***Official*** 2009 Washington Redskins Thread (1 Viewer)

[DCThunder]

I have questioned how much Haynesworth improves the defense, but he really had a beast of a game on Monday. There is no denying he was a force wreaking havoc. And except for the first series and the one blown coverage, the defense was really dominant against a good offensive team.

Once the Eagles scored 20 points they drastically dialed back the offense. They knew the only way the Redskins would beat them was if McNabb threw a pick-6 (a definite possibility) because Campbell would never mount multiple long drives for TDs. So to say that the 'Skins D "dominated" may be technically true, but is inaccurate. Westbrook on the sideline for the Eagles didn't help their offense, either.

 

[dgreen]

Sometimes I think the media does try to make Cerrato look like an idiot. In the Washington Post yesterday, they printed transcript for the whole press conference. Answers like this make Cerrato look clueless.

The media doesn't have to go out of it's way. Vinny takes care of that all by himself.

Somewhat amazingly, redskins.com has the video for that PC still up. Watch it. When Vinny gets to this part:

Are you surprised by the lack of production of the backup offensive linemen?

"I think when you look at the -- Are you talking about all the sacks and stuff?"

Yeah, I'm talking about everything.

"Such as?"

Sacks, no pass protection, many players today said you guys didn't address the line, you knew it was a problem and you didn't address it, people have said it's one of the worst lines in the league. All that.

That last bolded part isn't just one reporter answering back. There is a cacophony of voices airing out the laundry list of problems with the current state of the OL. That Vinny directed the PC to a point where people outside the organization had to clue him in to the OL problems is mind-boggling.For crying out loud, just admit that the backups are struggling and not getting the job done and stop trying to blow smoke up everyone's back sides.

Love watching Vinny dig his own grave. Hopefully Snyder will recognize the need to push him in and pile on the dirt.Are Vinny's eyes more buggy than usual in that video? Is he on something?

 

[duckhook]

Sometimes I think the media does try to make Cerrato look like an idiot. In the Washington Post yesterday, they printed transcript for the whole press conference. Answers like this make Cerrato look clueless.

The media doesn't have to go out of it's way. Vinny takes care of that all by himself.

Somewhat amazingly, redskins.com has the video for that PC still up. Watch it. When Vinny gets to this part:

Are you surprised by the lack of production of the backup offensive linemen?

"I think when you look at the -- Are you talking about all the sacks and stuff?"

Yeah, I'm talking about everything.

"Such as?"

Sacks, no pass protection, many players today said you guys didn't address the line, you knew it was a problem and you didn't address it, people have said it's one of the worst lines in the league. All that.

That last bolded part isn't just one reporter answering back. There is a cacophony of voices airing out the laundry list of problems with the current state of the OL. That Vinny directed the PC to a point where people outside the organization had to clue him in to the OL problems is mind-boggling.For crying out loud, just admit that the backups are struggling and not getting the job done and stop trying to blow smoke up everyone's back sides.

Love watching Vinny dig his own grave. Hopefully Snyder will recognize the need to push him in and pile on the dirt.Are Vinny's eyes more buggy than usual in that video? Is he on something?

I think the pounding in the rear is finally catching up to Vinny. Danny must be getting more violent with him in the sack.

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Somewhat amazingly, redskins.com has the video for that PC still up. Watch it. When Vinny gets to this part:

Are you surprised by the lack of production of the backup offensive linemen?

"I think when you look at the -- Are you talking about all the sacks and stuff?"

Yeah, I'm talking about everything.

"Such as?"

Sacks, no pass protection, many players today said you guys didn't address the line, you knew it was a problem and you didn't address it, people have said it's one of the worst lines in the league. All that.

That last bolded part isn't just one reporter answering back. There is a cacophony of voices airing out the laundry list of problems with the current state of the OL. That Vinny directed the PC to a point where people outside the organization had to clue him in to the OL problems is mind-boggling.For crying out loud, just admit that the backups are struggling and not getting the job done and stop trying to blow smoke up everyone's back sides.

Vinny's clued in. I don't read his responses as being born of ignorance. They come from stubborness and a refusal to admit that his approach is wrong. Couple that with the fact that he's really not a guy you want in front of the camera and you get a trainwreck like you saw.

 

[fatness]

Since I still see the occasional Haynesworth naysayer (not necessarily here, although there may be some), I'd like to present the following.The '09 team leader in sacks (Andre Carter - 6.5; on pace to set a career high) already has more than the '08 leader had through all 16 games (Carter - 4). The '09 #2 in sacks (Brian Orakpo - 3.5) already has as many as the #2 from '08 (Jason Taylor and Demetric Evans tied w/ 3.5). The team, as a whole, has 18 sacks through 7 games in '09. The '08 team had 24 sacks in 16 games. So, sack production has improved dramatically. If not because of Haynesworth, then why?Also, if you've managed to sit through all of the games so far, it seems apparent, at least to me, that QBs don't have the time and comfort in the pocket during 4-man rushes this year that they had last year. Last year it felt like opposing QBs could set up camp and grill up some franks and beans before having to worry about getting rid of the ball. This year, not so much. Again, if this improvement is not due to the presence of Haynesworth, then why?Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say the '09 pass rush isn't improved over last year or how a significant amount of that improvement can't be attributed to Haynesworth. But I still see/hear complaints about his PT, his injuries, him taking breathers, etc.

Czabe was questioning whether Carter's sacks are with Haynesworth on the field or not. You know, cause Haynesworth only plays like 10 plays a game. For some reason, some just don't see the impact he's making. I love just watching him. Even if a play for the other team goes for 10 yards, it's fun watching Haynesworth just shove some guy 7 yards deep.MFN showed the stats for Carter and Vanden Bosch, suggesting that Haynesworth is good to play next to.

Haynesworth has been in for 50 plays/game each time I checked that stat. Usually the 2nd or 3rd most on defense, next to Carter. And I agree, he's made a tangible difference in line play. Now if we just had some semblance of a linebacker so they could stop putting Orakpo there out of need, and had Orakpo on the D-line instead of Daniels, then we'd really have something cooking.While I'm at it, when the hell is Blache going to abandon his hold-the-fort defensive style and just go after the other team? It's not like the defense can lose a game for us, the offense takes care of that every week.

 

[fatness]

Love watching Vinny dig his own grave. Hopefully Snyder will recognize the need to push him in and pile on the dirt.

I think Snyder may have already started pushing. Vinnie has seemed a bit desperate for at least 3 weeks now, is way out of his comfort zone, and there's only one thing that can cause that --- the threat of losing the only NFL job available to him.

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Love watching Vinny dig his own grave. Hopefully Snyder will recognize the need to push him in and pile on the dirt.

I think Snyder may have already started pushing. Vinnie has seemed a bit desperate for at least 3 weeks now, is way out of his comfort zone, and there's only one thing that can cause that --- the threat of losing the only NFL job available to him.

Danny's about to leave the gun and take the cannoli.

 

[fatness]

Are Vinny's eyes more buggy than usual in that video? Is he on something?

He probably wants to run away.Runaway GM

Runaway bride

 

[fatness]

Steve Young doing his best to ignore Vinnie on Monday night

And Vinnie compared to Matt Millen

 

[fatness]

I think fans just showing up to the game but hanging out in the parking lot would be a pretty powerful scene.

It may happen in Cleveland.

“We’re tired of losing,” the 39-year-old Randall said. “We’re tired of the booing, of seeing fans leave in the fourth quarter. There are fans who have had tickets for 30 years who are turning their seats in because they can’t take it anymore. So many fans are fed up.” Randall and his friend, Tony Schafer, decided to go ahead with plans for the protest following last Sunday’s 31-3 loss to the Green Bay Packers. As they walked out of the stadium, they heard fans grumbling about how they’re wasting their Sundays and money.

Their hope is that fans stay outside the stadium, on concourses or in the restrooms for the start of the game.

The Akron Beacon-Journal first reported the protest, which Randall and Schafer announced on the Web site www.mobiledawg.com. “We don’t want to see fans with bags on their heads or booing,” Randall said. “We love the Browns and will do anything to support them. But we’re not being heard. Our goal is to say to the Browns’ organization, ‘Hey, listen to your fans.”’

 

[Sidewinder16]

Somewhat amazingly, redskins.com has the video for that PC still up. Watch it. When Vinny gets to this part:

Are you surprised by the lack of production of the backup offensive linemen?

"I think when you look at the -- Are you talking about all the sacks and stuff?"

Yeah, I'm talking about everything.

"Such as?"

Sacks, no pass protection, many players today said you guys didn't address the line, you knew it was a problem and you didn't address it, people have said it's one of the worst lines in the league. All that.

That last bolded part isn't just one reporter answering back. There is a cacophony of voices airing out the laundry list of problems with the current state of the OL. That Vinny directed the PC to a point where people outside the organization had to clue him in to the OL problems is mind-boggling.For crying out loud, just admit that the backups are struggling and not getting the job done and stop trying to blow smoke up everyone's back sides.

