Attended 'Chalk Talk' with Coach Gruden last night

[Spearfeather]

4 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Good stuff.

 

I too think we're going DL or ILB with our 1st rounder. Manusky said something similar earlier. But if Cook or McCaffery are at 17, you have to think about it. The offense would be explosive with one of those two at RB and Kelley would make the perfect backup RB.

 

Seriously asking here. Is there any way McCaffery last until 17 ?

Just thinking Cousins with Reed, Crowder, Pryor and McCaffrey, could be borderline unstoppable, and a hell of a lot of fun to watch.

[zoony]

So now we are back to drafting for neeed rather than BPA?

[Morneblade]

3 minutes ago, zoony said:

So now we are back to drafting for neeed rather than BPA?

 

Looks like it, after failing to address our biggest issues in the FA......................with a couple of guys still out there that would be a big boost to our biggest issues.

 

 

[elkabong82]

I remember the days when most on ES hated the team trying to fix everything through free agency and not prioritizing building through the draft.

[TSO]

2 hours ago, elkabong82 said:

I remember the days when most on ES hated the team trying to fix everything through free agency and not prioritizing building through the draft.

 

For me, it's not about fixing everything. It's addressing immediate needs/gaping holes so that you can go into the draft picking the best players at your spot and not boxing yourself into forcing a position. 

 

So, actually, it IS about prioritizing building through the draft. If you don't address immediate need in FA, the fear is you end up doing so in the draft and increase the chances of reaching. 

 

That's actually been the stated philosophy of the team itself, so it's not something anyone is making up. 

 

Now, one could argue that they actually did address those needs in FA. They certainly targeted the correct positions for the most part. But the criticism is about how they addressed it at Dline, with mid tier players, instead of ensuring they get at least one impact player there. That was really their biggest need by all accounts, even according to what we're still hearing from the coaches. 

 

So, yes, they can get that guy in the draft. And even if they got a more impact player in FA, that shouldn't change them still picking at that position in the draft. But now it's like they're forced to, which is unfortunate for the aforementioned reasons. 

 

I don't think anyone has advocated building through FA. It's about the context of where the team is at. We've done a solid job the last few years building mainly through the draft, and the team has been competitive and is very close to contention, so some of us would've liked to see them be a little more aggressive this offseason in shoring up the few truly glaring holes that remain on defense, while being able to almost purely draft BPA to maximize the potential of each pick. 

 

 

None of this means that they've failed, though. They could knock this draft out of the park, both McClain/McGee could end up being revelations, and maybe other young guys still on the roster like Lanier, Aj Francis, Spaight and Daniels take big steps and emerge.

 

It only means we have to hold on to the hope that happens more than getting more of a sure thing, and that there's more of a possibility we still end up with major struggles at those positions, if that makes sense.  

[Conn]

22 minutes ago, elkabong82 said:

I remember the days when most on ES hated the team trying to fix everything through free agency and not prioritizing building through the draft.

 

Little context is needed here I think. But you already know that, as everyone on ES has been salivating over offseason 2017 as the year we planned to take a big step forward, and it hasn't materialized. No one is advocating a Vinny approach here and it's disingenuous to imply otherwise. We want to fill holes in FA specifically so that we CAN build through the draft and not go back to the days of reaching for need again.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Exactly. 

 

First of all all thank you everyone who gave write ups of the chalk talk. Great stuff 

 

being forced to address needs in the draft is what the team should be avoiding. It is how you are able to find a 2nd round star who may not play more then special teams as a rookie

[elkabong82]

2 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

For me, it's not about fixing everything. It's addressing immediate needs/gaping holes so that you can go into the draft picking the best players at your spot and not boxing yourself into forcing a position. 

 

So, actually, it IS about prioritizing building through the draft. If you don't address immediate need in FA, the fear is you end up doing so in the draft and increase the chances of reaching. 

 

That's actually been the stated philosophy of the team itself, so it's not something anyone is making up. 

 

Now, one could argue that they actually did address those needs in FA. They certainly targeted the correct positions for the most part. But the criticism is about how they addressed it at Dline, with mid tier players, instead of ensuring they get at least one impact player there. That was really their biggest need by all accounts, even according to what we're still hearing from the coaches. 

