Washington Examiner: Season review-Offensive line

[wildbill1952]

The Skins need to look at who's available through the draft for the next two years. Not just this year. Locker is better than any of this year's QB's. Next year's OT's don't look as good as Okung this year, and this year's class of centers can't touch the kid from Florida (Pouncey) in next year's draft. Iupati and Ducasse are very good guards and project well against any guard in next year's draft class.

So, assuming an upgrade in the OLine doesn't turn Campbell into Joe Montana, it's better to wait until next year for the better QB and take the better OT and OG 1-2 this year, QB and center in rounds 1-2 next year for the best overall improvement.

Of course, it ain't going to happen, but if anyone could wait two years for the best personnel, that would be it.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

This is fundamentally flawed thinking. You believe that because a QB never pans out that this proves he wouldn't have panned out entering into a different situation.

Look at the QBs that were taken high and have busted. All of them had glaring issues that were ignored due to being enamored of physical gifts, or because they were the percieved best player. JaMarcus Russell was the beneficiary of a stacked LSU team, allowing him to put up decent numbers. However, his intelligence and work ethic were in question from day one. Maybe a better situation could have helped him develop that work ethic, but he simply was not a very smart QB.

Alex Smith is probably a QB that was severely hurt by his situation - he needed to transition into the NFL offense, and the situation with his coordinators and the team being bad overall probably did hurt him. He probably needed to sit for a year before being a starter. Even so, he's about where Campbell is now as a QB, with the problems that have supposedly held JC back in spades (worse line, worse targets, WAY worse coaching - Nolan could have ruined his career)

Definitely a bust for the #1 pick, but he's not bad - and by your thesis, what he's gone through as a QB should have ruined him entirely.

Carr and Harrington were Tedford QBs, and Tedford QBs ALWAYS bust in the pros, unless they have a nearly perfect support structure, like Rodgers. Rodgers had more going for him coming in than either in any case.

Also, as Darth Tater mentioned, it is because we cannot fix OL in one offseason that we must get started now. Get a couple OL high in the draft now, so that you can approach future offseasons with the mindset of simple upkeep for the OL. Take the Ravens as an example. They had OL problems for years and really struggled with the QB position whether it be draft (Boller) or FA (Grbac and Wright). But then they spent about two offseasons really focusing on OL in the draft, and next thing you know they draft Flacco behind an established OL suddenly you have the first (I think that is right) NFL rookie QB to win 2 playoff games. Now Sanchez comes in behind a good Jets OL and we get the second example of that.

Are you implying that a guy who completed 51% of his passes in college was going to be a good NFL QB? Or that Anthony Wright and Elvis Grbac would have worked out at QB if only they had a line? Keep in mind that they had a very quality line up until 2005 - Ogden was in his prime, and Mulitalo and Flynn were very good then. Seriously, using the mid-decade Ravens as an argument is laughable. Those lines made Jamal Lewis a 2000 yard rusher a few years removed from ACL surgery.

The Ravens were lucky enough to have a subpar year (due almost entirely to the regression of Steve McNair) which put them in position to take Flacco. The Jets expended two first round picks to get their QB - I think that's a bad idea unless the QB in question is absolutely CANNOT MISS (I think Locker is a bust in the making, he is not worth a 1st rounder let alone a top 5 pick; scouts are in love with his athleticism and size just like they were with Russell). Bradford and Clausen are elite QB prospects and to pass them up for an average LT (the LT class this year is deep but there are no franchise LTs really, though I love Bulaga for this scheme), would set us back greatly.

[Atlass]

i figured i would just add another source to the pile suggesting that o-line needs tha most attention.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sports/blogs/redskins-confidential/Season-review-Offensive-line-81774737.html

Looking back: The Redskins failed to adequately address their depth along the line so it was just a matter of time before that error was exposed. Sure enough, by early in the season Chris Samuels and Randy Thomas -- both coming off surgeries and still battling issues -- were done. Shocker, we know. Apparently it was to the Redskins. The foolish decision to rarely draft offensive linemen came back to haunt this franchise. Unless Chad Rinehart is your idea of a building block; he's the only linemen chosen in the past five drafts. Let that one sink in. Anyway, Levi Jones showed that he could not play left tackle; Stephon Heyer continued to prove he is not a legitimate starter -- though he deserves credit for playing hurt; Mike Williams, signed as a right tackle showed he was better at guard; Edwin Williams proved he should have been a practice squader and Will Montgomery proved he was a center. Sadly, he was at guard. Casey Rabach and Derrick Dockery played every game; neither was particularly great.

