Sebowski Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Don't San Francisco and Washington always swap each others sloppy seconds? Off the bat here are a few that come to mind....Walt Harris Zak Keasey Taylor Jacobs Demetric Evans Derek Smith Dana Stubblefield Otis Leverette Tyronne Drakeford Ray Brown Charles Mann Ricky Ervins And then we have Brandon Lloyd Andre Carter Mike Rumph Piersen Prioleau Jeff Posey Kevin Mitchell Deion Sanders Mark McMillian Help me fill in the rest Matt Millen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Trade back and take Tyson Jackson......Orakpo won't be there at #13. Not a big Jackson fan. Ayers is ok, but only had one good season. I wonder if they'd consider trading back a bit and grabbing Clint Sintim. He is projected as more of a 3-4 rush guy but I've seen him play with his hand in the dirt plenty as well at UVA. Pretty good size at 6'3 256 with room to add more muscle weight. He seems to do pretty well in space also. Gets off blocks very well and locates the ball. He could possibly be a SAM/DE on rushing downs for us possibly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqqDuYX9gVM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWCREDSKINS Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Geez that's really bad news. Oh well Phillip Daniels is our last hope or we could be in real trouble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormy Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Man, so much ose in the room for letting a backup DE go... I'm surprised you don't see the irony here. Last year our F.O. gave away a second round pick when Daniels went down, and that was when we already had a solid backup (who was actually Daniels' superior) like Evans on the roster. We are FAR more thin at the position now than we were last year, so how is it going to be resolved this time? Re-sign Daniels, then panic when he goes down to injury again? Most of the viable FA options are off the table and there likely won't be a franchise LDE on the board worthy of #13. There just soesn't seem to be a coherent plan with this F.O. They express interest in Canty who was a definite solution at LDE, but then wait to cut Taylor until Canty is off the market. They go public with the rationale for why Taylor will 100% be here in 2009, then cut him in less than a week. They opt to let Evans walk, then attempt a bid to regain him once he's hit the open market. Where's the vision? Yes, we vastly upgraded our DT position, but then just as vastly downgraded our DE position by letting both Taylor and Evans walk with no visible replacement in sight. I loved the Haynesworth signing. I was fine with letting Taylor (who never should have been here) walk, BUT with the contingency that we either a.) had an upgrade in mind or b.) were at least going to retain Evans as the run stuffer LDE complement to one of our young edge rush specialists. Now we have none of the above, and a huge hole to fill at DE. Problem is, we already have even more pressing holes to fill along the OL, and far too few picks to do both. A neverending vicious cycle. Demetric Evans was a STELLAR spot starter DL in Blache's scheme, stout versus the run on defense, and capable of bringing some pressure when Blache moved hijm inside. For those acting like he's detritus, he was good enough to start on an elite run defense unit. He'll be missed, even moreso because we have nothing to replace him with. I'm not furious about this, but we sure don't need to be creating more holes for ourselves. We needed to at least hold ground at DE while we filled our OL needs this year, and then turned our attention to DE next draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skindawg Willie Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 I sort of agree, but anybody next to Haynesworth should get a boost. The contract wasn't so big that we would have been left unable to do anything else there. The FO knows this guy well, something else must be cooking. I wonder what the plan is? For anyone that has been reading (the statements made by Blache and others, as well as the tea leaves), the plan is simple: Haynesworth was used at tackle and end in Tennessee, and Blache intends to use him the same way. With AH, we are 4 starting tackles deep, plenty. At end you will see the return of Daniels, who by his account, is almost 100%, and an upgrade over Evans, along with some capable young backups behind him. I think the FO feels that Daniels will be the starter, rotating in AH on running downs, and the youngsters like Wilson on passing downs. Relax people, don't you have better things to worry about than Demetric Evans? Give me a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 I'm surprised you don't see the irony here. Last year our F.O. gave away a second round pick when Daniels went down, and that was when we already had a solid backup (who was actually Daniels' superior) like Evans on the roster. We are FAR more thin at the position now than we were last year, so how is it going to be resolved this time? Re-sign Daniels, then panic when he goes down to injury again? Most of the viable FA options are off the table and there likely won't be a franchise LDE on the board worthy of #13. Actually, a lot of what happened should tell you what the team thinks of Evans. They didn't have confidence enough in him to start and traded for another end. Then, they