Network News

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

Breaking down the Redskins' injury list

With safety Reed Doughty and right guard Mike Williams joining the long list of players already on the injured-reserve list, the Redskins will slide a couple of new warm bodies into the starting lineup for their season finale at San Diego. It's become quite the gameday trend with this team.

We looked back over the Redskins' starting lineups this season and counted 17 players who've started at least one game and missed at least one game because of injury. Doughty will become No. 18 this weekend. Altogether, by the conclusion of Sunday's game, Redskins' starters -- or at least those who've started at least once this season -- will have combined to miss 78 games this season (fully tally below). And that number could grow if receiver Devin Thomas and safety LaRon Landry -- neither of whom practiced Wednesday -- are unable to play Sunday.

As we all know by now, Vinny Cerrato, the team's former executive VP of football operations, said he built a playoff-bound team. Even if that was true at one time -- stop laughing -- the roster the team will use to close its season barely resembles the one that started the year. From the Redskins' Week 1 starting lineup, 10 players have missed at least one game and five of those starters are on injured reserve. And as you know by now, four of those IR guys played on offense (Chris Samuels, Randy Thomas, Chris Cooley and Clinton Portis).

Based on the assumption that Williams and Doughty are the only Week 16 starters who aren't available Sunday, here's the full list of players who've started at least one game this season and missed at least one game because of injury. The number of games each will have missed at season's end is in parenthesis.

Randy Thomas (14)
Chris Samuels (11)
Clinton Portis (8)
Chris Horton (8)
Chad Rinehart (6)
Chris Cooley (6)
Ladell Betts (6)
Mike Williams (3)
Albert Haynesworth (3)
DeAngelo Hall (3)
Hunter Smith (3)
Devin Thomas (1)
Mike Sellers (1)
Cornelius Griffin (1)
Byron Westbrook (1)
Justin Tryon (1)
Fred Smoot (1)
Reed Doughty (1)

By Rick Maese  |  December 31, 2009; 9:10 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: A 'Burgundy & Gold' look at who's playing for a job
Next: Campbell's future more complex than it seems

Comments

Washington... First in war, first in peace, first on the IR and last in the NFC East.

Sigh, at least the years almost over.

Posted by: rawk | December 31, 2009 9:05 AM | Report abuse

saw a chunk of jibba abut the end of the current CBA. The uncapped year, the RFA extension, and free-agency-only-for-non-playoff-teams provisions were set up as 'poison pills' to encourage both sides to continue the CBA.
Obviously, the owners see a lot more upside than the original negotiators thought they would. I presume that the down economy combined with the increased age of UFA candidates means that the owners don't fear a price war right now, and they see the opportunity to really squeeze labor costs going into 2011.
This is interesting from a Redskins perspective in that amongst the various dysfunctions of this organizations, the hardest one to break is the way we structure contracts (with big bonuses up front, then increasing base salaries which force renegotiation (and make release or trade difficult because of the cap hit). If we take the uncapped year to get off that train, clean up some of the potential dead money, and get some sanity in our new signings, it might make the money they spend translate to performance on the field.
This is, I think, the Cap magic that Allen brings.

Posted by: daggar | December 31, 2009 12:18 AM | Report abuse

Great post. In his mind, I wonder if DAN will translate rich pay and long-term contracts into franchise devaluation. If he does, there are going to be a lot of old veterans from other places on next years uncapped team, all on one or two year contracts.

Posted by: glawrence007 | December 31, 2009 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Must.. fire... conditioning coach!

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

rypien11

"...what draft pick would we receive if we don't match an offer for JC?"


Again, this all goes back to the power of the word 'if'.

Yeah, IF somebody wants Campbell (the vikings would be the best fit in my mind), you take the picks.

But that's all based on IF anybody wants him.

There's the world we see and the world of the NFL.

No GM is going to burn picks for a vet q-back who's been hit a lot and game planned against a thousand times.

This happened with M Cassel as he had upside.

What's Campbell's upside?

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 31, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Every writer on this staff should be working on finding out what Allen-Snyder's plans are. Give us something.

