1st?

Looking down on the skins like i'll be doing at the end of 2008

Inconsistent 2007 season? Huh? JLC, you just love to criticize Portis.

damn you, loseable type!

I demand a post ordering recount!!

Adam

Who cares if it's a position of strength? Let's do the Matt Millen thing and only draft running backs. And then throw 60% of the time.

Let's get the beast fullback from WVU as a backup to Sellers and long-term replacement. Dude is straight animal.

Speaking of counting....we're at 180,810 posts. Back to fubball....

Hopefully under Zorn they can scheme some zone blocking that Portis excels at so well. That is generally when he is going to break one. Also, I would like to see him catch more passes/screens as he does this better than he gets credit for. Any time he caught a pass last year, he wasn't going down easy. Betts is a solid power back. Run him downhill and pitch it to him on the corner as a change of pace.

Philly would be silly to let go of Lito Sheppard, even if he is no longer gruntled there. I like him alot.

Posted by: Cindy | April 16, 2008 12:31 PM

It all depends what you get in return. Philly's in a great position to shop Lito for a very high price. If they can't find a suitor, keeping him would be perfectly fine. I just wish they could/would do the shopping a lot more on the down low (easier said than done) so they don't piss Lito off any more than they probably already have.

Adam

180k, whoo boy, 200k here we come!

and then... and then... 300k! WOO HOOO

180,114th!

I am not concerned at all about the long snapping position. The Red Snapper has that on lockdown.

Also, I would like to see him catch more passes/screens as he does this better than he gets credit for.

Posted by: vze2bnyf | April 16, 2008 12:59 PM

So you're saying what this team needs is More Bellcow!

Any Alaskan bloggers up here?

I'm not concerned about this season's tough schedule. Actually, I think its good that we will be challenged, because...it seems like the team is developing a solid core of young players for the first time in say 15 years. There is a lot of future potential at some key/expensive positions (QB, CB, DT, OT, OLB, S). If we can expand on that talent pool over the next 3 seasons, then we may be a powerhouse/top tier team when Campbell is peaking in his 6th season as a starter...

Jasno again proves his ignorance about the sport of American football.

Offensive lines make a tailback with very few exceptions. Good tailbacks shine because they have the talent to make things happen at the second level -- but getting to that level is all about the O-line.

Of course, Jasno doesn't know anything about football anyway. He thinks a running back makes holes. Little league football coaches know more than Jasno.

But Romo peaked as a starter in his 3rd season.

(in case someone hasn't reminded you of that recently)

I don't really read the supermarket magazines, but I haven't heard much about Romo in a while. Usually its half ESPN drooling over him/half tabloid rumors and half idiot cowboys fans (sorry smack) treating him like the second coming of the Almighty.

Maybe its because he's 0-2 in the playoffs?

Don't mind me, just stirring up old issues. I'm not used to this frequency of threads of 'new'information.

Offensive lines make a tailback with very few exceptions. Good tailbacks shine because they have the talent to make things happen at the second level -- but getting to that level is all about the O-line.

Posted by: | April 16, 2008 1:35 PM

Unless your name is Barry-freaking-Sanders or Earl-I'll-run-right-thru-you-Campbell

Good afternoon anonymous, 1:35pm. Perhaps your eyes accidentally missed this sentence in Jason's post. Or you just chose to ignore the sentence in your never ending quest to be a hemmy infested butt monkey:

"Of course, the erratic play of the injury-plagued offensive line had something to do with Portis's inconsistent 2007 as well."

I was hoping that the Seattle game would be earlier in the season, before the weather out here turns to crap.

Oh well. I'll be there regardless. San Fran, too.

Neat.

"Had something to do" isn't the same as "had EVERYTHING to do."

You mention Barry Sanders -- I guess you missed the line "very few exceptions"?

The Skins are fine at RB and HB. Totally, completely fine.

It's the LINE, people, the LINE!

Oh, everyone already said that.

In any event, then, I wholeheartedly agree with Jasno's assessment of the situation. Let's not be wasting a draft pick on a position of unneed.

7/10 pee wee coaches agree:

Anon posting is lame

You know, I keep coming back to RI for insights like this: no injuries and win the first game. Reminds me of that other one about "we take them one game at a time." Or is it "We want to beat this week's opponent. We're not looking beyond them?"

