Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS
Posted at 5:18 PM ET, 12/ 8/2010

Redskins healing for Tampa Bay game

By Rick Maese

The Redskins Wednesday injury report reflected a team as healthy as it has been in weeks.

Neither safety LaRon Landry (Achilles) nor cornerback Carlos Rogers (hamstring) participated in practice. But Coach Mike Shanahan said both took part in the team's morning walk-through.

Only three players were limited in practice: receiver Brandon Banks (knee), safety Kareem Moore (ankle/biceps) and running back Ryan Torain (hamstring).

Other players who had been bothered lately by nagging injuries were able to fully participate, according to the injury report, including Lorenzo Alexander, Kedric Golston, Donovan McNabb, Santana Moss, Brian Orakpo, Casey Rabach and Trent Williams.

Every Tampa Bay player practiced Wednesday except linebacker Quincy Black (ankle) and tight end Kellen Winslow (knee), both of whom missed practice entirely.

By Rick Maese  | December 8, 2010; 5:18 PM ET
Categories:  LaRon Landry  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Ryan Torain practices, could start Sunday
Next: Could Albert Haynesworth overturn his suspension?

Comments

Suspending Hayney not only made some Skins fans happy, it also made opposing players happy....

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/dec/08/081700/bucs-dont-have-to-worry-about-blocking-haynesworth/news-breaking/

"When I heard about Haynesworth, I texted (center) Jeremy Zuttah and said, 'Zuttah, I know you're happy,' " said Tampa Bay left tackle Donald Penn. "I had been thinking to myself, 'Watch this guy come back the week he plays us.' ''

Posted by: Alan4 | December 8, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

The Giants only converted 20% of their third downs. That is an advancement.

Of the Giants 8 second half drives, 6 resulted in punts. None was any longer than 5 plays. Their only two 2nd half scores were the result of them having excellent field position due to a turnover and blocked punt. That is an advancement.

Yes, our run defense sucked in the first half, and yes, the turnovers killed us, but I see many things that are IMPROVING in our performance and execution.

Posted by: kaasmaster | December 8, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse
I'm not ready to make too much of all that "advancement" just yet, kaas. Remember, Ginas had about a 28 point lead at that time, had no incentive other than to kill the clock. We were not threatening to get any scores. I think Coughlin kind of shut down. If it had been Belichek, it might have been 59-3.

Posted by: frediefritz | December 8, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

kaas, if you are looking for advancement, think about the first 6 games of the season. Our players were healthy, we didn't need to use backup players. This is the good news. What our team is sorely lacking is depth, because we don't have enough draft picks every year. Depth is built from drafting players from picks 100-230, ie the later rounds of the draft. You are getting 22 year old athletes, who want to learn. After learning for several years, they are ready to compete for starting roles. In the meantime, they serve as back-ups when starters are hurt. If you have a lot of them, this is depth. We haven't had as many, so our depth is lacking.

Posted by: frediefritz | December 8, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

I am actually looking forward to seeing a young backfield of Torain/Davis and a late round speed back running behind a new guard and center next year. Whether or not you agree with Shanny and his moves (and some of them are hard to fathom), this team is on its way to getting a lot younger, which is definitely a good thing.

Posted by: NYPDee | December 8, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

The Giants had 139 rushing yards in the first half, but only 58 in the second half. 28 of those came on one play.

Eli Manning completed 81% of his passes in the first half (9 of 11), but only 42% in the second half (6 of 14).

This means that the Redskins defense did it's job to keep us in the game. How many times in the past have we seen the Redskins fail to stop the run and get other teams' offense off the field in the second half?

Posted by: kaasmaster | December 8, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Hey Barno,
Why do you keep posting the Wilbon crap? I get you don't like the guy, neither do most of us, but why keep it up? He's gone. Good riddance, move on.
(Notice I'm not calling you an idiot or ripping you in any way. (yet.))

Posted by: mack1 | December 8, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

They should sit Landry and Rogers. No need to risk any serious injuries. Let the young guys audition for next season. Not to mention the more we lose the better the draft choice.

Posted by: skins91r | December 8, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

I think Coughlin kind of shut down. If it had been Belichek, it might have been 59-3.

Posted by: frediefritz | December 8, 2010 5:26 PM

I wouldn't call going for a punt block when you're up by 21 in the second half shutting it down. The fact is they were NOT ABLE to run the ball with the success they had in the first half. Stopping the run and replacing Buchanon with Barnes made it so they were NOT ABLE to pass the ball with the success they had in the first half.

Give Haslet and the defense credit for a major improvement in their play for the second half.

Posted by: kaasmaster | December 8, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

That Wilbon opener was incredibly weak. Then I read the "hard core" questions ... and I can't say they were any better than he got in DC.

"Do you think the Jets will make a Super Bowl run?"

ooooooooo .... hard core ...... ooooooooooo

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: kaasmaster | December 8, 2010 5:55 PM
================================
it was garbage time, Kaas.. If a team is losing by a wide margin the opposing team plays prevent defense, like a secondary being 20 yards off the line. Makes the opposing QB look great and opens holes for the once ineffective RBs. Its why Campbell had decent QB stats yet a terrible Won Loss Record.

As one poster said, if it was Belicheat it would of been 59-3. He doesnt believe in taking the foot off the throat, ever. As he says..."I dont see why?"?

