Roster transition in the Shanny era

[Paintrain]

There's been a lot of hand wringing over the state of the roster right now and how good or poor of a job Shanahan is doing with it..

It's been 2 years and most new management around the NFL gets at least 4 years. Do some of us really forget how bad that 2009 roster was? To wit, of all of the players who were here then and are no longer on the roster, how many players have moved on and are contributing vs. those no longer in the league?

From the final 2009 roster (including IR), by my estimation, these players are out of the league completely or not in a contributing role on their current team:
Richard Bartel
Todd Collins
Quinton Gather
PJ Hill
Marcus Mason
Malcolm Kelly
Marko Mitchell
Todd Yoder
Paul Fannika
Levi Jones
Casey Rabach
Phillip Daniels
Corneilius Griffin
Anthony Montgomery
Renaldo Wynn
HB Blades
Alvin Bowen
Curtis Gatewood
Robert Henson
Chris Wilson
Lendy Holmes
Marcus Macauly
Kareem Moore
Fred Smoot
Ethan Albright
Ladell Betts
Clinton Portis
Colt Brennan
Chris Horton
Jeremy Jarmon
Chris Samuels
Randy Thomas
Eddie Williams
Mike Williams
That's 35 players that either are retired or are no longer NFL caliber players within 2 years.

From the 2010 roster (without duplicating):
Andre Brown
James Davis
Ryan Torrain
Roydell Williams
Artis Hicks (he may be on a roster, I can't recall)
Anthony Bryant
Joe Joseph
Macho Harris
Reggie Jones
Sha'reff Rashard
Sam Palescu
Josh Bidwell
Mike Furrey
Ma'ake Keymoyatu
Clint Oldenburg
Anderson Russell
Chad Simpson

That's 17 more players for a total of 52 players who are no longer in the NFL. Is it any question why it is going to take more than 2 years to restore this roster to the level of respectability? Even now there are probably about 10-15 players that wouldn't be on other rosters but we had SO many holes to fill we had to plug bodies in. With a couple more off seasons like this past one there is hope for 2013 and beyond but it's going to be a while before we see the results.

[SmootSmack]

As far as most people are concerned, no one else matters but Carlos Rogers and Andre Carter. Those two players are the poster children for why "former Redskins ALWAYS go to to other teams and have so much success"

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

As far as most people are concerned, no one else matters but Carlos Rogers and Andre Carter. Those two players are the poster children for why "former Redskins ALWAYS go to to other teams and have so much success"

Don't forget Chad Rinehart.

As I said in another thread, MS/BA have not been spectacular in talent acquistion/management. But for their mismanagement of the QB position (a big "but for" I acknowledge), I would suggest they have been solid. Good acquisitions have been made. The 2011 draft has the potential to be a foundation for this team for years to come and may be the best one since 1981.

Plenty of players go from one team to another and succeed. It happens. The question is - are you developing young players to provide the depth needed when players leave. In the past, under Cerrato/Snyder/Gibbs, I would suggest we did not do that. It appears, to me, that we now are trying to do that.

I think this off-season will tell us a lot about whether the Paintrain (there has been a plan from the beginning) or the GTripp (No plan or management, just reaction to events) school of thought is in place.

In my humble opinion, the team Gibbs took to the play-offs hung around too long under Zorn. Had Gibbs coached it another year, perhaps the 6-0 streak would not have been a mirage (I personally think it was more the result of a Gibbs hangover rather than anything Zorn did or didn't do). Unfortunately, Zorn/Cerrato simply couldn't manage the team that Gibbs built and it was allowed to continue with the inmates (including Cerrato) running the asylum.

I agree with Paintrain that Shanahan came in and said, essentially, "Let's see what we got." At that point, I think a lot of us felt that that team had the talent to win. We were wrong (Actually, at that point, and IMHO, it may have had the talent to be a winner, but it certainly didn't have the "personality" of one - for lack of a better term). MS should have blown it up immediately. At the same time, I have a hard time holding that against MS/BA when so many folks seem to think he was inheriting a talented team.

Frustrating as they have been, I will not count the last two seasons as a waste so long as the 2012 offseason continues to build upon the 2011 offseason - solid, not necessarily spectacular, acquisitions; continuing to show a belief that throwing lots of darts on draft day is the best way to succeed; and a focus on the offense through both free agency and the draft.

As I have said elsewhere, if our 2012 off season mirrors our 2011 off season in terms of talent managment, I think we will have the foundation for a truly competitive team (play-offs and better) for years to come.

Wait - - I just realized I typed that whole spiel with my rose-colored glasses on. Let me try it again with my "GTripp Glasses" instead ....

