Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Follow PostSports on Twitter  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

The Redskins are doomed

By Jason Woodmansee

Since the Redskins had a bye week, I took a bye week as well. I didn’t really watch any of the games on Sunday. I did my best to ignore the swirling winds of craziness surrounding the Redskins. I tried very hard not to have a fit when John Clayton said on ESPN that not only would Donovan McNabb not be around next year, but that the Redskins most likely option was Michael Vick -- “If a trade for Jay Cutler doesn’t work out.” It was my calm, zen-like approach to the bye week that kept be from pulling an Elvis on my TV.

I came through it all feeling refreshed. After all, the 4-4 record is pretty reasonable, given the schedule, and it seems that McNabb & Shanahan seemed to have patched things up. And then I got an email from Jeff, a Twitter friend and fellow Redskins fan, who managed to convince me that the Redskins are doomed.

Jeff’s basic point is that the Redskins under Snyder refuse to understand the basic truth that the Redskins have to be torn down before they’re built back up. The plan has been consistent -- sign free agents, trade away draft picks, lather, rinse, repeat. Because of this philosophy, the Redskins will always end up between 6-10 and 10-6 (with an occasional 4-12 thrown in).

History backs Jeff up -- in the 12 seasons Snyder has owned the team, they’ve finished within two games of .500 nine times, and they’re heading that way again. Sure, this year there is a new, more professional regime that will make it more likely the Redskins are 10-6, but Allen/Shanahan haven’t changed the basic script. As much as I’m in the tank for McNabb, you don’t trade away draft picks for a veteran leader at the end of his contract unless you have a good line and a solid team in place. The Redskins were a hot mess last year, and one year with somewhat competent leadership team won’t make them a sudden contender.

So, the question really isn’t what the Redskins do the rest of this year -- we know it will be between 6-10 and 10-6 -- but what will they do next year? Will they hold onto draft picks? Trade them away? Keep McNabb? Is there any chance that the team will break out of this pattern of earnest mediocrity? It’s hard not to see the clouds of doom overhead when you stop and think about it. I guess I’ll just live in the moment and hope the Redskins break Vick again on Monday night. Unless that’s our future quarterback...

By Jason Woodmansee  | November 12, 2010; 12:48 PM ET
Categories:  Jason Woodmansee, Redskins  | Tags:  Jason Woodmansee, Redskins  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Powerball with Nick Young
Next: Redskins-Eagles 2: A subtle rivalry


This break it down and build it up "theory" is a Hoax! Are you serious? Show me one NFL team that this has worked for, even better show me two! This has been an even bigger myth in Baseball. "You got to build it up through the minor league system!" "You have to build through the draft!" Yes, those things help your team but show me the NFL team that has broke it down to build it up? The team that really gets it and it pains me to say it is the Patriots, they develop players and then go out and get value for those players. Here are a few examples of where the Redskins go wrong and should learn from the Pats, Ladell Betts(Portis goes down and he runs off 1000 yds- he should have been trade bait- we never got anything more out of him really), Fred Davis (Cooley goes down and he has a great year and know he is doing next to nothing, couldn't we have used a couple picks for each of these guys). Loyalty is killing us! Yes, what you beleive to be a positive trait is a negative. Loyalty leads to entitlement. We don't need to break it down, just don't be scared to lose a "star"! If there is any locker room issues, trade them before it goes public, especially positions that have value. Holding on to a running back as long as we have is stupid (no offense Portis, I like ya, just business). He has been here so long that he feels entitled, the day he gets back, he will get the bulk of the carries, regardless of his cardiovascular fitness.

Posted by: wzrthnu | November 12, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse


Show you one? OK. In just THIS year: St Louis, KC, Tampa Bay, Detroit, and maybe even Oakland the way they're going.

Not good enough? How about another sport - our beloved Washington Capitals. Worst to first in 2 years.

Every one of those teams fell into suckage, got a ton of picks, and are building themselves back up through the draft. The key isn't failing, the key is DRAFTING. Trading picks for aging free agents is not a winning strategy. It is however a strategy perfect for achieving mediocrity.

Posted by: innocentbystander | November 12, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

The Redskins have been doomed under Snyder. Here's a theory. The only coach with a winning record under Snyder has been Norv Turner. Even Gibbs was a net loser under Snyder. And, another perennial winner, Schotty, was even .500.

I think the only logical conclusion here is that Norv Turner put a Senegalese hex on the team. "Norv" probably means "Shaman" in Senegalese.

Posted by: mirf59 | November 12, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company