Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=Mattyk;700117]Anything could happen with a new staff I guess, but Doughty has really turned into a solid player, I don't see him getting cut. He's the kind of hard working overachiever coaches love.

I'm hoping for big things from Moore. It's time for him to step up and contribute.[/quote]

agree on both counts. I also think Horton has been pretty solid & both he & Reed contribute on spec. teams.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;700115]I'd cut Landry before I'd cut either one of them. They're cheaper and just as good, maybe better.[/quote]

Theyre definitely cheaper, but neither of them even approaches being as talented as Landry.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=freddyg12;700118]I don't agree w/that. [B]Apparently he wasn't traded because teams wouldn't meet the skins demands.[/B] If there is still the desire to trade him & someone meets demands, it will get done & it could be good for us. A training camp injury could spur some offers a la the J. Taylor trade in 08, only we would hopefully be on the better end this time.

given Allen's fiscal discipline to this point, I think he's set the trade bar for AH fairly high realizing that the danny has already spent a lot of $ on him. If we can't get value for him then they'll just try & get their money's worth on the field.

This is the ideal trade: AH for J. Brown & NO pays us a portion of Brown's signing bonus in a new deal w/the skins.[/quote]

These demands were not met before the draft, and given Shanahan's "win now" attitude, he's not going to settle for future compensation. Part of the reason why Jason Campbell was trade for peanuts to Oakland, was because teams could have easily waited until he was cut (since there was no way he was going to stay in the team). Trading Haynesworth right now would probably not result in the compensation we want or need, and it would seem like an act of desperation.

In the draft you had teams that needed d-linemen for 4-3 defenses that could have easily trade for AH, and it would have made sense. Tampa Bay could have traded their 2nd rounder for Haynesworth, and picked up Eric Berry with the 3rd overall. Hell, the Lions could have gotten Haynesworth with their 2nd and still get Suh with their first rounder, given them the MOST ridiculous d-line in history. But I believe they didn't because they either: A.) had the sense that Haynesworth was a "problem" for the Redskins and could sit and wait or B.) the team (unlike a lot of ppl here) does not think Haynesworth is a problem and they were just getting feelers on what they would get for him (in case someone gave us an offer we couldn't refuse).

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=NYCskinfan82;699994]Reed, Horton & Laron IMO are all SS the only FS is Kareem. Horton & Reed don't have the speed to play FS IMO they would really need to know their assignments & trust their teammates in order for them to play FS.[/quote]

I agree with this...and simply would add....Is Kareem a starter right now in this league?

I dont think so, and by the time the season begins I say we are starting someone else not mentioned. Most likely a cut player.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=Ruhskins;700122]These demands were not met before the draft, and given Shanahan's "win now" attitude, he's not going to settle for future compensation. Part of the reason why Jason Campbell was trade for peanuts to Oakland, was because teams could have easily waited until he was cut (since there was no way he was going to stay in the team). Trading Haynesworth right now would probably not result in the compensation we want or need, and it would seem like an act of desperation.

In the draft you had teams that needed d-linemen for 4-3 defenses that could have easily trade for AH, and it would have made sense. Tampa Bay could have traded their 2nd rounder for Haynesworth, and picked up Eric Berry with the 3rd overall. Hell, the Lions could have gotten Haynesworth with their 2nd and still get Suh with their first rounder, given them the MOST ridiculous d-line in history. But I believe they didn't because they either: A.) had the sense that Haynesworth was a "problem" for the Redskins and could sit and wait or B.) the team (unlike a lot of ppl here) does not think Haynesworth is a problem and [B]they were just getting feelers on what they would get for him[/B] (in case someone gave us an offer we couldn't refuse).[/quote]

Which means they would be open to trading him. We're saying the same thing essentially, you just think that it would have to be an "offer we couldn't refuse." Thats relative, so I guess I could agree w/that. If a 1st round pick is offered, I think they would do it.

The most likely trade scenario IMO is if Minn., NO or another 4-3 team w/super bowl caliber roster has a preseason injury to one of their DTs, they might be willing to give up a lot & AH will be happy to play in a 4-3, so his agent would work hard to make the deal happen.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=Mattyk;700117]Anything could happen with a new staff I guess, but Doughty has really turned into a solid player, I don't see him getting cut. He's the kind of hard working overachiever coaches love.

