Backup center discussion
 

There was an [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/04/AR2008060404331.html"]article in the WaPo[/URL] last week that stated Jansen has been taking snaps at center and as of right now he would be the #2 guy if Rabach went down. Anyone else have a problem with this? I really hope that's not the plan for the season. There's gotta be a guy out there that would be serviceable enough as a backup center. I wonder what happened with the plans to work in Reinhart at center.

re: Backup center discussion
 

yeah, that's not a good look at all. we really need to find somebody.

apparently lecharles bentley is taking a physical today. the browns don't need him though. plus this is the final year of his contract and he hasn't done a thing for them. so hopefully he'll get cut (or least shopped) and we can go after him.

re: Backup center discussion
 

Cerrato said last week that he doesn't anticipate Rhinehart getting time at Center in the immediate future, but that Crummey would be getting a look there.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=SmootSmack;451960]Cerrato said last week that he doesn't anticipate Rhinehart getting time at Center in the immediate future, but that [B]Crummey would be getting a look there[/B].[/quote]

That would be a situation equally crappy to having Jansen be the backup. I trust Buges when it comes to identifying talent along the offensive line for the long term, but Crummey's still an undrafted rookie who's natural position is not C.

Jansen as the back-up center makes me nervous. It reminds me of the attempt to move Todd Wade to G. It just feels like square peg in a round hole. I don't care how many snaps Jansen took at C in college, it's different in the pros.

I definitely have my fingers crossed when it comes to Rabach's health this season.

re: Backup center discussion
 

I read the article few days ago; I don't think it looks good for us.. However his size may help other O-line men since he is pretty big and he could push some D-line men around.. But this definitely does not look good, and I wonder why we did not go after any free agent Cs or even undrafted rookies?

re: Backup center discussion
 

I think that you guys are making a big deal out of nothing. How hard is it to slam the ball into your taint before you engage in a block?

re: Backup center discussion
 

I think the potential problem is with his height. At 6-6 that's really tall for a center and opposing defensive lineman would have an advantage regarding leverage and getting under his pads. He would have to play awfully low. And then there's the potential issue with the shotgun. Snapping in the gun is not an easy thing to do and it's something that requires a lot of practice.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[QUOTE=J. Spanky;451958]yeah, that's not a good look at all. we really need to find somebody.

apparently lecharles bentley is taking a physical today. the browns don't need him though. plus this is the final year of his contract and he hasn't done a thing for them. so hopefully he'll get cut (or least shopped) and we can go after him.[/QUOTE]

didnt they just sign him like two years ago to a huge deal and then he went down for the year with a knee injury.
How is he already on the last year of that contract.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Angry;451965]I think that you guys are making a big deal out of nothing. How hard is it to slam the ball into your taint before you engage in a block?[/quote]

It is pretty big deal, Center is basically the QB of O-line.. You would have to read the D-line and even anything that would hint blitz then you would have to tell ur sides to watch our for them.. Once you snap the ball, u have to make sure u put it in right place (Like Matty mentioned, especially during the shotgun formula)..

re: Backup center discussion
 

[QUOTE]I think that you guys are making a big deal out of nothing. How hard is it to slam the ball into your taint before you engage in a block?
[/QUOTE]

HAHA yea seriously Jansen will probably get hurt again and Rabach will be fine. All this fuss is about who can slam a ball into their taint better then who.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Mattyk72;451966]I think the potential problem is with his height. At 6-6 that's really tall for a center and opposing defensive lineman would have an advantage regarding leverage and getting under his pads. He would have to play awfully low. And then there's the potential issue with the shotgun. Snapping in the gun is not an easy thing to do and it's something that requires a lot of practice.[/quote]

1. Santana Moss is only 5'10" and plays reciever against taller corners with a height advantage, but still manages to get the job done. The height thing is no excuse to me.

2. The skins have not run the WCO but are doing it this year. It is going to take alot of practice but they will get it done.

