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

2023 Offseason Mini Camp, OTA’s, Training Camp Discussion Thread: Hallelujah, Josh Harris & Co. Era Edition

Conn

By Conn
in The Stadium

 Share

Recommended Posts

Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted (edited)

Keim podcast with Nicki from the WP

 

A.  Nicki was asked if she felt better or worst about the O line after the Ravens scrimmages.  She said she felt the same. She thought the O line were up and and down versus the Ravens.

 

B.   Keim thought Wylie was up and down against the Ravens.  He suspects they are going to chip and do things to help him on the right side this season

 

C.  Nicki isn't high on the starting O line but is even more concerned about the depth.  Keim chimed in that if they do the backups based on merit, Monteiro should win a backup job

 

D.  Keim for the third podcast in a row if my count is right likes what he's seeing from Stromberg

 

E.  Alex Armah is having a good camp, very physical player, they think he has a good chance to make the roster

 

F.  Chris Rodriguez looks good.    Nicki commented that his vision stands out in contrast to how Gibson looked earlier in his career 

 

G.  Keim doesn't know if the O line will be good but wonders if they can scheme around their deficiences 

 

H.  Keim feels good about Howell 

 

I.   Sweat having a big camp

 

J.  Jamin Davis has come on of late

 

K.  Beckham was a challenge for Forbes.  Forbes won some reps but so did Beckham.  They think that was good for Beckham's development

 

L. Hyped that Jones has popped more than Henry. Jones is a hard worker and hits up Kerrigan often for advice. They don’t think they can try to put him in the practice squad they think some team would claim him 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Voice_of_Reason

Voice_of_Reason

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

LOL, another Panther. Probably post RR as well but apparently it doesn't matter. 

His name sounded really familiar for a reason I couldn't place, so I googled it.  It appears as though he was signed to the Commander's roster on May 23,2022.  And then he was released on August 30th 2022. Then it looks like he was signed to our practice squad after that.  So, yes former Panther, but former Panther after Ron was gone.  But also former Commander.  Kindo.  In that he never made the 53 man roster but has seemingly practiced with them a lot. 

 

I have no real memory of him last off-season, except the name was familiar.  

 

The Hogs Haven article I turned up when he was originally signed, however, had the magic Ron words "position flex."  He was signed as a tackle, but has played all three positions.

 

This is interesting.  Not because Monteiro is anything close to a savior.  But they're bringing in a guy who's at least been around the league for 4 a number of years and can play multiple positions.  Is this because they are concerned about the inexperience of their depth?  Do they think Charles truly can't stay healthy?  

 

I'm less curious about the player rather than the motivation.  Because Monteiro would not project as a starter.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Always A Commander Never A Captain

Always A Commander Never A Captain

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

His name sounded really familiar for a reason I couldn't place, so I googled it.  It appears as though he was signed to the Commander's roster on May 23,2022.  And then he was released on August 30th 2022. Then it looks like he was signed to our practice squad after that.  So, yes former Panther, but former Panther after Ron was gone.  But also former Commander.  Kindo.  In that he never made the 53 man roster but has seemingly practiced with them a lot. 

 

I have no real memory of him last off-season, except the name was familiar.  

 

The Hogs Haven article I turned up when he was originally signed, however, had the magic Ron words "position flex."  He was signed as a tackle, but has played all three positions.

 

This is interesting.  Not because Monteiro is anything close to a savior.  But they're bringing in a guy who's at least been around the league for 4 a number of years and can play multiple positions.  Is this because they are concerned about the inexperience of their depth?  Do they think Charles truly can't stay healthy?  

 

I'm less curious about the player rather than the motivation.  Because Monteiro would not project as a starter.  

 

This isn't a worried about inexperience from Charles or Paul or whoever thing. Monteiro has played 0 games, he's the least experienced. Some people are slow learners but they never stop slowly learning. Maybe Monteiro actually is worthy of a roster spot on his own merit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DWinzit

DWinzit

Posted
Posted

I hate spell check. I swore I text Risner not Monteiro to RR

6 hours ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

 

This isn't a worried about inexperience from Charles or Paul or whoever thing. Monteiro has played 0 games, he's the least experienced. Some people are slow learners but they never stop slowly learning. Maybe Monteiro actually is worthy of a roster spot on his own merit.

