| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
PARROTHEAD
Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 4165
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
turtle28
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 53076
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
Well I Don't like how he seems content with the current state of the OL.
| Quote: | The most startling comments came in regards to the right tackle position. We have to draft another tackle in the third or fourth, right? RIGHT? I feel like I've been yelling that for year's but Shanny seems pretty content with Jammal Brown and others:
"His flexibility is 100 percent different than the last two years, We believe we helped ourselves just with Jammal Brown getting better." via Mike Wise
Shanny also hinted at Tyler Polumbus and recent addition James Lee at being very capable backups at the right tackle position. Strangely enough Willie Smith was not mentioned, so perhaps he is slated to backup Trent Williams. Shanny made it sound as if additions to the tackle positions are not in the immediate future for the Skins. |
I do like that he is speaking about Cooley being ready to go for OTAs, which tells me that he isn't on the trading block.  He also didn't mention anything about Santana Moss, which could be good or bad. I think it's a good sign and probably means be expects Moss to be back for his 8th season with the team, but who knows? 
_________________
 mike23md
Days until:Days until:Minicamp 22; Training camp 66; Eagles @ Redskins 112 RIP SSF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
turtle28
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 53076
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sports/redskins-confidential/2012/04/redskins-notes-cooley-improving-shanahan-likes-rt-situation
Bro, did you read this examiner breakdown of the interview? It's much better than what the hogs haven wrote up. Hogs haven, much like me, often get get caught up in their displeasure of how the team handles the OL.
On Cooley:
| Quote: | | "He’s felt as good as he’s felt the last couple years,” Shanahan said. “Hopefully he’s full speed once we get started with our [organized team activities] and he can stay injury-free.” |
On Gaffney:
| Quote: | Shanahan said he gave Gaffney the ability to seek a trade because with newcomers Pierre Garcon and Josh Morgan, as well as second-year Leonard Hankerson, there will be less time for him. Didn't take much to do the math. Shanahan did leave open the possibility of a return...
“He may want to come back and compete,” Shanahan said. “I can’t tell you at this time what’s going to happen.” |
On Moss and the rest of the roster:
| Quote: | | Shanahan also said there will be "18 or 19" new starters from when he came in. The only ones who might remain the starters from Shanahan's first year: Linebackers London Fletcher and Brian Orakpo and corner DeAngelo Hall. Receiver Santana Moss would be the fourth guy, but it's no lock that he returns. It's clear he has to show the coaches something during offseason workouts to return. |
_________________
mike23md
Days until:Days until:Minicamp 22; Training camp 66; Eagles @ Redskins 112 RIP SSF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RunfromLandry
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 999
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Trusting anything Shanahan says this close to the draft (with the exception of RG3) seems foolish to me. If anything his endorsement of Cooley/Brown makes it more likely we address those positions in the draft. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
turtle28
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 53076
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RunfromLandry wrote: | | Trusting anything Shanahan says this close to the draft (with the exception of RG3) seems foolish to me. If anything his endorsement of Cooley/Brown makes it more likely we address those positions in the draft. |
Could be, good point.
_________________
mike23md
Days until:Days until:Minicamp 22; Training camp 66; Eagles @ Redskins 112 RIP SSF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RunfromLandry
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 999
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| turtle28 wrote: | | RunfromLandry wrote: | | Trusting anything Shanahan says this close to the draft (with the exception of RG3) seems foolish to me. If anything his endorsement of Cooley/Brown makes it more likely we address those positions in the draft. |
Could be, good point. |
at least I hope. if there's one thing I want after rg3 is a boatload of OL picks to keep him upright and Helu rolling |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
turtle28
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 53076
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RunfromLandry wrote: | | turtle28 wrote: | | RunfromLandry wrote: | | Trusting anything Shanahan says this close to the draft (with the exception of RG3) seems foolish to me. If anything his endorsement of Cooley/Brown makes it more likely we address those positions in the draft. |
Could be, good point. |
at least I hope. if there's one thing I want after rg3 is a boatload of OL picks to keep him upright and Helu rolling |
I'm with ya there buddy. 
_________________
mike23md
Days until:Days until:Minicamp 22; Training camp 66; Eagles @ Redskins 112 RIP SSF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
footy_29
Joined: 31 Jan 2007
Posts: 11161
Location: The Frozen Tundra that is Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I honestly believe the starters are set for at least 2012, potentially 2013. Yes, the team needs to look for a player who can be groomed behind Jammal but I firmly believe what you see is what you'll get, with maybe two OL drafted as depth.
_________________
Blknite01's masterpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DCRED
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 2352
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| turtle28 wrote: | | RunfromLandry wrote: | | turtle28 wrote: | | RunfromLandry wrote: | | Trusting anything Shanahan says this close to the draft (with the exception of RG3) seems foolish to me. If anything his endorsement of Cooley/Brown makes it more likely we address those positions in the draft. |
Could be, good point. |
at least I hope. if there's one thing I want after rg3 is a boatload of OL picks to keep him upright and Helu rolling |
I'm with ya there buddy. |
Can I 3rd this??