 

So, yes, they can get that guy in the draft. And even if they got a more impact player in FA, that shouldn't change them still picking at that position in the draft. But now it's like they're forced to, which is unfortunate for the aforementioned reasons. 

 

I don't think anyone has advocated building through FA. It's about the context of where the team is at. We've done a solid job the last few years building mainly through the draft, and the team has been competitive and is very close to contention, so some of us would've liked to see them be a little more aggressive this offseason in shoring up the few truly glaring holes that remain on defense, while being able to almost purely draft BPA to maximize the potential of each pick. 

 

 

None of this means that they've failed, though. They could knock this draft out of the park, both McClain/McGee could end up being revelations, and maybe other young guys still on the roster like Lanier, Aj Francis, Spaight and Daniels take big steps and emerge.

 

It only means we have to hold on to the hope that happens more than getting more of a sure thing, and that there's more of a possibility we still end up with major struggles at those positions, if that makes sense.  

 

Pretty much every team in the NFL is going into the draft with immediate needs. If they weren't then people wouldn't be throwing mock drafts together so easily. 

 

We have been addressing immediate needs in free agency already. We've added tall WRs to bolster red zone production and help more in run blocking. IMO we have improved safety simply by having Su'a back there and adding Swearinger at free safety where he was better cast with AZ. The team was in on a couple big name DL, but Calais wanted too much, Poe has injury concerns, and Logan chose the Chiefs. It happens. Hankins wants too much money. The ILB free agents are underwhelming. 

 

So we go into the draft now with DL and ILB as the pressing needs and the early rounds are good on both spots.

 

Sure nobody is outright advocating we build through free agency, but that seems to be the underlying tone each and every offseason, and it ramps up when we don't go after a bunch of big names. People say they don't want the team to sign the big names, but plenty of posts complaining about when they don't suggest otherwise. 

 

Now I'll be one of the first in line to complain if defense isn't seriously addressed in the draft. But all reports have been that the team is planning on doing exactly that and has been for a while. I would have liked Logan, but I for one am glad the team didn't panic and throw a bunch of money at Poe or Calais, and I'm glad they're not in on Hankins at $10 million a year. 

 

I like McClain. I think he will be great for our DL for stopping the run and generating some pressure. McGee I think helps keep the line strong as well. We get two good DL picks added to that, along with our depth, and we should be ok. 

 

Look at the Texans and Giants. Their DLs are born of them consistently addressing theline in the draft. That's what I want the Skins to do. Given the neglect over the years, maybe it's a good thing it's our biggest need going into the draft so that they'll actually address it. 

 

If we end up taking an atheltic freak like MacDowell for the line and Watt/Davis/McMillan at ILB in the 2nd, then we could be in good shape on defense. 

 

The team added strength and run stopping to the DL, which I feel is being overlooked by many and shouted down by others. Our DL has been pushed around for years. We added 2 guys who don't get pushed around, and both are coming off their best seasons to date. They aren't prefect, but in all honesty none of the free agent DL are. 

 

Who knows. Maybe Hankins wakes up to reality and takes a 1 year prove it deal?

 

But I'm excited for this draft. Lots of good defensive players with potential. My response was mostly in regards to the same few using the tone of "we're screwed" because we missed on one guy for the DL while overlooking what we have added and that we still have the draft and a lot of picks. Sure it may be popular to trash Allen because the Post tells us to, but it was only a few months ago people on here and the media were praising Bruce for that 2014 draft. We still have the recommendations of Scot as well. I think we'll do fine in the draft.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, elkabong82 said:

 

Look at the Texans and Giants. Their DLs are born of them consistently addressing theline in the draft. That's what I want the Skins to do. Given the neglect over the years, maybe it's a good thing it's our biggest need going into the draft so that they'll actually address it. 

 

 

50% of the Giants line was part of their FA spree the previous off season.  They signed Damon Harrison and O. Vernon.   Those signings basically turned around a wretched run defense to one of the league's best.  Both marquee guys that at the time weren't considered bargain singings -- if anything NFL pundits thought the Giants perhaps overpaid for both. 

 

I think many of us were hoping the Redskins would do a modified version of what the Giants did. 