Vinny's clued in. I don't read his responses as being born of ignorance. They come from stubborness and a refusal to admit that his approach is wrong. Couple that with the fact that he's really not a guy you want in front of the camera and you get a trainwreck like you saw.

Oh, I know he know's what's going on. It's that stubbornness, and the playing ignorant and coy with the media in hopes that they don't know what's going on that is mind boggling. He kept dragging the stupid question out until everyone in the room had to basically say "EVERYONE IN THE WORLD KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON AND YOU'RE ACTING LIKE YOU DON'T".He was asked a pretty simple question about the performance of the backup offensive linemen. He could have avoided that whole ridiculous exchange by simply saying something like "It's been frustrating, yes, because they haven't been getting the job done".

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Somewhat amazingly, redskins.com has the video for that PC still up. Watch it. When Vinny gets to this part:

Are you surprised by the lack of production of the backup offensive linemen?

"I think when you look at the -- Are you talking about all the sacks and stuff?"

Yeah, I'm talking about everything.

"Such as?"

Sacks, no pass protection, many players today said you guys didn't address the line, you knew it was a problem and you didn't address it, people have said it's one of the worst lines in the league. All that.

That last bolded part isn't just one reporter answering back. There is a cacophony of voices airing out the laundry list of problems with the current state of the OL. That Vinny directed the PC to a point where people outside the organization had to clue him in to the OL problems is mind-boggling.For crying out loud, just admit that the backups are struggling and not getting the job done and stop trying to blow smoke up everyone's back sides.

Vinny's clued in. I don't read his responses as being born of ignorance. They come from stubborness and a refusal to admit that his approach is wrong. Couple that with the fact that he's really not a guy you want in front of the camera and you get a trainwreck like you saw.

Oh, I know he know's what's going on. It's that stubbornness, and the playing ignorant and coy with the media in hopes that they don't know what's going on that is mind boggling. He kept dragging the stupid question out until everyone in the room had to basically say "EVERYONE IN THE WORLD KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON AND YOU'RE ACTING LIKE YOU DON'T".He was asked a pretty simple question about the performance of the backup offensive linemen. He could have avoided that whole ridiculous exchange by simply saying something like "It's been frustrating, yes, because they haven't been getting the job done".

Cool. We're on the same page then. And yes, the " -- Are you talking about all the sacks and stuff?" still slays me.

It's like someone asking about the seaworthiness of the Titanic and someone saying, "Wait, are you talking about that hole in the side from the iceberg?"

 

[Sidewinder16]

Cool. We're on the same page then. And yes, the " -- Are you talking about all the sacks and stuff?" still slays me. It's like someone asking about the seaworthiness of the Titanic and someone saying, "Wait, are you talking about that hole in the side from the iceberg?"

Exactly.

 

[Sidewinder16]

And Vinnie compared to Matt Millen

The link to the old Steinberg blog post is more interesting than the hogshaven bit.I never knew the NCAA had the "Vinny Cerrato Rule".

Sounds like he's still using a "recruit the high schooler" mindset with his current big boy job.

 

[buster c]

Since I still see the occasional Haynesworth naysayer (not necessarily here, although there may be some), I'd like to present the following.The '09 team leader in sacks (Andre Carter - 6.5; on pace to set a career high) already has more than the '08 leader had through all 16 games (Carter - 4). The '09 #2 in sacks (Brian Orakpo - 3.5) already has as many as the #2 from '08 (Jason Taylor and Demetric Evans tied w/ 3.5). The team, as a whole, has 18 sacks through 7 games in '09. The '08 team had 24 sacks in 16 games. So, sack production has improved dramatically. If not because of Haynesworth, then why?Also, if you've managed to sit through all of the games so far, it seems apparent, at least to me, that QBs don't have the time and comfort in the pocket during 4-man rushes this year that they had last year. Last year it felt like opposing QBs could set up camp and grill up some franks and beans before having to worry about getting rid of the ball. This year, not so much. Again, if this improvement is not due to the presence of Haynesworth, then why?Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say the '09 pass rush isn't improved over last year or how a significant amount of that improvement can't be attributed to Haynesworth. But I still see/hear complaints about his PT, his injuries, him taking breathers, etc.

Czabe was questioning whether Carter's sacks are with Haynesworth on the field or not. You know, cause Haynesworth only plays like 10 plays a game. For some reason, some just don't see the impact he's making. I love just watching him. Even if a play for the other team goes for 10 yards, it's fun watching Haynesworth just shove some guy 7 yards deep.MFN showed the stats for Carter and Vanden Bosch, suggesting that Haynesworth is good to play next to.

I love watching him as well, and he makes a tremendous impact when he is in the game. this is not the problem.the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

 

[Sidewinder16]

the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

Pretty much every team has at least one guy with a monster contract, and I have no problem with the best player on the team getting it.The overpaying problem comes from massively extending contracts to guys who are either on their last legs (Samuels) or are getting paid like starters but aren't starter quality (Randle El). Samuels and Randle El are just the current examples, but the team has had to deal with significant amounts of dead cap because of horrible contracts given to the likes of Archuleta, Lloyd, Jansen, Springs and Washington. Randy Thomas' contract will likely become problematic, too, if his career is basically over.

 

[Marvelous]

the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

Pretty much every team has at least one guy with a monster contract, and I have no problem with the best player on the team getting it.The overpaying problem comes from massively extending contracts to guys who are either on their last legs (Samuels) or are getting paid like starters but aren't starter quality (Randle El). Samuels and Randle El are just the current examples, but the team has had to deal with significant amounts of dead cap because of horrible contracts given to the likes of Archuleta, Lloyd, Jansen, Springs and Washington. Randy Thomas' contract will likely become problematic, too, if his career is basically over.

If next year is an uncapped year, the issue of dead money is gone. And it will be just in time for the Redskins to shed a number of contracts (Thomas, Samuels, maybe Griffin and Randle El). I truly believe the Redskins are banking on an uncapped year to solve their salary cap issues. The biggest issue with continually extending the current players is that is gives the team no flexibility on the roster. And it encourages them to keep players well beyond their prime to delay the dead money issue. All this, in addition to not having younger players who can take the place of the aging veterans.

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Since I still see the occasional Haynesworth naysayer (not necessarily here, although there may be some), I'd like to present the following.The '09 team leader in sacks (Andre Carter - 6.5; on pace to set a career high) already has more than the '08 leader had through all 16 games (Carter - 4). The '09 #2 in sacks (Brian Orakpo - 3.5) already has as many as the #2 from '08 (Jason Taylor and Demetric Evans tied w/ 3.5). The team, as a whole, has 18 sacks through 7 games in '09. The '08 team had 24 sacks in 16 games. So, sack production has improved dramatically. If not because of Haynesworth, then why?Also, if you've managed to sit through all of the games so far, it seems apparent, at least to me, that QBs don't have the time and comfort in the pocket during 4-man rushes this year that they had last year. Last year it felt like opposing QBs could set up camp and grill up some franks and beans before having to worry about getting rid of the ball. This year, not so much. Again, if this improvement is not due to the presence of Haynesworth, then why?Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say the '09 pass rush isn't improved over last year or how a significant amount of that improvement can't be attributed to Haynesworth. But I still see/hear complaints about his PT, his injuries, him taking breathers, etc.

Czabe was questioning whether Carter's sacks are with Haynesworth on the field or not. You know, cause Haynesworth only plays like 10 plays a game. For some reason, some just don't see the impact he's making. I love just watching him. Even if a play for the other team goes for 10 yards, it's fun watching Haynesworth just shove some guy 7 yards deep.MFN showed the stats for Carter and Vanden Bosch, suggesting that Haynesworth is good to play next to.

I love watching him as well, and he makes a tremendous impact when he is in the game. this is not the problem.the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

Bruce Smith was actually pretty good in 2000. He wasn't worth the money and he was a rental, only, however. The DT position doesn't tend to have a long effective shelf-life given how hard it is on the body, so how many more years can we expect Haynesworth to play at a high enough level to justify his contract?

 

[MikeApf]

Pretty funny!

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsb...nd_feather.html

Snyder Gets Tarred and Feathered

(Dan Steinberg blog)

When the D.C. Lottery and its ad agency were coming up with its new POWERBALL campaign, the Redskins foment hadn't yet boiled over. It was hardly even warm. This was back during just a regular preseason, filled with optimism and hope and the promise of grilled Tofurkey sausages and an undefeated fantasy football campaign and maybe some hot Redskins playoff action.

Which meant that no one at the Lottery or at MDB Communications was thinking about Redskins ownership when they wrote the script for this 30-second spot, touting the benefit of "Strength in numbers" and unity in office lottery pools. You know, how it only works if everyone participates, and how you don't participate at your peril, and all that.

In the ad, one character--who previously hadn't participated in his office's pool--finally decides to join in. Turns out he was tarred and feathered as part of his recruitment. This character--the only named character in the entire spot--is called "Snyder."

