Stephon Heyer at RT

[Chump Bailey]

The difference here is that there are multiple positions Heyer can play, and less rush to have him be the starter.

I'm not aware of him having played inside for us, but I think that should be an option down the line. I've always felt and stated often that he would make for a better Guard. We'll see. I hope you're right and I'm wrong about him at RT.

[MrJL]

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.

Well actually, if it's agreed that Jansen is done then a third tackle would need to be brought in as the backup.

And as a reminder Heyer did not get the job in an open competition last year. He went in and beat out a veteran. So that says something about his talent.

[Jizmaglobin]

I'm still undecided on Heyer. I think they should give him one more shot this year (if they DO believe he can do it) and see what happens. It is still early in his career. If he doesn't get it by the end of the year then seriously look at a replacement.

[DGREENHULK]

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.

Heyer is LT he does a solid job in pass protection but does not have the leg drive or proper technique to be an effective run blocker...QUESTION why did the skins run so much to behind Samuels and Pete over the left side last year...ANSWER because Heyer nor Jansen can run block over there on the right side.

I agree 100% if Heyer is our starting day RT we are in trouble...

[Oldskool]

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?

The bread and butter of the Skins running attack for years under Bugel II has been running to the right side of the field, be it with zone blocking or good old counter trey.

Anyhow, look at the film from last year and you will see that when Heyer started, they stopped running to the right and started running to the left, behind a weaker Kendall (who was better against the pass) versus going behind Thomas and Heyer. Simply put, Heyer could not seal the edge against the run and was a liability.

Fast forward to when Jansen gets his starting job back, and lo and behold we start running to the right and correspondingly have a better running attack overall.

Jansen can't pass block and Heyer can't run block. Neither should be starting day 1.

[Oldskool]

Heyer is LT he does a solid job in pass protection but does not have the leg drive or proper technique to be an effective run blocker...QUESTION why did the skins run so much to behind Samuels and Pete over the left side last year...ANSWER because Heyer nor Jansen can run block over there on the right side.

I agree 100% if Heyer is our starting day RT we are in trouble...

Samuels is the LOT not Heyer. Don't think anyone has started at LOT instead of Samuels (unless due to injury) since his rookie year.

[[S.S.F. | Nero]]

:helmet::helmet::helmet::helmet::helmet::helmet:

Jansen can't pass block and Heyer can't run block. Neither should be starting day 1.

Correct. I think the reason they kept Heyer as the backup last year was that they were leaning on the run game early, so Heyer's poor run blocking was not exposed due to the fact that he wasn't on the field.

Once teams started taking the run away with run blitzes, Jansen started struggling. Instead of reinserting the more versatile Heyer, they kept JJ at RT and Heyer in reserve. It actually wasn't the worst strategy, in light of the Samuels injury and subsequent need for Heyer as a fill in at RT. Otherwise, if Heyer had been playing RT since his return from injury, you would have to switch Heyer to LT mid-season and bring in a rusty Jansen at RT. This way, they kept all players fresh by letting Heyer sub for both RT and LT - then fill in for LT when Samuels went down.

I agree though, we have an issue at RT that hopefully will be resolved in the not too distant (i.e. before the season) future.

sigh..... :logo:

:helmet::helmet::helmet::helmet::helmet::helmet:

[MrJL]

Samuels is the LOT not Heyer. Don't think anyone has started at LOT instead of Samuels (unless due to injury) since his rookie year.

He's saying the Heyer is an LT not that he's the Redskins LT. THat shifting to RT is a change from what he played before.

[Xero21]

The answer is that Stephon Heyer is simply not a great tackle. He is good, not great.

This presents a interesting decision. He is only "good," but is that "good" enough? Is he good enough to be the full-time starter, or is he "not great" enough to warrant an upgrade? Do you see what I'm saying?

[MrJL]

The answer is that Stephon Heyer is simply not a great tackle. He is good, not great.

This presents a interesting decision. He is only "good," but is that "good" enough? If he good enough to be the full-time starter, or is he "not great" enough to warrant an upgrade? Do you see what I'm saying?

I see exactly what you're saying.

I think he's good enough and frankly I get a little annoyed with people who want great players at every position but get pissed off when we try to sign them as free agents.

[FuriousD]

Let's not forget that Gibbs was the HC in 2007.

With Heyer starting at RT, Gibbs would have changed his blocking assignments to help the rookie and fortify that side of the line. He certainly would not have routinely left him on an island the way Zorn did.

This is part of the learning curve for a rookie HC. I think we saw a lot of evidence in 2008 that Zorn was actively trying to impose his "system" on guys that were not ready or missing the skill sets to fully impliment that system.