Posted by: tomj4425 | December 31, 2009 9:01 AM

Just curious. Allen-Snyder will disclose their plans when it suits them and, until then, want their plans kept quiet. So, what legal means do you think "every writer on this staff" should be employing to expose their plans? And, why? This isn't insider information that can make you rich by trading on it. WTF difference does it make whether you know now or Monday?

Posted by: League-Source | December 31, 2009 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Moe, what makes you think the Vikings want a QB at all? Farve is playing lights out, and says he's on the best team he's ever been on. I don't see him pulling the same retirement BS after this year. I bet he comes back.

I think JC goes to Buffalo, Carolina, or Tampa.

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Must.. fire... conditioning coach!

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 9:13 AM

Bring in Coach Leach from Texas Tech. All these guys will stop faking injuries.

Posted by: League-Source | December 31, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Farve is playing lights out, and says he's on the best team he's ever been on.

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 9:27 AM

You mean aside from the fact that he's undermined the head coach and is swooning heading into the playoffs?

Posted by: League-Source | December 31, 2009 9:30 AM | Report abuse

You mean aside from the fact that he's undermined the head coach and is swooning heading into the playoffs?

Posted by: League-Source

You're a head coach who wants to make a championship run, not rebuild a team. You have a choice between Farve and JC. Which do you think gives you a better chance of getting to the Superbowl?

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Moe, sorry, I meant LITERALLY what picks (asking the question)... if someone makes an offer for JC that we don't match, we get a 1st and 3rd this year, right? That seems like an awful lot for someone to give up for him...

Posted by: Rypien11 | December 31, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

I see the skins scenario working out 3 ways for the draft. Jason Campbell will get a low ball offer for RFA and if another team takes him we will get those supplemental picks for him, from what I understand its a 1st and a 3rd if the contracts worth more than 2 million, dont remember what they get if its under 2 mill. If that happens the skins come into the draft with a 1123457. I think, we lost our 6th for the Taylor trade and our 3rd in the sup draft (correct me if wrong).

If they end up keeping Campbell, I would hope the team trades back in both the 1st and 2nd rounds and goes for something along the lines of a 1223457.

If we don't move arround any picks it should look like 12457

in case A(traded Campbell) I would like/expect to see it go.
1-QB
1-OT
2-OL
3-RB
4-BAP
5-BAP
7-BAP

In Case B (keep Campbell trade back)
1-OT
2-RB
2-QB
3-OL
4-BAP
5-BAP
7-BAP

In Case C (stick with what picks they have and keep Campbell)

1-OL
2-OL
4-RB
5-BAP
7-BAP

With Best Available Player (BAP) focused on the remaining holes not already filled in the draft or free agency Free Safeties, Outside Linebackers, more O-Line, a Corner to replace Rogers/Smoot, a MLB to eventually replace Fletcher, a DT and a backup RB.

Case D, the Redskins lose Campbell and don't move around any draft picks and need to draft a QB with only 5 draft picks.

1-QB
2-OL
4-OL
5-RB
7-RB

Posted by: alex35332 | December 31, 2009 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: alex35332 | December 31, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

You're a head coach who wants to make a championship run, not rebuild a team. You have a choice between Farve and JC. Which do you think gives you a better chance of getting to the Superbowl?

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 9:34 AM

JC. Favre won't even run the plays you call.

Posted by: League-Source | December 31, 2009 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Moe, sorry, I meant LITERALLY what picks (asking the question)... if someone makes an offer for JC that we don't match, we get a 1st and 3rd this year, right? That seems like an awful lot for someone to give up for him...

Posted by: Rypien11 | December 31, 2009 9:35 AM |

There is a lower tender in which the Skins would only get a 1st. Either way, if a team wants JC, I think they would end up negotiating with the Skins on the compensation.

Posted by: TWISI | December 31, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

This could be the first time that the term "Lust for mayhem" applies to the offseason.

Posted by: Original_etrod | December 31, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

I just wanted to address the Rooney rule. Whether you like it or not, whether it works or not. Whether the skins made it a sham. The bottom line has been and always will be "He who has the money, makes the rules". That applies everywhere, not just football.