Posted by: | April 16, 2008 11:47 AM

My point was about how winning the first game is more important than winning any of the other games (unless and until they get to late season divisional games that would make a difference for the playoffs). See the Saints last year. Its much harder to shake off a losing start than it is to start losing mid-season. Early wins parlay into more wins, esp. games that should be losses. See the Lions last year.

freakzilla, I'm a little bummed that the SF game is between the holidays. No way I'll be able to make that trip. Okay, a lot bummed.

Seattle, though, is ON.

-Nate in the PDX

sween, I thought you were borrowing the Captain Obvious mantle up there. It suits you, dude. Borrow it any time.

-Capt. Obvious

9/10 pee wee coaches agree:

A sign of a simpleton is believing that events/actions occur due to one variable (EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT) as opposed to a combination of factors.

Damn what's up with JLC hate of CP? He hated on him all last year and after he bounce back and proved JLC wrong he said nothing. Now this BS!

"defense (many bemoaned what they considered to be a double standard"

Funny you don't hear about this from no one but JLC around the league.

I've seen some mocks now having Brandon Albert going 5th overall? What gives?

7/10 pee wee coaches agree:

Anon posting is lame

Posted by: chris larrY | April 16, 2008 1:43 PM

Registration has turned me into a trained gerbel - I forget that I have to sign my name again.

So....feel free to call me lame.

15/10 pee wee coaches agree that JM220 has man crush on CP

More than anything, I think Clinton needs to have fewer carried, and Betts needs to make up that difference. Give Clinton 270 carries, otherwise, he's going to be ground into dust, by the end of the year.

"Portis will hold considerable sway with rookie head coach Jim Zorn"

Not sure I buy this statement. I'll lend it credence, but not much more. Zorn will no doubt want to maximize Portis's talents, but as far as being swayed by ANY player, I'm not sure that is going to happen.

Captain, I didn't recognize you with the sunglasses on ... the post didn't have any of the Nate tells, aka Nateotics.

My initial point was not just Belichekiotics, it was that losing the first game can be devastating and that fair weather band wagon jumper offers have a higher chance of being right after a Week One loss than after any loss other than that.

Of course, up here,* after a loss, we jump off on Monday mornings (except after a Monday night game) but are back on by around 2:30 or 3:00 pm.

* Gibbspeak: gone but not forgotten

20 out of 20 pee wee coaches agree that CL has man crush on T.O.

Whom do you have a man crush on?

Time to fess up, everyone.

And you have a man crush on Jasno

And you have a man crush on Jasno

I also am a little disappointed that there might not be roster space for the monster FB from WVU ... he has some hilarious YouTubes, like the fake run right/bad pooch punt on the run. Plus, he wears a mohawk. Everything about that guy to me says Sellers, Jr. I'm guessing he has many special teams tackles (but for the life of me, those are statistics I can't find anywhere in the intergoogles, even for the NFL much less college).

Man crush on Jack Bauer

Man crush on myself

I have a man crush on:
Brad Pitt
Denzel
Brett Favre

Man crush on whoever is currently Jessica Biel's boyfriend.

My man crush changes as JB's boyfriends change.

RI has a collective man crush on jm220

http://www.mancrush.com/mc/unit

OWEN SCHMITT OWEN SCHMITT

Here we go, again, with Jasno "misremembering:"

"but Byner was shown the door"

That's not how it happened, was it? Byner was offered a one year contract and he didn't sign it. The 'Skins got tired of waiting for him to make up his mind and looked elsewhere once they'd hired a new head coach.

Byner didn't have to be "shown the door." He found it on his own.

Okay, okay... I'll admit it would be nice to hear what Stump Mitchell thinks about all this. Or that nice Zorn fellow.

Do we have to wait for minicamp to start hearing what they think, or at least what they're willing to tell us they think?

Minicamp is, like, a million days away! I don't want to have to wait that long!

Good reminder about the importance of the O-line to the running game ... which leads me to a question for our resident draft monkeys. Who are the guys that blocked for Darren McFadden and Felix Jones that are in this draft?

Let's just end all the Redskins talk now...after seeing the line up this year for 08 and Zorn hired.....The Redskins will SUCK!

http://www.mancrush.com/mc/man?ad=699

go here to vote for Joe Thiesman. Maybe we can get him higher than God!

I already said this on another post but just to get an idea of what the rest of you think. Do you guys believe that JLC's Insider source was Earnest Byner.

I mean if you think about it JLC was on top of the coaching search and was able to report on everyone walking through Snyder's door. Since then....nothing, except for a million digs at the Skins and the childish "Hey kids, lets give Vinny a nickname (and then point and laugh)"

Anyway he's also been vocal about Byner being shown the door among other things, which as I said before, was kind of upset, as I grew up watching Earnest Byner help the Redskins win a Super Bowl.

