The Defensive Line Thread - Who makes the cut?

[RandyHolt]

We may need to keep our own stats and sell them back to the NFL. Even something as simple as snap counts are not even tallied up, let alone yards on those plays. Preseason in the other sports like hockey, you can see how much every player was on the ice to the second including for well over 80 games of 60 minutes of non stop action.

 

The DL rotation may be telling, but what be more telling is what we open in, and the snap counts. Vs Baltimore we opened in nickel 425, with Allen and Matt Ion inside. I am not sure 3-4 should even in be in our D's name. We are simply a pure hybrid.I am not sure when we would consistently even be in a 3-4 anymore. 

[DC Lumber Co.]

10 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

We may need to keep our own stats and sell them back to the NFL. Even something as simple as snap counts are not even tallied up, let alone yards on those plays. Preseason in the other sports like hockey, you can see how much every player was on the ice to the second for well over 80 games.

 

The DL rotation may be telling, but what be more telling is what we open in, and the snap counts. Vs Baltimore we opened in nickel 425, with Allen and Matt Ion inside. I am not sure 3-4 should even in be in our D's name. We are simply a pure hybrid.I am not sure when we would consistently even be in a 3-4 anymore. 

 

For some reason I recall Rich Tandler routinely posting snap counts after each regular season game which was a really nice resource. I wonder if thats something available to members of the press when requested or if he creates the snap count stats himself?

 

Regardless, I agree on the hybrid defense thing.

 

McGee, Taylor, Hood seemed to be the lineup for our base 3-4

 

As you mentioned, it was Allen and Ioannidis in nickel. I like that combo.

 

Aj Francis was 2nd up at nose, then Mbu. Someone also said they saw Mbu at end on some plays as well?

 

Couldn't get a feel for what they think McClain's ideal role is. Saw him do a little bit of everything, and did see one play where he got good penetration on a rush.

 

I can't see them wasting Allen's impact as a pass rushing only DL. Think he ultimately starts in place of Hood week 1. That would make our starting base 3-4 line: McGee | Taylor | Allen.

 

I think we have the depth and versatility necessary at LB to have an effective hybrid attack too. Smith can shift to DL, Anderson was rushed from inside Thursday night (so glad to see Manusky use him as a double-a gap rusher), and has anyone ever seen Galette rush from anything but a 4-point stance? Despite being listed as an OLB I think he is purely going to be a 3rd down, pass rushing RDE with his hand in the dirt. Lots of options to play with.

 

Hood might not be the odd man out after all with Jay Gruden's praise of him in his TC-exit press conference. Just really curious as to who is cut if not him and McClain being safe because of his contract.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

52 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

The DL rotation may be telling, but what be more telling is what we open in, and the snap counts. Vs Baltimore we opened in nickel 425, with Allen and Matt Ion inside. I am not sure 3-4 should even in be in our D's name. We are simply a pure hybrid.I am not sure when we would consistently even be in a 3-4 anymore. 

 

Matt Ioannidis hyped today by Jay.  Good sign.   Looks like Zach Brown might have pushed Foster out of the lineup versus it being rotational or at least it might be so for the moment judging by what I read about today's practice.

 

If Ioannidis is the real deal, with Allen and perhaps Lanier.  They actually might have a nice young cornerstone for once at D line.

[Master Blaster]

4 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Not me, I never had much of an expectation for either of these guys.  They just looked like more signings like Pae, Reyes and many of the others. Folks like to applaud these "low level" signings because we have been burned so often by big names.  But low level also means "just a guy" and that's what we've seen a lot around here since taking this low level approach. And players at this level are just not going to make a big difference. 

 

The Hood/Taylor/McGee unit was impressive. 

 

McClain looks like he put 20 not good pounds on this off-season. 

[TSO]

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

Again, I apologized in my first post and my rant was not directed towards you. It was simply sparked by something in your post I quoted. I understand meltdowns, and have participated in many myself. I just wish they would be contained to gameday threads where it's appropriate. All too often a negative game, injury, or free agent acquisition failure will cause these fans I describe to retreat to the "we will always suck as long as Dan is alive"/"Thanks Bruce" type mentality. I don't think the team has gotten nearly enough credit for how far we've come since Jay was hired. It hasn't been without it's hiccups, most notably the Scot and Kirk situations, but for the most part Dan has stopped trying to play fantasy football, and we've stuck to a draft-first team building philosophy. Kirk hasn't left the team yet, despite people thinking it's inevitable (another annoyance of mine), and we've drafted as well as this team ever has. Have we hit on all free agents? No, but that's because we shouldn't be relying on them anyway. They were warm bodies to get us through until we filled those holes the correct way through the draft. 

