There was a lot of talk of change in the air at Redskins Park over the last few days. At his season-wrap up presser, Jim Zorn indicated that there would be changes.
But he also said that there wasn't much of anything that he wanted to change.
He likes his quarterback, his offense, his job duties, his coaching staff, and his older players. The current player personnel structure, headed up by Vinny Cerrato, will stay intact.
Presumably there would be a major debate if someone wanted to change the carpet on the stairs at Redskins Park.
The team should stay the course in some areas. Staying with the same offense and the same quarterback for another offseason is a good idea. It would be good to see Zorn become more imaginative in his play calling but that will come as the team settles in. We've gone back and forth about Jason Campbell here but he's the man with no competition and we'll have to see what happens. I'd like to see a more solid Plan B in place than Todd Collins, who is too old, and Colt Brennan, who is too inexperienced. Perhaps letting Collins go and bringing in an experienced West Coast QB like Chris Simms would be the way to go here.
The offensive backs are likely to remain the same. Portis got $20 million in guarantees a year ago so he's not going anywhere. There will be some noise about trading Ladell Betts but that probably won't happen. Rock Cartwright is the special teams' Mr. Everything and Mike Sellers is a deserving Pro Bowl pick at fullback (just don't give him the ball at the goal line).
There may be some minor shuffling at WR—will a 34-year-old James Thrash be able to contribute enough on special teams to justify using a receiver slot? Other than that, any changes will come from increased (meaning any) production from Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly.
The offensive line may or may not get the upgrade that it needs. There is talk of Pete Kendall, an unrestricted free agent, returning. He'll be 36 by the time next season starts. I like the guy and I'll always respect him for standing in front of his locker after the Rams game and taking every question from every reporter. But it's time to move on.
Is it time for Jon Jansen to move on? He shouldn't start, that's for sure. There would be a net cap hit of about $6 million ($1 million higher than I previously estimated). In 2009 his salary is "only" $1.3 million, a number you can justify for a backup. The foolishly-paid guaranteed money is water under the bridge and it may be better to wait until 2010 to release him. That may be an uncapped year and even if it's not the hit will not sting quite as much.
At some point there has to be a youth movement on the O-line. They took Chad Reinhart in the third round last year and they need to see what they have there. Can Stephon Heyer develop the consistency and the run-blocking ability necessary to become a solid starter? If those two can start, that's a 40% injection of youth into the aging unit. If a starting center can be found in the third round of the draft, that's 60%.
On the other side of the ball, there isn't much wrong that can't be solved with a big, mean defensive tackle creating havoc in the middle of the line. That would help the ends get better pass pressure, which would, in turn, help the defensive backs play more aggressively and maybe get more than the occasional interception here and there.
Albert Haynesworth of the Titans fills the bill but he's going to demand a ton of money. It's a bit too early to say what might be available at pick #13 along those lines since the juniors haven't yet declared but I have to think that there would be a quality DT there.
Talk of trading Carlos Rogers is foolish. Shawn Springs has to go, along with his $8 million cap number (the net cap savings would be around $6 million). Give DeAngelo Hall a reasonable contract and let Rogers play in the last year of his deal. If there is no new CBA in 2010, he'll be a restricted free agent. There has been a debate on the message boards about whether to pay Hall or Rogers. As neither is going to warrant a monster contract, I'm not sure why it has to be an either/or situation.
Comments