Mr. Sinister Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Veterens make no mistakes. George Allen= The future is now What in gods name are you talking about? :hysterical: Did you seriously just type that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
konga2145 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Okay, now you're just rambling. Just make a point, man. Point is, Nobody wants to wait for us to be a winner. Gibbs built his line through the draft, Allen did it with trades. What people don't seem to realize is if we trade away our future like Allen did, our team will be worse off than it is now. Allen only kept us contenders for 2 or 3 years. The future is now theory is only good if you want to win now. We are not even winning now, but we have been somewhat respectable in our wins and losses, So for those who want us to sign free agents , just remember we may be trading away our whole future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Point is, Nobody wants to wait for us to be a winner. Gibbs built his line through the draft, Allen did it with trades. What people don't seem to realize is if we trade away our future like Allen did, our team will be worse off than it is now. Allen only kept us contenders for 2 or 3 years. The future is now theory is only good if you want to win now. We are not even winning now, but we have been somewhat respectable in our wins and losses, So for those who want us to sign free agents , just remember we may be trading away our whole future. Uh, acquiring players via trade is completely different than acquiring players through free agency. There are no trades involved in free agency, a player can go wherever he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoVaSkins21 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 This OL is going to take some time before it looks like one that can compete in the NFL. Rabach is a just awful and has to be replaced. That's a position that requires a 1st round pick. Brown isn't healthy and probably won't be re-signed IMO. Both guard positions are huge question marks. Williams is the only legitimate piece and part of the future. There are 4 big holes there that need to be filled and it's going to require some shrewd drafting and good FA signings in order to fill those positions. Shanahan and Allen have a plan otherwise it's going to be many years before this team has a legitimate offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
konga2145 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Uh, acquiring players via trade is completely different than acquiring players through free agency. There are no trades involved in free agency, a player can go wherever he wants. Uh with free agency it is worse, a lot of times you give up draft picks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostx08 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 DT and JC were young talents, where are they now? I think you're arguing with the wrong guy lol My argument has been putting our young players in the best position to succeed by laying a core foundation and giving them something to grow from. It's just my personal perspective on how to approach it *shrug*. Like I said, I don't feel we put the likes of JC or even DT in the best position to succeed where we could say for certain we knew what move to make next ---------- Post added December-3rd-2010 at 10:15 PM ---------- Uh with free agency it is worse, a lot of times you give up draft picks Huh?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Uh with free agency it is worse, a lot of times you give up draft picks Enlighten me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Uh with free agency it is worse, a lot of times you give up draft picks Those are called Restricted Free Agents....and you officially don't know what you're talking about, in the slightest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Its not, though. You're making it for me: The reason that Rogers and Orakpo fell? Because teams went for what they perceived as need over talent, and they fell. It happens every year. You have to take the best player in the first round, and get great value there. Teams that don't, allow studs like Rogers and Orakpo to fall, while they take a lesser player, pay him more, and fill a need with a player that's more likely to bust. You're making my point for me. And Brady was obviously an anomaly. Drafting for needs of a team is not the same teams needs as another team. Are you suggesting that every team needs are the same? The fundamentals of football are universal. Show me teams that went on to win with poor lines year after year after year. Show me a time when Mike Shanahan won in Denver with a bad offensive line. Show me a Redskins team that ever won anything without a good Offensive line. The notion that only stupid teams draft offensive linemen is absurd to me. Year after year is the same. We get excited about some new FA addition, draft poorly and don't address the offensive line. Season comes and we struggle and are at the back of the pack in the league. Wash rinse repeat. Why in the hell does anyone want to continue this? Is the offensive line a confusing position to some? Year after year the teams in this division beat us because they control the line of scrimmage better, they penetrate our offensive line constantly. We can't run against them with much success. We don't pass with much success. Why continue to ignore that no matter the running back, the WR, the TE, or the QB that unless we control the line we will lose every year? And in the age of win now or else, how can any coach be a Hall of Famer, a future Hall of Famer, a college coach, the complete unknown, or who ever we have coaching this team not see that they can't win here. The plan of improving the offensive