How many times have we heard that it's more important to tailor your plan to fit the strengths and weaknesses of the team you have rather than forcing square pegs into round holes?

Zorn is certainly older. Hopefully, he's also wiser and if we find Heyer starting again at RT, it will be because he's earned the right and will receive the support he needs to grow into the position.

:helmet:

[JMSSMJ7]

I think if we have a balanced offense this year, not just running the ball all day, then Heyer will do much better than people will expect. Teams were banking on us to run the ball frequently last season (actually for the past couple of seasons). If we have a more balanced offense, I think it takes alot of pressure off of Heyer. It also puts more pressure on the defense... they can't just put 7 or 8 in the box all day, which makes Heyer's job a heck of a lot easier.

I don't think Heyer as a huge liability in the run game, but I certainly don't think he is a threat.

[mithong1]

solution: andre smith or michael oher.

[elkabong82]

Heyer wouldn't be terrible at RT. I don't know why some are assuming he won't improve this year. Heyer isn't great, but we could do worse. He's young though, and I'd bet he can last a season before Jansen can.

Last season, Heyer won the starting job at RT. The run game was solid against New orleans and Arizona. However, Heyer was injured in week 3 against the cards, and Jansen took over from week 4 on. Heyer came back in week 8 and started against Detroit at LT in place of Chris Samuels.

The odd things is, Samuels came back and played 5 more games until getting hurt against Baltimore. Heyer replaced Samuels at LT in that game, and for the rest of the season. It is odd, because if Heyer was the starter at RT, when Samuels came back Heyer should have started at RT again.

The team was doing well though, and was 6-2 heading into Pittsburgh, when Samuels came back. The run game was the biggest strength on O, and given the success of the team to that point, I guess they felt Jansen earned back the RT spot and was best suited there for the teams strength. Right after Pitt was the bye, so Jansen got rest. Right after was Dallas, and then we beat Seattle, so the team might not have felt the need for a change at ROT given they were 7-4 at that point and had just come off a win. Then we lose to the Giants, and maybe a change should have been made here going against Baltimore, but after Baltimore Samuels was done for the season, so heyer had to play LT.

However, I think one thing to keep in mind is that even if Heyer had played RT the whole time, the OL as a whole declined, so the difference wouldn't have been substantial, IMO. Samuels got injured, and Heyer had to go to that side. Kendall was decent, but couldn't practice during the week, Thomas was still recovering from injury, and it showed, Rabach struggled as everyone around him did.

An OT at 13 is going to command a lot of money, but the team does need a RT. Heyer, IMO, is better on the left side, and would have more time to improve and eventually take over for Samuels. If Rinehart can transition to the right side, he can back-up both guard spots, and take over for Thomas at some point. This is probably Jansen's last season, so I imagine getting a starter at ROT now would be best, since Heyer could back-up both OT spots after Jansen leaves, allowing a roster spot on the OL for a back-up center and eventual replacement for Rabach the following season.

However, if the team stands pat with Heyer at RT, because they traded down for more draft picks, I won't be mad, so long as one of the picks in the first 3 rounds is used for an OL.

[SkinsHokieFan]

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.

1) I think this is an example of Jim Zorn being a rookie coach. From mishandling Jason Taylor's injury, to changing the running game when Alexander came in, and from somehow never getting the rookies on the field or adopting the wildcat into the offense, Zorn made numerous mistakes

One of them was the handling of Heyer. I think the coaches know that A) Jansen is done but Heyer is not an NFL quality tackle

So they went with what was working early in the year, Jansen at RT. And rode that as long as they could, even beyond the point of no return.

What is the plan now? Who knows

2) Renihart. Somebody needs to get fired for Andre Johnson part 2, because a first day pick should be able to at least see the field in preseason

[clarkskin]

What is up with all these idiots claiming they know exactly what Heyer is and is not capable of? The guy is 25 years old. Does everybody here write off rookies and second year players as "not NFL starters?" As if harped on numerous occassions, we knock the FO for not developing young talent and instead trying to make a splash in free agency all the time. Now, many of you are giving up on Heyer with such definitive statements like "he's not a starting calibur RT" and the like? What the hell are you basing that on? You salivate over draft and FA prospects because of their height and weight numbers without knowing anything about how they will perform in the NFL, yet are so quick to write off a 6'5 325 pound guy who became a starter in his second season after not even being drafted. You all who do that are, simply put, stupid. The draft is a crapshoot. Take a look at the long lists of draft busts and late round surprises. We have a promising kid who was forced to play out of position last year and everyone is saying he sucks. You all just don't get it.