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
midniterc
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 6653
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:11 pm Post subject: Re: Shans PreDraft Presser |
|
|
|
Thanks for posting the articles. Just a little more wood on the fire to hold us over til draft day. It's going to be BPA in every round and it will be a fun draft to watch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Macho Man
Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 195
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Could be a smoke screen, could be truth. Here's what I think: O-line is not that horrible. Do we have as much depth there as we would like? Probably not but who does. In defense of our line I will say this, bad qb's that cant move or are any good make lines look bad real quick. Peyton Manning rarely got sacked with the Colts, could he move? No but he was damn good. Curtis Painter and Kerry Collins step in and what happens. They get crushed. All of a sudden the colts line looks like it stunk. I hardly believe it was all their fault. Im tired of this debate, its getting kind of old. Same ol story repeated constantly by people that refuse to look at the other side of the coin. We average 15 to 18 points a game for the last few years now. We dont have weapons nor have we had real threats that scare people. No threats, no qb =less than 20 pts game. Stack the box, stop the run game and dare you to throw knowing you cant. You wont win many games like that and thats why we haven't. Not just our line. Give them a break, cause they can only do so much.
I hope we draft every playmaker we can in the draft and develop our young guys on the line. If we dont what in the hell did we draft em for
_________________
In the words of Vince Mcmahon " Theres no chance in hell" Nate Potter or Donald Stephenson are drafted before the 5th round. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PARROTHEAD
Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 4165
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I kinda agree with you MM.
The line and the youth already gathered isnt as bad as made out to be. Brown should be much improved and is doing twice as good as he was with the injury now. The backups showed alot of promise. Maurice Hurt stood in and did great against a super bowl team.
With the exp of the youth, and Brown rehabbing going so well now. We havent had near as good of line as this could be if there was no addressing it at all.
Doesnt mean I dont want a more secure interior lineman and a starting tackle that hasnt been so banged up.
And I think thats what Shan is meaning. Not that we dont really need it, but what we got aint so bad that they should be beatin up by fans all the time.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
turtle28
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 53076
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Macho Man wrote: | Could be a smoke screen, could be truth. Here's what I think: O-line is not that horrible. Do we have as much depth there as we would like? Probably not but who does. In defense of our line I will say this, bad qb's that cant move or are any good make lines look bad real quick. Peyton Manning rarely got sacked with the Colts, could he move? No but he was damn good. Curtis Painter and Kerry Collins step in and what happens. They get crushed. All of a sudden the colts line looks like it stunk. I hardly believe it was all their fault. Im tired of this debate, its getting kind of old. Same ol story repeated constantly by people that refuse to look at the other side of the coin. We average 15 to 18 points a game for the last few years now. We dont have weapons nor have we had real threats that scare people. No threats, no qb =less than 20 pts game. Stack the box, stop the run game and dare you to throw knowing you cant. You wont win many games like that and thats why we haven't. Not just our line. Give them a break, cause they can only do so much.
I hope we draft every playmaker we can in the draft and develop our young guys on the line. If we dont what in the hell did we draft em for |
What young guys have we drafted that you are talking about on the OL? That's my honest question. I can think of 3, Trent Williams (starting LT, I think he gets plenty of playing time), Erik Cook (who flat out sucked at C last year and it's the only position he plays), Maurice Hurt (Guard who played well the last month of the year) by the way, Cook and Hurt were 7th round picks, at that point in the draft players are basically the same talent as ndrafted free agents, only they don't get to have the freedom to choose what team they can go to as undrafted free agents get to.
IMO, I'd rather be an undrafted free agent than a 6th or 7th round pick. As an udfa you can go where you choose ex. Willie Smith signed here last year because he knew our OL had basically no young depth and he'd have a good shot at making the team last year. Guess what?? He and his agent Were right and Smith made the team.
So, explain to me how we've invested in the draft in young talent again...
_________________
mike23md
Days until:Days until:Minicamp 22; Training camp 66; Eagles @ Redskins 112 RIP SSF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Macho Man
Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 195
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Not going to keep arguing this. To make this plain and simple this is how I look at it. I trust Shanahan and Bruce Allen to make good decisions in the draft to help improve this team the best way they can. They can draft 6 lineman if they want, Ill support it. It may not be what I would have chosen if I were in charge but none the less this orginization will always have my support. I dont make it seem like I am going to get mad if they choose someone in a position that I have targeted. Its no big deal.
Last year at this time we all thought our biggest need was qb and rightfully so. I was on that badwagon myself. We could have traded up for Ponder or drafted Gabbert and felt good for a while about it but how would we feel now? They have a plan in place and rightfully so they didn't draft either of these guys and traded back and picked up a stud who if my memory serves me correctly wasn't that high on anybodys radar on this forum. Right now I know for sure that everyone on here would rather have Kerrigan than either of those guys. We traded alot of picks for RGIII this year and some people were not happy about that.
