Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Backup center discussion

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-09-2008, 11:25 AM   #16
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 81,273
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy View Post
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.
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.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 06-09-2008, 11:26 AM   #17
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,292
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.

Last edited by Schneed10; 06-09-2008 at 11:27 AM.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 12:57 PM   #18
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
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.
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).
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:15 PM   #19
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
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. Law of averages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:17 PM   #20
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,292
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angry View Post
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).
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.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:19 PM   #21
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,292
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMScud View Post
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. Law of averages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.
Interesting link though. It has a fascinating discussion on random events, such as flipping a coin... or other gambling phenomenon.

Last edited by Schneed10; 06-09-2008 at 01:21 PM.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:21 PM   #22
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
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.
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.
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:22 PM   #23
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,292
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMScud View Post
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.
Exactly. I guess that's the whole point. The situation bites.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:28 PM   #24
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
LOL

I hope you were being purposefully sarcastic/ironic. 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.

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?
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:36 PM   #25
MVP
 
mooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NoVa
Age: 26
Posts: 11,840
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.
mooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:40 PM   #26
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
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.

""I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach.""
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:51 PM   #27
Playmaker
 
BDBohnzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Frederick, MD
Age: 35
Posts: 4,466
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angry View Post
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?
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...
__________________
Bad Things man, I mean bad things...

“WE TOOK HIM IN THE SIXTH ROUND SO WE'RE NOT SMART EITHER.” - Shanny on what the Skins saw in Alfred Morris
BDBohnzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 01:53 PM   #28
Playmaker
 
Defensewins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,847
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.

Last edited by Defensewins; 06-09-2008 at 01:53 PM.
Defensewins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 02:14 PM   #29
Camp Scrub
 
Kope65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 9
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.
Kope65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2008, 02:25 PM   #30
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,292
re: Backup center discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMScud View Post
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?
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.

Last edited by Schneed10; 06-09-2008 at 02:25 PM.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.39455 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25