2010 NFL Off-Season Rumors and Reports (Week 5)

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by DCSportsFan98

carters more of a tweener and benefited alot from AH. i love that were switching to the 3-4. orakpo blitzing from the olb position is going to be devastating

I don't know how much of a tweener Carter is. He didn't do well as an OLB in San Fran. I think he is a 4-3 DE.

Orakpo is so talented that he will thrive in any defense. I am worried about our D-line if we ship out or misuse AC and AH. I just think that is the wrong move this year.

[DCSportsFan98]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

I don't know how much of a tweener Carter is. He didn't do well as an OLB in San Fran. I think he is a 4-3 DE.

Orakpo is so talented that he will thrive in any defense. I am worried about our D-line if we ship out or misuse AC and AH. I just think that is the wrong move this year.

well kemo is going to be our NT. daniels can be an end and if we trade AH i see us using the pick or the highest pick we get to replace him

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

What's going to be more devastating is if Haynesworth leaves via trade and we don't get an equal replacement.

Really? Consider 10 facts that provide indisputable proof that the Redskins will be just fine without Albert Haynesworth.

Fact 1: we were 4-12 with haynesworth playing his natural position as 4-3 DT.

Fact 2: Given that, Haynesworth alone likely wouldnt make the teams final record any better playing out of position in the 3-4.

Fact 3: The redskins generally had top 10 defenses for years without any semblence of a pass rush. Its our offense that is primarily to blame for our recent mediocrity.

Fact 4: Last year, 28 teams finished with a record better than the Redskins without Albert Haynesworth or an "equivalent" DT.

Fact 5: Every NFL team that has ever won a conference championship or superbowl has done so without Albert Haynesworth.

Fact 6: With or without Haynesworth, the defense doesn't have the personnel to run the 3-4. its probably going to be pretty bad whether he's on the team or not. Simply put, he won't make much of a difference to this team in 2010.

Fact 7: By hiring shanahan and trading for McNabb, we've signaled that we are going to become an offensive team. Unfortunately, we don't have a single starting quality tackle on our offense. Last time i checked, Albert Haynesworth does not play left or right tackle. he will not protect our franchise QB, donovan mcnabb. An offensive linemen acquired (directly or indirectly) as a result of trading Haynesworth could.

Fact 8: Albert Haynesworth is not Chuck Norris.

Fact 9: Albert Haynesworth is not Jack Bauer.

Fact 10: If Facts 1-7 do not convince you that the Redskins will do just fine without Haynesworth, read and meditate on Facts 8 and 9. There really is no arguing with them.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Really? Consider 10 facts that provide indisputable proof that the Redskins will be just fine without Albert Haynesworth.

Fact 1: we were 4-12 with haynesworth playing his natural position as 4-3 DT.

Fact 2: Given that, Haynesworth alone likely wouldnt make the teams final record any better playing out of position in the 3-4.

Fact 3: The redskins generally had top 10 defenses for years without any semblence of a pass rush. Its our offense that is primarily to blame for our recent mediocrity.

Fact 4: Last year, 28 teams finished with a record better than the Redskins without Albert Haynesworth or an "equivalent" DT.

Fact 5: Every NFL team that has ever won a conference championship or superbowl has done so without Albert Haynesworth.

Fact 6: With or without Haynesworth, the defense doesn't have the personnel to run the 3-4. its probably going to be pretty bad whether he's on the team or not. Simply put, he won't make much of a difference to this team in 2010.

Fact 7: By hiring shanahan and trading for McNabb, we've signaled that we are going to become an offensive team. Unfortunately, we don't have a single starting quality tackle on our offense. Last time i checked, Albert Haynesworth does not play left or right tackle. he will not protect our franchise QB, donovan mcnabb. An offensive linemen acquired (directly or indirectly) as a result of trading Haynesworth could.

Fact 8: Albert Haynesworth is not Chuck Norris.

Fact 9: Albert Haynesworth is not Jack Bauer.

Fact 10: If Facts 1-7 do not convince you that the Redskins will do just fine without Haynesworth, read and meditate on Facts 8 and 9. There really is no arguing with them.

After such a wonderful list, did you remember we also lost Cornelius Griffin. No Griffin, No Haynesworth, do you think Montgomery can step up? I like Golston and Alexander (moving to LB), the rest are question marks or too old (Daniels) for the NT position.

[44ever]

They would have to be crazy to get rid of this guy. One of the Best in the biz IMO.
NFL Trade Rumors: Could Asante Samuel Be Part of a Draft-Day Trade? | Bleacher Report

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by 44ever

They would have to be crazy to get rid of this guy. One of the Best in the biz IMO.
NFL Trade Rumors: Could Asante Samuel Be Part of a Draft-Day Trade? | Bleacher Report

ouch

"The whole team needs to improve from the front office, to the head coach, to the players," Samuel told CSNPhilly.com's Derrick Gunn.

[CRedskinsRule]

Adam_Schefter

The New Orleans Saints have re-signed restricted free agent offensive tackle Jermon Bushrod. Only OT they haven't signed is Jammal Brown.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

There are reasons Shanahan, Haslett, and Bruce Allen were all fired from their most recent NFL jobs. What we are seeing here is part of that. That said, all of them represent improvements over their predecessors. While i Think its completely foolish to switch to a 3-4 in 2010, i think that by the time the roster is finalized, we'll have more of the pieces in place to make the team successful.

I really think shanahan's offense will be able to score around 28 points per game. our defense will probably be one of the league's worst this year. i fully expect the switch to the 3-4 to cost us some games, though. hopefully the long-term benefit will be worth it.