Now, why is he called "Snyder?" Well, Cary Hatch is the president and CEO of MDB Communications, the advertising agency for the D.C. Lottery. And she happened to marry a guy named Doug Snyder. Which is why "Snyder" seemed like both an inside joke for her husband and son, and a relatively inoffensive and safe name for a made-up Lottery player.

"Well, we thought it was safe," Hatch told me Thursday afternoon, with a laugh.

Because after the spot was filmed, and not long before its debut (scheduled for next week), people started using that last name an awful lot around the water cooler. Folks from the agency and the Lottery realized that in this particular climate, in this particular town, it was going to be hard to ignore the sight of a man named Snyder being tarred and feathered. Rather than running away from the connection, the Lottery decided to have some fun with it, which is why the screenshot above is on the Lottery's home page as I type. (See DCLottery.com.)

"We knew that the name Snyder would resonate in the D.C. market," said new media specialist Derrick Eckardt, who called the selection of that name "an absolute coincidence."

"We thought this message would most succinctly get people interested and draw attention to the ad."

Which it seems to have done. After The Big Lead posted the video earlier this week, it got more than 3,000 page views in 48 hours. That's considered lot for a D.C. Lottery ad that hasn't even hit the air yet.

"Sometimes timing is everything in life, right?" joked Hatch, a native Washingtonian and longtime Redskins fan. "We never could have foreseen this....We shot this commercial a month ago, prior to the meltdown. Sometimes things happen that ignite, and this would be one of them."

"Sorry Mr. Snyder," she added, sincerely. "Sometimes these things happen."

 

[dgreen]

I think fans just showing up to the game but hanging out in the parking lot would be a pretty powerful scene.

It may happen in Cleveland.

“We’re tired of losing,” the 39-year-old Randall said. “We’re tired of the booing, of seeing fans leave in the fourth quarter. There are fans who have had tickets for 30 years who are turning their seats in because they can’t take it anymore. So many fans are fed up.” Randall and his friend, Tony Schafer, decided to go ahead with plans for the protest following last Sunday’s 31-3 loss to the Green Bay Packers. As they walked out of the stadium, they heard fans grumbling about how they’re wasting their Sundays and money.

Their hope is that fans stay outside the stadium, on concourses or in the restrooms for the start of the game.

The Akron Beacon-Journal first reported the protest, which Randall and Schafer announced on the Web site www.mobiledawg.com. “We don’t want to see fans with bags on their heads or booing,” Randall said. “We love the Browns and will do anything to support them. But we’re not being heard. Our goal is to say to the Browns’ organization, ‘Hey, listen to your fans.”’

And here's ownerships' response:

Lerner is aware of the response and said in an e-mail that he understand the fans’ frustration.

“On the grounds of frustration and irritation with performance, then that’s the medicine I (we) are going to take, and I accept that,” he said. “The goal this year was to rebuild the culture at the Browns. We felt at the end of last year that we lacked any overall philosophy, approach or direction regarding recruiting, drafting, coaching, preparation or training. As a result, each season was feeling like starting over and 4-12 following 10-6 felt painfully not all that surprising.”

Lerner added the team remains open to feedback and support to help the Browns improve.

“We won’t become entrenched or stubborn and despite my allergy to be more conspicuous, I do remain eager to seek help and guidance from any and all corners,” he said.

Slightly different response from the Redskins:

GET 'EM!!!

Lavar and Dukes started an interesting discussion last night, but didn't really produce any good answers. They asked, "What can fans realistically do that would actually have some effect?" A lot of the ideas thrown out by fans/media either won't really change anything (shirts, bags, etc.) or aren't realistic (nobody go to the games, everyone stop buying merchandise, etc).

 

[Dexter Manley]

Since I still see the occasional Haynesworth naysayer (not necessarily here, although there may be some), I'd like to present the following.

The '09 team leader in sacks (Andre Carter - 6.5; on pace to set a career high) already has more than the '08 leader had through all 16 games (Carter - 4). The '09 #2 in sacks (Brian Orakpo - 3.5) already has as many as the #2 from '08 (Jason Taylor and Demetric Evans tied w/ 3.5). The team, as a whole, has 18 sacks through 7 games in '09. The '08 team had 24 sacks in 16 games. So, sack production has improved dramatically. If not because of Haynesworth, then why?

Also, if you've managed to sit through all of the games so far, it seems apparent, at least to me, that QBs don't have the time and comfort in the pocket during 4-man rushes this year that they had last year. Last year it felt like opposing QBs could set up camp and grill up some franks and beans before having to worry about getting rid of the ball. This year, not so much. Again, if this improvement is not due to the presence of Haynesworth, then why?

Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say the '09 pass rush isn't improved over last year or how a significant amount of that improvement can't be attributed to Haynesworth. But I still see/hear complaints about his PT, his injuries, him taking breathers, etc.

Czabe was questioning whether Carter's sacks are with Haynesworth on the field or not. You know, cause Haynesworth only plays like 10 plays a game. For some reason, some just don't see the impact he's making. I love just watching him. Even if a play for the other team goes for 10 yards, it's fun watching Haynesworth just shove some guy 7 yards deep.

MFN showed the stats for Carter and Vanden Bosch, suggesting that Haynesworth is good to play next to.

I love watching him as well, and he makes a tremendous impact when he is in the game. this is not the problem.the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

What OL were really available on the FA market that could of been longterm help to the team? The marquee OL FA was Jason Brown, who the Rams overpaid for. It's not like there were any solid starting OT's available in FA, let alone a franchise OT.Also, wasn't Dockery considered one of the top 3-4 interior OL available last offseason? And I think we overpaid for him.

Last offseason for OL reminded me of a few years back when the FA market was horrible for wr's and we overpaid for Randle El and Lloyd. I'm actually pretty happy that they didn't repeat that mistake by overpaying a bunch of OL that had little chance to produce at a high level. Big Al is worth every $ he's getting paid, imo.

While me, you, and everyone else here would of loved to see the team fix the OL last offseason, I don't know if that was possible even if we didn't sign Big Al and spent all that $$$ on OL. This all goes back to the front office neglecting the OL in the draft for so many years. And the last one we spent a high pick on appears to be a complete bust (Rhinehart). When you combine this with the fact that the market for OL last offseason was pretty bad, there was no quick fix for the OL.

 

[duckhook]

actually the skins do DESPERATELY need a franchise QB. Problem is, they also need 5 new offensive lineman. I don't know the list of FA QBs, but I'm praying we can pick a great one that route, and then spend 4 of the first 5 picks on OL help. God this team needs SO much work.

In some irony, Jason Campbell and Kyle Orton are considered the top FA QBs. Here is the list of all 2010 FAs, as of a few months ago. Most positions look weak, except for maybe WR.http://www.footballsfuture.com/freeagents.html

I suspect we are looking at a David Carr type pickup, along with drafting McCoy, Bradford, or Tebow on Round 1. Again scwering our OL.

 

[fatness]

While me, you, and everyone else here would of loved to see the team fix the OL last offseason, I don't know if that was possible even if we didn't sign Big Al and spent all that $$$ on OL. This all goes back to the front office neglecting the OL in the draft for so many years. And the last one we spent a high pick on appears to be a complete bust (Rhinehart). When you combine this with the fact that the market for OL last offseason was pretty bad, there was no quick fix for the OL.

I want to see the team start to fix the o-line in the offseason, and continue with it every season thereafter. One draft pick every year spent in the first 3 (or preferably 2) rounds on an o-lineman for the next 5 years, minimum. This should have begun two years ago, when we wasted 3 picks on receivers. Last year Oher was available when Orakpo was. Orakpo is going to be very good if they ever let him play his position instead of farming him out to be a vulnerable linebacker because, whoops, they have no better idea at linebacker. But have you seen Michael Oher play? The guy is going to be quite good for years and years. If one or 2 of the picks spent on Thomas, Kelly, and Davis had been spent on o-linemen, and if Oher had been drafted instead of Orakpo, then we're going into the bye week somewhere between 4-3 and 6-1, there's no fan revolt, and the o-line building will go on for 3 more years. There's no quick fix, but look what 2 years would have done.

 

[Dexter Manley]

While me, you, and everyone else here would of loved to see the team fix the OL last offseason, I don't know if that was possible even if we didn't sign Big Al and spent all that $$$ on OL. This all goes back to the front office neglecting the OL in the draft for so many years. And the last one we spent a high pick on appears to be a complete bust (Rhinehart). When you combine this with the fact that the market for OL last offseason was pretty bad, there was no quick fix for the OL.