Posted by: onanygivensunday | December 8, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

ZEKE’S UNIQUE PERSPECTIVES brought to you by the fine people at Yahoo!

Like any business, the Skins need to know what assets to keep and which to get rid of. Parting with an asset is an interesting challenge. Economics tells us to ‘sell high’.

The Shanahan-led Skins, however, have taken several assets and chosen not to ‘sell high’. Nor have they attempted to build up the asset value. Instead, they have done things to diminish value, often dramatically, before selling low.

I’ll use 2 case studies. First is Denver parting with Cutler. Denver got a lot because the asset, Cutler, was insanely overvalued (Shanahan had a lot to do with Cutler’s perceived value).

The 2nd study compares Jason Campbell to Charlie Whitehurst, QBs who were both traded early in 2010. Whitehurst, 28, was a 3rd round pick in ‘06. He’d never thrown an NFL pass prior to his trade to SEA from SD. SD got a 3rd round pick + a swap of 2nd rounders, with SD moving up 20 slots to #40 overall. Whitehurst’s value was clearly inflated, Campbell’s diminished. Whitehurst has now thrown 29 NFL passes: 1 TD & 3 INTs. The better QB, by far, is Campbell. The team that got the most in trade, by far, was SD.

Albert, Andre Carter, Rocky, Dock and Carlos Rogers. Cooley or Fred Davis (pick 1) are here for the moment; each guy has seen their trade value drop. Campbell, Rock Cartwright (contributing solidly in OAK) and Devin Thomas left for little or nothing. 9 guys who began 2010 as a Skin. Few, if any, should be here in 2011. The team got, or will get, very little in return.

Thing is, Shanahan did nothing to increase their perceived value in order to ‘sell high’. For a guy like Rock, ‘high’ might have been a conditional late round pick. For Albert, ‘high’ might have been a 2nd round pick.

Among the ways Shanahan has diminished value are by changing playing time (Dockery, FD) and changing systems (the 3-4 with Carter, Albert). He battled some players and lost (DThomas, Albert) or simply didn’t value them adequately (Rock, Campbell). He set up contracts for guys likely to leave after 2010 with minimal compensation (Rogers, Rocky).

Some may say Cerrato left behind a bare cupboard (in part, because Shanahan fleeced Vinny). But it wasn’t bare. Shanahan has made the cupboard emptier.

A brief mention of the “buy” side. Though dominated by McNabb, Shanahan has done quite a bit of buying low for lower tier parts, with respectable results.

Shanahan has it right when he says “do the little things well and the big things take care of themselves”. Creating perceived value for players that no longer fill a need seems like a ‘little thing’. Multiply it by 9 and it’s nets out to be a ‘big thing’. Finding ways to create perceived value with guys that you don’t need is a key part of executive success in the NFL. On that front, Shanahan has been a disaster.

That’s a wrap of ZEKE’S UNIQUE PERSPECTIVES, brought to you by Yahoo!’s finest.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

You won't hear it from anyone in the media because it's the Redskins in a positive light, but the steal of the off season was getting a 4th round draft pick (even if it is in 2012) for Campbell.
Has anyone seen him play in Oakland? Just terrible, and he can't blame it on no running game or a bad o-line or no play makers at WR.
Campbell is a great guy, I wish him the best, but he isn't worth a 7th round pick in 2015.
Hopefully, Shannahallen can get something similiar for Albert next off season.

Posted by: jgarrisn | December 8, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: onanygivensunday | December 8, 2010 6:26 PM

J. Davis had only two runs in the second half for 7 yards or a 3.5 yard average. that was below his 4.4 yards per carry for the game. Yes, K wiliams had a big "garbage time" run to pad his stats, but the fact is the Redskins WERE having success with the run before they had to abandon it. That was NOT during "garbage time".

As I mentioned above, I don't think that the Giants let up on us, at least not with their offense. They simply COULD NOT run the ball with the same success they had in the first half. Only 3 of their 15 second half runs went for more than 3 yards. 11 of those 15 runs were for 2 yards or less. They were TRYING to stuff the ball down our throats like they did in the first half, but we were able to STOP them.

Posted by: kaasmaster | December 8, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

kaas- Didn't you know you're not allowed to find and discuss anything positive.

The sky is falling and we need to fire the entire coaching staff 12 games into an 80 game contract. Unbelivable that Shanahan and company couldn't fix 10 years in less than 10 months.

Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

And he does have more come-from-behind wins of any other ACTIVE NFL QB other than Favre.

Posted by: onanygivensunday | December 8, 2010 3:53 PM

As usual you're full of sh!t. McNabb has 24. Peyton Manning had 35 IN 2008!!! Tom Brady had 28 in 2009!!! You have zero credibility anymore because you don't research your bogus claims and you just make sh!t up.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | December 8, 2010 6:56 PM | Report abuse

Zeke,

Cooley and Davis will both be Redskins next year.

Cartwright had little trade value. He was a FA before last season, tested the waters, and came back and signed a 1-year deal with the Redskins because no one else wanted him.

Thomas is a model/special teams player masquerading as a receiver. No value.

Avoiding changing defensive schemes in order to prop up the trade value of a few players would be silly. The value of seeing who can play the scheme and of giving those players a year of experience in that scheme far outweighs the trade value of a few guys who can't cut it.

Haynesworth should have been traded before the season, but hindsight is 20/20. Now that Shanahan's been through that, he won't be so patient with the next troublemaker, and the rest of the players know it. That's a win.

