The 2017 FA Thread - OP Updated with Signings (Sundberg, Galette, VD, Hood re-signed) *** Terrell McClain, Stacy McGee, DJ Swearinger, Terrelle Pryor, Chris Carter, Brian Quick, ZACH BROWN(!!)***

[TheBlueIndian]

Have we given up on Matt IOwhatever  at being a contributor at NT ?

What about Daniels and Spaight at the LB position.

Is this not what so many people have been clamoring about ? Draft and develop talent, Supplement with FA. 

I am down with not breaking the bank in FA on big names unless it is the 1 year deal type that we have been seeing of late.

Don't we have a lot of our own homegrown guys to re-sign next year ?

 

We can't have it both ways, we will probably suck on D again this year, but make incremental improvements (like not being the most horrific D in the league) and if the offense continues to post like it did last year that will be good enough to win a couple more games. If Kirk continues to trend upward then we go as far as he takes us while a young developing D gets better. Hopeful I know but in my eyes a better sight than watching a overpriced FA throw up all over themselves at FEDEX on Sundays.

 

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

1 hour ago, DC9 said:

No idea why we haven't gone after an ILB yet.

 

Like, zero idea.

 

I also don't know why we haven't signed one of the three other big men.

 

 

I'm going to go out on a limb lil' bro' and say it might have something to do with dumping a top flight NFL evaluator and replacing him with a clueless imbecile with more faces than a town hall clock. 

 

Hail. 

[CTskin]

49 minutes ago, DM72 said:

How has our defense gotten worse? I keep reading that. We do have some "ifs", but I'm expecting better coaching, Breeland to have a much better year, even Norman to have a better year and Cravens to have a breakout year. 

 

Plus, we still have the draft.

You're expecting quite a lot there amigo. We did the same expecting last year and how did that work out? "Bruton will fix the Safety issue, Breeland, Dunbar and Preston will take a big leap forward..." Manusky's track record proves that he's OK and Tomsula may get a bit more out of some players, but the fact of the matter is we have average-to-sub-par talent at 9 of our 11 starting positions on defense. No D-coordinator can be effective with this. I've learned better than to expect magical progression out of any Redskin.

[Morneblade]

7 minutes ago, TheBlueIndian said:

Have we given up on Matt IOwhatever  at being a contributor at NT ?

What about Daniels and Spaight at the LB position.

Is this not what so many people have been clamoring about ? Draft and develop talent, Supplement with FA. 

I am down with not breaking the bank in FA on big names unless it is the 1 year deal type that we have been seeing of late.

Don't we have a lot of our own homegrown guys to re-sign next year ?

 

We can't have it both ways, we will probably suck on D again this year, but make incremental improvements (like not being the most horrific D in the league) and if the offense continues to post like it did last year that will be good enough to win a couple more games. If Kirk continues to trend upward then we go as far as he takes us while a young developing D gets better. Hopeful I know but in my eyes a better sight than watching a overpriced FA throw up all over themselves at FEDEX on Sundays.

 

 

Matt is a project. He wasn't big enough last year and I don't know if he will be big enough this year. He is, at best a big "?".

Daniels is probably a better 4-3 MLB, but I'd like to see what he can do. I hope he works out, but he will likely be a issue in coverage. I was high on Spaight, but he was worse than Compton last year. So, yeah.

 

A lot of us think we have regressed on Defense so far, that is NOT what you want to do in FA. FA is for filling holes. We did not do that. we've been cheap in the D for some time (outside of Norman) and it's not helping anything.

[DM72]

4 minutes ago, CTskin said:

You're expecting quite a lot there amigo. We did the same expecting last year and how did that work out? "Bruton will fix the Safety issue, Breeland, Dunbar and Preston will take a big leap forward..." Manusky's track record proves that he's OK and Tomsula may get a bit more out of some players, but the fact of the matter is we have average-to-sub-par talent at 9 of our 11 starting positions on defense. No D-coordinator can be effective with this. I've learned better than to expect magical progression out of any Redskin.

 

I certainly don't think we're worst than last year. 

[Pick6]

The Redskins are running a 3-4 defense. They will continue to suffer until they get a true NT. End of story. All the fans get it, not sure why the FO doesn't.

[Rattlesnake88]

We've got progressing young talent, no Joe Barry and 10 draft picks in a deep draft. I'm not jiving with the sinking ship hyperbole.

 

The NT issue is concerning. I get it. But let's see this thing play out.

