Redskins released Big Daddy

[Joe a Cowboys fan]

Cuting BDW is neither here nor there to me but the timing is horrible. Too late to get a real good DT and too soon to see if he would return to his admittedly lacadaisical play of last year. I think your DL will be a problem for you this year.

[Johnny Punani2]

You people crack me up...

What's with all the panic over letting Fat Daddy go? The guy has NEVER lived up to what we were paying him. He brought a horrible attitude to the team which effected other players. I'm glad that fat F'cker is gone!! He was a cancer and almost as bad as that fat worthless turd Stubblefield. Now, we can fully address Champ's contract and focus on drafting a real DT next year.

Also, I think some of you guys are in the dark over Haley. I talk to a lot of Dolphins fans and they all think he is a good player who could easily start on most NFL teams. We only need a DT that fills a gap. That is what this defense is geared towards. We don't need a Warren Sapp type of player to rush the QB. Haley and Noble will be fine. If another team like the Bears release Washington and we pick him up even better but we aren't going to be any worse at DT because Fat Ass got cut.

[Art]

Boozer,

Glover is still a very fine player. But, man, if he's so good why was he available? Or, if you don't like that, let me simply say, he's a very fine player still, and that doesn't alter a single word I've said, or, you'll be surprised, any that you've said.

Wynn is similar to Ellis in many ways. Upshaw is similar to Ekuban. I didn't say these players were any good in the balance, I said these players are similar, or more precisely, that yours aren't any better than ours. We have a substantial advantage with Noble over Myers or Nix, and that doesn't mean Noble has to be a world beater. It simply means he was your uncontested starter the last two years OVER those guys and he does what he does. The real difference is Bruce Smith remains a more dangerous player getting to the passer than you've got and he's on our bench. He doesn't have to beat good tackles to be that. If he can keep beating Adams for three sacks a year that's good enough and Adams gets paid like he's a good player . Zellner is not all that good, but he's further ahead of your fourth string defensive end. Holsey is a journeyman with numerous starts who I'd happily put up against Nix and put on par with Myers in terms of depth behind the starters whichever loses out in Dallas.

We both have the prospects we may have hope for. They aren't really part of the conversation today. Perhaps by the end of the year they will be. But not today.

What I said was that as of this moment our line is mildly better than yours. If you want to talk about rose colored glasses, one may ask you about yours if you think Glover will perform well without a grunt playing beside him with the proven ability to take up space and blockers and start over the guys you have left.

Or put another way, who do you think is more important to the other's game. Noble or Glover? I think you know Noble or his type is far more important to Glover's game than a Glover type is to Noble. Noble is just a chugger who'll try real hard and be extremely limited. It doesn't matter who's next to him. Glover NEEDS someone to take blockers off him. Noble proved he could do that. Myers hasn't. Nix certainly hasn't. And if they don't, then Glover is a liability due to his size and potential to get pushed around if HE's the one who has to take the doubles.

In the end I don't think either of us has a very good line. I just said we're still mildly better than you because of depth advantages with experience and that you could be better than us if you add someone.

[boozeman3]

Originally posted by Art

Boozer,

Glover is still a very fine player. But, man, if he's so good why was he available? Or, if you don't like that, let me simply say, he's a very fine player still, and that doesn't alter a single word I've said, or, you'll be surprised, any that you've said.

Wynn is similar to Ellis in many ways. Upshaw is similar to Ekuban. I didn't say these players were any good in the balance, I said these players are similar, or more precisely, that yours aren't any better than ours. We have a substantial advantage with Noble over Myers or Nix, and that doesn't mean Noble has to be a world beater. It simply means he was your uncontested starter the last two years OVER those guys and he does what he does. The real difference is Bruce Smith remains a more dangerous player getting to the passer than you've got and he's on our bench. He doesn't have to beat good tackles to be that. If he can keep beating Adams for three sacks a year that's good enough and Adams gets paid like he's a good player . Zellner is not all that good, but he's further ahead of your fourth string defensive end. Holsey is a journeyman with numerous starts who I'd happily put up against Nix and put on par with Myers in terms of depth behind the starters whichever loses out in Dallas.