3. We are doing several things against the norm, but they are nothing to hyperventilate over. These guys are all still professional athletes.

re: Backup center discussion
 

I'm sure all they are doing is having Jansen pratice so if they loose Rebach in the middle of a game we have his back up. Then we could have our back up center on the pratice sq. and not taking up a spot on the active roster. I also heard Buges interviewed last week on the Riggo show and he said both Thomas and Jansen have come into to camp in very good shape after rehab. He said they are knockin players off the ball and the entire O line looks really good. They have Heyer (speeling) playing both sides of the line and he has really come along way this off season. He thought that our depth was strong and that he was very comfortable with our O Line.

re: Backup center discussion
 

Once Crummey can get healthy I think he is going to be a great addition to the line. From what I saw of him at Maryland, I think he will be solid at guard or center.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;451966]I think the potential problem is with his height. At 6-6 that's really tall for a center and opposing defensive lineman would have an advantage regarding leverage and getting under his pads. He would have to play awfully low. And then there's the potential issue with the shotgun. Snapping in the gun is not an easy thing to do and it's something that requires a lot of practice.[/QUOTE]

One problem that Campbell had last year was that he was having to almost squat on the ground when he was under center and I know that was something the coaching staff wanted to address for next season. Could be the reason why they were trying Jansen out there. And, maybe it looks like the road for JJ is coming to an end, especially with his rash of injuries the past few seasons.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Angry;451974]1. Santana Moss is only 5'10" and plays reciever against taller corners with a height advantage, but still manages to get the job done. The height thing is no excuse to me.

2. The skins have not run the WCO but are doing it this year. It is going to take alot of practice but they will get it done.

3. We are doing several things against the norm, but they are nothing to hyperventilate over. These guys are all still professional athletes.[/quote]

I'm not saying height is an excuse, it's just a potential issue at that position. There's a good reason why 6-6 centers aren't common.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=skinsguy;451981]One problem that Campbell had last year was that he was having to almost squat on the ground when he was under center and I know that was something the coaching staff wanted to address for next season. Could be the reason why they were trying Jansen out there. And, maybe it looks like the road for JJ is coming to an end, especially with his rash of injuries the past few seasons.[/quote]

I remember Zorn saying at some point he wanted to work with Rabach on staying higher in his stance to help out JC in that regard.

re: Backup center discussion
 

Sounds like a whole lot of hope and not a lot of substance from the "we'll be fine" camp.

First, you don't do a whole lot of "blowing people off the ball" in OTAs. They're non-contact and no pads.

As Matty mentioned, Jansen is tall and will be easy for DTs to get under should he be forced into center duty. Also, with longer legs, the higher the chance is he'll step back on JC's feet.

The real problem with this situation is that if one guy gets hurt (Rabach), we essentially have two backups coming onto the field. Jansen moves to C, which makes me nervous as it is for reasons already mentioned, and on top of that Heyer comes in to play RT. Two backups at once, with Randy Thomas (the RG) in the middle of all that shifting, will all of a sudden have to get used to two changes on that side of the line. That sounds like a disaster from an assignment standpoint.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Schneed10;451985]Sounds like a whole lot of hope and not a lot of substance from the "we'll be fine" camp.

First, you don't do a whole lot of "blowing people off the ball" in OTAs. They're non-contact and no pads.

As Matty mentioned, Jansen is tall and will be easy for DTs to get under should he be forced into center duty. Also, with longer legs, the higher the chance is he'll step back on JC's feet.

The real problem with this situation is that if one guy gets hurt (Rabach), we essentially have two backups coming onto the field. Jansen moves to C, which makes me nervous as it is for reasons already mentioned, and on top of that Heyer comes in to play RT. Two backups at once, with Randy Thomas (the RG) in the middle of all that shifting, will all of a sudden have to get used to two changes on that side of the line. That sounds like a disaster from an assignment standpoint.[/quote]

True but from Bugel's standpoint the 5 best healthy players will be on the field in that situation. I understand our concern, but I feel he is more qualified to decide what is best for the team, at least until the Oline situation stinks and does not work; then we can lynch him (Bugel).

re: Backup center discussion
 

Fortunately Rabach has been very durable. He's been a full time starter at C since the beginning of the '04 season, and has only missed one game in that 4 season span.