Posted by: freakzilla | December 8, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

You won't hear it from anyone in the media because it's the Redskins in a positive light, but the steal of the off season was getting a 4th round draft pick (even if it is in 2012) for Campbell.
Has anyone seen him play in Oakland? Just terrible, and he can't blame it on no running game or a bad o-line or no play makers at WR.
Campbell is a great guy, I wish him the best, but he isn't worth a 7th round pick in 2015.
Hopefully, Shannahallen can get something similiar for Albert next off season.

Posted by: jgarrisn | December 8, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

he looks wAy better than mcNabb, have you seen th games? He's executing well, making great fakes, making plays with his feet, and leading a .500 2nd place team.

He was benched a couple times, but has come out on top so far.

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Remember how dismal the Redskins were at converting third downs in the first half of the season?

They've been over 40% in third down conversions for three weeks in a row. I'd say that's a sign of improved execution.

Posted by: kaasmaster | December 8, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

In regards to depth, first you must have qualified starters, then back-ups who could start either now, in the future, or for lesser teams.

We don't have qualified starters yet, so discussing depth is redonkulous .

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

I'm looking at the weather forecast for Sunday, and if that cold front heading toward the East Coast picks up a little speed over the next few days, we're looking at a snow game.

Looks like there could be several snow games on Sunday.

Posted by: freakzilla | December 8, 2010 7:09 PM | Report abuse

It's hard to cut loose a guy of that talent. Lesson learned.


The Lesson?:

Guys who lack talent but are committed are better building blocks than talented guys who aren't.

And once you get the right committed 'core' to build on, then you add the talent.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone seen him play in Oakland? Just terrible, and he can't blame it on no running game or a bad o-line or no play makers at WR.

Jgrisn,

th Raiders O line sux, you are dreaming. What playmakers at wr? None of the guys have accomplished anything except for havin potential.

Their mgmt has done a better job than ours and they're one game better just like last year.

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Is their a RB that never showed "flashes"? If so, who? It seems tht any RB given a decent hole will show a "flash".

Another stupid cliche used by fans who are reaching for anything.

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 7:28 PM | Report abuse

I think it was in the Sally Jenkins piece, AH told MS what kind of plays he would be comfortable doing (running plays not being one of them) and that left AH with about 12 plays a game he was willing to participate in. Now, 3-4 or 4-3 I don't know, but for the kind of money he is getting who is he to tell the HC what he is willing to do? Get real people, they guy is a wanker.

Posted by: FloridaCapsFan | December 8, 2010 1:28 PM
-----------------------------------------
in this short paragraph you have managed to say two different things while appearing to be saying the same thing...that's what i call skill...you twist like a politician..either he told him what he was Comfortable with or what he was Willing to do....which is it?

Posted by: BootneyFarnsworth | December 8, 2010 1:39 PM

I'm no politician - I meant "comfortable with" to be equivalent to "willing to do".

Posted by: FloridaCapsFan | December 8, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Summary of WikiLeaks, Redskin Fan Edition

--Six Fags, err, Flags is NOT the name of a gay porno filmed at a theme park once owned by Dan Snyder

--Joe Gibbs' Racing is an oxymoron as he's too old to run

--Rod Gardner and Carlos Rogers have settled a lawsuit over who owns the nickname 'Hands of Stone'

--despite his size, Brandon Banks IS NOT related to Gary Coleman

--Dana Stubblefield is not Albert Haynesworth, but it's okay to confuse the two

--the biggest scandal this summer was Santana Moss and Dr. Galea (memba dat?)

--Fred Smoot is still giggling that somehow, Philip Buchanan is a redskin, but he is not

--Adam Carriker IS a member of this year's defensive line and not a player missing in action

--Jeremy Jarmon and Malcolm Kelly are locked in the race to see who can remain on the roster the longest without ever actually playing a full season

--Chris Horton has been IR'd, again, his injury so severe this time he not only can't play football, but Mr. Horton doesn't hear a WHO, either.

--Clinton Portis will retire from the redskins and return to middle school to polish up his spoken English

--Since his release from the redskins, Joey Galloway as taken Anthony Armstrong's place as the leading receiver in the Intense Football League

--Roydell Williams IS NOT a player missing in action during games

--when the raiders beat the chargers this past weekend, the game was dubbed "Battle of the ex-Redskins" by Norv Turner, Rock Cartwright, and Jason Campbell.

Not that we are upset that they are no longer redskins.

But we are happy that this lame post has come to an unfunny end.

And leaking that is no secret.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: freakzilla | December 8, 2010 7:09 PM

Cold and rainy, or cold and snowy. Either way it will not be comfortable for the Bucs.

Posted by: kaasmaster | December 8, 2010 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Man, I wish there were a way to implement a killfile in Moveable Type.

Posted by: freakzilla | December 8, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

kaasmaster

Cold and rainy, or cold and snowy. Either way it will not be comfortable for the Bucs.


Young, warm weather team + old, humiliated, down on its luck veteran team playing at home = Redskin Win:

Redskins 24

Bucs 17

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone seen him play in Oakland? Just terrible, and he can't blame it on no running game or a bad o-line or no play makers at WR.

Jgrisn,

th Raiders O line sux, you are dreaming. What playmakers at wr? None of the guys have accomplished anything except for havin potential.

