What did the 82, 87, & 91 Redskins have in common?

[Sharkinva]

I've always said that. The issue that most of us have been pointing out, however, is value at number five. An OLB like Fowler matches that value and a need.

I've also always said we need to use our second rounder on an o-lineman. But, my ideal scenario is to trade down with Giants and take Scherff with the ninth overall pick and pick an OT with our second rounder. If we get another second rounder from the Giants, we can get an OG like Tomlinson.

And I have been saying that if we take Fowler, we end up with Morgan Moses 2.0 sitting there in the second round. Once starting caliber O-lineman start getting picked in the first round, they get gobbled up quick.

 

[kbso83432]

Now wait just a goll dang minute. I clearly saw the line "offensive lines win championships", I didn't make that shit up. I was pretty sure it was you but maybe another post? Was it edited later? I know I saw it.

Not from me Darrell. I've never even heard that phrase spoken before. But it's all good. No harm no foul.

 

[redskinsfan]

And I have been saying that if we take Fowler, we end up with Morgan Moses 2.0 sitting there in the second round. Once starting caliber O-lineman start getting picked in the first round, they get gobbled up quick.

And the difference this year is McCloughan. I'll trust what he does, including taking Scherff at five. Will you?

 

[Sharkinva]

And the difference this year is McCloughan. I'll trust what he does, including taking Scherff at five. Will you?

Honestly... Nope. Not if he grabs another pass rusher and trots out Chester and Compton for another year.

 

[Stymietee]

Tell you guys what, I'll take dominating offensive and defensive lines and average everything else. Guess who will be beating you every time?

The whole idea behind whether or not you need a really good defensive line and an average offensive line is ridiculous. The job of the OL unit is 1. To allow the running game to be consistently effective and 2. To keep their QB clean and upright.

BTW: Have we gotten to the point where we no longer challenge statements made here. Someone wrote that the majority of SB's were not won by teams with great offensive lines....WRONG!!!.......They may not have been stocked with HOF type players, but make no mistake, every winning SB team ( possibly 1 or 2 excepted......Steelers, early Ravens) had offensive lines that were very very proficient in performing the two tasks mentioned. If you want to say that they weren't great, I'd like to know what metric you're using to determine greatness.

There was another poster on another thread you wrote football 101 was if you can't block theirs, get to their QB (paraphrasing) as justification to select a pass rusher. REALLY? Is that really football 101? Then what's.........stop them, don't let them stop you?

I am not one to settle for what's passing as good football these days, I want to see this team and their front offices return to great footbal and that can only happen when their players especially their offensive and defensive linemen consistently report that their toughest competition comes from practicing with and against one another. That said, who's willing to bet against our defense front right now, if pitted against our current offensive line? I'll allow some leeway for those too young to have witnessed great football, because they have a natural excuse of not having today's game to measure against anything else.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Not from me Darrell. I've never even heard that phrase spoken before. But it's all good. No harm no foul.

Easy for you to say. You aren't the one losing his mind.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Tell you guys what, I'll take dominating offensive and defensive lines and average everything else. Guess who will be beating you every time?

The whole idea behind whether or not you need a really good defensive line and an average offensive line is ridiculous. The job of the OL unit is 1. To allow the running game to be consistently effective and 2. To keep their QB clean and upright.

BTW: Have we gotten to the point where we no longer challenge statements made here. Someone wrote that the majority of SB's were not won by teams with great offensive lines....WRONG!!!.......They may not have been stocked with HOF type players, but make no mistake, every winning SB team ( possibly 1 or 2 excepted......Steelers, early Ravens) had offensive lines that were very very proficient in performing the two tasks mentioned. If you want to say that they weren't great, I'd like to know what metric you're using to determine greatness.

There was another poster on another thread you wrote football 101 was if you can't block theirs, get to their QB (paraphrasing) as justification to select a pass rusher. REALLY? Is that really football 101? Then what's.........stop them, don't let them stop you?

I am not one to settle for what's passing as good football these days, I want to see this team and their front offices return to great footbal and that can only happen when their players especially their offensive and defensive linemen consistently report that their toughest competition comes from practicing with and against one another. That said, who's willing to bet against our defense front right now, if pitted against our current offensive line? I'll allow some leeway for those too young to have witnessed great football, because they have a natural excuse of not having today's game to measure against anything else.

Stop. Just stop. My point was the majority of the Super Bowl teams did not have the Hogs, not even close. I never claimed you can win big with a bad offensive line, I pointed out you don't need a top one to have success. The way to win big has been proven to be with a great defense and not with the best offensive line in the league. You want a matrix? Here are the top offensive lines according the NFL.com's stats:

2010: Indy. Super Bowl Teams: Green Bay and Pittsburg
2011: Detroit. Super Bowl Teams: Giants and New England
2012: Atlanta. Super Bowl Teams: Baltimore and SF
2013: Denver. Super Bowl Teams: Seattle and Denver (You got one, congrats. But of course this was all Peyton)
2014: Baltimore. Super Bowl Teams New England and Seattle

NFL Stats: by Team Category

The point remains passing over better players to take a lower rated guy who struggles at pass pro and will probably move to guard is idiotic and I"m happy my GM knows more than fans who are obsessed with offensive lineman. How many more times does it need to be posted that the vast majority of starting offensive lineman in the NFL were NOT drafted in the first round?

