Per Larry Weisman of USA Today with a hat tipped Extreme Skin's way.
Critcism for the Redskins' offseason has centered on their inability to address the defensive line, that inability taken at Hogs Haven as evidence that the coaching staff is not worried about the line, a questionable assumption if the team is shifting Daniels around. They would do so presumably for a lack of faith in Salave'a or Golston or Montgomery to hold shit down in the interior opposite Cornelius Griffin. Alternatively it could be taken as evidence that they've lost faith in Daniels pass rush on the edge, a possibility too depressing to consider (and likely absurd, since if he
ain't is no good at DE he ain't is no good anywhere else, methinks).
Moving along as if USA Today were scripture, who exactly would replace Daniels on the edge if he's busy pushing others down the depth chart? Renaldo Wynn backs up Andre Carter though he's the favorite to move over and start on that side. Or Demetric Evans. Neither represents an improvement on our pass rush. Wynn has eight sacks in five seasons with the Redskins, which is how many Daniels had in 2005 alone. Ditto on Evans, who has 7.5 in D.C., though admittedly on limited PT. To tell you the truth, with their numbers staring back at me, I'd lean towards Evans.
But again, I ask, how does moving our starting end to tackle (to replace our starting tackle), thereby necessitating replacement of our starting end with one of two backup ends, improve our defensive line? More disturbingly, what does it say about the coaching staff's confidence in our defensive tackles, as this could be interpreted as a somewhat drastic maneuver given that, as far as I can tell, Phillip Daniels hasn't played defensive tackle since his sophomore year of college. That was 1993, by the way.