Skip to content

Need to Know: What will Ziggy Hood’s role with the Redskins be?

Feb 3, 2016, 5:07 AM EDT

Zoggy-Hood-Jaguars

Here is what you need to know on this Wednesday, February 3, 21 days before the NFL Combine in Indianapolis.

What role will Ziggy Hood play on the Redskins’ defense?

The Redskins signed DE Ziggy Hood, a 2009 first-round draft pick of the Steelers, to a one-year contract. What role will Hood, who will turn 29 later this month and has played in 98 NFL games with 46 starts, play on the Redskins’ defensive line.

On the base level, Hood provides the line with another body. They could lose as many as four defensive linemen from last year’s 53-man roster. NT Terrance Knighton is a free agent and the buzz that he may not be re-signed is growing louder. Jason Hatcher and Kedric Golston well on the far side of 30 and the Redskins may look to go younger and, in Hatcher’s case, cheaper. Frank Kearse is under contract but the team could look to upgrade his spot.

Hood was signed now because he was available, eligible to sign with a team because he wasn’t on a team’s roster when the season ended. His acquisition is only the beginning of the Redskins’ defensive line rebuilding project. If things work out as they should, Hood should be fighting for a spot on the 53-man roster.

What is “things working out as they should”? Stephen Paea comes back fully healthy after a disappointing 2015 season that ended with him on the shelf with a toe injury. Scot McCloughan needs to invest two draft picks in the position, at least one of them in the first or second rounds (assuming a player fits the best-available requirement, of course). Assuming Knighton is gone, if one of those draft picks is not a nose tackle who is ready to contribute immediately that position needs to be addressed in free agency.

Nose tackle is important because it keeps Chris Baker at end, where he had his best season in 2015. He could play nose if necessary but McCloughan needs to try to make sure that it’s not.

That would leave Paea or Ricky Jean Francois and Baker as the starting ends and the draft pick or free agent pickup at nose. Hood, another draft pick, Kearse, 2015 practice squad player Cory Crawford and perhaps another low-priced free agent pickup or two would be fighting for the last few jobs and position on the depth chart.

It’s good that Hood has starting experience because you never know what will happen during a 16-game season. But if he is penciled in to be the Week 1 starter that is a sign that things did not go well along the line during the offseason when it comes to bolstering the defensive line. And the best case will be if Hood gets let go at the final roster cut because McCloughan has found enough younger talent to effectively fill out the depth chart.

The likely scenario is somewhere in between. Hood probably makes the roster and plays 20 or so snaps per game as part of the defensive line rotation.

Timeline

—The Redskins last played a game 24 days ago. It will be about 221 days until they play another one.

Days until: NFL Combine 21; NFL free agency starts 35; 2016 NFL draft 85

In case you missed it

  1. Sam - Feb 3, 2016 at 8:16 AM

    What about moving Trent Murphy to DE?

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 3, 2016 at 10:55 AM

      That could happen. I didn’t want to get into it in this post because it’s more speculation than anything else right now.

      • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:17 PM

        …and hopefully it ends at speculation. Murphy looks like a backup player no matter what position he plays. I guess if the staff wants to take a look at him as a two gap 3-4 DE then that might work since he seems to rarely get of his blocks, so maybe he turn that weakness into a strength becoming a sponge by holding onto blocks to free up the OLBers.

    • ajbus1 - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:30 AM

      He’d really have to beef up.

      • scottmccloughanfan - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:16 PM

        i noted him playing DE at times on a de facto basis late in the season. TRENT would curl inside to close that gap opponants often opened between HATCHER/BAKER and SMITH/MURPHY early in the season. Once BAKER and SMITH improved, that particular stunt seemed to be deployed mostly when MURPHY was in the play.

    • timwillhide - Feb 3, 2016 at 2:43 PM

      There is no way Trent Murphy is going to switch to DE unless we switch to a 4-3. He would have to gain 40lbs and that’s a lot to ask a player to gain. Why people think positions switches like that are easily done or capable of being done is beyond me.

  2. sidepull - Feb 3, 2016 at 8:33 AM

    Welcome to “Capital Punishment”. They gotta get better or let that moniker go….

  3. scottmccloughanfan - Feb 3, 2016 at 8:35 AM

    He should be aimed right at GOLSTON and KEARSE, and hopefully supplant one or the other.

    I agree, if he’s penciled in as a starter, we are in trouble.

    #21 DL/NT, later pick DE, or vice versa depending on the talent available, and another undrafted FA for the PS.