He could be do to "flex". But how good can he really be if he hasn't really made it off PS's?

 

It shows how weak the backups are, that's for sure.

 

If nothing more, he a body for if anyone goes down before the season starts I guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Going Commando

Going Commando

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

A.  I don't like a play it in the middle approach as to the off seasons.  Go for it or build for the future.  I don't mind a slower played incremental approach early in a coach's tenue but not in season 4.  I felt that way before Ron tested that here.  I used to blast Bruce Allen for many reasons and this play it in the middle approach was one of them.

 

B.  If Ron is going to be lets go hard on some spots and less hard on the O line, he's not my kind of coach.    I am in the camp of the scout who said once its hard to be a good team with a bad O line.  I felt this way before Ron tested that here.

 

I disagree with these two criticisms.  For the first point, I think the opposite is true.  Off-season #4 is not the time when you typically start making aggressive changes to your roster.  That should have happened in off-seasons one and two.  By year four your foundation needs to have been laid.  Your leaders need to have been found, and your culture established.  At this point incremental improvement and maintenance is what is called for.  We're not trying to jump from three wins to 10.  We're jumping from 8 wins to 10.  Ron did establish our culture, identity, and roster foundation.  He found our leaders.  And if it's true that he found our QB, then the build is on track.

 

For the second point, I disagree that any one position group is more vital to success than the others outside of the QB room.  There are a multitude of equally viable ways to build a good team, and the ONLY truism about building I can accept is that you get good by getting lots of good players.  Outside of QB, it doesn't matter where those players are clustered on your roster, the team with more good players on it is the one who is going to win.  A good or bad OL isn't any more of a force multiplier or liability than a good or bad secondary or DL or skill group.  If anything, there is some math to demonstrate that a secondary has become more heavily weighed in importance than other groups because it now involves six players routinely on the field with a minimum rotation depth of seven or eight.  Did you see this article from Bill Barnwell?  https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/38191444/ranking-flaws-weaknesses-2023-nfl-playoff-contenders-14-super-bowl-teams

 

Note this part:

 

Quote

It's awfully hard to win a lot of games with a bad secondary. The Lions went 9-8 last season with a pass defense that ranked last in the NFL in QBR allowed. To contextualize how difficult it is to post a winning record when a team can't stop the pass in the modern NFL, consider that no other squad that finished in the bottom five of the QBR rankings in 2019, 2020, 2021 or 2022 was able to match Detroit's feat. The average record for those teams, even with the Lions in the mix, was right around 5-12. The table stakes for being a playoff team is having a passable secondary.

 

And teams have absolutely made championship runs over the past ten years with the formula of dominant secondary and defensive front and weak OL.  Seattle, New England, Denver.

 

I used to think that all it took was a good QB and the ability to dominate the line of scrimmage to win championships.  But if that were true, then the Cowboys and Saints and Eagles would all have more than one SB between them in ten years.  There is more than one way to build a great team, and again, the only 100% way to do it right is to get good players when you can, no matter the position.  IMO we did that pretty well in 2023, very well in 2022, and OK in 2021, even though it didn't involve picking any OLs high except Cosmi.

 

On top of that point, I would like to add that OL has a longer development curve for draft picks, and that it is harder to successfully integrate multiple green players into that unit than a secondary or a skill group.  College OLs come into the NFL less skilled and developed than players at other positions.  Unless you are lucky, you have to use free agency to fill immediate OL needs.  But you can reliably fill long term needs by setting up a draft to starter pipeline where you are able to take super athletic day two and three OLs and red shirt them for one or two years to get their body and their game ready.  That's what we've been doing.  I know people around here hate the Braeden Daniels pick, but they are being shortsighted about him.  I picked Daniels in the ES mock draft specifically because he was one of the only day three linemen in this draft class with the athleticism to have any chance to develop into a decent starting tackle or guard.  The day three OLs this year sucked and getting an athlete like Daniels was good work, and I don't care that he may take a year or two to be ready to play, so long as he eventually gets there.  Do I wish we had drafted Dawand Jones and Olu Oluwatimi instead of Stromberg and Daniels?  Yes.  But arguing over which day three pipeline OLs we should have picked is a trifle. It's not a criticism of the actual strategy, nor is it anywhere close to being a reason to jump ship on Rivera's regime.  Especially since I know you actually liked Stromberg as a prospect and think he can become a good starter.

