gmenroc

I really want Tollefson back for the same reason I want Blackburn. He seems content in his backup role and when called upon, he's filled in nicely. Neither are stars and both seem to play with a lot of heart. Terrell Thomas is a no brainer, must sign. Injury this year will hurt his asking price and opportunities somewhat, but he's our 1A or 1B corner next to CWeb. McKenzie's best days are behind him I agree, but I'm always nervous replacing a starter on the OLine. Goff, I like a lot, but I think he could go if he asks for big money. If he goes, we should offer Blackburn a longer deal given the difference his re-signing this year has made. Maybe we offer it to Blackburn anyway. Manningham, Hixon, Thomas - I think we should make a move for at least one of these guys. Obviously the FO is going to go after Manningham, but so will other teams. Given Cruz's emergence, Manningham is less of a priority. I'd be pissed if he didn't get an offer from us, but I don't think he's #2 on this team anymore and his contract should reflect that.

http://www.spotrac.com/free-agents/nfl/new-york-giants/ Found this site, useful if we're discussing which free agents to re-sign

1. Pressure Matt Ryan with the front 4 while maintaining coverages. If we can double one of the recievers every play, shifting that double team throughout the game between Jones and White and cover Gonzales with a LBer, I think we're in good shape. Doubling both WRs would likely allow Gonzalez to roam the middle of the field. 2. Avoid the big play. We can't allow 25+ yard plays. Offensively, we really need to establish a running game. While Atlanta's secondary isn't phenomenal by any stretch and should be an advantage for our WRs, getting a running game going will allow us to win the time of possession battle. Basically, if this becomes a shootout, I think we ultimately lose. If we win the time of possession in a slower paced methodical game, I think we win.

Zone is often predicated on pressure. There are too many holes in zone coverage that WRs, TEs, or RBs can sit down in or run through if pressure isn't obtained fairly quickly. Fewell's 3 safety look worked well initially and I feel is actually a credible defense he developed in light of our poor CB play prior to the breaking out of Webster, prior to the drafting of Amukamura, and after the falloff of Ross. Fewell's issue has been his inability to adjust once opposing offenses figure it out.

I'd have little doubt that they study how a given opponent tackles. Whether or not they have the defense replicate it on the practice field is another story.

I figure they'll at least make him a reasonable offer, but he has a say in the deal as well. The chance to move to a team where he'd have a chance at a SB might take precedence over money at this point in his career. Beyond that, given he played with St Louis and Buffalo prior, he may not necessarily have a devotion to the Redskins at this point. I simply think the Giants should make their offer and then not lose a whole lot of sleep if he turns it down to return to the Skins.

Never had a problem with StubHub either. Only issue with them was that tix there seemed to be marked up moreso than other outlets. NFL ticket exchange works too, but checked already and there weren't any there.

Perhaps I just hope that they don't waste practice time on such things. Part of me cringes when I see a TE make the active decision to hurdle a defender as opposed to lowering a shoulder and running them over. Ahhh, the NFL of old vs. the NFL of today.

Eh, I'd welcome Spags back in a heartbeat and am not completely sold on the defense's play the past two weeks as a done deal in saving Fewell's job. The defense fell flat against the best the league had to throw at us. That's not the part that kills me as a fan. I'm looking at the Washington games, the Seattle game, the one Eagles game, and the complete shitting of the bed against New Orleans. If our DC was worth much, these games would have been significantly less onesided.

a 36 year old who (1) led the league in tackles in 2011 with 166, (2) had 2 picks, (3) forced 3 fumbles, and, (4) perhaps most importantly to our injury riddled defense, has played in 16 out of 16 regular season games each of the past 13 years. Nobody is saying that we need to sign him longterm. Two years max, with maybe a 3rd year voidable by either party. EDIT: Wanted to add a note not to underrate the information we'd get from him regarding the Skins defense. Given the Skins are a division rival and we play them twice a year and they'll likely have the same DCoordinator next year, we might already have a chunk of knowledge to pull from making this advantage less of an advantage - at the end of the day, it's still something to consider.

Romo puts up the numbers but fails to close the deal. And that's the extent of it. Eli consistently takes his team further than the Cowboys. Now, there's a slew of reasons behind it and we could argue for eternity which of the many reasons should take precedence, but at the end of the day, Eli is just the better of the two.