 

Honestly, I get the sense you're not really reading what I'm saying and just going on your own tangents. It's a bit frustrating. 

 

A lot of the points you made in this post really have zero to do with what I was saying about your willingness to generalize and label. Now you're getting into specifics here I didn't get into myself. 

 

I'll attempt to address some of these points, but my initial point remains. I'll re-post it here at the end of this so it's not lost. 

 

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

The team DID address the DL in FA, within the guidelines of their principles of money allocation to free agents, and sticking with the draft-first roster building philosophy. Is it wrong to want to see them play a few games before I declare McGee and McClain as terrible moves? 

 

Of course that's not wrong, I haven't said that. Nor have those who share similar views to me. 

 

All we've said is that we would've preferred a more impactful player versus those two. 

 

Doesn't mean that we think they'll automatically bust, just that we would've rather had someone more likely to boom. There's nuance there you're missing. 

 

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

Scot recently posted on Twitter that the entire draft followed his board to a T, save for ONE pick.

 

Nothing I said there negated that. Have no idea why you'd mention this. I simply stated the FACT that the board does get adjusted throughout the combine and pre-draft. I didn't say that that it was significantly so or that they changed it to the point where Scot's board was no longer recognizable. I even put that in the context of stating what both Gruden and Williams said about Scot's influence. I forgot to mention Scott Campbell as well. 

 

But, yeah, that's how I've always seen it. Didn't even need Scot to verify that. 

 

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

And sure, we don't know how far down exactly they were on the list. But is it also not fair to believe that they were relatively high considering how early in FA they were pursued? It's not like they were signed late in the process after hanging out on the market for days/weeks. I don't think the Skins were the only ones interested, because if they were... Wouldn't Bruce, being the "cheap" squeaker he is, waited them out and got them for cheap 1 year deals? The details and timing of their signings makes me believe they were more highly regarded than many want to believe is all I've ever said about them. And that I want to see them in a few frickin games before passing judgement because of that.

 

We know the team went after Campbell first and foremost. So, by default, they weren't top priority. Now, maybe they were next up, maybe not. We don't know. 

 

I don't know what the rest of your post has to do with anything. It's not even that important where they were on the list. If the team thought so highly of them, and we as fans don't, that doesn't mean they're automatically right and we're automatically wrong. 

 

I do concede to the professionals. But it's also okay to base our opinions on precedent. Those players don't have the pedigree the others do, hence the price difference. It's ok to assume they won't be as great of a player/s that we needed on the Dline here based on that. 

 

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

I don't think we know if we have built that solid enough foundation you are describing just yet. We have a TON of boom-or-bust situations all over our depth chart that need clarity before I'd be comfortable making the free agency push you describe. Not to mention I'd wanna see a playoff win to further gain confidence in such a move. 

 

And yes, you make exceptions for talents like Norman hitting the open market. He's actually the perfect reason why you don't chew up all of your cap space in free agency forcing square pegs in round holes if the right fit isn't there because of a need. When the right fit/player presents itself, the Redskins have shown that they will open up the checkbook.

 

Ok, you think that. I don't. I think we're right there. The team is acting weird if it doesn't think that, as well. 

 

The idea we have a ton of "boom or bust" situations that need clarity is nonsense to me. Both in that statement itself and in that somehow meaning the team isn't close to contention. 

 

We know what we have in our franchise QB, which most teams don't and that automatically puts us in a major advantage. Which is why it's maddening the team didn't immediately place emphasis on signing him long term. 

 

We have a very good core of players all throughout the offense. We've got some studs on defense with Norman and Kerrigan. We simply needed to get aggressive this offseason on the Dline, at ILB and Safety. 

 

In the end, it worked out because Allen fell to us. Before that, it was a concern because we only got aggressive enough at two of the three aforememtioned positions. And the most important one, to me, was the one we were least aggressive with. 

 

As for "fit", neither of us knows who fits best or doesn't. The team thought enough of Campbell as a fit to pursue him first. And there's always risk to someone you acquire not fitting. Heck, even with all the "cheaper" FAs we brought in, their dead money hurt us a bit when so many of them didn't pan out. Whereas the guys they spent big on have been hits. 

 

You could actually argue that this team is better on the overpriced (for a reason) guys than most teams now. 

 

So it's totally reasonable for those of us who wanted to take the next step this offseason to see them go after one of those types on the Dline. 

 

My God, we must be crazy. 

 

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

It again brings me back to my very valid argument that it seems the main problem with our DL signings seem to be with the name recognition they lack more than anything

 

Yeah, that's all it is. Name recognition, lol. 

 

Why are those guys recognized though? Hmmmm... one ponders. 