I want to see the team start to fix the o-line in the offseason, and continue with it every season thereafter. One draft pick every year spent in the first 3 (or preferably 2) rounds on an o-lineman for the next 5 years, minimum. This should have begun two years ago, when we wasted 3 picks on receivers. Last year Oher was available when Orakpo was. Orakpo is going to be very good if they ever let him play his position instead of farming him out to be a vulnerable linebacker because, whoops, they have no better idea at linebacker. But have you seen Michael Oher play? The guy is going to be quite good for years and years. If one or 2 of the picks spent on Thomas, Kelly, and Davis had been spent on o-linemen, and if Oher had been drafted instead of Orakpo, then we're going into the bye week somewhere between 4-3 and 6-1, there's no fan revolt, and the o-line building will go on for 3 more years. There's no quick fix, but look what 2 years would have done.

I completely agree with this. Right now there is not a single OL on the roster that has potential to be a longterm starter for the team. 4 or 5 years from now, at most, not a single one of the current OL guys will be with the team. This is a complete rebuilding project. The team is going to have to dedicate at least 1 high draft pick each year to an OL over the next several years. In addition to this, they're going to have to target at least 1 OL in FA every year.

 

[Sidewinder16]

http://www.footballsfuture.com/freeagents.html

I've seen this page linked a few times now, in this thread and in others.Just make sure you note that this list is from 2 months ago, before the season even began. There are players on there that have already moved to other teams (Jon Jansen, for example), and so have new/different contracts, or have received new contracts/extensions from their current teams (DeMarcus Ware) so they will no longer be FAs at the end of the season.

 

[duckhook]

Everyone here is right about the OL. Vinny has ignored it in the draft for about 8 years, and the whole team is paying the price for it. The QB, the DEF, the WR, Clinton would all be better if the line was solid. I think he has ignored the DL in the draft too, but kept it adequate through FA.

Conversely, the New England Patriots and Indianapoli Colts have taken a bunch of OL in the draft. Their entire starting offensive lines were acquired through the draft, and none that I can think of was picked higher than round 2. They bring them in to fit their system, and spend a couple of years developing the ones that don't start right away. That's what happens when you get a good GM and run the same system year after year. A concept Snyderatto will never get.

 

[buster c]

Since I still see the occasional Haynesworth naysayer (not necessarily here, although there may be some), I'd like to present the following.

The '09 team leader in sacks (Andre Carter - 6.5; on pace to set a career high) already has more than the '08 leader had through all 16 games (Carter - 4). The '09 #2 in sacks (Brian Orakpo - 3.5) already has as many as the #2 from '08 (Jason Taylor and Demetric Evans tied w/ 3.5). The team, as a whole, has 18 sacks through 7 games in '09. The '08 team had 24 sacks in 16 games. So, sack production has improved dramatically. If not because of Haynesworth, then why?

Also, if you've managed to sit through all of the games so far, it seems apparent, at least to me, that QBs don't have the time and comfort in the pocket during 4-man rushes this year that they had last year. Last year it felt like opposing QBs could set up camp and grill up some franks and beans before having to worry about getting rid of the ball. This year, not so much. Again, if this improvement is not due to the presence of Haynesworth, then why?

Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say the '09 pass rush isn't improved over last year or how a significant amount of that improvement can't be attributed to Haynesworth. But I still see/hear complaints about his PT, his injuries, him taking breathers, etc.

Czabe was questioning whether Carter's sacks are with Haynesworth on the field or not. You know, cause Haynesworth only plays like 10 plays a game. For some reason, some just don't see the impact he's making. I love just watching him. Even if a play for the other team goes for 10 yards, it's fun watching Haynesworth just shove some guy 7 yards deep.

MFN showed the stats for Carter and Vanden Bosch, suggesting that Haynesworth is good to play next to.

I love watching him as well, and he makes a tremendous impact when he is in the game. this is not the problem.the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

What OL were really available on the FA market that could of been longterm help to the team? The marquee OL FA was Jason Brown, who the Rams overpaid for. It's not like there were any solid starting OT's available in FA, let alone a franchise OT.Also, wasn't Dockery considered one of the top 3-4 interior OL available last offseason? And I think we overpaid for him.

Last offseason for OL reminded me of a few years back when the FA market was horrible for wr's and we overpaid for Randle El and Lloyd. I'm actually pretty happy that they didn't repeat that mistake by overpaying a bunch of OL that had little chance to produce at a high level. Big Al is worth every $ he's getting paid, imo.

While me, you, and everyone else here would of loved to see the team fix the OL last offseason, I don't know if that was possible even if we didn't sign Big Al and spent all that $$$ on OL. This all goes back to the front office neglecting the OL in the draft for so many years. And the last one we spent a high pick on appears to be a complete bust (Rhinehart). When you combine this with the fact that the market for OL last offseason was pretty bad, there was no quick fix for the OL.

off the top of my head, I know the beagles rebuilt their OT position. both guys probably for less than #92

 

[Sidewinder16]

off the top of my head, I know the beagles rebuilt their OT position. both guys probably for less than #92

The current starting tackles for the Bengals were drafted by the team 3 years ago (2nd round) and last year (4th round). In that regard, kudos to the Bengals for drafting guys that could actually play the position during a real NFL game.On the other hand, the OT they drafted #6 overall this year held out almost all of training camp and then proceeded to break his foot in a non-contact drill. He has yet to play a down this season. I can't imagine the complaints we'd be hearing had Andre Smith somehow landed with the 'Skins and the same thing happened. $21 million guaranteed for a guy that hurts himself when he can't get out of his own way? I'm not sure I'd want the 'Skins to be emulating that.

 

[dgreen]

beagles = Eagles

 

[Sidewinder16]

beagles = Eagles

I still say, kudos to the Bengals for drafting depth that could play. Carson Palmer and Cedric Benson are reaping the benefits. Not to mention that the team is 5-2 and tied for 1st in the AFC North. And all this despite the abject failure (to date) of their high profile, highly paid draft pick.

 

[Sidewinder16]

And Vinnie compared to Matt Millen

The link to the old Steinberg blog post is more interesting than the hogshaven bit.I never knew the NCAA had the "Vinny Cerrato Rule".

Sounds like he's still using a "recruit the high schooler" mindset with his current big boy job.

The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced that Vinny is still using high school recruiting tactics when he speaks to the media/public. He may have been great at that, but the same job skills you use as a college recruiter just don't seem to translate all that well to VP of Football Operations for an NFL team.

 

[Sebowski]

Redskin Fan Cards for people to turn back in.

With instructions on which TV stations to mail them to, and when.

That is the stupidest waste of paper I have ever seen.

Yeah, fans should just shut up about being unhappy. Who do they think they are, anyway? They don't run the team, and obviously they can be cut.Get ready to see more things like that. There are 10 weeks and 9 games left to go.

Just explain to me how this isn't a total nadwagon move"I am turning in my fan card until we start winning again"

Total BS I would expect from the Cowboy fans, not Skins fans.

 

[Dexter Manley]

Since I still see the occasional Haynesworth naysayer (not necessarily here, although there may be some), I'd like to present the following.

The '09 team leader in sacks (Andre Carter - 6.5; on pace to set a career high) already has more than the '08 leader had through all 16 games (Carter - 4). The '09 #2 in sacks (Brian Orakpo - 3.5) already has as many as the #2 from '08 (Jason Taylor and Demetric Evans tied w/ 3.5). The team, as a whole, has 18 sacks through 7 games in '09. The '08 team had 24 sacks in 16 games. So, sack production has improved dramatically. If not because of Haynesworth, then why?

Also, if you've managed to sit through all of the games so far, it seems apparent, at least to me, that QBs don't have the time and comfort in the pocket during 4-man rushes this year that they had last year. Last year it felt like opposing QBs could set up camp and grill up some franks and beans before having to worry about getting rid of the ball. This year, not so much. Again, if this improvement is not due to the presence of Haynesworth, then why?

Personally, I'm not sure how anyone can say the '09 pass rush isn't improved over last year or how a significant amount of that improvement can't be attributed to Haynesworth. But I still see/hear complaints about his PT, his injuries, him taking breathers, etc.

Czabe was questioning whether Carter's sacks are with Haynesworth on the field or not. You know, cause Haynesworth only plays like 10 plays a game. For some reason, some just don't see the impact he's making. I love just watching him. Even if a play for the other team goes for 10 yards, it's fun watching Haynesworth just shove some guy 7 yards deep.

MFN showed the stats for Carter and Vanden Bosch, suggesting that Haynesworth is good to play next to.

I love watching him as well, and he makes a tremendous impact when he is in the game. this is not the problem.the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

What OL were really available on the FA market that could of been longterm help to the team? The marquee OL FA was Jason Brown, who the Rams overpaid for. It's not like there were any solid starting OT's available in FA, let alone a franchise OT.Also, wasn't Dockery considered one of the top 3-4 interior OL available last offseason? And I think we overpaid for him.

Last offseason for OL reminded me of a few years back when the FA market was horrible for wr's and we overpaid for Randle El and Lloyd. I'm actually pretty happy that they didn't repeat that mistake by overpaying a bunch of OL that had little chance to produce at a high level. Big Al is worth every $ he's getting paid, imo.