We both have the prospects we may have hope for. They aren't really part of the conversation today. Perhaps by the end of the year they will be. But not today.

What I said was that as of this moment our line is mildly better than yours. If you want to talk about rose colored glasses, one may ask you about yours if you think Glover will perform well without a grunt playing beside him with the proven ability to take up space and blockers and start over the guys you have left.

Or put another way, who do you think is more important to the other's game. Noble or Glover? I think you know Noble or his type is far more important to Glover's game than a Glover type is to Noble. Noble is just a chugger who'll try real hard and be extremely limited. It doesn't matter who's next to him. Glover NEEDS someone to take blockers off him. Noble proved he could do that. Myers hasn't. Nix certainly hasn't. And if they don't, then Glover is a liability due to his size and potential to get pushed around if HE's the one who has to take the doubles.

In the end I don't think either of us has a very good line. I just said we're still mildly better than you because of depth advantages with experience and that you could be better than us if you add someone.

You keep using this wimpy terms like "mild". To me, that basically outlines the idea that I was right about how you might really feel about your DL. I would expect bigger terms from you, Art. But again, you are a realist...the only way you can save face is to say that your DL is "mildly" better. Cool...I can appreciate that

I cannot state that we have a great DL...I can only speak in terms that are hopeful for the future. Perhaps you would do your flock justice if you stated the same.

No hard feelings, Art. Glad to see that you still have a level head on your shoulders.

:moon:

[Ken]

Art,

I understand that your reality-challenged but come on....

Renaldo....freakin' RENALDO Wynn?????

On Par with ELLIS??????

When, why, to what extent?

Ellis had 67 tackles and 7.5 sacks last year.

Please find me more than 5 DE's who had more tackles than Ellis last year using espn stats.

Please.

I know Sacks is the end all with you but you will not find the stat that says Ellis had 31 qb pressures last season. Pressures is a huge stat. Ellis was the victim of loose coverage by the cowboys corners which allowed quick passes.

Wynn had 3 tackles last year. His career high is 31. His career high in sacks is 7.5. He's hasn't even had a pass defensed since 1998.

To say he is on par with Ellis just underscores your bias toward Redskin players.

Your DL is laughable.

[Kornheiser]

Laughable?! The D is miraculously top 5, despite the "laughable" DL.

Ellis had 7.5 sacks...oooo stunning. Bruce Smith had 8 going on 40. Let us know when Ellis goes double digit for the first time. Maybe in another 5 years.

[Larry]

Ellis had 7.5 sacks...oooo stunning. Bruce Smith had 8 going on 40.

And Bruce wasn't our best sack master.

[Ken]

Again,

What part of 67 tackles and 31 qb pressures didn't you mental midgets understand????

[Ken]

Originally posted by Kornheiser

Laughable?! The D is miraculously top 5, despite the "laughable" DL.

Ellis had 7.5 sacks...oooo stunning. Bruce Smith had 8 going on 40. Let us know when Ellis goes double digit for the first time. Maybe in another 5 years.

Take away your best DL in Gardener and your 2nd best DT and where does your DL rank?

[shamanistic1]

I just found out. But what I've read hear I tend to agree that he wasn't really worth it. He was just a body in the middle. But let's give The Dan the benefit of the doubt he's done a decent job thus far this year. He probably already has some one in the works as we speak. (crossing fingers)

[Glenn X]

Spurrier was no fan of that fat, unmotivated tub of goo (a.k.a. Wilkinson) from the word go. The ball has always been in Wilkinson's court to prove himself in this league and, with very few exceptions, he's consistently failed to do so. Good riddance, I say.

If our D-line sucks this year, at least it won't be due to lack of effort from yet another overpaid underachiever.

[bulldog]

congrats the Dallas Cowboys had a great defense in 2002. And finished 5-11 :laugh:

Happy now about our recognition of your awesome unit?