Oh, crap - were doomed.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

As far as most people are concerned, no one else matters but Carlos Rogers and Andre Carter. Those two players are the poster children for why "former Redskins ALWAYS go to to other teams and have so much success"

well, unless we were going back to a 4-3, AC had to go. he was great in SF until they moved him to LB... that's why he ended up here in the first place. The move to a 3-4 probably wasn't a wise choice just based on the talent we had available, but now the personnel fits the 3-4 so great 4-3 players that can't make the move gots ta go. It sucks to give up a pro bowler, but he would've sucked here.

rogers we should have kept, since he was the best corner on the market... but he was frustrated with the skins and asking for way too much money (hence him finally taking a 1 year deal), so that may have been out of the skins control. I would have rather dropped hall and kept him though, and that's not revisionist history, it's what I said this time last year.

The QB thing has really been awful though, and there really haven't been a ton of good available starting QBs, but beck was a huge mistake (he's failed 3 times, so... he must be great!) and DM stopped caring about football, so I'm not sure if that was a lack of research or something that just happened, but that was a huge loss (cheap money wise, but thinking you've got a QB when you don't and blowing a #2 pick on him is BAD).

outside of that, it's been fine.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

There's been a lot of hand wringing over the state of the roster right now and how good or poor of a job Shanahan is doing with it..

It's been 2 years and most new management around the NFL gets at least 4 years. Do some of us really forget how bad that 2009 roster was? To wit, of all of the players who were here then and are no longer on the roster, how many players have moved on and are contributing vs. those no longer in the league?

From the final 2009 roster (including IR), by my estimation, these players are out of the league completely or not in a contributing role on their current team:
Richard Bartel
Todd Collins
Quinton Gather
PJ Hill
Marcus Mason
Malcolm Kelly
Marko Mitchell
Todd Yoder
Paul Fannika
Levi Jones
Casey Rabach
Phillip Daniels
Corneilius Griffin
Anthony Montgomery
Renaldo Wynn
HB Blades
Alvin Bowen
Curtis Gatewood
Robert Henson
Chris Wilson
Lendy Holmes
Marcus Macauly
Kareem Moore
Fred Smoot
Ethan Albright
Ladell Betts
Clinton Portis
Colt Brennan
Chris Horton
Jeremy Jarmon
Chris Samuels
Randy Thomas
Eddie Williams
Mike Williams
That's 35 players that either are retired or are no longer NFL caliber players within 2 years.

From the 2010 roster (without duplicating):
Andre Brown
James Davis
Ryan Torrain
Roydell Williams
Artis Hicks (he may be on a roster, I can't recall)
Anthony Bryant
Joe Joseph
Macho Harris
Reggie Jones
Sha'reff Rashard
Sam Palescu
Josh Bidwell
Mike Furrey
Ma'ake Keymoyatu
Clint Oldenburg
Anderson Russell
Chad Simpson

That's 17 more players for a total of 52 players who are no longer in the NFL. Is it any question why it is going to take more than 2 years to restore this roster to the level of respectability? Even now there are probably about 10-15 players that wouldn't be on other rosters but we had SO many holes to fill we had to plug bodies in. With a couple more off seasons like this past one there is hope for 2013 and beyond but it's going to be a while before we see the results.

Good post. I feel like I can use this as a starting point for some research into other teams who also have struggled to win over the last two years and see if the Redskins have made more progress than those teams.

If my assertion that the Redskins aren't better off in 2011 than 2009 is correct, then our current roster will end up looking a lot like that list you made by 2013. Is that a good bet? I'd say it probably is. But you still made a pretty good indictment of the Cerrato/Zorn rosters (the point that no one wanted these guys).

And I think I've also made good points that Shanahan gave up on more players that ended up as starters elsewhere than maybe any other coach in football over the last two years.

The truth may very well be that the 2009 roster sucked, the 2010 roster sucked, the 2011 roster sucked, and the 2012 roster will suck. That's not my opinion on the matter, nor anyone else. It's a really negative view of the Redskins that I do not hold. But sometimes the truth hurts.

And if the truth is that the Cerrato-Zorn Redskins were worse than we thought and the Shanahan-Allen Redskins were still bad, then I hope our analysis leads us there. Likewise, if the truth is that our roster is deeper and talented than any scout currently acknowledges, I hope analysis of this sort leads us there.

[That Guy]

who have we given up that turned into starters? AC and CR off hand... campbell and DM, but neither one lasted very long, so i'm not sure I'd count either of them.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by That Guy

who have we given up that turned into starters? AC and CR off hand... campbell and DM, but neither one lasted very long, so i'm not sure I'd count either of them.

Edwin Williams, Chad Rinehart, Justin Tryon. Stephon Heyer is kind of sort of a starter, he's in a timeshare at RT.

Those are the seven/eight, but its only been two years. My fear is that we add LaRon Landry and maybe Fred Davis to this list before too long. Those guys were Cerrato picks after all.

Re-signing those guys would be, I think, a step in the right direction. But if we look at the recent history of the franchise, we can't feel good about those two being free agents.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Edwin Williams, Chad Rinehart, Justin Tryon. Stephon Heyer is kind of sort of a starter, he's in a timeshare at RT.

