Vinny Cerrato

Really? Let's come out of the 80's glory years and look at recent history.

QB is the key to everything. In today's NFL you win with a great QB.
Patriots: got Brady and built around him, their OL & DL haven't been filled with Pro-Bowlers during their successful run.
Indy: Manning, then fill in the pieces
Steelers: couldn't get over the hump until Big Ben arrived and when he struggled, no matter how good the OL & DL are, they struggled.
Seattle: solid, but playoff caliber when Hasselbeck put it together.
Green Bay: One of the better OL & DL, but Favre sucks, they suck. Favre plays well they go deep into the playoffs.
Dallas: (as much as I hate it) very solid OL & front 7, Romo goes to Mexico with Jess and they choke.
Jaguars: I'd argue they have the best OL & front 7 in the NFL. They can't get over the hump. Garrard's play improves and now they are on the cusp of doing something special.
Bears: outside of the miracle D in 2006, with no QB, they struggle.

How does this apply to us? JC is coming to the point where it is $hit or get off the pot. Zorn needed to get him the weapons to be successful. JC should have learned the system and be primed for a Pro-Bowl performance in 2009, the receivers should be ready in 2009 after a year to adjust to the NFL and learn the system. Even if we have an average OL / DL, JC playing at a Pro-Bowl level with the weapons the FO has provided should put us deep in the playoffs.

I would consider getting a great QB & LB the only other part of building from the inside out. Teams need great QBs and need to protect them. If they dont the rest is meaningless. JC can have all the targets he wants but if he has no time to throw to them than they arent weapons.

I would consider getting a great QB & LB the only other part of building from the inside out. Teams need great QBs and need to protect them. If they dont the rest is meaningless. JC can have all the targets he wants but if he has no time to throw to them than they arent weapons.
"No time to throw" would indicate a poor OL. Our OL was above average with all the injuries and as long as Joe Bugel is our line coach, no matter the talent, will continue to be at worst, average. Stats from 2007:

Sacks Allowed - NFL Rank 13th
Sack % - 12th

Rush Yds - 12th
Pass Yds - 14th
INTs - 4th lowest

The only poor OL stat was Yards per Carry and that has as much to do with the playcalling as OL performance.

"No time to throw" would indicate a poor OL. Our OL was above average with all the injuries and as long as Joe Bugel is our line coach, no matter the talent, will continue to be at worst, average. Stats from 2007:

Sacks Allowed - NFL Rank 13th
Sack % - 12th

Rush Yds - 12th
Pass Yds - 14th
INTs - 4th lowest

The only poor OL stat was Yards per Carry and that has as much to do with the playcalling as OL performance.

Thanks for posting these stats, I was just looking for this. We were one of the least sacked teams in the NFL. I think what happened here was, we just yieled some very untimely sacks.

I think unfortunately what's reported is inaccurate. Better said, incomplete. The real story is that they were exploring multiple options to do what was best for their team. And they identified early on that improving the WR position was best for the team. So they looked at drafting one in the first round, trading down to pick up a WR later and pick up draft choices, discussing various trade options for established veterans. It's just like every other team did (should have done) throughout the past several weeks. But the sexy story is "multiple picks offered for Chad Johnson." It just doesn't tell the whole story.


I hope it is inaccurate. I just am of the camp that the way to build the team is focus on the draft first and than fill your holes with trades and free agents, as this method gives you more salary cap flexability and also injects youth into the lineup. I know that getting a proven WR may seem to be the safer route, I just hate it when someone gets that $10-20 million signing bonus and kicks their legs up knowing they are set for life and does not produce. Whereas if you draft a lower round pick (2 and below in my opinion) you often don't have to give a huge signing bonus and get 4-5 possible years of great production for a good value. Would Chad johnson be productive - probably, but what does everyone think he would cost - I heard in the range of a $20 million signing bonus, which to me is pretty excessive and if I had my way I would rather put that $20 million into multiple players (like a couple of lineman) instead. Just my opinion.

I hope it is inaccurate. I just am of the camp that the way to build the team is focus on the draft first and than fill your holes with trades and free agents, as this method gives you more salary cap flexability and also injects youth into the lineup. I know that getting a proven WR may seem to be the safer route, I just hate it when someone gets that $10-20 million signing bonus and kicks their legs up knowing they are set for life and does not produce. Whereas if you draft a lower round pick (2 and below in my opinion) you often don't have to give a huge signing bonus and get 4-5 possible years of great production for a good value. Would Chad johnson be productive - probably, but what does everyone think he would cost - I heard in the range of a $20 million signing bonus, which to me is pretty excessive and if I had my way I would rather put that $20 million into multiple players (like a couple of lineman) instead. Just my opinion.

I guarantee you it's inaccurate. You have my word.

Well, however we got here, we still have a needs on the d line, O line, LBs, and Dbs. We MAY have gotten a potential starter on the O line, but on the d line we drafted late and that's a long shot. Likewise with the safeties and CB.

So we had, what, 10 picks, with 3 in the 2nd round, and we didn't fill those needs. Or we could have done much more to fill them than we did. That's my worry with VC. They overvalued WRs and missed a good chance to meet some needs. Even if the WRs and TE do well (and we have too many WRs now, it looks like), we still have to do lots more to get younger and to get better "from the inside out".

UDFAs are an even longer shot than drafted players, and camp cuts are generally cut for a reason. It's rare to pick someone up who is anything more than a stop-gap type player.

Next year, I hope we draft more towards the O/D lines, and I think we should explore a serious impact FA for our defensive front 7. At least we haven't added a huge FA cap hit a la AA or Lloyd!

I liked that Cerrato made the trades, but I do feel like he might have stuck to close to the draft trade chart. With what the Panthers gave up for the nineteenth pick I felt like the most we needed to throw in to get the fourth round pick should have been the fifth rounder.

You arew 100% correct. Everyone (except the Skins, even though they used to know it) knows that you build a team from the inside out. That means having strong O & D lines and then filling in around them. All the successful teams have done it that way and I doubt that formula for success will change anytime soon.
And Bill Parcells who always advocated building from the outside in. The lines are important, not disputing that, but skill position players put points on the board and keep them off..

The best O-line for most of this decade was the KC Chiefs, what did they win? The best D-line has been in Tampa for most of the decade, TB won once.

You've got to have better skill position (QB and LB) and perimeter players (WR & CB) than your opponent in order to win and win consistently.

And Bill Parcells who always advocated building from the outside in. The lines are important, not disputing that, but skill position players put points on the board and keep them off..

The best O-line for most of this decade was the KC Chiefs, what did they win? The best D-line has been in Tampa for most of the decade, TB won once.

You've got to have better skill position (QB and LB) and perimeter players (WR & CB) than your opponent in order to win and win consistently.

Which leads me to a question, does defense really win championships? I'll save that for another thread.

Which leads me to a question, does defense really win championships? I'll save that for another thread.I think the 2000 Ravens will tell you it most certainly can.