While me, you, and everyone else here would of loved to see the team fix the OL last offseason, I don't know if that was possible even if we didn't sign Big Al and spent all that $$$ on OL. This all goes back to the front office neglecting the OL in the draft for so many years. And the last one we spent a high pick on appears to be a complete bust (Rhinehart). When you combine this with the fact that the market for OL last offseason was pretty bad, there was no quick fix for the OL.

off the top of my head, I know the beagles rebuilt their OT position. both guys probably for less than #92

Philly traded for Jason Peters (1st and 4th round picks, the latter in the next draft). And they grossly overpaid for the other Andrews brother, who has been less than spectacular this season, to say the least.I would rather have Orakpo and Haynesworth than Peters and Andrews. Not sure how close the $$$ is.

 

[Sebowski]

Everyone here is right about the OL. Vinny has ignored it in the draft for about 8 years, and the whole team is paying the price for it. The QB, the DEF, the WR, Clinton would all be better if the line was solid. I think he has ignored the DL in the draft too, but kept it adequate through FA.Conversely, the New England Patriots and Indianapoli Colts have taken a bunch of OL in the draft. Their entire starting offensive lines were acquired through the draft, and none that I can think of was picked higher than round 2. They bring them in to fit their system, and spend a couple of years developing the ones that don't start right away. That's what happens when you get a good GM and run the same system year after year. A concept Snyderatto will never get.

The Colts only have two guys on their line that they drafted. Here is some research I did on it a few pages back.

I blame the line on Vinny and Bugel. There is not one way to build a team or a line. You just have to get the right guys and/or coach them up properly. The Dolphins only drafted two of the five starters on their line.The Colts highest pick lineman is a 2nd rounder. They have two undrafted guys and a sixth rounder as wellThe Giants drafted Snee in the 2nd, Diehl in the 5th, have two undrafted guys, and their 5th is from the Jets. The Falcons have a 1st rounder, 2nd rounder, 7th rounder, and two undrafted guys starting on their line. The Vikings have a 1st round tackle, a 2nd round tackle, a free agent (Hutch), a 6th rounder, and an undrafted guy. The Saints have a 2nd rounder, two 4ths, and two 5ths, with one of those guys drafted by another team. The Bengals are running the ball extremely well and winning games with only two guys that they drafted playing line. One in the 2nd and one in the 4th.The only two teams I saw looking looking this stuff up that was mostly made of their own draftees and higher pick were the Pats and the Ravens. We don't need to quit bringing in free agents and focus just on the draft. We just need to bring in the right guys, and have the proper coaching to get the best out of them.

Does anyone else think that if Rhinehart and Heyer landed on the Ravens they'd be decent starters right now?

 

[dgreen]

And Vinnie compared to Matt Millen

The link to the old Steinberg blog post is more interesting than the hogshaven bit.I never knew the NCAA had the "Vinny Cerrato Rule".

Sounds like he's still using a "recruit the high schooler" mindset with his current big boy job.

The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced that Vinny is still using high school recruiting tactics when he speaks to the media/public. He may have been great at that, but the same job skills you use as a college recruiter just don't seem to translate all that well to VP of Football Operations for an NFL team.

Cerrato: Hey, Peyton!Manning: Who's this?

Cerrato: Vinny Cerrato, Vice President of Football Operations for the Washington Redskins.

Manning: What's up?

Cerrato: You watching Monday Night Football?

Manning: No, I'm looking at my Super Bowl Ring.

Cerrato: Turn on your TV.

Manning: OK, I'm watching.

Cerrato: See our QB? See Jason Campbell? That could be you next year!

Manning: Ouch, that looked like it hurt.

Cerrato: You could be leading the Burgundy and Gold to the Super Bowl!

Manning: Dude, is Jason ok? Did you see that?

Cerrato: I've assembled a playoff roster here. You should join us.

Manning: Vinny - It's Vinny, right? Look, um, I'm not impressed. Now, I, uh, I gotta go. Bye.

Cerrato: Wait, we're about to throw a 7-yard hook on 3rd-and-9! Peyton? Hello? Peyton?

Cerrato: Get me Brady's number.

 

[Marvelous]

Everyone here is right about the OL. Vinny has ignored it in the draft for about 8 years, and the whole team is paying the price for it. The QB, the DEF, the WR, Clinton would all be better if the line was solid. I think he has ignored the DL in the draft too, but kept it adequate through FA.Conversely, the New England Patriots and Indianapoli Colts have taken a bunch of OL in the draft. Their entire starting offensive lines were acquired through the draft, and none that I can think of was picked higher than round 2. They bring them in to fit their system, and spend a couple of years developing the ones that don't start right away. That's what happens when you get a good GM and run the same system year after year. A concept Snyderatto will never get.

The Colts only have two guys on their line that they drafted. Here is some research I did on it a few pages back.

I blame the line on Vinny and Bugel. There is not one way to build a team or a line. You just have to get the right guys and/or coach them up properly. The Dolphins only drafted two of the five starters on their line.The Colts highest pick lineman is a 2nd rounder. They have two undrafted guys and a sixth rounder as wellThe Giants drafted Snee in the 2nd, Diehl in the 5th, have two undrafted guys, and their 5th is from the Jets. The Falcons have a 1st rounder, 2nd rounder, 7th rounder, and two undrafted guys starting on their line. The Vikings have a 1st round tackle, a 2nd round tackle, a free agent (Hutch), a 6th rounder, and an undrafted guy. The Saints have a 2nd rounder, two 4ths, and two 5ths, with one of those guys drafted by another team. The Bengals are running the ball extremely well and winning games with only two guys that they drafted playing line. One in the 2nd and one in the 4th.The only two teams I saw looking looking this stuff up that was mostly made of their own draftees and higher pick were the Pats and the Ravens. We don't need to quit bringing in free agents and focus just on the draft. We just need to bring in the right guys, and have the proper coaching to get the best out of them.

Does anyone else think that if Rhinehart and Heyer landed on the Ravens they'd be decent starters right now?

Some thoughts:1. Lots of starting OL were drafted in the lower rounds of the draft. And many were not drafted at all.2. The draft is partially a numbers game. The more picks you have, the more likely you are to hit on a player. 3. So the Redskins have continually hurt themselves by trading away their draft picks. 4. In past years, the Redskins have been able to patch together the OL despite the years of neglect (signing and starting a 40 year old Ray Brown, trading for Pete Kendall just before the season started)5. As I stated earlier, because the Redskins are always extending contracts to make room for the next big free agent signing and their continual lack of depth, they always hang onto and depend on veterans well beyond when they are dependable. Randy Thomas probably shouldn't have been a starter or made the team this year. Last year, Pete Kendall and possibly Jon Jensen shouldn't have been on the opening day roster. On the other end of the spectrum, the New England Patriouts trades Richard Seymour for a 1st round draft pick, which will likely be a top 5 pick in next year's draft. They traded a veteran before the decline and they stock pile draft picks.

 

[Dexter Manley]

Everyone here is right about the OL. Vinny has ignored it in the draft for about 8 years, and the whole team is paying the price for it. The QB, the DEF, the WR, Clinton would all be better if the line was solid. I think he has ignored the DL in the draft too, but kept it adequate through FA.Conversely, the New England Patriots and Indianapoli Colts have taken a bunch of OL in the draft. Their entire starting offensive lines were acquired through the draft, and none that I can think of was picked higher than round 2. They bring them in to fit their system, and spend a couple of years developing the ones that don't start right away. That's what happens when you get a good GM and run the same system year after year. A concept Snyderatto will never get.

The Colts only have two guys on their line that they drafted. Here is some research I did on it a few pages back.

I blame the line on Vinny and Bugel. There is not one way to build a team or a line. You just have to get the right guys and/or coach them up properly. The Dolphins only drafted two of the five starters on their line.The Colts highest pick lineman is a 2nd rounder. They have two undrafted guys and a sixth rounder as wellThe Giants drafted Snee in the 2nd, Diehl in the 5th, have two undrafted guys, and their 5th is from the Jets. The Falcons have a 1st rounder, 2nd rounder, 7th rounder, and two undrafted guys starting on their line. The Vikings have a 1st round tackle, a 2nd round tackle, a free agent (Hutch), a 6th rounder, and an undrafted guy. The Saints have a 2nd rounder, two 4ths, and two 5ths, with one of those guys drafted by another team. The Bengals are running the ball extremely well and winning games with only two guys that they drafted playing line. One in the 2nd and one in the 4th.The only two teams I saw looking looking this stuff up that was mostly made of their own draftees and higher pick were the Pats and the Ravens. We don't need to quit bringing in free agents and focus just on the draft. We just need to bring in the right guys, and have the proper coaching to get the best out of them.

Does anyone else think that if Rhinehart and Heyer landed on the Ravens they'd be decent starters right now?

Heyer wouldn't have even made the Ravens practice squad.I wonder where a team like the Ravens had Rhinehart ranked on their board. IIRC, a lot of teams were high on him, and Vinny and co. were pleasantly surprised he was still on the board in the 3rd round.