I'm hoping for big things from Moore. It's time for him to step up and contribute.[/quote]

This.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;700121]Theyre definitely cheaper, but neither of them even approaches being as [B]talented as Landry[/B].[/quote]

That's rich. I guess getting beasted on MNF is talent. Landry is a bum!

Re: Free Safety
 

Free safety is going to be a huge question mark. I'm just glad they're not putting Landry back there anymore cause he was terrible last year. Maybe Moore will take the bull by the horns. He's shown some flashes so we'll see.

Re: Free Safety
 

Haslett's defense don't historically follow the FS and SS roles the way that we historically think of them. He usually puts a closed safety (more like a SS) close to the LOS with deep responsiblity falling on the corner helping him. Laron would be ideal here, looking at his added bulk Haslett may have clued him into this idea early on. Then Laron doesn't have to worry about being the deep help, he'll play short zones and blitz and (hopefully) wrap up some running backs. Reed would not be ideal here b/c he is smaller and he does have some range to provide coverage deeper so playing the Open safety spot is probably where he fits in although comparing the two I'd say Reed is a better tackler. Laron is definitely faster than Reed but Laron also has an extremely aggressive nature, if you cater to that then you put him as close to the action as you can -- that means he plays the closed position and has no deep responsibility to worry about. Moore is really the only player on the roster right now who could step in and do the things that Haslett likes his deep safeties to do. Reed might be too slow, Holmes is completely unproven and I have no idea what he is capable of, Laron really cannot play at this position he's too aggressive and that isn't something you should coach out of a player and given his goal of 240 lbs he'd be better playing close to the line.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=redskins121684;700225]Haslett's defense don't historically follow the FS and SS roles the way that we historically think of them. He usually puts a closed safety (more like a SS) close to the LOS with deep responsiblity falling on the corner helping him. Laron would be ideal here, looking at his added bulk Haslett may have clued him into this idea early on. Then Laron doesn't have to worry about being the deep help, he'll play short zones and blitz and (hopefully) wrap up some running backs. Reed would not be ideal here b/c he is smaller and he does have some range to provide coverage deeper so playing the Open safety spot is probably where he fits in although comparing the two I'd say Reed is a better tackler. Laron is definitely faster than Reed but Laron also has an extremely aggressive nature, if you cater to that then you put him as close to the action as you can -- that means he plays the closed position and has no deep responsibility to worry about. Moore is really the only player on the roster right now who could step in and do the things that Haslett likes his deep safeties to do. Reed might be too slow, Holmes is completely unproven and I have no idea what he is capable of, Laron really cannot play at this position he's too aggressive and that isn't something you should coach out of a player and given his goal of 240 lbs he'd be better playing close to the line.[/quote]

good analysis, thanks for posting. They said good things about Holmes last year & he's still around to compete for a spot, maybe he catches on as a backup deep safety?

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;699991]I just went over to the Skins Official site and they're talking about Reed and Kareem being the FS? In my opinion Horton and Kareem would be better at FS. Laron and Reed would be best at SS. Making Reed a FS would be a huge mistake and a waste of my ability.

What Sayeth the Mob?[/quote]

Haslett scheme doesn't defeine FS/SS as different positions anymore.

Starting in the Oakland game[U] Reed was our FS[/U].

With that being said,after LaRon, i think Moore best S on the team.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=redskins121684;700225]Haslett's defense don't historically follow the FS and SS roles the way that we historically think of them. He usually puts a closed safety (more like a SS) close to the LOS with deep responsiblity falling on the corner helping him. Laron would be ideal here, looking at his added bulk Haslett may have clued him into this idea early on. Then Laron doesn't have to worry about being the deep help, he'll play short zones and blitz and (hopefully) wrap up some running backs. Reed would not be ideal here b/c he is smaller and he does have some range to provide coverage deeper so playing the Open safety spot is probably where he fits in although comparing the two I'd say Reed is a better tackler. Laron is definitely faster than Reed but Laron also has an extremely aggressive nature, if you cater to that then you put him as close to the action as you can -- that means he plays the closed position and has no deep responsibility to worry about. Moore is really the only player on the roster right now who could step in and do the things that Haslett likes his deep safeties to do. Reed might be too slow, Holmes is completely unproven and I have no idea what he is capable of, Laron really cannot play at this position he's too aggressive and that isn't something you should coach out of a player and given his goal of 240 lbs he'd be better playing close to the line.[/quote]