    GOLSTON had a rough first half of the season. Time and again, holes were created where he played, especially notable on goal-line stands. He just couldn’t hold his ground when double-teamed, and opponants knew it.

    I don’t want KEDRIC to go, but his time has come. As the longest tenured REDSKIN [10 seasons], he has my respect and admiration, and best wishes for life after football. Thank you KEDRIC.

    • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 9:24 AM

      I hold the exact opposite view as you on Golston. He was solid in goal-line, especially in the first half of the season. There were a couple of games, maybe the Tampa game was one, where the d-line was huge in preventing TDs and Golston was right there on that fourth down play. The holes you refer to appeared to my eye to be on the big fella, Knighton. Golston also played on 175 special team snaps. Here are the rest of the d-linemen in that category: Knighton 92, RJF with 85, Hatcher 50, Paea 27, Kearse 3, and Baker 0. Golston does the dirty work and apparently better than Kearse. If his time is up, it’s up; but I would be fine if the Redskins gave him a veteran minimum contract for a shot to make the team and let the best man/men make the team.

      • scottmccloughanfan - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:18 AM

        I wish you and I had an in with a coach on the team. I’d love to know their thinking on the matter.

        Always respect your take on things BEN, but we’re at opposite ends of the spectrum on this one. What i saw late in the season was some inspired play by GOLSTON. But early on, the opposition actually targeted him, and were successful. So I just can’t see your take. Overall, he should be replaced.

        I will say HOOD should replace KEARSE over GOLSTON, but KEARSE is younger, and to my mind should be retained over KEDRIC.

        Actually, I’d like both of them replaced.

        • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:32 AM

          Your position is fair. I think Golston’s time is done too. I just think he deserves the chance to make a case for himself at training camp. It basically costs the team nothing – $80,000 and a roster spot out of 90. Re-signing Kearse would cost the Redskins something similar but I don’t think he has shown the team anything in the past year to even warrant a look. Upgrade, if we can but so far Hood is just a body and while I’m fine with just a body for Kearse, for Kedric, I’m not. For Golston, there should be a clear upgrade, not just youth.

        • scottmccloughanfan - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:04 PM

          BEN, here’s where SCOTTMcCLOUGHANfan[sic] comes in.

          I’m a believer in the guy. Frankly, I think he’s the best GM since BOBBY BEATHARD, and in time may become the best GM we’ve ever had.

          He will find players to compete with GOLSTON and KEARSE, and I think HOOD is the first move.

          Of course, I want to see both REDSKIN vets given a chance to retain their slots in July here in RICHMOND. I’m just hoping out loud that improved talent prevails in the back-up slots along the d-line, not to mention the starters where I believe two high picks are needed.

          DE JONATHAN BULLARD rated the 21st best player in the draft.

          DT JARREN REED rated the 22nd best player in the draft.

          Hopefully, we have the choice of one when we pick, other contingencies not considered. Both may be gone. McCLOUGHAN may have a solution in FA before draft time.

          In the third round, I like DE SHAWN OAKMAN. He’s got the size that McCLOUGHAN likes, speed and quickness.

        • Trey Gregory - Feb 4, 2016 at 2:29 AM

          You have to trust me about Shawn Oakman, he’s awful. It’s easy to fall in love with him because of his size, but try to refrain.

          I’m a Baylor fan, I’m supposed to love this guy. But I watched every game he played in and it was maddening. His technique is very sloppy, lazy and he has a weak motor. You can easily attribute that to him being so physically dominate, so the coaches don’t bother with him and coach up the lesser athletes. However, he’s a big project. Not deserving of a 3rd round pick. He’s going to take longer to develop. Plus he probably is better suited to be a 4-3 end, but you never know.

          The worst part is that he would take shortcuts that ANY DE (regardless of coaching) knows you don’t do. He would cut way too far inside to go for the sack which completely broke contain and left his side of the field open for the QB or RB to hit the edge. Or he would allow the tackle to push him (in a half circle) around the QB, so Oakman was behind the QB, and the QB could just run for a good 10 yards on his side because nobody was there. Baylor got gashed on his edge. Every DE knows those are two no nos. Sometimes those things just happened to work, and they made great highlights, but if you really watch him play, he’s mostly bad.

          I can’t figure out if this matters, but his body is weird. At the senior bowl the announcers couldn’t help but talk about how he has the skinniest ankles you’ve ever seen on a big guy. Built more like a basketball player is what they said. Just FYI.

