Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

2016 Roster Thread (Building a Champion Edition) - Doct to IR - Mo Harris Up


DC9

Recommended Posts

I remember most of the draft experts say that this years draft was average at best.  Not a lot of blue chippers and difference makers.  Sure it was a good draft for DL, but maybe there weren't a lot of difference makers to Scot.  I think that's why he doubled down on taking BPA and collecting 3 extra picks for the 2017 draft as that draft is supposed to have more impact players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question, We have 11 NEW Players on Defense.  5 New starters on defense than the ones that started against Greenbay in the playoffs and 9 new starters than the ones who started against Miami last year.  It seems GMSM has addressed the defense very much.  Now I understand that he may not have picked the people you would have liked.  But to say he didn't address the DL when he has replaced 3 people all of whom have started in Pot Roast, Hatch and Paea, with Hood, Reyes and Lanier.  We have replaced a starting secondary of Culliver, Hall, Goldson and Ihenacho to Norman, Breeland, Hall and Bruton.  All of the rotational guys are replaced.  We kept 6 defensive lineman last year 50% of them are gone.  

Redskins Starters

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, pjfootballer said:

I remember most of the draft experts say that this years draft was average at best.  Not a lot of blue chippers and difference makers.  Sure it was a good draft for DL, but maybe there weren't a lot of difference makers to Scot.  I think that's why he doubled down on taking BPA and collecting 3 extra picks for the 2017 draft as that draft is supposed to have more impact players. 

 

And another 1st/2nd round pick at DL is out for the season as of yesterday.  That makes like 3 or 4 I think...

It's interesting that it happened at the rate that it has.

Not saying we knew something, I still think if the value was there at one of our picks we would've grabbed a C or a linemen, but it's an interesting rate for a similar position.

1 hour ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Still, he could be expected to close his eyes and fall into a solo tackle at least once out of 16 games. 

 

For me he could close his eyes and not end up next to the safety by the end of the play.  #SkatesOff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About our porous run D, teams that don't run well should struggle to exploit it. Let's just say that is half the league. Teams like to pass now. Forcing themselves to run, takes them out of what they want to do more than ever before. Barry is inadvertently baiting them to run.

A team that truly does run well, we will need to counter it with our passing attack, assuming our run game remains grounded.

Therefore, it's imperative to have an A1 passing game plan in place, when facing a team like GB in the loffs. I know it was as windy that day in DC as any in recent memory (game day or non game day), but I still think it was a mistake to try to establish the run as much as we tried, and failed. It was not us - we had evolved to a vaunted passing attack and NO one was able to stop Jordan Reed. It's the playoffs and deception is wise - for us that would mean continued unpredictability in play calling since hurry up, gadgets etc remains largely abhorred.

GB went hurry up on us, gassing our beleaguered run D into submission. Our curve ball, was to get away from what worked the last month of the season. We went back to run run pass. We couldn't run, and we got blown out.  DJax not scoring wasn't the end of the game; we ran into a brick wall and couldn't punch it in. We have sucked in short yardage for 6+ years.  1st and goal on the 1 for us needs to be play action. At least as "Long" as our C gets no push. If that fails, spread it out, and then run.

Keds ballooned up to 330 should help. Don't laugh; yes we were THAT bad last year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We must be able to stop the run because we have at least two teams in our division that will try to do just that.  The Eagles and the Boys.  They will have rookie QBs and if they can run on us so much the better.  We will be playing many 8 man fronts, lets hope our DBs are very good on man to man coverage otherwise we can be in trouble.  Then again, how good can the Rookie QBs be to take advantage of man to man.  Whatever happens we are about to find out come Monday as we play a great offense both in passing and running the football.  This game will go a long way in identifying how much we have improved on run-D if any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of the chunk yards we gave up last year came after missed tables and/or horrible angles taken by our second or third level guys.  If we clean that up, our defense could go from bad to decent. We also missed some sacks (several of which turned into big plays for them) by a small fraction of a second, can our new dbs give our dl that fraction?  The only thing that seemed to be a problem that went unaddressed was our inability to contain mobile QBs (how many times in that Jets game did the QB get a first down with his legs off a third and long situation).  Maybe improving our corners can allow other dbs to shadow a more mobile QB.  BTW, though we were one of the worst defenses on a yards allowed basis, we were just a little below average in terms of points allowed, top 10 in the turnover category and about average in sack percentage.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, moondog said:

Run defense still certainly worries me but you can see when we are able to put points up and control the ball, our defense stays fresh and forced a lot of three and outs in the preseason (talking starters or at least when most of the 1st team d was out there). The run defense actually looked pretty solid with everyone swarming to the ball. Time will tell but I think we'll see a slight improvement there this year. 

