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

[GIBBS LIVES]

http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=7483109&postcount=130

Read that. Read the time stamp. Read the order. Understand that's almost certainly the current order of need at Redskins Park right now. And, try, as hard as it may be, to understand the Washington Redskins were 4-12 last year with atrocious play across the roster.

This is a team that has gone about addressing many of those needs while creating more. Switching from a 4-3 brings a lot of different needs than the bad team we ended the year as. By adding Hicks and Trent Williams prior to the Fourth Round pick the team helped parts of the line this offseason. Improvements to the system, running backs, play calling and QB provide additional boosts to the line, as does the possibility that guys NOT on the roster to start last year -- Jones, for example -- could be on the roster this year, or, that we find a couple of other vets for additional depth and to challenge for the starting job.

Some of you have offensive line on the brain. This team had three major voids heading into the draft and only ONE pick to think was good enough to potentially fill one immediately. Trent Williams plugged that gap. No one taken in this round was at all likely to improve our offensive line this year and the work put in to make a young player, say like Campbell, better is the same work we'll put in to making another still young player like Heyer better.

I don't doubt our line will have more changes both this season and next, but, some of you need to grasp this team wasn't one spot away. It would have been criminal to avoid adding any inside backers as it will be not to add a safety.

Try to get over the drum beat that this team only needed one thing. It needed many.

Excellent thread. And the clear truth. This team isn't making a playoff run this season and anyone who thinks they are has been drinking too much of the koolaid.

The offensive line is still not up to par. And the WR are either unproven or underacheivers. Also, we still do not have a real RB because they guys we have are all on the decline. This is a three year project. It will take time but we are headed in the right direction.

WE HAVE TO LEARN TO KEEP DRAFT PICKS FROM THIS POINT ON!!!

[TheDane]

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.

Holy **** it's been too many years since I've read one of these.

[Peregrine]

So, I guess the question would be...Why did we spend a 2nd and 3rd rounder on McNabb, a QB with only 2-3 years left, when this team is THAT far away from filling all of those holes? Clearly the Redskins FO didn't think so.

[Bootleg]

So, I guess the question would be...Why did we spend a 2nd and 3rd rounder on McNabb, a QB with only 2-3 years left, when this team is THAT far away from filling all of those holes? Clearly the Redskins FO didn't think so.

Clearly a 2nd and 3rd rounder are valuable... But I don't understand why people overrate those picks so much when we're talking about an actual competent starting quarterback who has earned many superlatives throughout his career. If we spent them on Anquan Boldin, yeah I'd understand....

But it's a quarterback! We have holes, but the biggest one was quarterback and we got one... A great one.

Pretty cheap, too, if you look at the other deals that have gone on around the league. How much did Eli Manning cost... And Jay Cutler... Heck, remember when we got Brunell... McNabb costs the same plus a 2nd rounder... Not a bad deal. How about Jason Campbell.... 1st, 3rd and 4th.... How about Brad Johnson... 1st, 2nd, and 3rd!

[KennyKhaos]

So, I guess the question would be...Why did we spend a 2nd and 3rd rounder on McNabb, a QB with only 2-3 years left, when this team is THAT far away from filling all of those holes? Clearly the Redskins FO didn't think so.

Because they knew they were getting at least one of the top linemen in the draft and had already started working on the line with free agents. Biggest holes were O-line, RB and QB. Getting a vet QB of McNabb's ability drastically speeds up the process. We only gave up a 2nd this year for McNabb. They know exactly how many holes we have. That's why they drafted the way they did and went about free agency the way they went about it. Not to mention all the undrafted guys we've got. Some will make the team and some won't, but the best will make the team and holes will be filled

[ATLredskin]

Saying we need a "future RB" is stupid and is not a need. Who drafts RB's to groom them. You either can play now or you get cut. The only RB's that are groomed multiple years are RBs picked in the 1st round since teams desperately don't want to give up on their 1st round investment. Any other round and that RB is gone after 2 years of being a bust. If we want a RB we can get one in any year and in any round. They come a dime a dozen...