          Baylor really only has one defensive player worthy of an early round pick, Andrew Billings. I know there’s other good DTs out there but I’m comfortable saying he would be a good pick because I’m very familiar with him. Go check him out for a DT to take at 21. Other than Billings, we should probably stay away from Baylor’s defensive players all together. They just don’t seem to translate well to the NFL. Yet anyway.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 4, 2016 at 9:25 AM

          Trey, that was very informative comment

  4. scottmccloughanfan - Feb 3, 2016 at 8:42 AM

    Hopefully DT JARREN REED will be there when the REDSKINS pick.

    And in the third, SHAWN OAKMAN for DE.

    Wishful thinking no doubt, but I’m hopeful anyway.

  5. renhoekk2 - Feb 3, 2016 at 9:39 AM

    Last season McCloughan was applauded for signing mid level vet guys from winning teams on the cheap that brought leadership and a winning attitude. He does it again this off-season and fans are questioning it. How is this signing different than Knighton, RJF, and Paea? People are strange.

    • scottmccloughanfan - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:19 AM

      Well I consider HOOD an upgrade over GOLSTON or KEARSE.

    • ajbus1 - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:59 AM

      There’s always skeptics. Especially after all the mistakes that were made by our Skins in the past 20 years.

  6. bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 9:53 AM

    “Scot McCloughan needs to invest two draft picks in the position, at least one of them in the first or second rounds (assuming a player fits the best-available requirement, of course). Assuming Knighton is gone, if one of those draft picks is not a nose tackle who is ready to contribute immediately that position needs to be addressed in free agency.”

    This is always the tricky thing. The draft comes after free agency so that teams’ immediate needs are more evident by the time the draft rolls around. The Redskins currently have an immediate need at NT and depending on which FA is signed to play nose and how long the contract is, the Redskins may continue to have great need there.

    At #21, recent history shows us that you can usually get the best center, one of the top two ILBs, and one of the top two to three NTs – all positions of need for the Redskins. Even when you factor in degree of need and best (overall) player available, I wonder where the GM factors in value or if he even does.

    Say for instance, that when #21 is on the clock, the best center is available, the 2nd best ILB is not taken, the only true nose tackles left are so far down the Redskin’s board that they’re not considered for this pick, there already have been 5 d-linemen taken in the first 20 picks, and the top three wide receivers are also gone; AND the ‘skins board looks like this:

    4th WR
    6th DL
    2nd ILB
    1st C

    Do they take the guy highest on their board, 4th WR, or the highest on their board that meets the most urgent need, 6th DL, or do they take best in position? How flexible is their board? Do the other picks effect their board?

    • renhoekk2 - Feb 3, 2016 at 10:35 AM

      DL is very deep in this upcoming draft. I guess there may be two ways to look at that. You might get a guy at 21 who would normally be a top 12 or so pick in any other draft and thereby get tremendous value by choosing a DL. Or it means you could wait until the 2nd rd and still get a good DL player then and give you the opportunity to fill another need at 21. I’m sure it will depend on which players are available at 21 when the time comes.

      • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:01 AM

        I’m thinking it will also depend on the players available. You mentioned possibly waiting for DL, but in my experience watching, when there is a position that “everybody” is drafting, there is a panic that the talent is going to be gone soon.

    • ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Feb 3, 2016 at 10:42 AM

      I don’t think there is any center in this draft worth a 1st round pick.

      If you can get a top 10 D.L. at 21 simply because the draft is so rich at that position, I’m guessing that’s the way McGlue will go.
      ~

      • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:05 AM

        That may be true about center and I know the talk early was about the deep DL. I’m not sure if that still is the case since guys like Jonathan Allen, out of Alabama, and Ashburn’s Stonebridge HS, have elected to return to school. Also, a lot changes from February to the draft.

        • ET - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:27 PM

          Not only does a lot change between February and the draft, but it seems that Scot puts a lot of weight on the non-metric portion of the combine. Obviously we can’t know for sure, but I think the combine interviews help to solidify many of his draft positions—both good and bad.

    • sidepull - Feb 3, 2016 at 10:42 AM

      Bang what do you think of NT Ian Williams out of SF? He may come available and hes worth a look.

      • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:12 AM

        I don’t know too much about him. He’s listed at 6′ 1″ and 305 pounds. That sounds like he is on the small side. [Funny side note. I saw Barry Cofield at a local Panera the day before his release and he was telling the guy he was with, “I don’t know, what they’re changing to, is what I do best.”] Okay, not really funny nor interesting – just a random side note.

