replaced Tiki Barber with Jacobs as their lead back in 2007, he averaged .09 fewer yards per carry than Barber had the year before. Of course, the common denominator in all of the success the Giants' backs have enjoyed is their great offensive line. The Giants' five starters on the offensive line have started every regular-season game for the past two seasons, making them the healthiest line in football. That's simply not likely to continue thanks to the law of averages; in the long run, losing someone like Snee or center Shaun O'Hara could be far more painful than losing either Jacobs or Ward. Philadelphia: Will the Eagles solve their short-yardage woes? Philadelphia was oft-criticized this year for its inability to run the ball in short-yardage situations, thanks primarily to a key goal-line stand by the Bears in their 24-20 victory over the Eagles in Week 4. The frustration bled into a general concern that Andy Reid needed to run the ball more in order to find the proper balance for his pass-happy offense. Running the ball in short-yardage situations tends to be a wiser move than throwing it. With 2 yards or fewer to go this season for a first down or a touchdown, run plays picked up the necessary yardage 69.8 percent of the time; pass plays were successful only 54.6 percent of the time. Although the average NFL team threw the ball in these situations 34 percent of the time, the Eagles chose to throw the ball with 2 yards to go 46 percent of the time. They were successful in those pass plays 56 percent of the time; when they ran the ball, though, they were successful 62 percent of the time. They were better at passing the ball in short-yardage situations than the average team, but even though they were worse than the league average at running, they were still more successful running the ball in short yardage than throwing it. While the possibility exists for a big play when you throw in a short-yardage situation, Philadelphia had only one pass play of more than 20 yards in those situations last year. Washington: What is Carlos Rogers doing in Jim Zorn's doghouse? Rumors persist that the Redskins are dangling cornerback Carlos Rogers, a former first-round pick, in trade talks to replace the pick sent to Miami in the Jason Taylor trade. The thinking in the Washington front office is that Rogers can be replaced by free-agent acquisition DeAngelo Hall, who started to usurp Rogers' playing time as the season went along to the point. Would it be a good move? We can answer that question with our game-charting data, which is compiled by a group of volunteers who break down every play of the NFL season to analyze a number of things, including who was in coverage and why a pass was complete or incomplete. This yields some interesting data for comparing the performances of Hall and Rogers. Here are the metrics for all of the Washington corners this past season. Hall's numbers are fantastic, but they're also subject to a small sample size; Hall played only seven games as a Redskin. As a Raider, Hall was awful; he had 56 passes thrown at him, and he allowed 9.0 yards per attempt with a success rate of 43 percent. While the Redskins have a better pass rush than the Raiders, it didn't stop Nnamdi Asomugha from posting elite numbers across from Hall. Hall also failed to put up these sort of numbers throughout his career with the Falcons, implying that his short-season performance with the Skins was a bit of a fluke. How good were they? Success Rate: Plays with this back in coverage, in which the offense failed to reach 45 percent of yards on first down, 60 percent on second down or 100 percent on third down Redskins' cornerbacks: 2008 season Player Passes Yds/Pass Success Rate Carlos Rogers 92 5.6 63 percent DeAngelo Hall 24 3.2 67 percent Shawn Springs 34 6.3 53 percent Fred Smoot 56 8.7 38 percent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 answersorn? lol... Ok, what are those bottom figures telling us, exactly...is the 5.6 next to Rogers' name, for instance, the percentage of plays that the offense failed to reach 45% of the yards on first down? Whatever that means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 16, 2009 Author Share Posted February 16, 2009 Ok, what are those bottom figures telling us, exactly...is the 5.6 next to Rogers' name Avg Passing Yds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pounds Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Good post! Hall's numbers are fantastic, but they're also subject to a small sample size; Hall played only seven games as a Redskin. As a Raider, Hall was awful; he had 56 passes thrown at him, and he allowed 9.0 yards per attempt with a success rate of 43 percent. While the Redskins have a better pass rush than the Raiders, it didn't stop Nnamdi Asomugha from posting elite numbers across from Hall. Hall also failed to put up these sort of numbers throughout his career with the Falcons, implying that his short-season performance with the Skins was a bit of a fluke. Personally, I'm very leery of DeAngelo. He played outstanding for us down the stretch, but historically those numbers and that standard of play look to be somewhat aberrant. He may be fool's gold. We should make every effort to resign him, but certainly not to the extent of Oakland's effort. Between he, Carlos and Shawn, someone will be left out, barring a base three corner/one safety defense. If Hall reverts to the player I think he is, then he will be on the outside looking in as the nickel. At least then, Fred Smoot will play less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Bailey Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Cool with trading Los for a 2nd rounder and hopefully VC can trade down for more. If Vinny can somehow orchestrate deals netting us three or possibly four first day picks - I would be