Latest from JLC: The lying game

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by irish

There is no way this organization will draft a defensive lineman. It's just not attractive and exciting enough of a position to make the kind of media splash this organization craves.

Although I am 99.99999% certain he will be gone if the Skins stay at 6, if he is available the Skins will draft QB Jamarcus Russell.

Are you kidding? I am desperately looking for sarcasm here, but I can't find it. D-lineman is not an "attractive and exciting enough of a position..." ???? Is it more attractive and exciting to be 27th in the league against the run and have a banged-up, aging D-line with a weak pass rush? It's "attractive and exciting" to win football games. I will argue that regardless of where we end up picking in the first round, we will take the best D-lineman available.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Is it more attractive and exciting to be 27th in the league against the run and have a banged-up, aging D-line with a weak pass rush?

That's a question for the coaches/front office -- I'm not convinced they're actually going to draft a D-lineman.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

That's a question for the coaches/front office -- I'm not convinced they're actually going to draft a D-lineman.

I don't think the coaches are really worried about what's "attractive and exciting." I think they're worried about what puts us in the best position to win ball games. I was just quoting Irish.

All I'm saying is there's no denying it's a definite area of pressing need. So if we end up taking a guy like Landry and don't draft any D-lineman, do you not agree we have to take more steps to address the position? We'd have to get a guy after the June 1st cuts (maybe a Kris Jenkins).

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by GMScud

All I'm saying is there's no denying it's a definite area of pressing need. So if we end up taking a guy like Landry and don't draft any D-lineman, do you not agree we have to take more steps to address the position? We'd have to get a guy after the June 1st cuts (maybe a Kris Jenkins).

Absolutely. They should get both Jenkins and Ian Scott if they don't use their draft picks for D-linemen. My personal feeling is that Griffin and Salave's are both done; that they have been totally milked for all they're worth. The biggest fear I have is that the coaching staff believes they are fine with the current front four.

If Ian Scott is available now, why haven't they snatched him up? They've shown interest in every other aspect of defense (linebacker and secondary) other than the defensive line. That's why I'm starting to have this feeling that maybe they're not even considering DE or DT. Maybe they felt like last year's drafting of Golston and Montgomery, along with the signing of Andre Carter shored up any weaknesses at the front four.

The more I hear about Landry, the less irate I feel like I would be if we actually drafted him -- but that's assuming they pick up a defensive tackle or end somehow, somewhere. I'd be fitted for a straight-jacket if they completely ignore the front four and went for Landry then did something really stupid and pulled off a trade for an offensive guard or something.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Absolutely. They should get both Jenkins and Ian Scott if they don't use their draft picks for D-linemen. My personal feeling is that Griffin and Salave's are both done; that they have been totally milked for all they're worth. The biggest fear I have is that the coaching staff believes they are fine with the current front four.

If Ian Scott is available now, why haven't they snatched him up? They've shown interest in every other aspect of defense (linebacker and secondary) other than the defensive line. That's why I'm starting to have this feeling that maybe they're not even considering DE or DT. Maybe they felt like last year's drafting of Golston and Montgomery, along with the signing of Andre Carter shored up any weaknesses at the front four.

The more I hear about Landry, the less irate I feel like I would be if we actually drafted him -- but that's assuming they pick up a defensive tackle or end somehow, somewhere. I'd be fitted for a straight-jacket if they completely ignore the front four and went for Landry then did something really stupid and pulled off a trade for an offensive guard or something.

Yeah, I hear ya. Landry would be great provided we still significantly address the D-line. I know Gibbs is obsessive about preparation and planning. Maybe he has a solid plan in place about what to do with the D-line, and maybe nothing has happened yet to put a kink in his plan. Wishful thinking? I really, really think we should take a good hard look at Kris Jenkins, even if we do draft a d-lineman.