Stephon Heyer at RT

[bulldog]

With Ray Willis resigning in Seattle it appears more likely that Stephon Heyer will go into training camp as the primary competition with Jansen for the RT spot (barring #1 pick used on OT).

While that possibility at the end of 2007 after the run to the playoffs and 4-0 ending stretch would have seemed at the time to be a natural transition given Heyer's contribution as a starter the last 6-7 games of season, it now seems a fallback or second-choice solution.

My question is why? The history to me is a bit baffling.

Gibbs and Bugel brought Heyer to the Redskins and started him at LT in the preseason in 2007 when Chris Samuels was recovering from a high ankle sprain. While quite raw Bugel at the time indicated Heyer had a physical upside and was a player the team 'might have gotten lucky with'.

Heyer then started those last sequence of games in 2007 when Todd Collins was fairly well protected and Portis had some outstanding rushing days.

Fast forward to 2008. The same 6'6 and 325 tackle is named the starter, suffers a sprained knee and then is on the shelf for the entire season. Jansen wears down noticeably after his first 5-6 starts and yet is allowed to finish out the season despite his alarming drop in effectiveness week to week. Heyer is nowhere to be found.

After the 2008 season, OL is identified by the press, fans and NFL observers as a definite need area for the team and both Zorn and Bugel address some questions about the line. In those dialogues you see a (from my perspective) reversal on the earlier optimism about Heyer. You hear comments that he mixed up plays and took the wrong blocking angle on audibles. You hear that he had 'consistency' issues in blocking for the run game, that he didn't focus or show intensity play in and play out.

Well, that's all fine and good, but when exactly was this identified in Heyer?

The team didn't discover that when he was sitting on the bench during the 2008 season after he was injured. And Zorn did name him the starter after training camp and the preseason after seeing him perform day in and day out. He could have gone with Jansen to start with if Heyer was so lacking, right?

Going back to 2007 Heyer may have blown some assignments as a rookie, but the Redskins OL must have hid his major gaffes quite well because in that last quarter of the season I thought the offense both in the passing game and running game had improved with #74 in the lineup.

I would agree that Heyer didn't look very good when subbing for Chris Samuels at LT in spot duty during last season, but I thought the consensus was that he projected to RT in the future, so I should doubt his failings at LT would be held against him. No more so than HB Blades substituting for MW at strongside linebacker in 2008 despite projecting to middle backer.

So, what's the story on Heyer? Inquiring minds want to know

[jnhay]

I thought left tackle was his natural position, but considering Samuels can't lose his job, they've worked him in at right tackle. I think getting a right tackle in the draft would be a good idea. Heyer can be a backup at both left and right tackle spots, and maybe eventually take over for Samuels if he improves.

[da#1skinsfan]

I thought Heyer showed improvement from day 1 and is extremely promising.

Not sure why they think otherwise, maybe they think hes almost there but not quite ready. Could be why we didnt sign one of these FA RT's...maybe the FO is more comfortable than we think with Heyer, maybe they want just one more round of OTA's to determine if he's ready or not this year...

[2cents]

"Might have gotten lucky with" after one preseason game is not a ringing endorsement.

[Oldskool]

If Heyer is our starter at ROT next year, this offense will not progress, Portis will be unhappy with run blocking and Skins fans will be calling for his head by week 6.

This team simply cannot have Heyer starting and have any progression in the offensive scheme.

[da#1skinsfan]

If Heyer is our starter at ROT next year, this offense will not progress, Portis will be unhappy with run blocking and Skins fans will be calling for his head by week 6.

This team simply cannot have Heyer starting and have any progression in the offensive scheme.

This is the fundamental question that exists within the OP's well-put rant....

How did you come to this conclusion? What did you see in Heyer that led you to this belief?

[bulldog]

what's more important is what did the REDSKINS see?

again, Jim Zorn made Heyer not Jansen the starter at RT to start the 2008 season and he lost his job after spraining his shoulder.

as to the point about the offense not progressing with Heyer in the lineup, do you think the offense will improve in 2009 with the 33 year old Jansen taking 16 games worth of snaps?

if you are worried about Portis being upset, how about seeing Jason Campbell being knocked out for the season by the outside rush?

[Dmac#5]

I thought left tackle was his natural position, but considering Samuels can't lose his job, they've worked him in at right tackle. I think getting a right tackle in the draft would be a good idea. Heyer can be a backup at both left and right tackle spots, and maybe eventually take over for Samuels if he improves.

