Wynn restructures

I've asked this question a couple times, but no one has answered, so I am assuming that no one knows right now. It would be tough to tell at this point anyway due to the fact that none of these rookies for any team have been signed. We'll know more in late May I'm sure.

From Jason LaCanfora's Washington Post Blog:

The D Line

Coach Joe continues to say all is fine with the D Line, that the Redskins "really didn't get close to taking anybody" for the line in the second day of the draft and that an improved secondary will elevate the play of the line.

I am not sure how this will work, but I guess we'll all find out. The fact that teams repeatedly beat them up, gashed them for long runs and wore them down, well, having another big-hitting safety in the box might help a bit, but they lack real big bodies on the D Line, period, to stuff the run. Griffin is a beast when healthy and the one true gem of the entire line, but will he ever be healthy and at his 2004 form again?

Coach Joe also said that by investing so much of their offseason resources into the secondary - draft Landry, sign Smoot and Macklin and Stoutmire - they "will force people to hold the ball" longer, and thus allow the D Line to do itsr job. Again, we'll see. They will try to rush Marcus and Rocky more from the LB spot and expect to have more leads and play from ahead, Gibbs said, when you tee-off on people with the rush.

Only time will tell, eh?

All I know is that for three years they have had a difficult time taking teams on straight up at the line and generating a rush. Expecting Salave'a, Griffin, Wynn and Daniels to be healthy and to revert to their old form is a stetch. Expecting Golston and Montgomery to be vital contributors as second-year kids might be a stretch, too. Golston could be a solid starter, but again, you are talking mostly high-motor guys on that line, tweeners like Carter, and no real specimens.

So, knowing these guys and how they operate, don't for a moment think they won't be sniffing around on trades. The Briggs thing won't be over until he is either dealt or signs an extension (highly unlikely), so they could start talking to the Bears about 2008 draft picks should they get the itch.

Also, Joe has not yet assured us entirely that they will have a full compliment of picks next year - exempting the 4th roudner they are already without from the horrible Duckett trade, of course - and I don't blame him. Shopping Springs hasn't and won't yield much and if they are going to make a play for a quality D Lineman in trade it will have to include 2008 picks.

So, who's out there?

Well, they have not expressed an iota of interest in franchised tackle Cory Redding (Motown) and end Justin Smith (Cincy). Carolina tackle Kris Jenkins (Maryland) is out there (although there are concerns about his weight and attitude among the Skins staff), but I have heard internally that people don't think tackle is near the need that end is. Would they look at the right tackle in the right deal? Sure, but the football people really want another end. It's their biggest need.

So, who do I think they might move for?

Well, I hear that things between Buffalo and pass-rushing end Aaron Schobel are getting dicey. He wants a new deal (he has 2 years left but is way underpaid compared to other players of his ilk) and I get the sense the Bills might eventually put more effort into dealing him. Now, would owner Ralph Wilson do a deal with Dan Snyder, one of his not-so-favorite-people? Maybe not. But I know Schobel was a stud in Gregg Williams's system and I know he would be welcome, if not coveted, around here. Going into next year with Carter and Daniels as starters and Demetric as the top backup might not work out.

Also, Oakland's Derrick Burgress, another pass rushing end, is pushing for a new contract and not showing up for voluntary OTAS and the like. The Raiders might try to make nice here, but he's a guy to watch.

Acquiring any of these kinds of players will be difficult and complicated and they won't come cheap. But they are the best options. Also, if the Redskins do make a big move, I would not be stunned if Springs were released to create cap room - in fact people close to the player tell me he is bracing for it - and if Springs is not here you tell me who the elite coverage CB in the secondary would be?

Bottom line is that I think this offseason is far from over.

From my perspective, the two big issues I will be watching are a trade for a D Lineman, and, to a lesser degree, the possible firing of scouts and/or Vinny or Riddick. I asked Coach Joe about it again Sunday and he essentially said those rumors are not true, but I will still monitor the situation.

From Jason LaCanfora's Washington Post Blog:

The D Line

Coach Joe continues to say all is fine with the D Line, that the Redskins "really didn't get close to taking anybody" for the line in the second day of the draft and that an improved secondary will elevate the play of the line.

I am not sure how this will work, but I guess we'll all find out. The fact that teams repeatedly beat them up, gashed them for long runs and wore them down, well, having another big-hitting safety in the box might help a bit, but they lack real big bodies on the D Line, period, to stuff the run. Griffin is a beast when healthy and the one true gem of the entire line, but will he ever be healthy and at his 2004 form again?

Coach Joe also said that by investing so much of their offseason resources into the secondary - draft Landry, sign Smoot and Macklin and Stoutmire - they "will force people to hold the ball" longer, and thus allow the D Line to do itsr job. Again, we'll see. They will try to rush Marcus and Rocky more from the LB spot and expect to have more leads and play from ahead, Gibbs said, when you tee-off on people with the rush.