Their mgmt has done a better job than ours and they're one game better just like last year.

Posted by: pabrian2003

Living in the area, I've seen him play a good bit. Campbells's doing just fine and Raider fans are pretty happy -- those 2 wins he led (and yes, he really did lead them) over SD are looking especially good.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

he looks wAy better than mcNabb, have you seen th games? He's executing well, making great fakes, making plays with his feet, and leading a .500 2nd place team.

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 7:03 PM


I have.

And he's benefitting from what I said all along he needs to be a good QB in the NFL...a solid ground game and a good defense to help him. Doesn't hurt to have a couple of solid pass catchers either.

He's not a guy who can win you games by himself but he is a guy you can win with if you put some nice pieces in place around him and don't ask him to play beyond what he is.

Not exactly rocket science...

Posted by: brownwood26 | December 8, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

The sky is falling and we need to fire the entire coaching staff 12 games into an 80 game contract. Unbelivable that Shanahan and company couldn't fix 10 years in less than 10 months.

Posted by: Diesel44 |

We get your sarcasm, but on a serious note a few things concern me,.

First Shanahan wasn't exactly a ball of fire those last years in denver.

What has he done to improve the team since he's been here?

Well most of his FA acquisitions have been busts--the Geezers at RB, Artis Hicks, Buchanon, Garroway, R. Williams etc.

Not really thrilled with his coaches. Haslett looks clueless with his 3-4 Yes, I get the personnel aren't right,but it seemed to me he has consistently had people blitzing from the wrong place all season, and he HAS taken a top ten defense and put it in the basement.

If the 3-4 doesn't work, or the Personnel are more fitted for a 4-3 run the damn 4-3 most the time until you can make changes and get the right people.

Not thrilled with sonny boy as an OC either--and if he doesn't improve, how does Shanny fire him?

And then there's the bungling of McNabb...

Add in Snyder's quick trigger finger and Shanahan's future is a topic that can be on the table.

Posted by: TheCork | December 8, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

....."If the 3-4 doesn't work, or the Personnel are more fitted for a 4-3 run the damn 4-3 most the time until you can make changes and get the right people.".....

Posted by: TheCork | December 8, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Amen, and remember they sold it as a "hybrid"

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Zeke,

Cooley and Davis will both be Redskins next year.

Cartwright had little trade value. He was a FA before last season, tested the waters, and came back and signed a 1-year deal with the Redskins because no one else wanted him.

Thomas is a model/special teams player masquerading as a receiver. No value.

Avoiding changing defensive schemes in order to prop up the trade value of a few players would be silly. The value of seeing who can play the scheme and of giving those players a year of experience in that scheme far outweighs the trade value of a few guys who can't cut it.

Haynesworth should have been traded before the season, but hindsight is 20/20. Now that Shanahan's been through that, he won't be so patient with the next troublemaker, and the rest of the players know it. That's a win.

Posted by: freakzilla

And there is the issue I raised. You can make the case for devaluing a player. Mgmt needs to make it for valuing a player.

Rock has been a terrific value for the Raiders, including some critical plays, easily the value of a 7th round pick.

Thomas had value at some point, but benching him (even for most of preseason) never gave anyone a chance to consider ponying up for him. The 49ers gave up a 5th rounder for Ted Ginn, a marginal WR whose only significant contributions were on teams.

Both TEs might be back next year, but if they are going to use them the same way that they've been used this year, why? Davis was great trade bait last year, given his strong finish to 2009.

I want mgmt who is good enough to accomplish things like what SD with Charlie Whitehurst, sell a guy whose done nothing in 4 years and get substantial value for him.

Mgmt needs to extract value for the assets that don't fit. So far, they've done really badly.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Campbells's doing just fine and Raider fans are pretty happy

I've caught at least a quarter of every game he--Campbell--has played in this year as a raider, and he looks way more confident.

It helps to have a decent offensive line, very capable young receivers, D McFadden, and a fanbase that's not as win-hungry as the one he left behind in the East Coast.

Those of us who wanted him re-upped to play behind a re-building offensive line in D.C. lament feel somewhat vindicated.

Not that JC is the best in the AFC West.

But what he is, is a fairly adequate quarterback.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2010 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Campbells's doing just fine and Raider fans are pretty happy

I've caught at least a quarter of every game he--Campbell--has played in this year as a raider, and he looks way more confident.

It helps to have a decent offensive line, very capable young receivers, D McFadden, and a fanbase that's not as win-hungry as the one he left behind in the East Coast.

Those of us who wanted him re-upped to play behind a re-building offensive line in D.C. lament feel somewhat vindicated.

Not that JC is the best in the AFC West.

But what he is, is a fairly adequate quarterback.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse


I have.

And he's benefitting from what I said all along he needs to be a good QB in the NFL...a solid ground game and a good defense to help him. Doesn't hurt to have a couple of solid pass catchers either.

He's not a guy who can win you games by himself but he is a guy you can win with if you put some nice pieces in place around him and don't ask him to play beyond what he is.

Not exactly rocket science...

Posted by: brownwood26

Those 'pieces' are actually pretty sketchy. The OL was awful at the start of the year, but it has improved. Not great, but decent. Played their bet game vs SD this past week. His WR were ... ugh. Lots of drops and mistakes. At least 1 of Campbell's picks (he's only thrown 6) came on a pass that hit the WR between the numbers and bounced out -- similar to what Moss did with Donovan recently. Rookie Jacoby Ford seems to have a clue, though. Only Zach Miller (TE) is noteworthy in a good way among the receiving group -- and he's missed a bunch of games.