 

I agree with just about every word of this. I think the only question to me is about priorities. If Doctson was the BPA and it wasn't close, he was the right pick. Same with Cravens, Fuller, Ionnadis, etc. I suspect that was the case in SM's eyes. However, it does seem like he doesn't really value the DT/NT positions as much as I personally would given that he hasn't used much in terms of resources (low draft, cheap FAs) on the interior DL. That does worry me and many here. 

But again, it could be that the guys that fell to us were equally important in terms of value now and future planning, and as you point out, there are only so many bullets to fire.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, bobandweave said:

 

   

 

So true, that's why with our RB situation being as bad as it is and we did nothing when guys like Matt Forte, Lamar Miller, Chris Ivory, Doug Martin , C.J. Anderson, Alfred Morris, and Arian Foster who were out there makes no sense how we didn't get someone from that list for depth. I don't think it was money, it was us over valuing Matt Jones which will bite us in the butt this season and with anyone knowing and understanding stats like I expect SM to do is even more head scratching to me

Totally disagree.  I don't like to pick up other team's discards, unless it is an elite young player like Josh Norman.  And, that goes double for RBs.  This is a position where players go over the hill often by their late 20's because of all the punishment they take.  It is far smarter to draft RBs and play them.  You lament the departure of Alfred Morris, but the truth is that he is already past his prime.  Moreover, for cap purposes, every team must have some young, inexpensive players.  There is no better position for such players than RB, because that is a position that needs no seasoning or experience and RBs tend to have very short shelf lives anyway.  I would take Rob Kelley over any of those RBs you listed.

If you doubt that strategy, ask yourself why the Ravens risked putting Justin Fossett on waivers.  They knew even a starting RB won't draw much attention on the waiver wire when he is nearing 30.  And, they were right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, moondog said:

Is this the confirmed/no kidding number? It does seem very high. Obviously the number was not so high during the FA period when we still had to at least run plans off of guys like Paea/Riley making the team. That being said, yes, we likely could have signed some additional guys. Again, you will find many of my recent posts lamenting the RB position and saying we should have re-signed Morris. 

However, I still would not have advocated another big signing to a guy like Harrison. The fact that we can roll money over into the next year is essential to continue to build this team because we are anticipating Cousins continuing his upward climb. We are projected to be $45M or so under the cap next year but that can be substantially used up by Cousins/DJax and don't forget that Breeland will also command top dollar soon if he continues to get better. As I said, we could have spent more. I would have kept Morris for sure, but as for the Dline - who would you have signed?

Well reasoned.  It makes no sense to spend significant cap room to sign a FA just because the team is weak in the position the FA plays if the FA isn't the real answer.  That strategy is similar to the "drafting according to need" strategy and is a proven loser for the long-term.

Not sure about DJax, but surely the Skins should re-sign Cousins, Breeland and Baker after this season.  Moreover, the Skins should also be thinking about extending such players as Smith (a monster in the making), Compton, Moses, Nsekhe, Hopkins, Way.  Further, who knows, a Josh Norman type player could become available next off season.  It would be a shame if the Skins can't sign such a FA due to lack of cap room.  So, since the cap space can be rolled over into next season, saving that space now makes a lot of sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, bobandweave said:

Feel like our biggest weakness this offseason was not addressing the RB position. We screwed the pooch there so badly it makes me believe as smart as SM is that was not a mistake but calculated plan of which I do not see any point in doing when we are not that far off from being a top 10 team in this league. I will continue to believe that this is the achilles heel on the offense and keeping Sudfeld is/was a mistake over another body at that position.

Sudfeld won't ever make anything of himself in this league and worrying about being the only QB signed next year is so short sighted it irritates me to see it repeated. Does anyone saying that actually believe when the season starts in 2017 we won't have QBs signed? If that's why we kept him I'm disappointed in the decision makers for making such a stupid decision.

3rd string QBs don't get traded (First overall draft picked QBs get traded) those who think we have a trade chip with Sudfeld, The best 6th round drafted QB of all time we all know is Tom Brady, now name another 6th round drafted QB who ever did anything at all in this league? Between 2001-2014 there were 25 QBs taken in round 6 of the draft, of them you have Tom Brady and everyone else.  Hoping for anything more then an arm to save Cousins arm during the off week here is really asking too much.

PFF ranks our WR grouping as third best in the league, our Offensive Line as top 12, and our QB as ranked 17th, Those won't be the areas why we struggle in games this year on that side of the ball. It will be at the RB position and we've known this all off season so load up on shares of this passing game because our best RB is a pass catcher so I expect if he's healthy we will be top 5 in the league in passing attempts

I couldn't disagree with you more.  Just what RB would you want instead of Sudfeld on the 53-roster?  Yes, Sudfeld is unlikely to contribute anything this season.  But, just what do you think a 4th RB would contribute?  Do you seriously think a 4th RB would spell the difference between playoffs and sitting home in January?  Truth is the 4th RB, just like the 3rd QB, would be inactive on most game days.

