Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by KB24

Here's something no one has considered. If we want to give up two draft picks so badly for an established player, why aren't we going after Kansas City DE Jared Allen? He just turned 26, led the league in sacks with 15.5 last season and would fill a bigger need immediately on the Redskins. Oh, that's right. Chad Johnson jerseys probably would sell much better than Jared Allen ones.

Because this isn't a college spring game. This is the NFL, you beat your opponents by scoring more points than them. Sacks do not equal points, (safety excluded) touchdowns do.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Angry

Because this isn't a college spring game. This is the NFL, you beat your opponents by scoring more points than them. Sacks do not equal points, (safety excluded) touchdowns do.

But a dominant D-Line can shut down an opponent's offense so you don't have to score as many points to win. (See NYG Superbowl win)

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

But a dominant D-Line can shut down an opponent's offense so you don't have to score as many points to win. (See NYG Superbowl win)

I understand your argument, however we already have a solid Defense that has been limiting other team's offense. We need to generate more points ourselves. If we would have scored 3-7 more points a game, we may have only lost one game last season.

[KB24]

Originally Posted by Angry

I understand your argument, however we already have a solid Defense that has been limiting other team's offense. We need to generate more points ourselves. If we would have scored 3-7 more points a game, we may have only lost one game last season.

Do you mean that same solid defense that has only one bonafide pass-rusher, question marks in the secondary due to age (Springs) and injury (Rogers), and lost winnable games against Dallas, the Giants, Philly and Buffalo because it couldn't make stops?

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by KB24

Do you mean that same solid defense that has only one bonafide pass-rusher and lost winnable games against Dallas, the Giants, Philly and Buffalo because it couldn't make stops?

On the flip side of that coin we only needed 3 to 7 more points to beat each of those teams.

Our offense averaged only 20.9 PPG our D only allowed 19.4 PPG and alot of those points you cannot blame on the Defense. Our offense was not staying on the field long enough and often turned the ball over. That gave opponents favorable field position.

If we are still losing close games in a year and our Offense is putting up 24 PPG or more, then I will say that we need to upgrade the D.

[KB24]

Originally Posted by Angry

On the flip side of that coin we only needed 3 to 7 more points to beat each of those teams.

Our offense averaged only 20.9 PPG our D only allowed 19.4 PPG and alot of those points you cannot blame on the Defense. Our offense was not staying on the field long enough and often turned the ball over. That gave opponents favorable field position.

If we are still losing close games in a year and our Offense is putting up 24 PPG or more, then I will say that we need to upgrade the D.

Our offense wasn't staying on the field long enough because our aging, injury-prone offensive line with little in the way of proven back-ups wasn't getting the job done. We could have, both, Chad Johnson and Anquan Bolden at the wide out positions. It won't matter if the line can't open holes for Portis an Betts consistently, or keep Campbell upright long enough to get the ball to Moss and Company. Yes, the offense needs upgrades, but it has to start with the line.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by KB24

Our offense wasn't staying on the field long enough because our aging, injury-prone offensive line with little in the way of proven back-ups wasn't getting the job done. We could have, both, Chad Johnson and Anquan Bolden at the wide out positions. It won't matter if the line can't open holes for Portis an Betts consistently, or keep Campbell upright long enough to get the ball to Moss and Company. Yes, the offense needs upgrades, but it has to start with the line.

Dude, I am so tired of arguing that I don't want to anymore. To continue this fight with you I would have to repeat every post that I have made regarding the team over the past offseason. I do not have the time or the energy to keep revisiting the same discussions. I will just agree to disagree with you and leave it at that.

Enjoy the Draft.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by KB24

Our offense wasn't staying on the field long enough because our aging, injury-prone offensive line with little in the way of proven back-ups wasn't getting the job done. We could have, both, Chad Johnson and Anquan Bolden at the wide out positions. It won't matter if the line can't open holes for Portis an Betts consistently, or keep Campbell upright long enough to get the ball to Moss and Company. Yes, the offense needs upgrades, but it has to start with the line.

Our offensive line improved by mid to late season. And the Redskins I believe fared well in giving up sacks...I think they were ranked 13th in sacks allowed (giving up around 29 sacks). What was constant last season was our offense's inability to score and put the game away was a big reason we lost those close games, and the fact that our WR receivers didn't score a TD well into the season should tell you something about our passing game. I mean look at how we lost the game in the playoffs, when we recover that kickoff that sailed over Burleson's head, we could not even score 3 points.

While I admit that gambling on our defense, which does need improvements, is a risk somehow they have managed to keep our team competitive two out of the past three years. Wheareas our offense has always held us back.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Angry

On the flip side of that coin we only needed 3 to 7 more points to beat each of those teams.

Our offense averaged only 20.9 PPG our D only allowed 19.4 PPG and alot of those points you cannot blame on the Defense. Our offense was not staying on the field long enough and often turned the ball over. That gave opponents favorable field position.

If we are still losing close games in a year and our Offense is putting up 24 PPG or more, then I will say that we need to upgrade the D.

I understand the stats you are quoting. But Campbell's development and Zorn's offense will be the determining factor in improved offensive production. CJ will not lift the average scoring output by himself. If Campbell doesn't develop, or we have injury issues on an aging OL this deal is basically worthless.

Our defense, while playing well in the latter part of the year after they abandoned the Cover 2, has some glaring issues; a young strong-side DE is needed, DT who can collapse the pocket, LB depth, young shut-down corner, Safety depth.

CJ is a talented WR, one of the better ones in the NFL, but we have so many issues to address and the offensive development doesn't hinge on a star WR right now. It hinges on Zorn, Campbell, a healthy OL and healthy Portis. If one of those components has a problem it basically negates any benefit CJ would bring. Then we've given up a 1st this year and 3rd in 2009 for a 31 yr. old WR whose production could be in decline and whose attitude may have created problems with team chemistry. Risk & price too high, reward too low.