Really??? You think LT is his natural spot. I know he played it at Maryland but if his footspeed is too slow on the right side what more against the speed rushers and 34 OLB's he'll face on the left side. Most important thing about a LT is his pass protection and protecting the QB's blind side, pass blocking however is Heyer's biggest weakness. IMO Heyer is built to be a RG.

[SkinsNorth]

I thought he looked better at LT than RT last yr. Heyer is better at pass blocking than run blocking at this stage.

Ideally the skins take an OT that can play guard as well. They let the rookie, Heyer and Jansen battle it out for the RT spot. The losers of the competition provide depth/competition for the rest of the OL.

[Chump Bailey]

For me the Heyer experiment has failed and should be shelved. He is what he is - a nice backup to have to insert for a limited amount of time in case of injury.

IMO, we need to have a complete overhaul at RG, C and RT by the start of next season. They played well for us and have been well compensated for their effort. It is time to move on.

We need to draft someone like Beatty who likely can start immediately at RT, keep him there for a couple of seasons, then have him and Samuels switch sides.

The right side of the line is the most problematic and we have done nothing to alleviate it thus far. I hope that changes.

[jnhay]

For me the Heyer experiment has failed and should be shelved. He is what he is - a nice backup to have to insert for a limited amount of time in case of injury.

IMO, we need to have a complete overhaul at RG, C and RT by the start of next season. They played well for us and have been well compensated for their effort. It is time to move on.

We need to draft someone like Beatty who likely can start immediately at RT, keep him there for a couple of seasons, then have him and Samuels switch sides.

The right side of the line is the most problematic and we have done nothing to alleviate it thus far. I hope that changes.

The Heyer experiment has barely even begun. Yeah, maybe they'll bring in a tackle in the meantime, but that doesn't mean he can't do something in the future.

Really??? You think LT is his natural spot. I know he played it at Maryland but if his footspeed is too slow on the right side what more against the speed rushers and 34 OLB's he'll face on the left side. Most important thing about a LT is his pass protection and protecting the QB's blind side, pass blocking however is Heyer's biggest weakness. IMO Heyer is built to be a RG.

I'm pretty sure I'm just going by what he's said. I couldn't explain to you the intricacies of each position, so I won't act like I know where he would fit best. Sure, right now I'd be more scared of putting him at LT, but that's just because that's Jason's blindside.

[bulldog]

well, you can't replace an entire line in one offseason

even the best GMs take time to build a quality unit or rebuild it for that matter.

in that regard, whether the Redskins made mistakes in the past in giving some players outsized bonuses (Jansen and Thomas) and then resigning them at even larger amounts later on, it is still a heckuva rebuilding task at hand.

it isn't going to be accomplished in one offseason, not with only 4 draft picks and no existing depth on the roster.

free agency filled 3 strategic needs for the Redskins at DL, CB and LG.

that's about as much as one can expect unless there was no cap in the NFL as there is in baseball.

of course the situation would be alleviated to a great degree if the younger players the team did identify and place on the roster, namely Stephon Heyer and Chad Rinehart, can actually play the game as solid NFLers.

the fact the Redskins spent a #3 pick on Rinehart and he wasn't good enough to even be activated for games in 2008 is a real sign that the club missed the boat with this pick.

[Dmac#5]

I just think we are putting too much stock in Heyer. Yes her performed admirably as an undrafted rookie but there was a reason he was undrafted, he lacks the raw physical tools to succeed as a starter. I'm in no way saying he's a bad player who we need to let go of, I actually think he projects well as having a long career as a Skin as a really good backup for most of the O-line positions. I just don't think his play as a rookie in which the line in general overchieved should haev us still trying to force him as a starter when I don't think he lacks the skills to.

[TheLongshot]

The story? The story seems to be that there are questions if Heyer will ever be good enough to be the man. While they seem to feel good about his pass protecting ability, they do seem to question his ability to run block effectively.

Despite what Oldskool says, I don't think we'd be bad off with him as our starter there next season if that's all we have. Honestly, I think the only reason Jansen started is because Zorn knew that the running game was ahead of the passing game and decided to focus on that.

[bulldog]

again, so what made the Redskins and Zorn name Heyer the starter at RT going into the 2008 season if he is that overmatched in talent and technique and will not overcome his learning curve in the NFL?

that is the $640,000 question.

it appeared at first as if Bugel had stepped in and boosted Jansen because he was loyal to the vets and didn't want to see Jansen be shelved without a chance to play and redeem himself.

but when his play dropped after the first 8-9 games wasn't it Zorn's responsibility to step in and make the call to put a healthy Heyer back in the lineup and take out a struggling Jansen who was once again battling physical issues?