[Morneblade]

4 minutes ago, DM72 said:

 

I certainly don't think we're worst than last year. 

 

I think we are, from a personnel standpoint.

 

However I DO think we made improvements in coaching. I think Manusky is a substantial upgrade at DC. I also think that Tomsula is a fantastic DL coach. Collectively, they might be able to get more out of less. I would like to give them more to work with however.

[Skinsinparadise]

50 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

And, while the draft has DL talent, NT talent is sparce. Which happens to be our largest hole.

 

So, maybe you should not just dismiss everyone out of hand for thinking we're worse off.

 

The D line talent according to most draft geeks is really more in terms of 4-3 edge rushers or players who could be converted to 3-4 edge rusher.  They don't really consider the draft stacked for 5 technique types or noses like it was last year.  From what I've looked at I agree with that take.

 

I liked to hear that Tomsula studied the defensive tackles in the draft and they probably have some good targets in mind.  But I don't love abandoning a BPA approach -- I got my doubt that the best players available in early rounds will be DTs-NTs.   But will see.   If they stop at this, IMO they need to draft at least two D lineman early, a 5 technique and 0 technique.   The more I think about it, perhaps they have a very specific target.  It's hard to predict the 2nd-3rd rounds where you can zone in on a specific target.  Easier to target a first rounder.  Hardly anyone is talking about Caleb Brantley or Malik Mcdowell going before #17.  Maybe they are honed in on one of them.     As for nose, maybe they figure among Tomlinson, Qualls, Vanderdoes - for sure they land them in the 2nd round or if not one likely falls into the third.

[fordranger76]

I think the Swearinger signing was the biggest of the offseason even bigger than Pryor. He might have question marks but I think people have forgotten in the midst of the BIG NT talk is just how bad we were at safety too. FS has been the biggest sore eye on this team since I can remember. Yes bigger than NT. This move is being overlooked IMO. Sure he might not be the best to play the position but he will be miles better than anything we have thrown back there in years. That is also why I do not think the Defense will be worse. The defense was ugly bad last year all around not just on that D-line. It could be just as bad but it is no way no how worse. 

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

.....  But I don't love abandoning a BPA approach .....

 

 

I shudder to think what CC's approach will be but I'll lay good money it won't be that sadly. 

 

Hail. 

[Morneblade]

3 minutes ago, fordranger76 said:

I think the Swearinger signing was the biggest of the offseason even bigger than Pryor. He might have question marks but I think people have forgotten in the midst of the BIG NT talk is just how bad we were at safety too. FS has been the biggest sore eye on this team since I can remember. Yes bigger than NT. This move is being overlooked IMO. Sure he might not be the best to play the position but he will be miles better than anything we have thrown back there in years. That is also why I do not think the Defense will be worse. The defense was ugly bad last year all around not just on that D-line. It could be just as bad but it is no way no how worse. 

 

No, it's not being overlooked. There are 2 reasons why.

First, Swearinger is not a top flight FS. He is absolutely NO Eric Berry. If anything he's a tweener, he can play FS, but is not a true FS, he does not have great range and he is aggressive, which can get him out of position, and he wont be able to recover. Which is why he has been on like 3 teams.

 

Second, I disagree with you about what is more important. FS is not as important as NT IMO. I would also say we've had more talent at FA than at NT. Not that we have had good talent at FS, just that we have had zero talent at NT, because we don't even have one. We;re throwing 3-4 ends at the position.

[CTskin]

5 minutes ago, fordranger76 said:

I think the Swearinger signing was the biggest of the offseason even bigger than Pryor. He might have question marks but I think people have forgotten in the midst of the BIG NT talk is just how bad we were at safety too. FS has been the biggest sore eye on this team since I can remember. Yes bigger than NT. This move is being overlooked IMO. Sure he might not be the best to play the position but he will be miles better than anything we have thrown back there in years. That is also why I do not think the Defense will be worse. The defense was ugly bad last year all around not just on that D-line. It could be just as bad but it is no way no how worse. 

You're WAY overrating him. Pryor is by far the biggest signing and to debate that isn't worth the time. There's a reason the best offer Swearinger got was for only $4M/yr, from us, the same team who just overpaid two poor DL by twice what they're worth. Sure, he's a slight improvement, but he's no top tier S talent. Don't get caught up in the highlight reel hits, there's a lot more to the safety position.