Only time will tell, eh?

All I know is that for three years they have had a difficult time taking teams on straight up at the line and generating a rush. Expecting Salave'a, Griffin, Wynn and Daniels to be healthy and to revert to their old form is a stetch. Expecting Golston and Montgomery to be vital contributors as second-year kids might be a stretch, too. Golston could be a solid starter, but again, you are talking mostly high-motor guys on that line, tweeners like Carter, and no real specimens.

So, knowing these guys and how they operate, don't for a moment think they won't be sniffing around on trades. The Briggs thing won't be over until he is either dealt or signs an extension (highly unlikely), so they could start talking to the Bears about 2008 draft picks should they get the itch.

Also, Joe has not yet assured us entirely that they will have a full compliment of picks next year - exempting the 4th roudner they are already without from the horrible Duckett trade, of course - and I don't blame him. Shopping Springs hasn't and won't yield much and if they are going to make a play for a quality D Lineman in trade it will have to include 2008 picks.

So, who's out there?

Well, they have not expressed an iota of interest in franchised tackle Cory Redding (Motown) and end Justin Smith (Cincy). Carolina tackle Kris Jenkins (Maryland) is out there (although there are concerns about his weight and attitude among the Skins staff), but I have heard internally that people don't think tackle is near the need that end is. Would they look at the right tackle in the right deal? Sure, but the football people really want another end. It's their biggest need.

So, who do I think they might move for?

Well, I hear that things between Buffalo and pass-rushing end Aaron Schobel are getting dicey. He wants a new deal (he has 2 years left but is way underpaid compared to other players of his ilk) and I get the sense the Bills might eventually put more effort into dealing him. Now, would owner Ralph Wilson do a deal with Dan Snyder, one of his not-so-favorite-people? Maybe not. But I know Schobel was a stud in Gregg Williams's system and I know he would be welcome, if not coveted, around here. Going into next year with Carter and Daniels as starters and Demetric as the top backup might not work out.

Also, Oakland's Derrick Burgress, another pass rushing end, is pushing for a new contract and not showing up for voluntary OTAS and the like. The Raiders might try to make nice here, but he's a guy to watch.

Acquiring any of these kinds of players will be difficult and complicated and they won't come cheap. But they are the best options. Also, if the Redskins do make a big move, I would not be stunned if Springs were released to create cap room - in fact people close to the player tell me he is bracing for it - and if Springs is not here you tell me who the elite coverage CB in the secondary would be?

Bottom line is that I think this offseason is far from over.

From my perspective, the two big issues I will be watching are a trade for a D Lineman, and, to a lesser degree, the possible firing of scouts and/or Vinny or Riddick. I asked Coach Joe about it again Sunday and he essentially said those rumors are not true, but I will still monitor the situation.

A lot of good info there. It concerns me that he thinks the DL will be better, and he's OK with the fact that the QB will hold the ball longer so we'll get more penetration...how about get a good DE and then we'll create more sacks and not need to worry about a qb holding the ball longer?
Bottom line, we need 1 more DE to make this team complete. We are OK or above average everywhere else.

The fact is, we won’t ever get to find out if someone less expensive could be found to replace Wynn because this team doesn’t see the need to get such a player. It’s my contention that just about any other team with a half-way decent front office could find someone who could give us more production. Now, judging by the record of this organization, I can actually understand how people here would doubt that this franchise could do it. My argument is, that player is out there – – whether Gibbs, Williams, or Cerrato can find him is another matter.

I think we'll just disagree on this. It is a subjective argument really.


The “leadership” thing is overrated. We saw what Renaldo’s great locker room leadership got us last year. I think that’s more fanspeak. People throw around the “leadership” word without really ever stopping to examine exactly what it means. What counts is production on the field. If Wynn were the type of player that the fans here have spent over 80 posts trying to convince everyone that he really is, then he’d still be starting. I believe this is just another demonstration of blinding loyalty to a player whose mystical, yet bogus contributions in the locker room far exceed any rational observation of his actual abilities on the field.

But on this I am simply stumped. For some reason "leadership" is valued in this LEAGUE. Not just on this team but in this LEAGUE. That is not a Skinscentric thing. By no means did I mean to say we should keep him for only "leadership" abilities. It is my contention that he does an average job playing-wise. By average I mean solid enough that finding a BETTER option would not be considered 'real easy' nor 'real hard'. I also contend that beyond his playing abilities he brings intangibles that have a positive impact on the team. No one has argued against this. It may have been argued how much he truely impacts the team positively but no one has argued that he does not have these intangibles at all. Your contention that his "leadership" did nothing for this team though is false logic. You implied that it had nothing to do with the record at all. That it had zero effect on the play of this team. How have you drawn this conclusion? For all we know we were a 2 win team that was led by guys like Wynn to an extra 3 wins. Hell maybe we were an 8 win team held back by the leadership. I have no idea since I was not in the locker room but I highly doubt any amount of quality "leadership" would cause a net loss of games. To assert that our record reflects the importance of such "leadership" is to ignore the overwhelming evidence that we had other issues that were insurmountable and that they were far more likely the cause of our 5-11 season. Not his "leadership" or lack of talent. We did not lose 11 games because Wynn can't play. It is silly to argue that "leadership" has no value when it is a common trait saught by NFL teams.

