Would it be practical to just (mostly) draft o-line this upcoming year

Any of those 3 a FA this yr? :)

I really don't know. Fine pick a NT if it makes you happy. It still doesn't help our OL giving the QB time to throw or making holes for the RB. Any chance at all Shanahan and Alex Gibbs can make amends and bring him on board to work his magic with the OL? I was just not excited with our OL coach prior to him being here or now that he is.

Depending on what players we can bring on board from FA I still might go after a RT and C. But if we pick one up in FA then I might switch up and pick a NT high and pick a late round RT or C. Our problem (I feel) is we just don't have the players to run Shanahan's style of zone blocking or cut blocking. I saw very little cut blocking especially recently.

You pick the damn stud player over the need player every time because the stud player is sure to be with you 5+ years down the road while the "need" player is likely a reach and more prone to failing, in which case you then have to draft for need once again in a future draft. For example, we "needed" big WRs, we grabbed two extremely risky WRs with red flags. We bombed on them. We could have had more "sure things" like DeSean or Eddie Royal OR stayed in the 1st for round just grabbed Chris Johnson, Sam Baker, etc.

yes, yes and yes. lets stop playing to win each season and try for a multi-year plan to build a sustainable winning franchise.

that starts with the o-line. a mediocre core of WRs, TEs, RBs and QB would be playoff material with an extra 2 seconds - and a stellar O-line can do that. None of the coaches over the last 10 years had the time to let their plays develop because the O-line was well coached, and hard working but undertalented.

on the other hand an all-star cast of WRs, RBs and QB would look like losers with lots of sacks and interceptions due to pressure if the O-line can't give them time.

I say, let the defense rot and go all out for a solid O-line this year. if we can sustain long running drives and pass the ball then our defense would look a whole lot better. they'd also be a lot less tired and stronger if they play less. our defense is actually fine this year - with moral down and too many injuries we get run all over the last few weeks. but before we had too many guys go down our D kept us in games and an O-line would have won it for us.

maybe al can play center ;)

But a great QB wins in either of those situations; and we need to start thinking long term with that position. If an undervalued quarterback is available at any point, we should consider drafting him.

You pick the damn stud player over the need player every time because the stud player is sure to be with you 5+ years down the road while the "need" player is likely a reach and more prone to failing, in which case you then have to draft for need once again in a future draft. For example, we "needed" big WRs, we grabbed two extremely risky WRs with red flags. We bombed on them. We could have had more "sure things" like DeSean or Eddie Royal OR stayed in the 1st for round just grabbed Chris Johnson, Sam Baker, etc.

Wouldn't be surprised at all to see us make a play for Royal. It's been kind of rumored for a few months now

As for Jackson, he was far from a "sure thing"

Wouldn't be surprised at all to see us make a play for Royal. It's been kind of rumored for a few months now

As for Jackson, he was far from a "sure thing"

Yeah ok, but was he more "sure" than Devin or Malcolm? I think the answer is closer to "yes" than "no" since I would guess most of the doubts were due to his size.

Yeah ok, but was he more "sure" than Devin or Malcolm? I think the answer is closer to "yes" than "no" since I would guess most of the doubts were due to his size.

Not just his size. In college he apparently was a diva and people were afraid that he might be an NFL head case.

Not just his size. In college he apparently was a diva and people were afraid that he might be an NFL head case.

Exactly. Wasn't he suspended once or twice for violating team rules in college?

Wouldn't be surprised at all to see us make a play for Royal. It's been kind of rumored for a few months now

As for Jackson, he was far from a "sure thing"

I would be salivating if the Redskins went after Eddie Royal. Not just because I'm a VT guy and Royal has impressed in limited time earlier in his career when Shanny was the coach, but also because I can definitely see him having the potential to be a great #2 wideout for us. I'd pull the trigger on that one if he is available.

And I'm def. not on the Vincent Jackson train. If there's one thing Haynesworth has taught us, it's that you can't trust a head case. And I feel like with the stuff V.Jax pulled with the Chargers, the DUI's, the holding out for more money, there's no reason take on a risk/reward guy like that, especially considering he's like one more DUI away from getting suspended. Plus Eddie Royal will be cheaper too.

Shahanan still has very high hopes for Malcolm Kelly...so we'll see

Exactly. Wasn't he suspended once or twice for violating team rules in college?

Whoa. Are you guys talking about Eddie Royal? When I think of diva's, I def. don't think of him, and I followed him throughout his collegiate career when he was at VT. I don't even think he's made so much as a negative comment in his time in the league so far.

Not just his size. In college he apparently was a diva and people were afraid that he might be an NFL head case.
These people were dense then, as being a head case has little bearing on success and productivity. See T.O. At the VERY WORST, he could be considered a simple special teamer who may have turned into trade bait.

And Philly sure didn't mind even though they had T.O before.