line from Free Agency or another teams decision to not re-sign a linemen doesn't work. That method has been tried over and over again and while we've had limited success for a short amount of time what we normally find is that the other team dumping said player was right to do so and we wish we had a signed a better player. Quality linemen being available is rare in this league because other teams know how hard it is to find quality offensive linemen in Free Agency. You have two methods of improving the quality of players on the team, Free Agency and the Draft. By our own experience what we see is that the linemen choosen in the earlier part of the draft rounds have a high rate of success and the linemen we added in the later rounds or through free agency don't play at a high level for very long or don't pan out at all. To think that we have greater needs anywhere outside of the offensive line to me on offensive is silly. McNabb's investment is going to be a waste of time and money unless we protect him. What running back in this league is going to be able to be successful with this group and stay healthy for a season? What WR is going to be able to get open and be productive every game with this line? It all starts and ends here. Without the Hogs the Redskins will never win a superbowl. Not in my lifetime or yours. We need the a Hogs rebirth in the worst way. What? You really think that EVERY single draft "guru" on the internet, etc., are bought off and paid for by agents of college players? Because that would have to be what happens. Kiper and others who get national TV exposure aren't the only ones who do this. Hell, they aren't even the only ones who do it for a living. Yet we're supposed to believe that everyone takes their opinions from a few paid-off guys? Okay. In reality, while there is SOME variance in opinion, most draft guru's actually agree on many players every season. And its not because they are all bought off. My attitude on the college system is its currupt as can be. That far too much of the hype around players is the same reporters eating from the same trough. Not all but most. I don't believe that the best players are ever identified before a draft, only that we hear the most about the players they want us to know about but that's not always because they are the best. I can see that you don't feel this way which is ok with me. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle of both our thoughts but you can call me crazy for this if you want. In the game of self promotion not everyone is treated equally, not all players are ever held to the same standards, and some guys are so clearly hyped up that the unsuspecting team who drafts them all have buyers remorse. Why do the best teams always go to some screwy school and leave the "common sense" approach to other teams? Because they don't buy the hype, the records, the past games. They look at the skills of that player and know how they fit into their system and draft for their system. That's drafting with a twist of best available. They go into the draft with the idea that they want to leave with a specific player and get that player and they leave the busts for the other teams. We on the other hand in past seasons wanted little to do with the draft and give away picks so we don't expose ourselves the the certain ridicule that is associated with bad talent evaluation. No choice is a choice. Look, these guys can definitely be wrong. But to suggest that what they have to say is completely useless, is asinine. Do teams use what they say? Hell no. But to pretend like they don't have a semi-accurate view of some of the prospects is stupid. Semi accurate view is one thing. Pushing players and the idea that this player is the best fit for any team and should be drafted by everyone is another. The best player to help turn this around for us won't be the best player to help turn around the Bengals. We have 32 different teams with different needs yet we should listen to Mel Kipers "This guy should go #15" without thinking about the team drafting that player is what is stupid. Um...yes. If our TEAM thinks that the best Center has a 2nd round grade. I don't care what the draftniks say in regards to our team's draft. But if our own FO thinks that the best Center has a 2nd round grade, I don't care HOW badly you need a Center....no way in hell do you draft that guy early-mid first round. You HAVE to hit on those picks. Bad teams don't. You get one shot. You have to make that count. You take that shot on the best player to help your teams needs regardless of draft grade. You sound as if a 2nd round grade means something real which unfortunately does not. That is some made up crap. Why does the same 2nd rounders make a difference on the teams drafting them that are good but don't do anything on teams that are terrible? Because those teams have the fundamentals first. If the Center is a 2nd round grade and the Guard is a late round first and your line sucks like ours does then you take the Guard. No one is saying that this is the case at all, the premise is that you can't draft these players with the first rounder because of the salary requirements due those high picks. The competitive balance with salaries would get thrown out of wack if they did that. It's poltical. If its ok to draft what most consider one of the most useless positions on the team - the Kicker - in the first round it's ok to draft the Guard or Center there too. If your team needs it. And ours does. I can't see how anyone could say we didn't need interior offensive line help. We clearly do and it's once again the root cause of us likely having a losing season. No, its not. Outside of the first and possibly second rounds, you may have a point. Reaching to fill a need is acceptable, mostly because there is much less