Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[QUOTE=J.Campbell;436455]Uhh...With all due respect SKINSnCANES, Chad is a whiny twit that only wants money. He would be a bigger bust than Brandon Lloyd, and that is saying something.

[/QUOTE]

That is really saying something, he would at least have 1 Td.

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

Mcshay has Merling going to us in the first and Jordy in the second as of today. At the same time he's guessing that Carl Nicks will still be available in the third round. It makes sense though when you look at the factors.

- According to JLC the front office has promised Blache a D-lineman early in the draft
- Cerrato doesn't like any of the 1st round recievers
- Synder is desperate for another reciever and almost had us take Ted Ginn Jr. over Landry
- They're banking on a guy like McGlynn being available in the 3rd round. As some of you know McGlynn is the drafts most versitle O-Line prospect with the ability to play all 5 positions along the line. Plus they might also be eyeing a Dockery type in Felton during the 5th round. And history has shown the Redskins drafting two players at the same position for a while now. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the Redskins go a little later with O-Line if they come out of this years draft (Picks and UDFA's) with McGlynn, Felton, Crummy as one of those guys is bound to be a good player.

Either way I would rather have Merling then Campbell. To me he's a younger version of Phillip Daniels and though he doesn't rack up a ton of sacks he still gets pressure on the QB as well as tackle's for loss. I know he's not sexy, and I know he's not Branden Albert, but still drafting a guy like Merling might go a long way in showing how the front office has changed.

In fact I would much rather have Merling/Nelson then Sweed, Kelly, Thomas/Campbell.

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[QUOTE=J.Campbell;436455]Uhh...With all due respect SKINSnCANES, Chad is a whiny twit that only wants money. He would be a bigger bust than Brandon Lloyd, and that is saying something.

As for Pac Man, Vinny stated that the FO has absolutely no interest in Pac Man. On ES there was a thread that was recapping Vinny on Redskins radio saying that.[/QUOTE]

yea youre right, its totally unreasonable for the only receiver to have over 70 recpetions and 1200 yards the last five years to want to get paid more than brandon llyod. And its so annoying that hes one of the hardest working players in practice and one of the best receivers in the game.

oh yea but he does have fun on the field putting on HOF coats and stuff...but who cares. Portis and he are great friends adn it would be fun to watch.

Id whine too if my team was doing crappy becuase the entire defense is in jail...

How can you in good conscience compare Johnson to Llyod...I mean come on, you could have made a great argument to not want Chad...but not with those reasons...

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[QUOTE=Dirtbag359;436483]Mcshay has Merling going to us in the first and Jordy in the second as of today. At the same time he's guessing that Carl Nicks will still be available in the third round. It makes sense though when you look at the factors.

- According to JLC the front office has promised Blache a D-lineman early in the draft
- Cerrato doesn't like any of the 1st round recievers
- Synder is desperate for another reciever and almost had us take Ted Ginn Jr. over Landry
- They're banking on a guy like McGlynn being available in the 3rd round. As some of you know McGlynn is the drafts most versitle O-Line prospect with the ability to play all 5 positions along the line. Plus they might also be eyeing a Dockery type in Felton during the 5th round. And history has shown the Redskins drafting two players at the same position for a while now. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the Redskins go a little later with O-Line if they come out of this years draft (Picks and UDFA's) with McGlynn, Felton, Crummy as one of those guys is bound to be a good player.

Either way I would rather have Merling then Campbell. To me he's a younger version of Phillip Daniels and though he doesn't rack up a ton of sacks he still gets pressure on the QB as well as tackle's for loss. I know he's not sexy, and I know he's not Branden Albert, but still drafting a guy like Merling might go a long way in showing how the front office has changed.

In fact I would much rather have Merling/Nelson then Sweed, Kelly, Thomas/Campbell.[/QUOTE]

Good post, I like the info.

Did you see that Kiper updated his mock today to have Branden Albert going to the Chiefs at 5! thats one hell of a jump up the boards!

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[quote=SKINSnCANES;436488]Good post, I like the info.

