Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

So no way he is playing in Bills game I would think even if he seems better - cant afford it becoming worse - wonder if that is going to affect what we see out of RG-3 and the offensive playcalling - anyway good news i guess - sad state of affairs with the line when a minor injury is good news - lol

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Paintrain;928912]With Chester going down in practice today with a left leg injury (severity TBD) [U][B]I think we can blame bad luck[/B][/U] more than poor planning. It's impossible to be two starters deep at every position group and no other team has injuries to 3 starting linemen. I'm fine with how we've addressed our depth with players with NFL starts (Polumbus, Smith, Hurt) and drafted rookies (LeReibus, Gettis, Compton) who will back up the starters. I also refuse to hit the regular season panic button until September.[/quote]

It's definitely a little bad luck.

But it's hard to say it's just luck -- if injuries decimate our O-line every single year. Injuries are not *that* random -- it's not rocket science -- players who are older and have hx injuries are more likely to get injured again. JBrown/Licht were injured last year, and CChester is one year from 30yrs old. Just saying that it's not completely surprising, without considering "luck" at all. Just hate when we tend to blame some "curse" and "bad luck" instead of admitting this could have been expected.


Anyway, I agree with you - we've drafted some O-line depth, and now's the time to see our depth. Not panicking yet, with a mobile QB and a coach who creates O-lines out of scraps. It could be exciting to finally see developing youth on the O-line, as long as our QB stays upright.


Just don't blame luck, unless it's someone named Luck on the other team.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=ethat001;928947]It's definitely a little bad luck.

But it's hard to say it's just luck -- if injuries decimate our O-line every single year. Injuries are not *that* random -- it's not rocket science -- players who are older and have hx injuries are more likely to get injured again. JBrown/Licht were injured last year, and CChester is one year from 30yrs old. Just saying that it's not completely surprising, without considering "luck" at all. Just hate when we tend to blame some "curse" and "bad luck" instead of admitting this could have been expected.


Anyway, I agree with you - we've drafted some O-line depth, and now's the time to see our depth. Not panicking yet, with a mobile QB and a coach who creates O-lines out of scraps. It could be exciting to finally see developing youth on the O-line, as long as our QB stays upright.


Just don't blame luck, unless it's someone named Luck on the other team.[/quote]
I'd say the only injury gamble is Brown. Lichtenstieger is only 26 or 27. All of the backups are under 27. Even Chester being 'almost' 30 isn't a negative. My point was if the Eagles or Texans or Chiefs lost 3 starters on their OL during camp would everyone be bemoaning they didn't have depth or would they say they had a bad stretch of luck?

When we were trotting Samuels, Jansen, Rabach and freaking Pete Kendall out there (not so long ago) you could say that age was a factor in injuries. Hard to blame roster composition for what's going on today.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Injuries happen. If you pay attention to news around the league there are many other teams with bigger injury concerns right now.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Mattyk;928950]Injuries happen. If you pay attention to news around the league there are many other teams with bigger injury concerns right now.[/quote]


This happens every year and some people seem to forget. In preseason if a body part has so much as a mosquito bite on it it's grounds to sit out for a preseason game. In the regular season the criteria is weather or not the injured body part in question is still attached to the body. I know we overuse it but Chester will be fine.

Allow me to demonstrate with pictures

Preseason
[IMG]https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTGqLPLCqoXP6mcFyAP8D2rz79uKVVO2OIZwQkcT1RmzdXEEdnf1g[/IMG]

Regular Season
[IMG]https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4XxGnMi-aKxKogC6h8jCSGGZOMQ5BkAevQWmwHG3JfJZZxx0UqQ[/IMG]

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Kory and Chester are unlucky.
Jammal Brown was predictable.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=ethat001;928947]It's definitely a little bad luck.