decided he wasn't worth paying 2m a year to retain him. There just soesn't seem to be a coherent plan with this F.O. They express interest in Canty who was a definite solution at LDE, but then wait to cut Taylor until Canty is off the market. They go public with the rationale for why Taylor will 100% be here in 2009, then cut him in less than a week. They opt to let Evans walk, then attempt a bid to regain him once he's hit the open market. Where's the vision? Yes, we vastly upgraded our DT position, but then just as vastly downgraded our DE position by letting both Taylor and Evans walk with no visible replacement in sight. Canty was plan B if Haynesworth didn't work out. I wouldn't have been surprised if the Skins moved him inside. So, no, he wasn't going to be the solution at LDE. As for the vision, it is kinda early to judge that they have none. I'm certain now that Daniels will be retained. It is possible that they could go after Renaldo Wynn as well. Not to mention there are other guys available. We haven't even gotten to the draft yet. Demetric Evans was a STELLAR spot starter DL in Blache's scheme, stout versus the run on defense, and capable of bringing some pressure when Blache moved hijm inside. For those acting like he's detritus, he was good enough to start on an elite run defense unit. He'll be missed, even moreso because we have nothing to replace him with. You are overrating him a bit. He was a decent reserve guy and he did a solid job last year, but I'm not going to cry because he decided to go to another team. Fact is, I wouldn't be surprised if someone else jumped ahead of him on the depth chart if he remained here. I'm not furious about this, but we sure don't need to be creating more holes for ourselves. We needed to at least hold ground at DE while we filled our OL needs this year, and then turned our attention to DE next draft. I call bringing back Daniels holding our ground. Maybe not all that impressive, sure, but it is holding our ground. I doubt, tho, that it will be the only move we make to shore up the DE position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Emrys Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Not surprised at all. Once again Dan and Vinny send the message that homegrown, affordable talent is no where as important as other team's high priced free agents. We also sacrifice several role players at once in order to make big splashes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 I don't understand what Vinny's plan is with the DE spot. He knew he was going to kick out Taylor. He had to have a plan B Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CounterTrey75 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Isn't this the reason why AH decided not to go with the Bucs? They got rid of all their starters. I wonder what he's thinking now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 That may mean we draft a DE at #13. Otherwise our only option is Daniels IF we re-sign him, and he just isn't a young guy any more. Offensive line needs the most help, but you know the FO wont pass up an opportunity to make Skins fans bemoan another draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 I don't understand what Vinny's plan is with the DE spot. He knew he was going to kick out Taylor. He had to have a plan B Right? Plan B is Daniels, the guy who was supposed to start last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 For anyone that has been reading (the statements made by Blache and others, as well as the tea leaves), the plan is simple:Haynesworth was used at tackle and end in Tennessee, and Blache intends to use him the same way. With AH, we are 4 starting tackles deep, plenty. At end you will see the return of Daniels, who by his account, is almost 100%, and an upgrade over Evans, along with some capable young backups behind him. I think the FO feels that Daniels will be the starter, rotating in AH on running downs, and the youngsters like Wilson on passing downs. Relax people, don't you have better things to worry about than Demetric Evans? Give me a break. I'm not worried about Evans, and am not sure why you think I am. He was a known, cheap, servicable option, that's all. I considered AH at DE too. That opens up our draft options considerably. Smith, Oher, Orakpo, Raji, Jerry, Brown, Curry. One of those guys will be at #13, allowing us good value for this draft. We can patch the other positions with a FA or camp cut for this year. Or we might have some guys targeted with a tradedown. One thing is for sure, except for LA and ST, the FO always seems to have different ideas than me for the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormy Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Plan B is Daniels, the guy who was supposed to start last year. He's 36 1/2 years old at season's start, is coming off of a serious injury, hasn't played a down of regular season football in nearly 2 years, and was one dimensional and only mildly effectual when he last started. It was a bad plan that cost us dearly in 2008, and it's an even worse plan in 2009. If he goes down in training camp should we trade away our 2010 #2 pick to replace him again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Emrys Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Plan B is Daniels, the guy who was supposed to start last year. Brilliant!!! The what, 36 year old guy