[Morneblade]

Just now, CTskin said:

You're WAY overrating him. Pryor is by far the biggest signing and to debate that isn't worth the time. There's a reason the best offer Swearinger got was for only $4M/yr, from us, the same team who just overpaid two poor DL by twice what they're worth. Sure, he's a slight improvement, but he's no top tier S talent. Don't get caught up in the highlight reel hits, there's a lot more to the safety position.

 

Exactly. Especially at FS. It's about coverage, reading the QB and not letting that guy get past you, because you're likely the last guy. Trying to blow someone up? I've seen enough of Laron Landry, thanks.

 

And Pryor was a huge get for us, especially at that price.

[fordranger76]

1 minute ago, CTskin said:

You're WAY overrating him. Pryor is by far the biggest signing and to debate that isn't worth the time. There's a reason the best offer Swearinger got was for only $4M/yr, from us, the same team who just overpaid two poor DL by twice what they're worth. Sure, he's a slight improvement, but he's no top tier S talent. Don't get caught up in the highlight reel hits, there's a lot more to the safety position.

Where did I say he was a top tier safety? Bruton, Hall, Whitner, Everett, Ihenacho, and Blackmon. That is reality. That is what we rolled with last year. Pryor is a great signing no doubt. However there is depth at the receiving corps. So that debate is worth the time when there is literally nothing close to Swearinger on the roster. That is how absolute dog **** the position is. His signing is going to at least bring average play. Something we did not have at all last year through 16 games. 

 

4 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

No, it's not being overlooked. There are 2 reasons why.

First, Swearinger is not a top flight FS. He is absolutely NO Eric Berry. If anything he's a tweener, he can play FS, but is not a true FS, he does not have great range and he is aggressive, which can get him out of position, and he wont be able to recover. Which is why he has been on like 3 teams.

 

Second, I disagree with you about what is more important. FS is not as important as NT IMO. I would also say we've had more talent at FA than at NT. Not that we have had good talent at FS, just that we have had zero talent at NT, because we don't even have one. We;re throwing 3-4 ends at the position.

Again when did I say this guy was an Eric Berry? I did not imply it either. We have nothing there. We do not have tackling dummies. Zilch. Zero. Nadda. How many times were our corners caught with their hands up on a replay wondering where the hell the safety was? How many times were they standing with hands on hips because the safeties missed yet another assignment. I do not think this guy is the second coming of anyone I just think it was a really underrated signing and still believe for this team it is just as important if not more so than NT. We play 3-4 base 30 percent of the time. How often is the FS on the field though? That is what I am getting at here.

[Pick6]

Pryor was hands down the best signing for the Skins. Especially because he wanted a prove it deal and knows if he balls out he will get paid.

 

No matter who the Skins sign in the secondary they will suffer without a line disrupting the QB. If a QB has time to find a receiver and throw not much the secondary can do.

[NeverSurrender]

Who said Bruton would fix anything?  All I heard was "He's Big"

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

Not even trying to be a douche but the exact same people that are saying the defense will be better...literally say it every year in threads like these 

 

I know a lot of the homers like to crap on the analysts and the like but when almost every news outlet is ****ting on our DL signings, they probably really do suck 

 

 

[Morneblade]

10 minutes ago, fordranger76 said:

Where did I say he was a top tier safety? Bruton, Hall, Whitner, Everett, Ihenacho, and Blackmon. That is reality. That is what we rolled with last year. Pryor is a great signing no doubt. However there is depth at the receiving corps. So that debate is worth the time when there is literally nothing close to Swearinger on the roster. That is how absolute dog **** the position is. His signing is going to at least bring average play. Something we did not have at all last year through 16 games. 

 

Again when did I say this guy was an Eric Berry? I did not imply it either. We have nothing there. We do not have tackling dummies. Zilch. Zero. Nadda. How many times were our corners caught with their hands up on a replay wondering where the hell the safety was? How many times were they standing with hands on hips because the safeties missed yet another assignment. I do not think this guy is the second coming of anyone I just think it was a really underrated signing and still believe for this team it is just as important if not more so than NT. We play 3-4 base 30 percent of the time. How often is the FS on the field though? That is what I am getting at here.

 

 

Ok. First, lets look at the WR's we had when we signed Pryor. Cowder (slot guy) Doctson (out all year) and then it's Grant and Harris. So, even with the signing, we have question marks there. No one knows about Doctson at this point. Without Pryor, it's Crowder having to move from the slot and then what? Grant? Doctson and his achilles? Harris?

 

Second, Hall and Blackmon are better than what we had at NT last year. The issue is neither one was healthy. Which has been a huge issue the last couple of years. We see 3-4 guys go down for the year at the S position. I don't know if we're snake bit, or if there is something else going on.