But it's hard to say it's just luck -- if injuries decimate our O-line every single year. Injuries are not *that* random -- it's not rocket science -- players who are older and have hx injuries are more likely to get injured again. JBrown/Licht were injured last year, and CChester is one year from 30yrs old. Just saying that it's not completely surprising, without considering "luck" at all. Just hate when we tend to blame some "curse" and "bad luck" instead of admitting this could have been expected.


Anyway, I agree with you - we've drafted some O-line depth, and now's the time to see our depth. Not panicking yet, with a mobile QB and a coach who creates O-lines out of scraps. It could be exciting to finally see developing youth on the O-line, as long as our QB stays upright.


Just don't blame luck, unless it's someone named Luck on the other team.[/quote]

Word. Those who mainline Kool-aid would try to simplify your argument to just age, but Kory coming off an (major, sometimes career-ending) injury is arguably a bigger concern/red-flag than age taken alone i.e. Kory was unlucky last year, not in 2012. There's also a pretty solid argument to make that not adding a reliable starter at RT was a major oversight. I hear Yoda saying, "[I]Don't try, dooo[/I] right now hehe.

Yeah, there's a lot more than "Luck," which is just Superstition's Irish cousin, at work here.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

The offensive line will come together. Hopefully in the interior of the line, LeRibeus and Gettis can show what they can do. Figure Maurice Hurt in the mix. I'm not too worried about Lichtensteiger or Chester. Brown was given too much credit. Considering that he's missed a lot of games, Shanahan should have considered that Brown would have a set back. It was bound to happen.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

I it makes anyone feel better the Cowpukes are having some severe problems of there own with the interior line.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

There seems to be some debate as to whether or not Chris Williams will become available at some point during the preseason. Apparently, he's going to lose out the starting job to J'Marcus Webb and some teams are wondering whether he will become available. Some pretty weak evidence here: [URL="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-08-05/sports/ct-spt-0806-bears-chicago--20120806_1_tackle-offensive-coordinator-mike-tice-frank-omiyale"]Source[/URL], but who knows, maybe he will get released or traded.

If he does become available (a long shot, I think) how much interest would you have in a former first round pick?

I think he'd be a good pickup to be the swing tackle, if he comes here for free. I don't want to trade a draft pick for him unless it's a really low one. Unfortunately, I don't see the Bears thinking that a 6th/7th round pick would be worth giving up on a guy they spent the 14th pick on a few years ago. However, stranger things have happened, if he's released, I'd love to sign him.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Well, Chester's setback will help rookies like LeRibeus or Gettis to get some good experience.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[url=http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tandlers-real-redsk/2012/08/can-the-offense-survive-with-polumbus.html#tp]Can the offense survive with Polumbus? - Rich Tandler's Real Redskins[/url]

good read, valid points

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Chico23231;929052][url=http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tandlers-real-redsk/2012/08/can-the-offense-survive-with-polumbus.html#tp]Can the offense survive with Polumbus? - Rich Tandler's Real Redskins[/url]

good read, valid points[/quote]

I just read the same thing and was about to post it.. What's always funny is the same people who rip Jammal Brown are the ones most concerned that he's out. From the metrics, Polumbus is an adequate replacement and in the games where he struggled, Brown would probably have the same struggles based on who he was facing.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

The same analysis is due for Hurt and Smith.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Chico23231;929052][URL="http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tandlers-real-redsk/2012/08/can-the-offense-survive-with-polumbus.html#tp"]Can the offense survive with Polumbus? - Rich Tandler's Real Redskins[/URL]

good read, valid points[/quote]

Definitely good read. People seem to forget that JB hasn't really been all that great when in the starting lineup to begin with. Are we really going to miss him?