Based simply on the law of averages, our offensive line has gotta have a healthy season. No way we can be that ravaged again. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages]Law of averages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Angry;452007]True but from Bugel's standpoint the 5 best healthy players will be on the field in that situation. I understand our concern, but I feel he is more qualified to decide what is best for the team, at least until the Oline situation stinks and does not work; then we can lynch him (Bugel).[/quote]

So long as it's recognized that this opinion basically says "I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach." then I've got no beef.

I can't fault you for thinking Bugel is a good coach and good evaluator of talent.

But you have to ask yourself, are we going with Jansen at backup center because Bugel thinks it will work, are are we doing it because the front office didn't get Bugel any better backup C options in FA or the draft?

Bugel believes in his guys, and he believes he can make the best out of any situation. The question isn't Joe Bugel. The question is the situation: was he given what he needs at backup C to succeed?

I say no. Hopefully Rabach stays healthy all 16 so we don't have to find out.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=GMScud;452009]Fortunately Rabach has been very durable. He's been a full time starter at C since the beginning of the '04 season, and has only missed one game in that 4 season span.

Based simply on the law of averages, our offensive line has gotta have a healthy season. No way we can be that ravaged again. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages"]Law of averages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL][/quote]

LOL

I hope you were being purposefully sarcastic/ironic. Because this is what it says on Wiki:

[quote]As invoked in everyday life, the "law" usually reflects bad statistics or wishful thinking rather than any mathematical principle.[/quote]

Interesting link though. It has a fascinating discussion on random events, such as flipping a coin... or other gambling phenomenon.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Schneed10;452010]So long as it's recognized that this opinion basically says "I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach." then I've got no beef.

I can't fault you for thinking Bugel is a good coach and good evaluator of talent.
[B]
But you have to ask yourself, are we going with Jansen at backup center because Bugel thinks it will work, are are we doing it because the front office didn't get Bugel any better backup C options in FA or the draft?[/B]

Bugel believes in his guys, and he believes he can make the best out of any situation. The question isn't Joe Bugel. The question is the situation: was he given what he needs at backup C to succeed?

I say no. Hopefully Rabach stays healthy all 16 so we don't have to find out.[/quote]

I think given the circumstances, Bugel hopes it will work. By "circumstances" I mean the Skins not getting him a guard/center type player to fill that role. I highly doubt Buges told Vinny & Co to not bother addressing this need because we've got. Doesn't make much sense to have a starter at one vital position also be the #1 backup at another vital position.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=GMScud;452012]I think given the circumstances, Bugel hopes it will work. By "circumstances" I mean the Skins not getting him a guard/center type player to fill that role. I highly doubt Buges told Vinny & Co to not bother addressing this need because we've got. Doesn't make much sense to have a starter at one vital position also be the #1 backup at another vital position.[/quote]

Exactly. I guess that's the whole point. The situation bites.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Schneed10;452011]LOL

[B] I hope you were being purposefully sarcastic/ironic[/B]. Because this is what it says on Wiki:



Interesting link though. It has a fascinating discussion on random events, such as flipping a coin... or other gambling phenomenon.[/quote]


Actually not really. While lots of variables factor into injuries- stretching, conditioning, smart play, etc- it's largely random and dumb luck. Not as much as so as flipping a coin, but close. Kinda like JC somehow not blowing out his knee in that preseason game because his foot didn't stick in the turf. Dumb luck. Given last year's miserable rash of injuries to a historically durable group of lineman, it would be pretty unprecedented if it repeated itself just one season later.

