I shall guide you to the light. We don't ONLY need offensive line.

[Art]

Our success rate? We've made the playoffs how often in the last ten years? The Redskins success rate is poor at best. We have been a team that hovers around mediocrity more often dipping below than above.

Our team success rate has been low. Yet, we've gotten very high productivity from a number of the players we've added. We've often spoken how we have long been a team with a sum less than the worth of the parts. Because we have been a bad team does not mean Portis, Moss, Griffin, Washington, Hall, Fletcher, Springs, etc., have been poor performers.

That we've been a poor team does not stem from just the failures of the Archuleta's and Lloyd's. Largely the team has frequently had good players at most spots. Just not QB. More likely the core problem we've had is never getting good play here and in the very few instances we got good play there we looked pretty good.

While Collins was never the answer, you saw how the whole team took off when it got competent QB play for that brief, wonderful stretch. Once we answer that spot, all the rest just seems to be a lot better on the whole. McNabb should improve it in the near term at least.

[#98QBKiller]

Our success rate? We've made the playoffs how often in the last ten years? The Redskins success rate is poor at best. We have been a team that hovers around mediocrity more often dipping below than above.

And a lot of that can be attributed to pissing away draft picks year after year. I think the picks for McNabb was good and I think this year's 3rd for Jeremy Jarmon was good too. But in the past decade we've pissed away an awful lot of 3-6 rounds picks for unproven NFL players or to move up and draft mediocre-at-best players.

And to the OP, no the offensive line isn't the only need for this team but it is by far the most urgent need in terms of starting talent but especially in terms of depth. If you look back at the ridiculous magnitude of OL injuries last season and how poorly we were prepared, it becomes obvious that depth is still a major concern. At this point we have depth guys on the right side of the line that are going to be used as starters. What happens if one or more of them goes down?

Trent Williams fills the void of losing Chris Samuels, Derrick Dockery is a solid starting LG and we can live with Rabach for another season. We can't rely on Stephon Heyer or Mike Williams to start at RT and not even at RG. Chad Rhinehart went down with a serious knee injury that won't bring him back until late season at best. Artis Hicks and Kory Lichtensteiger have been brought in for depth but neither are starting-caliber players. If we don't make some moves in free agency to address RT and RG we're going to be in serious trouble again if we lose an offensive linemen to injury for the season.

[jtyler42]

Watching videos of Riley and looking at his build and measurable's, I see a lot of James Farrior in him...I think Haslett will use him in the same capacity in this defense if Riley is willing to put in the work to get better and strengthen hi weaknesses...

[ressecup1987]

People also need to remember that our off-season doesn't end with the draft. I'm sure the Skins plan on adding quite a few more players before training camp and during training camp. Teams will have to make cuts sooner or later and who knows who we will be able to pick up from those cuts or future trades. Who knows, we might even find a diamond in the ruff in a rookie who isn't drafted at all during draft week.

[Art]

Yeah we know that and we have seen the results year in and year out of going with veteran castoffs from other teams paying them like the went to the probowl while playing for the Redskins, instead of developing our own.

You look at the rest of or division and you see teams that are ridiculously young and talented with plenty of draft picks to add to depth or use as bargaining chips get more picks next year or fill a spot with a vet.

We don't have the fire power to do any of that.

If Kolb is a Top 10 QB the Eagles will be pretty darn good. If he's a bottom 10 QB, the Eagles will be 6-10 and we'll be mocking them for being so young and sucky.

[bulldog]

After the second round you really have to assess BPA against your needs.

You can't go into Rounds 4 and 5 and just take linemen for the sake of taking linemen.

This team needs OLB, a fast young RB, a free safety, etc.

If those guys come up you take them

[Burgold]

Our team success rate has been low. Yet, we've gotten very high productivity from a number of the players we've added.

I agree with much that you wrote here, however, it's a bottom line business. If we got great parts that aren't getting it done then you've failed (hense the turnover in front office and coaching) If the players are good, but the team doesn't gel because of injuries/limited depth, chemistry, or attitude... then the strategy of co-opting already proven players is a failed one.