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Mattyk;929099]Definitely good read. People seem to forget that JB hasn't really been all that great when in the starting lineup to begin with. [B] Are we really going to miss him?[/B][/quote]

No


I'll admit years ago when we made that trade I was like "Wow we have two great bookend tackles." Then when I heard that we were moving JB to RT I thought it was ridiculous moving a RT to LT and a LT to RT (Trent Williams in College; JB in college and new orleans). So I was like whatever this is still good we have two very solid tackles, one of which has been to 2 probowls. The whole time I heard he had a hip injury I figured that it would just go away and be less worse than having a torn ACL. Boy have I been wrong and really underestimated that injury. At first I thought we clearly got the better of New Orleans in that trade; looking back, man we really got shat on. But who could blame us for trading a couple of mid rounders for a two time probowl LT. Next year RT MUST be the top priority of both FA and the draft. Jammal is done. Simple as that. No way he comes back and ever finishes even a half season again.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

I think we'll be okay up front. Not stellar, but good enough to keep defenders from breathing down RG's neck on every play.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

With our running game coming along, RG3 elusive nature, and hopefully the defense keeping us on relatively short field, things could still work out.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

I guess what I have been seeing concerning Brown's absence is not so much: "Boy, are we going to miss him!". Instead it seems to me to be more: "They knew Brown wasn't the solution two years ago and they should have done something about it then. They didn't and now we're stuck with Polumbus/Smith which is an unnecessary risk."

Too me, the article simply reinforces my belief that the offense - and more importantly, RGIII - will, in fact, survive with Polumbus at RT. He will need help at times, but he simply will not cause the offense to stall in the way that the lack of a true deep threat at WR has.

Does Polumbus make us a "better" offense? No. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Does he makes a bad offense? Again, No.

Also, from what I have been reading in other articles - and maybe I am misinterperting it - the lineman's struggles have been highlighted in the one v. one drills. While important, those drills really aren't reflective of "Line Play". Yes, sometimes you have to man up and everyone needs to blow their guy off the line, but most [I]effective[/I] line play is about the line working together. As I understand it, this is particular true in the ZB system.

Again, let's wait and see what they look like against Buffalo. Even in playing vanilla offense & defense, we need to see that the line can be effective together.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Polumbus may be better then Jammal Brown.
But moving Polumbus to starter weakens the depth.
And its my hope that endstate for RT isn't to just 'get by'.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

I guess I think, for this year, it is "just get by" b/c we had more pressing needs in other areas [[I]EDIT - in the opinion of the FO[/I]].

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;929110]I guess what I have been seeing concerning Brown's absence is not so much: "Boy, are we going to miss him!". Instead it seems to me to be more: "They knew Brown wasn't the solution two years ago and they should have done something about it then. They didn't and now we're stuck with Polumbus/Smith which is an unnecessary risk."

Too me, the article simply reinforces my belief that the offense - and more importantly, RGIII - will, in fact, survive with Polumbus at RT. He will need help at times, but he simply will not cause the offense to stall in the way that the lack of a true deep threat at WR has.

Does Polumbus make us a "better" offense? No. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Does he makes a bad offense? Again, No.

Also, from what I have been reading in other articles - and maybe I am misinterperting it - the lineman's struggles have been highlighted in the one v. one drills. While important, those drills really aren't reflective of "Line Play". Yes, sometimes you have to man up and everyone needs to blow their guy off the line, but most [I]effective[/I] line play is about the line working together. As I understand it, this is particular true in the ZB system.

Again, let's wait and see what they look like against Buffalo. Even in playing vanilla offense & defense, we need to see that the line can be effective together.[/quote]

I agree, it's more important that the line play together as a unit vs what guys do in individual drills.

As for the JB situation, I'm sure the cap penalty hurt our plans. And really the only great fit would have been Winston, and he signed without even coming in for a visit.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

If we didn't get nailed with the bogus $18mil cap penalty, Winston would be here.

Once that stuck, likely signings like Vincent Jackson and Winston were not possible. They have have been, but we had to be smarter with our signings and overall, we were. Garcon+Morgan are a nice consolation to Jackson. We also had the secondary to address and we did what we could with the money we had left.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=CrustyRedskin;929023]I it makes anyone feel better the Cowpukes are having some severe problems of there own with the interior line.[/quote]

:food-smil

Yessir!