 

The other thing I wanted to make clear is that I don't think it's at all realistic to hope for a world where Sam Howell is our long term answer at QB after wholesale front office and coaching staff changes are made.  His fate is totally bound to theirs, no new regime is going to come in and hitch their wagon to a fifth round pick that got their previous coaches fired.  If Sam plays well enough to erase any doubts about his future here, then it would be Dan Snyder level malpractice to fire the regime that drafted and developed him.  Like it or not, Howell and Rivera are a package deal.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

 

The other thing I wanted to make clear is that I don't think it's at all realistic to hope for a world where Sam Howell is our long term answer at QB after wholesale front office and coaching staff changes are made.  His fate is totally bound to theirs, no new regime is going to come in and hitch their wagon to a fifth round pick that got their previous coaches fired.  If Sam plays well enough to erase any doubts about his future here, then it would be Dan Snyder level malpractice to fire the regime that drafted and developed him.  Like it or not, Howell and Rivera are a package deal.

 

This is where you are missing the forest through the trees.

 

People keep going back to the "fifth round pick" thing, which is absurd.

 

But a lot of the conversation we're talking about here is that if Howell is decent to good and the team does just okay... a new HC may very well roll with Howell. Or at least have him be a part of the competition (unless a high end QB becomes available). In that case, Howell didn't get the regime fired. The new regime got their people in.

 

This is a conversation that is impossible to have without the context of this season playing out. 

 

So we'll see. 

  • Like 2
  • Thumb up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
redskinss

redskinss

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just read Danny Johnson has a rotator cuff strain and is day to day from the body slam in practice. 

I know preseason is supposed to be mild but I hope someone lights up andrew's in the game monday.

Edited by redskinss
  • Like 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HigSkin

HigSkin

Posted
Posted (edited)

Listening to a few media heads about this Ravens game and Ravens are literally not playing anybody. 

 

Should be good for our first team offense to be playing against 2/3's for a half or however long they're in there.

 

 

Edited by HigSkin
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

 

I disagree with these two criticisms.  For the first point, I think the opposite is true.  Off-season #4 is not the time when you typically start making aggressive changes to your roster.  That should have happened in off-seasons one and two.  By year four your foundation needs to have been laid.  Your leaders need to have been found, and your culture established.  At this point incremental improvement and maintenance is what is called for.  We're not trying to jump from three wins to 10.  We're jumping from 8 wins to 10.  Ron did establish our culture, identity, and roster foundation.  He found our leaders.  And if it's true that he found our QB, then the build is on track.

 

 

We are talking about two different things.  You seem to be referencing overhauling a roster.  Yes you do that early.  I am taking about using the off season to fix your remaining flaws to be a contender.   That's what I mean aboiut being aggressive

 

Ron said multiple times duriing the off season of year 3 is the season where you take the next step up and win.  it didn't happen.  He clearly thought he made it happen going for that bad trade for Wentz.  That was aggressive.  Big swing and miss.  But don't lose that mindset for off season 4 for other positions.   It doesn't have to be a trade.  But aggressively fix your holes. 

 

The Giants IMO did it.  Their pass weapons were meh and they did a trade, signed FAs, traded up in the draft for Hyatt.  And they keep using higher draft capital than we do for the O line which is also a weakness for them.  And judging by their camp reports especially if Waller can stay healthy and Hyatt's camp translates to the season not only did they fix their weakness but might have turned it to a strength. 

 

I expected him to aggressively fix the team's remaining flaws. Instead, he went to town on one weakness but not the other and left the big hole in the ship to sink it again.  This mind you after Ron made it a point that the O line sunk them last year.  Plenty of evidence exists that they know they didn't fix the spot as I pointed out in other posts.    They just decided to ride with it anyway.   They didn't clearly have lets go for it hard to be a contender mindset this off season IMO.  I know you are really into the Wylie signing.  Cool.  But at this moment i am not.  Maybe he will change my mind but it hasn't happened, yet.