Anyway my guess is that Byner was JLC's source until he got replaced.

Seems beyond question that Coach Byner was a reliable source, but also seems beyond question that Byner would be the only source on the coaching staff.

Responding to my own question about guys who blocked for McFadden and Felix Jones, I found this guy, Robert Felton, G (plus OT) projected to be a late round guy. http://www.hogwired.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=30724&SPID=2419&DB_OEM_ID=6100&ATCLID=186723&Q_SEASON=2007

Also for the sake of adding to the article. The possibility of drafting a RB in the first 3 rounds seems to be realistic. Apparently the team is interested in potential 3rd round pick Matt Forte out of Tulan and Jamaal Charles out of Texas. They also met with Rasard Mendenhall from Illinois but I wouldn't look to much into that one.

Also if anyone is a member or Warpath Insiders could you post the rest of this story:

NFL Draft Buzz: Forte, Atchison, Langford

RB Matt Forte (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan) By Ed Thompson
Senior NFL Analyst
Date: Apr 11, 2008

In this installment of the Draft Buzz, see which of these players the Redskins have been showing serious interest in.

I've seen some mocks now having Brandon Albert going 5th overall? What gives?
Posted by: TDawg | April 16, 2008 1:49 PM

Chalk that up to Buges working him out....

Mistyped that ... meant to say there were coach sources OTHER than Byner ... beyond, such as

why do people waste their time here if you don't want to hear what he has to say? go elsewhere. let the man blog as he wants, you don't have to read it! give it up and do something else with yourself......

Seems like using a draft pick on more than one running back or fullback would be akin to drafting a QB with Brunell, Collins, Campbell, and Bramlett already on the roster (and Hollenbach added the day after the draft) ... unless Betts and/or Rock are QUIETLY being shopped. Someone should ask Coach Byner ... oh wait ... never mind ...

I have another question (aren't I just a bundle of questions today?) ... when a guy gets traded, if he is under contract, does the contract transfer to the new team? I know that the draft (and trades) means only one team has the RIGHTS for the playing time of that player (see Jake Plummer), but does the new team inherit the contract? or is the contract only btwn the player and the team he negotiated with?

Chalk that up to Buges working him out....

Posted by: 4th | April 16, 2008 2:57 PM

Not likely. If this were the case, then everyone Buges worked out would be rocketing up the charts. More than likely, teams already rated him pretty well, then looked at what else was out there, and started thinking he looked better than the others. Finally, the press realized it, and started moving him up in the Muck Drafts.

Clinton Portis is my favorite player.

Clinton Portis is my favorite player.

Clinton Portis is my favorite player.

Clinton Portis is my favorite player.

4th, I'm with you re: Buges ... that article from the Fredricksburg paper was linked all over the place, then a couple three days later, Jasno mentioned Albert, then a couple few more days and Albert was moving up quick ... and around that time, "NFL executives and scouts and talent evaluators" (not our own, mind you) starting saying that Albert could play left tackle ... and with the "narrative" about this position changed, he became consistently a top ten pick.

sween, isn't Brunell off the roster at this very moment? I seem to remember rejoicing over that news... but point taken anyway, that RB like QB is NOT a position of relative need, in my opinion from out here in the PDX.

and it wasn't Buges working him out, it was Buges monopolizing all of this free (non-workout) time chatting him up at the UVa Pro Day.

@sween

They get the contract.

second 3:15pm, I was suggesting that taking a RB in this draft might be (almost) as stupid as taking a QB in the sixth round in the last draft. [The "almost" is because, with nine picks rather than five (six? four?), another RB wouldn't be a stupid as the Jordan Palmer pick.] That said, if they are prepared to "waste" a pick, I've been clear about where I am on that question ... punter!

@3:19pm, thanks ... all the more value in quietly shopping Betts.

I have another question (aren't I just a bundle of questions today?) ... when a guy gets traded, if he is under contract, does the contract transfer to the new team? I know that the draft (and trades) means only one team has the RIGHTS for the playing time of that player (see Jake Plummer), but does the new team inherit the contract? or is the contract only btwn the player and the team he negotiated with?

Posted by: dcsween | April 16, 2008 3:07 PM

The contract transfer and stays the same (bonus, ULTBE, LTBE, and Base Salaries). But, the majority of trades usually rip up the old contract and hammer out a new one....

Seems like Chad Johnson is at it again....