 

[fatness]

Does anyone else think that if Rhinehart and Heyer landed on the Ravens they'd be decent starters right now?

No.

 

[fatness]

I would rather have Orakpo and Haynesworth than Peters and Andrews. Not sure how close the $$$ is.

Not an answer to your statement, just a thought.Orakpo at LB was a bad draft choice. So far a high draft choice has been effectively spent on a below-average LB. Oher would have helped the team more.Orakpo at DE would help the team more.But anyone they put in his place at LB is worse.

 

[fatness]

Just explain to me how this isn't a total nadwagon move"I am turning in my fan card until we start winning again"Total BS I would expect from the Cowboy fans, not Skins fans.

Just explain to me how being silent while the team is wrecked and plays terribly isn't a defeated move. Seriously.The media covering the Redskins has always been #####cat media. Redskin fans are adoring, they've always been totally behind the team through good times and bad. The media as a result has been largely uncritical. And there have been enough "ups" over the years to tide fans and media through the down times. But this has been 10 years of grinding a team into immobilization. And both fans and media have finally gotten out of their comfort zones enough to criticize publicly. That is a good thing. Do you know of some other way to pressure the owner into making the significant changes required to help the team rebuild? Or are you saying it's useless for peons to try? And please don't tell me Snyder already knows what to do --- there's been no evidence of that over 10 years.The owner is very cognizant of how angry fans are and is embarrassed by it. The "Sell the Team" chants reach the owners' box. The signs get on national TV. The local media is all over him and last Monday the national media was too. It's gotten to him. There is no other way to explain such a kneejerk juvenile reaction as sending security people around the stadium to remove signs, shirts, and fans other than embarrassment and anger on the part of the owner. His attention has been gotten.And until he begins rebuilding the team the right way, the pressure on him should keep up. Mailing the cards in will get something physical into the Redskins office. More importantly it will get media attention if enough people do it, which will focus again on what's wrong with the Skins. The that will increase the chances of the right changes being made.Silence implies assent.

 

[buster c]

I love watching him as well, and he makes a tremendous impact when he is in the game. this is not the problem.

the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

What OL were really available on the FA market that could of been longterm help to the team? The marquee OL FA was Jason Brown, who the Rams overpaid for. It's not like there were any solid starting OT's available in FA, let alone a franchise OT.Also, wasn't Dockery considered one of the top 3-4 interior OL available last offseason? And I think we overpaid for him.

Last offseason for OL reminded me of a few years back when the FA market was horrible for wr's and we overpaid for Randle El and Lloyd. I'm actually pretty happy that they didn't repeat that mistake by overpaying a bunch of OL that had little chance to produce at a high level. Big Al is worth every $ he's getting paid, imo.

While me, you, and everyone else here would of loved to see the team fix the OL last offseason, I don't know if that was possible even if we didn't sign Big Al and spent all that $$$ on OL. This all goes back to the front office neglecting the OL in the draft for so many years. And the last one we spent a high pick on appears to be a complete bust (Rhinehart). When you combine this with the fact that the market for OL last offseason was pretty bad, there was no quick fix for the OL.

off the top of my head, I know the beagles rebuilt their OT position. both guys probably for less than #92

Philly traded for Jason Peters (1st and 4th round picks, the latter in the next draft). And they grossly overpaid for the other Andrews brother, who has been less than spectacular this season, to say the least.I would rather have Orakpo and Haynesworth than Peters and Andrews. Not sure how close the $$$ is.

I'd rather have Peters and Andrews with enough left over to have signed Jason Brown then Heyer and Mike Williams. I guess my point remains that if depth is such a big need, why would you blow the budget on one DT? by himself, he cannot raise a 2 win team to contender status. but several quality bodies to populate an OL could.

 

[Sebowski]

Just explain to me how this isn't a total nadwagon move"I am turning in my fan card until we start winning again"Total BS I would expect from the Cowboy fans, not Skins fans.

Just explain to me how being silent while the team is wrecked and plays terribly isn't a defeated move. Seriously.And please don't tell me Snyder already knows what to do --- there's been no evidence of that over 10 years.

This is our fundamental disagreement. Yes, I do think Dan knows Vinny needs to be replaced. I know it will happen as soon as the season is over.

 

[Sebowski]

Mark Cuban saying what I was saying last week in regards to luck.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsb...rss=dcsportsbog

Mark Cuban talks about Dan Snyder

Because I honestly do feel bad for the people who want me to be doing what I used to do, I'll keep apologizing and promising that I'll do that stuff again. I just want to write about this right now, because it's fascinating to me. All our other beat writers will continue writing their stories and doing their blogs, and there's no chance I'll keep this up for weeks.

But in the spirit of accountability and customer service, I'm sorry to those who really hate this. Speaking of which, did you see the e-mail from Browns owner Randy Lerner, when informed that fans would be protesting?

"On the grounds of frustration and irritation with performance, then that's the medicine I (we) are going to take, and I accept that," he wrote.

Perfect, perfect response.

Anyhow, I've been meaning to post Mavericks owner Mark Cuban's thoughts about Redskins ownership, offered up earlier this week on Mike Wise's radio show on 106.7 The Fan. Obviously, a lot of people have a lot of very strongly held feelings about Redskins ownership that pre-dated this season, but the level of vitriol this year is certainly unprecedented.

Now, is that because ownership has appreciably changed its behavior over the past few months? Or is that because the team is obviously stinky right now?

Does the distinction matter? I think it does, because if it's the latter, then if the tides turn and the team starts winning next year or the year after, all this stuff might disappear. Maybe not entirely, but to some degree. I don't know how I come down on this issue, but I think it's absolutely a possibility. And, as blog commenter Barno1 often says, if current ownership brings home a Super Bowl, all will be forgiven by a massive number of Skins fans. Here was the exchange between Wise and Cuban:

Wise: "Do you know Dan Snyder at all?"

Cuban: "I've met Dan and talked to him and we get along great."

Wise: "There was this perception, not just by David Stern and the old school way of thinking, but there was this perception that this guy [Cuban is] a little too meddlesome. He's over the top. How did you change that perception, and what would be your advice to Dan Snyder in that regard?"

Cuban: "Well, I don't know that I changed that perception. You know, anybody who owns a professional sports franchise has had some success in business, and the biggest mistake that I've seen any of them make is rather than just do what got them to the dance, they try to change to fit what they think the public wants to see. And I certainly never changed. The way I'd done things had always worked for me, so there was no reason to change.

But there's a lot of luck that's involved. I mean, you can point to the Redskins and jump on Dan Snyder, gut you can also point to 20 other teams who haven't won a Super Bowl or been to the Super Bowl and nitpick them. I think what it comes down to, whether it's the NFL, the NHL, maybe less so Major League Baseball but definitely the NBA, it takes luck. You know, smarts combined with luck. The Lakers have got to be able to get Pau Gasol in that deal, they've got to have the nerve to trade for Kobe Bryant and make it work. The Cowboys ... they're 1-15 and the Cowboys decide to go with Troy Aikman and that leads to future Super Bowls. And then they get the Herschel Walker trade as luck and that cements those Super Bowl teams.

I just think Dan wants to win so badly, SO so badly, that it sometimes comes across as meddlesome because they haven't won yet. If they had won--let's just say they had drafted the right quarterback, they had drafted Matt Ryan or whoever, the young quarterback coming out. And that's not to say that their current quarterback isn't going to get the job done, but the Redskins just haven't had that superstar at the quarterback position that I think can carry them. And if they had, you would hear less or talk less about Dan Snyder, and he would be the guy who transitioned, took over and did a great job."

Anyhow, I'm going out of town for a few days for Halloween, and probably won't post anything. We'll see what next week brings. And sorry again to the longtime readers who hated this week.

Everyone including the Patriots passed on Tom Brady multiple times. Luck plays a gigantic role in sports. Every team picks busts. Steelers with Limas Sweed, Pats with Chad Jackson... Slam dunk can't miss guys are one in a million and you have to be just bad enough at the right time to get them. Everyone keeps bringing up the Capitals as a model to build from. How good would they be if they were the thgird worst team in the league the year Ovechkin was drafted instead of the worst?

It's the same with new coaches and GMs too. Was the entire NFL after Ozzie Newsome for GM 10 years ago? They should have been...

 

[Sebowski]

I love watching him as well, and he makes a tremendous impact when he is in the game. this is not the problem.

the problem is with the team-building approach where a team with many many holes overpays for one position. a position that was not a glaring weakness. we could have used the coin spent on Al to provide the badly needed depth to the OL.

What OL were really available on the FA market that could of been longterm help to the team? The marquee OL FA was Jason Brown, who the Rams overpaid for. It's not like there were any solid starting OT's available in FA, let alone a franchise OT.Also, wasn't Dockery considered one of the top 3-4 interior OL available last offseason? And I think we overpaid for him.