 

I think there is a happy medium from being reckless in FA versus being overly conservative.  I don't think the sky is falling based on the FA haul, I like aspects of what they did but clearly Bruce wasn't moved by the Giants signing arguably 3 of the top 10 FA defensive on the market last off season and seeing that defense transformed as a consequence.  I understand that perhaps the Giants just got lucky.  But I'd still have liked to see the Redskins land at least one of the top tier reputation wise D lineman. 

 

As John Keim said in recent column its good to be frugal but they need to show that FA isn't summarized as them being cheap but ineffective.   I think people would be easier on what Bruce is doing on D line if we didn't see this same movie for the last 2 off seasons.  Paea, Reyes, Ziggy Hood, Terrance Knighton.    We are used to shopping in the cheaper aisle in the store for D line and trusting that the results will be better than what it looks like on paper -- maybe the third time is the charm playing that same game but to me skepticism is warranted.

 

I think they've done a nice job of replacing D. Jax and Garcon and I like Swearinger.  But D line to me is "meh" again.   And I think Sub's point is when you leave a BIG hole to be filled in the draft.  That puts some serious pressure on the draft.  And could result in an opportunity cost.  Often the mid 2nd round is a nice place to pick up a surprise fallen player who teams have graded as a first rounder.  So I hate being boxed in to take a NT there.

 

Judging by mocks -- getting arguably a top NT:  Qualls or Tomlinson lets say -- their best value is likely in the third round.  But you likely don't have the luxury of waiting until the third round because if you wait for a player's sweet spot as for value in the draft you might be a pick or two too late.   Scot flat out told me he had a D line in his sights in the 2nd round but the player was taken before their pick.  If you are desperate for need, you can't really afford to take chances like that so you often end taking a player a little earlier than you might have wanted to do. And I am not suggesting my example has to be accurate but its a case in point of how drafting need over BPA could result in opportunity lost.

 

If the bottom line for this defense is to stop the run and you got to find your nose in that draft, that's pressure.   It's a key cog.  The Redskins have other weaknesses, too but could get away without addressing them all.  NT I don't think they can get away with ignoring.  The Eagles for example had receiver as their #1 weakness heading into the off season but after FA the pressure is off of them on that front. For the Redskins arguably the pressure is still on in the draft to address their #1 weakness.

[zoony]

No team should be going into a draft with as many needs as the Redskins in year 3 of a rebuild.  An incredibly poor draft last season with three straight years of bad free agency.

[Morneblade]

1 hour ago, elkabong82 said:

 

Pretty much every team in the NFL is going into the draft with immediate needs. If they weren't then people wouldn't be throwing mock drafts together so easily. 

 

We have been addressing immediate needs in free agency already. We've added tall WRs to bolster red zone production and help more in run blocking. IMO we have improved safety simply by having Su'a back there and adding Swearinger at free safety where he was better cast with AZ. The team was in on a couple big name DL, but Calais wanted too much, Poe has injury concerns, and Logan chose the Chiefs. It happens. Hankins wants too much money. The ILB free agents are underwhelming. 

 

We don't know how much Hankins wants now. He fired his agent and has been sitting out there for a couple weeks now with no interest. So, why not contact the guy?

 

Quote

 

So we go into the draft now with DL and ILB as the pressing needs and the early rounds are good on both spots.

 

Not at NT. You're looking at 3rd round grades on these guys.

 

Quote

 

Sure nobody is outright advocating we build through free agency, but that seems to be the underlying tone each and every offseason, and it ramps up when we don't go after a bunch of big names. People say they don't want the team to sign the big names, but plenty of posts complaining about when they don't suggest otherwise. 

 

No, it's about not even addressing the biggest hole we have. It doesn't have to be a big name, just somebody at this point.

 

Quote

 

Now I'll be one of the first in line to complain if defense isn't seriously addressed in the draft. But all reports have been that the team is planning on doing exactly that and has been for a while. I would have liked Logan, but I for one am glad the team didn't panic and throw a bunch of money at Poe or Calais, and I'm glad they're not in on Hankins at $10 million a year. 

 

Me too. But I'd see if he would take 6 million. Hell we paid 5 million for McGee.

 

Quote

 

I like McClain. I think he will be great for our DL for stopping the run and generating some pressure. McGee I think helps keep the line strong as well. We get two good DL picks added to that, along with our depth, and we should be ok. 