 

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

 

 

For the second point, I disagree that any one position group is more vital to success than the others outside of the QB room.  There are a multitude of equally viable ways to build a good team, and the ONLY truism about building I can accept is that you get good by getting lots of good players.  Outside of QB, it doesn't matter where those players are clustered on your roster, the team with more good players on it is the one who is going to win.  A good or bad OL isn't any more of a force multiplier or liability than a good or bad secondary or DL or skill group.  If anything, there is some math to demonstrate that a secondary has become more heavily weighed in importance than other groups because it now involves six players routinely on the field with a minimum rotation depth of seven or eight.  Did you see this article from Bill Barnwell?  https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/38191444/ranking-flaws-weaknesses-2023-nfl-playoff-contenders-14-super-bowl-teams

 

Note this part:

 

 

And teams have absolutely made championship runs over the past ten years with the formula of dominant secondary and defensive front and weak OL.  Seattle, New England, Denver.

 

 

I just looked so 2 out of the 14 teams had offensive line as their weakness. Both teams with veteran stud QBs.  Aaron rodgers and Josh Allen.  Using your other examples, yeah if we had Payton Manning, prime Russell Wilson, and Tom Brady, agree, i wouldn't worry as much about the O line.    When Howell is playing in year 4, and he gets comfortable let the bullets fly.  :ols:

 

Now the 2 teams with that O line as an apparenty weakness still with a better ranked O line than ours.  So it shows the potential of how bad this O line is.  If our version of a weakness is the 21st ranked O line like the Bills, that's not so bad but its not the case at least according to these guys.  Will see.

 

Pro Football Network with the Bills and Jets at 21, 23 -- we are 30th.

 

Warren Sharp with the Bills and Jets at 21, 24, we are 30th

 

PFF with the Bills and Jets at 22, 23, we are at 27

 

The 2 Superbowl teams with the #1 offensive line and #3 ranked offensive line.

 

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

 

On top of that point, I would like to add that OL has a longer development curve for draft picks, and that it is harder to successfully integrate multiple green players into that unit than a secondary or a skill group.  College OLs come into the NFL less skilled and developed than players at other positions.  Unless you are lucky, you have to use free agency to fill immediate OL needs. 

 

Agree.  That's the other part I don't like about the O line.  Some of the other O lines that haven't been hot yet have more young investment in them.  Lets take the Giants, Andrew Thomas was meh in year 1, then developed into one of the best LTs in the league.  Neal stunk last seaon.  But he might grow.  They drafted JMS in the 2nd.  It hasn't come together for them yet but it has more potential.  More young pedigreed talent.

 

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

 

I But you can reliably fill long term needs by setting up a draft to starter pipeline where you are able to take super athletic day two and three OLs and red shirt them for one or two years to get their body and their game ready.  That's what we've been doing. 

 

It doesn't seem like we draft young O lineman to the exent of some other teams do.  I haven't none a study on it. But whenever I've looked it seems like we draft less.  Maybe one day when I have time I'll study it.  But at a minimum we certainly don't draft them high to the extent of other teams do -- I recall some sort of study of that,

 

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

 

 

The other thing I wanted to make clear is that I don't think it's at all realistic to hope for a world where Sam Howell is our long term answer at QB after wholesale front office and coaching staff changes are made.  His fate is totally bound to theirs, no new regime is going to come in and hitch their wagon to a fifth round pick that got their previous coaches fired.  If Sam plays well enough to erase any doubts about his future here, then it would be Dan Snyder level malpractice to fire the regime that drafted and developed him.  Like it or not, Howell and Rivera are a package deal.

 

I couldn't disagree more.  Kyle and Mike Shanahan worshipped Kirk Cousins.  They left and Kirk didn't go anywhere.

 

I think you are overthinking the Haskins (RIP) element where there was context of him not fitting Ron's culture.

 

Kirk was an easy culture fit.  Howell also is a proven culture fit for any type of coach.

 

Josh Harris isn't a moron like Dan Snyder.  This team hasn't found and kept a franchise QB since arguably Joey T.  You really think if Howell shows he can be the guy, they'd just discard him?  It woukd be torches and pitchforks from the fans.

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you have the QB in house and in turn fix the O line next off season you can be a serious contender.  

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koolblue13

Koolblue13

Posted
Posted
Just now, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

I know it has been a window dressing QB competition for a few weeks, but I don’t think that was the case when OTAs started. Although everyone hoped and planned for Howell to win the job it wasn’t a guaranteed deal.

 

I still think Howell is much better than most here realize. We are gonna find out. 

Until Brissett lights up the Ravens PS players and Ron walks it back to "you never know when things could change at the position".  :ols: 

  • Haha 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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