 

4 hours ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

Have I proved I'm capable of citing specific reasons, evidence, etc and having intelligent discussion yet? Again, my post wasn't specifically directed towards you to begin with as I respect you big time around here. Where we will have to agree to disagree is the percentage of the fanbase who ignorantly throw shade on anything this team does. I clearly think it's  not bigger contingent than you give credit for. Maybe our little discussion will get you to keep an eye out for it more in the future. 

 

Have I said otherwise? I told you to stop generalizing and labeling. You admitted you were doing just that. You even came with a "what's good for the gander is good for the goose" response. 

 

THAT's what I was referring to. That's it. All of this back and forth that has come out of it, while I've enjoyed much of it, I've got no idea what the point has been.  

 

I never argued there aren't too many negative people in general. I've been at the forefront of dealing with that here. It's absolute insanity that you have the audacity to tell me what to keep my eye on. 

 

But you remain wrong about who is labeling who wrongly, generalizing, and lumping people into one category. That's the issue here.

 

Please separate the two things, brother. Don't lump those of us citing specific criticisms based on legitimate reasoning into one group of negative nancies. We deserve better. 

 

When someone would just label me a homer in the past, I'd take issue with it as well in the same way. I'd like to think that anyone actually reading what I'm saying would understand that I've got nuanced, detailed points that can flow from one side to another on topics depending on the context and adjusted as more evidence comes out. 

 

I know of many here on the board who hold similar stances and are the same way, so I don't want to see them all labeled incorrectly.

 

It's that simple. 

[Master Blaster]

Some of ya'll need a drink or eight. 

 

 

 

Best thing about the game was their is finally a DC with some knowledge of how to run the 3-4

 

[DC Lumber Co.]

1 hour ago, thesubmittedone said:

All we've said is that we would've preferred a more impactful player versus those two. 

 

And all I'm saying is that I view it a little premature when we have no idea what the impact of any of them will be just yet. If we are going strictly off of past-performance, your point is certainly valid. Fortunately, personnel decisions are not always made on precedent and you often have to project future success and a players development in order to get value out of your signings. McGees run stopping abilities on display Thursday night are already making his signing look good, Imo... But for all of them McGee, McClain, or the others we passed on... It's way too early to declare what their impact will be.

 

Quote

Doesn't mean that we think they'll automatically bust, just that we would've rather had someone more likely to boom. There's nuance there you're missing. 

 

How am I missing nuance when the entire thing is completely speculative. Fans are often wrong about free agents and draft picks that are passed over. Players who they thought would be "more likely to boom" than the players selected/acquired instead of them. Speculation over a players potential or boom/bust factor matters far less than the end result. 

 

Quote

We know the team went after Campbell first and foremost. So, by default, they weren't top priority. Now, maybe they were next up, maybe not. We don't know. 

 

I don't know what the rest of your post has to do with anything. It's not even that important where they were on the list. If the team thought so highly of them, and we as fans don't, that doesn't mean they're automatically right and we're automatically wrong. 

 

It is important how highly they were on the list, because I've been trying to advocate that they aren't the total scrubs a lot of people are painting them to be. If they were simply JAGs, wouldn't our recent history with our frugality in spending cause us to wait much longer than we did on signing them to drive their price lower? If we waited on a talent perceived to be much better in Zach Brown, I'm making the argument that either A) outside competition forced our hand or B.) Our staff saw something in both McClain and McGee that fans aren't seeing. It's a completely reasonable theory is all I was saying.

 

Quote

It's ok to assume they won't be as great of a player/s that we needed on the Dline here based on that. 

 

And I'm simply arguing against how easy it is for you/others to assume that before we actually see how these players perform... Just like I detest the assumption that just because Kirk didn't sign this off-season means he is gone after this year. It's ignorant to me to assume things and I think that there is so much we don't know to feel comfortable assuming ANYTHING. People even take it a step further and speak about it as if it's fact sometimes.

 

Quote

 The idea we have a ton of "boom or bust" situations that need clarity is nonsense to me. Both in that statement itself and in that somehow meaning the team isn't close to contention. 

 

We know what we have in our franchise QB, which most teams don't and that automatically puts us in a major advantage...

 

We have a very good core of players all throughout the offense. We've got some studs on defense with Norman and Kerrigan. We simply needed to get aggressive this offseason on the Dline, at ILB and Safety.

 

In the end, it worked out because Allen fell to us. Before that, it was a concern because we only got aggressive enough at two of the three aforememtioned positions. And the most important one, to me, was the one we were least aggressive with. 

 

Let me rephrase my comments on this. If you go back through my posts on this subject you will see that I very much so agree with the idea that this roster is very close to contention. I also recognize that this is a very optimistic take, or glass half-full view, if you will.