All 3 RBs (DMC, Bush and Reece) are really good at pass catching (2 are very good runners). And, as we know, Jason likes the checkdown, So that's a big help.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Pretty hard to do any serious evaluation of Campbell... Oakland is the polar opposite of the skins; they have quality at RB and potential quality at WR/TE. I don't know how good the OL is, but if you put JC back in the burgundy and gold he'd be pretty close to mangled right now.
Just ask yourself how many more wins/losses we'd have with him at the helm, and ask yourself if you could get up for another year of that... not that DMac has lit the league on fire, but there were a couple of moments early...

Posted by: daggar | December 8, 2010 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Cork-

First Shanahan wasn't exactly a ball of fire those last years in denver.

-53-27 with Elway
-85-59 without Elway

-Not too shabby if you ask me. Pretty tough to win after a HOF QB retires

What has he done to improve the team since he's been here?

-Purged the roster of dead weight and added a bunch of low cost STOP GAP veterans while taking over a team during the worst FA period in the history of FA with only a few draft picks. It's going to take more than 10 months to fix 10 years of mistakes.

Well most of his FA acquisitions have been busts--the Geezers at RB, Artis Hicks, Buchanon, Garroway, R. Williams etc.

-Once again. Terrible FA class, most FAs were 30+.

Not really thrilled with his coaches. Haslett looks clueless with his 3-4 Yes, I get the personnel aren't right,but it seemed to me he has consistently had people blitzing from the wrong place all season, and he HAS taken a top ten defense and put it in the basement.

-10th ranked team in regards to YDs allowed. Most coaches judge a D on PTs allowed and TOs. Even without the right personnel (worst DL in the NFL even w/ AH). I've been disappointed with Haslett

If the 3-4 doesn't work, or the Personnel are more fitted for a 4-3 run the damn 4-3 most the time until you can make changes and get the right people.

-This is a rebuilding year and the 3-4 is what Shanahan wants. Needs the players but I wouldn't switch back to the 4-3. I would however run more of a hybrid 3-4.

Not thrilled with sonny boy as an OC either--and if he doesn't improve, how does Shanny fire him?

-Major disappointment even with least talented Offensive roster in the league.

And then there's the bungling of McNabb...

-McNabb has been terrible and he deserved to see the bench but not in favor of Rex "freaking" Grossman. Shanahan hates the media and he would tell you the wrong day if you asked him.

Add in Snyder's quick trigger finger and Shanahan's future is a topic that can be on the table.

-No Chance with Shanahan, but Haslett is definitely in the discussion

Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Mgmt needs to extract value for the assets that don't fit. So far, they've done really badly.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 8:41 PM

You're confusing the two sides of the balance sheet. The assets that don't fit aren't assets. They're liabilities.

Fundamentally, the only guys you can trade for value are the ones you don't want to trade. Look at all the guys that management has "valued" or showcased this year. What can we get for Moore? Daniels? Lichtensteiger? Etc.

Most of the guys like Thomas and Cartwright are less valuable the more that other teams see of them. For example Thomas had more value to Carolina before he spent four weeks on their roster than he did afterward. And Cartwright? Do you think that now that Oakland has "valued" him that they can trade him for a seventh round pick?

Posted by: beep-beep | December 8, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

I hear what you're saying, Zeke. Perhaps the deal is that the new administration has been more focused to date on evaluating the talent on hand to see who they want to keep around, and thinking less about what they can get for the guys who haven't made their cut? I can see that as a failing. My guess is that's also Step #2 in the personnel plan, though, to be implemented at season's end.


On JC and the Raiders, I've actually been rooting for the Raiders this year -- a team I've always loathed -- because of Campbell.

I was okay with letting him go, because I just didn't think things were going to work for him here, but I supported him while he was here and admired the way he handled himself through everything. He's a good dude, and I'm happy he's having some success.

Posted by: freakzilla | December 8, 2010 9:11 PM | Report abuse

mcFadden was hurt the firs 4-5 weeks BTW

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Mgmt needs to extract value for the assets that don't fit. So far, they've done really badly.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 8:41 PM

You're confusing the two sides of the balance sheet. The assets that don't fit aren't assets. They're liabilities.

Fundamentally, the only guys you can trade for value are the ones you don't want to trade. Look at all the guys that management has "valued" or showcased this year. What can we get for Moore? Daniels? Lichtensteiger? Etc.

Most of the guys like Thomas and Cartwright are less valuable the more that other teams see of them. For example Thomas had more value to Carolina before he spent four weeks on their roster than he did afterward. And Cartwright? Do you think that now that Oakland has "valued" him that they can trade him for a seventh round pick?

Posted by: beep-beep | December 8, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse
Ah, sorry guys, neither of you are accountants, so maybe we shouldn't be using financial terminology. Let's stick with x's and o's. No more assets that are liabilities, valuing assets that don't fit. It just too confusing.

Posted by: frediefritz | December 8, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Ah, sorry guys, neither of you are accountants, so maybe we shouldn't be using financial terminology. Let's stick with x's and o's. No more assets that are liabilities, valuing assets that don't fit. It just too confusing.