[TheLongshot]

Clearly a 2nd and 3rd rounder are valuable... But I don't understand why people overrate those picks so much when we're talking about an actual competent starting quarterback who has earned many superlatives throughout his career. If we spent them on Anquan Boldin, yeah I'd understand....

Boldin is 5 years younger than McNabb. Granted, he's had injury issues in recent years, but so has McNabb

But it's a quarterback! We have holes, but the biggest one was quarterback and we got one... A great one.

Pretty cheap, too, if you look at the other deals that have gone on around the league. How much did Eli Manning cost... And Jay Cutler... Heck, remember when we got Brunell... McNabb costs the same plus a 2nd rounder... Not a bad deal. How about Jason Campbell.... 1st, 3rd and 4th.... How about Brad Johnson... 1st, 2nd, and 3rd!

Problem is, how long is McNabb going to be good? Maybe 3 years is my guess, and that also depends if we can keep him healthy, which he hasn't been for 4 of the past 5 years.

No doubt that McNabb is an improvement for us. But, is it enough of an improvement to overcome all the other questions there are about this team? Will this team be good enough to bring a return on this investment? Shanahan seems to be betting hard that this team is good enough. I have my doubts.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

The problem has not been that the Redskins ignore the draft and use free agency. The problem has been that the Redskins use draft picks to acquire vets. Free agency in and of itself is fine. You will never hear me ****ing about Haynesworth.

The problem is trading picks for vets. You get the cost and transitional issues of free agents WHILE losing the ability to add youth. We've been way way too reliant on that approach.

I'm hoping that the McNabb deal is the last we see of it for a while.

[MumboSauce]

No problem, just difference in opinion. In my opinion we have been dominated in the trenches, and seeing division teams draft MORE DL made that situation even more critical. A lot more critical than LB or FB. I would have preferred Campbell in the 4th, and anyone other than a FB in the 6th. That is just my opinion.

^^^ Bruce Campbell sucks dude. Just a big physical freak that can't play a lick of football. Getting Oline just to get online is silly. I mean I don't know that he'll definitely suck anymore than you think it would have been good to draft him but that guy has a looonnnnggg way to go if he'll ever be anything. We'll see in a few years though. Going overboard judging a current draft is kinda silly.

[illone]

How does the post not make sense?

Your claims are not based in reality therefore they do not make sense.

Everything the Skins havedone thus far is a departure from the way things have been conducted since 2000.

[Art]

Thanks for stating the obvious. Who did not know this?

Apparently a great number of folks.

It is obvious, yet, somehow many seem to have missed that.

[Art]

Wildbill.

My post is clearly a timed one.

It comes AFTER the Trent Williams pick. It comes as people complained of our fourth-round pick. And what I said was simple. At that point in the draft it is far more likely a safety, or linebacker or a number of other spots will potentially be capable of starting for your team than an offensive lineman THIS year.

When acquiring players through the draft, I wholly reject your premise you select them targeted to perceived weakness. I, and nearly ever NFL team, believe you select players based on their grade on your board and you worry about their position in a secondary fashion. When there's a tie, you may go to your need board.

After Trent Williams was picked, our need board RADICALLY changed. After adding Hicks, a fourth-round pick two years ago BY Shanahan AND Trent Williams, no longer was offensive line the most pressing need then. We just switched to a 3-4. We've done nothing at linebacker. Two of our backers are converted defensive ends. Another has never played inside. That became your top need position and without great surprise, that was the next pick.

While true our weakest position on the whole last year was offensive line, not far behind it was safety. Nonetheless, the weakness stems from the loss of a Top 5 left tackle. The acquisition of one transforms a line from weak to strong because such a player masks much. If Williams is strong, nothing else really needs to be prioritized to make the line good. If Williams is terrible, we'll suck no matter what else we do.

I have no problem with Williams over Berry if the team had the two graded similarly. In a Berry thread I wrote if the team has Berry as a certain, huge, monster safety prospect and the team has Williams as a tier below, you go with Berry. That would be perfectly reasonable given the drastic need at safety.

The team had, in the view of many, a top NFL line halfway through 2008. Injuries and catching on to Zorn eliminated those thoughts. As I've told others, when you have an elite left tackle, you don't have two. And if you lose your elite left tackle, your line suffers drastically. Ours did. Ours will under Williams.