Posted by: outsourced_in_va | December 31, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Moe, sorry, I meant LITERALLY what picks (asking the question)... if someone makes an offer for JC that we don't match, we get a 1st and 3rd this year, right? That seems like an awful lot for someone to give up for him...

Posted by: Rypien11 | December 31, 2009 9:35 AM

Rypien, they went into this in great detail in today's paper:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/30/AR2009123002532.html

The short answer is that it will be whatever pick(s) the Redskins and the other team negotiate. Given that the Redskins couldn't get a second rounder for him last year when they were trying to trade for Cutler, then it wouldn't be much better this year.

Posted by: League-Source | December 31, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

JC. Favre won't even run the plays you call.

Posted by: League-Source

Can you imagine them firing Farve and give up draft picks for JC? Farve is just so much better than JC could dream to be, even on his bad days.

I think coach just puts up with some insubordination, QBs are allowed to call audibles. He wants to win, Farve is a winner. He can actually lead comebacks.

If a QB plays as well as Farve has this season you dont get rid of him, I don't care what he does.

I'll be mountains to mole hills Farve plays for them next year.

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

alex35332 you're my hero.

Posted by: MonkMossMann | December 31, 2009 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Keep JC. Draft o-line hard. We must establish o-line or it's more of the same.

BOYCOTT $NYDER ACROSS THE BOARD-GEEEESH!!!!

Posted by: hessone | December 31, 2009 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: alex35332 | December 31, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

I don't think a CAMPBELL trade will net a first in an uncapped year. Maybe under normal circumstances, but draft choices become critically important with the best 4-5 year FA veterans off the market.

Posted by: glawrence007 | December 31, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

The short answer is that it will be whatever pick(s) the Redskins and the other team negotiate. Given that the Redskins couldn't get a second rounder for him last year when they were trying to trade for Cutler, then it wouldn't be much better this year.

Posted by: League-Source

FTA: "Campbell's minimum tender amount would be $3.14 million, according to a league source familiar with his contract situation. If the Redskins increased the offer to $3.268 million, they would receive first- and third-round compensation."

This runs contrary to what you said, which is it?

I can't see any team giving up a 1st and 3rd for JC.

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Glawrence,
I think that there is a argument for that, but their are rules about the picks you get off a RFA and stuff.

Posted by: alex35332 | December 31, 2009 10:02 AM | Report abuse

"Just curious. Allen-Snyder will disclose their plans when it suits them and, until then, want their plans kept quiet. So, what legal means do you think "every writer on this staff" should be employing to expose their plans? And, why? This isn't insider information that can make you rich by trading on it. WTF difference does it make whether you know now or Monday?Posted by: League-Source"

Sorry, the first writer has a point: there's way too much secrecy around the NFL in general, and this version of the Skins in particular. That's an owner's right, of course, but the journalist's job is to get at the background -- that is, if said journalist wants to keep his readers.

I'm not a fan of the sort of gossip pedaled by the Post's Sports Yentas, Sally Jenkins and Tracee Hamilton, but a little investigation into how the Skins got where they are today would be of value to the fans. Particularly two questions: does Vinny really deserve all the blame he's getting? And who is going to coach the Skins next season?

Let's not pretend nobody at Redskins Park or around the League knows the answer to those questions.

Tom

Posted by: Samson151 | December 31, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

I can't see any team giving up a 1st and 3rd for JC.

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry ALEX, I can't either. Of course, if the 'SKINS don't really want him they might get a third-rounder for him.

Posted by: glawrence007 | December 31, 2009 10:10 AM | Report abuse

again it depends on how the skins play their cards. If they do the RFA game on JC they could get either a 1/3 or a 2 (i think).

