• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

Building a team, with what we currently have

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,705
Reaction score
106
Points
143
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc
Alma Mater
UTEP
1- you dont trade RG3, you will never even remotely get what you paid for him right now, HOWEVER, if Gruden is interested in building a legacy here, he will find a way to maximise RG3, if kyle shanahan could do it, then Gruden can. even if its just to increase his value so that gruden can trade him for some value, gruden has to see that increasing RG3's value is in his best long term interest.

2-you take this hit this year and play young players BUT only if they have upside, the best teams all have a solid mix of vets and young guys, best player plays and young guys get on the field only if they earn it.

3-no matter who you bring in to be a DC and no matter what front concepts he wants to run, YOU PLAY AGGRESSIVE FOOTBALL. we will either go big or go home, but at least it gives us hope, watching as haslett shit the bed so often in the clutch means anything is an improvement so just give us some good old fashioned pressure defence, we will be forgiving this year, so take risks.

4-FIX THE OLINE FIX THE OLINE FIX THE OLINE, no excuses, before you draft one godamn player on offence at any other position, you better draft at least one preferably 2 Olinemen to go with several young free agents and some later round picks. If you draft a receiver or TE or god forbid a QB, im so done with this team, unless its a generational defensive player who will singlehandedly win you games I better see Oline early and often. we have a huge investment at QB, but we will only see what he can do if he isnt getting hit on every single play. now is not the time for high risk players, now is the time for sure things.

5-do NOT trade down unless the trade is ridiculously one sided, yes we have holes, but we also lack top end talent, aside from TW and perhaps Desean and Kerrigan, we have nobody who would start for ANY team in the league. we need some more "gotta get em on madden" guys.

6-Fix the secondary, especially safety, depending on the DC, go get dbs who fit the scheme, and most importantly understand that you will have to spend money in free agency, but not on a 32 year old.

7-be smart in free agency, if a great player is interested, do your homework, and pull the trigger but no old guys, thats for 2 years down the road once we get a couple drafts and build up some talent, right now its about putting the base in.

8- prioritise, yes the d is horrible, and yes the secondary is bad, but if we build an Oline quickly, we could have an Offence that is solid right away, and since we would then lose shootouts, we would have a second year of decent picks with which to rebuild the defence. we cant fix everything so first fix the oline because that gives Rg3 a fighting chance at showing it was not an epic screwjob to draft him before putting an oline in place, hopefully he regains his form but then if he doesnt, you build up your defence next season, take your lumps , draft well and in season three after you have a stud Oline and a solid defence, you go after a franchise qb, and if he isnt there, you stock up your oline and Defence one more year and do it again the next year, thats how dynasties are born.

I am willing to watch a rebuild, if its a real rebuild. I will tough it out, but I cant watch as we make stupid mistakes anymore, its too hard. if Gruden goes all ego and tries to " win with kirk or colt" I will not be amused, if we do not hire a competant DC, I will not be amused, and if we do not find and hire much better assistant coaches especially Oline, I will not be amused.

we are watching, and im pretty certain nobody here is rooting for this team to fail, we just have ver lowered expectations. oh and eff the cowpies, I will be cheering against them no matter who they play.
 
I'd go d-line first....but there are many paths to the same end. over the last two years...the d, IMO, has been the bigger liability. See Indy and KC games for reference material.
 
We don't know much yet, obviously, but some inklings have been divulged concerning Scot M.'s approach to drafting most notably a baseline preference for a BPA approach rather than a specific "draft for need"-a long term development strategy. I do expect-even in this first plunge into draft waters with a new GM who does have a track record of superlative talent-spotting some perceived needs will be addressed happily for Redskins fans simply because there are needs in so many areas. Ry, would you be amenable to something like a player sought out by Scot and Jay that while a notable need, for example safety or CB, or, perhaps a TE with a great college reputation as a blocker were grabbed with the first pick or a DT/NT rather than an OL right off the bat with, say, OL picks coming in later rounds?
 
All the best GM/organizations operate on the BPA approach. All of them.

I HOPE, there happens to be some studs for the front 7, or some studs for the Oline, or some studs for the secondary.

We just need more studs. And I don't give a hoot in hell what round, what UDFA, what FA, or what rock we find them under.
Smart. Big. Fast. Strong. Mean.
 
Agree for the most part except for number 1 and number 4.

