Vinny Cerrato

What's more amazing to me is despite most draft experts saying the Redskins had a good draft, there are still people out there bashing away at everything the team does.I dunno man, most of the people who bash the team on everything they do seem pretty happy with the draft.

I'm not impressed by the haul, but I AM impressed by the job that Vinny did. Trading down three separate times, and attacking a need to make sure it wouldn't be a need anymore, all signs of a great GM in the making.

Yeah but, and no offense, you tend to get so mired in the details when it comes to the draft and all these players that if the draft doesn't go according to how you'd draft it, you'll naturally be unimpressed.

If you step back and check out the forest for the trees, we acquired some weapons at key areas, which will expand the various methods we can employ to attack a defense.

If you focus on what we didn't get, I think you miss the point of the draft. Instead focus on what we did get. It was a number of very talented players who will be paid on the cheap.

Vinny is a likeable guy. I thought he did well in the draft this year. However...I still judge the skins and the FO on wins and losses. Vinny hasn't really done a good job (we don't know exactly what his role has been in the past), b/c we haven't really been too successful. There's really no way to argue to the contrary. Hopefully we're headed in the right direction.

I dunno man, most of the people who bash the team on everything they do seem pretty happy with the draft.

A couple of people gave the Redskins an 'F' here in our draft grade poll, granted those were only a select few, but still a sign that the team can seemingly do no right for some. And what the hell is up JLC's ass?

A couple of people gave the Redskins an 'F' here in our draft grade poll, granted those were only a select few, but still a sign that the team can seemingly do no right for some. And what the hell is up JLC's ass?He seems frustrated and pessimistic, but he is right on everything he said. I didn't have a problem with the draft plan, but had we deviated from it in a few places, we could have done much better. I agree with him on that.

But if the first-day gamble does not work, then those moves in the second round could be long remember(ed) as well, for very different reasons.That is factual, is it not?

I'm getting the vibe that people are very willing right now to throw out the possibility that this draft might not look as good in three years as it does right now.

What's more amazing to me is despite most draft experts saying the Redskins had a good draft, there are still people out there bashing away at everything the team does.


Oh God the draft was horrible, we suck, Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly will be the next Desmond Howard and Michael Westbrook, Fred Davis can't hold David LaFleur's jockstrap.....

:D


(Just thought I would get that out of the way... :D )

There's always, always a pick here or there that people just won't be happy with. Just two years ago, maybe it's been three now, people jumped all over the Texans for taking Mario Williams over Bush. Now that choice 'aint looking so bad, especially since Bush isn't an every down back like most initially thought.

Wilbon (who I respect more than most talking heads) is a big Cerrato supporter. I for one am VERY happy with the draft. I love the bolstering of offense we've put in. Our problem under Gibbs was not being able (or willing) to score enough points to win the game. We didn't lose many games 31-28, it was moreso 21-13 or 17-13. If we can score 24-28 PPG we're going to win a bunch of football games in '08. Our defense has more than enough talent to keep 21 points off the board most weeks.

Yeah but, and no offense, you tend to get so mired in the details when it comes to the draft and all these players that if the draft doesn't go according to how you'd draft it, you'll naturally be unimpressed.

If you step back and check out the forest for the trees, we acquired some weapons at key areas, which will expand the various methods we can employ to attack a defense.

If you focus on what we didn't get, I think you miss the point of the draft. Instead focus on what we did get. It was a number of very talented players who will be paid on the cheap.I feel that's a fair criticism of me, but again, when I see the potential for a great draft, and all we can do is fill a mid level need for the future with it, I'm (naturally) going to be disappointed.

I mean, there's the train of thought that you filled a critical need cheaply, but you have to ask yourself if the need was actually filled, and at what cost. Yes, the "red zone weapons" need was filled, but it cost THREE second round draft picks. Was the red zone weapons need worth three second round draft picks? A rational person would say no.

I think who we didn't draft is a very critical factor in evaluating a draft. If it wasn't, no one would every have a bad draft. I'm not advocating hindsight three years from now if Calais Campbell becomes an all-pro. That's pretty pointless. I'm looking at a roster that is seven deep with competent receivers, and I'm just thinking to myself, as we all should be:

"If Santana Moss gets back on track this year, where are we going to play him? If Randle El continues to play well, where are we going to play him?"

Fact: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends don't have the impact on the game to make the offense score ten more points per game than it did last season. People don't have any clue what they are talking about. That's just not the way things work.

What we didn't do was add any significant help for a front seven that is starting 4 players over the age of thirty, and a 5th next year when Andre Carter hits 30. That matters. It really does.

Yes, we can address those needs next year, but do you have any confidence that we will?

He seems frustrated and pessimistic, but he is right on everything he said. I didn't have a problem with the draft plan, but had we deviated from it in a few places, we could have done much better. I agree with him on that.

[In response, JLC's assertion that this draft is big gamble]

That is factual, is it not?

I'm getting the vibe that people are very willing right now to throw out the possibility that this draft might not look as good in three years as it does right now.

It may not look that good in three years. Of course that's possible. I have yet to anyone say - Wow brilliant these guys are starters from day one. Rather its: I like what they have done, I think they have created a situation where have improved teh chances of this draft being successful.

By trading down and gaining multiple picks, VC did just what Schneed said - they attacked a need with quality picks. Since the draft is a gamble in the first place, VC did what good gamblers do and create better odds in their favor.

Could it still fall flat? Yup. Is that an indictment of the team's scouting dept.? Yup. As head of scouting, ultimately, if it fails is in Vinny's court? Yup.
But strictly from the draft management aspect of it, Vinny did a good job of getting targeted guys in good spots. Gotta give him a thumbs up on that.