The last thing I would want to happen is what happened to Carolina last year. They got a stud in Cam Newton. A rookie phenom. But the year before they reached for quarterbacks and took Jimmy Clausen and Tony Pike in the same draft. Thats a fact. If they took BPA they could have really had a shot at the playoffs last year potentially.
To make a long story longer we had two sorry qb's last year on our roster. Draft comes around we didn't reach for a player just because he played the same position as what we needed. We traded back, took BPA and got a player who can really help this team. Whats wrong with that?
Turtle 28 and everyone else that looks at this just like you do I can guarantee you this: We will not take a player just because of the position he plays. That would be really stuiped. We will not reach, we will take BPA, cause this team is not as far off from contending as everyone thinks we are. You can mark that down.
_________________
In the words of Vince Mcmahon " Theres no chance in hell" Nate Potter or Donald Stephenson are drafted before the 5th round. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
turtle28
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 53076
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Macho Man wrote: | | Not going to keep arguing this. To make this plain and simple this is how I look at it. I trust Shanahan and Bruce Allen to make good decisions in the draft to help improve this team the best way they can. They can draft 6 lineman if they want, Ill support it. It may not be what I would have chosen if I were in charge but none the less this orginization will always have my support. I dont make it seem like I am going to get mad if they choose someone in a position that I have targeted. Its no big deal. |
I trust them also, I mean really we have no choice right?
| Quote: | | Last year at this time we all thought our biggest need was qb and rightfully so. I was on that badwagon myself. We could have traded up for Ponder or drafted Gabbert and felt good for a while about it but how would we feel now? They have a plan in place and rightfully so they didn't draft either of these guys and traded back and picked up a stud who if my memory serves me correctly wasn't that high on anybodys radar on this forum. Right now I know for sure that everyone on here would rather have Kerrigan than either of those guys. We traded alot of picks for RGIII this year and some people were not happy about that. |
Poder was the 12th pick, we wouldn't have had to trade up for him because he was drafted after our natural 10th overall pick.
If we had taken either, I'd be fine personally. We'd be sitting where the the Vikings and Jaguars are sitting and we'd have our 2nd round pick this year, and our 1st rounder in 2013 and 2014. We'd be sitting at 6, and looking to draft the bpa there, it could be Claibore (shut down cb), Blackmon or Floyd as a playmaker for our young qb. We'd have a 2nd round pick where we'd probably be looking to take a pass rusher opposite Orakpo since we wouldn't have drafted Kerrigan. There are plenty of prospects available then.
But really it didn't happen that way, so it's all a moot point. And maybe right now people think Kerrigan over them, but the draft is about picking for the future of your team right? You keep saying that, QBs take years to develop, pass rushers are usually immediate contributors.
| Quote: | | The last thing I would want to happen is what happened to Carolina last year. They got a stud in Cam Newton. A rookie phenom. But the year before they reached for quarterbacks and took Jimmy Clausen and Tony Pike in the same draft. Thats a fact. If they took BPA they could have really had a shot at the playoffs last year potentially. |
3 things: Jimmy Claussen fell from being a possible top 10 pick to round 2. Pretty safe to say that when the Panthers drafted in round 2, he was one of best players available on the board right?
2. Tony Pike also fell further than they thought and they did what you like to do, just go best player available so that's what happened there. If they had thought bpa in a position they needed instead of just bpa, they would have selected another position instead of double dipping at the qb position.
3. New regimes mean new qbs and Newton was the most talented player in 2011the draft with the biggest upside also. The panthers started the season in 2010, thinking Fox would still be their coach in 2011, and that they wouldn't be picking 1st overall in the 2011 draft, especially after the season they had in 2009. Anyways, you can't blame them now two years later for taking Clausen with a different regime.
| Quote: | | To make a long story longer we had two sorry qb's last year on our roster. Draft comes around we didn't reach for a player just because he played the same position as what we needed. We traded back, took BPA and got a player who can really help this team. Whats wrong with that? |
absolutely nothing, I'm glad they took one of my favorite prospects in last years draft (Ryan Kerrigan) and he proved almost every other poster in this forum wrong, really I don't think anyone really liked the pick, but me. No one thought he'd fit the 3-4.
| Quote: | | Turtle 28 and everyone else that looks at this just like you do I can guarantee you this: We will not take a player just because of the position he plays. That would be really stuiped. We will not reach, we will take BPA, cause this team is not as far off from contending as everyone thinks we are. You can mark that down. |
Classic by the way!  I agree, that would be dumb to just take a player because of the position he plays and reaching for talent, I say it all the time, that gets gms fired. I've said that for a decade, I've never advocated reaching, but when you need a position and you have players on your board worthy of the current selection, you take them to get the need filled and the talent to the position at the same time. That's just common sense bro.
_________________
mike23md
Days until:Days until:Minicamp 22; Training camp 66; Eagles @ Redskins 112 RIP SSF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