[HLF]

Good point, I never got why he's so bad when he started but ended up losing his job due to injury. He barely has had a chance to prove himself to start.

[TheLongshot]

again, so what made the Redskins and Zorn name Heyer the starter at RT going into the 2008 season if he is that overmatched in talent and technique and will not overcome his learning curve in the NFL?

Well, it might have been more about Jansen than Heyer. Jansen was looking pretty questionable in preseason. Even so, there were plenty at Redskins Park questioning the move.

but when his play dropped after the first 8-9 games wasn't it Zorn's responsibility to step in and make the call to put a healthy Heyer back in the lineup and take out a struggling Jansen who was once again battling physical issues?

I answered that above. I think the feeling was that Jansen's run blocking ability was worth what they were giving up in pass blocking skills at the time. Also, while he wasn't great at pass blocking, he wasn't awful either.

[bulldog]

Heyer is mystery #1. Rinehart is mystery #2.

who are the scouts on this team that are recommending these players?

Snyder may be in the War Room but he doesn't drill down far enough in the weeds to evaluate a tackle from Northern Iowa.

Somebody in the front office recommended a player that Mel Kiper said he had rated as a 5th or 6th round pick.

Given the failure of ANY of the #2 picks to make even a slight contribution in 2008, I can't believe no one in the scouting department lost their jobs.

[flexxskins]

If I am understanding your question correctly bulldog, I would have to assume (which I should never do) that Zorn chose Heyer over Jansen simply because of the type of offense that he was implementing.

The bottomline of course is that both Heyer nor Jansen are the answer for the starting position at RT.

[Neophyte]

but when his play dropped after the first 8-9 games wasn't it Zorn's responsibility to step in and make the call to put a healthy Heyer back in the lineup and take out a struggling Jansen who was once again battling physical issues?

Was he completely healthy at that point though? Remember, he got hurt a second time on a FG or PA attempt 3-4 weeks after the injury that took him out of the game. I seem to remember reading or hearing somewhere that he was not really healthy again until right about the time Jansen got hurt in Baltimore.

[MrJL]

I just think we are putting too much stock in Heyer. Yes her performed admirably as an undrafted rookie but there was a reason he was undrafted, he lacks the raw physical tools to succeed as a starter. I'm in no way saying he's a bad player who we need to let go of, I actually think he projects well as having a long career as a Skin as a really good backup for most of the O-line positions. I just don't think his play as a rookie in which the line in general overchieved should haev us still trying to force him as a starter when I don't think he lacks the skills to.

Funny I thought the reason Heyer wasn't drafted was he had the raw tools but was to unrefined.

[MrJL]

again, so what made the Redskins and Zorn name Heyer the starter at RT going into the 2008 season if he is that overmatched in talent and technique and will not overcome his learning curve in the NFL?

that is the $640,000 question.

it appeared at first as if Bugel had stepped in and boosted Jansen because he was loyal to the vets and didn't want to see Jansen be shelved without a chance to play and redeem himself.

but when his play dropped after the first 8-9 games wasn't it Zorn's responsibility to step in and make the call to put a healthy Heyer back in the lineup and take out a struggling Jansen who was once again battling physical issues?

continuity. Once the season starts in the NFL continuity is king. Plus since Heyer wasn't actually playing they probaly couldn't be sure it completely healed up

And he was also backing up Samuels who was pretty banged up last year

[Chump Bailey]

Yeah, maybe they'll bring in a tackle in the meantime, but that doesn't mean he can't do something in the future.

Sure I agree:someone has to be the backup

We disagree. If he were the answer the job would be his. There would be no talk of bringing in Willis nor would we have heard the reports out of Redskins Park that the consensus was Heyer is not the guy and other options need to be considered.

[Chump Bailey]

well, you can't replace an entire line in one offseason

even the best GMs take time to build a quality unit or rebuild it for that matter.

I meant two seasons time

[jnhay]

Sure I agree:someone has to be the backup

We disagree. If he were the answer the job would be his. There would be no talk of bringing in Willis nor would we have heard the reports out of Redskins Park that the consensus was Heyer is not the guy and other options need to be considered.

The Chargers replaced Drew Brees. Both QBs ended up successes. The difference here is that there are multiple positions Heyer can play, and less rush to have him be the starter. A lot of players don't start out as starters, and keep their jobs throughout their careers.