Posted by: frediefritz | December 8, 2010 9:16 PM

This coming from a retired professor from one of the most esteemed private schools on the East Coast. Fredie you have to remember and grade beep-beep on a curve, he went to Duke.

Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

mcFadden was hurt the firs 4-5 weeks BTW

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 9:14 PM |

McFadden missed 2 weeks (week 5 & 6). Campbell has been pulled during weeks 2, 6,& 11 and rode the pine 3, 4,& 12.

He's been woefully average posting a QB rating of 78 with 8 TDs and 6 INTs while fumbling 9x.

But you go right ahead and continue to be delusional.

Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 9:35 PM | Report abuse

mcFadden was hurt the firs 4-5 weeks BTW

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 9:14 PM |

McFadden missed 2 weeks (week 5 & 6). Campbell has been pulled during weeks 2, 6,& 11 and rode the pine 3, 4,& 12.

He's been woefully average posting a QB rating of 78 with 8 TDs and 6 INTs while fumbling 9x.

But you go right ahead and continue to be delusional.


Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 9:35 PM | Report abuse

that is a better rating than mcNabb whose also been pulled. big difference they are in the hunt and young, so you are the one who is delusional

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 9:39 PM | Report abuse

I have been following D M his whole career
way back to Syracuse and i dont believe i
have ever seen him so down-warn out and with
less emotion then recently.

Lets see if the "cloud" lifts off the team
with the A H RESULTS.

If this does not send a message to the team
that no one is safe...............

Posted by: GEARAUTO1 | December 8, 2010 9:44 PM | Report abuse

that is a better rating than mcNabb whose also been pulled. big difference they are in the hunt and young, so you are the one who is delusional

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 9:39 PM
==========
ummm you are either a Campbell fan or a Rex fan.. scary either way. Its hard to erase the images of Rex's last performance when McNabb was "pulled". It was like watching a Jackass episode. You knew if he continued to take snaps he would be seriously injured.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | December 8, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

McFadden missed 2 weeks (week 5 & 6). Campbell has been pulled during weeks 2, 6,& 11 and rode the pine 3, 4,& 12.

He's been woefully average posting a QB rating of 78 with 8 TDs and 6 INTs while fumbling 9x.

But you go right ahead and continue to be delusional.


Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010

He also has a 5-3 record as a starter this year. Nothing delusional about that.

Posted by: dcwun | December 8, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Not the least bit confused by assets and liabilities.

The issue is one of valuation. Which is why I chose the case studies I did.

Jason Campbell has been valuable to OAK, he'd have been worth even more to AZ, they just didn't know it. Its up to mgmt to extract that maximum value, like DEN and SD did.

Here's the thing. It is a big deal. It probably cost us, at minimum, the equivalent of a couple high draft picks, maybe more. People up here complain about our lack of picks, this was one way to get significant value.

To point to the bigger issues, Albert was worth at least a 3rd. If he was traded before all the stuff went down but after he got his $$, probably a 2nd. He was one year removed from DPOY and cheap at $4.5mil/yr.

Andre Carter, a top 10 sack guy in '09, a DE who rarely takes a play off, good tackler, good leader, takes outstanding care of himself ... 3rd.

Fred Davis, maybe a 3rd + something else. he looked like a guy who could have been a top 10 TE in the last half of '09, plus he's still really young and under a modest contract.

Campbell is better than Whitehurst, and SEA gave up the equivalent of 2nd rounder. Heck Campbell was middle of the pack in QB rating with the saddest sack of an OL, 4th string RBs, MK12 as his #2 WR and a bingo caller.

Rock, sure, a 7th rounder, conditional. OAK would be thrilled with parting with a 7th, considering what he's done for them.

Devin Thomas for a 6th? All you need is 1 team to bite -- at any point in time.

Rogers? Heck, find the good WR he did best against and call the teams that face the guy 2x/yr. Those are the teams that he be most valuable to.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2010 10:27 PM | Report abuse

raiders without Campbell 0-3

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 10:44 PM | Report abuse

He also has a 5-3 record as a starter this year. Nothing delusional about that.

Posted by: dcwun | December 8, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

and came in to lead a comeback

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 10:47 PM | Report abuse

He also has a 5-3 record as a starter this year. Nothing delusional about that.

Posted by: dcwun | December 8, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

and came in to lead a comeback

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 10:47 PM
-----==========----------
yeah..and who is JC playing against in the AFC West?.. "Sisters and Orphanages of the Needy"? Skins are much better off with McNabb.. Campbell is lucky that QB ratings dont include fumbles.. whats he up to now? 9?

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | December 8, 2010 11:04 PM | Report abuse

What has he done to improve the team since he's been here?

-Purged the roster of dead weight and added a bunch of low cost STOP GAP veterans while taking over a team during the worst FA period in the history of FA with only a few draft picks. It's going to take more than 10 months to fix 10 years of mistakes.

~excuse. dead weight that contributes on better teams, campbell, betts, rock, tryon, thomas, dead weight like Haynesworth (dominant d line style dead weight?) = denial

Well most of his FA acquisitions have been busts--the Geezers at RB, Artis Hicks, Buchanon, Garroway, R. Williams etc.

-Once again. Terrible FA class, most FAs were 30+.

~excuse #2, if they aren't qualified get younger, or keep your "dead weight" replacing dead weight with dead weight

Not really thrilled with his coaches. Haslett looks clueless with his 3-4 Yes, I get the personnel aren't right,but it seemed to me he has consistently had people blitzing from the wrong place all season, and he HAS taken a top ten defense and put it in the basement.