 

NT's are not great, or deep in this draft. And we'll probably reach to get on, and miss out on a better player in a position that we need help at as well.

 

Quote

 

Look at the Texans and Giants. Their DLs are born of them consistently addressing theline in the draft. That's what I want the Skins to do. Given the neglect over the years, maybe it's a good thing it's our biggest need going into the draft so that they'll actually address it. 

 

1000000000% agree with the first part. This is not the draft class I would want to do it in. It's not great.

 

Quote

 

If we end up taking an atheltic freak like MacDowell for the line and Watt/Davis/McMillan at ILB in the 2nd, then we could be in good shape on defense. 

 

MacDowell does nothing for the hole at NT, and I think he'll be a bust. However I'd probably look at either a ILB, edge rusher or a 3-4 DE in the 1st and 2nd rounds as well.

 

Quote

 

The team added strength and run stopping to the DL, which I feel is being overlooked by many and shouted down by others. Our DL has been pushed around for years. We added 2 guys who don't get pushed around, and both are coming off their best seasons to date. They aren't prefect, but in all honesty none of the free agent DL are. 

 

Baker was better than either one of the guys we brought in though. And both of the guys we brought in have one good year (or in McGee's case, JAG) and then basically nothing. Signing guys that have done nothing except in a contract year usually does not bode well.

 

Quote

 

Who knows. Maybe Hankins wakes up to reality and takes a 1 year prove it deal?

 

He already fired his agent. And we're still not talking to him. He might even take a more moderate multi year deal. But we'll never know.

 

Quote

 

But I'm excited for this draft. Lots of good defensive players with potential. My response was mostly in regards to the same few using the tone of "we're screwed" because we missed on one guy for the DL while overlooking what we have added and that we still have the draft and a lot of picks. Sure it may be popular to trash Allen because the Post tells us to, but it was only a few months ago people on here and the media were praising Bruce for that 2014 draft. We still have the recommendations of Scot as well. I think we'll do fine in the draft.

 

 

 

There are a lot of good defensive players in the draft. But not NT's and we desperately need one. And because of that, we'll likely end up reaching for one and miss out on a better player, that could also make a impact. That's the problem that myself and others are having. We made a play at Logan, great. And we missed, it happens, but Hankins is still out there, looking like he's going to resign for the around same amount with the Giants we paid McGee. And there are no great NT's in this draft. Just a couple of ok guys and then it drops off badly. I'd rather go in where we can go BPA and BUILD the team, not just fill gaping holes with players that are reaches.

[elkabong82]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

50% of the Giants line was part of their FA spree the previous off season.  They signed Damon Harrison and O. Vernon.   Those signings basically turned around a wretched run defense to one of the league's best.  Both marquee guys that at the time weren't considered bargain singings -- if anything NFL pundits thought the Giants perhaps overpaid for both. 

 

I think many of us were hoping the Redskins would do a modified version of what the Giants did. 

 

I think there is a happy medium from being reckless in FA versus being overly conservative.  I don't think the sky is falling based on the FA haul, I like aspects of what they did but clearly Bruce wasn't moved by the Giants signing arguably 3 of the top 10 FA defensive on the market last off season and seeing that defense transformed as a consequence.  I understand that perhaps the Giants just got lucky.  But I'd still have liked to see the Redskins land at least one of the top tier reputation wise D lineman. 

 

Judging by mocks -- getting arguably a top NT:  Qualls or Tomlinson lets say -- their best value is likely in the third round.  

 

If the bottom line for this defense is to stop the run and you got to find your nose in that draft, that's pressure.   It's a key cog.  The Redskins have other weaknesses, too but could get away without addressing them all.  NT I don't think they can get away with ignoring.  The Eagles for example had receiver as their #1 weakness heading into the off season but after FA the pressure is off of them on that front. For the Redskins arguably the pressure is still on in the draft to address their #1 weakness.

 

Giants and Texans I was talking about historically, over the course of years, not just a snap shot of 1 offseason. JPP, Hankins, Joseph, Tuck, Cofield, Kiwanuka, etc. All teams add through free agency to a dgree, but the goal is to build more through the draft than rely on free agency and that's what those teams historically have done. When the Giants were champions they had DL that was mostly drafted. 