What they need: Lots of help. Dockery is the only one who is almost guaranteed to return as a starter. Rabach is a free agent. My thought? Nobody else should be starting next year. With Samuels expected to retire, they'll need a left tackle. Thomas' age (34) and recent injury past suggests his time is almost up, if not over. They need to find more athletic linemen, which could mean smaller one's as well, to help with the cutback lanes by getting to the linebackers. That's something Heyer could not do. They also need to find guards who can pull.

Grade: D. We'd give them an F, but the real F goes to the front office for thinking this group had enough depth. And the effort of the players was never in question. So we're being kind. Besides, these guys are twice my size.

Where they're headed: For major changes. We'd suggest drafting a left tackle in the first round and finding a quarterback in the second. MIke Shanahan drafted a lineman in all but one of his drafts in Denver -- and selected 17 overall. He gets it; the previous Redskins front office (and the owner) did not. But if Russell Okung is not available at No. 4, I'd either trade down or go elsewhere. Okung fits what Shanahan likes (and is similar to Ryan Clady, whom Shanahan picked with Denver). The options in free agency are limited, though Tampa left tackle Donald Penn might be one, though teams typically don't let young players at this spot walk away (if they're any good). Denver guard Chris Kuper is another possibility, though his status could be determined more by the CBA. Regardless, this team will not return to any sort of glory until the line is fixed

That's a great little blip there. Two things you can count on in a Shanny draft; he'll draft a rb and an OL. The zone blocking scheme usually takes an OL a year to learn. Rookie OL don't play. Even the great Tom Nalen didn't start his rookie year.

The only OL to do that ever under Shanny in Denver was Clady. That's why I look for Shanny to draft an OT in the first round. He'll start right away and start the foundation of what is going to be a great OL given time.

[Atlass]

And drafting linemen in the high first is like drafting a running back high tbh - you might get an elite player, but will he be THAT much better than a well-scouted, well developed 2nd or 3rd rounder? Whereas it is nearly impossible to find elite QBs past the 3rd round.

That is so wrong. Look at all your elite LT in the NFL. Almost everyone of them were drafted in the first round most of them in the top 15. I also agree with you on the elite QB, but there are lots of QBs that are drafted in the top 10 that are busts. There are not many OT that are busts. If Shanny doesn't like Bradford than he should draft an OT.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

That is so wrong. Look at all your elite LT in the NFL. Almost everyone of them were drafted in the first round most of them in the top 15.

Wrong.

Let's name some elite LTs.

Light, 2nd round pick. Gaither, 6th round supplemental. McNeill, 2nd round. Peters: undrafted. Then you have the Saints starting a 4th rounder at LT.

You did have two 1st round LTs in the championship, but they both lost. Ferguson isn't *great* imo anyway.

[Atlass]

Wrong.

Let's name some elite LTs.

Light, 2nd round pick. Gaither, 6th round supplemental. McNeill, 2nd round. Peters: undrafted. Then you have the Saints starting a 4th rounder at LT.

Ok, then you Thomas, From the Browns, Clady from the Broncos, Orlando Pace from the Bears,

You did have two 1st round LTs in the championship, but they both lost. Ferguson isn't *great* imo anyway.

Here are some elite OT that were draft high in the first round.

Oher, Michael OT

Smith, Andre OT

J. Thomas OT

Debrickershaw Fergusen OT

Orlando Pace OT

Ryan Clady, OT

Levi Jones OT

Jake Long OT

These guys are building blocks for great offensive lines. They will or have anchored their OL for 10-15 years.

[Skinsinparadise]

Bradford and Clausen are elite QB prospects and to pass them up for an average LT (the LT class this year is deep but there are no franchise LTs really, though I love Bulaga for this scheme), would set us back greatly.

For the record I wouldn't mind if Shanny drafts a QB in the first if he's sold that they strongly have franchise QB potential. But you go on about how previous first rounders who were busts had obvious flaws that teams ignored but at the same time you feel confident to say that Bradford and Clausen, don't have any obvious flaws, and are elite QBs?

Been reading the NFL draft geek sites about both guys, watching Kiper and McShay, etc. And if you go by that, flaws are presented. I haven't encountered any talk that these guys are the real deal to the extent that they are definitively bonafide elite QB's.

Red flags have been presented on both. To your point, lets say we do draft either one, I can see an I told you so based on what's being said now.