But, there is far more risk of losing a 3rd string QB on waivers than any 4th RB simply because the former position is so much more vital than the latter position and there is always a shortage of good QBs.  Mack Brown proved again that a 4th RB won't be claimed off waivers even when he gains almost 150 yds in the last pre season game.  Now, if the Skins had 4 elite RBs and needed to protect them all, I could understand keeping all 4 on the 53 roster.  But, that was obviously not the case.

For 2017, if McCoy were to leave via a trade, Sudfeld could well be the backup to Cousins,  As such, he would just be one play away from being a vital contributor.  Not sure what 4th RB you have in mind who could play such a key role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, HanburgerBum said:

Well reasoned.  It makes no sense to spend significant cap room to sign a FA just because the team is weak in the position the FA plays if the FA isn't the real answer.  That strategy is similar to the "drafting according to need" strategy and is a proven loser for the long-term.

Not sure about DJax, but surely the Skins should re-sign Cousins, Breeland and Baker after this season.  Moreover, the Skins should also be thinking about extending such players as Smith (a monster in the making), Compton, Moses, Nsekhe, Hopkins, Way.  Further, who knows, a Josh Norman type player could become available next off season.  It would be a shame if the Skins can't sign such a FA due to lack of cap room.  So, since the cap space can be rolled over into next season, saving that space now makes a lot of sense.

 

you can sign someone to one year deals so they don't end up a long term drag on the cap.  Fact is the Skins aren't at the point where people just jump for the chance to sign with us.  A massive regression because of a team weakness would be very bad

 

I'm pretty sure you can't extend people while they're on their rookie contracts, so I'm not sure how many of those guys can be extended

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wrong Direction said:

 

I agree with just about every word of this. I think the only question to me is about priorities. If Doctson was the BPA and it wasn't close, he was the right pick. Same with Cravens, Fuller, Ionnadis, etc. I suspect that was the case in SM's eyes. However, it does seem like he doesn't really value the DT/NT positions as much as I personally would given that he hasn't used much in terms of resources (low draft, cheap FAs) on the interior DL. That does worry me and many here. 

But again, it could be that the guys that fell to us were equally important in terms of value now and future planning, and as you point out, there are only so many bullets to fire.

 

Many fans are too impatient (I guess 2 decades of futility under Dan Snyder exacerbated that problem).  They think everything can be fixed at once, instead of appreciating the excellent job McCloughan has already done.  And, many fans think if the team is weakest in one area, every move must be made towards addressing that weakness--even if the move doesn't make sense.  That is just not the smart and right way to build a lasting contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, carex said:

 

you can sign someone to one year deals so they don't end up a long term drag on the cap.  Fact is the Skins aren't at the point where people just jump for the chance to sign with us.  A massive regression because of a team weakness would be very bad

 

I'm pretty sure you can't extend people while they're on their rookie contracts, so I'm not sure how many of those guys can be extended

 

You can't negotiate in the first 3 years. However, after 3 years there is a 3 month window where teams can renegotiate or/and in the case of 1st round picks, decide if the want to exercise the 5th year option. Think Tyrann Mathieu and Andrew Luck. I think Russell Wilson was also renegotiated.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HanburgerBum said:

Many fans are too impatient (I guess 2 decades of futility under Dan Snyder exacerbated that problem).  They think everything can be fixed at once, instead of appreciating the excellent job McCloughan has already done.  And, many fans think if the team is weakest in one area, every move must be made towards addressing that weakness--even if the move doesn't make sense.  That is just not the smart and right way to build a lasting contender.

 

I think the other thing many are missing is that Scot is addressing the positions that take longer for them to impact the game. WR's, CBs, S's, QBs, ILBs, Oline take a bit longer to develop. Where OLBs, Dline and especially RBs can generally contribute much faster. That's why you use the majority of your resources developing the positions that take longer to develop. In the meantime you do what you can with the rest of your resources. If it works out, great. If not, as the rest of the team develops you can stop using more resources on those other positions.

Everyone knew this was to 3+ year project. But people are just too impatient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, carex said:

 

you can sign someone to one year deals so they don't end up a long term drag on the cap.  Fact is the Skins aren't at the point where people just jump for the chance to sign with us.  A massive regression because of a team weakness would be very bad

 

I'm pretty sure you can't extend people while they're on their rookie contracts, so I'm not sure how many of those guys can be extended

It is my understanding that any unused cap space this year can be rolled over to next year.  If that is correct, I would much rather do that than sign a somewhat expensive FA to a 1-year deal this year when that FA is nothing more than a stop-gap and isn't likely to have any impact.

As to renegotiating rookie contracts, Goskins10 is presumably right that it can be done after 3 years.  McCloughan believes in taking care of his own players, and it is just smart to lock down key young players if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...