 

We do have the QB position solidified for this season (Which is more than most teams can say, we agree here). We do have a great core of players on Offense. However Reed always comes with an injury asterisk, and our top two receivers are brand new and could face some growing pains/chemistry issues with Kirk and possibly walk before they run to start the season. Pryor still only has one year of production on his Resume, and Doctson has injury history of his own to overcome. Our running game wasn't great last year, and while I loved the Perine pick and Fat Rob has slimmed down, nothing is guaranteed here.

 

Now to clarify what I meant about the boom or bust factor: it IS a roster close to contention if everything lives up to the potential. In a perfect world Pryor lives up to the hype, as does Doctson. We see a slight slip in receiving yards but the uptick in red zone efficiency & touchdowns more than makes up for the yardage. Reed stays healthy for 14 games or more. Jay commits a little more to running the ball over previous years and a slimmed Fat Rob coupled with a Perine to punch things in at the goal line improves our running game overall. 

 

It should be easy to see that all of the above is a very optimistic take as it would require a lot of things going ideally for us and few things going wrong, including injury. But I've long been on the hype train for this roster, and we don't disagree in how close this team is. I was just saying that it's not unreasonable to toss out the theory that the team is waiting for all of these scenarios to play out like they have planned... Because if they do we will be looking at a playoff win. If we do that, I think the off-season that follows could be the one that sees us go all in for the big names that you were hoping would happen this off-season.

 

Quote

As for "fit", neither of us knows who fits best or doesn't. The team thought enough of Campbell as a fit to pursue him first. And there's always risk to someone you acquire not fitting.

 

So it's totally reasonable for those of us who wanted to take the next step this offseason to see them go after one of those types on the Dline. 

 

Ok, if we're shifting to "fit" of the DL that were available, you also can't say with certainty that after Campbell/Logan proved to be too expensive for the Skins that McClain or McGee weren't viewed as the next best fit for what Tomsula wants out of his lineman. Again, purely speculation here. 

 

Quote

Yeah, that's all it is. Name recognition, lol. 

 

Why are those guys recognized though? Hmmmm... one ponders. 

 

Yes, those players have better resumes, more production, better PFF grades. Sweet. Ponder me this: how often do those Marquee names pan out on their new teams compared to fan expectation? They are more often than not terrible value compared to the contract they fetch. Plain and simple. Again, we will have to wait and see.

 

Swearinger also had a terrible resume until last year and now all of a sudden he's a great pick up, when I know damn well he would have been slammed as a Redskins acquisition if we picked him up based on potential and possible development the off-season the Cardinals did. I bring that point up again to emphasize that McGee or McClain could easily be a be a similar situation to Swearinger in that they have untapped potential, or were miscast in their previous roles.

 

Quote

I never argued there aren't too many negative people in general. I've been at the forefront of dealing with that here. It's absolute insanity that you have the audacity to tell me what to keep my eye on. 

 

But you remain wrong about who is labeling who wrongly, generalizing, and lumping people into one category. That's the issue here.

 

Please separate the two things, brother. Don't lump those of us citing specific criticisms based on legitimate reasoning into one group of negative nancies. We deserve better. 

 

When someone would just label me a homer in the past, I'd take issue with it as well in the same way. I'd like to think that anyone actually reading what I'm saying would understand that I've got nuanced, detailed points that can flow from one side to another on topics depending on the context and adjusted as more evidence comes out. 

 

I know of many here on the board who hold similar stances and are the same way, so I don't want to see them all labeled incorrectly.

 

It's that simple. 

 

And I will apologize again for disrespecting you with the "keep your eye on" comment. I respect you and the time you've spent here and your contributions to this community.

 

I, like you, also have been blasted as a blind Homer when I have taken specific stances to go against popular (often negative) opinion on a subject. 

 

And I really hope you won't label me now, or discredit my opinions for me stepping out of my usual lane either. I like to think I have contributed positively to this community as well, as SIP seemed to touch on in his comments a few posts back. More often than not I make legitimate points, take pride in backing up my posts with citations and factual quotes/ information and don't stereotype or generalize. I just got fed up. It's easy to snap when your well thought out posts get glanced over and ignored just because they don't vibe with the current group think on ES (that again, seems to be often of the negative type but not always).

 

As someone who has been blindly labeled as a Homer yourself, I hope the time I've taken to defend myself has proven to you I'm not just some troll or anything of the sort. I'd also like to believe that people who actually read what I say know that as well. But im also a man who is able to take criticism and I will work to vent my frustration at those who don't read what I have to say and would rather ignore me to continue with their negativity without entertaining a post to the contrary...in a better, more constructive way.