Bradford -- why did you draft this guy, coming off of shoulder surgery. Playing a lot of his snaps from shot gun, not playing in an NFL style offense. Doesn't have a rocket of an arm. Not very mobile. You wanted more leadership out of your QB? And then you draft a guy who his teamates call the big easy because he's VERY laid back? You want a change of personality from JC to provide a lift and then you draft someone with arguably the same personality.

Clausen -- the team didn't win for the most part under him. Has an arrogant attitude about him where you wonder if he will be liked by his teamates -- didn't the Redskins have their issues with Clinton Portis, why did they need another guy like that? His arm and mobility is nothing special. Heck Mike Mayock and Todd McShay wonder if he is even first round worthy and we take him with the 4th overall pick?

I am not saying personally I buy into this. But am saying at least based on what I have read and saw neither QB is considered a consensus stud. If Shanny thinks they are, cool enough for me, pull the trigger. But i am not seeing anywhere that either QB is a no brainer stud and the Redskins would be nuts not to draft them.

Don't know how you can judge them definitively to be elite QB's. But I am sold if Shanny thinks they are elite QB's.

[TerpSkin]

For the record I wouldn't mind if Shanny drafts a QB in the first if he's sold that they strongly have franchise QB potential. But you go on about how previous first rounders who were busts had obvious flaws that teams ignored but at the same time you feel confident to say that Bradford and Clausen, don't have any obvious flaws, and are elite QBs?

A -Freakin- MEN!!! The best argument these QB-folks can come up with is that all these 1st round QBs who sucked were obviously going to suck before they were drafted. If it was so obvious, how come football teams were drafting them in the 1st round? Please don't be so naive to say they are all incompetent. So if the crux of your argument is that so very, very many of the 1st round QB talent historically is fundamentally flawed, why then are you so confident that this is the right strategy to employ this year?

And to the person who said it is not true that you can't have a great team with a great QB and awful OL, please name some of these great teams for me. I can't think of any great team that hasn't had an OL that is not very good at either protecting the passer or run-blocking or both. The most questionable superbowl winning OLines are probably the most recent Steelers OL and the Ravens 2000 OL... but those teams had two of the greatest defenses of all time, and had OL that were still pretty darn good at run-blocking. And while Roethlisberger is probably a pretty great QB... Dilfer?

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Here are some elite OT that were draft high in the first round.

Oher, Michael OT

#26 pick in the draft, and he was a right tackle until Gaither went down.

Smith, Andre OT

This year was a complete disaster for him, and didn't start until December.

J. Thomas OT

Yes he is elite but his team still sucked. And it's not like the line underachieved, they were 8th in rushing.

Debrickershaw Fergusen OT

Took a while to really get going as a great LT, and still got abused by Freeney on Sunday. Faneca (FA) and Manigold (#21 iirc) are the real stars on that line.

Orlando Pace OT

Okay, that's one.

Ryan Clady, OT

Clady has seriously regressed. He gave up 10 sacks last season after giving up one the year before.

Levi Jones OT

Even at his best he wasn't an all-pro lineman.

Jake Long OT

Fine LT, he's a franchise tackle.

Bradford -- why did you draft this guy, coming off of shoulder surgery. Playing a lot of his snaps from shot gun, not playing in an NFL style offense. Doesn't have a rocket of an arm. Not very mobile. You wanted more leadership out of your QB? And then you draft a guy who his teamates call the big easy because he's VERY laid back? You want a change of personality from JC to provide a lift and then you draft someone with arguably the same personality.

Andrews gives him a clean bill of health. In addition, Bradford played in a pro-style offense freshman year and was quite productive, so the transition won't be as bad as I originally presumed. He's not a statue in the pocket, but he didn't see enough pressure, which IS a knock against him. And I don't mind his personality - you don't need to be loud and rah-rah-rah to be a leader.

Clausen -- the team didn't win for the most part under him. Has an arrogant attitude about him where you wonder if he will be liked by his teamates -- didn't the Redskins have their issues with Clinton Portis, why did they need another guy like that? His arm and mobility is nothing special. Heck Mike Mayock and Todd McShay wonder if he is even first round worthy and we take him with the 4th overall pick?

Did you watch any ND games?

Clausen was singlehandedly responsible for 4 of their wins last year. Clausen, and Clausen virtually alone, kept them from being a 2-10 or 1-11 team. They were that bad, especially defensively. His attitude isn't really a problem; his teammates certainly liked him. His arm is good enough; he doesn't need to throw it through the goalposts on his knee to be good at the NFL level. But like Bradford, he is smart, accurate, has a quick release, and has good footwork, and he adds toughness and an intangible clutch factor that shows in his 4 comeback wins last year.