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3349761

4th, I'm with you re: Buges ... that article from the Fredricksburg paper

Posted by: dcsween | April 16, 2008 3:15 PM

That is exactly what I was refering to. No one could have jumped as early on the Albert Bandwagon earlier than us because that article is what did it....

New Era Scouting scouting report on Branden Albert ... apparently, Skins not listed as interested ... but my favorite part is the best case/worst case projections. Could be as good as Larry Allen ... couldn't be worse than Leonard Davis. http://www.newerascouting.com/profiler/viewprofile.php?id=141

" ... But, the majority of trades usually rip up the old contract and hammer out a new one ...."

Posted by: 4th | April 16, 2008 3:21 PM

I also would be interested in learning WHY they re-negotiated with Brandon Lloyd.

dc, why would you want to know that? He's gone, lets let that one go...

Chad Johnson is REALLY making it hard for the Bengals to save face and trade him.

Which reminds me, why is it that ... "NEXT QUESTION!" I mean, I just wanted to know ... "NEXT QUESTION!" ... but if ... "NEXT QUESTION!"

dc, why would you want to know that? He's gone, lets let that one go...

Posted by: Greg | April 16, 2008 3:28 PM

Never saw this post coming

Greg, I'm a Skins fan, but I think The Owner and the EVP have made some dubious decisions. I don't want to be bashed like Jasno, so I'm all ears for any rational explanation ... even if its just theoretical ... I figure there is no way we could ever REALLY find out the "why" ... so if there IS even a possible rational reason, I'm prepared to let it go.

They did it 2 years ago right? I mean, what does it matter now, other than they learned their lesson, and have changed their way's, which it appears that they have, hopefully.

I guess I've just moved on from the Brandon Lloyd era...

sween, I've been combing through the CBA over on the NFLPA site, and in several places language indicates that the contract itself is traded to the new team. The player apparently comes with.

I'm no lawyer, but this CBAotics is REALLY interesting reading. On this page, search for "(f) Traded Contracts"

http://www.nflplayers.com/user/template.aspx?fmid=181&lmid=231&pid=612&type=c

-PDX

I also would be interested in learning WHY they re-negotiated with Brandon Lloyd.

Posted by: dcsween | April 16, 2008 3:26 PM

Because they traded a 3rd and 4th rounder for him and he only had a one year deal. They didn't want to let him go after they spent so many quality draft picks on him for just one year, even though that has happened before....

I searched for "(f) Traded Contracts", but all that came up was "(F chRIs Larry)"

Sween, if a trade occurs, the contract is assigned to the new team. However, the trade "accelerates" signing bonus and the new team is not responsible for any of the signing bonus. Accordingly, because Redskins typically give big signing bonuses to their big money players, they would take a significant cap hit if they were to trade any of such players.

See response to question 1.12 at the following link. http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp

4th, that's what I was looking for ... that he only had a year left on his contract. I'm pretty sure Betts is under contract for longer than till the end of next year, though I know Rock only has a one year deal. The bit about assuring duration to replace two picks makes a ton of sense ... and I buy it.

DROPPED.

@sween,

Agree with 4th, plus they thought that he was going to have a break-out year with the Skins (catching the long ball from Mark Brunnell) and that if they waited a year it would cost them a lot more for a long-term deal. It was risky either way, and the 'Skins paid for being wrong.

Post about the salary cap hit on a trade is correct. Whatever money is remaining on a bonus is charged to the team trading the player. We took a big cap hit to trade Coles and that is exactly why the Bengals are balking at trading Chad Johnson. It would be an 8M cap hit to trade him.

Maybe Marvin Lewis should offer to buy CJ an HDTV to watch the games on.

Accordingly, because Redskins typically give big signing bonuses to their big money players, they would take a significant cap hit if they were to trade any of such players.

Posted by: M | April 16, 2008 3:38 PM

You can offset any bonus by transfering the gaureented bonus to the new team, A La Archibingus and Da Bears who took $5Mil of the $10Mil gaureented bonus and got a new contract.

"... going to have a break-out year with the Skins ..."

This is what happened when I turned 15. Let's hear it for Retin-A.

Also, M, thanks for the reminder about the accelerate cap hit on the signing bonus. I don't have the link to the state of the cap (tried to find it ... redskinswarpath.com?), but I wonder how much of Betts' contract was front-loaded.

[I wonder if Betts ever reads RI or ES ... he seems like the most trade-talked guy on the team in both ... if so, its nothing personal against you Ladell, its just that you seem like the only guy who has that combo of trade value and redundancy.]