Number 1:
We have to stop making decisions based on what we gave up for a player. I WANT to see Griffin do it. I like Griffin. Critical of him? sure... but I do truly want to see him be our QB. I DONT want our Front Office making emotional decisions based on 'wanting' a guy to succeed, or based on what we gave up to get them. If Gruden and McCloughan don't believe he's got what it takes, then they need to make that decision and stick to it. If (and it appears at this point he does) McCloughan evaluates Griffin and see's what he needs to see... GREAT, but we can't hold onto players because of what a previous decision maker gave up for them.


Number 4:
We are such a talent ridden team that we NEED to take the best player that can make a difference and would fit for the long term. Outside of WR or RB, we need help. I wouldn't like to see us take a QB (hell i'd hate it) because we have so many other needs to address. Pretty much anything else can be addressed. I don't want us to draft for 'Need' because I don't want us to take a tackle at 5 who grades out for middle of the round. Not if there is a legit stud of a player who can be a franchise guy at 5.... regardless of position.
 
We need big people who can compete and win at the line of scrimmage. On both sides of the ball. We haven't done that here in recent memory.

Among the encouraging things our new GM said yesterday was that his focus has been and will be on big people. At one point--and I don't recall the exact words he used--he drilled down on that a bit to stress the people up front.

I think we're going to see a big effort over the next few years to get bigger, younger and faster on the LOS. And for the first time in a long time, we're going to have some comfort level in the evaluation process that is going into procuring those guys.
 
I'll chalk it up to PTSD from Vinny years but I get leery hearing BPA...that is until now. Pretty sure we ALL agree both sides of the big uglies is where we're most malnourished. I personally would be giddy taking a G or RT with that 5 pick tho seems we FINALLY...after forever and a day have a GM who won't neglect quality O-line.

I think the bigger question at hand is giving Scot a nickname.
 
Agree for the most part except for number 1 and number 4.

Number 1:
We have to stop making decisions based on what we gave up for a player. I WANT to see Griffin do it. I like Griffin. Critical of him? sure... but I do truly want to see him be our QB. I DONT want our Front Office making emotional decisions based on 'wanting' a guy to succeed, or based on what we gave up to get them. If Gruden and McCloughan don't believe he's got what it takes, then they need to make that decision and stick to it. If (and it appears at this point he does) McCloughan evaluates Griffin and see's what he needs to see... GREAT, but we can't hold onto players because of what a previous decision maker gave up for them.


Number 4:
We are such a talent ridden team that we NEED to take the best player that can make a difference and would fit for the long term. Outside of WR or RB, we need help. I wouldn't like to see us take a QB (hell i'd hate it) because we have so many other needs to address. Pretty much anything else can be addressed. I don't want us to draft for 'Need' because I don't want us to take a tackle at 5 who grades out for middle of the round. Not if there is a legit stud of a player who can be a franchise guy at 5.... regardless of position.

in short...difference makers!
 
don't forget..there are many scenarios: suppose Cooper is BPA at 5....one option is to draft and trade other WRs for a 3, 4 or 5. value is driven by how confident the strategists/evaluators are that they have a gem identified & projected for one of those rounds + high probability the player will be available.....or maybe there are several such players. just sayin there is more than one way to skin a cat....and get better across the board.
 
I'd go d-line first....but there are many paths to the same end. over the last two years...the d, IMO, has been the bigger liability. See Indy and KC games for reference material.

I just have to disagree. Given a decent OL, the defense is on the field less times. There were too many games last year where the offense would go 3 and out on 3 or 4 possessions in the 2nd half, putting our defense back on the field where they would make stop after stop, only to be placed back on the field because our offense was incapable of providing them rest with a time consuming drive...all based on the extremely poor play by our OL.

There was one game where the opposing team, I can't remember who, had 7 possessions in the 2nd half of a game and only scored on the last 2 possessions of the 2nd half . We lost that close game, a game we led going into the 4th quarter. If any teams is given that many chances, it's because our offense is failing.

Not to mention, there are no defensive lineman in the top 10 we will have a chance to draft. There are 3-4 OL in the top 10 of this year's draft.
 