Whether they play zone or man, the secondary has to maintain coverage long enough for the pass rush to get home. Boley was the guy relaying the defensive calls and as such, had the responsibility to direct players where they needed to be if they weren't there already. So yeah, I could see Tuck's point. But the Tuck comment really has nothing to do with the Phillips/Rolle argument. Our safeties are serviceable, at the very least. I think that they're above average. Rolle's and Grant's flexibility in the secondary has probably helped this defense more than any casual fan would ever realize given the injuries to our LBs and CBs. KP has looked a bit slower than he did before his injury, but he still holds his own. None of our safeties are by any means dominant, ball hawking, head hunting, guys that opposing teams have to plan around. But there are far, far worse safeties in the league and there are far, far worse players on our very team at their respective positions than Rolle, Grant, or Phillips are at their's. As such, I'd argue that the play of these 3 have kept us in more games than what they've cost us. If you're simply stating that a better pass rush will hide poor coverages whether those coverages are man to man or zone or a combination of the two, than that's a no brainer and is simply stating the painfully obvious.

I read where Tuck referred to the dirty play of the Falcon's OLine. I think it's more of an alert to the referees to be watching for it. I am by no means a basketball fan, but I believe this to be a Phil Jackson move.

I think it's more that one guy tried it, had success, and the second guy saw the same defender and thought, 'what the hell, it worked once'

half thoughts of ebaying tix. they're relatively cheap so far for playoff tix. 2 tix + parking with 2 days left on auction = 300.00 (roughly)

I'd make a serious attempt at London Fletcher. He seems to be a leader where we're lacking in the department defensively. On top of that, it'd be a huge blow to Washington's defense. That said, I read that Washington is going to make him a priority this offseason. However, he might look back on how often his team was actually in competition to win the division and decide that we'd be the better choice. It'd come down to money vs. desire to win for him.

I'd be okay with that too. Stealing London Fletcher from Washington wouldn't be a bad move I wouldn't think. Though, they are supposedly making him a priority this offseason. Then again, he may very well want out of Washington to go somewhere where there's a chance to win.

If we get a DE in the top 4 picks, we're making a mistake. Tuck, Umenyiora, Pierre-Paul, Tollefson are all quality starters. Kiwi could fill in if necessary given we have a healthy LB that could fill in for him. If you want to argue a DT in the top 4 rounds, I could live with that. But we're in need of LB and OLine depth in a much bigger way than DE. I'd like a RB too in the top 4 or 5 picks as well. A guy with breakaway speed and vision would be nice.

Pressure on the QB obviously hides a secondary's faults. But the thing is, that the secondary has to maintain coverage for 3 seconds at least to allow that pressure to get to the QB. AND that QB cannot be great at throwing in the face of pressure. Against Green Bay and New Orleans, the game will come down to our secondary's ability to maintain coverage for as long as it takes to get Rodgers and Brees on the ground. Both are good at staring down the blitz and delivering the ball. Both have weapons that can beat man coverage. That said, we've improved our play dramatically since facing these two teams earlier in the season. That said, let's beat Atlanta first.

With the talent the Eagles brought in, given clear direction and a good scheme, they could be awfully good under Spags. Granted, I think some of their guys are overrated (Asante Samual, Nmandi Asumuagh), but they are a talented bunch that with a DC like Spags - could become a very good defense. Signing Spags as our DC would be as much as a defensive move as it would be anything else. The thing though is that Spags went from LB coach with Eagles to DC with Giants to HC with Rams. Taking a demotion back to DC will be a blow to the ego. Going back to the team you left might even be worse. I would think that he'd take an opportunity elsewhere as a HC first if available followed by a DC position outside the NFC East so long as the D he goes to is as talented as either the Giants or Eagles. Of course, it's all pointless speculation at this point. I really just don't want him back with the Eagles.

I think that's an entirely different award ceremony.

apparently he was some piss poor WR made QB for the Steelers...

With Cruz putting up the numbers he put up from a 3rd WR roster spot, it's pretty impressive and I believe should've been recognized. I am not sure how many PB roster spots there are for WRs, which given the pro-passing tendancies of the league nowadays, could have been the issue here.

Was listening to Kordell Stewert on Mike and Mike this morning singing the praises of Alex Smith over Eli too. That one I just don't see. The argument is very simply that while SF's defense and running game carries their team, Eli carries the Giants. While that seems like it's not a big deal putting it that simply, it really is noteworthy for a QB to put the team on his shoulders and win the game as opposed to just not losing it and providing just enough to give your offense some balance. If you want to argue Matthew Stafford or even Tony Romo over Eli, it's a better stance from which to base your argument.

I beg to differ. With playoffs on the line, you stick with what got you this far. If we were out of playoff contention, I would agree wholeheartedly. These guys have been practicing all season long. And while I'm sure the coaches spend most of their time with the first team, there has to be some level of reporting from the second team or third team or even the practice squad to either TC, PF, or KG so that they can adjust depth charts and whatnot. If that communication is not available, I think it's a huge detriment to the team in general. The point though is, that by this point in the year, the coaching staff should know what these guys are able to offer despite the fact that they don't see much time on Sundays.