        Williams sounds like an end to me and that would fine too.

      • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:06 PM

        The defense line is being reported to be the position with the best 1st round talent. There are as many as 5 nose tackles that could be drafted in the first round. The question is if you are not going to go after Damon Harris then would you gamble with a projected expensive contract on Ian Williams? He has only recently shown to be a force in stopping the run. So the question would be is if he is the real deal? Damon Harris is and Ian, an undrafted nose tackle, has only shown the potential to be one. IMO, you stay away from him if he is asking for a big time contract and draft a Nose Tackle out of what has appeared to be a very strong class. It should be a player with greater or equal talent to Ian but with a rookie contract.

    • hail74 - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:00 AM

      It would probably come down to how far apart their grades are on those 4 you listed. If the 4th best receiver is just slightly hire than the 6th DL then they prob take the DL where as the #1 C may not be graded anywhere close to the other guys and therefore not considered, even if that were to mean solidifying the line.

      • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:25 AM

        For argument’s sake, lets say that the grades are relatively close. But that is what I’m trying to figure out. How set is the board? Are they’re any outside factors that loosen the order. Do guys who play DL suddenly move up the board because you thought “the glut” would last into the 2nd round?

        There isn’t much that we can extrapolate from last year’s top pick. McC took the best OL on the board – even if that made him the highest OG taken in the Super Bowl era. OL also was considered the greatest team need. Leonard Williams was largely regarded as a better prospect than Brandon Scherff and fit a team need – albeit less of a team need due to tree agency. McC is a huge talker when it comes to best player available. So taking him at his word he had Scherff higher on his board than Williams. But it all makes we wonder that when need is factored into BPA, it seems to me to be a pretty high factor for the GM.

        • ET - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:56 PM

          For all the talk of BPA, it can’t and shouldn’t exist in a vacuum. I don’t believe any team practices BPA in the truest sense, but many appear to practice a variety of “weighted BPA.” There could be a score of mitigating factors indluencing the overall rank of a player on a draft board. It seems like most teams take a fluid approach during the draft, constantly adjusting. It’d be interesting to know which teams employ analytics to redraw their draft boards, and which teams take a more intuitive approach.

        • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:06 PM

          Cleveland moving forward would be in the analytical approach. You’re also right that in what you say about the boards and how our GM will weight his board – player interviews. We as fans might think if any of these seven D-linemen are there at 21, we’re fine; while McC might only see two possibilities because of the interview process.

        • ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:15 PM

          Ben, that’s not my take from last year.

          Scherff went ahead of Williams because McGlue had Scherff rated higher in “really wants to play football” and “sure thing.”

          So he is big on that football culture he wants to build, and he doesn’t want to risk a very high pick on a gamble.

          I don’t think he’ll take Robert Nkemdiche this year, for example.
          ~

        • hail74 - Feb 3, 2016 at 2:28 PM

          Williams also fell to seventh because of his shoulder injury.

    • scottmccloughanfan - Feb 3, 2016 at 11:47 AM

      This is why I’m pounding the table for shelling out the $$$ for ALEX MACK.

      I feel he wants out of CLEVELAND, and we need not spend a pick on a center. It’s anchors the o-line going forward for the next several years, and as a bonus we jettison LeRIBEUS.

      Losing FS GOLDSTON [8 million-no cap hit] should net enough to sign MACK.

      Of course, that puts us into a tight negotiation with GOLDSTON, or D-HALL as a starter, neither a glowing prospect.

      And for that reason, I was for signing BERRY who probably won’t leave KC, or ERIC WEDDLE who probably will leave SAN DIEGO.

      To my mind, REDSKINS have to pony-up to improve this upcoming season, and two key FA’s is where money should be spent, other cap considerations [COUSINS] not withstanding. The schedule for 2016 is demanding, and an improved squad may yet deliver a less satisfactory result.

      Two top FA’s, one at the point of attack on offense, one as the last line of defense, are critical to that improvement.

      ROMO returns to DALLAS and AIKMAN wants RGIII to follow. Will this improve their standing? Maybe.

      COUGHLIN is finally out in N.Y. Will a new coach bring out the best in the better N.L. East team in 2015? Dunno, but they should have won the division and they won’t stand still.

      KELLY disaster over in PHILADELPHIA. What now? Hopefully, they muddle their way through at the same level for a year.

      • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:32 PM

        Look, Rich is right. Those guys won’t be free agents or the Redskins won’t sign them. Might as well accept facts. The days of splash are gone. Kirk Cousins will have biggest contract of any Redskin free agent signing. There may be another Chris Culliver type signing and team will be improved in the talent area. The draft will likely be another “meat-n-potatoes” type draft that will also improve the team’s talent. Scot M is not worried about next year’s schedule as much as he worried about building a sustainable winner.

        As for the division, they have to be stronger, right? How much? Who knows. I doubt the Cowboys are as good as 2014 but definitely better than 2015. The giant are the same without Coughlin being the one responsible. Do they underachieve? The Eagles may have a year of transition before they improve. None of that matters. The Redskins have to improve in their weak areas irregardless.

      • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:32 PM

        Look, Rich is right. Those guys won’t be free agents or the Redskins won’t sign them. Might as well accept facts. The days of splash are gone. Kirk Cousins will have biggest contract of any Redskin free agent signing. There may be another Chris Culliver type signing and team will be improved in the talent area. The draft will likely be another “meat-n-potatoes” type draft that will also improve the team’s talent. Scot M is not worried about next year’s schedule as much as he worried about building a sustainable winner.

        As for the division, they have to be stronger, right? How much? Who knows. I doubt the Cowboys are as good as 2014 but definitely better than 2015. The giant are the same without Coughlin being the one responsible. Do they underachieve? The Eagles may have a year of transition before they improve. None of that matters. The Redskins have to improve in their weak areas irregardless.

        • renhoekk2 - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:14 PM

          Agree. Cousins contract changes they way they do business in FA. They haven’t had to pay a QB big money. Except the one season with McNabb. They also need to resign Jordan Reed and Chris Baker soon. Not sure they can look at C and pay big FA money. Pretty sure Scot M will be similar to the way GB does business. That’s were he learned the trade. Make sure you always have money to resign your own guys before you go spending money in FA.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:23 PM

          Scot is not going to just pass on a potential addition that upgrades this team even if that player comes at a high price tag. I’m sure guys like Mack and Damon Williams are being evaluated and weighed against the price to acquire them. Will the team revert to the days of Vinny when the team was out bidding for some overrated free agents or players past their prime? No, but Scot may go after some marquee players that solidify a position for many years. I can’t see Berry being worth the risks but a guy like Mack or Williams is possible to go along with a Cousins extension.

        • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:46 PM

          It’s not about just the price. There is age involved. I have no idea who Damon Williams is or how he’s a part of this conversation. Mack would be an upgrade but he also would be a Jason Hatcher type contract – at some point restructuring or releasing with dead money will be needed.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:32 PM

          “Make sure you always have money to resign your own guys before you go spending money in FA.”

          As an organization, the Redskins were pretty good about resigning players before heavily attacking the FA market. I’m sure Scot will continue that rule but I think you’ll see less extension on marginal players currently on the team than in the past. However big time this QB contract may be, it need not come with a heavy price on the Salary Cap for the first few seasons. Cousins does not hold the resume of past big QB contracts with only a single season which showed progress, potential, and considerable need for more development. He should not get a deal that impacts the cap at 17 to 20 million like many are calling. Overall, I hope there is enough room for another FA signing that comes with a major upgrade. Personally, I like the idea of going after Mack with a big contract. We can get a good nose tackle out of this draft and then find a less expensive options at that position in FA.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 2:12 PM

          ” Mack would be an upgrade but he also would be a Jason Hatcher type contract – at some point restructuring or releasing with dead money will be needed.”

          Damon Williams was brought up as a potential big FA contract signing that the Redskins would consider. Comparing Hatcher to Mack is comparing the night to the day. Hatcher had one good season with Dallas that awarded him the big FA contract signing here …sound familiar? Anyway Mack is a proven elite Center who is also durable. He even played through one game with appendicitis. Mack was a 1st round selection as a center which is a position with the second best longevity for players drafted in the 1st round (10.0 years). So with Mack you have a proven player at an elite position that normally includes one of the longer careers in the NFL.

        • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 2:48 PM

          Mack has been great. I’m not comparing the players but the contracts in the terms of final years. Mack is 30, will get a minimum 4 year deal and may not play up to the terms of the contract during the final years.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 3:06 PM

          Anything can happen in the league but I’d be really surprised if Mack can put another 4 seasons in at a high level. My concern is catching him on his down years. So his age is a red flag but he is a better gamble at 30 than many other players acquired in the past with similar contracts.