I think Archuletta was an exception. He wanted out badly and the Bears wanted him. Not many teams would agree to take on the bonuses we hand out.

If Chad Johnson wants out as bad as he says he does, seems like a totally fixable problem along the lines of what 4th brings up ... both Archuleta and LaVar. I was just wondering what might happen if Betts were to be traded INvoluntarily.

You can offset any bonus by transfering the gaureented bonus to the new team, A La Archibingus and Da Bears who took $5Mil of the $10Mil gaureented bonus and got a new contract.

Posted by: 4th | April 16, 2008 3:43 PM

Technically, the way it works is that Arch re-negotiated the old contract with the 'Skins, reducing his bonus and repaying them the amount that the new team was paying him in bonus in his new contract. It takes a willing player to go along with it.

http://www.skinsfans.com/pcinoz/Salaries%20Pages%20Summary.html

The Bengals also seem a little thin at RB (Rudi Johnson and Kenny Watson, plus a single FB in yet another Bengal named Johnson). I wouldn't be surprised (and remain too lazy to check) if Ladell Betts had better stats than Rudi Johnson in 2006.

Yikes! That site says that, in 2002, Betts signed an ELEVEN year contract (till 2013) that included a $4.85M signing bonus, with a total value of $15M and change. I have a vague recollection, however, that his contract was redone in 2006 before the season was over (because he supposedly would have hit free agency at that end of the 2006 season). Something in there doesn't make sense (other than me).

So you're saying what this team needs is More Bellcow!

Posted by: SMACK | April 16, 2008 1:24 PM

Not more Bellcow, different Bellcow, with Betts in the mix up the middle and on he corners. Every time they hand Portis the ball up the middle, it makes me cringe.

Accounting question (you'll notice me around town as the guy with a question mark on his forehead ... in permanent magic marker).

When they say that the signing bonus gets "amortized" over the life of the contract, does that amortization include interest like my mortgage? Or does it just mean that it gets divided up into as many equal amounts as there are years in the contract (with the time value of money to be dambed)? [Trying to figure out how much of Betts' 2002 signing bonus already would have been paid.]

I have a man crush on dcsween.

Hate Hate Hate Hate

v, what they NEED is more cowbell ... SMACK was being too clever by half (whatever that means).

couldn't resist huh Greg...some people find it inforamative to look back at what happened as a way to understand the present...normally they are called Historians...but in RI we call the "Jansonianins"

Pretty soon someone will mention Antonio Pierce (prolly beantown Greg responding to no one bringing him up....)

I kid b/c I like Greg....lighten up (as a wise one said to me once....)

Half-clever, half-idiot (thanks, Dorf).

If we're going to talk about signing Lloyd, then we might as well bring up Antonio Pierce...lets do this right....

(how was that cl?)

Things are getting uglier and uglier in Cincinnati.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/

In related news, here is my latest mock:

Skins send the 21st overall pick in the 20087 Draft and Rock Cartwright to the Bengals for Receiver Chad Johnson.

1 (TRD)Chad Johnson, WR, Cincinnati Bengals
2 (WAS)Dre Moore, DT, Maryland
3 (WAS)Reggie Smith, CB/S, OU
3 (CMP)Tavares Gooden, LB, Miami
5 (WAS)Mike Fladell, OG, Rutgers
6 (WAS)Colt Brennan, QB, Hawaii
7 (WAS)Bobby Byrd, OT, Wash St.
7 (CMP)Carlton Powell, DT, VT
7 (CMP)Tommy Blake, DE, TCU

(you'll notice me around town as the guy with a question mark on his forehead ... in permanent magic marker).
Posted by: dcsween | April 16, 2008 4:01 PM

At least you're not this guy.

http://www.nndb.com/people/422/000031329/lesko.jpg

ugh, no thanks to TJ. If he's causing waves in Cincy, what makes people think he wont do the same thing here?

Or this guy:

http://www.moviestore.com/Photos/C320747_C42137.html?SID=0b051fe105985f9fec5302bc006466b0

Does fake not dcsween have a crush on dcsween, or is fake not dcsween trying to frame dcsween as being notguy

Yes, I'm glad I'm not that guy ... he has question marks on his JACKET ... that's way harder to remove than permanent marker.

Internet searches on "too clever by half" give me no satisfaction ... so I'm going with 50% clever, 50% idiot.

DOOMED.