Last offseason for OL reminded me of a few years back when the FA market was horrible for wr's and we overpaid for Randle El and Lloyd. I'm actually pretty happy that they didn't repeat that mistake by overpaying a bunch of OL that had little chance to produce at a high level. Big Al is worth every $ he's getting paid, imo.

While me, you, and everyone else here would of loved to see the team fix the OL last offseason, I don't know if that was possible even if we didn't sign Big Al and spent all that $$$ on OL. This all goes back to the front office neglecting the OL in the draft for so many years. And the last one we spent a high pick on appears to be a complete bust (Rhinehart). When you combine this with the fact that the market for OL last offseason was pretty bad, there was no quick fix for the OL.

off the top of my head, I know the beagles rebuilt their OT position. both guys probably for less than #92

Philly traded for Jason Peters (1st and 4th round picks, the latter in the next draft). And they grossly overpaid for the other Andrews brother, who has been less than spectacular this season, to say the least.I would rather have Orakpo and Haynesworth than Peters and Andrews. Not sure how close the $$$ is.

I'd rather have Peters and Andrews with enough left over to have signed Jason Brown then Heyer and Mike Williams. I guess my point remains that if depth is such a big need, why would you blow the budget on one DT? by himself, he cannot raise a 2 win team to contender status. but several quality bodies to populate an OL could.

What budget? We have cap room.I have hope for Big Mike. He looked good Monday Night.

 

[Marvelous]

Mark Cuban saying what I was saying last week in regards to luck.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsb...rss=dcsportsbog

Mark Cuban talks about Dan Snyder

Because I honestly do feel bad for the people who want me to be doing what I used to do, I'll keep apologizing and promising that I'll do that stuff again. I just want to write about this right now, because it's fascinating to me. All our other beat writers will continue writing their stories and doing their blogs, and there's no chance I'll keep this up for weeks.

But in the spirit of accountability and customer service, I'm sorry to those who really hate this. Speaking of which, did you see the e-mail from Browns owner Randy Lerner, when informed that fans would be protesting?

"On the grounds of frustration and irritation with performance, then that's the medicine I (we) are going to take, and I accept that," he wrote.

Perfect, perfect response.

Anyhow, I've been meaning to post Mavericks owner Mark Cuban's thoughts about Redskins ownership, offered up earlier this week on Mike Wise's radio show on 106.7 The Fan. Obviously, a lot of people have a lot of very strongly held feelings about Redskins ownership that pre-dated this season, but the level of vitriol this year is certainly unprecedented.

Now, is that because ownership has appreciably changed its behavior over the past few months? Or is that because the team is obviously stinky right now?

Does the distinction matter? I think it does, because if it's the latter, then if the tides turn and the team starts winning next year or the year after, all this stuff might disappear. Maybe not entirely, but to some degree. I don't know how I come down on this issue, but I think it's absolutely a possibility. And, as blog commenter Barno1 often says, if current ownership brings home a Super Bowl, all will be forgiven by a massive number of Skins fans. Here was the exchange between Wise and Cuban:

Wise: "Do you know Dan Snyder at all?"

Cuban: "I've met Dan and talked to him and we get along great."

Wise: "There was this perception, not just by David Stern and the old school way of thinking, but there was this perception that this guy [Cuban is] a little too meddlesome. He's over the top. How did you change that perception, and what would be your advice to Dan Snyder in that regard?"

Cuban: "Well, I don't know that I changed that perception. You know, anybody who owns a professional sports franchise has had some success in business, and the biggest mistake that I've seen any of them make is rather than just do what got them to the dance, they try to change to fit what they think the public wants to see. And I certainly never changed. The way I'd done things had always worked for me, so there was no reason to change.

But there's a lot of luck that's involved. I mean, you can point to the Redskins and jump on Dan Snyder, gut you can also point to 20 other teams who haven't won a Super Bowl or been to the Super Bowl and nitpick them. I think what it comes down to, whether it's the NFL, the NHL, maybe less so Major League Baseball but definitely the NBA, it takes luck. You know, smarts combined with luck. The Lakers have got to be able to get Pau Gasol in that deal, they've got to have the nerve to trade for Kobe Bryant and make it work. The Cowboys ... they're 1-15 and the Cowboys decide to go with Troy Aikman and that leads to future Super Bowls. And then they get the Herschel Walker trade as luck and that cements those Super Bowl teams.

I just think Dan wants to win so badly, SO so badly, that it sometimes comes across as meddlesome because they haven't won yet. If they had won--let's just say they had drafted the right quarterback, they had drafted Matt Ryan or whoever, the young quarterback coming out. And that's not to say that their current quarterback isn't going to get the job done, but the Redskins just haven't had that superstar at the quarterback position that I think can carry them. And if they had, you would hear less or talk less about Dan Snyder, and he would be the guy who transitioned, took over and did a great job."

Anyhow, I'm going out of town for a few days for Halloween, and probably won't post anything. We'll see what next week brings. And sorry again to the longtime readers who hated this week.

Everyone including the Patriots passed on Tom Brady multiple times. Luck plays a gigantic role in sports. Every team picks busts. Steelers with Limas Sweed, Pats with Chad Jackson... Slam dunk can't miss guys are one in a million and you have to be just bad enough at the right time to get them. Everyone keeps bringing up the Capitals as a model to build from. How good would they be if they were the thgird worst team in the league the year Ovechkin was drafted instead of the worst?

It's the same with new coaches and GMs too. Was the entire NFL after Ozzie Newsome for GM 10 years ago? They should have been...

There is luck involved, but I also think there is a lot of skill involved. Some teams consistently hit on their draft picks more often than others. The Steelers, Colts, and Ravens sure come to mind. Philly and New England do pretty well to. Over a long period of time, that points to some level of skill.

 

[Sebowski]

Mark Cuban saying what I was saying last week in regards to luck.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsb...rss=dcsportsbog

Mark Cuban talks about Dan Snyder

Because I honestly do feel bad for the people who want me to be doing what I used to do, I'll keep apologizing and promising that I'll do that stuff again. I just want to write about this right now, because it's fascinating to me. All our other beat writers will continue writing their stories and doing their blogs, and there's no chance I'll keep this up for weeks.

But in the spirit of accountability and customer service, I'm sorry to those who really hate this. Speaking of which, did you see the e-mail from Browns owner Randy Lerner, when informed that fans would be protesting?

"On the grounds of frustration and irritation with performance, then that's the medicine I (we) are going to take, and I accept that," he wrote.

Perfect, perfect response.

Anyhow, I've been meaning to post Mavericks owner Mark Cuban's thoughts about Redskins ownership, offered up earlier this week on Mike Wise's radio show on 106.7 The Fan. Obviously, a lot of people have a lot of very strongly held feelings about Redskins ownership that pre-dated this season, but the level of vitriol this year is certainly unprecedented.

Now, is that because ownership has appreciably changed its behavior over the past few months? Or is that because the team is obviously stinky right now?

Does the distinction matter? I think it does, because if it's the latter, then if the tides turn and the team starts winning next year or the year after, all this stuff might disappear. Maybe not entirely, but to some degree. I don't know how I come down on this issue, but I think it's absolutely a possibility. And, as blog commenter Barno1 often says, if current ownership brings home a Super Bowl, all will be forgiven by a massive number of Skins fans. Here was the exchange between Wise and Cuban:

Wise: "Do you know Dan Snyder at all?"

Cuban: "I've met Dan and talked to him and we get along great."

Wise: "There was this perception, not just by David Stern and the old school way of thinking, but there was this perception that this guy [Cuban is] a little too meddlesome. He's over the top. How did you change that perception, and what would be your advice to Dan Snyder in that regard?"

Cuban: "Well, I don't know that I changed that perception. You know, anybody who owns a professional sports franchise has had some success in business, and the biggest mistake that I've seen any of them make is rather than just do what got them to the dance, they try to change to fit what they think the public wants to see. And I certainly never changed. The way I'd done things had always worked for me, so there was no reason to change.

But there's a lot of luck that's involved. I mean, you can point to the Redskins and jump on Dan Snyder, gut you can also point to 20 other teams who haven't won a Super Bowl or been to the Super Bowl and nitpick them. I think what it comes down to, whether it's the NFL, the NHL, maybe less so Major League Baseball but definitely the NBA, it takes luck. You know, smarts combined with luck. The Lakers have got to be able to get Pau Gasol in that deal, they've got to have the nerve to trade for Kobe Bryant and make it work. The Cowboys ... they're 1-15 and the Cowboys decide to go with Troy Aikman and that leads to future Super Bowls. And then they get the Herschel Walker trade as luck and that cements those Super Bowl teams.

I just think Dan wants to win so badly, SO so badly, that it sometimes comes across as meddlesome because they haven't won yet. If they had won--let's just say they had drafted the right quarterback, they had drafted Matt Ryan or whoever, the young quarterback coming out. And that's not to say that their current quarterback isn't going to get the job done, but the Redskins just haven't had that superstar at the quarterback position that I think can carry them. And if they had, you would hear less or talk less about Dan Snyder, and he would be the guy who transitioned, took over and did a great job."