Good post. Welcome to the Warpath.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=redskins121684;700225]Haslett's defense don't historically follow the FS and SS roles the way that we historically think of them. He usually puts a closed safety (more like a SS) close to the LOS with deep responsiblity falling on the corner helping him. Laron would be ideal here, looking at his added bulk Haslett may have clued him into this idea early on. Then Laron doesn't have to worry about being the deep help, he'll play short zones and blitz and (hopefully) wrap up some running backs. Reed would not be ideal here b/c he is smaller and he does have some range to provide coverage deeper so playing the Open safety spot is probably where he fits in although comparing the two I'd say Reed is a better tackler. Laron is definitely faster than Reed but Laron also has an extremely aggressive nature, if you cater to that then you put him as close to the action as you can -- that means he plays the closed position and has no deep responsibility to worry about. Moore is really the only player on the roster right now who could step in and do the things that Haslett likes his deep safeties to do. Reed might be too slow, Holmes is completely unproven and I have no idea what he is capable of, Laron really cannot play at this position he's too aggressive and that isn't something you should coach out of a player and given his goal of 240 lbs he'd be better playing close to the line.[/quote]

good post and welcome to the site.

obviously i'm no expert, but it sounds like the exact same thing, just different terms., hether you call it an open safety/free safety or a closed safety/ strong safety. one safety is primarily responsible for playing deep. the other is closer to the LOS and does more blitzing and short coverage. translation - landry is playing strong safety and we still dont have a starting caliber free safety on the roster.

Re: Free Safety
 

Maybe LaRon is another Adam Archuleta in disguise and won't even be able to play SS. Man, I hope I'm wrong with this sarcastic statement! But I know I'm right on my Clinton Haynesworth comments...

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=JLee9718;700309]Maybe LaRon is another Adam Archuleta in disguise and won't even be able to play SS. Man, I hope I'm wrong with this sarcastic statement! But I know I'm right on my Clinton Haynesworth comments...[/quote]

Maybe you should just copy and paste your comments. That will save you the trouble of typing the same point that you've managed to write in every single thread.

Re: Free Safety
 

Even at 230 or 240 pounds Laron is the best FS on the team. He is also the best SS on the team. People who think he should be cut or traded for a wet ham sandwich really do not want to see the Redskins succeed.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote]Even at 230 or 240 pounds Laron is the best FS on the team. He is also the best SS on the team. People who think he should be cut or traded for a wet ham sandwich really do not want to see the Redskins succeed. [/quote]

I definitely think he is the best guy to play SS the way this defense will use one, think Troy Palumalu playing real close to the LOS almost like another linebacker but I do not think he is the best Free Safety, too aggressive, doesn't anticipate routes AT ALL, marginal ball hawk, he cannot play 30 yards off the ball like he did last year it will not work for him. Guy has all the speed in the world but he doesn't do the things in space that you need a deep safety to do and what's more he can't shake his inclination to bite on stutter/stop-go routes. Kareem Moore showed a little bit of what he can do deep last year, he covered well and he knew his assignments when he was on the field. I thought in the NO game he demonstrated and ability to anticipate routes and he showed us that he does have some range. From a positional standpoint I think doing what the position requires Moore is probably a better deep safety that Landry. I know Landry was faster and has more upside, he is a freak athlete and Moore is not but a part of me really thinks that Landry cannot make the light go on when it comes to playing deep. Part of playing deep especially in the old system is anticipating where a play can end up not reacting to where it is right now. Landry doesn't do that he always just misses the big hit or takes just a little bit to short of an angle, he's gotta be closer to be good. Moore doesn't need that, I don't know if he can start at that spot but Landry absolutely cannot.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=redskins121684;700573]I definitely think he is the best guy to play SS the way this defense will use one, think Troy Palumalu playing real close to the LOS almost like another linebacker but I do not think he is the best Free Safety, too aggressive, doesn't anticipate routes AT ALL, marginal ball hawk, he cannot play 30 yards off the ball like he did last year it will not work for him. Guy has all the speed in the world but he doesn't do the things in space that you need a deep safety to do and what's more he can't shake his inclination to bite on stutter/stop-go routes. Kareem Moore showed a little bit of what he can do deep last year, he covered well and he knew his assignments when he was on the field. I thought in the NO game he demonstrated and ability to anticipate routes and he showed us that he does have some range. From a positional standpoint I think doing what the position requires Moore is probably a better deep safety that Landry. I know Landry was faster and has more upside, he is a freak athlete and Moore is not but a part of me really thinks that Landry cannot make the light go on when it comes to playing deep. Part of playing deep especially in the old system is anticipating where a play can end up not reacting to where it is right now. Landry doesn't do that he always just misses the big hit or takes just a little bit to short of an angle, he's gotta be closer to be good. Moore doesn't need that, I don't know if he can start at that spot but Landry absolutely cannot.[/quote]