[TSO]

53 minutes ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

And I will apologize again for disrespecting you with the "keep your eye on" comment. I respect you and the time you've spent here and your contributions to this community.

 

I, like you, also have been blasted as a blind Homer when I have taken specific stances to go against popular (often negative) opinion on a subject. 

 

And I really hope you won't label me now, or discredit my opinions for me stepping out of my usual lane either. I like to think I have contributed positively to this community as well, as SIP seemed to touch on in his comments a few posts back. More often than not I make legitimate points, take pride in backing up my posts with citations and factual quotes/ information and don't stereotype or generalize. I just got fed up. It's easy to snap when your well thought out posts get glanced over and ignored just because they don't vibe with the current group think on ES (that again, seems to be often of the negative type but not always).

 

As someone who has been blindly labeled as a Homer yourself, I hope the time I've taken to defend myself has proven to you I'm not just some troll or anything of the sort. I'd also like to believe that people who actually read what I say know that as well. But im also a man who is able to take criticism and I will work to vent my frustration at those who don't read what I have to say and would rather ignore me to continue with their negativity without entertaining a post to the contrary...in a better, more constructive way.

 

Thanks, brother, this is all I was getting at initially. Nothing more, nothing less. 

 

And you need not worry about me thinking you're some troll, far from it. I've read through every one of your posts. They're always well thought out and I actually agree with the majority of things you say. I'm sure you'll see my username show up in your notifications a good amount since I've given you "likes" all the time. Recently,  I agreed with all of your posts defending Jay after the first preseason game. 

 

But when I see you generalize or label, it bothers me. I don't want you to go down that road. All it does is divide the board further, fueling the dichotomy of "camps" or extreme sides, and making it harder for nuanced discussions. Which is what separates ES from the rest. 

 

We should all strive to be better than that and take every post, every argument, for what it is. Let us mods handle any "groups" that might arise with an agenda, where they seek to control the narrative at all costs and make it near impossible for opposing views to be stated. I promise you, we've done plenty of that. 

 

Finally, if there's been a more negative slant on the board lately, you've got to understand that it's a consequence of moves the FO has made, both within the building and PR-wise, that can be legitimately criticized with plenty of reasoning and precedent. You might not agree with that, but the only thing you should be frustrated with, in this case, is the fact that fans are continuously put in that position by this FO. 

 

The frustration didn't erupt unwarrantedly. If I may, I'm a good example of that myself. 

 

If you do respect me like you say, and know anything about my history, your first thought should be, "damn, if he's bothered by this, maybe there IS something wrong here". Or at least be open to it. It shouldn't be to where you're annoyed by there being more negativity than not when said negativity is an effect versus a cause.

 

If you think I, or many on this board who've expressed frustration over some of the things that went down this offseason, just went into it wanting to be negative or wanting to complain... well, all I can say is that you don't know me at all and, therefore, I don't believe you respect me. 

 

But I get your frustrations in general. And, yes, there are plenty of those who are like that. It's part of the anonymity of the internet, however, and is inescapable. People will act in a (poor) manner they normally wouldn't otherwise. 

 

I've stayed away, myself, from these topics as much as I could so as to avoid being a purveyor of negativity here. I hate to be the one who brings a sense of despair to anyone. I want people to have hope.

 

So even though I hold very strong positions on how an FO should be structured, how team building should work and especially at the QB position, etc... if you noticed I stayed away from those threads the vast majority of the time they are/were running. I'd only increase my participation once the major news came out (when we actually fired Scot, when we actually restructured the FO, when the deadline passed and Kirk stayed on the tag, etc...).

 

Between those periods of times I barely posted, no matter what was said that I disagreed with. 

 

Since Training Camp has started, I haven't  even thought about posting on those issues. Other than a back and forth with Califan that erupted as a consequence of some hires in the personnel department, I really try not to mention it. But I can understand why others do, and where their frustrations emanate from. And I know which posters are ones who've always been quick to be negative no matter what versus those who haven't. It's not nearly as many as you think. They just might be more vocal about it, lol. 

 

Perfect example of that? There were polls made on Kirk Cousins right after the season-ending loss against the Giants. First off, how scientific would those polls be after an emotional loss like that? I questioned the posters who made them considering the timing... what were they expecting? 

 

But the polls all ended up HEAVILY in Kirk's favor. How?

 

If you went into those threads and read the comments, you'd think he was the absolute worst QB and that the entire fanbase despised him. The reality was, however, that it was maybe 15-20 extremely vocal posters constantly stating their (way overboard) displeasure, whereas the vast (silent) majority saw through that. Few really wanted to participate in that smorgasbord of emotion, except mostly those who were beholden to those emotions in the first place. Hence, rage.  

