re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

I've always suspected that Snyder's loyalty with Cerrato lies more so with the very tight friendship Cerrato had with Snyder's father than any relationship they have.

Anyhow, using my front office powers to edit the thread title.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;512795]I've always suspected that Snyder's loyalty with Cerrato lies more so with the very tight friendship Cerrato had with Snyder's father than any relationship they have.

Anyhow, using my front office powers to edit the thread title.[/quote]

whats wrong with my title? Please inform.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=maroonandblack30;512796]whats wrong with my title? Please inform.[/quote]

See #2

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/370946-post1.html[/url]

Every other post these days is about someone associated with the team, usually Vinny, being an idiot. I thought maybe the thread title for this should be a bit more specific

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

Vinny being called an idiot is about as specific as you can get. No gray area in that statement.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

That is the exact opposite of logic. If you have a position that isn't a need, and then you draft someone at that position because they're the best available THAT is the position you end up with a glut at.

As for the stats on Merling and Campbell he really isn't that far off in a 16 game season. He might not have looked at the stat sheets for a couple of weeks is all.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

Cerrato: You know, I think Calais has like 11 tackles

OK so if your not sure of the numbers you say you think so what is the big deal with what he said. He did not state these as facts.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=Defensewins;512804]Vinny being called an idiot is about as specific as you can get. No gray area in that statement.[/quote]


Oh my god, Smootsmack works for Vinny. lol. He's changing the topic sentence on purpose in order to facilitate a more reasonable responce to his boss. lol.

see my point ^ it's already effecting firstdown. lol.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

You know I was thinking about starting a thread concerning a similar issue in that we give Vinny shit for not drafting any lineman untill the end of the third round but in looking back I wonder who we could have drafted, and in a way Vinny might have been right about taking the BPA. Still part of me is suspicious considering Snyder's desire to add a playmaking reciever and the corresponding excuse that the recievers and TE selected just happened to be the BPA. Keep in mind I have no objection to Vinny's 2nd round trade down. Personally I thought it was one of the great moves in the draft.

I know the author of the article brought up Phillip Merling but unfortunately Merling is a moot point considering the fact that he was picked before we got a chance to get back onto the clock. Anyway heres a few guys that we should have considered drafting in the second round, keep in mind this doesn't include taking guys like Chris Horton and saying that he should have been taken earlier. This is based on current performance and draft status based on evaluations prior to April.

[B]- Curtis Lofton - LB -[/B] Oklahoma - Productive Linebacker for the Falcons, God knows he need help at LB
[B]- Chilo Rachel - G- USC[/B] - Would have made sense in terms of getting a lineman but I'm not sure that he was worth being taken this early
[B]- Matt Forte - RB - Tulane [/B]- They were considering taking him and personally I wish we would have taken him if he lasted till Fred Davis's spot. He certainly qualifes as a potential best player available. Especially considering the fact that before the season I was concerned about how long Clinton would able to last. For the record love the guy (CP) to death but theres only so much punishment a human being can take
[B]- Jordy Nelson - WR - Kansas State [/B]-Had the physical specs the team wanted in a Reciever and was more productive at the collegiate level then both Thomas and Kelly. Also is having a better year then both of them but that might be because Green Bay is more willing to give him a chance. Talk about keeping the white man down.
[B]- Jordan Dizon - LB - Colorado -[/B] Would have made sense for us at WLB, but would have had to have been taken with our first 2nd round pick. Wouldn't have been to popular on draft day.
[B]- Calias Campbell DE - Miami - [/B]Probably should have taken him where we took Fred Davis. At the very least it would have saved us a Second Round Pick in 2009. Then again he seems to have a similar playing style and talent level to our very own Demetric Evans. [B]
- Trevor Laws DT - Notre Dame -[/B] Would have had to have been taken with our first pick. In retrospect though he's had health problems so maybe we dodged a bullet but still if he had been healthy then he might have been able to provide us with the push we needed up the middle to have an effective pass rush from Carter and Taylor.
[B]- Jeremy Zuttah - OL - Rutgers - [/B]Would have been a perfect pick for us and he was available for each one of our 2nd round picks. From what I've heard he's played well and on top of that he can play anywhere on the line.
[B]- Mike Pollack - C - Arizona State - [/B]Wouldn't have made a ton of sense on draft day as a lot of us still thought very highly of Rabach at the time but in terms of BPA he should have been high enough to at least recieve strong consideration for getting drafted by us
- [B]Any Cornerback including Porter, Lee, Flowers - [/B]Personally I'm glad we didn't use a 2nd round pick on a Corner especially considering the fact that we got a top flight corner for virtually nothing (D. Hall) when originally we considering using a second round pick for.
- [B]Quinton Groves - DE - Auburn - [/B]Not sure I would really wanted to get him in retrospect as I think our pass rushing woes aren't exactly a personell problem.
[B]- Pat Sims - DT - Auburn - [/B]Looks like he's having a productive season for Bengals in all honesty it looks like he would have been a good fit here
- [B]Ray Rice - RB - Rutgers - [/B]Honestly would have rather gotten Kelly.

So in retrospect, knowing how the draft turned out and looking at how this season turned out I think our ideal draft should have been as follows.

[B]34th - Jordy Nelson - WR - Kansas State [/B]- They get the big productive Reciever they want, complete with a team first attitude. Not that Thomas has this problem, then again Kelly might but he hasn't shown it since he's been here.
[B]48th - Pat Sims - DT - Auburn - [/B]We get the big guy up the middle to help create a push and take pressure off our DE's.
[B]51st - Jerremy Zutah - OL - Rutgers[/B]- Would have been perfect for us this year, especially considering he can play everywhere. Probably would be starting at RT this week.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

Dirtbag, good post. even though some will say it's easy to look back and say who we should have picked.