With a top 5 pick the goal is to find a great player regardless of position. Filling a need instead is just stupid.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

2010: Indy. Super Bowl Teams: Green Bay and Pittsburg
2011: Detroit. Super Bowl Teams: Giants and New England
2012: Atlanta. Super Bowl Teams: Baltimore and SF
2013: Denver. Super Bowl Teams: Seattle and Denver (You got one, congrats. But of course this was all Peyton)
2014: Baltimore. Super Bowl Teams New England and Seattle

Now let's examine these 10 teams who played in the last 5 Super Bowls. What patterns are we seeing here? Dominating defense and/or franchise QBs were the keys to every single team on this list.

Now let's examine my post that has been called into question:

Yes but as I pointed out in my last post offensive lines for the most part do not win championships, great QBs and dominating defenses win championships. .

Bam!

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Final thought since I can go back and edit here: If a top offensive line "will beat you every time" then please explain Detroit and Atlanta on the list above? Why was only one of the last 10 Super Bowl teams the team with the top offensive line in the league? And of course that ranking was entirely due to Payton and his quick read and release.

This is not 1982 guys. The game is all passing and the way to win is to have a great passing attack (read QB, receivers) and a way to get after the other team's passer.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

OK I guess I had 2 final thoughts. The Cowboys seem to be everyone's poster child. They have 3 Pro Bowlers on their offensive line. They were done by the 2nd round and only got there because of a horrible call in round 1.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

OK I guess I had 2 final thoughts. The Cowboys seem to be everyone's poster child. They have 3 Pro Bowlers on their offensive line. They were done by the 2nd round and only got there because of a horrible call in round 1.

Yep & even with that a lot of their success was due to a solid QB & several elite players at the skill positions (Bryant, Murray & Witten). Sure the O-line put them in a better position, but the other players were major contributors.

I guess that the bottom line is that it takes all types of players to make up a good team, and there is no one blueprint for building a team. IMO - the biggest thing is simply stockpiling good players - period. The Redskins appear to be heading in the right direction in that regard.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Yep & even with that a lot of their success was due to a solid QB & several elite players at the skill positions (Bryant, Murray & Witten). Sure the O-line put them in a better position, but the other players were major contributors.

I guess that the bottom line is that it takes all types of players to make up a good team, and there is no one blueprint for building a team. IMO - the biggest thing is simply stockpiling good players - period. The Redskins appear to be heading in the right direction in that regard.

Bingo. As I continue to contend Redskins fans are obsessed with a great offensive line due to what happened here in the past. The problem is this obsessions is resulting in poor ideas such as passing over better player to draft offensive linemen. Thankfully our GM does not think this way.

 

[redskinsfan]

Honestly... Nope. Not if he grabs another pass rusher and trots out Chester and Compton for another year.

Compton (or Moses) won't be playing RT. We'll be taking a RT by the second round. So, I guess you can trust him.

 

[Sharkinva]

Compton (or Moses) won't be playing RT. We'll be taking a RT by the second round. So, I guess you can trust him.

I will say it again. By round two most day one starting o lineman are usually off the board. But sure let's grab a pass rusher and a backup. Sounds logical

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I will say it again. By round two most day one starting o lineman are usually off the board. But sure let's grab a pass rusher and a backup. Sounds logical

Well - I suggest that you put in your application for NFL GM since apparently you believe that you are possibly a better GM than SM. Good luck. How about looking at the multi-year plan instead of simply putting the entire focus on one year or one draft? You might also be surprised if your guy is actually selected at # 5, but in the end none of us are qualified to make these picks.

 

[redskinsfan]

I will say it again. By round two most day one starting o lineman are usually off the board. But sure let's grab a pass rusher and a backup. Sounds logical

You're wrong about that. There are plenty of starters that got drafted past the first round.

And you'll beg my pardon if I give the benefit of the doubt to McCloughan over you or anyone on this board, won't you?

 

[Sharkinva]

You're wrong about that. There are plenty of starters that got drafted past the first round.

And you'll beg my pardon if I give the benefit of the doubt to McCloughan over you or anyone on this board, won't you?

Believe what you like. I'm going off of recent draft history. Most starting o line are of the boards day one.

 

[redskinsfan]

Believe what you like. I'm going off of recent draft history. Most starting o line are of the boards day one.

Look at the Eagles offensive line, recently one of the best in the NFL. Jason Peters (undrafted), Jason Kelce (sixth rounder), Evan Mathis (third rounder), Todd Herremans (fourth rounder). Herremans is no longer with the team, but until last year the Eagles only had one first rounder on that line, which was Lane Johnson.

I'm trusting Scot over you, me, and anyone here. Is that too bold a proposition? Or do you have skills he doesn't?

 

[Sharkinva]

Well - I suggest that you put in your application for NFL GM since apparently you believe that you are possibly a better GM than SM. Good luck. How about looking at the multi-year plan instead of simply putting the entire focus on one year or one draft? You might also be surprised if your guy is actually selected at # 5, but in the end none of us are qualified to make these picks.

See I don't get that line of thinking. The whole have faith b because he is the GM. If you have no opinion that's fine. But what I would do does not have to agree with. The gm. If we are all so unqualified why even have an opinion which is what we are expressing here nothing more

 

[Sharkinva]

Look at the Eagles offensive line, recently one of the best in the NFL. Jason Peters (undrafted), Jason Kelce (sixth rounder), Evan Mathis (third rounder), Todd Herremans (fourth rounder). Herremans is no longer with the team, but until last year the Eagles only had one first rounder on that line, which was Lane Johnson.

I'm trusting Scot over you, me, and anyone here. Is that too bold a proposition? Or do you have skills he doesn't?

Then why even have an opinion at all.