coming off reconstructive knee surgery. Glad to know there's a well thought out Plan B. Thanks for enlightening us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Not surprised at all. Once again Dan and Vinny send the message that homegrown, affordable talent is no where as important as other team's high priced free agents. We also sacrifice several role players at once in order to make big splashes. I hate that we didn't re-sign Evans. He played well for us when the FO passed him over and handed a starting spot and a boat load of cash to JT who underperformed. He knows the system and fits the system and now with Haynesworth in the mix he could really get some favorable match-ups. And with JT gone he would've been primed to get a chance to start. He wasn't asking nor did he receive a grip of cash... But we let him go without even putting up a fight.... :doh::doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 He's 36 1/2 years old at season's start, is coming off of a serious injury, hasn't played a down of regular season football in nearly 2 years, and was one dimensional and only mildly effectual when he last started. It was a bad plan that cost us dearly in 2008, and it's an even worse plan in 2009. If he goes down in training camp should we trade away our 2010 #2 pick to replace him again? Daniels is very good at holding the point and stopping the run. That was something Taylor was never going to bring to the table and we did miss him out there last year. Now, I don't think it all ends with Daniels. There still is a lot of FA and the draft yet to go, plus other castoffs. So, everyone calm down and we'll see where the organization goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 I don't blame him ... the FO took his freakin number away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH. So let's recap. For the last few years we've all been harping that we need quality DE's. So we sign Carter one year, trade for Taylor another. Then we need a DT to collapse the pocket and give these guys a chance. We sign AH and now we're letting DE's walk. WTF? We still need a RT and SAM by the way. I really hope they can figure this out with 4 draft picks and shrinking FA market. If we have to trade more of our future picks to figure this out, I'm going to be LIVID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Daniels is very good at holding the point and stopping the run. That was something Taylor was never going to bring to the table and we did miss him out there last year.Now, I don't think it all ends with Daniels. There still is a lot of FA and the draft yet to go, plus other castoffs. So, everyone calm down and we'll see where the organization goes. What Daniels used to do is really irrelevant. Let the fact sink in that we are relying on 36 year old Daniels, who didn't do **** as a DE for 3 years BEFORE having a serious, career threatening and season ending leg injury and Alex Buzbee, who himself is coming off a season ending leg injury. The point is that the Front Office screwed the pooch by playing hardball with Taylor when he knew he had our jimmies in his hand. We called his bluff and he told us to take a piss. To quote Snatch: Turkish: *Now* we are ****ed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Why can't Vinny hold onto his Draft picks? Ok, I can understand some of the free agent signings but can't the skins have a full draft just in case things like this happens? The redskins will find a starter it is the depth problem I'm worried about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 To quote Snatch: Turkish: *Now* we are ****ed. Nice quote. I agree.:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 So, everyone calm down and we'll see where the organization goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 The point is that the Front Office screwed the pooch by playing hardball with Taylor when he knew he had our jimmies in his hand. We called his bluff and he told us to take a piss. Actually, we told him to take a piss after trying to call our bluff. It was our choice to part ways with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH.So let's recap. For the last few years we've all been harping that we need quality DE's. So we sign Carter one year, trade for Taylor another. Then we need a DT to collapse the pocket and give these guys a chance. We sign AH and now we're letting DE's walk. WTF? We still need a RT and SAM by the way. I really hope they can figure this out with 4 draft picks and shrinking FA market. If we have to trade more of our future picks to figure this out, I'm going to be LIVID. We need a starting level DT, DE, LB and a couple starters on the OL. We need our young receivers to produce. We need depth at various locations. We have 4 picks and $12M. I don't expect to get it all solved this year, but we can get off to a nice start with a good draft. We will have to make do with some patches too. We can still improve on last years team and get a little youth into the system. I'm trying to be optimistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Actually, we told him to take a piss after trying to call our bluff. It was our choice to part ways with him. So in other words, the FO bet the farm that they could call Taylor's bluff and risk cutting him and re-sign Evans. Guess what brain trusts, it backfired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.