Did you see that Kiper updated his mock today to have Branden Albert going to the Chiefs at 5! thats one hell of a jump up the boards![/quote]

WHAT! I mean I love Branden Albert, but 5th overall? For that to happen the Chiefs would have to be banking on his potential as an OT. But man, Kipers being one stingy mofo in his mock draft. I guess I missed that because out of habit I went right to the Redskins pick.

If things go his way we'll basically lose most of our first and second round prospects of Albert, Merling, Harvey, Mike Jenkins, L. Jackson (who we might be forced to reach for in the first if all those DE's are taken and Synder and Cerrato stick to their guns about not drafting a 1st round reciever......well Cerrato, Synder on the other hand wanted "Mr. I run 3 routes" over "Mr. Best Defensive Prospect")

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

comparing chAD JOHNSON - to brandon lloyd? ... i almost choked on my chickin wing!

round 1 - kenny phillips
round 2 - campbell/green
round 3 - jordy nelson/marcus monk
round 3 - weak side LB
round 4 - that versitale OL guy 4get his name
round 5 - Any decent corner still out there
round 6 - QB
round 7 - another tall receiver
round 7 - OL depth

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[QUOTE=Meks;436839]comparing chAD JOHNSON - to brandon lloyd? ... i almost choked on my chickin wing!

round 1 - kenny phillips
round 2 - campbell/green
round 3 - jordy nelson/marcus monk
round 3 - weak side LB
round 4 - that versitale OL guy 4get his name
round 5 - Any decent corner still out there
round 6 - QB
round 7 - another tall receiver
round 7 - OL depth[/QUOTE]


Now that is a pipe dream but I would be quite ok with that

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

lol i kno

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

I don't know about you guys, but I just saw some highlights for Campbell, and man does he look fast. If anything he looks a lot quicker then Kentwaan Blamer when I saw footage of the guy on NFL Network. I think it's very possible that this guy ends up being our first pick. And given the conncection with the coach it's very possible that they might pass Merling, not saying I want them to just saying it's possible. Of course best scenario would be convincing Jacksonville to trade up.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrpBqFA0hFI]YouTube - Calais Campbell...The U...1st round[/url]

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

IMO.. Best case scenario:

Kenny Philips falls and the Skins can grab him.. and then Calais Campbell is available in the 2nd round.. (Although I wouldn't mind Erin Henderson from Maryland as a 2nd round pick at LB)

After that we could attack O-line positions and consider drafting a receiver..

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[QUOTE=CPAlltheWay012;437715]IMO.. Best case scenario:

Kenny Philips falls and the Skins can grab him.. and then Calais Campbell is available in the 2nd round.. (Although I wouldn't mind Erin Henderson from Maryland as a 2nd round pick at LB)

After that we could attack O-line positions and consider drafting a receiver..[/QUOTE]

I'm not too high on Kenny Phillips, because if we draft him, that pretty much pushes Reed Doughty into a backup job, and I really hoped that he would start. Calais Campbell in the 2nd would be nice, but in the first round I think we go after a WR, like Limas Sweed.

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[QUOTE=SeanTaylor21;437717]I'm not too high on Kenny Phillips, because if we draft him, that pretty much pushes Reed Doughty into a backup job, and I really hoped that he would start. Calais Campbell in the 2nd would be nice, but in the first round I think we go after a WR, like Limas Sweed.[/QUOTE]

Reed Doughty isn't a playmaker. We need a playmaker next to Laron Landry and someone with more range so we don't have that nonsense like 2006. Doughty is not a [U]proven[/U] starter, but he [U]DID[/U] execute as a backup and special teams where he should continue to play. I don't mean to "hate" on this guy either, because I liked the way he performed at the end of the year with pressure.

If it were me, I'd stay away from wide receivers in the draft. I'm not a fan of drafting these guys especially with our luck. Besides we really are overlooking ourselves here. Santana Moss and Antwaan Randel-El are both good receivers.. it just becomes a question of their health and size. They can't change their size but if they take extra steps in stretching, etc..they could limit their injuries. Complimenting them, at tight-end, is Chris Cooley who sometimes seems alot like a receiver with his route running. In fact teams are beginning to focus on trying to limit his touches per game. That leads to Anthony Mix who could do workouts in preparation for this year focusing on his hands and red-zone ability. I've seen some videos on him and I think he could be very talented and weapon for us this year if he has the proper work ethic.