Yikes! That site says that, in 2002, Betts signed an ELEVEN year contract (till 2013) that included a $4.85M signing bonus, with a total value of $15M and change. I have a vague recollection, however, that his contract was redone in 2006 before the season was over (because he supposedly would have hit free agency at that end of the 2006 season). Something in there doesn't make sense (other than me).
Posted by: dcsween | April 16, 2008 3:58 PM

This is including his rookie contract. I believe it was a 6 or 7 year extension of his original contract. They did this for salary cap purposes.....

Does fake not dcsween have a crush on dcsween, or is fake not dcsween trying to frame dcsween as being notguy

Posted by: | April 16, 2008 4:12 PM

That sounds like just the thing notguy would want us all to believe ... or not believe.

1. I totally would want to be Frank Gorshin and/or The Riddler ... but I would not be clever enough by 95%.

2. 4th, now I'm getting more confused ... so in doing the extension, does that mean he got the same annual salary for additional years and a longer period of time over which to spread out the signing bonus cap effect? I'm starting to think that it might be a bad idea to quietly shop Betts ... because it would require not only two lawyers, but also a mathematician.

* beep beep * for everyone who doesn't mind when Jasno posts about things other than football

everybody else, stay here!

Caps fans should head to the new thread from Jasno.

Redskins fans should stay here.

BEEP BEEP - only if you really like hockey.

er, football only people, please ADVANCE TWO THREADS. do not pass go, do not collect $200.

* beepfrog*

beep beep... a football related beep beep

Well, more junk about Chad Johnson is ALMOST a football-related post.

It got "super-smart" up here all of a sudden.

Accounting question (you'll notice me around town as the guy with a question mark on his forehead ... in permanent magic marker).

When they say that the signing bonus gets "amortized" over the life of the contract, does that amortization include interest like my mortgage? Or does it just mean that it gets divided up into as many equal amounts as there are years in the contract (with the time value of money to be dambed)? [Trying to figure out how much of Betts' 2002 signing bonus already would have been paid.]
Posted by: dcsween | April 16, 2008 4:01 PM

I may qualify to answer this. No interest. BUT, because the cap becomes bigger each year, the value of the yearly amortized signing bonus becomes a smaller percentage of the cap year over year over year.

Most of Betts original '02 signing bonus has mostly been amortized. He signed his new deal in the last year of his original contract. Because the Skins had Cap room in that year, they used the majority of it to include a signing bonus. There's a big roster bonus coming up this or next year...

Sween, is this the link you were trying to find?

http://www.redskinswarpath.com/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm?vbseourl=redirect/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm

Um LaVar -- as much as I loved him as a player -- signed a contact as the highest paid LB in the game, then sued the owner falsely claiming he was due two signing bonuses in one year. Which ultimately resulted in his agent getting suspended and LaVar paying to leave for the Giants. He also had a bruise and never played at a high level again...

If your best player sues the owner and doesn't perform up to expectations, then yeah that sounds like pretty good justification for getting cut.

Siris, the reference to LaVar was just about a player voluntarily re-negotiating his contract to take less money in order to be released from the contract and play for another team.

M, that was it. Thanks ... and now I have it bookmarked.

Posted by: talkshowhost | April 16, 2008 4:07 PM

Colt Brennan sucks - and so does the rest of your mock draft. It isn't even good enough to qualify as memedom.

Wow, I'm shocked by the Portis comments. I mean the guy is a complete player who blocks, runs, and catches. He's one of the best players on the team. Last year running behind the Skins injured/backup OL -- and returning from injury himself -- Portis was the 12th ranked RB in the NFL. He ran for 1,262 yds on 325 carries, caught 47 passes for 389 yds (3.9 avg), had 11 TDs with only 5 fumbles for loss. I suspect he'll be even better this year with a healthy OL, zone blocking, and a better passing game.

Betts in contrast was healthy and didn't look good last year. He only rushed for 335 yds (3.6 avg) on 93 carries, with 174 yds receiving, 1 TD and 1 fumble. I like him as a backup, but he should have plenty of competition in camp this year from Cartwright and Mason.

Sellers is an excellent FB and Cartwright is a good backup/ST player. I'm not sure why the Skins don't use Rock as a backup FB... Wasn't that his original position out of college?

The Skins re-signed Nemo too. Perhaps he can stay healthy this year and make the team as the backup FB. Schmidt didn't even make the practice squad last year, so I'm guessing he's just a camp body.

The Skins are set at both RB and FB. I'd be surprised if they draft any RBs, but not if pickup a late round FB or FAs for training camp.

"Accounting question (you'll notice me around town as the guy with a question mark on his forehead ... in permanent magic marker)."

Matthew Lesko?