Posted by: alex35332 | December 31, 2009 10:15 AM | Report abuse

"I don't think a CAMPBELL trade will net a first in an uncapped year. Maybe under normal circumstances, but draft choices become critically important with the best 4-5 year FA veterans off the market.Posted by: glawrence007"

I think a Campbell trade could in fact net a first, although not a high one. You've got three or four clubs that could use a competent young QB. The draft is not looking particularly strong in that area. Campbell doesn't get much blame for the Skins' problems in the eyes of NFL GMs. When they watch the tapes, he'll get even less blame. He'll appear to be a tough, disciplined guy who got little protection from his blockers and not much help from his runners and receivers. A strong club could do worse than Campbell at QB.

Anybody who watched Jay Cutler against the Vikes should recall precisely why it was the Bears wanted him in the first place. He's a very, very talented guy. Not a lot of difference between him and the younger Brett Favre.

Campbell's a completely different sort of QB. But one who could take a good club fairly deep into the playoffs.

Posted by: Samson151 | December 31, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

I can't see any team giving up a 1st and 3rd for JC.

Posted by: REXskins | December 31, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse


2 words: Al Davis.

Posted by: Original_etrod | December 31, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry ALEX, I can't either. Of course, if the 'SKINS don't really want him they might get a third-rounder for him.

Posted by: glawrence007 | December 31, 2009 10:10 AM


Getting only a 3rd pick would be a strike against Allen in my books. I could see getting a 3rd and a 5th in this draft. even a 3rd this year and a 4th next year. In my book, the Skins need to get a potential starter and a solid backup for JC to recoup the players they lost in their original trade to get him.

Posted by: TWISI | December 31, 2009 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Redskin Goners?

Chris Samuels

Mike Sellers

Renaldo Wynn

Cornelius Griffin

Randy Thomas

Casey Rabach

Clinton Portis

Ladell Betts

Rock Cartwright

Phil Daniels

Fred Smoot

Antawn Randle El

Stephon Heyer

Mike Williams

Todd Collins

Colt Brennan


I wish all of these men a Happy New Year.

And that hopefully, they enjoy retirement or a new uniform.

'Cuz they've all gotta kinda old and slow and ineffective in the one they have now.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 31, 2009 8:49 AM | Report abuse

I agree with most of these, Moe. I do think that Rabach, Heyer, BMWilliams, and Colt will return. And I would like to know what Smoot's contract is. If he's not too expensive, I think he will return too.

Right now the biggest weakness is OL. I don't want to get rid of the core that we have. All are certainly expendable, for sure. But all would be reasonable backups if we can find replacements.

re-Posted by: frediefritz | December 31, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: frediefritz | December 31, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Don't be surprised to see the Skins sign Ben Hamilton to play center next year. Hamilton is a backup on the current Broncos team. He and Rabach are about the same age. Hamilton has played both center and guard for Shanahan, so he'd be able to call the protections, and act as a mentor for the younger centers and guards on the team.

Posted by: TWISI | December 31, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

beep

Posted by: TWISI | December 31, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

bring back bubba tyler...

Posted by: jimmy_the_crickett | December 31, 2009 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Either way, if a team wants JC, I think they would end up negotiating with the Skins on the compensation.

Exactly. The tender we make for JC becomes 'sticker price'. GMs then get to wander through the lot, looking at a 2005 Jason Campbell SUV, a 2003 Chris Simms Hang Glider, a 2000 Chad Pennington F-150 (with 150,000 miles, an underpowered engine, and some right side body damage), maybe even kick the tires on a 2003 Brooks Bollinger UFL MVP Vespa. Then start haggling from there -- with the ability to trade picks and players to get what you want.
It'd be nice to think they could get a couple of teams bidding early in FA, because the RFA window is pretty tight, and I think that -- if teams feel that the Redskins are planning on moving on -- that they might be able to wait until after the draft and get him for next to nothing. Because if they take someone like Bradford, it's going to be hard to convince anyone that they should cough up picks/players for JC when the potential is you could get him for free.

Posted by: daggar | December 31, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Anybody notice that the higher the number of missed games, the more important the player? (CP being the exception.)

Posted by: charley42 | December 31, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

cooley went down in the eagles game. he's missed more than 6 games, no?

Posted by: shanafan | December 31, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company