Mike Keith was on 104.5 The Zone this morning talking about how the Titans are not scared to take a guy like Jason Pierre-Paul because they have Jim Washburn who is the best defensive line coach in the NFL. While I agree that Washburn is one of the better defensive line coaches in the game, I am not sure just having him is a reason to take a project like JPP.
Do I think Wash can make Pierre-Paul a good player? Yes, but I don't think it will happen in 2010. That is the problem with this philosophy. The Titans need a player to step in and make an impact from day 1, not a guy that is going to possibly be a stud in 2-3 years. That brings me back to my question about Washburn. Is he that good?
That segways nicely into a discussion on Fat Albert. Sure he became arguably the most dominant player in the game, but it took 5 years. Go look at his stats. He had 9.5 sacks in his first 5 years and 14.5 in his two contract years.
Antwan Odom? He racked up an astounding 4.5 sacks in his first 3 years before having 8 in his contract year.
Last year they brought in Jovan Haye who had actually had some production early in his career. Washburn was supposed to bring him back to dominance. The result? Non-factor.
There are also the cases of Randy Starks and Mookie Johnson who were no good here but have moved on to have success at other places.
The two cases that work in Washburn's favor are Travis LaBoy and Tony Brown, but do two cases really make him worthy of spending #16 on a guy that has never proven anything? The guy they take has to make an impact next year if this team is going to be any better than 8-8 in 2010.
So what do you think? Is there something I am missing here? Again, I am not saying that Wash isn't a very good D line coach, but I don't think his track record proves that he can turn a guy into a stud in one offseason.