Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

I think Carlos Rogers is going to be key. I believe one reason we didn't have to rely on a bigtime DE to get sacks last year was that Springs and Smoot could man cover and that basically gave you an extra player or two to blitz.

So the question is Rogers and his man-coverage abilities. Or Walt Harris or whoever it is that starts.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

I think the main reason we have so many RBs, LBs, and TE types is for special teams. You don't send big DEs and DTs out on kickoff coverage units. You need powerful and fast players who can cover ground and are willing to take on big collisions.

I think when Joe Gibbs looked at our team this offseason, he said priority 1 was improving special teams. Then after that, he figured WR and CB were practically secondary priorities.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

I understand the concern about the Dline; conventional wisdom says a good defense starts with a good front four. The thing is, Williams' doesn't run a coventional defense. He uses backs and linebackers to get the job done.

Moreover, why mess with success. We were the #3 defense last season and the only D-lineman we had to speak of was Cornelius Griffin.

Finally, D-Linemen don't come cheap - especially pass-rushing D-Linemen. Where would we get the money to get one? (If you're thinking the draft.....remember, D-Linemen usually take several years to develop).

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]I think the main reason we have so many RBs, LBs, and TE types is for special teams. You don't send big DEs and DTs out on kickoff coverage units. You need powerful and fast players who can cover ground and are willing to take on big collisions.

I think when Joe Gibbs looked at our team this offseason, he said priority 1 was improving special teams. Then after that, he figured WR and CB were practically secondary priorities.[/QUOTE]

Yes, if you read my post which started this thread, I stated that you can usually win a ball game if you win on 2 of your 3 teams, and that perhaps the Skins we're bringing in many LBs and DBs because they were trying to win games on Defense AND Special Teams. So, I understand what you're saying. It still doesn't explain why we didn't pick up a single stud DT or DE. I'm starting to think GW will surprise everyone and start using the 3-4 a lot more.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

I agree that it would be nice to have a pass rushing DE but I like the fact that we can effectively stop the run forcing the other team beat us with there passing attack. I mean look at how many games we made teams one diminsional. Personaly I would rather have a team try to beat us with there air attack rather than rushing. And since no one could run on us last year, well that puts the game in the hands of the D, our D forced the opposing offense to become predicable...

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

We will be flat out better in our secondary this season, which will allow our LB's to really get after the QB, our D-line just need's to stop the run that's it, of coarse it would be nice to have a big time DE but you can't have everything, we are very fortunate to have William's who can get the job done without a major pass rushing DE.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

[QUOTE=Redskins8588]Personaly I would rather have a team try to beat us with there air attack rather than rushing.[/QUOTE]

I totally agree. How demoralizing is it to see a defense give yp 5 yards per carry? I love to see runner's gang-tackled in the backfield.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

[quote]We will be flat out better in our secondary this season[/quote]

I question this for two reasons. I don't trust Harris/Rogers (whoever starts) quite yet. Not saying they CAN'T play Smoot's role, but it has yet to be seen. I think that will be what makes or breaks a winning or losing season for us. The play of our secondary. With the emergence of Matt Bowen back onto the field, expect to get burned in the passing game some. Whenever we have to put him in coverage, I close my eyes, count to 5-8 (depending on where the ball is) then say DAMN, because 90% of the time they score a TD.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

That's exactly why I'm thinking that Bowen will be cut. He's a huge liability in the passing game.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

Perhaps Bowen's past liabilities in the passing game were more due to poor coaching and an even poorer defensive scheme?

We really didn't get a chance to see him much last year. Even if he is on the roster this year, which isn't a guarantee at this point, with the way Williams rotates guys I wouldn't expect to see Bowen back there in critical situations if Williams does view him as a liability in coverage.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

True. I see him playing a Clemons role or being used as a decoy for pass rushes.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

LAVAR ARRINGTON will be blitz mania this year......Lavar will come from all angles.....I think the two DE we have just have to stand up and stop the run and have a little outside contain.....but I think Lavar could very easily have 8-10 sacks this year......I probably would think more like 8!! If he is healthy we don't need a DE rush specialist!

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

I think people would just like the idea of someone that's a DE being a pass-rusher. The way Williams works, he makes everyone a pass-rusher, so I wouldn't be too worried about the lack of a true DE on one side since we have Daniels on the other.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]That's exactly why I'm thinking that Bowen will be cut. He's a huge liability in the passing game.[/QUOTE]

I liked Bowen rushing the passer and he appeared to be a pretty decent tackler. True, he doesn't have the coverage skills that we would like for him to have, but I personally don't want to see him get cut.

Re: Lots of RBs, DBs, LBs, but why no DT or DE?
 

I'd like to cap space he would bring to possibly sign McQuarters. I'd love to have McQuarters as a backup.