 

Again, Skins tried on Calais and Logan. Logan chose elsewhere, Calais was too expensive. But the team at least recongzied the need and tried. To their credit at least they didn't get desperate and overpay and instead seemingly will look to the draft. But instead the same few post, in multiple threads now, about how it's all doom and gloom because we didn't add a big name on the DL. Let the draft play out first. 

 

For every Giants success you have many more failures, like the Jaguars every single year now, the Skins in the past, and the Eagles in recent years. Can you really fault the Skins for not going toe-to-toe with the Jags on the Calais contract? Or not ponying up $10 mil+ for Hankins when nobody else is either? Or passing on Poe's questionable injuries? You can fault them for losing out on Logan because that wasn't a bad deal. But they did address the DL to a degree and there were legitmiate reasons outside of Logan not to bite on the big name DL, certainly not to the point where one would be justified in posting the same woes ad nauseum in multiple threads and ignore the rest of the additions and the draft in the process. 

 

In other years it would be a greater concern that going into the draft with glaring needs could force drafting for need, but this is a year when the draft is loaded on defense and on the line, and that definitely factors in to a team's offseason plans. I get the frustrations of the past few years not going bigger in free agency on the line, but this was the first year we actually were in on some of them, just didn't materialize, yet some don't seem capable of reigning in the frustration to see that. 

 

NT the best are often found in the later rounds and I wouldn't be surprised if we went for one in the 3rd or 4th round. I'd imagine pass rusher and ILB are taken early. There is pressure to find one in the draft, but with 10 picks and a loaded draft the pressure is lessened. That's a much better situation than the team overbidding and paying Calais $12mil a year, or Logan $10 mil a year, same with Hankins who nobody is biting on. Is it an ideal situation we are in? No. But in all the complaining about it nobody seems to be considering what it would have actually took for the team to do what they want nor are the advocating that as the better path.

[elkabong82]

25 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

We don't know how much Hankins wants now. He fired his agent and has been sitting out there for a couple weeks now with no interest. So, why not contact the guy?

 

 

Not at NT. You're looking at 3rd round grades on these guys.

 

 

No, it's about not even addressing the biggest hole we have. It doesn't have to be a big name, just somebody at this point.

 

 

Me too. But I'd see if he would take 6 million. Hell we paid 5 million for McGee.

 

 

NT's are not great, or deep in this draft. And we'll probably reach to get on, and miss out on a better player in a position that we need help at as well.

 

 

1000000000% agree with the first part. This is not the draft class I would want to do it in. It's not great.

 

 

MacDowell does nothing for the hole at NT, and I think he'll be a bust. However I'd probably look at either a ILB, edge rusher or a 3-4 DE in the 1st and 2nd rounds as well.

 

 

Baker was better than either one of the guys we brought in though. And both of the guys we brought in have one good year (or in McGee's case, JAG) and then basically nothing. Signing guys that have done nothing except in a contract year usually does not bode well.

 

 

He already fired his agent. And we're still not talking to him. He might even take a more moderate multi year deal. But we'll never know.

 

 

There are a lot of good defensive players in the draft. But not NT's and we desperately need one. And because of that, we'll likely end up reaching for one and miss out on a better player, that could also make a impact. That's the problem that myself and others are having. We made a play at Logan, great. And we missed, it happens, but Hankins is still out there, looking like he's going to resign for the around same amount with the Giants we paid McGee. And there are no great NT's in this draft. Just a couple of ok guys and then it drops off badly. I'd rather go in where we can go BPA and BUILD the team, not just fill gaping holes with players that are reaches.

 

Maybe the lack of interest with Hankins has to do with consistency questions. Not sure. Doesn't seem like many are biting since he visited several teams and balked at all their offers. Who knows, maybe he lowers his demands and agrees to a prove it deal and he falls in our lap. For all we know he fired his agent because his agent told him he wasn't going to get the money he wanted. 

 

The best NTs in the league, for the most part are lower round picks and I imagine that's where we'll find one.  NTs every year are a rare commodity and every year it's supposedly a weak draft class for them. Yet the best ones are consistently found in the later rounds. 

