Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

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(!!)***

DC9

By DC9
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

RWJ

RWJ

Posted
Posted
On ‎4‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 11:57 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I just can't remember the last time we had a featured RB who could go to the house on any play.  So if Jay sees that magic in any of those guys, I'd be ok with it.  But the offense is loaded, the defense stinks so I am on board with the premise of fix that problem first and foremost.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/2136743/christian-mccaffrey Compare to Brian Westbrook.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/christian-mccaffrey?id=2557997 Compares to Tiki Barber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HTTRDynasty

HTTRDynasty

Posted
Posted

More on Williams:

Quote

Williams, who will turn 30 years old this year, took a significant step back in 2016. After posting a career-high 48 tackles in his first season with the Raiders, he posted a career-low 17 tackles this past season.

 

The drop-off in Williams' production was due to a sharp decline in playing time. In 2015, he was on the field for 49.4 percent of Oakland's defensive snaps (via Pro Football Focus). This past season, he only saw the field for 35.3 percent of those snaps.

 

One of the reasons why Williams saw less playing time in 2016 was because he showed up to training camp out of shape and, as a result, was forced to do a lot of work with the second team. His conditioning issues are nothing new. While with the Arizona Cardinals during the lockout year, he admitted that he did not work hard enough to stay in shape.

 

As a former first-round draft pick, Williams may have been able to get by on his natural ability in the past, but that is not going to fly as he gets older. Players who do not put in the time and effort to keep their bodies at peak physical performance tend to fizzle out once they reach the age of 30.

 

 

http://oak.247sports.com/Bolt/Its-time-for-Raiders-to-cut-veteran-DT-Dan-Williams-51200095

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, SkinsPassion4Life said:

When you don't have a NT; there's no reason not to kick the tires on Dan Williams

 

That's how I see it.

 

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

 

Good stuff SIP. And you are right, outside of Phil Taylor and um....Mu, we don't have a NT. Did you find anything that might signal as to why such a big drop off? I know for instance, McGee went down. Did he have any help?

 

Based on posts here.  Looks like best case scenario he has a rebound year, he at his best was one of the top NTs in the league.  At worst, he's eating his way out of the league like Knighton did.  But its worth kicking the tires IMO.  I am with you on the thought that the D line as its currently constructed is a disaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HTTRDynasty

HTTRDynasty

Posted
Posted
Just now, Morneblade said:

@HTTRDynasty I went over to one of the Raiders boards and saw them saying very much the same thing. In fact the thought going around is the reason he was cut today, is because today was the first day of OTA's, and he came in out of shape.

 

Yeah, any contract that we offer would need to be heavily incentive-based, but I would still give him an offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morneblade

Morneblade

Posted
Posted
Just now, HTTRDynasty said:

 

Yeah, any contract that we offer would need to be heavily incentive-based, but I would still give him an offer.

 

I'd work him out and see what kind of shape he is in first. But yeah, make it incentive based, ala Eddie Lacy.

Pay cut for fat gut!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morneblade

Morneblade

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:
 Fifty Gut Retweeted

Reggie called Dan Williams and gave him the news Sunday night. Wasn’t like Williams reported out of shape Monday. Raiders wanted cap room.

0 replies1 retweet5 likes
 

 

Let's hope that is the reason. Still, bring him in, see if he is in shape, incentive ladened contract, call it a day.

 

I still draft a NT in the 4th round though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
justice98

justice98

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, wilco_holland said:

Raiders are working towards Lynch trade and new deal. So need to make room. They cut Dan because he isn't to important any more for there D. They started running more looks where he wasn't in the line up. So he was just over paid for his current role and playing time. 

 

Which is basically what's gonna happen here, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bowhunter

bowhunter

Posted
Posted

The addition of a 30 year old declining production NT to our roster would not decrease our need to draft and develop one this year, so I'd agree with the premise that any contract would have to on the cheap side. Our rookie NT would need to garner some of that playing time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morneblade

Morneblade

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, justice98 said:

 

I just don't think we're gonna decide to run a bunch of looks that require him simply because he's on the roster.  Nor do I necessarily think he'll play his way into more snaps.

 

We run looks that require a NT. We are a 3-4 base defense after all.

 

We don't have one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
justice98

justice98

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Morneblade said:

 

We run looks that require a NT. We are a 3-4 base defense after all.

 

We don't have one.

 

I understand that, but that was the same logic when Pot Roast was here and he wound up barely being on the field during games.  Is Williams better now than Pot Roast was then coming on?  Perhaps, but you still wouldn't pay a lot for it.

 

Now Manusky could have a different way of doing things, but Williams still wouldn't be on the field that much IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morneblade

Morneblade

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

I understand that, but that was the same logic when Pot Roast was here and he wound up barely being on the field during games.  Is Williams better now than Pot Roast was then coming on?  Perhaps, but you still wouldn't pay a lot for it.

 

Now Manusky could have a different way of doing things, but Williams still wouldn't be on the field that much IMO.

 

Ok, then who plays NT when we are in our base?

 

And, did anyone say to pay a lot for it? In fact, the little bit that was mentioned was to give him a cheap deal with incentives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
justice98

justice98

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Ok, then who plays NT when we are in our base?

 

And, did anyone say to pay a lot for it? In fact, the little bit that was mentioned was to give him a cheap deal with incentives.

 

I dont know who plays NT. 

 

But if the position is that critical to the defense, anybody you get on a cheap deal plus incentives likely won't be that impactful. Cheap deals is what we were paying every other guy we put there since we went to the 3-4.  We basically got what we paid for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morneblade

Morneblade

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

I dont know who plays NT. 

 

But if the position is that critical to the defense, anybody you get on a cheap deal plus incentives likely won't be that impactful. Cheap deals is what we were paying every other guy we put there since we went to the 3-4.

 

Well, make up your mind then. You say we really don't need one. But we don't have one, out side of Phil Taylor and bad knees on the roster. You don't want to spend a lot, but don't think we should spend a little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
justice98

justice98

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Well, make up you mind then. You say we really don't need one. But we don't have one, out side of Phil Taylor and bad knees on the roster. You don't want to spend a lot, but don't think we should spend a little.

 

I dont wanna spend a lot if the guy's essentially gonna be a part time player. 

 

Nor do I think we should pinch pennies expecting to get more than we've gotten, which is what it seems people think is gonna happen.

 

If there was a guy that would play significant snaps and have an impact, pay that guy.  People seemed to think that was Hankins before last week.  

 

Generally, I think the whole thing is overrated.  They should stop running a defense that relies on a position that is basically a unicorn.  Or they can go another 5 years hoping some stud falls in their lap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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