The Real Problem of the Redskins ...

Errrr. We have to get 'football guys' first! I don't qualify Vinny for that!

Errrr. If you look at the post I was responding to you'd understand why my response was worded the way it was. But I do agree that the Skins dont have any football guys in positions that matter in the FO.

Let's disregard 2001 because that was clearly Marty's year and Cerrato wasn't even there.

But let's also not act like the Redskins are ignoring the lines either. You can make the argument that they're not effectively addressing the lines, but I think it's wrong to simply say they're ignoring them. Or to pretend that all we do is go after WRs

Dating back to 2002 we have drafted 4 WRs, 6 OL, and 4 DL.

Additionally, besides going after Moss, Patten, ARE, and Lloyd we have gone after Andre Carter, Pete Kendall, Jason Taylor, Todd Wade, Jason Fabini, Chris Wilson (plus UDFAs Alex Buzbee and Stephon Heyer)

All which leads me to two points

1. We are definitely not ignoring the trenches, we're just not addressing them correctly

2. Scott Campbell should be held largely accountable for a lot of the late round misses due to his time serving as the team's Director of College Scouting. So I'm not sure I can or should continue to defend his ascension up the Redskins food chain.

Addressing your lines in the draft doesn't consist of drafting Montgomery 5th and Golston in the 6th round of the draft. I like these guys as Redskins but they aren't exactly dominators of the game. On offense drafting Heyer, or the lack thereof since he was an undrafted free agent, doesn't count either.

Addressing a position should entail making it proficiently sound enough to stand on its own. I can even think of a OL or DL, under Snyderatto, that has been selected within the first 3 rounds (save Reinhardt).

Samuels was selected at LT with a first round pick. That position has not needed to be addressed for the last 10 years. Our lines are inefficient and need to be addressed with Day One draft talent. Until then they won't be considered addressed.

Addressing your lines in the draft doesn't consist of drafting Montgomery 5th and Golston in the 6th round of the draft. I like these guys as Redskins but they aren't exactly dominators of the game. On offense drafting Heyer, or the lack thereof since he was an undrafted free agent, doesn't count either.

Addressing a position should entail making it proficiently sound enough to stand on its own. I can even think of a OL or DL, under Snyderatto, that has been selected within the first 3 rounds (save Reinhardt).

Samuels was selected at LT with a first round pick. That position has not needed to be addressed for the last 10 years. Our lines are inefficient and need to be addressed with Day One draft talent. Until then they won't be considered addressed.

I can't tell if you actually read my post or not

I can't tell if you actually read my post or not

Yeah I did, but I just don't think the signing of several half-rate FA's (save Carter) is addressing and the position proprotion draft stats you showed were bias.

Bottom line we have not focused the direction of our team to be line centric. We love the skill player and are perpetually attracted to the glitz potential a star player can bring.


I like the recent Washingotn Post article about Sherman Smith and his remarks about the Titans. Following a tempalte like that should allow us to consistently win.

i think what smootsmack is saying is that we havent ignored our O line, just havent addressed the situation properly . .

what skinnytee is saying is that by not drafting day one O line talent we have ignored the situation . .

kind of a fine line difference in definition i suppose . . i do hope we use the 13th pick on a top end talent instead of trading back and ending up with solid but not great talent. our team is full of solid but not great talent. yeah i know you can find pro-bowl players in the 2nd and 3rd rounds and no 1st rounder is guaranteed to be a pro-bowler but id take 1 top tier talent over 2 could be's at this point.

go skins!!

Yeah I did, but I just don't think the signing of several half-rate FA's (save Carter) is addressing and the position proprotion draft stats you showed were bias.

Bottom line we have not focused the direction of our team to be line centric. We love the skill player and are perpetually attracted to the glitz potential a star player can bring.


I like the recent Washingotn Post article about Sherman Smith and his remarks about the Titans. Following a tempalte like that should allow us to consistently win.

My point was that they have invested heavily throught trades and free agency in our lines. For every Moss, Lloyd, Patten, and Randle El there is a Kendall, Carter, Griffin, and Jason Taylor. Additionally, they have addressed the lines through the draft and undrafted free agents as they've felt best (I'm not even accounting for times when they might have wanted to draft a DE, such as Gaines Adams, but couldn't; because that's all highly speculative). So I don't believe the issue is complete ignorance of the problem, it's "misunderestimation" of the problem or ineffective management of the problem.