Those are the seven/eight, but its only been two years. My fear is that we add LaRon Landry and maybe Fred Davis to this list before too long. Those guys were Cerrato picks after all.

Re-signing those guys would be, I think, a step in the right direction. But if we look at the recent history of the franchise, we can't feel good about those two being free agents.

No offense to any of those guys but did any of them represent an upgrade from who replaced them?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

No offense to any of those guys but did any of them represent an upgrade from who replaced them?

I think they all did, except perhaps Heyer, who is simply one of two uninspiring veterans on a one year contract in Oakland.

The Colts got rid of Tryon during this season (after starting 10 games on a playoff team last year), and the Giants then picked him up. He's on IR with the Giants, but is also a free agent in March. I don't know where his future is. Probably as a backup. He essentially was a younger Philip Buchanon who could have played inside.

The jarring thing may not be that any one of those players got away, but that 3/5s of an offensive line was deemed by Shanahan/Forester to be not worthy of a roster spot. Meanwhile, we signed Tyler Polumbus for some reason.

[GTripp0012]

You could make the Heyer > Brown argument, but we already had that debate. Neither is an average offensive lineman in the NFL today.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think they all did, except perhaps Heyer, who is simply one of two uninspiring veterans on a one year contract in Oakland.

The Colts got rid of Tryon during this season (after starting 10 games on a playoff team last year), and the Giants then picked him up. He's on IR with the Giants, but is also a free agent in March. I don't know where his future is. Probably as a backup. He essentially was a younger Philip Buchanon who could have played inside.

The jarring thing may not be that any one of those players got away, but that 3/5s of an offensive line was deemed by Shanahan/Forester to be not worthy of a roster spot. Meanwhile, we signed Tyler Polumbus for some reason.

Williams I can MAYBE give you because he could have been developed to be decent but Rinehart and Heyer were given plenty of chances here and never showed potential for being any good. Rinehart started (after injuries) on a team that went 1-10 down the stretch. Heyer was a turnstile at both tackle positions. It seems like you are looking at anything that Shanahan has done and twisting it to be a mistake.

[MTK]

We're really lamenting the likes of Tryon, Rinehart, Williams, etc.?

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

We're really lamenting the likes of Tryon, Rinehart, Williams, etc.?

Exactly.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Williams I can MAYBE give you because he could have been developed to be decent but Rinehart and Heyer were given plenty of chances here and never showed potential for being any good. Rinehart started (after injuries) on a team that went 1-10 down the stretch. Heyer was a turnstile at both tackle positions. It seems like you are looking at anything that Shanahan has done and twisting it to be a mistake.

They're different players but I don't think it's any sort of a stretch to think that Chad Rinehart could have been a better player for less money than Chris Chester. We're talking about a projecting here, but I thought there was more to work with re: Rinehart, than Chester.

I wouldn't say that anything and everything Shanahan has done is a mistake. But let's put it this way: when you trade for Donovan McNabb with two draft picks and can't find a place for him in your offense, and somehow that gets lost in history as some sort of a necessary progression of the QB position in Washington...well, lets just say that stringing together a bunch of small evidences fits a lot better when you also have the all-time personnel gaffe.

The easiest way to make my argument seem like nitpicking is to go pick another losing team, and find six to eight players they've let go via free agency or release who have gone on to start elsewhere within the last two years (with two pro bowlers?!), and suggest that the Redskins aren't alone in their struggles to identify starters. Trust me, I am looking. I don't want to keep repeating this point only to find out that I missed a team that has been doing the same thing.

Every team has two or three of those guys (I would expect the winning teams to have a lot more of those guys), but the Redskins have six or seven even if you count Heyer as a backup.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

They're different players but I don't think it's any sort of a stretch to think that Chad Rinehart could have been a better player for less money than Chris Chester. We're talking about a projecting here, but I thought there was more to work with re: Rinehart, than Chester.

I wouldn't say that anything and everything Shanahan has done is a mistake. But let's put it this way: when you trade for Donovan McNabb with two draft picks and can't find a place for him in your offense, and somehow that gets lost in history as some sort of a necessary progression of the QB position in Washington...well, lets just say that stringing together a bunch of small evidences fits a lot better when you also have the all-time personnel gaffe.

The easiest way to make my argument seem like nitpicking is to go pick another losing team, and find six to eight players they've let go via free agency or release who have gone on to start elsewhere within the last two years, and suggest that the Redskins aren't alone in their struggles to identify starters. Trust me, I am looking. I don't want to keep repeating this point only to find out that I missed a team that has been doing the same thing.

Every team has two or three of those guys (I would expect the winning teams to have a lot more of those guys), but the Redskins have six or seven even if you count Heyer as a backup.

. I guess I'm not excited by backups pushed into starting roles on bad teams as evidence of huge personnel gaffes.
Since no team has turned thier roster over so much in the past two years you aren't going to find those parameters. We see it differently, that's cool. Hope the 2012 roster has the playmakers and depth necessary for progress to continue.