 

Some of our biggest holes were addressed, including safety and run-stoppers on the DL. 

 

MacDowell is a physical freak who could become legit in the NFL but he needs coaching and motivation. We have Tomsula for that which is why I think he could be a great addition. 

 

Baker was inconsistent and Gruden even alluded to that. PFF has it's grades sure, but we all saw that line get pushed back constantly and do nothing in the run game. I don't think there's a single Skins fan out there that remembers Baker stopping the run well last year. 

 

and most teams go into the draft with several big needs. Just because you have big needs doesn't mean your draft is going to be a bunch of reaches for need. This team, even under Allen with the draft, hasn't drafted like that and we've had years with far greater needs.

[Skinsinparadise]

31 minutes ago, elkabong82 said:

 

Giants and Texans I was talking about historically, over the course of years, not just a snap shot of 1 offseason. JPP, Hankins, Joseph, Tuck, Cofield, Kiwanuka, etc. All teams add through free agency to a dgree, but the goal is to build more through the draft than rely on free agency and that's what those teams historically have done. When the Giants were champions they had DL that was mostly drafted. 

 

Again, Skins tried on Calais and Logan. Logan chose elsewhere, Calais was too expensive. But the team at least recongzied the need and tried. To their credit at least they didn't get desperate and overpay and instead seemingly will look to the draft. But instead the same few post, in multiple threads now, about how it's all doom and gloom because we didn't add a big name on the DL. Let the draft play out first. 

 

 

The idea that the Giants have over the years drafed many D lineman but still signed two marquee D lineman in the previous off season to me strengths my point, not weakens it.   They saw their D line stunk especially against the run  They didn't want to depend on the draft again.  The draft is great but its a crap shoot, the odds are against you.  They took drastic measures.  They signed the best NT on the market.  They signed arguably one of the top 3 DEs on the market.  It worked out for them.

 

As Keim said talking around the league the feeling people get about the Redskins now in FA is they have to win the deal first and foremost.  And I don't feel like repeating my take on that but cliff notes version of it is if you want to land the top players in the draft -- "winning the deal" is unlikely going to land you your top targets.  So the idea that Bruce tried but wasn't going to win a bidding war with the Jaguars and Chiefs for their likely top two targets -- doesn't make me think Atta boy Bruce, nice try. 

 

Under Cerrato, I didn't like the feeling that we'd always be the top bidder for our targets.  When we wanted our guy, we get that guy. It was fun but there were clear downsides to it.   But I don't care much for the opposite feeling either.  Whenever I watch FA in recent years and I hear of another team interested in the same target  as the Redskins-- my first take is we will be outbid.  And yeah there are rare exceptions.  But I don't like the feeling that if another team is interested in the same player, forget it, its unlikely to happen.   Again -- I'd like a happy medium between Vinny and Bruce. 

 

As for putting all our marbles on the draft.  Its risky.   We will get our stud NT in the third round -- no problem! Well statistically speaking you have a 27% shot of landing on your solution.  Heck even the first round is far from slam dunk. 

 

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

Defensive Line

• Defensive line ties with running backs and wide receivers for the lowest first round success rate at 58%.
• Of 442 players selected, only 114 have become starters for at least half their careers.
• The success rates are as follows:
• 1st - 58%
• 2nd - 26% 
• 3rd - 27%
• 4th - 37% 
• 5th - 13% 
• 6th - 13% 
• 7th - 3%
•  

[Morneblade]

26 minutes ago, elkabong82 said:

 

Maybe the lack of interest with Hankins has to do with consistency questions. Not sure. Doesn't seem like many are biting since he visited several teams and balked at all their offers. Who knows, maybe he lowers his demands and agrees to a prove it deal and he falls in our lap. For all we know he fired his agent because his agent told him he wasn't going to get the money he wanted. 

 

Well, last year he got moved positionally and was expected to play a different style of play, so that could be part of it. I forgot who it was, but someone posted that when he was out of the game, the Giants D went to being the worst run D in the league. That's telling.

 

Quote

 

The best NTs in the league, for the most part are lower round picks and I imagine that's where we'll find one.  NTs every year are a rare commodity and every year it's supposedly a weak draft class for them. Yet the best ones are consistently found in the later rounds. 