Sure there's no real science to it, but isn't wishful thinking what the offseason is all about?

re: Backup center discussion
 

I really don't think Jansen should be the backup center lol. I'd rather have someone we've never heard of taking the backup reps, we need Jansen at tackle and as someone mentioned earlier I think it would be like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Schneed10;452010]So long as it's recognized that this opinion basically says "I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach." then I've got no beef.

I can't fault you for thinking Bugel is a good coach and good evaluator of talent.

But you have to ask yourself, are we going with Jansen at backup center because Bugel thinks it will work, are are we doing it because the front office didn't get Bugel any better backup C options in FA or the draft?

Bugel believes in his guys, and he believes he can make the best out of any situation. The question isn't Joe Bugel. The question is the situation: was he given what he needs at backup C to succeed?

I say no. Hopefully Rabach stays healthy all 16 so we don't have to find out.[/quote]


""I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach.""

re: Backup center discussion
 

[QUOTE=Angry;451965]I think that you guys are making a big deal out of nothing. How hard is it to slam the ball into your taint before you engage in a block?[/QUOTE]
Quotable...

It's still too early to worry about this. If we're into the 3rd Preseason game with no C backup that isn't named Jon Jansen, then you worry. But I have the impression that Buges is doing this because the Skins did not get him the depth he needs to go into Training Camp...

re: Backup center discussion
 

It is not an ideal situation if have to move your starter at RT to center if your center goes down. That displaces two starter, not just one. However given our quality depth at RT (Wade & Heyer) it probably makes sense. You can have Wade or Heyer start at RT with out much of a drop off in ability from Jansen. If Jansen is our second best center on the team than it is the right move. What good is putting in a 6' 3" center to replace Rabach if that 6' 3" replacement is going to give up sacks and cause the rest of the line play worse. The height thing is a non-factor.

re: Backup center discussion
 

This might not be about Rabach at all. Mebbie Heyer has become the RT, and that is why JJ is now backing up at center.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=GMScud;452014]Actually not really. While lots of variables factor into injuries- stretching, conditioning, smart play, etc- it's largely random and dumb luck. Not as much as so as flipping a coin, but close. Kinda like JC somehow not blowing out his knee in that preseason game because his foot didn't stick in the turf. Dumb luck. Given last year's miserable rash of injuries to a historically durable group of lineman, it would be pretty unprecedented if it repeated itself just one season later.

Sure there's no real science to it, but isn't wishful thinking what the offseason is all about?[/quote]

OK. But using the Law of Averages to say we're due for an injury-free season is bad reasoning, just making sure that kind of reasoning isn't creeping in here.

The Law of Averages says we should have an "average" injury season. Last year's ravage is in the past, and has no bearing on this year. We're not due for an injury-free year any more than we're due to repeat the ravage.

You're right in saying it's dumb luck. But that's why they call it "dumb" luck. It can't even itself out.

What we're really saying here is that last year we had an abnormally high number of games missed along the line. Chances are we won't have to endure that again, as it was a pretty rare event to be that ravaged. But that doesn't mean we should be injury free. The law of averages states that we should have an "average" number of games missed along the line.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=BDBohnzie;452025]Quotable...

It's still too early to worry about this. If we're into the 3rd Preseason game with no C backup that isn't named Jon Jansen, then you worry. But I have the impression that Buges is doing this because the Skins did not get him the depth he needs to go into Training Camp...[/quote]

Then by that logic, until the backup C situation changes, we have reason to be worried about it for the start of the season.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Schneed10;452033]OK. But using the Law of Averages to say we're due for an injury-free season is bad reasoning, just making sure that kind of reasoning isn't creeping in here.

The Law of Averages says we should have an "average" injury season. Last year's ravage is in the past, and has no bearing on this year. We're not due for an injury-free year any more than we're due to repeat the ravage.

You're right in saying it's dumb luck. But that's why they call it "dumb" luck. It can't even itself out.