 

As far as "blown coverages", you just assumed that every time it's the S, and not the CB. Even though it's been documented that Breeland was blowing a lot of coverages, and even went rouge and stopped even bothering. So, your case is VERY weak there. However if I ever see Donte' Whitmer in a Redkins uniform again, it will be too soon.

 

I'm not going to debate what a NT does for a 3-4 defense. I'll just put it this way. When you have a base 3-4, and you move to a 4-3 for passing downs, you literally put your entire front 7 out of position. You're better off just scrapping the  3-4 and go with a 4-3, which is easier to find players for, and is schematically better against the run. You don't have that issue with a FS.

[Pick6]

6 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

I'm not going to debate what a NT does for a 3-4 defense. I'll just put it this way. When you have a base 3-4, and you move to a 4-3 for passing downs, you literally put your entire front 7 out of position. You're better off just scrapping the  3-4 and go with a 4-3, which is easier to find players for, and is schematically better against the run. You don't have that issue with a FS.

 

My question is why don't they just say screw it and pull the plug on the 3-4 experiment. It was Shanny's idea and hasn't really worked out. What is the argument for keeping it around? Especially since they are abandoning it around 70% of the snaps.

[Morneblade]

7 minutes ago, Pick6 said:

 

My question is why don't they just say screw it and pull the plug on the 3-4 experiment. It was Shanny's idea and hasn't really worked out. What is the argument for keeping it around? Especially since they are abandoning it around 70% of the snaps.

 

I have no idea, and this is one of the things that REALLY bothers me. If you are not going to commit to a scheme, why run it? You are only setting yourself up for failure. Not only that, it's a tough scheme to find certain players for. Yes, it does create more "mystery" because you don't have as much of a tip where pressure is coming from, but it also has liabilities against the run, made even more promenate when you don't even bother with a NT.

 

I'm at least as perplexed as you are. It's almost like hitting yourself in the face all the time and wondering why you have a bloody nose and black eyes.

 

I'd scrap the 3-4 in a heartbeat.

[elkabong82]

51 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Sorry, this just isn't true. And to just dismiss what a lot of people think about this, without looking into why? You're better than this.

 

As someone in that camp, I'll explain to you why I think they are downgrades. And why it's not just about a splashy name.

 

First, lets go with track record. McClain, has had 1 good year in his carrier, which happened to be last year. And, it was a nice year. However the 4 previous were horrific. Zero starts and less than 30 tackles in 4 years. He also has injury issues. And, is a 4-3 guy, so this is a new scheme for him. So what he has done in the past gets a * by it, because he will be doing something a little different here.

 

Baker is better in every aspect, except age.

 

Now, let's go with McGee. 18 starts in 4 years, with 9 coming last year, before he got hurt. Which is a real issue, has he seems to be hurt a lot. Availabilty is a real thing. Then, his production is unimpressive, 14 tackles per season is low even for a DE, Except when it's 2. Multiple reports say he has bad conditioning and does not work hard. To me, that's a red flag. He is also not a great athlete, so when you're not great naturally, and don't wanna work, well that is usually not a good sign. And there there are the off the field issues.

 

RJF is better in every aspect, except age.

 

Swearinger has not been overlooked. He might not be a great fit as a FS however. He has limited range and is aggressive, 2 things that should give you pause.

 

And, while the draft has DL talent, NT talent is sparce. Which happens to be our largest hole.

 

So, maybe you should not just dismiss everyone out of hand for thinking we're worse off.

 

Really, you're going to sit there and call me out for not looking into "why" (despite the fact that what I said about run stopping has been echoed by every single report on the signings), yet you yourself haven't posted one iota as to why Baker or RJF is better, just that they are. Don't hold standards to others that you don't hold to yourself. Spare me the "you're better than this" diatribe, because you haven't done jack to quanitfy your stance that Baker and RJF are better, other than thow out every negative possible of the two signings and not one mention of their positives. 

 

Newsflash, our DL SUCKED last year. Big time. Baker, as long as he's been a starter for us, the defense has been awful at stopping the run. But ok, so he's not good with stopping the run, so how about pass rush? He should be good at that to make up for the poor run stopping. He'll be 30 and has 11.5 sacks on his career, last season he had 6, this season down to 3.5. That combined with age highly indicates someone is starting the downswing of their career. On top of that dude took plays off and there have been plenty of posts and photos on here showing that. Honestly if it wasn't for him beign a big DC guy o twitter I don't think fans would be as upset over his loss. He provided a pass rush at times, but again inconsistent.