[clarkskin]

Let's not forget that Gibbs was the HC in 2007.

With Heyer starting at RT, Gibbs would have changed his blocking assignments to help the rookie and fortify that side of the line. He certainly would not have routinely left him on an island the way Zorn did.

This is part of the learning curve for a rookie HC. I think we saw a lot of evidence in 2008 that Zorn was actively trying to impose his "system" on guys that were not ready or missing the skill sets to fully impliment that system.

How many times have we heard that it's more important to tailor your plan to fit the strengths and weaknesses of the team you have rather than forcing square pegs into round holes?

Zorn is certainly older. Hopefully, he's also wiser and if we find Heyer starting again at RT, it will be because he's earned the right and will receive the support he needs to grow into the position.

:helmet:

That is just stupid, man. Buges would have been in charge of adjusting the O-line scheme under both head coaches. It has nothing to do with JZ being a rookie head coach. Do you really think that a guy who has been in the league as long as he has as a QB and positional coach wouldn't think of something that you did? Get real.

[skinny21]

The bread and butter of the Skins running attack for years under Bugel II has been running to the right side of the field, be it with zone blocking or good old counter trey.

Anyhow, look at the film from last year and you will see that when Heyer started, they stopped running to the right and started running to the left, behind a weaker Kendall (who was better against the pass) versus going behind Thomas and Heyer. Simply put, Heyer could not seal the edge against the run and was a liability.

Fast forward to when Jansen gets his starting job back, and lo and behold we start running to the right and correspondingly have a better running attack overall.

Jansen can't pass block and Heyer can't run block. Neither should be starting day 1.

I feel the same way and then find myself envisioning Jansen and Heyer rotating based on play call.

[FuriousD]

That is just stupid, man. Buges would have been in charge of adjusting the O-line scheme under both head coaches. It has nothing to do with JZ being a rookie head coach. Do you really think that a guy who has been in the league as long as he has as a QB and positional coach wouldn't think of something that you did? Get real.

You are wrong. How the hell is Buges gonna call protections in the middle of the game?! Get real!

It is the centers job to call the protections based on the defense but the center doesn't call the play and neither does Buges. Zorn is calling the formation and on that decision decides who goes in motion, who stays in to protect and how many receivers go out.

I'm sure you can figure it out given enough time.....

Steve Spurrier was another first time HC hell bent on imposing his idea of what an NFL offense should look like with little thought to sufficient protection. Don't you think he had plenty of football experience? He had played pro ball and been a QB coach as well, if I remember rightly, and he almost got Ramsey killed trying to do it his way.

You assume too much!

:helmet:

[eljeasel]

I feel the same way and then find myself envisioning Jansen and Heyer rotating based on play call.

If I have Jansen on my roster I use him as the TE in jumbo sets or in the 4th when we have to choke a team to death with the run

[corrupt3d]

I feel the same way and then find myself envisioning Jansen and Heyer rotating based on play call.

And tipping our hand to the play?

I see what you're saying, but I think theres a good reason we dont do that.

[Chump Bailey]

He went in and beat out a veteran. So that says something about his talent.

Beating out Jansen at this point in his career is nothing to write home about. Look, Heyer's not garbage and I'm not saying get rid of him. I do think he is simply not good enough to be a starting RT. I think he's had ample time to prove something to the staff, and that being he's still a backup at this point. He's got good strength. He's a quality person but his footwork and overall technique is IMHO inadequate to the job.

[skinny21]

And tipping our hand to the play?

I see what you're saying, but I think theres a good reason we dont do that.

Kinda' like bringing in Betts tips our hand that we're passing the ball?

I mean we can still run the ball if Heyer is in, just like we can pass if Jansen is in... Eh, whatever, I'm defending my statement like that's what I think should happen but I'm really just wondering out loud I guess. Hopefully we draft a RT and this conversation is rendered moot.

For conversations sake though...

When Jansen is in, that doesn't necessarily mean we run behind him and we can leave an extra body in (or run quick routes) when passing.

With Heyer, we can still run middle or left or run behind him (with help - Dock pulling) and run draw plays and such.

In other words, try to force teams to maintain discipline and not be able to expect run or pass any given down.

Probably not a good idea, just talking.

[mbws]

I feel the same way and then find myself envisioning Jansen and Heyer rotating based on play call.

Edit: Point already made above.

[Going Commando]

Maybe the Coaches are frustrated with a lack of improvement. This could be apparent in practices, not just games. It could be a situation where coaches were a lot quicker to forgive mistakes he'd made as a rookie than they were when he made them as a second year player.