"leadership" is obviously not the be all/end all but it is one trait that teams look for. Solid guys who lead by example absolutely do positively impact a team. Anyone who has ever played an organized sport has experienced this. Obviously results on the field are what matters but having guys like Wynn can lead to better results on field. If Sean Taylor sees Wynn being a professional guy and putting his all into all the little details and he says to himself "Gee, that guy isn't the most talented in the world but he has stuck around. Maybe if I stepped up and did some things like him I could be even better than I am." then Wynn has contributed to the on field product.

If there were clearly better talent options out there then yeah we could probably stand to lose Wynn's "leadership" in favor of some more talent at the right price. But I am no where near convinced that there is someone out there who gives this team the value for the money now that he has restructured.

Is your contention that "leadership" is simply worthless or just way over-valued? If it is just over-valued then how do you rectify that teams league wide value it?


And it’s exactly that type of mentality that keeps this team in the losing column. Too many people in Redskin Park (and apparently here at the Warpath) favor loyalty and “locker room leadership” over results.

This is just silly. We obviously have more than just this one problem. Hell I know you've argued about other problems that this team has had.

From Jason LaCanfora's Washington Post Blog:

Also, Joe has not yet assured us entirely that they will have a full compliment of picks next year - exempting the 4th roudner they are already without from the horrible Duckett trade, of course - and I don't blame him. Shopping Springs hasn't and won't yield much and if they are going to make a play for a quality D Lineman in trade it will have to include 2008 picks.

So, who's out there?

Well, they have not expressed an iota of interest in franchised tackle Cory Redding (Motown) and end Justin Smith (Cincy). Carolina tackle Kris Jenkins (Maryland) is out there (although there are concerns about his weight and attitude among the Skins staff), but I have heard internally that people don't think tackle is near the need that end is. Would they look at the right tackle in the right deal? Sure, but the football people really want another end. It's their biggest need.

So, who do I think they might move for?

Well, I hear that things between Buffalo and pass-rushing end Aaron Schobel are getting dicey. He wants a new deal (he has 2 years left but is way underpaid compared to other players of his ilk) and I get the sense the Bills might eventually put more effort into dealing him. Now, would owner Ralph Wilson do a deal with Dan Snyder, one of his not-so-favorite-people? Maybe not. But I know Schobel was a stud in Gregg Williams's system and I know he would be welcome, if not coveted, around here. Going into next year with Carter and Daniels as starters and Demetric as the top backup might not work out.

Also, Oakland's Derrick Burgress, another pass rushing end, is pushing for a new contract and not showing up for voluntary OTAS and the like. The Raiders might try to make nice here, but he's a guy to watch.

Acquiring any of these kinds of players will be difficult and complicated and they won't come cheap. But they are the best options. Also, if the Redskins do make a big move, I would not be stunned if Springs were released to create cap room - in fact people close to the player tell me he is bracing for it - and if Springs is not here you tell me who the elite coverage CB in the secondary would be?

.

So this begs the question, one that is inexhaustably discussed on this site: Do the Redskins rely on the shoddy Dline they currently have, rely on their other Defensive strengths, and hope the Offense can carry them so that they can keep their draft picks for next year; OR do they make a move for one of these players and once again yeild their Draft picks for veterans in the hope that they will make an imediate impact and help to propell us into the Super Bowl?

I'd guess that most of you would prefer the former, and I'd have to agree with you. I am nervous about the strength of our DLine (More so for DE I think Golston has shown alot of potential), and I am worried that this may be the first pitfall casting us into another lousy or mediocre season, but we have alot of young talent on our team, and I would rather see us struggle for a season, and bolster our Dline in the draft next year then squander the picks yet again on vets that don't pan out.