 

Now, as time went on, and the emotions of the game wore off, much of it died down and the discussion improved. Some of those elements remained, but as Mods, we cleaned up a significant amount of that. We've got a good track record at doing that. 

 

So I can confidently say that, right now, the board is in a good place. We'd see it if it was otherwise. The negativity that exists is mostly justified, isn't just for "the sake of it", and no one "side" is shouting so loudly to where opposing views can't see the light of day. 

[Rattlesnake88]

My goodness. Mom and dad is that you?

 

I think DL actually looked pretty decent on Thursday. Can't wait to see more this week.

 

Would really love for Taylor to pan out as the NT. It's about time we turn trash to treasure on defense. Ioniadis was impressive too, I actually though he played decent in his spot work late last season. Dude is super strong. 

[TSO]

@DC Lumber Co. Great, now I think you got others labeling me as someone who hates this Dline, lol. 

 

Since I'm sure no one was following along with our ginormous posts, and are probably just assuming our positions, let me set the record straight. 

 

I was bothered by the way the team addressed the Dline during Free Agency. I wanted them to be more aggressive. I still prefer that a more impactful (and, yes. expensive) player at that position was brought in versus what we did by signing the Mc's. Nothing that has been said has convinced me otherwise. 

 

I don't even think the team itself is/was convinced of that considering how hard they sought Campbell and were even in on trade talks with the Jets for Richardson. 

 

However, with all that said, I've repeatedly stated that I was happy with how it went overall after Allen fell to us in the draft. In fact, even before the draft I said that I was worried the team would reach for need and force a pick on the Dline. They even insinuated such straight from their mouths, which was concerning. 

 

But then Allen fell and BPA/Need were one and the same. It was awesome. I was happy. 

 

Now I'm totally fine with how it went, and my preference is only because of my personal philosophy regarding defense... that it all starts with the Dline. Some don't see it that way. Some believe it's all equal. That's fine, there are arguments to be made there. But it's my preference, and I wanted that. 

 

I'm hoping McGee and McClain can emerge as gems. If not, that's okay if guys like Ioannidis, Lanier, Taylor, etc... emerge instead and Allen lives up to his first round talent. Of course, it'd somewhat be a negative since we did tie up a decent amount of resources between the two and it's not like we can release them right away because of the amount of dead cap they'd create... but it's not a killer. 

 

As for the preseason game, here's a portion of my first post after it was over: 

 

Quote

Last year I came away with one big thing from the preseason and that was our Dline was going to get killed, specifically in the running game. You could see them losing almost every one on one battle. They were just man handled. 

 

I went into this game uninterested in the offense and really wanting to see the defensive players, specifically the linemen (as indicated by my first post here, no one can claim I'm just saying that now, lol).

 

 I can't bring myself to give a crap about our offensive ineptitude right now knowing what that side of the ball has accomplished, when it actually matters, for some time now. That's not going to change at all from the first preseason game, lol. But I was just glad to see our Dlinemen look good for the most part, no one seemed physically incapable. And Anderson is a total gamer. 

http://es.redskins.com/topic/414956-redskins-at-ratbirds-game-day-thread/?do=findComment&comment=11012070

 

So, there. Shut up.  

[DC Lumber Co.]

@thesubmittedone I appreciate you man. I'm glad we were able to conclude all of it on a positive note. You telling me that you actually have read my posts and have liked what I have to say makes me feel like I'm not just wasting my time on here that led to a lot of my frustration in the first place.

 

Getting back on topic: I found a pretty interesting Raiders article discussing Stacy McGee that may instill some confidence about him. At the very least it gives good explanation as to why he has been 1st up in our base 3-4 defense at DE.

 

Quote

Pro Football Focus gave him a quality grade of 80.5, by far the best of his career.

 

However, the truth of the matter is McGee looked great in only a small sample size during the 2016 season. As previously mentioned, he played in just nine games.

 

Sure, McGee still played in more than half of his team’s games, but another thing to consider is he was on the field for just about 20.0 percent of the Raiders’ defensive snaps. It would have been more had he been healthy...

 

...With so few snaps, his overall impact on the team was limited. One NFC West executive told The Washington Post last week that “McGee is a stingy interior player that can hold the line of scrimmage, but he’s very average as a pass rusher.”

 

In each of the first three years of his career, Pro Football Focus awarded him a “very poor” grade. According to the site, he was actually consistently bad with a 46.0, 45.3 and 43.1 player grade in 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively. It nearly doubled in 2016 to 80.5.

 

Whether the defensive tackle actually figured something out or just happened to play well in limited action remains to be seen, but it’s completely understandable for the Raiders to believe it’s the latter.

