arftech Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Vince Wilfork...thats the guys i want. Vince will be 34 next year and signing aging veterans to me is a no go. HTTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 -------------------------------------------------QB targets:Sean Mannion-I struggle with Sean Mannion. He has the traits that make him a good pro-style QB prospect. Size, arm, played under center, played in rhythm drop back passing game, was productive in college. But I wonder about his quickness in Jay's WCO. But if he can speed up his process?Jamiel Showers-Fits the bill of a modern WCO style QB. A little size deficient the but has the athleticism and quickness (movement and throwing). Played in a rhythm drop back offense that was under center a ton. But lacks big time college production. Was compared to Russell Wilson during the NFLPA game/practices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassSkinsFan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I know he's going to be 34, but if we could get Wilfork for a reasonably low price, I'd love to have him. He is a real leader and one hardworking mofo. Having to watch the Pats on local news all the time, he stands out to me as one of the main heart and soul guys on the Pats since he's been here. If you want a veteran to come in and set the right tone, show the kids how a motivated professional works, and give his all, this is your guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco Bell Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I love wilfork, and I remember the other guy I wanted if we didn't get sean taylor that draft was wilfork. Probably just by chance I have that odd memory of him being my second favorite player that draft but it was mostly because I saw him play in stuff by virtue of watching sean stuff. There is no way we should sign him. The only way, and it actually will sound the most stupid (and the reason why I am saying no, because the contingencies are absurd), but the only way we should sign him as a NT is if we also take Danny Shelton. Because, I will give you Vince Wilfork seems to be a great teammate which would be great for our lockeroom. I honestly think he's the type of guy who appreciates having gotten to be on the best franchise in the nfl and the experiences he received out of it. Meaning, I think he's a more than willing type to try to be a positive influence in the lockerroom and help "coach" his position players with information and wisdom. But, I'm not paying 2-3m per year for a player-"coach" with no talented students beneath him. So, I think letting Danny learn from a "gracious great" would be the only way I'd actually like adding him. Because obviously, you are getting a player past their prime on a team that has no reason to be playing for now. Eventually, the stopgaps have to stop, but we all know that for that to happen it means years and years of solid drafting so our franchise can stop essentially admitting they suck at drafting through the language of "FA pickups." He's one of those guys that just from the corny intangibles I wouldn't mind if he set foot in the redskins organization, but yea is it the "right" move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arftech Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 ^ Key point from above: "Eventually, the stopgaps have to stop" HTTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 The FO needs to know their plan. Depending on what they're doing Vince may/may not make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epochalypse Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I don't think you can have a hard and fast "sign no one older than X". WRT Wilfork, I would agree that chances are he would be above what I'd expect to pay for a FA his age, but I am definitely hoping we explore what kind of contract he is looking for and I would honestly have no problem signing him to a team friendly contract if possible. Fact is the guy can play and plays a position that we need. As much as people like Shelton he is not a guaranteed instant Pro Bowl caliber NT. He's not even guaranteed to be good. He's potential and yes if we end up going that route you don't want Wilfork keeping him off the field but it would allow us to groom a Shelton or another NT until they are ready. I've seen a lot discussion about how Rodgers had Favre to play behind and learn from; why wouldn't that be a good construct to follow in this case? If a guy we drafted isn't immediately ready, we'd have a very good nose in place to mentor them until they were. If the guy we drafted is ready, we have a solid rotation and are covered in case of injury better than we've been at the position. Again, the price would have to be right and allow Scot to shed him without hurting us short term or long, but to say no he's over X years old is to ignore the fact we need players and those players will cost money anyway. The important thing is to get players that provide maximum bang for the buck. It may be that a 33 yr old NT provides that. I mean think about it, what good is having 3 guys who are younger and cheaper if they can't even hold Wilfork's jock? If I'm Scot, I have a price in my head for Wilfork and I'm finding out if I can get him for that. I'm not ruling him out just because he's 33. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassSkinsFan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Fact is the guy can play and plays a position that we need. As much as people like Shelton he is not a guaranteed instant Pro Bowl caliber NT. He's not even guaranteed to be good. He's potential and yes if we end up going that route you don't want Wilfork keeping him off the field but it would allow us to groom a Shelton or another NT until they are ready. I've seen a lot discussion about how Rodgers had Favre to play behind and learn from; why wouldn't that be a good construct to follow in this case? If a guy we drafted isn't immediately ready, we'd have a very good nose in place to mentor them until they were. If the guy we drafted is ready, we have a solid rotation and are covered in case of injury better than we've been at the position. Let's not forget we're talking DL here, not OL. Starting one guy doesn't mean another won't get reps. They're constantly in and out, so having 2 NTs who can do the job wouldn't be a big issue. As much as I'd love to see us sign the VW Bus, I realize it's pretty much pie in the sky, and it may run totally counter to Scot's strategy/plans. I just suggested it because, regardless of logic, I like the guy as a football player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogsOfWar Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Marcus Mariota. Then flip him to the Eagles for three firsts and a second. What's not to love - we get tons of picks, and we'd be inflicting a spread offense QB on a divisional rival! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santana_4_prez Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 More draft picks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epochalypse Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Marcus Mariota. Then flip him to the Eagles for three firsts and a second. What's not to love - we get tons of picks, and we'd be inflicting a spread offense QB on a divisional rival! The circus that would ensue if we can't unload him. That's what not to love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIKKI8 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 FREE AGENTS: DRAFT PICKS 1. Jeremy Parnell OT 1. Vic Beasley 2. Clint Boiling OG 2. Marcus Peters CB 3. James Casey TE 3. Laken Tomlinson OG 4. A good pass blocking RB 4. Chris Conley WR 5. Terrence Knighton or Dan Williams NT 5. Cedric Ogbuehi OT 6. Walter Thurmond CB 6. Tyler Kroftt TE 7. Arthur Moats ILB 7. Tyeler Davidson DT 8. Tarell Brown CB 9. Jerron Johnson S 10. Rahim Moore S *** I know none of this will never happen, just my stab at it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I mean think about it, what good is having 3 guys who are younger and cheaper if they can't even hold Wilfork's jock? If I'm Scot, I have a price in my head for Wilfork and I'm finding out if I can get him for that. I'm not ruling him out just because he's 33. I guess I'm just tired of the stopgaps. We aren't going far this year and would Wilfork come in here and see that it's night and day compared to the Patriots atmosphere and be excited to play here. I'm more interested in developing those three guys. That's been our problem over the years. We bring in guys to plug the leaks in the dam, but we never build a better foundation so the cracks in the dam don't occur in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epochalypse Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I'm more interested in developing those three guys. That's been our problem over the years. We bring in guys to plug the leaks in the dam, but we never build a better foundation so the cracks in the dam don't occur in the first place. Wouldn't having a solid vet aid in the development of younger guys? I would argue that the issue is more likely who we are bringing in and not the fact we are bringing someone in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFanatic Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Why is Mariota not a (real) option? Our team has so many holes and I am 95% done with the RG III experiment. Of course I am biased as I am from Eugene and of course a die hard Ducks fan, the guy has the skills and temperment I would love for our team to build on. He is not a Me first guy as we have become accustomed to with RG III. It isn't like we are just a few pieces away from contending. We are almost a full team away so why not start with the right piece? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Wouldn't having a solid vet aid in the development of younger guys? I would argue that the issue is more likely who we are bringing in and not the fact we are bringing someone in. We need our coaches to sack up and start developing players and not relying on old vets to play and coach. Yes, who we have brought in has hurt us along with ages and money. I don't want to limit my wants to an age, but at this point, anyone over 28 would have to bring an extra ordinary something to the position. It could be argued that Wilfork does, but I'm not sure he brings that. I guess what I'm saying is, if he came in here and saw this mess, compared to what he's used to in NE, he may retire on the spot, not before he's laughed his ass off walking out of the lockeroom. We have a long way to go and he's a short term investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogsOfWar Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Why is Mariota not a (real) option? Our team has so many holes and I am 95% done with the RG III experiment. Of course I am biased as I am from Eugene and of course a die hard Ducks fan, the guy has the skills and temperment I would love for our team to build on. He is not a Me first guy as we have become accustomed to with RG III. Because he is a spread offense quarterback and they have a bad track record of NFL success compared to those from pro-style offenses. About half of the premier QBs came out of pro-style offenses (Brady, Manning, Luck, Wilson, Eli Manning) and half are from spreads (Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers, Newton). But there are about 115 spread offenses in college compared to about 5 pro-style offenses. The bust rate of spread QB's is significantly higher. A spread QB has to learn new fundamentals like playing under center and taking 3, 5, and 7 step drops (sound familiar?). But even more importantly, spread QBs are in basically "one read" offenses. Learning new fundamentals of footwork is easy compared to learning to keep track of multiple different receivers. You can't just precommit to one target in the NFL because the defenses are so good. So you have to pick the most open guy. Now think