But, bear in mind. If Williams is GREAT and plays lights out and is an elite left tackle, he's the only significant player there we'll have. If he ever gets hurt, our line will suffer, and it won't be that we need to draft another left tackle. In the world with no cap you might be able to help yourself here differently than in capped world, so we'll see how that landscape changes.

In the end, our line will be dramatically improved because McNabb will get the ball out of his hands better than Campbell. Without making a single change. With the changes and hoped for solid play of Williams, it'll probably be a pretty good line. Though, it's not a line ideally built for this system, so I suspect it's got a bit more of a transformation to go.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Problem is, how long is McNabb going to be good? Maybe 3 years is my guess, and that also depends if we can keep him healthy, which he hasn't been for 4 of the past 5 years.

Three years in the modern NFL is an eternity. If we can get 3 good years out of McNabb (while concurrently figuring out who his long-term replacement will be), I will be a very happy man. Especially if it means that we're contenders for those 3 years.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Your claims are not based in reality therefore they do not make sense.

Everything the Skins havedone thus far is a departure from the way things have been conducted since 2000.

chris samuels was drafted in the 1st round of the 2001 draft. from 2002-2009, the redskins drafted a total of 6 offensive lineman.

we drafted 3 this weekend. at this pace we'll tie our entire drafted offensive lineman output by next april! lol

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Three years in the modern NFL is an eternity. If we can get 3 good years out of McNabb (while concurrently figuring out who his long-term replacement will be), I will be a very happy man. Especially if it means that we're contenders for those 3 years.

so true. i fully expect us to be in the QB draft market next year, or the year after. if mcnabb gives us 3 years of high level QB play, we can stay competitive while still building for the future.

[SKINchiefer]

I know he may end up being a fodder but Curtis Gatewood (who?) can be moved inside as well if he earns a spot. Or do you guys think he is more well suited for the outside?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

so true. i fully expect us to be in the QB draft market next year, or the year after. if mcnabb gives us 3 years of high level QB play, we can stay competitive while still building for the future.

Exactly. The McNabb moved gave us a 3-4 year window with which to find and groom the future QB of the Shanahan(s) era.

And, in terms of worrying about a time period 3-4 years out, it's ridiculous. In that window, the Patriots went from an also-ran, to winning multiple Super Bowls, to just a playoff contender.

So, if McNabb plays great and we compete for 4 years, I'll assume our competent FO will have a backfill for QB...but I won't dwell on it if we're doing something great in the meantime.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Exactly. The McNabb moved gave us a 3-4 year window with which to find and groom the future QB of the Shanahan(s) era.

And, in terms of worrying about a time period 3-4 years out, it's ridiculous. In that window, the Patriots went from an also-ran, to winning multiple Super Bowls, to just a playoff contender.

So, if McNabb plays great and we compete for 4 years, I'll assume our competent FO will have a backfill for QB...but I won't dwell on it if we're doing something great in the meantime.

its really the perfect plan. it buys this front office time to truly find the QB of the future, who will most likely be kyles guy.

now the problem is if we end up being too good we wont have a high enough pick to take one of the franchise guys in the top 10! lol

[TheLongshot]

I have no problem with Williams over Berry if the team had the two graded similarly. In a Berry thread I wrote if the team has Berry as a certain, huge, monster safety prospect and the team has Williams as a tier below, you go with Berry. That would be perfectly reasonable given the drastic need at safety.

It is hard to know if safety is a drastic need this year, because it is pretty clear that the safety position will be defined differently from when Blache was here. It seems the days of having one guy play center field is going away.

Three years in the modern NFL is an eternity. If we can get 3 good years out of McNabb (while concurrently figuring out who his long-term replacement will be), I will be a very happy man. Especially if it means that we're contenders for those 3 years.