Oakland will miss McGee because he did do a lot of nice things in 2016. However, there’s no guarantee had the Raiders kept him that he would be able to repeat his 2016 performance. Oakland is probably better off going for a home run such as Dontari Poe in free agency or starting all over at defensive tackle and draft a player with more potential than a guy coming off a career-year.

 

Articles like this are what lead me to believe that McGee is set up to have a bigger impact for this team than McClain. I think McClain is what he is at this point in his career while McGee may have a ceiling he only started to reach last season.

 

The points about him being a stingy interior player with limited pass rush makes sense of why he is the starter in our base defense with others rotating in for him in nickel/pass rushing downs. It also makes me love what it could mean for our run defense coupled with Taylor at nose this year. The dude is a load I didn't see get moved off the ball Thursday night.

 

Could he have been under-utilized by the Raiders last year? Or was his limited snap count last year due to him subbing out for better pass rushers? Was he mis-cast in the Raiders 4-3 defense to begin with and could he flourish as a 5-tech for the Skins?

 

At 27, I could easily see him being a late bloomer who was only starting to show that he was putting it all together last year.

[Skinsinparadise]

Can McGee and McClain deliver? — Washington signed free agents Stacy McGee and Terrell McClain to help upgrade the defensive line. Yes, Washington’s line looks better from top to bottom. But it’s Allen, second-year players Matt Ioannidis and Anthony Lanier, less-heralded free agent addition Phil Taylor and 2016 practice squad members A.J. Francis and Joey Mbu that have stood out the most. Thus far, McGee and McClain haven’t looked like difference-makers. As of late, McGee started to flash a little more and receive some snaps with the first team. But McClain remains behind. McGee (five-year, $25 million deal) was viewed by many around the league as a more natural nose tackle than defensive end, but he hasn’t played much nose, and even so, Taylor looks more impactful there. McClain (four-year, $21 million deal) didn’t start full-time in Dallas until last season but hasn’t yet looked like a starter for Washington. These two have work to do to validate Washington’s investments in them.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/football-insider/wp/2017/08/14/three-things-we-learned-at-redskins-training-camp-and-three-questions-that-remain/?utm_term=.863e99103b65

[skins island connection]

23 hours ago, Master Blaster said:

Some of ya'll need a drink or eight. 

 

 

 

Best thing about the game was there is finally a DC with some knowledge of how to run the 3-4

 

Fixed it for ya.  Yes, I know, but its bothersome to see things like that, I just HAVE to do sumtin.

 

Back to your post; having a coach who may know how to run a 3-4 [ questionable ]  is one thing, but having the right players to execute it is another.

It has been horrendous since its inception here, and every year I get my hopes up, only to watch them crash to the ground like a drunk duck. [ I had a friend who had a duck who did enjoy partaking in alcohol, and it was hilarious ].

 

The majority of teams are using the 3-4, so it becomes a supply vs demand for quality players, and we seem to end up scraping the barrel. I've always had the belief that going back to the 4-3 would be better since the majority of teams already run the 3-4, they have to change things up because they're not used to going against it.

 

I know we rarely go with a true 3-4 mostly due to not having the players, but why continue fighting and struggling against something that hasn't worked since Shanny & co. got here? A lot will hinge on the abilities of the LB group, but until it can prove to be a somewhat formidable unit, I'm not expecting much difference.

[TSO]

Hopefully you all enjoy this... took some time to put together. Intense focus on the Dline with a ton of video.  

 

 

[RandyHolt]

Good work, thanks for that. The gifs are great to make viewing all the positions much easier.

 

Intense Focus indeed.... maybe even Extreme Focus

[RandyHolt]

I tubed Phil Taylor draft day hoping for a forklift - highlights at 3:20

 

The Browns traded up to draft a pure nose into their Jaroun 4-3 .  They had 4 wins that year. The players wanted to go back to the 4-3 the next year.   Doesn't sound like fun times for Phil. I wonder if he pancaked 3 at Baylor.

 

He is one of the bigger surprises at camp.

 

[Riggo'sRangers]

I'm starting to love the Phil Taylor pick up.  We shall see how it all pans out but he CAN be a difference maker at the most important spot on a 3-4 defense.  Please stay healthy & coaches, please rotate often to KEEP him healthy.  We have been picking up more players with local roots.  I think that matters very much to the players.  We'll see, but loved how he looked game 1.  Step 2 tonight.  Excited!  Hail

 

http://www.richmond.com/redskins-xtra/woody-redskins-hoping-phil-taylor-sr-can-be-answer-at/article_16c1a0ca-9146-5c4b-8c00-f17bdf53bfdb.html

[Koolblue13]

This defense is definitely riding on Uncle Phils Knees. Speaking of which, what happened to @Morneblade? That cranky **** should be pretty damn happy.