          Also, in 2014 Jacksonville Jags tried to sign him to a 5 year, 42 million contract. However Cleveland matched the offer to retain him. So Mack’s market value is looking to over 8 million dollars annually. That’s if he wants to leave and Mack may prefer a team he feels is closer to SB contender than Playoff contender. Honestly, I don’t see this happening but would be thrilled to have him.

        • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 4:41 PM

          I’m going to agree with everything you said except perhaps differ with you on the degree of Mack’s play. It will decline. The questions are: when does that start, how much is the decline, and what’s that level of play worth? He figures to get at least $8M in signing alone. Otherwise, why void the contract? He also figures to have cap hits above $8M/year. That is double Lichtensteiger’s cap hit for this year and 3 to 4 times more than the 21st pick’s. He would be a clear upgrade, no doubt. But what does his presence do to the team. Suddenly we have an o-line with 2/5 being paid at the top 5 of their position and Scherff who is also already in the top ten at RG. We will have a well paid line and even a good o-line but do we have a dominant 0-line? How far away from dominant are we without the $10M/year investment? Even if you and I both think that it is worth the investment that still doesn’t matter if McC doesn’t. I’d give it a 2% chance of happening and that’s probably 2% too high.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 3:08 PM

          ….Sorry, the “if Mack can” should have been “if Mack can’t”

    • Trey Gregory - Feb 4, 2016 at 2:37 AM

      I think when most GMs say “best player available,” that’s a formula that includes need. They don’t strictly draft based off need but if you desperately need a center, and one is available, but he’s ranked slightly under another available player at a position of much less need, then they take that into account and draft the center. Every GM is different but I’ve heard it talked about before. Rankings, need, then just how much higher the best player available is compared to the best available player at a position of need, and how needy that position is.

      Brandon Scherff was pretty obviously not the best player available. But, with all of our QB issues plus the enormous amount of sacks we gave up in 2014, getting a better OLine was very important. Scherff was probably a top 15, maybe top 10 player on McCloughan’s board. So when he fell to five we pulled the trigger bases of his ranking AND our need. But McCloughan probably wouldn’t have done that if Scherff was ranked closer to 20-25. Which makes sense when you think about it.

  7. Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:50 PM

    Its stupid to get rid of pot roast and keep a guy like Stephen paea who had only had 1 sack in games he played in…Chris Baker is more effective coming off the bench like Ricky jean so we could end up having new faces at NT and DE…but the three guys who clearly needs to go is…Jason hatcher Kendrick gholston Stephen paea and the only reason why I say frank kearse should be let go is because he should’ve been good enough to crack at least the rotation and he didn’t so he should get cut….Corey Crawford really flash in all the preseason games he played in…scot m. Sign 2 DL to future contracts Anthony Johnson and kamal Johnson I know one of these guys went to Clemson and everybody knows Clemson always have defensive studs….scot m. Really investing in the DL and CB position…I think he setting up the defense to were even breeland will have to fight to keep his starting job next season…I just watched tape on CB Al louis -jean from Alabama last week and I think if he comes to training camp ready to fight for playing time I think he can push somebody out of they starting role…the guy can be a thumper sometimes but he overall he’s a good tackler

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:56 PM

      How in the world can you say that Baker is better off of the bench when he had by far his best year ever while starting 15 games?

    • Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:02 PM

      He only had 6 sacks ?

      • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:16 PM

        It’s a 34 defense. 6 sacks is great for an end.

      • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 2:58 PM

        According to NFL.com he only had 10 starts versus 12 starts last season. So with 10 starts Baker recorded 6 sacks and the second most pressures by a player on the team with 14. He also added to his performance boost in getting to the quarterback, the most tackles of his career at 26 and his most tackles by assist in his career with 27. I’d say that is a pretty good season for Baker playing a new position under Barry’s 3-4 defense.

        • Rich Tandler - Feb 3, 2016 at 7:25 PM

          I wasn’t right on the starts but he did start all but a couple of games when the began the game in a true 3-4. But more significantly he played more snaps than anyone else on the DL by a lot, 80 more than Hatcher and 140 more than any other DL. Call that what you will, I don’t call it coming off of the bench.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 8:47 PM

          Actually I should have looked at the snap counts is you pointed out instead of the starts. Baker had 617 snaps in 2015 and 530 in 2014. So he did receive a increase in snaps by a healthy 87 in 2015 that may have contributed some to his improved statistical numbers.

          So to weigh his actual quality plays on the field Baker in…

          2014 had .074% of those snaps resulted in tackles (.047% tackles/ .026% assists).
          2014 had an almost non existent .0019% result in sacks on number of snaps.

