|
|
Skinny Tee 03-03-2009, 10:45 AM Willis started games but so did Heyer and so did Jansen. Starting games doesnt mean anything. Theres tons of players in this league who have "started games."
Nothing i have seen or read about Willis gives even the slightest inkling he would be an upgrade over what we have. We don't need depth at OT. We need a starter. We can only carry so many OTs on our roster and if we add someone, it needs to be someone who provides a clear upgrade at the position. Willis is just another teams Stephon Heyer. Nothing more, nothing less. We don't need another backup.
As long as we can keep Justin Geseling from blocking Terrell Suggs late in the season then it's fine with me. I'll take anybody over that guy.
Jansen is through so he can't even be counted as an OT. The Skins don't even want this guy to touch the field.
BigHairedAristocrat 03-03-2009, 10:49 AM The defense was 4th in the league. The offense couldn't bust a grape. Bill Walsh's playcalling would have been lousy the way the line crumbled last year. I don't know how you can criticize playcalling when they barely had time to complete a three step drop.
I'm not going to argue that our offensive line didnt regress last year, but your point is exaggerated. Campbell had plenty of time to complete a three step drop 99.9% of the time. We didnt have a bad offensive line last year. It was just average.
2008 NFL Offensive Line Rankings (http://www.fftoolbox.com/football/2008/nfl-offensive-line-rankings.cfm?page=2)
15. Washington
The Redskins' offense was very inconsistent last year, putting up solid numbers in some areas and weak numbers in other areas. They finished 7th in rushing touchdowns, 12th in rushing yards, 13th in sacks allowed, and 14th in passing yards. On the other side of it, they were 20th in passing touchdowns and 27th in yards per carry. Much of that had to do with injuries, as the o-line was missing a few starters due to those injuries. If they come back healthy, the offense should definitely be more consistent.
The vast majority of the time, Campbell had more than enough time to get the play off. In fact, there are only one or two instances where he didnt have enough time for a 3-step drop - a staple of the WCO. The problem is, Campbell is a horrible fit for the WCO and he's never been comfortable taking 3 step drops. Campbell is a guy who needs more 5 and 7 step drops. He's not that quick. I cant count the number of times last year i yelled at the TV because campbell was holding on to the ball to long when he needed to make a decision. Campbells problem is that he locks on to one receiver and waits to see if he gets open or not... he will have to make much quicker decisions and anticipate the recevier breaking his route if he wants to have any success in 2009. Our O-line isnt great and it needs to be upgraded, but its good enough for our offense IF Campbell breaks his old habits and does what he needs to do.
BigHairedAristocrat 03-03-2009, 10:51 AM As long as we can keep Justin Geseling from blocking Terrell Suggs late in the season then it's fine with me. I'll take anybody over that guy.
Jansen is through so he can't even be counted as an OT. The Skins don't even want this guy to touch the field.
Thats an exaggeration in some post article (and I thought I was the only one who liked to exaggerate facts to prove a point). If they didnt think he was a capable backup, he'd be cut - We actually have the cap space to do it now. If we get rid of Jansen, then by all means, we should bring Willis in, but as of right now, we need to find someone who is an upgrade over Heyer and Jansen, if possible. If not, we need to hope Oher falls to us in the draft.
GTripp0012 03-03-2009, 01:24 PM Willis started games but so did Heyer and so did Jansen. Starting games doesnt mean anything. Theres tons of players in this league who have "started games."
Nothing i have seen or read about Willis gives even the slightest inkling he would be an upgrade over what we have. We don't need depth at OT. We need a starter. We can only carry so many OTs on our roster and if we add someone, it needs to be someone who provides a clear upgrade at the position. Willis is just another teams Stephon Heyer. Nothing more, nothing less. We don't need another backup.Seeing as how Jason Fabini started three games at RT, I would say depth should be a priority.
BigHairedAristocrat 03-03-2009, 02:13 PM Seeing as how Jason Fabini started three games at RT, I would say depth should be a priority.
Heyer and Jansen ARE the depth.
How many tackles do you think a team can carry on a 53 man roster? Unless your answer is 5, we only have room for one more OT. And unless you wholeheartedly beleive that Jansen or Heyer will be solid at RT all year, then we have no reason to bring in any "depth." We need to bring in a starter.
That Guy 03-03-2009, 02:26 PM Thats an exaggeration in some post article (and I thought I was the only one who liked to exaggerate facts to prove a point). If they didnt think he was a capable backup, he'd be cut - We actually have the cap space to do it now. If we get rid of Jansen, then by all means, we should bring Willis in, but as of right now, we need to find someone who is an upgrade over Heyer and Jansen, if possible. If not, we need to hope Oher falls to us in the draft.
sorry, but i disagree. jansen is cheaper to keep than cut. we don't need to cut him if we're still getting other players or waiting on draft picks (if we were going to take the hit, but its silly to take a hit and lose your OT depth for no reason).
BigHairedAristocrat 03-03-2009, 02:31 PM sorry, but i disagree. jansen is cheaper to keep than cut. we don't need to cut him if we're still getting other players or waiting on draft picks (if we were going to take the hit, but its silly to take a hit and lose your OT depth for no reason).
You misunderstand my point. Its obviously stupid to cut Jansen. The point i was making is that if Jansen is taking up a roster spot, then it would be foolish to bring in Willis. If jansen and Heyer are here - they are our depth. We need a starter.
If we decided Jansen wasnt even capable of being a backup, then at that point we would have to eat the cap hit and cut him. In that scenario, i would be in favor of bringing in Willis - but we would still need to draft an OT to start at RT.
The Goat 03-03-2009, 02:33 PM Seeing as how Jason Fabini started three games at RT, I would say depth should be a priority.
Truer words...
BigHairedAristocrat 03-03-2009, 02:35 PM Truer words...
A team can only afford to carry 4 OTs. Last year, Samuels and Jansen were our starters, so Fabini and Heyer were our depth.
This year, we know Jansen cannot start, so at this point, he IS our depth. We've "upgraded" our depth already by replacing Fabini with Jansen as a backup OT. Heyer is our other backup OT and there is no one available in free agency who is a noticable upgrade over Heyer... so anyone we bring in would just be another backup. Do you want 3 backup-caliber OTs and only one starting-caliber OT on our roster?
We need to bring in a starter, not more depth. I dont understand why some people just cant seem to grasp this concept. Am I not explaining it clearly or is there some huge hole in my logic that I dont see?
The Goat 03-03-2009, 02:50 PM A team can only afford to carry 4 OTs. Last year, Samuels and Jansen were our starters, so Fabini and Heyer were our depth.
This year, we know Jansen cannot start, so at this point, he IS our depth. We've "upgraded" our depth already by replacing Fabini with Jansen as a backup OT. Heyer is our other backup OT and there is no one available in free agency who is a noticable upgrade over Heyer... so anyone we bring in would just be another backup. Do you want 3 backup-caliber OTs and only one starting-caliber OT on our roster?
We need to bring in a starter, not more depth. I dont understand why some people just cant seem to grasp this concept.
I thing there's room for honest disagreement on this point. Yes Heyer has started in the past but has always struggled, especially in run-blocking. Willis out of Seattle started 10 games last year and played in all 16 but only gave up 1.5 sacks. I believe that's fewer than each of our o-lineman surrendured. Willis is also said to be a mauler in the running game. I don't even know whether the FO is looking at him but it wouldn't surprise me... personally i think he'll be an upgrade over our RT situation for the past 2 years.
... btw even if we grab Willis i'm still onboard for taking Oher, Smith @ 13. We do need to get another legit starter @ LB too.
|