It all depends if the rest of the team can catch up to benefit from those years, which is my concern. Despite what detractors say, Campbell wasn't the lone issue with the offense.

we drafted 3 this weekend. at this pace we'll tie our entire drafted offensive lineman output by next april! lol

Well, the last two were pretty much head starts on RFA signings, which is the way I treat most mid to late 7th round picks. We've had plenty of those guys going through our system over the years.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

its really the perfect plan. it buys this front office time to truly find the QB of the future, who will most likely be kyles guy.

now the problem is if we end up being too good we wont have a high enough pick to take one of the franchise guys in the top 10! lol

If we get THAT good, I would contend that we could win with a "good" QB just like Shanahan almost did with Plummer (unless we get that good simply from QB play alone).

I think, through whatever means necessary, they will be able to find a potential QB of the future over the next 3 off-seasons even if we are picking in the bottom third of every draft.

[mcgraw238]

Great thread Art.

The OL has been addressed in a major way with the TW selection @ 1:4 and Hicks being signed as a free agent. That gives us 2 new OL starters right there. Then they picked up Shanny's 4th rounder from a couple years ago plus added a couple developmental guys in round 7. It's clear that the current regime viewed OL as a weakness that needed attention.

In the later rounds, some other needs were addressed with the Riley ILB pick for the 3-4 transition. Many seem to overlook that LB, whether running a 34 or 43, is an area that required attention. Riley is a solid pick that could see playing time fairly early. The Dennis Morris pick gives us a multi-talented FB that Shanny loves in his version of the WCO. The guy looks to be a great blocker and has excellant hands. He may be the steal of our entire draft class. Finally, the Austin pick was a low risk attempt to add some explosiveness to PR/KR.

[Skinsinparadise]

The problem has not been that the Redskins ignore the draft and use free agency. The problem has been that the Redskins use draft picks to acquire vets. Free agency in and of itself is fine. You will never hear me ****ing about Haynesworth.

The problem is trading picks for vets. You get the cost and transitional issues of free agents WHILE losing the ability to add youth. We've been way way too reliant on that approach.

I'm hoping that the McNabb deal is the last we see of it for a while.

I agree. And if you look at Shanny's past he usually has his full draft plate plus a spare pick. And for that matter he liked FA too. So we likely get a combo approach as opposed to the Gibbs 2 -- FA, combined with trading for veterans approach.

When you screw up for example on giving Brandon Lloyd a big contract the problem is compounded beyond the salary cap implications. You lose a 3rd and 4th rounder, picks you can use to make up for bad signing by finding a suitable replacement.

I understand the thought process of adding proven players but why not add youth simultaneously? The Patriots seem to build that way. And yeah there are some teams out there with that approach, like the Ravens who have been successful without an elite QB. But no question an elite QB helps a lot, and I like the McNabb trade.

[TK]

Exactly. The McNabb moved gave us a 3-4 year window with which to find and groom the future QB of the Shanahan(s) era.

And, in terms of worrying about a time period 3-4 years out, it's ridiculous. In that window, the Patriots went from an also-ran, to winning multiple Super Bowls, to just a playoff contender.

So, if McNabb plays great and we compete for 4 years, I'll assume our competent FO will have a backfill for QB...but I won't dwell on it if we're doing something great in the meantime.

its really the perfect plan. it buys this front office time to truly find the QB of the future, who will most likely be kyles guy.

now the problem is if we end up being too good we wont have a high enough pick to take one of the franchise guys in the top 10! lol

Shanny & Allen both have a 5 year contract.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

It all depends if the rest of the team can catch up to benefit from those years, which is my concern. Despite what detractors say, Campbell wasn't the lone issue with the offense.

No, that's completely true. However, we've improved the OL and the rest of the players are no longer running "this" offense, they'll be running an offense that was in the top-5 for two straight years.

Granted, there's no telling what our group of players will do with it, but I think we're improved at QB and OL for sure. Additionally, we're in year 3 for two of our WRs, have an established WR who's still good, have a boatload of talent in the backfield, two dangerous TEs, etc.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Shanny & Allen both have a 5 year contract.

I don't see the point?

My window was a realistic assessment of how long McNabb will lead this offense...not how long Mike will coach. I think (even as someone who loves the McNabb acquisition) it's fair to say that he might not be our starting QB in year 5. If he still is, that makes my point even stronger!