Anyhow, I'm going out of town for a few days for Halloween, and probably won't post anything. We'll see what next week brings. And sorry again to the longtime readers who hated this week.

Everyone including the Patriots passed on Tom Brady multiple times. Luck plays a gigantic role in sports. Every team picks busts. Steelers with Limas Sweed, Pats with Chad Jackson... Slam dunk can't miss guys are one in a million and you have to be just bad enough at the right time to get them. Everyone keeps bringing up the Capitals as a model to build from. How good would they be if they were the thgird worst team in the league the year Ovechkin was drafted instead of the worst?

It's the same with new coaches and GMs too. Was the entire NFL after Ozzie Newsome for GM 10 years ago? They should have been...

There is luck involved, but I also think there is a lot of skill involved. Some teams consistently hit on their draft picks more often than others. The Steelers, Colts, and Ravens sure come to mind. Philly and New England do pretty well to. Over a long period of time, that points to some level of skill.

Agreed. Hopefully whoever takes over for Vinny will be better at it than Vinny and Gibbs was.

 

[fatness]

This is our fundamental disagreement. Yes, I do think Dan knows Vinny needs to be replaced. I know it will happen as soon as the season is over.

OK, I'll bite.How do you know?

 

[fatness]

Everyone including the Patriots passed on Tom Brady multiple times. Luck plays a gigantic role in sports. Every team picks busts. Steelers with Limas Sweed, Pats with Chad Jackson... Slam dunk can't miss guys are one in a million and you have to be just bad enough at the right time to get them.

2005 DraftRound Pick Overall Name Position College1 9 9 Carlos Rogers CB Auburn1 25 25 Jason Campbell QB Auburn4 19 120 Manuel White FB UCLA5 18 154 Robert McCune LB Louisville6 9 183 Jared Newberry LB Stanford7 8 222 Nehemiah Broughton FB The Citadel2006 DraftRound Pick Overall Name Position College2 3 35 Rocky McIntosh LB Miami (FL)5 20 153 Anthony Montgomery DT Minnesota6 4 173 Reed Doughty S Northern Colorado6 27 196 Kedric Golston DT Georgia7 22 230 Kili Lefotu G Arizona7 42 250 Kevin Simon LB Tennessee2007 DraftRound Pick Overall Name Position College1 6 6 LaRon Landry S Louisiana State5 6 143 Dallas Sartz LB Southern California6 5 179 H. B. Blades LB Pittsburgh6 31 205 Jordan Palmer QB Texas-El Paso7 6 216 Tyler Ecker TE Michigan2008 DraftRound Pick Overall Name Position College2 3 34 Devin Thomas WR Michigan State2 17 48 Fred Davis TE Southern California2 20 51 Malcolm Kelly WR Oklahoma3 33 96 Chad Rinehart G Northern Iowa4 25 124 Justin Tryon CB Arizona State6 2 168 Durant Brooks P Georgia Tech6 14 180 Kareem Moore S Nicholls State6 20 186 Colt Brennan QB Hawaii7 35 242 Rob Jackson DE Kansas State7 42 249 Chris Horton S UCLA2009 DraftRound Pick Overall Name Position College1 13 13 Brian Orakpo DE Texas3 16 80 Kevin Barnes CB Maryland5 22 158 Cody Glenn LB Nebraska6 13 186 Robert Henson LB Texas Christian7 12 221 Eddie Williams TE Idaho7 34 243 Marko Mitchell WR Nevada[edit] 2009 Supplemental DraftRound Name Position College3 Jeremy Jarmon DE KentuckyWhich of those players would be starting for other teams?

Everyone keeps bringing up the Capitals as a model to build from. How good would they be if they were the thgird worst team in the league the year Ovechkin was drafted instead of the worst?

They're a better team across the board than the Redskins are.

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Mark Cuban saying what I was saying last week in regards to luck.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsb...rss=dcsportsbog

Mark Cuban talks about Dan Snyder

Because I honestly do feel bad for the people who want me to be doing what I used to do, I'll keep apologizing and promising that I'll do that stuff again. I just want to write about this right now, because it's fascinating to me. All our other beat writers will continue writing their stories and doing their blogs, and there's no chance I'll keep this up for weeks.

But in the spirit of accountability and customer service, I'm sorry to those who really hate this. Speaking of which, did you see the e-mail from Browns owner Randy Lerner, when informed that fans would be protesting?

"On the grounds of frustration and irritation with performance, then that's the medicine I (we) are going to take, and I accept that," he wrote.

Perfect, perfect response.

Anyhow, I've been meaning to post Mavericks owner Mark Cuban's thoughts about Redskins ownership, offered up earlier this week on Mike Wise's radio show on 106.7 The Fan. Obviously, a lot of people have a lot of very strongly held feelings about Redskins ownership that pre-dated this season, but the level of vitriol this year is certainly unprecedented.

Now, is that because ownership has appreciably changed its behavior over the past few months? Or is that because the team is obviously stinky right now?

Does the distinction matter? I think it does, because if it's the latter, then if the tides turn and the team starts winning next year or the year after, all this stuff might disappear. Maybe not entirely, but to some degree. I don't know how I come down on this issue, but I think it's absolutely a possibility. And, as blog commenter Barno1 often says, if current ownership brings home a Super Bowl, all will be forgiven by a massive number of Skins fans. Here was the exchange between Wise and Cuban:

Wise: "Do you know Dan Snyder at all?"

Cuban: "I've met Dan and talked to him and we get along great."

Wise: "There was this perception, not just by David Stern and the old school way of thinking, but there was this perception that this guy [Cuban is] a little too meddlesome. He's over the top. How did you change that perception, and what would be your advice to Dan Snyder in that regard?"

Cuban: "Well, I don't know that I changed that perception. You know, anybody who owns a professional sports franchise has had some success in business, and the biggest mistake that I've seen any of them make is rather than just do what got them to the dance, they try to change to fit what they think the public wants to see. And I certainly never changed. The way I'd done things had always worked for me, so there was no reason to change.

But there's a lot of luck that's involved. I mean, you can point to the Redskins and jump on Dan Snyder, gut you can also point to 20 other teams who haven't won a Super Bowl or been to the Super Bowl and nitpick them. I think what it comes down to, whether it's the NFL, the NHL, maybe less so Major League Baseball but definitely the NBA, it takes luck. You know, smarts combined with luck. The Lakers have got to be able to get Pau Gasol in that deal, they've got to have the nerve to trade for Kobe Bryant and make it work. The Cowboys ... they're 1-15 and the Cowboys decide to go with Troy Aikman and that leads to future Super Bowls. And then they get the Herschel Walker trade as luck and that cements those Super Bowl teams.

I just think Dan wants to win so badly, SO so badly, that it sometimes comes across as meddlesome because they haven't won yet. If they had won--let's just say they had drafted the right quarterback, they had drafted Matt Ryan or whoever, the young quarterback coming out. And that's not to say that their current quarterback isn't going to get the job done, but the Redskins just haven't had that superstar at the quarterback position that I think can carry them. And if they had, you would hear less or talk less about Dan Snyder, and he would be the guy who transitioned, took over and did a great job."

Anyhow, I'm going out of town for a few days for Halloween, and probably won't post anything. We'll see what next week brings. And sorry again to the longtime readers who hated this week.

Everyone including the Patriots passed on Tom Brady multiple times. Luck plays a gigantic role in sports. Every team picks busts. Steelers with Limas Sweed, Pats with Chad Jackson... Slam dunk can't miss guys are one in a million and you have to be just bad enough at the right time to get them. Everyone keeps bringing up the Capitals as a model to build from. How good would they be if they were the thgird worst team in the league the year Ovechkin was drafted instead of the worst?

It's the same with new coaches and GMs too. Was the entire NFL after Ozzie Newsome for GM 10 years ago? They should have been...

There is luck involved, but I also think there is a lot of skill involved. Some teams consistently hit on their draft picks more often than others. The Steelers, Colts, and Ravens sure come to mind. Philly and New England do pretty well to. Over a long period of time, that points to some level of skill.

Of course there's luck involved. But the Matt Ryans and Ovechkins only account for one pick, and not in every draft either. The number of problems this team has and its lack of depth at a whole bunch of positions tells you that it ain't just luck that's gone bad for the Redskins.

 

[thayman]

This is our fundamental disagreement. Yes, I do think Dan knows Vinny needs to be replaced. I know it will happen as soon as the season is over.

OK, I'll bite.How do you know?

I feel the same as Sebowski on this point. Since Gibbs 2.0 Snyder has seemed to have backed off considerably than prior to Gibbs 2.0. It seems Snyder is the driving force behind moves like Haynesworth, but Vinny is running the draft etc.. I guess we will have to wait until the off-season, but I find Vinny to be a far bigger problem than Snyder. Personally I'd like to see Snyder hire a good GM and fire every single person employeed within the football operations at FedEx Field.