-10th ranked team in regards to YDs allowed. Most coaches judge a D on PTs allowed and TOs. Even without the right personnel (worst DL in the NFL even w/ AH). I've been disappointed with Haslett

~worst 3-4 D line WAS a good 4-3 D line

If the 3-4 doesn't work, or the Personnel are more fitted for a 4-3 run the damn 4-3 most the time until you can make changes and get the right people.

-This is a rebuilding year and the 3-4 is what Shanahan wants. Needs the players but I wouldn't switch back to the 4-3. I would however run more of a hybrid 3-4.

~they said it WOULD BE a hybrid, lies that created more needs

Not thrilled with sonny boy as an OC either--and if he doesn't improve, how does Shanny fire him?

-Major disappointment even with least talented Offensive roster in the league.

~it's the coaches job to bring in the talent and make the most of it

And then there's the bungling of McNabb...

-McNabb has been terrible and he deserved to see the bench but not in favor of Rex "freaking" Grossman. Shanahan hates the media and he would tell you the wrong day if you asked him.

~hate the media or not, shanny should have the experience and intel to say something that works, he didn't

Add in Snyder's quick trigger finger and Shanahan's future is a topic that can be on the table.

-No Chance with Shanahan, but Haslett is definitely in the discussion

~give it a year or 2, snyder even fires winning coaches

Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Raiders 6-3 with Campbell 0-3 without FACT

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 11:05 PM | Report abuse

He also has a 5-3 record as a starter this year. Nothing delusional about that.

Posted by: dcwun | December 8, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

and came in to lead a comeback

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 10:47 PM
-----==========----------
yeah..and who is JC playing against in the AFC West?.. "Sisters and Orphanages of the Needy"? Skins are much better off with McNabb.. Campbell is lucky that QB ratings dont include fumbles.. whats he up to now? 9?

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | December 8, 2010 11:04 PM | Report abuse

mcNabb is better than Campbell, but QB wasn't the problem

mcnabb has 10 lost 1 in 12 games
campbell has 9 lost 1 in 9 games

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 11:13 PM | Report abuse

He also has a 5-3 record as a starter this year. Nothing delusional about that.

Posted by: dcwun | December 8, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

and came in to lead a comeback

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 10:47 PM
-----==========----------
yeah..and who is JC playing against in the AFC West?.. "Sisters and Orphanages of the Needy"? Skins are much better off with McNabb.. Campbell is lucky that QB ratings dont include fumbles.. whats he up to now? 9?

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | December 8, 2010 11:04 PM
============================
oops...for your anal JC fans.. I meant "fumbles lost", which is NINE. "Fumbles lost by a QB" are worst than INTs because they more likely than not..result to the opponent being closer to the goal line than a downfield INT.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | December 8, 2010 11:17 PM | Report abuse

Zeke- You're easily worth a 1st and 3rd to another blog and that's while we'll keep you..

Campbell's value dropped when we traded for McNabb. A 2012 4th is all we could get and he didn't exactly distinguish himself in his 50+ starts. I would have kept him one more year and not traded for McNabb but it's too late.

We tried to trade Albert but the rumor was a 4th in return from Tenn. We don't know if that’s true but the gamble was a 4th or 5th at the trading deadline or an all pro DE/NT if he came around. He didn't...and snake eyes, he's either cut or traded for a 5th-7th.

AC had a no trade clause and he probably would have waived it but he's been the anthesis of AH and was never going to fetch a 3rd.

Fred Davis was a solid contributor last year but has regressed on the field regardless of playing time. Once again probably wasn't going to net us a 3rd.

Devin Thomas was a bust. Who's to say they didn’t shop him. He's on his 3rd team and will probably be released again when Nicks or Smith return.

Rock was a solid special teamer but talked his way off the team . Was a FA in 2009 and had no suitors and returned. He's had a pretty good career for a 7th RD pick considering his size but had no trade value and was released.

The only guys on our team that a team would have interest in are the guys we need to build around.

Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 11:32 PM | Report abuse

raiders without Campbell 0-3

Posted by: pabrian2003 | December 8, 2010 10:44 PM | Report abuse

He also has a 5-3 record as a starter this year. Nothing delusional about that.

Posted by: dcwun | December 8, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

He's 6-3 in games that he's played...but he's gone.

Once again, I wanted to keep him one more year and build our biggest weaknesses the OL and DL but we didn't. We are a better team this year and next but not in 2012 and it has nothing to do with the loss of Campbell. It's the 2nd and 3rd we gave to the Eagles that we will regret, not trading Campbell.

Posted by: Diesel44 | December 8, 2010 11:40 PM | Report abuse

Same old crap on here night after night. Ugh...

Posted by: scampbell1975 | December 9, 2010 12:08 AM | Report abuse

Cork-

First Shanahan wasn't exactly a ball of fire those last years in denver.

-53-27 with Elway
-85-59 without Elway

-Not too shabby if you ask me. Pretty tough to win after a HOF QB retires

What has he done to improve the team since he's been here?

-Purged the roster of dead weight and added a bunch of low cost STOP GAP veterans while taking over a team during the worst FA period in the history of FA with only a few draft picks. It's going to take more than 10 months to fix 10 years of mistakes.