 

Some of our biggest holes were addressed, including safety and run-stoppers on the DL. 

 

I'm going to disagree a bit here. I don't know how much better, if any, we are against the run with the DL pick ups. As far as S is concerned, we should be better, but we might not be great in coverage with Cravens and Swearinger. And honestly, I'd much rather not have to rely on a SS to be a big part of the run game, because you're getting thrashed at the PoA.

 

I'd have to see some stats on where the best NT's are taken. But I agree on that is where we'll find one (if we do) because we're not going to spend a high pick on a NT unless we're really desperate.

 

Quote

 

MacDowell is a physical freak who could become legit in the NFL but he needs coaching and motivation. We have Tomsula for that which is why I think he could be a great addition. 

 

Well, if there is a coach that could get him to play, Tomsula is the guy. I really liked him as a pickup. But, motivation is something I'd rather not have to worry about in a high draft pick. IF MacDowell is a motivated player I agree with you, he'll be nasty and a huge upgrade on our DL.

 

Quote

 

Baker was inconsistent and Gruden even alluded to that. PFF has it's grades sure, but we all saw that line get pushed back constantly and do nothing in the run game. I don't think there's a single Skins fan out there that remembers Baker stopping the run well last year. 

 

I'm not sure if Gruden was referring to Baker or not, but let's say he was. Most of that issue was having a 300 pound 3-4 DE (Hood) try to play NT. Hood got a horrible grade, mostly because he was playing out of position and honestly, was way over matched. in a 3-4, the NT is the lynch pin that keeps everything together. And ours was terrible. And, so was Will Compton. Even with that Baker still had better production that McClain.

 

I'll also point some of the blame at Barry. He was terrible, and Gruden said as much, and called him out.

 

Quote

 

and most teams go into the draft with several big needs. Just because you have big needs doesn't mean your draft is going to be a bunch of reaches for need. This team, even under Allen with the draft, hasn't drafted like that and we've had years with far greater needs.

 

No, but it happens a lot. Maybe really well run teams do not, but most of the time they don't have huge holes either. And I'm not sure we have had bigger needs than a NT for a 3-4 and quite literally not having a guy there. I don't see when we've ever had a FAR great need in recent history. Maybe going back to which QB we're gonna start, Grossman or Beck?

[TSO]

3 hours ago, elkabong82 said:

So we go into the draft now with DL and ILB as the pressing needs and the early rounds are good on both spots.

 

This is the concern for me. I'm speaking for myself, of course. 

 

The draft isn't something you go into looking to address a position for the upcoming season. It's for the future. It's about coming away with as many prospects that have the potential to be great as possible, with positional significance weighing into it as little as possible. 

 

Going into this offseason, I felt our far and away biggest need was at the Dline. We needed at least one, if not two, guys there who could impact the game more consistently than what we had. Multi dimensional guys who can win one on one and, gasp, even beat double teams more often.  

 

I felt that's what killed our entire defense (and by extension our entire team) last year more than anything else, even with subpar play at ILB and DB, and fixing that would go a long way in elevating the defense overall. 

 

So not getting those guys means we still have that major issue. Now, maybe losing Baker/RJF and adding McClain/McGee ends up being a net gain there, but that's hard to envision. You seem to agree with that and believe help will come from the draft. 

 

That's my problem, really. I don't want to assume that about the draft. I don't want the team viewing it that way, either, because it leads to potentially reaching for need, and I don't believe that's the approach one should have with the draft. Neither does anyone speaking for the team, as they continue to stress BPA even though they acknowledge they need to address the defense. 

 

I'm looking at this from a bigger picture perspective here. Like the team, in one post it seems like you're advocating that the draft will save us there, while in another it seems like you're arguing that they won't reach for need. There's a contradictory thought process with believing in both ideas, and that's the concern. 

 

It just may be that things fall our way at our picks, and the BPA happens to coincide with our pressing need, but you do understand the risk involved with that, right? It's pretty concerning, hence the disappointment with not being a bit more aggressive in FA, specifically with Logan. 

 

Which is a bit of a downer considering we've been competitive the last two years and have a chance to take a big step this offseason. Still could happen, of course, but it's been tough to watch how a lot of things have went thus far, and not just with Free Agency. 