consensus on a player's talent in those later rounds. But the first two rounds, you have to hit on. Sure do...or what it costs jobs right? Well what happens when a coach doesn't address the offensive line? He loses his job. So really what is the difference? You have to hit on the player and by no means am I suggesting we should draft a 3rd rounder in the first round however unless you know how the Redskins grade these recruits then how could you know that these guys entering the league at those critical positions are crap anyway? It sounds to me as if your minds made up that no Guard or Center is worth our picks. I think that belief is clouding some judgment here Maybe your argument will have even more merit when there's a rookie salary cap in place. Until then, you can't reach on the first round, and probably not in the second, either. Ok so review the last decade or so of doing what you want us to do in the draft - picking the best available 90% of the time - and explain how that's worked out for us so far? I don't see how that was any good for us. And if your refusing to draft linemen in the first two rounds then please point out these later round gems that worked out for us at that posistion. I could be way off here so I'd like you to re-enforce your opinion because all I see are the same mistakes repeating over and over again. Thinking that we can just throw anyone on the line and it work for us is silly to me because it doesn't work. Thinking that we can go another season without an offensive line overhaul is also silly to me. And forgetting that we don't have a 3rd or 4th rounder this draft is also silly to me. Maybe the 3rd or 4th rounds are the best rounds to get linemen but without those picks what difference does it make if we go 1-2 on those positions this year? The moneys no issue, it's not coming out of your pocket. And we now gain a competitive advantage over other teams because with the preemptive strike we get the best player at that position that year before anyone else can wait until the later pick to snag him. About the only problem I see with this is it doesn't sell jerseys or excite anyone. Hell maybe the commissioner can pull a nickname out of his butt once again and make us laugh at the pick? Or maybe just maybe we make the pick and it's a Hog. With our tradition we should be a cornerstone in the league for powerful offensive lines like the Bears are with linebackers not the bargain bin shoppers we have been for a decade. Yes...and the same old teams getting good value in the draft. You don't see teams like the Patriots, Steelers, Ravens, or even Eagles reaching in the draft. You do, however, see bad teams like the Jaguars take a DT that they "like" in the top ten, when he doesn't belong there, which is horrible value. If you notice, their team is a mess, and so is their FO. Look, there definitely has to be a healthy balance between drafting for need and drafting for talent...but in the first round, it really needs to be skewed towards the best player available. And possibly in the second round, as well. Teams who don't get great players and good value there, fail. Or you have a team of mercenaries like we always do. Line them all up and you can play duck duck goose with them...Talent...Bum...Bum...Bum...Bum...Talent...Talent...Bum...Bum...Bum...Bum...Talent... No line no championships. Sorry but that's the truth. And no offense ok but I don't know you and don't think you can rightfully say there are no Centers worth taking in the first round this year because if I can't judge a draft after less then one season I don't think anyone can judge one before it ever happens. How does that work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 ...Isn't going young and GOOD a big part of and a less biased way of defining rebuilding? We can say Shanny didn't rebuild in Denver, it sounds good, the guy always wants to win, he didn't go through one crazy overhaul so why not label that on him. But I can easily likewise say he did at least on offense. Before he left in Denver, he put together a young QB, 2 young receivers, young TE, young RB, fairly young line -- these were year one, two, three players -- sounds a lot like a rebuild to me...You claim impartiality on the Shanahan hire, but you don't argue that way. You cherry-pick some good draft picks he made over a ten-year span and claim his competence. I'll grant that in the last few years of his Denver run, you can cite a handful of good picks on offense. But, his overall record over that ten-year span was barely mediocre, There has to be some explanation that his teams won just one playoff game since he took control in 1999. If his main problem wasn't personnel, then was his coaching that bad?---------- Post added December-4th-2010 at 05:42 AM ---------- ...My argument has been putting our young players in the best position to succeed by laying a core foundation and giving them something to grow from. It's just my personal perspective on how to approach it *shrug*. Like I said, I don't feel we put the likes of JC or even DT in the best position to succeed where we could say for certain we knew what move to make nextI will grant your premise that it is easier to grade players when they are surrounded by better talent. However, in the early stages of a rebuild, the price for keeping aging vets is too high. They take away roster spots and playing time which is better used trying out talent. Yes, the talent is harder to judge, but you get to look at more prospects.The Eagles used this year's draft pick obtained in the McNabb trade to select starting free safety Nate Allen. They will have another shot at a young player next year as a result of that trade. We should be on the selling end of trades like that, not on the buying end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.