But on this I am simply stumped. For some reason "leadership" is valued in this LEAGUE. Not just on this team but in this LEAGUE. That is not a Skinscentric thing. By no means did I mean to say we should keep him for only "leadership" abilities. It is my contention that he does an average job playing-wise. By average I mean solid enough that finding a BETTER option would not be considered 'real easy' nor 'real hard'. I also contend that beyond his playing abilities he brings intangibles that have a positive impact on the team. No one has argued against this. It may have been argued how much he truely impacts the team positively but no one has argued that he does not have these intangibles at all. Your contention that his "leadership" did nothing for this team though is false logic. You implied that it had nothing to do with the record at all. That it had zero effect on the play of this team. How have you drawn this conclusion? For all we know we were a 2 win team that was led by guys like Wynn to an extra 3 wins. Hell maybe we were an 8 win team held back by the leadership. I have no idea since I was not in the locker room but I highly doubt any amount of quality "leadership" would cause a net loss of games. To assert that our record reflects the importance of such "leadership" is to ignore the overwhelming evidence that we had other issues that were insurmountable and that they were far more likely the cause of our 5-11 season. Not his "leadership" or lack of talent. We did not lose 11 games because Wynn can't play. It is silly to argue that "leadership" has no value when it is a common trait saught by NFL teams.

"leadership" is obviously not the be all/end all but it is one trait that teams look for. Solid guys who lead by example absolutely do positively impact a team. Anyone who has ever played an organized sport has experienced this. Obviously results on the field are what matters but having guys like Wynn can lead to better results on field. If Sean Taylor sees Wynn being a professional guy and putting his all into all the little details and he says to himself "Gee, that guy isn't the most talented in the world but he has stuck around. Maybe if I stepped up and did some things like him I could be even better than I am." then Wynn has contributed to the on field product. I think you are misunderstanding Beems, FRPLG. As I understand it, his arguement is that "additional wins provided by Renaldo Wynn's leadership=0". I don't think he's saying that Wynn's leadership was responsible for a 5 win season.

For all of his leadership, it's likely not going to change our record any. But Wynn is a good character guy, who still does a lot of things well on the field. However, his value to this team is not a whole lot more than any old waiver wire dude we could get to replace him who may or may not provide leadership.

Does this mean we should up and replace Wynn? No, of course not! But it means that having Wynn and Daniels around does not mean our future DL situation is secure.

I think we'll just disagree on this. It is a subjective argument really.


But on this I am simply stumped. For some reason "leadership" is valued in this LEAGUE. Not just on this team but in this LEAGUE. That is not a Skinscentric thing. By no means did I mean to say we should keep him for only "leadership" abilities. It is my contention that he does an average job playing-wise. By average I mean solid enough that finding a BETTER option would not be considered 'real easy' nor 'real hard'. I also contend that beyond his playing abilities he brings intangibles that have a positive impact on the team. No one has argued against this. It may have been argued how much he truely impacts the team positively but no one has argued that he does not have these intangibles at all. Your contention that his "leadership" did nothing for this team though is false logic. You implied that it had nothing to do with the record at all. That it had zero effect on the play of this team. How have you drawn this conclusion? For all we know we were a 2 win team that was led by guys like Wynn to an extra 3 wins. Hell maybe we were an 8 win team held back by the leadership. I have no idea since I was not in the locker room but I highly doubt any amount of quality "leadership" would cause a net loss of games. To assert that our record reflects the importance of such "leadership" is to ignore the overwhelming evidence that we had other issues that were insurmountable and that they were far more likely the cause of our 5-11 season. Not his "leadership" or lack of talent. We did not lose 11 games because Wynn can't play. It is silly to argue that "leadership" has no value when it is a common trait saught by NFL teams.

"leadership" is obviously not the be all/end all but it is one trait that teams look for. Solid guys who lead by example absolutely do positively impact a team. Anyone who has ever played an organized sport has experienced this. Obviously results on the field are what matters but having guys like Wynn can lead to better results on field. If Sean Taylor sees Wynn being a professional guy and putting his all into all the little details and he says to himself "Gee, that guy isn't the most talented in the world but he has stuck around. Maybe if I stepped up and did some things like him I could be even better than I am." then Wynn has contributed to the on field product.

If there were clearly better talent options out there then yeah we could probably stand to lose Wynn's "leadership" in favor of some more talent at the right price. But I am no where near convinced that there is someone out there who gives this team the value for the money now that he has restructured.

Is your contention that "leadership" is simply worthless or just way over-valued? If it is just over-valued then how do you rectify that teams league wide value it?


This is just silly. We obviously have more than just this one problem. Hell I know you've argued about other problems that this team has had.

Ok, I'm about as over it as Renaldo Wynn is in arguing this point. If you see Renaldo Wynn as a field general who inspires and leads the troops into battle while still able to make some contributions himself, fine.

I think he's done, I think HE thinks he's done and knows he wouldn't be invited to any other training camp in the league. So he gladly accepts the pay cut, thanks his lucky stars that he'll be able to squeeze one more season's worth of paychecks into his checking account, further strengthening his future retirement.

Finally, no -- my last point isn't the only thing that's holding this team back. Certainly there are many, many reasons why we can't seem to right this ship. Saturday and Sunday's action being one of the primary reasons why ... it goes on and on.