          2015 had .086% of those snaps resulted in tackles (.044% tackles/ .044% assists).
          2015 had a .0097% result in sacks on number of snaps.

          Overall, I think there was solid improvements with Baker’s move to 3-4 DE.

    • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:09 PM

      They’re already “pot committed” to Paea. He get’s one more year. Same reason Andre Roberts wasn’t cut last year.

      • Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:18 PM

        That’s a bad investment…I think Andre Roberts is gone this year tho….lol…Stephen paea got man handled sometimes just like Trent Murphy… Ryan kerrigan needs competition breeland needs competition witch I think he will this off-season but these guys need better competition so it can bring the best out of them when there’s no competition players know they can get away with stuff….did you notice will blackmon production fell off once we lost Chris culliver for the season… In the beginning we stood out to stay with the redskins but started fading

        • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:29 PM

          Point is: It was a two-to-four year investment. After two years, you can get out of it relatively unscathed $2.5M in dead money; $3.3M savings). You can’t get rid of him until then. If now, you’re saving just $903,125 and carrying $3.75M in dead money. THAT is bad business. No guy who’s changing teams is going to give his new team a one-year out on a long-term contract. If he plays well, you have him for four years.

      • Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:43 PM

        I hope he show something better then the 1 sack in 6 games he played in…redskins had I think 30+ sacks of the season Denver got 58 in the regular season we got along ways to go…they better draft and groom some studs like Denver did

    • Skulb - Feb 4, 2016 at 5:35 PM

      Chris Baker started most of the season didn’t he? To me Bake and RJF are the starting DEs unless someone amazing gets signed or drafted here. Both were consistently good. The three real questions are the rotation players to replace Hatch and Paea as well as Knighton at nose, if he doesn’t get rehired.

      • Trey Gregory - Feb 5, 2016 at 5:43 PM

        I personally think it’s a huge mistake to get rid of Knighton. I know a lot of people weren’t too pleased with him, but who are we going to get who can play the same or better? A 3-4 needs a real nose tackle. It’s not a position you can get by without.

        Terrance Knighton is still the best NT on our team, and probably the best guy we can hope to get out of the FA pool. Maybe we can draft his replacement, but that would probably need to be in the first round, maybe second. And even then there’s no guarantee the right guy will fall to us.

        Knighton is already at the tail end of his career. Let’s sign him (with the intention to probably cut him writhin two years, work out the contract accordingly) and hopefully to an incentive laden contract where he can earn his money based on how he performs. That method has been proven to work over and over again with players who have a tendency to be a bit lazy. Then let’s try to draft his replacement, to develop, hopefully without using a first round pick.

        A true NT is one of the rarer players in the NFL, and very important. If we get better at safety, Corner, ILB, OLB, whatever… the whole thing falls apart if we can’t win at the line of scrimmage. I don’t think it’s smart to let the man walk before we have a replacement. Even if he ends up a little overpaid.

        • Skulb - Feb 5, 2016 at 8:13 PM

          No I agree with you. Knighton certainly was a big step up from Cofield and seems to be a good, driven presence on the team. It just seems like he’s leaving based on the chatter, unless of course that’s all it is.
          Either way the big problem with the defense in 2015 wasn’t the line but the LBs and DBs. Some of that was due to injury obviously, but still needs to be addressed somehow. For the first half of the season we had no pass rush at all and we were giving up huge plays all season long in the secondary.

          Because of that would like a DB drafted in the first myself. A game changer at free safety (Biggest weakness?) would really help, although it might not be realistic..

  8. berniebernard666 - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:58 PM

    Preston Smith is a big boy. 6’5 and bout 270. Why can’t he gain 10 pound of muscle during the offseason and be inserted at DE in a 3-4??? If Junior Galette is indeed coming back then having Galette and Smith on the same side would appears to be a nightmare pass rush for other teams…..

    • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 5:52 PM

      Eventually moving Preston Smith to DE is what I’ve speculated they’d do since they drafted him. He has basically the same size and frame as JJ Watt (Same height, arm length, and similar hand size), but Smith came into the NFL with a playing weight of 270 where Watt came in at 290. However, even Barry suggested Smith looked light when he met him. Aside from just his length and size, Smith is very strong and hard to move off the line. He also has great technique in getting off his blocks that allows him to add consistent pressure in the pass rush. If he can improve his ability to stop the run off the line then I think that DE could be his more common position or at least when Galette is in the game as OLB.