stoked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoBob Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I don't understand how people keep throwing out the "Deangelo would replace Carlos" line...? Who here actually thinks Springs or Smoot are the answer at CB? Even if they are both around, neither should be starting, so there is no "Replacing Carlos", there is the "Finding someone to start opposite Carlos" thing..... Do really want that to be Gimpy 1 (Springs) or Gimpy 2 (Smoot)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNoles21 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 keep rogers and hall, i think they complement each other well. Rogers is better as a cover corner and Hall tends to make more plays on the ball. But that won't happen ... will it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Bailey Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I don't understand how people keep throwing out the "Deangelo would replace Carlos" line...? Who here actually thinks Springs or Smoot are the answer at CB? Even if they are both around, neither should be starting, so there is no "Replacing Carlos", there is the "Finding someone to start opposite Carlos" thing.....Do really want that to be Gimpy 1 (Springs) or Gimpy 2 (Smoot)? I understand your line of thinking DB, but why dole out such money for both when we have gaping holes at LB and DL? IMO, it's a luxury we can ill afford having two premier CB's like Los and Rogers. I think we should roll the dice a bit and go with Hall. I'm fine with Smoot, Springs and adding another CB in the draft or someone like Bodden for one season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitmandm Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Really? Rogers gettng traded--even for a second rounder--sucks. What is it with the Skins trading away good top 10-pick CBs for second round things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitmandm Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I understand your line of thinking DB, but why dole out such money for both when we have gaping holes at LB and DL? IMO, it's a luxury we can ill afford having two premier CB's like Los and Rogers. I think we should roll the dice a bit and go with Hall. I'm fine with Smoot, Springs and adding another CB in the draft or someone like Bodden for one season. The money thing can be addressed by cutting Springs. He is old, hurt and is a liabilty because of his inability to get on the field for extreme periods of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 keep rogers and hall, i think they complement each other well. Rogers is better as a cover corner and Hall tends to make more plays on the ball.But that won't happen ... will it? I said the exact same thing to a buddy of mine today. I REALLY hope we're able to keep both of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jthor99 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 The money thing can be addressed by cutting Springs. He is old, hurt and is a liabilty because of his inability to get on the field for extreme periods of time. The problem is if Hall is resigned that Springs I would assume is coming back under his bloated salary. Which IMO is ridiculous. The guy cannot be counted out plain and simple. I realize also that Fred Smoot is a fan favorite, but if we have to stroll him out there as our #2 CB then we could be in serious trouble. The way he played down the stretch even has me weary of him playing in that Nickel slot. I'd like to see Tyron or maybe even a FA aquisition compete for that 3rd CB spot. As someone else mentioned something about Hall worries me as well. I question was he just keeping his mouth shut and acting mature so that he could get paid? Or is he truely maturing? If the Redskins aren't sure is paying the guy a bunch of guaranteed money to find out worth the risk? That's something honestly they are going to have to figure out. In a perfect world the Redskins would work things out with Rogers, and re-sign Hall, and allow both of these CB (who are in there prime) to hold down the spots for years to come. Unfortunatley, I think I know what's going to happen I certainly don't agree with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Bailey Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 The money thing can be addressed by cutting Springs. He is old, hurt and is a liabilty because of his inability to get on the field for extreme periods of time. I'd rather invest in the front seven than the back. I think we've done that far too often over the years. Doling out huge contracts to keep two CB's with the current state of our offensive and defensive lines IMO is not the best thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedevilhimself Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I think we should be able to keep both . The question is though the press seems to be be really bigging up Rogers . I am wondering if this press hype plus the fact the defense in Washington has been in the top 10 over the last few years based soley on the secondary and the ability to stop the run really raises Rogers value . I am wondering what the team will do if someone offers multiple picks for him, or a first round pick . At this point in their NFL careers Rogers is a better prospect than anyone looking at Jenkins or Davis . I think the fte of Rogers depends on what happens to Springs. If Springs is cut in 2 weeks or restructures his contract significantly then Rogers and Hall stay . If Springs stays on his current deal AND Hall re-signs then they are really dangling Rogers . If Springs stays and Hall tests the market then there is no way they dump Rogers . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedevilhimself Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I also think it would be the dumbest thing in the world to roll the dice and trade a solid top 10 CB for a prospect DL . I keep hearing the - Oh well I would sacrifice our secondary if we could beef up the lines ... Okay that's fine ... but by saying you are okay trading rogers for a second round pick then what you are saying is I want to sacrifice a strenght on the team for a chance to improve our lines ... which is not okay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booballen Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I don't understand how people keep throwing out the "Deangelo would replace Carlos" line...? Who here actually thinks Springs or Smoot are the answer at CB? Even if they are both around, neither should be starting, so there is no "Replacing Carlos", there is the "Finding someone to start opposite Carlos" thing.....Do really want that to be Gimpy 1 (Springs) or Gimpy 2 (Smoot)? exactly...what are we gonna do when we trade carlos and springs goes down for another 10 weeks...springs is solid when hes playing....whenever that is...you'll have smoot and hall and?????????? Ade Jimoh!?!?!?! lets bring him back... carlos just came off a career threatening injury and played solid...he got beat on some key plays but no where near as bad as smoot. trading him is not gonna get it done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walking Deadman Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Keep Rogers, use the money from springs (cut)to pay for Hall. Keep Smoot at least through 2009. Determine if Tryon has any potential to be a solid nickle DB and bring in a vet that can serve as a nickle or #2 CB if needed (Bodden, Ivy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graffjd Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I don't understand the logic about not being able to keep los and hall. I'd understand the salary concerns if they were both free agents. However los is under his rookie contract for 1 more year. We could jettison Springs and sign Hall and worry about los and his $ next year. Maybe by then Tryon or Westbrook develop into a decent #2 corner or we sign los to a longer deal then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyro281 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Carlos was pissed about not starting. Either Hall or Springs will be gone before the draft, which put Carlos back in the starting roll. On the plus side, if we don't re-sign Carlos before the season starts, he'll be playing for a new contract, which always tends to bring out the best in athletes. I'm hopeful he stays here long term. I would hate to see the FO trade a top-10 pick (who's finally playing up to his potential, and yes I am biased toward him as I've always liked him) for a mid-2nd rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touchdown Redskins Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 keep rogers and hall, i think they complement each other well. Rogers is better as a cover corner and Hall tends to make more plays on the ball.But that won't happen ... will it? That would make too much sense for our front office to follow through with it. It's kind of sad that we already know how poorly our FO will perform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herb mul-key Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I said the exact same thing to a buddy of mine today. I REALLY hope we're able to keep both of them. I know what the hell Vinny...then next yr we are looking for a corner w Los ability...**** we brought him up and he played mostly great last year...keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 If we don't have Hall and Rogers starting come September, then we truly have the worst front office in the history of the world. Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 The sub-title says it all: why is Rogers in Zorn's or Blache's doghouse? Yes, he cannot catch a ball (for interceptions); if he could catch he would be a WR. But he is a damn good cover corner. Springs is running on fumes; Smoot is aggressive as a run support corner, but is beaten on passing plays too easily these days. There is no one else on the roster who can play corner. So, what is the problem? I would like to keep him. I would really like to keep him and Hall, if possible. But there is a problem here. Why? What triggered this problem, and the late season benching? IF (big If, I know) you knew that he was so unhappy that he would leave as a FA after 2009, what would you do, FO gurus? Trade him now when he has some value, keep him only for 2009 and lose him to FA, or keep him and tag him (CAP ouch!!) after 2009? HTTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DexterSackMachine Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 If we don't have Hall and Rogers starting come September, then we truly have the worst front office in the history of the world.Ever. Agreed. Springs has to go just like McAllister went. You can't grossly overpay for past-their-prime, injury-prone players in the NFL today and expect to keep your cap intact. Long term deal for Hall, Rogers stays under his current deal and if he has another good year, give him a new contract towards the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABSTRACT Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Damn....We can't cut Springs instead?? Rogers can't catch but he has alot of good years left in him to get better than he even is today. If we do get rid of Carlos...We BETTER pick up Leigh Bodden. I do not think we are gonna drop Los though....he just had a video on redskins.com...man.... I am VERY confident in D. Hall. He is not a gamble at all. If we trade Rogers for another pick 1.D. Hall 2.S. Springs 3.L. Bodden 4.F. SMoot 5.J. Tryon If we trade Springs for another pick 1. D. Hall 2. C. Rogers 3. L. Bodden 4. J. Tryon 5. F. Smoot IDK.....We just better pick up Bodden because I do not trust SMoot at all lol...Seriously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.