about all the times RG3 missed open receivers. That's a skill spread offense QBs never have to learn until they're in the NFL. And it's not necessarily a skill everyone can learn. That kind of field vision is a gift that you either have or don't have. It can be coached, but only if you've got it in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epochalypse Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 We need our coaches to sack up and start developing players and not relying on old vets to play and coach. Yes, who we have brought in has hurt us along with ages and money. I don't want to limit my wants to an age, but at this point, anyone over 28 would have to bring an extra ordinary something to the position. It could be argued that Wilfork does, but I'm not sure he brings that. I guess what I'm saying is, if he came in here and saw this mess, compared to what he's used to in NE, he may retire on the spot, not before he's laughed his ass off walking out of the lockeroom. We have a long way to go and he's a short term investment. Well we've brought in a large number of new coaches, so hopefully they'll help but solid vets willing to mentor the younger players are vital to successful teams. As for what mess he would come into when he came in, the only way to fix that is bringing in vets to fix it. If you think it's bad for a vet to walk in and see dysfunction, what must it be like for a rookie to walk into the same situation? A vet at least knows that this isn't what it looks like across the league and can offer ways to improve the situation starting with themselves. "This is how we did it in NE, it worked for us and I think we can do this here." That is invaluable. Who's going to change that climate if all we bring in is young guys and rookies? The coach certainly plays a role but to have that leadership at the player level is critical. And as I've said before, I'm not talking about a 7 yr 13M per deal for Wilfork. I'm thinking a shorter deal, with a team friendly price range. Beyond that no thank you. Because ultimately you want to get what you pay for. Player X may be 25 and making 2M a yr and player Y may be 32 and making 6M a yr. But if player Y just for comparison's sake is 5 times better than player X is, then the better deal is player Y. If player X is out there making mistake after mistake and player Y is making play after play, that's what is important. Value is a better gauge than just cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogsOfWar Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Wouldn't having a solid vet aid in the development of younger guys? I would argue that the issue is more likely who we are bringing in and not the fact we are bringing someone in. I think fanbases tend to take on the personality of their owners. The Redskins have won the offseason superbowl 19 of the past 24 years, so fans get used to thinking about gaudy free agents. But it doesn't generally work because (1) success in the NFL is due in large part to the system and the coaching. That part doesn't come over with the free agent. And (2) pursuing free agents generally means buying high. See also: the Washington Redskins. A team like the Redskins needs to build through the draft and bring in character guys as free agents on the cheap. Once they have a good team culture and a stable coach and system in place, then they can think about adding that shiny bauble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epochalypse Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I think fanbases tend to take on the personality of their owners. You take that back. Now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedBeast Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 What is driving me nuts is trading scenarios. People wanting to trade too far back just for more lower round picks. It will take at least 2 to 3 years. Lets get as many quality players in the upper echelons of the rounds while we can And overall? I am against a Philly trade unless is a ludicrous blockbuster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 As much as I like VW, all I think about when I see him hitting FA is that Bellichick think he's toast and have a backup plan (Eddie Goldman? Jordan Philips?). Otherwise, he'll find a way to sign him again. I might be wrong, still that's what I think when looking at VW being a FA. Marcus Mariota. Then flip him to the Eagles for three firsts and a second. What's not to love - we get tons of picks, and we'd be inflicting a spread offense QB on a divisional rival! They would most likely back off and leave us in a complete mess with Mariotta, Cousins and RG3 on the roster. Forcing us to trade for KC or RG3, for not much because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 That kind of field vision is a gift that you either have or don't have. It can be coached, but only if you've got it in the first place. I don't think that is necessarily true. It is a skill like any other; you have to practice it and practice it in the correct way for it to become something you do well. It may take a bit more time for some compared to others, but it is something that I think pretty much any intelligent QB who is willing to work hard can pick up. The question is whether they have the correct sort of coaching and plan to get them there. You don't have to have an IQ of 160 to be a chess grandmaster. It just takes lots of practice and studying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsenic Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_c_19960 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Im surprised not more people want us to just take Mariota and compete with RG3 But Id rather Keep RG3 and trade out of 5 get more Pick's but not so far down We miss who I really want us to take . To answer the tread I Really Want Landon Collins. Best safety in the Draft and physical player. And with safety a need we should definitely draft this guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.