Jets tried to trade for Betts

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by holcknowsbest

oh and somebody clue redskins rich in on this joe gibbs type of runner. his statements about north and south are so retarded that i end up looking like a dick when i have to say he is fing retarded. portis is north south you freaking clueless ones.

Keep flaming and the only one needing a clue will be you when you can't log on anymore. The mods do a good job of patrolling around here and I am pretty sure that calling people retarded and/or fing retarded is a no-no.

[holcknowsbest]

for the money we are gonna give fletcher he will be a bust.....his stats arent the problem....his play isnt the fix.....and stop gap until we draft someone huh? well let me tell you this name the last rookie linebacker to start after he was drafted. not ol rocky who we traded up to get...g will likes vets but this vet wont get it done...there isnt enough talent around him to run free to the ball and at 5-9 240 he is basically smaller than marshall 6-2 235 and will get eaten up just like marshall did. just another bust its my lock of the year.

[Questfor31]

Ladell Betts proved he was stud last year. The two headed monster at running back seems to be the new hot formation for NFL offenses in the last couple of years ... Colts, Bears, Jags, Saints, Broncos, Pats, Cowboys.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Daseal:

Where did you come up with the phrase "use Portis as our bellcow"? That was the description that Frank Broyles used to use all the time when he and Keith Jackson used to do the college football games on ABC before there was such a thing as ESPN. You are way too young to remember those days...

[DGreen28]

Trade Betts for DLineman or Draft pick. Think that Rock can carry the ball as Portis's backup

[MTK]

I thought for a rookie 6th rounder Golston played extremely well and flashed some very promising moments. All considered I thought he exceeded expectations and gave us a reason to look forward to his further development.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I thought for a rookie 6th rounder Golston played extremely well and flashed some very promising moments. All considered I thought he exceeded expectations and gave us a reason to look forward to his further development.

But did he exceed expectations to the point that we are fine and dandy at defensive tackle?

I don't think you can look at the performance of any player at that position last year and draw that conclusion.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

But did he exceed expectations to the point that we are fine and dandy at defensive tackle?

I don't think you can look at the performance of any player at that position last year and draw that conclusion.

I just think that between Golston, Griffin, Montgomery and Salavea we ought to be able to put together a full season of decent enough play. I can't say that about the DEs without Adams or someone else new. I remember when we brought in Stubblefield and Wilkinson people were making similiar arguments. They were going to draw double teams and free up the LBers, collapse the pocket. I thought they played okay but they didn't make Rod Stephens any better.

I think we could get better play at Tackle but I don't buy the argument that they were the weak link or that their shoddy play is preventing other people from getting it done. Tackle will have to wait. And, I do think you are too bearish on Golston. He made a lot of plays last year. People always say, "Let's develop our own talent". I say that Kedrick represents on opportunity to do exactly that.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

I just think that between Golston, Griffin, Montgomery and Salavea we ought to be able to put together a full season of decent enough play. I can't say that about the DEs without Adams or someone else new. I remember when we brought in Stubblefield and Wilkinson people were making similiar arguments. They were going to draw double teams and free up the LBers, collapse the pocket. I thought they played okay but they didn't make Rod Stephens any better.

I think we could get better play at Tackle but I don't buy the argument that they were the weak link or that their shoddy play is preventing other people from getting it done. Tackle will have to wait. And, I do think you are too bearish on Golston. He made a lot of plays last year. People always say, "Let's develop our own talent". I say that Kedrick represents on opportunity to do exactly that.

I'm not saying Golston should be kicked off the team or anything. I think he's fine as a #3 rotation guy. But we already saw what he, Griffin, Salave'a and Montgomery were able to accomplish last year -- a #27 ranking against the run. Plus, they're all another year older and Salave'a has proved again and again that he's been vulnerable to injuries on a frequent basis. He was never meant to be a full time starter anyway. Griffin's getting to be the same way.

That brings up another point. Remember the flack we got when signing Griffin? The word on him was that he was a one-season wonder. He did great for his rookie year in NY, then gradually started to fizzle. There's a very similar pattern here. And this time, he's eight years older.

The Stubblefield/Wilkinson comparisons are irrelevant. Those guys just didn't work. Now, that's not to say if we were to draft Alan Branch or any other D-tackle that instantly shores up all defeciences in rush defense -- sure, he very well turn out to be a bust. That goes for every player out there.

We may disagree as to the percentage of blame the defensive tackles get for failing to stop the run in '06. Personally, I'd put it at around 60-70% -- the rest being the linebackers and ends. But the DTs are the guys in the trenches who are primarily responsible for clogging things up. They failed miserably. If we leave things as they are at that position, without even adding one player for insurance in case they get injured, expect more of the same in '07.

Bottom line, we already saw what these four guys were able to give us last year. What would give you the impression that there's some sort of magical turn-around in store?

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Bottom line, we already saw what these four guys were able to give us last year. What would give you the impression that there's some sort of magical turn-around in store?

This statement could apply to any group on the defense. We just disagree about who's more to blame, I guess. My perception was that the DTs played at about the same level they had in 04 and 05 when we were great against the run. I thought the drop off was at LB and DE - mainly because Carter had trouble against power and Holdman just lacked talent. I wish the fact that the coaches seem (and I emphasize SEEM) to agree with me were more reassuring than it is. Your analysis could well be the correct one. I think we all could agree that Tackle will have to be dealt with next year if not this.

My bottom line is that I think we're better off with Golston and Griffin than we are with Daniels and Carter. Carter MAY be a bust and Daniels is DEFINITELY getting up there in age.

I would also say that the Stubblefield/Wilkinson argument is not wholly irrelevant. We must have learned something from that. I think the lesson is that improving the DT position is not a silver bullet that will improve the play of other positions - which is one of the main arguments you hear from the Branch faction. Can't we also say that having Adams will improve the play of Golston? Also, there are reports that Branch may have some Stubblebutt-like tendencies. (weight, poor work habits, etc.)

[12thMan]

I pretty much share Matty's sentiments about Golston...and don't forget Montgomery, he has showed promise too. I think GW will keep fresh bodies rotating in the middle and we'll go for a big, fast DE instead of someone in the middle.

Griff was getting man handled last year. I'll chalk it up to his hip issues, but those things do tend to linger. Let's hope he can bounce back.