I love having guys like Montgomery and Alexander on the team, but yeah in a perfect world those guys are strong backups.

Let's disregard 2001 because that was clearly Marty's year and Cerrato wasn't even there.

But let's also not act like the Redskins are ignoring the lines either. You can make the argument that they're not effectively addressing the lines, but I think it's wrong to simply say they're ignoring them. Or to pretend that all we do is go after WRs

Dating back to 2002 we have drafted 4 WRs, 6 OL, and 4 DL.

Additionally, besides going after Moss, Patten, ARE, and Lloyd we have gone after Andre Carter, Pete Kendall, Jason Taylor, Todd Wade, Jason Fabini, Chris Wilson (plus UDFAs Alex Buzbee and Stephon Heyer)

All which leads me to two points

1. We are definitely not ignoring the trenches, we're just not addressing them correctly

2. Scott Campbell should be held largely accountable for a lot of the late round misses due to his time serving as the team's Director of College Scouting. So I'm not sure I can or should continue to defend his ascension up the Redskins food chain.OK, let's disregard 2001 as Marty calling the shots. Since then we have drafted only two linemen earlier than the 4th round (Dockery in 2002 and Rinehart in 2008, both 3rd rounders). During that period, we have drafted the following non-linemen in the 1st three rounds:

WR (4) - Cliff Russell, Taylor Jacobs, Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly
DB (4) - Rashad Bauman, Sean Taylor, Carlos Rogers, Laron Landry
TE (2) - Chris Cooley, Fred Davis
QB (2) - Patrick Ramsey, Jason Campbell
RB (1) - Ladell Betts
LB (1) - Rocky McIntosh

Fourteen perimeter/skill position players vs. just two linemen is a disproportionate use of high draft choices, and it is the biggest reason that we are mired in mediocrity. Both NY and Philly have invested high draft choices on linemen during that same period, and both have made deep runs in the playoffs. Coincidence? I think not.

The same genius who had to have Brunell?

Sticking with Brunell was a mistake I am not going to defend. None the less, Gibbs was the only coach to succeed under Snyder. In large part because Snyder did not interfere in the football operations ie picking players soley because they were a big name star.

If there was a proper GM here under Gibbs' second coming he would have been a lot more successful. As it stood Danny boy was largely responsible for some of the gaffs Joe suffered from, by not be able to supply him with all the tools he needed.

Once again how many of Snyder's past coaches have done as well as Gibbs? For that matter, lets see how well many of his future coaches do.

Addressing your lines in the draft doesn't consist of drafting Montgomery 5th and Golston in the 6th round of the draft. I like these guys as Redskins but they aren't exactly dominators of the game. On offense drafting Heyer, or the lack thereof since he was an undrafted free agent, doesn't count either.

Addressing a position should entail making it proficiently sound enough to stand on its own. I can even think of a OL or DL, under Snyderatto, that has been selected within the first 3 rounds (save Reinhardt).

Samuels was selected at LT with a first round pick. That position has not needed to be addressed for the last 10 years. Our lines are inefficient and need to be addressed with Day One draft talent. Until then they won't be considered addressed.
Dockery was a 3rd round pick. I forget if that was Marty or Spurrier though.

Either way, the whole OL argument is largely overblown. Look at the Steelers and Cards, their offensive lines were terrible this year. But, they have elite players at key positions to compensate for that. Who is the most dominant DL left in the playoffs, Hatoli Ngata? Again, overblown when you have elite players who can compensate. We lack elite players and an elite scheme.

Dockery was a 3rd round pick. I forget if that was Marty or Spurrier though.

Either way, the whole OL argument is largely overblown. Look at the Steelers and Cards, their offensive lines were terrible this year. But, they have elite players at key positions to compensate for that. Who is the most dominant DL left in the playoffs, Hatoli Ngata? Again, overblown when you have elite players who can compensate. We lack elite players and an elite scheme.

At times Pitts oline was terrible but they've come together as of late. They are run blocking well, too.

Ngata is pretty good.