I agree with you on the second paragraph, but not so much the first. They definitly are better then our last duo. However I think Allen was let go the same time Gruden was let go. Ownership chose to go in a different direction completely. Similar to our situation with Cerrato. I'm in no way saying Cerrato was awsome and he simply got thrown out with the bath water. I actually think Tampa made a mistake letting him go, but I guess that would mean the Raiders did also. So I could be wrong. Shanahan on the other hand is different. I think he probably would have been allowed to stay had he fired the DC like the owner wanted and brought in someone more qualified. Instead Shanahan was too loyal and wouldn't fire the DC. The owner got tired of the SSDD so he let Shanahan go. He never should have let Shanahan go.

Haslett has his issues. No where has he been that his defenses were top 5. If I'm not mistakent they even drifted down the chart. I'm actually worried about the defensive side of the ball. I hope and pray it turns out dominant but if it's not .... is Shanahan prepared to fire someone and bring in someone better? or will he be too loyal again?

[Longtimefan]

Just finished watching the Tuesday edition of Redskins Nation with Larry Michael. He spoke to the issue of Laron Landry, saying he's been at Redskin Park working out every day and does not know how the rumors got started that he was not, or that he left at one point in time.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

What's going to be more devastating is if Haynesworth leaves via trade and we don't get an equal replacement.

I just don't get this arguement? No we won't have someone AH's size and agility on the OL, but I don't see how we will be helpless? We essentially will have Daniels, kemoeatu, Bryant, Jarmin, Carter, and Orakpo.

Seeing a line of

Daniels, Kemoeatu/Bryant, Jarmin

with LB's of Orakpo and Carter?

Still dominating. Obviously not AH dominating but still dominating.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I agree with you on the second paragraph, but not so much the first. They definitly are better then our last duo. However I think Allen was let go the same time Gruden was let go. Ownership chose to go in a different direction completely. Similar to our situation with Cerrato. I'm in no way saying Cerrato was awsome and he simply got thrown out with the bath water. I actually think Tampa made a mistake letting him go, but I guess that would mean the Raiders did also. So I could be wrong. Shanahan on the other hand is different. I think he probably would have been allowed to stay had he fired the DC like the owner wanted and brought in someone more qualified. Instead Shanahan was too loyal and wouldn't fire the DC. The owner got tired of the SSDD so he let Shanahan go. He never should have let Shanahan go.

Haslett has his issues. No where has he been that his defenses were top 5. If I'm not mistakent they even drifted down the chart. I'm actually worried about the defensive side of the ball. I hope and pray it turns out dominant but if it's not .... is Shanahan prepared to fire someone and bring in someone better? or will he be too loyal again?

We aren't even to the draft, and question of which coach will be fired first...

I guess I wonder, Shanahan basically had all year to contemplate which coaches he would want. Now I have no clue how much time he actually spent doing that, but he certainly wasn't disregarding football. So my question is, if after a year away, and time and resources to "get his guy", if Haslett doesn't pan out, why would any other coach he choose be better.

Finally, I am not sold on Haslett, but I'll at least wait til the season to see how he performs.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

We aren't even to the draft, and question of which coach will be fired first...

I guess I wonder, Shanahan basically had all year to contemplate which coaches he would want. Now I have no clue how much time he actually spent doing that, but he certainly wasn't disregarding football. So my question is, if after a year away, and time and resources to "get his guy", if Haslett doesn't pan out, why would any other coach he choose be better.

Finally, I am not sold on Haslett, but I'll at least wait til the season to see how he performs.

Uh, I didn't say I wouldn't? My comment was based off of someone elses comment in regards to Allen, Shanahan, and Haslett not being all that great cause they were fired from their last jobs.

I pointed out that I think Allen is going to be great for us. I respect Shanahan and have always liked what he's brought to the table. So I don't think our Offense will be a problem for the future. My only concern and still is my only concern is defense. I don't have any say in what happens if it works out or not. I think you even eluded to the fact that you have some concern about Haslett as our DC.

Going back to what I was talking about I refered to Shanahan not wanting to fire his DC while in Denver. It's fact. Shanahan stayed too loyal to his DC and got fired. Had Shanahan fired his DC ( who by the way was not getting it done over several seasons) then he might still be working in Denver.

I in no way implied after one season we should can Haslett. What I said was he really has not done anything in the NFL to speak of with any of his defenses and I'm a little concerned. I hope that if ever the time comes that Shanahan has to make a decision about letting someone go who is not getting the job done he does. I'd rather keep Shanahan who is a proven HC vs. having to fire him cause he's being too loyal.

and yes there are better people out there who can do the job better then Haslett.... they just weren't available.

[CRedskinsRule]

fair enough, mine was a knee jerk post on a slow moving day.

[jdc65]

I am comfortable with Shanahan as Head Coach and Kyle as Offensive Co-ordinator, but I do have serious reservations about Haslett as Defensive Co-ordinator. His track record suggests he is a short-timer, and his defenses are good the first year or two, but then get progressively worse until he is canned in year 3 or 4.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I just don't get this arguement? No we won't have someone AH's size and agility on the OL, but I don't see how we will be helpless? We essentially will have Daniels, kemoeatu, Bryant, Jarmin, Carter, and Orakpo.

Seeing a line of

Daniels, Kemoeatu/Bryant, Jarmin

with LB's of Orakpo and Carter?

Still dominating. Obviously not AH dominating but still dominating.

Daniels-OLD
Kemoeatu-Coming back from major injury
Bryant-4th or 5th team he's in, what is that tell you?
Jarmon-Same as Kemoeatu
Carter- Might be gone