Just so you know you probably be asked to leave soon becasue you make way too much sense. =)

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;700340]Even at 230 or 240 pounds Laron is the best FS on the team. He is also the best SS on the team. People who think he should be cut or traded for a wet ham sandwich really do not want to see the Redskins succeed.[/quote]

:nono:
For the record, it was a grilled cheese. He's not good enough for ham.

Re: Free Safety
 

If you want him to play FS again better make it turkey it's leaner Landry as bulked up he would need to lose weight.

Re: Free Safety
 

I still think that Moore will be our other safety opposite LaRon, Right now, but I have a feeling that OJ Atogwe will join haslett here.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;700670]I still think that Moore will be our other safety opposite LaRon, Right now, but I have a feeling that OJ Atogwe will join haslett here.[/quote]

I think it will come down to what kind of offers he gets. We haven't been breaking the bank on anybody.

Re: Free Safety
 

IMO the only FS we have is Moore and he's not a starter on most teams. Good news is it's [B]May[/B] so he's the starter... for now. I thought we should've grabbed a FS in a deep draft class, but assuming we get Atogwe none of this matters. If we don't then we need to be mildly concerned.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=vallin21;700672]IMO the only FS we have is Moore and he's not a starter on most teams. Good news is it's [B]May[/B] so he's the starter... for now. I thought we should've grabbed a FS in a deep draft class, but assuming we get Atogwe none of this matters. If we don't then we need to be mildly concerned.[/quote]

All the good FS's in this years draft were in the first round, there really wasn't any quality FS's in any of the other rounds. This draft was filled with SS's though.

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;700693]All the good FS's in this years draft were in the first round, there really wasn't any quality FS's in any of the other rounds. This draft was filled with SS's though.[/quote]

Solid SS's, or basically guys who can be effective playing closer to the LOS, are definitely more plentiful.

Re: Free Safety
 

Redskins Mailbag:



Question: Who do you think would make the best free safety for the Redskins this year? Reed Doughty? Chris Horton? LaRon Landry? Or a player not yet on the team?

-- Sean K.

Gary: Lots of question on this topic this week. First of all, defensive coordinator Jim Haslett wants defensive backs who can play both strong and free safety because they could line up at either position depending on the play call. That said, Haslett appears committed to playing Landry closer to the line of scrimmage, as a strong safety, on many downs. Horton, who played strong safety the last two years, would likely be Landry’s backup. That likely leaves Doughty and Kareem Moore competing for playing time opposite Landry, at free safety. Doughty and Moore alternated at free safety during the Redskins’ most recent mini-camp. Based on experience, Doughty has the edge, but Moore has shown some big-play ability--and big hit ability--in his limited playing time. This is going to be one of the top training camp competitions to watch this summer.

Re: Free Safety
 

Oh, hey, [URL="http://redskinshogheaven.com/2010-articles/may/deangelo-hall-should-not-be-a-corner.html"]good bump[/URL]. Well timed.

Re: Free Safety
 

Schemes like the cover-2 couldn't gives two craps about the distinction between free and strong, since all the nomenclature really boils down to is which safety gets to be on the TE's side. I know this is some 3-4 variant, but the safeties can simply be assigned portions of the field to cover.

That said, the least-knuckledheaded of the safeties should be playing the "free" role of being the last line of defense simply because one big mistake and it's a touchdown, and that means anyone but LaRon. Basically, [B]I'll take Hal Gill over Mike Green.[/B]

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=GTripp0012;703201]Oh, hey, [URL="http://redskinshogheaven.com/2010-articles/may/deangelo-hall-should-not-be-a-corner.html"]good bump[/URL]. Well timed.[/quote]

Good read. Nice find Tripp. ;)

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=GTripp0012;703201]Oh, hey, [URL="http://redskinshogheaven.com/2010-articles/may/deangelo-hall-should-not-be-a-corner.html"]good bump[/URL]. Well timed.[/quote]
Interesting points

aggregates*

Re: Free Safety
 

[quote=tryfuhl;703215]Interesting points

aggregates*[/quote]/hates Joomla.

Will fix.