[GTripp0012]

If, hypothetically, a team had a replacement level offensive line, and a replacement level passing game, you probably would have no better option on offense than to hand Ryan Torain the ball and hope that he gets hot and rips off a couple of 12-17 yard gains in a row moving the ball downfield.

So I'm probably underrating Torrain's effect on the 2010 Washington Redskins by valuing his skill set to an average offense that can throw the ball a little bit and has other runners with breakaway speed who make better cuts. You could argue the Redskins didn't have those options in 2010. I'd like to think I am doing it this way because I am being forward thinking. Perhaps I'm just being abstract for the sake of abstract, which is where people have their issue with my assessment of him.

My whole thing is if we carry that logic forward to include the 2011 Redskins, where Torain is still the best option on the offense to move the chains, there would be a good chance the offense has gone backwards and that the offensive coaches are getting fired after the year.

In the most blunt of terms, I don't think a world where Ryan Torain is a valuable chain-mover (despite his other faults) is a world that Redskins should want to live in. It just means you have no other options by which to achieve yards and points, so you use a boom or bust runner who's busts tend to end drives and booms tend not to break 20 yards. It's like bringing a 1970's offense to the modern day.