A -Freakin- MEN!!! The best argument these QB-folks can come up with is that all these 1st round QBs who sucked were obviously going to suck before they were drafted

Teams reach for QBs. That is a fact. Every team thinks they can take a physically talented QB and coach them into a winner. However, more often than not, if they lack the mental part of the game coming in, they'll never truly get it.

[TerpSkin]

Teams reach for QBs. That is a fact. Every team thinks they can take a physically talented QB and coach them into a winner. However, more often than not, if they lack the mental part of the game coming in, they'll never truly get it.

And there are people who have pointed out possible flaws with Bradford and Clausen... so if they fail in the NFL, will you one day be pointing out how people should have seen that coming because some noticed these flaws way back when they were drafted? This is all ex-post thinking. The point isn't whether or not we can scout OL or QB correctly... the point isn't that only high round OL make good OL. There are good QBs and good OL found everywhere. The point is, unlike QB, we have ignored even trying to build and maintain a talented and youthful OL for far too long and QB success comes downstream of OL success by the very nature of the game. Regardless of scouting efficiency, it is a better team building philosophy to build a great OL first. It works much more frequently then putting the QB in before the solid OL is in place... and that cannot all be blamed on bad scouting of QBs.

[pjfootballer]

Thing about this draft is, we need OL and QB, but this draft doesn't have a clear cut franchise QB or LT. So you have to take a flyer on one or the other. Franchise QB's come about less than a franchise LT, so it looks like that's Shanny/Allen's thinking. It's not a bad thing to go QB in the first and OT in the second.

[D'Pablo]

Again, you're trying to fix a DECADE-LONG PROBLEM in one offseason. That is the kind of thinking we thought we got rid of with Vinny. Instead of thinking towards the future, you over-commit to addressing immediate needs and then are shocked when another problem comes up in the future.

Problems at WR? Draft 3 pass catchers.

Problems at D-Line? Sign a 100 million dollar DT and draft a DE #13.

Problems at CB? Take Rogers over Merriman or Ware.

You will NOT rebuild this line this offseason. Regardless of whether you take a LT first or a QB first. But taking a LT first simply means you have to use future resources to take the QB of the future, or hope someone like Colt pans out. So the choice is: partially address the line in 2010 and potentially address QB for a decade? Or partially address the line in 2010 and reach for a mediocre prospect in 2011?

We've done it before.

1981

Mark May T Pittsburgh

Russ Grimm C Pittsburgh

Joe Jacoby T Louisville

[chaught76]

We've done it before.

1981

Mark May T Pittsburgh

Russ Grimm C Pittsburgh

Joe Jacoby T Louisville

Wasn't that a 12 round draft? A lot easier to land potential targets when get more assured picks. Plus' date=' Gibbs was hiding personnel on IR.[/color']

[darrelgreenie]

i figured i would just add another source to the pile suggesting that o-line needs tha most attention.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sports/blogs/redskins-confidential/Season-review-Offensive-line-81774737.html

Looking back: The Redskins failed to adequately address their depth along the line so it was just a matter of time before that error was exposed. Sure enough, by early in the season Chris Samuels and Randy Thomas -- both coming off surgeries and still battling issues -- were done. Shocker, we know. Apparently it was to the Redskins. The foolish decision to rarely draft offensive linemen came back to haunt this franchise. Unless Chad Rinehart is your idea of a building block; he's the only linemen chosen in the past five drafts.

I agree with the overall sentiment.

But i think his individual 'assessments' were typical 5 minute media shallow.

Edwin Williams proved he should have been a practice squader and Will Montgomery proved he was a center. Sadly, he was at guard

I thought the Rhinehart played well.

If you compare Rhinehart's play at RG to either of the OTs i would say he was better at RG then they were a OT.

Second, i thought that Edwin Williams playing out of position as rookie showed well for himself.

Although it might not be saying much i thought he played as well and in some cases better then Rhinehart, Montgomery and Big Mike.

I don't see how Montgomery's struggles at RG prove that he's a center.

If anything it leaves a question mark if he can play center.

Big Mike was okay at RG although he appears that he'll always have big problems with speed rushers and stunts.

The guy just doesn't seem to move well, maybe he'll improve next year but i would rather go with with Edwin Williams at RG and Rhinehart as a backup.