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=12thMan;929109]With our running game coming along, RG3 elusive nature, and hopefully the defense keeping us on relatively short field, things could still work out.[/quote]

I hope the running game is coming along - seems like they might be the second most injury prone unit on the team..........RG-3 rookie or not is going to make such a difference. I just keep saying to myself that Rex won 5 games and we were within inches from winning about 6 or 7 more. I think RG-3 is those inches we need, and apparently I think that I am Al Pacino giving a speech in Any Given Sunday...........

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

^^ My favorite sports movie...

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Dude, Im sorry, but that movie is absolutely horrible. My god was that movie bad.......

Oliver Stone himself wishes he could have a mulligan on that one.....

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Yeah but the speech is fantastic!

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Mechanix544;929154]Dude, Im sorry, but that movie is absolutely horrible. My god was that movie bad.......

Oliver Stone himself wishes he could have a mulligan on that one.....[/quote]

Agreed... terrible movie

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Griffin reminds me alot of Willie Beamen actually.

edit.........

just wanted to bring Willie Beamen into the equation here. I dont think RG-3 is anything like the Beamen character so before I get to beat up on this I had to add this edit. What about Cap Rooney and Favre though?

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Mattyk;929195]Agreed... terrible movie[/quote]

if we're talking about AGS? Yes it sucked but honestly I thought the remake of Longest Yard was GARBAGE

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=punch it in;929197]Griffin reminds me alot of Willie Beamen actually.[/quote]

A self centered 3rd string prick who loses himself in the fame and stardom that comes from a moment in the spotlight, who thinks he is more important than the coach and who has to be benched before getting his priorities straight reminds you of RGIII?

You and I have been reading very different articles about our new QB.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;929204]A self centered 3rd string prick who loses himself in the fame and stardom that comes from a moment in the spotlight, who thinks he is more important than the coach and who has to be benched before getting his priorities straight reminds you of RGIII?

You and I have been reading very different articles about our new QB.[/quote]

I was jokin man - If you google search Willie Beamen there are articles about Willlie Beamen = Cam Newton and Cap Rooney = Brett Farve - Did you just copy and paste Beamens Character synopsis - if not you should be doing movie reviews......lol. Its actually an atrociously bad film with one good scene - the speech. Other than that I hated everything about it, and yes just for the record RG-3 is nothing like Beamen. They are both fast though.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Chico23231;929052][url=http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tandlers-real-redsk/2012/08/can-the-offense-survive-with-polumbus.html#tp]Can the offense survive with Polumbus? - Rich Tandler's Real Redskins[/url]

good read, valid points[/quote]

Decent article. Based on injuries and performance, I'd rather have Tyler Polumbus playing RT than Jammal Brown.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Mechanix544;929154]Dude, Im sorry, but that movie is absolutely horrible. My god was that movie bad.......

Oliver Stone himself wishes he could have a mulligan on that one.....[/quote]

I have to disagree. Any movie that LL doesnt die in is a step up from average.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

Wow, do we need games to start.. :-)

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Mechanix544;929154]Dude, Im sorry, but that movie is absolutely horrible. My god was that movie bad.......

Oliver Stone himself wishes he could have a mulligan on that one.....[/quote]

I agree that movie was terrible.

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Paintrain;929226]Wow, do we need games to start.. :-)[/quote]

Only 35 hours to go! Live-action fooball! Sure it's only preseason but who cares?!

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=mooby;929230]Only 35 hours to go! Live-action fooball! Sure it's only preseason but who cares?![/quote]

Woohoo! Preseason beats the heck out of offseason!

Re: We've got big trouble on the OL.
 

[quote=Lotus;929250]Woohoo! Preseason beats the heck out of offseason![/quote]

agree...damn Im ready for this game now. Just want to see RG3 throw in live action...cant wait to the see the hatters jaws drop.

And that Oliver Stone football movie...always been a fan of.