The result of our player acquisition is measured by our results. You're right, that doesn't mean that all of the players we traded for or acquired are bums, but the net effect is one that no one has wanted.

[Art]

After the second round you really have to assess BPA against your needs.

You can't go into Rounds 4 and 5 and just take linemen for the sake of taking linemen.

This team needs OLB, a fast young RB, a free safety, etc.

If those guys come up you take them

Yep.

Your pick is based on who you have on the board, not need. We may come to think the board we put together sucks as more drafts are complete and we get limited late round production or we may come to think we're mad scientists in the late rounds with great production.

But, this is not about need. It's about the board we've put together.

[Rypien1191]

Well, Art says it, I guess it must be so. Pretty cool that he gets to have his own thread too.

[Art]

Well, Art says it, I guess it must be so. Pretty cool that he gets to have his own thread too.

Correct on both counts.

I am not you. Nor am I held to the same constraints you are. There's another thread about pick 103 questioning why. Here's a thread for balance explaining why. All thoughts can be constrained therein as both sides are covered.

In your next post, say you understand what you've just been told and I will consider this time well spent. Say anything else, and I'll feel great disappointment.

[HailGreen28]

<snip>

Get your over-rated common sense and perspective outta here, man!

We don't need that stuff in here! :mad:

I'm OK at this point with BPA for anything except TE/RB/QB. Hoping for another OL though.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I think a good deal of the criticism over the pick isn't the position, but the player. Also, a high 4th round pick should be described by various scouting reports in a more complimentary way than how Riley seems to get described lol...we got excited over Barnes because from descriptions of his play and from reports, he had the talent level to be a high 2nd round pick if not for the injury. He felt like a "steal" of sorts, someone worth taking a chance on if the reports from his physical gave the green flag. Riley is kind of the opposite, someone who seems like a reach going by the description of his play and production in various media outlets and reports. And when you only have 4 draft picks, as a fan you REALLY don't wanna see any of those picks being described as a reach...let's hope Shanahan and Haslett have enough on the ball to see something in Riley that can be transformed into a long term, productive player and hopefully starter.

[Rypien1191]

Correct on both counts.

I am not you. Nor am I held to the same constraints you are.

Oh believe me, I understand that much.

[GibbsFactor]

We got the following out of this draft so far:

Starting Left Tackle

Franchise Quarterback

Solid SAM/Jack/DE depth

Solid Buck depth

Now we need a right guard and a cover safety, depth at both lines.

[Art]

Oh believe me, I understand that much.

Go a bit further by expressing you see and understand two break out threads exist on this topic which is balanced and easy to navigate. Express even a tad more that the creators of this site and those who maintain it -- I'm on longer in the latter group -- are granted the perk of knowing what the board needs at any given time where you may be a bit more focused, as a normal user, on what HE wishes to say.

[Ryman of the North]

Yup we NEED linebackers, but Linebacker is a position that you can get by with Free agents and castoffs rejuvenating their careers. Kirk morrison would have been an ok fit and went to the jags for almost nothing! this guy may turn out to be solid and because of shanny's brain fart in switching to the 3-4 for no real reason we now have holes where we did not before. I would have preferred staying 4-3 and only really needing a solb and cover safety, that would have allowed us to target mainly Oline and those two spots.

[Chris Worthy]

Well, Art says it, I guess it must be so. Pretty cool that he gets to have his own thread too.

Couldnt get your attention in the other thread I see, so you had to inflate your chest here. Good for you.

you will probably need this:

http://www.motorizedbicycles.biz/product_info.php?products_id=62&osCsid=men3m1vsnv2l856n0dflg93df0

[MumboSauce]

Unfortunately around here posts with good reasoning, logic and understanding such as this are becoming aberrations instead of the norm.

Right you are JKYpoo lol it wouldn't matter if it was Vince freakin Lombardi, or an Omnipotent football God people would still gripe and complain. It's both comical and sad.

[33]

If you look at the Steelers defense they use both guys as FS's interchangeably. Similar to a cover 2 in the sense that the safeties play left and right side a lot. Both Polamalu and Ryan Clark seem like FS's in their defense.