[Art]

Boozer,

I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about here since I didn't add "mildly" to save face in the slightest. I said our line was mildly better than your line before you said boo. So, what it seems happened was you tried to debate me on statements I never made and then come off surprised by a reasoned debate lacking any inflammatory commentary.

My feelings on our defensive line in Washington and what we need to do along the defensive line in Washington have likewise been stated on this board for months. Do a search. I'm pretty confident the "flock" knows what to think of our defensive line. And I'm pretty confident we're still ahead of you.

Ken,

Ellis is a dog. He dresses up pretty, no doubt. But, he's a dog. The stat of 31 quarterback hurries sounds a great deal like a Dallas Cowboy scorekeeper keeping score and giving that information to the media in Dallas which wrote a profile using those fictional numbers.

The point is simple. Wynn and Ellis remain approximately equal players in terms of what they provide. The difference is teams wouldn't run at Wynn. Bruce Smith for years piled up big tackle stats and he's been a weakness against the run for years. I'm not saying Ellis is, but let me put it to you this way. When you're not afraid of a defensive end, he's likely to get any number of tackles because teams are running at him.

To me a huge number of tackles along the line is similar to a huge number of passes defensed at corner. It's nice. It's a solid stat to point to. But, in the end, it means teams don't fear you because they're going AT you. There are some special players that make plays all over the field even along the defensive line. Daryl Gardener was that sort a year ago. Glover has been that type of player as well.

Ellis isn't that type of player.

No doubt you'll pay him as such, but you did the same thing with Adams and he's not worth a quarter of what he got. Bruce Smith STILL out performs Ellis getting to the passer. Wynn, even milking a knee problem, still made a huge number of plays in the backfield from the end position and he was only a part time end as Lavar had most of the opportunity rushing the passer from that spot.

While our defensive line may well be laughable and that's not in dispute, the fact is, your's is slightly more laughable. You just don't know it. But, remember, the underlying bias I had regarding the players on the Redskins allowed me to embarrass you time and again last offseason when we discussed comparisons on our teams. Like, if you'll recall, the offensive line. Trust me when I say when this year is over I'll remind you of this conversation as well.

[flashback]

Sorry, Art, you can provide all the anecdotal evidence you want of how Wynn "made a huge number of plays in the backfield", but he's not in Ellis' class, and you know it. And 32 NFL GMs know it. You're also real fond of talking about how playing next to Noble helped Glover, how about how much playing next to Gardener helped Wynn? Obviously, not that much, because he still only got 2 sacks, but still.

The Cowboys have 1 Pro-Bowler on the DL, a very solid end, and 2 spots that need improvement. The Redskins have 1 bona-fide starter at DT, a backup who's been promoted, a 'tease' at one end and a "part-time" (your word, not mine) end on the other side. There is absolutely NO WAY I would trade the Cowboys DL situation for the Redskins. And I don't think you would either.

[Art]

Flashback,

Wynn was a full time player. He simply played end part time because Arrington played it the rest. Wynn played tackle most of the time he wasn't at end. But, let's assume we go with your description of the starting four, there's still the factor that you have almost nothing in reserve but hope and we have Smith, Zellner and Holsey who've all rotated in at various points as starters over the last couple of years in this league.

You trust too much if you think I'd trade much of anything for your line.

[Ken]

Originally posted by Art

Boozer,

I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about here since I didn't add "mildly" to save face in the slightest. I said our line was mildly better than your line before you said boo. So, what it seems happened was you tried to debate me on statements I never made and then come off surprised by a reasoned debate lacking any inflammatory commentary.

My feelings on our defensive line in Washington and what we need to do along the defensive line in Washington have likewise been stated on this board for months. Do a search. I'm pretty confident the "flock" knows what to think of our defensive line. And I'm pretty confident we're still ahead of you.

Ken,

Ellis is a dog. He dresses up pretty, no doubt. But, he's a dog. The stat of 31 quarterback hurries sounds a great deal like a Dallas Cowboy scorekeeper keeping score and giving that information to the media in Dallas which wrote a profile using those fictional numbers.