 

Either way, I really hope everything is on track and they knock the draft out of the park. I just want great players at whatever position drafted here. My hopes for this team are still more heavily tied with what they do in terms of hiring a GM and signing Kirk long term than anything else. 

[WelshSkinsFan]

Multiple comments on here that we are not talking to Hankins. Unless you are Bruce how do you know we are not?  

 

Leaving that aside there was a comment about being ok with not getting a big name but we needed to at least pick up a NT before the draft even if it was JAG.  I am pretty sure Phil Taylor fits that description and he is on the roster right now.  Of course he has not played in a couple of years so there is a big concern but he is still pretty young and if he is fit then he is a legitimate NT and a pretty decent one too.  If Taylor does not work out there are still non draft options to fill the position if we are just looking for a true NT, heck Knighton is sitting on his couch and would play for anyone for veterans minimum at this point.

[Morneblade]

36 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

Multiple comments on here that we are not talking to Hankins. Unless you are Bruce how do you know we are not?  

 

Leaving that aside there was a comment about being ok with not getting a big name but we needed to at least pick up a NT before the draft even if it was JAG.  I am pretty sure Phil Taylor fits that description and he is on the roster right now.  Of course he has not played in a couple of years so there is a big concern but he is still pretty young and if he is fit then he is a legitimate NT and a pretty decent one too.  If Taylor does not work out there are still non draft options to fill the position if we are just looking for a true NT, heck Knighton is sitting on his couch and would play for anyone for veterans minimum at this point.

 

We don't for sure. But we WOULD know if he was coming in for a visit. Nothing is planned. It's been reported that he has not had any contact with any teams recently, and has fired his agent. So if there is any talking, there isn't much to it.

 

Ah, Phil Taylor. I think you pretty much covered it. Guy that has been out of the league for 2 years and coming off another knee injury. That's not even a JAG. That's a wish. Sure, I'd LOVE to see him come in and be the player he was his rookie season. But the chances of that are slim and none, and slim just left the room.

 

Knighton would be an upgrade, if he isn't pushing 360 pounds. Again, there has been nothing to even suggest there has been talk.

 

And maybe most important, Jay Gruden has said that they were done in FA, and looking towards the draft to get a NT. Greg Maunsky has said the same thing.

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

18 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Little context is needed here I think. But you already know that, as everyone on ES has been salivating over offseason 2017 as the year we planned to take a big step forward, and it hasn't materialized. No one is advocating a Vinny approach here and it's disingenuous to imply otherwise. We want to fill holes in FA specifically so that we CAN build through the draft and not go back to the days of reaching for need again.

 

So it's automatic that you must reach in the draft if you don't fill holes in free agency?

[Koolblue13]

20 hours ago, zoony said:

So now we are back to drafting for neeed rather than BPA?

You mean like 2 years ago when we needed a right side to our Oline and has a new GM that wanted a cant miss pick or like last year when we knew our top 2 WRs would leave after the season?

 

Us drafting pure BPA is as much of a myth as using football player, to describe a football player is dumb.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

17 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

You mean like 2 years ago when we needed a right side to our Oline and has a new GM that wanted a cant miss pick or like last year when we knew our top 2 WRs would leave after the season?

 

Us drafting pure BPA is as much of a myth as using football player, to describe a football player is dumb.

 

If there is one possible good result from Scot's firing, it will be the retiring of the phrase "He's a Football Player" to describe football players by ES members.

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

 

If there is one possible good result from Scot's firing, it will be the retiring of the phrase "He's a Football Player" to describe football players by ES members.

This football player, whos played football his entire life is now a professional football player who plays football, but this guy? He's a football player. 

 

That's some Maddenistic **** right there.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

8 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

This football player, whos played football his entire life is now a professional football player who plays football, but this guy? He's a football player. 

 

That's some Maddenistic **** right there.

 

LOL...it was the "In football shape" of 2015-2016. "In football shape" left the building when Shanahan did.

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

 

LOL...it was the "In football shape" of 2015-2016. "In football shape" left the building when Shanahan did.

That was stupid too. 

[The Rook]

"• He plans to do 100% of the offensive play calling"

 

I certainly hope he remedies the poor game management issues that happened when he previously handled those duties. 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rook