 

McClain with the Cowboys finished 8th in run stopping this year. 

 

 

Yes, they are just the highlights, but they show a guy who doesn't get pushed back and stays on the line and makes plays. Plus, it's not like the DL for them is full of stars and he was lucky to be there. The biggest thing this video shows with this guy is hustle. He hustles on every play. 

 

Given that our team was 9th in sacks this past season and very little of that came from the DL, it's not suprising that the team let go of two pass rushers who sucked against the run and brought in younger DL who are better at stopping the run. This is what I brought up before. Yet you claim Baker is better at everything than this guy except age? Umm, Baker has never been good against the run, this guy has. It's the reason he was brought in and it's what you and others are overlooking. 

 

You also call his past years "horrific" why? Because of stats. Yet is previous years he was a back up or injured. You applaud Baker, yet before 2015 his stats were abysmal as well. Heck, he wasn't even the starter at the beginning fo 2015. So we lost an inconsistent pass rusher with just one good season in that regard, who was inconsistent at pass rushing and bad at run stopping, for a younger player with a similar lackluster tracker record, but who is much better at stopping the run, seems to have better consistency, and was cheaper. As for the off field issues, when was the last time that happened for him? I did some searching but couldn't find anything recent and nothing of any kind is even mentioned in his wiki page.

 

The biggest concern is will he transition from 4-3 DT to 3-4 DE and will he stay healthy. As far as health, big concern but at least he's recently had a solid season. Plus, you have to imagine if Tomsula and Manusky didn't think he could transition then they would have recommended against that signing.

 

Bottom line is he's an improvement over Baker in the run stopping category, he's younger, and cheaper, and seems to have a more consistent motor. Given that the vast majority of our sacks last season came from OLBs, the loss of Baker isn't that significant in terms of pass rush, and in terms of run stop McClain is an improvement.

 

So no, neither Baker nor RJF are "better in every aspect." That's false hyperbole. Neither is as good as these guys in terms of run stopping and given how bad we've been at that, it's obvious the coaches want the team to have a stout DL that doesn't get pushed back. So Baker and RJF had to go, and McClaina nd McGee are better players to realize that defensive goal. But again it's something you've completely overlooked while also offering zero analysis as to why Baker and RJF are better.

 

Plus, all these arguments can be applied the same to RJF vs. McGee. McGee has been in the league for 4 seasons. 2 healthy, 2 he was injured. This recent year he was a starter and looking good as far as run stopping, though Oakland overall was not good at that, but then got hurt. All reports indicate he is great on the interior with stopping the run and occupying blockers. He had his best year this past season, so again another younger DL possibly on the upswing of his career, instead of a guy doing nothing for the run game and only offering some help as a pass rusher back up. Instead of a back up we got a potential starter, who is younger, good at run stopping, and annual salary is only a little bit more. I haven't read a single report questioning his work ethic or conditioning, and I've read Raiders fan forums to get a gauage on fan opinions (the majority liked McGee and wanted him back, but said we outpriced Oakland). 

 

In terms of people saying defense got worse, yes they absolutely are overlooking Swearinger. 1, because his name is almost never mentioned in that argument, and 2, because he is an upgrade over what we had back there, and Su'a should be too, thus making the defense better. Plus, Swearinger has played both positions and film breakdown shows he's very good at jumping in front of routes, which is good for FS play. 

 

Lastly, if you and others didn't outright dismiss the very reason we brought those DL in and act like Baker is some all-pro who is worlds better, then it wouldn't be so easy to dismiss your opinions out of hand. If you and others didn't just post "Baker and RJF better, end of story" with nothing behind that, it wouldn't be so easy to dismiss. You should spend more time actually quantifying your argument instead of only harping on negatives of signings you don't like, and less time using a poor tone that your argument hasn't earned you the right to use.

[nemocystem]

Hybridization...it's the present, & foreseeable future due to the rules changes. Get on the train, or get left behind.

[50yrSKINSfan]

Just now, Pick6 said:

The Redskins are running a 3-4 defense. They will continue to suffer until they get a true NT. End of story. All the fans get it, not sure why the FO doesn't.

A real good one is hard to get.

[Rattlesnake88]

3 minutes ago, nemocystem said:

Hybridization...it's the present, & foreseeable future due to the rules changes. Get on the train, or get left behind.

Aaron Rodgers loves "true" NT's