POSTED BY DEISEL44

Deisel--

Perhaps I should have been more specific. His last three years in Denver (2006-2008) produced a .500 record. Fairly shabby actually.

I think his trouble as Redskin coach has been a schizophrenia. The "so-called "Stop Gap vets" include McNabb--who is designed to win in the next couple of years. Instead of developing young players, he's added ancient warhorses, almost none of whom worked out.

I don't see a plan, actually. I certainly don't see someone willing to go down to the pits and build up from the bottom.

This team is in sad shape after those many years of neglect, I'm not happy with the way he's going about trying to correct it. I'm not sure he's still got it.

Is he in trouble?Not yet.

But look how Ziggy Milf (sp?) in Minnesota acted when HIS coach decided to dump one of his Special favs" Randy Moss without consulting him.

Snyder has at LEAST as big an ego, and while Mike is entitled to dump Albert. doing so embarrasses Snyder. So, yeah. Shanahan's in the conversation. Haslett HAS to go, tho.

Shanny may get three years, but I don't see an improvement next year. The trouble with going to a 3-4 is the D was "okay," the offense was sick in DC.

To bring in proper 3-4 personnel, he has to use money or draft picks better used to build the offense.

Good comments on your part. Don't totally agree, don't claim to know all the answers myself .Just not real confident in the new brain trust.

Posted by: TheCork | December 9, 2010 4:17 AM | Report abuse

I don't see a plan, actually. I certainly don't see someone willing to go down to the pits and build up from the bottom.

Posted by: TheCork | December 9, 2010 4:17 AM


LOL...this is rich. Of course you don't...they JUST started the process! I'll bet you also try to judge paintings after the first couple brush strokes too. And movies during the opening credits...

What baffles me is why the crowd that wants the team to take a wrecking ball to the whole thing and start over claim they have the patience for that sort of thing and yet they expect immediate results from this team even though it's painfully obvious they're in transition. As if the course charted would make the 2010 season any better. Amazing.

And constantly bringing up "old FAs" are the ramblings of a punch drunk fans...the guys they brought in are low-salary stopgaps designed to fill out the roster. Just because they ended up outplaying some of the young bloods everyone so clamors for, doesn't mean the original plan was to totally lean on those guys.

Did they miss on some of those older stop gaps? Yes. New England made the same mistake on Galloway a year or two ago. So did the Steelers. But those teams haven't been completely mismanaged over the course of a decade or two like the Skins have...mismanagement that Shanahan and Allen had no part of. The Steelers and Pats get the benefit of the doubt and a bit more leeway to scrub themselves of mistakes like that right away...when the Skins swing and miss on a Galloway it looks 100 times worse.

It's a work in progress. Anyone who thought this team was gonna hit the ground running under this new regime were sadly mistaken. Year 1 is what it was supposed to be--a chance to wash our hands of some of the big salary/low impact players we've been stuck with over the years and evaluate what we have left. Just because the answers aren't encouraging doesn't mean there isn't a plan or that the plan in place isn't working.

2010 was the opening credits. We can start evaluating the actual movie in 2011.

Posted by: brownwood26 | December 9, 2010 5:38 AM | Report abuse

Well said, brownwood.

Posted by: beep-beep | December 9, 2010 6:11 AM | Report abuse

Here's some info for Moe and the other Bucs fans in our midst:

2010 Week 14: What we know about the Buccaneers

1. The offensive line is decimated » Tampa Bay is on its seventh starting offensive line combination after losing center Jeff Faine for the year. The result is a starting guard (Jeremy Zuttah) has been moved to center while two rookie guards play alongside him. Their best lineman, guard Davin Joseph, is among those lost for the season. Derek Hardman, one of three linemen promoted from the practice squad, is now starting at right guard. Left tackle Donald Penn has not played as consistently as he did a year ago.

2. LeGarrette Blount can run the ball » The offense has survived because it has a running back capable of pounding defenses. Blount, whose college career at Oregon ended in controversy, is a bruising runner. He has rushed for 599 yards this season, and all but 30 have come in the last seven weeks. Blount's size (247 pounds) makes him effective, though there are questions about his running style. He hasn't been effective in short-yardage situations and sometimes needs to get lower.

3. The defense is improving vs. the run » Tampa Bay ranks 26th in rushing yards allowed a game and 27th in yards allowed a carry. The defense was hurt by the loss of rookie safety and Oakton High/Virginia Tech alum Cody Grimm to a broken leg. Grimm was good in run support. However, several weeks ago the Bucs were ranked 31st against the run. Nose tackle Roy Miller and defensive tackle Gerald McCoy have started to mesh, and that has made a difference. Losing corner Aqib Talib will hurt what has been a good pass defense.

4. The quarterback doesn't make mistakes » At least that has been the case most of the season, just not recently. In the past two games, second-year quarterback Josh Freeman has completed just 36 of his 75 passes. But for the most part Freeman has done a nice job, having thrown just six interceptions this season. One of his favorite targets? Rookie fourth-round wideout Mike Williams, who has 51 catches for 769 yards and seven touchdowns.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/redskins-confidential/2010/12/2010-week-14-what-we-know-about-buccaneers#ixzz17c1zu42p

Posted by: brownwood26 | December 9, 2010 6:20 AM | Report abuse

follow the leader to the new post. follow

beep-beep


what else -- Haynesworth

Posted by: beep-beep | December 9, 2010 6:23 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com'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