Redskins Talking Trade with Raiders?

Okay that makes a lot more sense to me.

Im wondering if it really is Cooley, or for a o-line man. Unless they plan on releasing Cooley, he seems like we wouldnt get much in return for the man in the oline category. Maybe back when Al was running things but isnt the Raiders FO a lot more reasonable now?

Okay that makes a lot more sense to me.

Im wondering if it really is Cooley, or for a o-line man. Unless they plan on releasing Cooley, he seems like we wouldnt get much in return for the man in the oline category. Maybe back when Al was running things but isnt the Raiders FO a lot more reasonable now?

If they somehow manage to swing Veldheer for Cooley that would be incredible but I'm not sure how they (Raiders) view Veldheer or if that would even be an option. A million times no to Cooley for Barnes. Get a 3rd or 4th round pick in that case if you're hell bent on trading Cooley.

Got it. Trade Cooley for Heyer. RT problem solved.

Got it. Trade Cooley for Heyer. RT problem solved.

Heyer is no longer with the Raiders unfortunately...

If they somehow manage to swing Veldheer for Cooley that would be incredible but I'm not sure how they (Raiders) view Veldheer or if that would even be an option. A million times no to Cooley for Barnes. Get a 3rd or 4th round pick in that case if you're hell bent on trading Cooley.


Would be bitter sweet but awsome. But no way the raiders do that.

Maybe, but he would still be an upgrade from Jammal Brown.

No he is not!! Cooley for Barnes would be a very stupid trade. I've seen plenty of Raider games and Barnes is lucky to be on a team, he is horrible. I would much rather have Polumbus or Smith in there. Barnes just flat out sucks!!

Well since we're rehashing.
I would have happily paid Winston 4 for $22 million he would have turned an area of weakness into an area of strength.
Run or pass Winston has been one of the best: Eric Winston Hits the Market. Really? | ProFootballFocus.com (http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/03/13/eric-winston-hits-the-market/)

Imo QB success is linked to the quality of the OL and especially for rookie QB who typically are even more dependent upon pass protection.
People look at Cam's success and forget how good his OL was, Cam had all day back there.
Imo the quality of play at the point of attack is the easiest/surest way to ensure success or failure.


And this isn't a slight against Garcon, I think he's gonna be a good player.
But, I think the development of a franchise QB begins inside out.
In year 1 having solid OL/pass protection is more important then upgrading the WR corps.
Also, I think there was greater depth in the WR market place then there was in the RT.

I like the potential of our young OL/RT and at this stage I would rather go with what we got then chase after Barnes or a Barnes like player.
Forester just knows going in that RT might be an area that needs help schematically but how different would that be from when Jammal Brown was starting?

The argument for protecting your rookie QB is bulletproof. Literally, bulletproof, and anybody who argues otherwise is drinking koolaid and smoking whatever Davis/Williams tested positive for.

Agreed also Garcon is likely to be a good player for us, but I think a big target, and I'm thinking endzone here especially, would have been a better WR pairing for Griffin. Time will tell. But consider even prior to Griffin this offense has been decent at moving the ball between the 20's. It's redzone/ endzone where we struggle mightily. An improved running game will help but IMO a big WR target would (have) helped the most.

I'm not trying to trivialize the importance of line help...but the Panthers had a UDFA rookie starting at RT for 3/4 of last season

Apparently, Lichtenstieger missed practice again today. That scares me.

So here's your answer to #2

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Black_(American_football)

Shanahan confirmed the signing this afternoon