What we're really saying here is that last year we had an abnormally high number of games missed along the line. Chances are we won't have to endure that again, as it was a pretty rare event to be that ravaged. But that doesn't mean we should be injury free. The law of averages states that we should have an "average" number of games missed along the line.[/quote]

Well, I never said we were due for a totally injury-free season. But I think the chance of repeating the rash of injuries in consecutive seasons is much more remote than just randomly have one such season. The Law of Averages talks about random events evening things out. I simply said that given how ravaged we were last season, it would be that much more unlikely for it to occur again. And the Law of Averages agrees with that, as an "average" amount of injuries this year would mean far less than last year for us.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Kope65;452030]This might not be about Rabach at all. Mebbie Heyer has become the RT, and that is why JJ is now backing up at center.[/quote]

Doubtful, although Heyer did a serviceable job he's no Jon Jansen. Our oline got killed much of the year last year.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Kope65;452030]This might not be about Rabach at all. Mebbie Heyer has become the RT, and that is why JJ is now backing up at center.[/quote]

Right.

So now Heyer has secretly beaten out Jansen before training camp even starts and Jansen has been bumped over to center.

Please.

:doh:

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=BDBohnzie;452025]Quotable...

It's still too early to worry about this. If we're into the 3rd Preseason game with no C backup that isn't named Jon Jansen, then you worry. But I have the impression that Buges is doing this because the Skins did not get him the depth he needs to go into Training Camp...[/quote]
Well on the Riggo show Buges was very happy with the line and with its depth. I'm still thinking we end up with a backup center on the pratice sq. and Jansen would only take the center job if an injury occured durn a game. Heck it coud be they want someone ready if a back up center was to get injured. Just about all positions you have a plain A, B and C with Jon as plan C. I'm sure after June cuts there will be a few decent centers looking for work.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=firstdown;452043]Well on the Riggo show Buges was very happy with the line and with its depth. I'm still thinking we end up with a backup center on the pratice sq. and Jansen would only take the center job if an injury occured durn a game. Heck it coud be they want someone ready if a back up center was to get injured. Just about all positions you have a plain A, B and C with Jon as plan C. I'm sure after June cuts there will be a few decent centers looking for work.[/quote]

Yeah but I've never seen Buges every say something bad about his line, ever. He's always 100% supportive of them. Can't say it means a lot.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=GMScud;452039]Well, I never said we were due for a totally injury-free season. [B]But I think the chance of repeating the rash of injuries in consecutive seasons is much more remote than just randomly have one such season.[/B] The Law of Averages talks about random events evening things out. [B]I simply said that given how ravaged we were last season, it would be that much more unlikely for it to occur again.[/B] And the Law of Averages agrees with that, as an "average" amount of injuries this year would mean far less than last year for us.[/quote]

You, sir, are a subscriber to the gambler's fallacy. Out of respect for all things Warpath, I refuse to down THAT road again. But I will ask you this:

If you flip a coin and it lands on heads, what is the likelihood that it will land on heads on the NEXT flip?

If you answered anything other than 50%, you'd be wrong.

The fact that an event just occurred does nothing to change the probability of it occurring in the future.

You're right in saying that the probability of having two injury-ravaged seasons in a row is much lower than having one. But that's not the issue: the issue is will this ONE season coming up in 2008 be injury-ravaged? We're not looking at two at the same time, we're looking at one season. We're looking at the NEXT coin flip. What happened last season has no bearing, the odds remain the same.

The law of averages states that things even out. This does tend to be true, but only over TIME with large enough samples. Meaning if you look at the Skins over the next 30 seasons or so, we'll approach the average number of games missed. But we're talking about one season, about one coin flip. The odds remain the same.

The fact that we got so injured last year does not help us, nor does it hurt us, going into this season.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;452046]

You're right in saying that the probability of having two injury-ravaged seasons in a row is much lower than having one. But that's not the issue: the issue is will this ONE season coming up in 2008 be injury-ravaged? We're not looking at two at the same time, we're looking at one season. We're looking at the NEXT coin flip. What happened last season has no bearing, the odds remain the same.
[/QUOTE]

Please note in the official warpath records that this is the first time I have ever disagreed with the very astute Schneedster.