Is our D-line salvagable or are we going to be picking new personel? I guess Snyder has to sit down and decide how much change we need and how many new people we will need to bring in on the D line in order to get production. If we are going to bring in 1-2 players in the offseason then I presume we keep Blache and his scheme. If we are going out and getting anymore then that to beef up the D line then I probably would change to a 3-4 which has been doing the past few seasons and hard to figure out where the blitz is coming from.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

I think it's funny that, prior to the draft, nearly everyone on this board agreed in the Pioli principle of drafting the best player available. Now that it appears that we need linemen, most people seem to have done a 180. For the record, I've always believed in the "blended" model whereby you take the best player available at a position of need.

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=skinsfan69;512655][B]What Vinny says here is really really stupid. First he says not to draft for need, then he says we have the west coast offense and it NEEDS big wr's. So isn't it funny how we draft two big wr's in the 2nd round? Sorry Vinny but we drafted for need. He is one dumb dude who would never have a job in the NFL if it wasn't for Snyder.[/B] You see when Marty fired him no came knocking on his door. [B]But with that being said, I think he deserves two more years of running things by himself.[/B] Everyone wants to blame him for all of the past moves, but some of that falls on Gibbs.[/quote]

I like how you give an example of how Vinny contradicted himself and then you bad mouth him, which leads you to say that he should be given two more years. If he is "really really stupid" why would you want him here for two more years.?????

re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;512798]See #2

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/370946-post1.html[/url]

Every other post these days is about someone associated with the team, usually Vinny, being an idiot. I thought maybe the thread title for this should be a bit more specific[/quote]

Please....

Re: Cerrato's Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;512821]I think it's funny that, prior to the draft, nearly everyone on this board agreed in the Pioli principle of drafting the best player available. Now that it appears that we need linemen, most people seem to have done a 180. For the record, I've always believed in the "blended" model whereby you take the best player available at a position of need.[/quote]

I remember after the first day of the draft I was pissed, with most of my immediate day 1 thoughts being placed in the Kareem Moore thread (you can see it if you click on the link to the original post on the quotes I placed at the bottom). I couldn't believe we went after three receivers when we had needs elsewhere.

Funny thing was my friend who watched the draft with me wasn't to pleased either saying that his team (Falcons) gave up to much to get back into the first round. Eventually I decided to drink the kool aid and give Vinny's BPA explanation a chance to prove itself. Since then I regret the decision but Sheriff is right about the 180's. A lot of us have done a 180, even though mines is more like a 360. At the very least I have a history of lobbying for us to build up front as seen partly in my last mock the day before the draft as well as the various other lineman that I was hoping we'd take a chance on. Of course this mock was based in part on what I honestly thought the team was going to do based on pre-draft rumors and visits, but it also included a few personal preferences.

[URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/442502-post302.html[/URL]

Either way I think a lot of us should take this season as a leason and make sure we as fans no longer tolerate our front office constant neglect of our offensive and defensive lines in favor of players at sexier positions like Reciever.

Also thanks for the props XXVI.

[quote=Dirtbag359;443895]No offense but who cares, the team threw the draft. Dan Snyders going to have to learn the hard way that you don't win with the passing game. Sorry man, not towards you it's just right now I don't really care, and I'm kind of pissed that I put so much faith into the braintrust of my favorite team.[/quote]

[quote=Dirtbag359;443942]I actually didn't mind the Fred Davis pick. My two biggest fears right now as a Redskin fan is loosing Cooley or Samuals to injury. I just don't know why they want to wait so long to adress the line. I mean it's not like they have a track record of finding good offensive lineman in the 4th 5th and 6th rounds.

Also I think that with the way things are going they'll take Josh Johnson with one of their next two picks. After that they'll hopefully take an O-Lineman and then they'll draft Marcus Dixon in the 6th round. 7th round we'll probably see a corner and maybe the Safety Kareem Moore. Anyway I know the drafts not over but still I don't like the idea of drafting 3 pass catchers.

Though it will be fun to see them sub guys in and out to create mismatches.[/quote]

Re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;512821]I think it's funny that, prior to the draft, nearly everyone on this board agreed in the Pioli principle of drafting the best player available. Now that it appears that we need linemen, most people seem to have done a 180. For the record, I've always believed in the "blended" model whereby you take the best player available at a position of need.[/quote]

Not me.
I am neither a "needs" or a "best athlete available" draft theory person.
There are a lot less big (in size) athletes in our population. There are a lot less quality athletes that are 6'4" to 6'7" and 300 pounds then there are 5'9' to 6'4" and 220 pounds athletes in our population. Lineman are in big pileups and can get hurt more frequently, so it is important to have good backups.
I believe in drafting defense and size (O & D lineman)first, when you can. You can always trade a quality defensive player or lineman and get value in return.
There are always quality skill position players available every off season, but there are [B]not[/B] many [B]quality[/B] lineman or defensive players, they are a hot commodity.
You do not draft a punter or a kicker.

Re: Cerrato Vaguely Explains Draft Strategy (with Questionable Evidence)
 

[quote=firstdown;512701]People are reading this wrong. He wanted to draft a O Line but the ones we thought worth drafting were gone. So we did not draft an O Lineman just for need and that what he was saying. He has made his mistakes but what he said made sense but his delievery was not the best.[/quote]

No, Cerrato is coming off looking like an idiot. As many here point out he says you don't draft for need and then says that they needed tall receivers to run the west coast offense. Then he says there was a load of linemen they wanted but they were all gone by their pick...uh....maybe project and draft up then??

You don't always have to move back or stand pat.

Anyway, Cerrato is just throwing some smoke screen out there. I'm sure Danny was making the picks or at least told Cerrato to go get some offensive guys.