Also, all signs point to ZBS and Big Mike seems very ill suited for this scheme at any position.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think the OL be "rebuilt" in one offseason, but there is no reason we can't be significantly better.

Our OL was near league worst so its not a stretch to say that almost any quality young OL will be an improvement.

Other teams have greatly improved their OL in one offseason and recently key has been drafting OL.

Granted not all 1st round OL pan out, but recent history shows that OL especially top rated OL are a solid choice. I can't think of any recent 1st round OL that has failed to be an everydown, every game contributor and the top picks are playing very well and have had big impacts on the quality of their respective OLs: Jake Long, Joe Thomas, Ryan Clady.

Due to the weak state of our OL, imho every OT rated in the 1st 2 rounds is good enough to start for us probably going into the 3rd round as well.

If the coaching staff can assemble a young scheme specific OL i don't see why there won't be significant improvement.

LT-Rookie draft pick-Okung?

LG-Dockery

C-Rabach/Lichtensteiger

RG-Ed Williams/Rhinehart

RT-Rookie draft pick/Free Agent/Rhinehart/Edwin Williams

Although Rhinehart might not be stout enough to play OT in a one-on-one power man blocking scheme maybe he can be a fit as a ZBS OT??

I remember Buges saying that he thought Edwin Williams could play any spot on the OL?

[D'Pablo]

Wasn't that a 12 round draft? A lot easier to land potential targets when get more assured picks. Plus, Gibbs was hiding personnel on IR.

May was a first round pick. Grimm was a third round pick. Jacoby was an undrafted free agent. Jeff Bostic was an undrafted free agent from the year before. Starke was around for a long time prior to these guys arriving. It definitely takes some great scouting to get guys of this caliber, but it's possible.

[Atlass]

Lines dominate games. Shanny will do more with less on the OL, but if he doesn't feel these QBs are elite drafting an OT out of the gate will be a great step forward.

[RandyHolt]

We need more linemen than are available with our sole pick in the first round. That makes me wonder if we shouldnt take a QB. ISWT - In Shanny we Trust.

[nelsonal]

My own analysis is that it's much harder to spot good to very good NFL QBs, but it's ironically easier to spot the very best QBs. Interestingly, contrary to popular belief, RB are one of the better scouted positions (Defensive Line and Wide Recievers are very difficult to scout/draft).

Here's a nice summary chart, I've broken out 7 major position groups (QB, RB, WR, O-Line, D-Line, LB, and DB--sorry no TE or FB, yet). And compared the first player from each group selected*, rest of the first round, and second round. Players carreers are evaluated as

excellent if they were named to the All NFL first team or 5 pro bowls

good made it to a pro bowl at least once

average never made it to a pro bowl

bust didn't start at least 3 years (400 carries for RB, or 130 rec for WR).

* Since QBs were the only position with numerous #1 picks they've been separated from the first person selected if they weren't pick 1, there's a very wide gulf between those two, surprisingly.

I highlighted the QB bust column and QB pro bowl columns to show the similarity between first QBs taken, first rounders, and second rounders.

My conclusions are:

Scouts have a very hard time finding QBs when there's not a clear standout prospect (like an Elway or Peyton). As examples, Marino was the 6th quarterback taken behind Elway and two of the four taken between them were busts.

At every other position there is a fairly major separation between the first person taken and everyone else taken (even in the first round).

Interestingly QBs taken below #1, are rarely left to start if they don't become a star quickly, if a QB doesn't make the pro bowl in his first 3 years (of play), he'll probably never start beyond that.

Concerningly, the odds of getting a pro bowl or better QB are about the same for QBs taken anywhere in the first two rounds. (The exceptions are #1 pick QBs). If a team has a high pick, and wants a better than starting QB they would be better off trading for 2-3 second round picks and using those on QBs. I'm surprised because that strategy would not work for almost all other positions.

I have the third round and later rounds if you want to see them, I didn't want to make the chart too busy.

[Mahons21]

QFT.

We had a top 3 overall pick for years in Samuels who individually was great, but the entire OL during his tenure as LT was mostly mediocre at best.

-Prior to Dockery being traded, we had more than a mediocre line. Jansen was playing well at RT, Thomas hadn't been injured for the umpteenth time, and Rabach was doing fine at center.

[icbmayday]

Our O line is so bad I wish we could draft a two tackles 1st and 2nd round

[darrelgreenie]

Does anyone want to talk about our Redskins offensive lineman?