The point is simple. Wynn and Ellis remain approximately equal players in terms of what they provide. The difference is teams wouldn't run at Wynn. Bruce Smith for years piled up big tackle stats and he's been a weakness against the run for years. I'm not saying Ellis is, but let me put it to you this way. When you're not afraid of a defensive end, he's likely to get any number of tackles because teams are running at him.

To me a huge number of tackles along the line is similar to a huge number of passes defensed at corner. It's nice. It's a solid stat to point to. But, in the end, it means teams don't fear you because they're going AT you. There are some special players that make plays all over the field even along the defensive line. Daryl Gardener was that sort a year ago. Glover has been that type of player as well.

Ellis isn't that type of player.

No doubt you'll pay him as such, but you did the same thing with Adams and he's not worth a quarter of what he got. Bruce Smith STILL out performs Ellis getting to the passer. Wynn, even milking a knee problem, still made a huge number of plays in the backfield from the end position and he was only a part time end as Lavar had most of the opportunity rushing the passer from that spot.

While our defensive line may well be laughable and that's not in dispute, the fact is, your's is slightly more laughable. You just don't know it. But, remember, the underlying bias I had regarding the players on the Redskins allowed me to embarrass you time and again last offseason when we discussed comparisons on our teams. Like, if you'll recall, the offensive line. Trust me when I say when this year is over I'll remind you of this conversation as well.

Ellis is not a dog. Ask any gm around the league and they will all take Ellis over Smith or Wynn, guaranteed.

Smith can still get to the passer, no doubt, but do you think there is a difference rushing from the RE(Smith) and LE(Ellis)? There is. Look around at the sack totals of guys who play LE and only Strahan and Peppers have impressive numbers from that spot. Ogunlye from the Dolphins played pretty well to but you have to factor in the corners and playing opposite Taylor for some of his numbers sacking the qb. Attacking the from the RE is easier because you are attacking the qbs blind side. In addition, teams tend to be right handed, lining up the TE on the Rt side and running more to that side. Wears you down being an every down player. Smith wouldn't know anything about playing every down anymore though.

It is really not disputable, Ellis is better than any lineman you have. Simple as that. The stats prove me correct. Smith may have more sacks but as a total, Ellis is clearly superior.

As far as last offseasons arguements go.... I am embarassed about the offensive line arguement. No doubt, I was wrong and our line was horrific. An absolute nightmare. That is why you will not hear a peep out of me about our OL in comparison to yours this year. Your is CLEARLY better. They have a lot to prove to me.

As far as QC goes, I blame that on Jerry Jones. I think if the guy would have played out the season the cowboys would have won 8 games last year. That is irrelevant though and I was wrong about that as well. I am confident he is going to win the starting qb battle this year and prove me right....a year late.

[Art]

Ken,

You don't know Parcells well enough yet to know he's playing QC but that QC has no real shot at the starting job. He's in love with his mobility. He likes his fluidity. He's throwing well. He's picking up the offense. He'll say a ton of wonderful things about Carter. In the end he'll be saying them to get a measure of Hutchinson.

A couple of years ago we had Brad Johnson in the fold and added Jeff George. It was clear that with a competent backup behind him Johnson couldn't play. He wasn't mentally able to withstand the scrutiny and worry. He crumbled under the pressure and we should probably have replaced him earlier given that.

Parcells is a master at measuring his players not just by athletic skills but by their mental toughness. He's going to sing Carter's praises to see how Hutchinson handles the competition mentally. The only chance QC has is if Hutchinson is frail mentally and Parcells picks up on it quickly. But that's another discussion.

Smith was an every down player a year ago for the Redskins and he's been an every down player his whole life and, you know, there's no assurance he won't be an every down player this year. And while you're correct that rushing the passer from the right side is different than the left you also forgot to mention that the left side contains the better pass blockers and the better pass rushers they are matched up against.