11 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

I tubed Phil Taylor draft day hoping for a forklift - highlights at 3:20

 

The Browns traded up to draft a pure nose into their Jaroun 4-3 .  They had 4 wins that year. The players wanted to go back to the 4-3 the next year.   Doesn't sound like fun times for Phil. I wonder if he pancaked 3 at Baylor.

 

He is one of the bigger surprises at camp.

 

That was painful to watch. Seeing Hankerson as the highest rated WR and hearing how the Browns have a QB in Colt McCoy, while Peyton Hillis (who I had no idea was a white guy) was on the Madden cover.  

[RandyHolt]

I am curious to see Phil's stamina. I think he has the agility. One problem with the hybrid is when an OC decides we are not going to rotate in fresh men on every down.  I am sure we envision a very limited snap count but I hope he gets tested early vs hurry up, vs in a playoff game like Knighton and Green Bay.

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, RandyHolt said:

I am curious to see Phil's stamina. I think he has the agility. One problem with the hybrid is when an OC decides we are not going to rotate in fresh men on every down.  I am sure we envision a very limited snap count but I hope he gets tested early vs hurry up, vs in a playoff game like Knighton and Green Bay.

I don't think there's a comparison. Also, when that happened, there wasn't a lot of talent on the line to begin with. Now, we have guys that can slide all around and play both pass and run, so we can't be caught as off guard.

[Riggo'sRangers]

7 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

This defense is definitely riding on Uncle Phils Knees. Speaking of which, what happened to @Morneblade? That cranky **** should be pretty damn happy.

Good call.  Where the hell is he?  He was/is cranky, but provides balance.  Morneblade, get busy!  Hail

[Burgundy Yoda]

I'm hoping by week 1 our starting DL is Hood, Taylor, and Allen. I think that's our best lineup right now, and probably what the coaches will ultimately go with.  

[RandyHolt]

McGee caught by Rodgers jogging off the field... glad this stuff is happening in preseason, vs the playoffs. An OC trusting his QB at the LOS allows exposing the inherent flaw with our hybrid. We have to rotate players. I am not convinced heavily rotating is always better. Rodgers may be changing the game going hurry up every time he sees a load trying to jog off. Just target the oppositions heaviest player week to week, get him out of the game and then run up the gut.

 

There was a great play Mbu early in the 3rd manhandling a guard into the back.

[DC Lumber Co.]

On 8/14/2017 at 9:37 PM, skins island connection said:

1.) Back to your post; having a coach who may know how to run a 3-4 [ questionable ]  is one thing, but having the right players to execute it is another.

It has been horrendous since its inception here.

 

2.) The majority of teams are using the 3-4, so it becomes a supply vs demand for quality players, and we seem to end up scraping the barrel.

 

3.) I know we rarely go with a true 3-4 mostly due to not having the players, but why continue fighting and struggling against something that hasn't worked since Shanny & co. got here?

 

1.) Coaching is definitely a huge factor, and we all can only hope that the 3rd time will be the charm for Jay in that regard. I have more faith in Manusky than either of the previous DCs. 

 

BUT it bears repeating just how horrible of a team Jay was tasked with rebuilding. As an offensive minded coach, I think it's understandable that the focus of the rebuild started on that side of the ball the first two years. We didn't really have the personnel to run ANY respectable defense, regardless of scheme.

 

2.) While you may be onto something with the supply vs. demand thing, I think it's more the lack of any defense talent rather than 3-4 specific talent that hurt us here.

 

3. This was the first draft and off-season we saw a focused effort on the defensive side of the ball, and added a lot of players who have the potential to overhaul not only the depth charts but also the mentality and identity of the defense, which is an aspect that is almost equally important that we have lacked for years.

 

[DC Lumber Co.]

14 hours ago, Riggo'sRangers said:

We have been picking up more players with local roots.  I think that matters very much to the players.

 

I think this is an underappreciated fact about how this roster is constructed. 

 

It seems that if a player wasn't a home-grown guy via us being the team who drafted them, the free agent acquisitions seem to be players who either grew up fans of the team like Swearinger and Phil Taylor (he might be from here too), or are guys with local roots (Francis, Mbu, etc.)

 

Even our top draft pick Jonathan Allen happens to be a local guy, so I'm sure part of it is luck. But I could easily see it being a big factor for the cohesion of the locker room and identity of this team, especially on defense. 

 

It certainly seems like an unprecedented amount of locals on this team, and even more if you count guys who just grew up fans of the Skins. If there was a stat for the percent of NFL players that grew up in the area/rooted for the team they play for, I'd be shocked if the Redskins weren't #1