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[quote=CPAlltheWay012;437733]Reed Doughty isn't a playmaker. We need a playmaker next to Laron Landry and someone with more range so we don't have that nonsense like 2006. Doughty is not a [U]proven[/U] starter, but he [U]DID[/U] execute as a backup and special teams where he should continue to play. I don't mean to "hate" on this guy either, because I liked the way he performed at the end of the year with pressure.

If it were me, I'd stay away from wide receivers in the draft. I'm not a fan of drafting these guys especially with our luck. Besides we really are overlooking ourselves here. Santana Moss and Antwaan Randel-El are both good receivers.. it just becomes a question of their health and size. They can't change their size but if they take extra steps in stretching, etc..they could limit their injuries. Complimenting them, at tight-end, is Chris Cooley who sometimes seems alot like a receiver with his route running. In fact teams are beginning to focus on trying to limit his touches per game. That leads to Anthony Mix who could do workouts in preparation for this year focusing on his hands and red-zone ability. I've seen some videos on him and I think he could be very talented and weapon for us this year if he has the proper work ethic.[/quote]

No offense man, but the "we need a playmaker" line sounds like Madden speak in my book where you don't feel comfortable with your franchise unless most of the guys have a rating of at least 90(ok some offense, but still I don't mean it as a personal attack). The reason I would be for drafting Kenny Phillips is because I worry about the vauge possibility of something happening to Landry and given how much of an impact the safety position has had on our defense I am unopposed to taking a guy like Phillips. However at the same time whats the cost? Would it be passing up a DE like Merling or Campbell (I'm banking these days that the coaching staff can work with him)? Is it going to cost us a chance to draft a quality offensive lineman by trading away a third round pick to get back up into the running for Phillips or Campbell (should we try to nab both of them)? In the end I believe it depends on what we can get, but I'm definately for drafting a safety like Phillips over a corner.

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

[QUOTE=Dirtbag359;437754]No offense man, but the "we need a playmaker" line sounds like Madden speak in my book where you don't feel comfortable with your franchise unless most of the guys have a rating of at least 90(ok some offense, but still I don't mean it as a personal attack). The reason I would be for drafting Kenny Phillips is because I worry about the vauge possibility of something happening to Landry and given how much of an impact the safety position has had on our defense I am unopposed to taking a guy like Phillips. [B]However at the same time whats the cost? Would it be passing up a DE like Merling or Campbell (I'm banking these days that the coaching staff can work with him)? Is it going to cost us a chance to draft a quality offensive lineman by trading away a third round pick to get back up into the running for Phillips or Campbell (should we try to nab both of them)? [/B]In the end I believe it depends on what we can get, but I'm definately for drafting a safety like Phillips over a corner.[/QUOTE]

I think that in the NFL, Safety is a much more valuable position than the D-Line or O-Line if your talking about just one player. Good safties are harder to come by than those positions on the line, and it seems that since O/D-Line is more of a "group" (pardon the phrase) workout--those other members on the line can sorta "hide" the weak spot. Where as safety, if you don't have two active players there's a great chance that you can be toast if teams can get behind you. That would certainly be the case in the NFL, as it would seem rules, etc. favor the offense.

That said, you make a great point to mention that if Laron got hurt, we'd be in trouble.. another reason, in my opinion, you might try to get Kenny Philips.

Re: More of The U for the D?
 

I would love to have Kenny Phillips, but I am not sure that he is worth the 21st overall pick, and he is definitely not going to be on the board by the time we pick in the 2nd. So getting Phillips seems unlikely to me. However I am a huge advocate of us bringing in a safety. I am just not sold on Reed Doughty as a starter at all. Another interesting safety prospect, that not a lot of people are talking about, is DaJuan Morgan from N.C. State- I think he could be better than Phillips and I would love to find a way for us to draft him.