      • timwillhide - Feb 3, 2016 at 7:48 PM

        Smith moving to DE sounds a little more reasonable than Murphy. Although for him to gain 20-25lbs that would end up being a 2 year project. If that is the plan we would hope to see him put on at least 10lbs this off-season.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 4, 2016 at 9:18 AM

          You’re probably right about the time period it’d take for him to move to a 295 playing weight. I really think because he came in light the staff figured it’d be easier to play him at OLB in a 3-4 now with a possible transition to DE eventually. Preston Smith is a strong athletic man but Murphy doesn’t seem to possess either strength or athleticism in the NFL. Murphy would probably just be dead weight at DE because I think the guards and tackles can contain and move him at will.

  9. Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 12:58 PM

    The more realistic thing is to have Preston smith beef up a lil bit and put his hands in the dirty because he played DE NT he played all over the the DL in college I don’t think Trent Murphy ever did that

  10. berniebernard666 - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:02 PM

    and what about Brandon Mebane? He is a free agent in Seattle and excellent at stuffing the run.Which is a sensitive weak spot for the Redskins. He is 31 but its better than 34 year old Hatcher or 33 year old Golston.

    • sidepull - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:18 PM

      Akeem Hicks FA playing for the PATS
      6’4 324 That big enough?

  11. Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:09 PM

    I think for NT we need to groom a young stud instead of picking up old guys in free agency… Or Chris baker can start at his regular position at NT…

  12. abanig - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:13 PM

    I don’t think he will be viewed as a possible starter. Just s depth signing. He’s always been stout against the run but has never provided much of a pas rush. He can also play some nose tackle as well – especially in a one gap scheme – he did so for the Steelers some after Casey Hampton retired, but he wouldn’t be viewed as a starting NT either.

    More or less, I see the Ziggy Hood signing as a signing to replace Kedric Golston and his role on the defense, not to replace any of our starters or top back ups.

    • Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:23 PM

      That’s how I see it was well…I think the first pick will be a DL the second pick will be a CB and the third pick is possible C or WR if they don’t pick up one in free agency

      • abanig - Feb 4, 2016 at 10:20 AM

        I think I’d rather take a FS if one of them is available in round 2 rather than a corner in a perfect world. Someone like Darian Thompson from Boise State.

        I still think the skins can re-sign Blackmon, Culliver should be back at some point within the first month and we have Breeland and Dunbar at corner.

        Safety is the position that this organization has mostly ignored for nearly a decade in terms of truly fixing it long term.

  13. Mr.moneylover - Feb 3, 2016 at 1:37 PM

    The one year prove it deal kinda guys always standout why ? Its because they wanna show they can still play at a high level…and when Ziggy hood worked out for the redskins last month they clearly must like what they seen to give him a chance to show he can still play…I think the biggest mistake Ziggy hood made was going from the Steelers to the jaguars and then to the bears…scot m. Like nope you not coming here for the big money you gotta show your worth you gotta show you can still play so he gave him the same kinda deal as junior gaullet…we not gonna pick up nobody on the first day of free agency third day that’s when players value go way down and that’s when redskins make they moves…

  14. kenlinkins - Feb 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM

    Ziggy Hood was more of a run stopper at Pittsburgh who wanted to play in a 4-3 defense. As a under performing last first round pick he never really broke into the starting first unit and the Steelers allowed him to walk as a Free Agent. He was hurt in Jacksonville and then released, signed with Chicago but seemed to not really fit there and released later in the year. IMO the Redskins GM saw a first round DE pick, sitting at home who was better then any of the other jobless NFL players who would cost him almost nothing to bring into OTA’s. Does the GM have concerns about the talent level at D-Line or is it more about finding 90 guys who can push each other in OTA’s and Training Camp (if Ziggy even makes it that far.) Maybe a few of us Redskins fans have “gotten a bit out over our ski’s” on the talent level and winning 9 games didn’t seem to help keep us grounded. In the old days Ziggy would have been known as a “Human blocking dummy with a name some fans know”. Good luck to Mr. Hood, I hope he does well in DC but if I were him I wouldn’t be signing any long term leases for a while as I am 100% that this is not the only move at D-Line the GM will be making.

    • bangkokben - Feb 3, 2016 at 4:45 PM

      Ken, you and I are in complete accord on this one.

    • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 3, 2016 at 5:59 PM

      Nicely put Ken

  15. Destiny - Feb 5, 2016 at 8:03 PM

    Cool!!AWESOME!! It is BURGUNDY AND GOLD??😀😀

RealRedskins.com Archives

Follow Us On Twitter