However, I would argue that coming off an injury-ravaged year makes us MORE probable to have another one, since injuries are known to have set-backs and/or cause new injuries to occur.

It's like once you have heat-stroke, you're exponentially more likely to have it again. Once you're injured, you've very likely to be injured again.

By my math, the odds are 72.9% that we'll not have an injury-filled year. My cousin Vinny the Clam from Vegas confirmed this to be accurate.

I'm not happy about it, but the numbers don't lie.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Schneed10;452046]You, sir, are a subscriber to the gambler's fallacy. Out of respect for all things Warpath, I refuse to down THAT road again. But I will ask you this:

If you flip a coin and it lands on heads, what is the likelihood that it will land on heads on the NEXT flip?

If you answered anything other than 50%, you'd be wrong.

The fact that an event just occurred does nothing to change the probability of it occurring in the future.

[B] You're right in saying that the probability of having two injury-ravaged seasons in a row is much lower than having one.[/B] But that's not the issue: the issue is will this ONE season coming up in 2008 be injury-ravaged? We're not looking at two at the same time, we're looking at one season. We're looking at the NEXT coin flip. What happened last season has no bearing, the odds remain the same.

The law of averages states that things even out. This does tend to be true, but only over TIME with large enough samples. Meaning if you look at the Skins over the next 30 seasons or so, we'll approach the average number of games missed. But we're talking about one season, about one coin flip. The odds remain the same.

The fact that we got so injured last year does not help us, nor does it hurt us, going into this season.[/quote]

That's really all I was trying to say all along. And like I said, if we have an "average" injury season, it will be far less than last season. Maybe '07 was evening out how healthy we stayed in '05 when we won 11 games (including playoffs). I wasn't trying to imply we'd be injury-free in '08 because of '07. But the Law of Averages is in our favor in the health department compared to last season.

As far as the gambler's fallacy, I guess it's a good thing I don't bet. I understand what you mean as far as probabilities are concerned. I'm not trying to take the Warpath down a road of flawed logic or anything. Trust me, I'm not that complicated.

re: Backup center discussion
 

[quote=Ade Jimoh Fan Club;452047]Please note in the official warpath records that this is the first time I have ever disagreed with the very astute Schneedster.

However, I would argue that coming off an injury-ravaged year makes us MORE probable to have another one, since injuries are known to have set-backs and/or cause new injuries to occur.

It's like once you have heat-stroke, you're exponentially more likely to have it again. Once you're injured, you've very likely to be injured again.

By my math, the odds are 72.9% that we'll not have an injury-filled year. My cousin Vinny the Clam from Vegas confirmed this to be accurate.

I'm not happy about it, but the numbers don't lie.[/quote]

Yeah you're actually correct about this, because my argument is purely academic and mathematic in nature. It assumes that the onset of injury is entirely random. This of course is not true, as players like Rocky McIntosh who have degenerative knee conditions are certainly more susceptible to injury. So yeah, some lines are going to be more injury-prone than others.

But we're talking about the Redskins here, all of whom have shown an ability to play through a lot of pain and have been largely injury-free. I would argue that Jansen's two devastating injuries (achilles, then the ankle last year) were both freakish in nature and are in no way indicative of an injury trend. Last year, someone flat out rolled up on his ankle and turned it 90 degrees sideways, that would have broken even the most bionic of ankles. I can't recall RT ever having a triceps problem before last season, and I can't recall him missing much time for us before that. Rabach and Samuels have been on the field a ton the last few years.

So in my football opinion, I think the Skins have a decent chance at staying healthy this year, because by and large I think they're very durable. Broken bones tend to heal stronger than they were before a break, good news for Jansen. And RT has more than enough time to deal with the triceps. But from a purely academic standpoint, we're no more or less likely to stay healthy because of last year's debacle. Last year has nothing to do with this year from a mathematical standpoint, and from a football/medical standpoint, I think the guys are healed up enough to get back to being their durable selves.