Right ends are largely run stuffers rather than pass rushers so it's not that anyone would expect Ellis to have huge sack numbers. You may be right that GMs would prefer him over an aging Smith. I doubt you're right as to Wynn as Wynn is more versatile as a player and, simply put, teams were afraid to run at him last year when he was going right. Teams picked on Bruce to be sure and Lavar when he was in at end, but Wynn changed the game.

It's no secret I don't like Ellis and I DREAM that he gets a contract like Adams. I also don't like Adams and I think you guys are killing yourself with monster deals to completely average players. But that's something you have to deal with internally.

[Dale]

Parcells hasn't had one positive comment about either QB publicly. If he's playing mind games, it's behind scenes. He hasn't had a glowing -- or critical, for that matter -- comment about either player.

Quincy has pretty clearly outperformed Hutchinson thus far in camp through eight practices.

Hutchinson had a great morning session on the 2nd day of camp, and I thought he was going to take off from there. But outside of a great deep pass to Joey Galloway today, he has done very little so far.

And as far as Ellis goes, he has seen quite a bit of playing time at DT as well over the past several years.

[Ken]

Originally posted by Art

Ken,

You don't know Parcells well enough yet to know he's playing QC but that QC has no real shot at the starting job. He's in love with his mobility. He likes his fluidity. He's throwing well. He's picking up the offense. He'll say a ton of wonderful things about Carter. In the end he'll be saying them to get a measure of Hutchinson.

A couple of years ago we had Brad Johnson in the fold and added Jeff George. It was clear that with a competent backup behind him Johnson couldn't play. He wasn't mentally able to withstand the scrutiny and worry. He crumbled under the pressure and we should probably have replaced him earlier given that.

Parcells is a master at measuring his players not just by athletic skills but by their mental toughness. He's going to sing Carter's praises to see how Hutchinson handles the competition mentally. The only chance QC has is if Hutchinson is frail mentally and Parcells picks up on it quickly. But that's another discussion.

Smith was an every down player a year ago for the Redskins and he's been an every down player his whole life and, you know, there's no assurance he won't be an every down player this year. And while you're correct that rushing the passer from the right side is different than the left you also forgot to mention that the left side contains the better pass blockers and the better pass rushers they are matched up against.

Right ends are largely run stuffers rather than pass rushers so it's not that anyone would expect Ellis to have huge sack numbers. You may be right that GMs would prefer him over an aging Smith. I doubt you're right as to Wynn as Wynn is more versatile as a player and, simply put, teams were afraid to run at him last year when he was going right. Teams picked on Bruce to be sure and Lavar when he was in at end, but Wynn changed the game.

It's no secret I don't like Ellis and I DREAM that he gets a contract like Adams. I also don't like Adams and I think you guys are killing yourself with monster deals to completely average players. But that's something you have to deal with internally.

Well,

I truly hope your analysis of Parcells is wrong. I really do not want Hutchinson as our starting qb. He may have a nice arm and be a tough SOB, but he is a goofy, gangly, plodding, erratic, project of a qb. He really has no shot at being a good qb until next year at the earliest. Early reports from various sources at Cowboys camp say he is no better at sensing the rush than he was last year. I have already heard numerous reports of him falling or tripping in the pocket. He just has no chance.

Say what you will about Carter but the guy is 6-7 in his last 13 games as a starting qb on a piss poor team.

The guy knows how to win, Parcells can definitely appreciate that.

I did leave out the part about the better tackles being at LT. That is true. And to a degree a hinderance. But at the same time, most of those tackles are on an island, one on one and once you get past them, its just you and a qb who doesn't see you coming....generally On the other side, you may face tackles who are a tick below that of LTs but your also fighting through chips from the TE and rb.

I hated giving Adams big money but it is what the market is bearing. There was no one else in FA who was worth big money. We couldn't go into this season with a hole at LT. He is not elite but he is not bad either. He is a top 12 LT, IMO. I hate give ENORMOUS money to Woodson and Allen more than I hated giving Adams his money. G and SS is not where you want to spend your big bucks, especially on players over 30.

