And the Washington Redskins select....

FRPLG is right on the money. Depth is important, but not as important as having difference makers and game breakers. We all point to the Pats, but that is the only team you see like that. The other teams that are contending (Eagles, Steelers, Colts, Chargers, Falcons, etc.) have a number of big-time players. Mike Williams is the kind of player you get a shot at only once in a very long time. Especially since I believe, as most of us do, I think, that we will not be drafting so high for a while. We can get CB depth other places, we can get DE depth other places. What we cant get other places is that one player who will make our offense and all its players better, a la Moss or TO. I believe Wiliams is that.

Anyone know how Williams' speed compares to TOs'?

Depth is important, but not as important as having difference makers and game breakers. We all point to the Pats, but that is the only team you see like that.

What about Gibb's other 3 superbowls with the Skins? Rypien, Timmy Smith, Doug Williams...

Exactly. Those were cases of the players around them making them look better than they were. Not to say they weren't great players, but I can see Ramsey easily fitting into that list.

If Williams and Edwards are gone by that pick. Trade down and pick up something else. If we draft a receiver we need a stud. I'd even go as far as to get rid of our first this year as long as we got someones first next year plus some! (whatever the tradechart sees as plausible.)

What about Gibb's other 3 superbowls with the Skins? Rypien, Timmy Smith, Doug Williams...

I'm not saying that every player has to be a difference-maker. Those teams had big-name guys like Charles Mann, Darrell Green, Art Monk, Joe Jacoby, Wilber Marshall etc. and there are many I'm not naming. The fact that some of the critical players were no-names is undeniable, especially when you consider their performances in the Super Bowls, but what is also undeniable is that a lot of marquee guys played big roles in carrying those teams through the season and the playoffs. I'm just saying, its crucial to have as many guys as possible who can truly change a game.

yah i like derrick johnson i said earlier.... they compare him to lavar and say that he is small but he looked just like lavar at penn and he may be the best athlete in the draft and last year that was taylor and he showed up last year but if barrow is good to go i say drop down to get more picks and fix up more positions

I'm not saying that every player has to be a difference-maker. Those teams had big-name guys like Charles Mann, Darrell Green, Art Monk, Joe Jacoby, Wilber Marshall etc. and there are many I'm not naming. The fact that some of the critical players were no-names is undeniable, especially when you consider their performances in the Super Bowls, but what is also undeniable is that a lot of marquee guys played big roles in carrying those teams through the season and the playoffs. I'm just saying, its crucial to have as many guys as possible who can truly change a game.

What about Clinton Portis, Santana Moss, Chris Samuels, Jon Jansen, Randy Thomas, Cornelius Griffin, Marcus Washington, LaVar Arrington, Shawn Springs and Sean Taylor? That seems like a pretty good number of difference makers and marquee names for one team.

The critical difference between this team and those Super Bowl teams of the previous Gibbs era: a little nuisance called the salary cap. Free agency. Kind of hard to keep a roster full of marquee names and difference makers intact anymore.

As far as the teams you mentioned in your previous post, the Pats aren't the only team that exercises fiscal responsibility (God, I'm already sick of that term!) successfully. In fact, some of the contenders you mentioned-- the Eagles, the Steelers, the Chargers-- have all been cited over the past few years as teams that spend frugally and are willing to let their own free agents leave when they price themselves out of the team's cap budget. They are teams that draft well, and successfully promote from within-- both things the Skins have generally struggled to do. The Eagles spent a little more than usual last season-- buying T.O. and Kearse-- but only after letting three of their difference makers (Staley, Vincent and Taylor) roam to greener pastures.

If you look at the Colts and Falcons, how many difference makers or marquee names can you name on those teams' defenses? The Colts: Dwight Freeney? The Falcons: Patrick Kerney, Rod Coleman, Keith Brooking, DeAngelo Hall. Those teams spend most of their money on the offensive side of the ball. The Colts have more playmakers on offense than virtually any team in the league, but even they are struggling to keep that core intact. Pollard's almost been signed away, and the Colts are looking trade away the franchise-tagged James.

Excellent, well thought-out post, drew.

I actually agree with most of what you said, and I believe the Skins will in fact trade down from #9 and possibly pick up a second rounder. They might be able to garner an additional 3rd rounder in a Gardner trade, so that would give them some solid, quality picks with which to improve in various areas, rather than gambling on an expensive top-10 pick at receiver.

I see the Skins being very active on draft day, trying to maneuver (both down and up) into position to get the guys they've targeted to improve in areas of need and poor depth. While I think Mike Williams or Braylon Edwards could certainly improve the wide receiver situation, I think the Skins are wary of handing out a big signing bonus to a player at a position that has historically been a huge gamble in terms of bang for first-round buck.


I agree Drew and Joe! Do the names Gardner, Westbrook, and whatshisname from UMich mean anything when it comes to drafting WRs in the first round?

I agree Drew and Joe! Do the names Gardner, Westbrook, and whatshisname from UMich mean anything when it comes to drafting WRs in the first round?
Ah yes. Old whathisname. I was going to get his jersey, but "whatshisname" didn't fit.

Desmond Howard.

;)