So, considering we have no real FS (and I don't agree Doughty can play FS) we could be in trouble, but I expect to see LL playing a lot closer to the line this season and having a bit of pressure taken off him by the pressure created by the front 7.

[Art]

Yup we NEED linebackers, but Linebacker is a position that you can get by with Free agents and castoffs rejuvenating their careers. Kirk morrison would have been an ok fit and went to the jags for almost nothing! this guy may turn out to be solid and because of shanny's brain fart in switching to the 3-4 for no real reason we now have holes where we did not before. I would have preferred staying 4-3 and only really needing a solb and cover safety, that would have allowed us to target mainly Oline and those two spots.

I'm not sure I'm totally on board with this. You can find castoffs and free agents at every position, except franchise QB. You still draft for players you like and when you like them and they also have potential to fit a position you need help in that's not a bad combination.

[33]

Also, nothing wrong with drafting LBs. When you make the switch to 3-4 you're practically saying that LBs are half your defense, not to mention the need on special teams. Cerrato/Zorn devalued our special teams incredibly.

[NavyDave]

If Kolb is a Top 10 QB the Eagles will be pretty darn good. If he's a bottom 10 QB, the Eagles will be 6-10 and we'll be mocking them for being so young and sucky.

I'm definately rooting for that to happen but at the same time I envy them having resources to build their team compared to us.

Hopefully in a couple of years we will be in that position.

[Wyvern]

Art -- Just because you posted it some time earlier --I'm still not sold on this this being the best order of replacement. Nor do I think this pick reflects the best blend of positional need and BPA.

Sure there's a need created by our desire for a 3-4, but from what I've been able to read about our latest pick, Riley is probably a special teamer for the first year or two, and he's a liability in pass coverage. IMO, it looks like in picking Riley we leaned much more heavily on positional system need, rather than BPA -- when these factors should be considered together. We reached into the LB pool when there might have been other needs we could have picked up more value BPA wise.

I'd note that even your orginal post seems to indicate that we needed a safety sooner, and I think there were some good ones (Chancellor,etc.) we passed on. I also feel that assuming Heyer is the answer at RT may be optimistic -- so maybe another OL pick (Capers, Campbell, etc.?) might not have been that crazy to consider. There were some highly regarded candidates that have slid to where we might pick them up.

Whatever, it's now history --Shanahan/Allen are putting their stamp on the team and we fans had better adjust to the ride.

[NavyDave]

We got the following out of this draft so far:

1. Starting Left Tackle

2. Franchise Quarterback

3. Solid SAM/Jack/DE depth

4. Solid Buck depth

5a DE with 1st round grade

5b ????

6 ???

Now we need a right guard and a cover safety, depth at both lines.

Yep potentially an A++ draft

[Mad Mike]

The Redskins prefer to acquire guys who've proven capable of playing in the NFL over guys who've proven nothing.

I think it's more accurate to say that in the past we have preferred to acquire vets over the draft. I believe the McNabb trade will be an exception to the rule moving forward. It allowed us to get a good QB *and* a top prospect at OT. Still, if we had any shot at Bradford it wouldn't have happened. Shanahan is playing the cards he was dealt in this draft. I expect a youth movement through the draft in coming years.

You are dead on as to our multiple needs. I think the O line only cult is the result of the groupthink mentality that is prevalent on the board. Once an opinion becomes popular it's like a boulder rolling down hill.

Jason Campbell was a popular player and people have never accepted that his holding the ball too long contributed to the sacks he had. Once teams learned they could tee off on him and he couldn't make them pay, it was all over. Campbell supporters have placed all of the blame on the O line.

As I'm watching, word is now that the Raiders are in negotiations for him which would mean a sixth rounder at best... The Raiders... the team that picked JaMarcus Russell.

A) They are terrible at judging talent. Seeing potential where little exists.

Even they wouldn't be giving much up to get him.

We may not have the best line in the NFL, but we can be competitive and successful with them in a better system and much improved QB play.