[shawn]

obviously neither Wynn or Ellis are all pro DE's, but to say that WYnn is in the same class as Ellis is not correct. There was a point made regarding teams not running at Wynn, but could it be that teams ran at Smith (and Wilky) because its the weaker side of the line and it was easier to run there? it wasn't really running away from Wynn as running at a weak point of the line.

Though Ellis has yet to reach his play before his injury, despite all that's said, he is also very solid against the run, even better than Wynn. Dallas did have a better yds/attempt rush defense than the skins.

Clearly Glover is head and shoulders above any one left on the skins team, a coveted DT last year who is disruptive and can rush the passer from the DT position.

I think we have also covered the issue regarding Noble, though a starter he shared signinficant playing time and was not head shoulders above players who backed him up. Slightly or mildly better, but not greatly.

Zellner, well you can have him, as in the case with Davis as Art put it, sometimes its the case of addition by subtraction. Though he was a starter a couple of years back, not because of his talent, but because of lack of depth and talent on the team. Last year with slightly better DEs on the team he could hardly garner any playing time.

since this is a skins board, being biased is expected, but realistically the DL of the skins is packed with role players and not play makers. How many players do you need to hold up the line? Wynn, Haley, Noble? none of them can make plays, penetrate, and be disruptive. Upshaw has to still prove himself and Smith is clearly a liability against the run and can only turn it on occasionally for a few plays and then go to pause (rest) mode for a quarter or so. If getting some sacks by playing for only a 5 minute spurt in each half is what you covet, then more power to you.

[flashback]

Originally posted by Art

Flashback,

<snip>

You trust too much if you think I'd trade much of anything for your line.

I didn't say you'd trade much of anything. I said you'd trade your D-Line.

[Art]

Shawn, no one here is denying that the skins line is packed with role players and not play makers. We know this is pretty much true. The point is no one who is a Redskin fan is under any false illusion as to the quality of their defensive line. We realize what it is and what we can likely expect.

But then we are brought back to just how much none of this is the point of any of this conversation. The point is it's still ahead of you. Before losing Big Daddy it was quite a bit ahead. Now it's only barely because of more depth rather than guesses. If you add a player the balance tips. If we do, it expands. In either case, the point is WE know what our line is. You don't seem to know what yours is.

[dannyskin]

Given Fat Daddy's departure is there any chance we use a 3-4 defense with Noble and Haley rotating at nose?

[shawn]

Art,

you are looking as depth as the strength of the DL and I tend to look at the starters. Though everyone would like to have good quality depth, its more likely that your starters (barring injuries) will be logging most of the playing time. Depth is a security in case of injuries and for breather to the starters occasionally, but they are not normally counted on for extensive playing time. Its the starters who are expected to be play makers and not the backups. When startes can't make plays, that's detrimental to success of that unit.

at this point, as you stated there are no play makers on the skins DL. However, I think each defense uses different schemes, in order to achieve the end point. The strength for the skins clearly lies in the LB core and CBs copared to the DL. Probably the skins are counting on the DL to hold the line and allow the LBs to make plays.

Are the cowboys head and shoulders above the skins on their entire DL. I don't think so either, but I do think they are slightly better, given their starters are better over all. They may lack proven depth at this point (though that may be proven wrong during the season), but the starting unit is better.

[Art]

Shawn,

If the Redskins run a scheme that puts their starters on the field almost exclusively, then we are in trouble. But, that's not the plan. We plan a rotational system where guys are moved in. Plays are split much more. Haley even talked about losing Wilkinson and how much it hurt the rotation they had planned.

The starters will still play a great deal, but, unlike most places you'll see each reserve getting 20-30 plays a game as well in an effort to increase the performance of everyone by keeping them more fresh. I don't agree with you that your starters are better because I believe Ellis is a dog and teams pick on him by running right at him so frequently.

But, if you believe he is better, you probably do have a better starting group. You just don't have a better line on the whole yet.