I could see where a good improved defense would help out also especially if it was able to create turnovers and stops and give the offense better field position
 
I just have to disagree. Given a decent OL, the defense is on the field less times. There were too many games last year where the offense would go 3 and out on 3 or 4 possessions in the 2nd half, putting our defense back on the field where they would make stop after stop, only to be placed back on the field because our offense was incapable of providing them rest with a time consuming drive...all based on the extremely poor play by our OL.

There was one game where the opposing team, I can't remember who, had 7 possessions in the 2nd half of a game and only scored on the last 2 possessions of the 2nd half . We lost that close game, a game we led going into the 4th quarter. If any teams is given that many chances, it's because our offense is failing.

Not to mention, there are no defensive lineman in the top 10 we will have a chance to draft. There are 3-4 OL in the top 10 of this year's draft.

Agreed. Offensive Line is terribly important and the most neglected position on this team format over a decade. Both Lines for that matter. I agree. A good offensive line sustains drives and keeps defense fresher. To me, we have to rebuild the right side first. Both RT and RG. Defensively, it starts up front. I'd you can't getbpressure with your four up front, then you have to blitz more often, which creates mismatches and open receivers.
 
you guys advocating defence missed the point I think.

you build the oline because they are the ones who your offence revolves around, you can make a decent qb good and a good qb great if you protect him and give him a solid run game. the reason you build your oline first, is because you can and should turn a defence around with one years resources, one year of concentrating the draft and free agency on defence with good coaching and scheme and you can literally go worst to first, while offence takes time to gel and Olinemen take some seasoning. more importantly you keep your playmaker healthy.

when I say maximise Rg3s value its not just because of what we paid and how far it set us back, its also because you do not want to waste those resources and frankly he is more than good enough to transition us if thats all he turns out to be we NEED to get this Oline built, its been garbage for too long.

I am always ok with BPA, I have been vocal about that, my issue was always with the gumbies doing the evaluations, I do not want a corner or a safety with our first, because frankly neither of them is gonna make this team that much better.
 
I am always ok with BPA, I have been vocal about that, my issue was always with the gumbies doing the evaluations, I do not want a corner or a safety with our first, because frankly neither of them is gonna make this team that much better.

I agree with you here. I think the frustration with BPA in previous years is that there is no faith in the people determining which player is the BPA. From what I understand, Collins is similar to Brandon Meriweather... we need range out there, a CF type player that can play the ball. Collins' strength is between the tackles and in run defense.
 
I think the bigger question at hand is giving Scot a nickname.
Mr. McGlue

Back to BPA...Obviously, you always hope that the analysis is right, concerning BPA. Instinct, about a guy, has to be the deciding factor, doesn't it? Anybody can read, 6' whatever,200 and whatever, fast, smart, etc... We have to trust the guy making the call (as if we have a choice).

So, if our new guy, Mr. McGlue, thinks the BPA at #5 is the next Art Monk, or Kenny Houston, verses the need pick of Andre Johnson, or Kenard Lang, he HAS to take the WR/S, if he can't trade out of the spot.

Again, obviously, if the difference between BPA and NEED is not so drastic, you go need.
 
I can dig McGlue...McLuvin...Big Mac..Big Red....ect...we'll have a nomination & vote in time.

Normally hearing the BPA approach would give worry, but this guy is proven, especially finding mid round gems. Especially like the thought of us having a monstrous sized defense.
 
Mr. McGlue

Back to BPA...Obviously, you always hope that the analysis is right, concerning BPA. Instinct, about a guy, has to be the deciding factor, doesn't it? Anybody can read, 6' whatever,200 and whatever, fast, smart, etc... We have to trust the guy making the call (as if we have a choice).

So, if our new guy, Mr. McGlue, thinks the BPA at #5 is the next Art Monk, or Kenny Houston, verses the need pick of Andre Johnson, or Kenard Lang, he HAS to take the WR/S, if he can't trade out of the spot.

Again, obviously, if the difference between BPA and NEED is not so drastic, you go need.

Ive looked at the draft already, I dont think thats an issue, the issue really is which topflght Olineman do we take, there are a couple dlinemen but they will go either 1-2-or -3 I dont think any of the qbs will be top 5 picks lost of flash no substance. but yeah you go BPA ALWAYS, but if its close, you go BPA combined with need, we have always juist thrown darts at a board it seems like.
 
You can't beat McLovin. He's like...21... The first grownup at Redskins Park in forever.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friends 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, and 'Posse Lover', Michael Huffman, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you guys ❤

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top