Football Outsiders Picks Redskins to Make Postseason

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

If guys like Galloway and Holliday, at this stage of their careers, displace Thomas and Carriker, then Thomas and Carriker weren't the long term answer anyway. We would have needed to replace them in 2011 regardless, so we'd be no worse for wear.

Shanahan's method of creating the competition just helps you find out about players faster.

Now I'm not saying you jettison a rookie because he was beaten out by Joey Galloway. But by the time you hit your third year, your development chances are done. Put up or shut up time.

I agree with your conclusions.

Which, of course, is Tanier's main point: if Galloway and Holliday are anything more than one-year roster fillers that do a little bit of pushing in camp and a lot of scout team work, then they will likely enter 2011 as the best of a bunch of bad options for a team desperately trying to hold on to a singular playoff berth while fighting off the same effects of age that the early decade Raiders had to.

[SFREDSKIN]

I would not be surprised if the Skins make the playoffs and go deep into it.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I agree with your conclusions.

Which, of course, is Tanier's main point: if Galloway and Holliday are anything more than one-year roster fillers that do a little bit of pushing in camp and a lot of scout team work, then they will likely enter 2011 as the best of a bunch of bad options for a team desperately trying to hold on to a singular playoff berth while fighting off the same effects of age that the early decade Raiders had to.

But that wouldn't be a function of the decision to go out and get Galloway this year, that would be a function of finding out that Devin Thomas just flat out sucks.

It's just we'd learn that this year instead of next. Tanier is questioning the decision making of Shanahan and the front office, suggesting that bringing in these vets for the quick fix is more of the same.

It's not at all. It's partly designed to find out about the current roster sooner rather than later.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

But that wouldn't be a function of the decision to go out and get Galloway this year, that would be a function of finding out that Devin Thomas just flat out sucks.

It's just we'd learn that this year instead of next. Tanier is questioning the decision making of Shanahan and the front office, suggesting that bringing in these vets for the quick fix is more of the same.

It's not at all. It's partly designed to find out about the current roster sooner rather than later.

Well, yeah. It's not like this is a new technique to ShanAllen. Gibbs and Saunders did this too. Vinny didn't because, well, Vinny didn't do a a lot of things that common sense suggested he should.

If you look at our roster right now, there's a very small number of undrafted rookies compared to other teams. Those spots of "players likely to be released anyway" have been given to veteran players. So maybe Galloway gets cut so we can give a roster spot to...Mike Furrey, or someone.

In other words, while our competitors might be cutting their low cost vets in camp for younger bit players, we're going to be picking and choosing between a bunch of unwanted players to fill out our roster. Theoretically, that's a complete lack of depth.

None of that means that we won't find some good players somewhere, even if the young players we have aren't worth our time. I don't think Shanahan is adverse to cutting Vinny draft picks gone wrong. There is, however, a shockingly small amount of player development going on with youth of any type, and given that there's no mid round draft picks next year, that's where I think the pessimism is justified.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, yeah. It's not like this is a new technique to ShanAllen. Gibbs and Saunders did this too. Vinny didn't because, well, Vinny didn't do a a lot of things that common sense suggested he should.

If you look at our roster right now, there's a very small number of undrafted rookies compared to other teams. Those spots of "players likely to be released anyway" have been given to veteran players. So maybe Galloway gets cut so we can give a roster spot to...Mike Furrey, or someone.

In other words, while our competitors might be cutting their low cost vets in camp for younger bit players, we're going to be picking and choosing between a bunch of unwanted players to fill out our roster. Theoretically, that's a complete lack of depth.

None of that means that we won't find some good players somewhere, even if the young players we have aren't worth our time. I don't think Shanahan is adverse to cutting Vinny draft picks gone wrong. There is, however, a shockingly small amount of player development going on with youth of any type, and given that there's no mid round draft picks next year, that's where I think the pessimism is justified.

Fair points, and an accurate assessment. But unfair for him to lay the lack of depth at the feet of Shanahan/Allen. Just because they're trading picks for McNabb and Jamaal Brown doesn't mean they can't be more successful on the undrafted free agents than Vinny was.

Honestly, how can they not be more successful than Vinny??

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Honestly, how can they not be more successful than Vinny??

I am an unabashed Bruce Allen fan, but I would have paired his veteran savvy and considerable job security with a younger coach who would have been much more likely to oversee a new age of player development. Shanahan is going to try to win a super bowl with McNabb, and probably will be unsuccessful, and then probably settle in to the same Gruden/Allen path of not choosing a quarterback to succeed McNabb, but rather having a little competition every year, and maintaining high roster turnover.

It really did work in Tampa for awhile, but they also preyed on a lot of wrongheaded organizations to make the postseason every year. Atlanta and New Orleans prior to 2006 had no direction. In the NFC East, I don't think the high-turnover route is going to produce a lot of success. Those first place finishes in Tampa would have been second or third place finishes in a more competitive division.

###

Vinny's roster was a lot deeper at most positions than recent Redskins rosters, including the current one. Admittedly, most of the depth was concentrated on defense, and the guy running that operation wouldn't have been able to figure out how to use guys that weren't starters effectively, but our defense has been remarkably healthy since the 2006 disaster. We really needed the depth on offense, and had it at just one position where it was needed: running back. The starting receivers were as bad as the backups, and the OL had no depth whatsoever, which is where Vinny was intentionally cutting corners.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I agree with your conclusions.

Which, of course, is Tanier's main point: if Galloway and Holliday are anything more than one-year roster fillers that do a little bit of pushing in camp and a lot of scout team work, then they will likely enter 2011 as the best of a bunch of bad options for a team desperately trying to hold on to a singular playoff berth while fighting off the same effects of age that the early decade Raiders had to.

Except he really didn't say "if," he essentially said "when." And at this point things are not that certain. If the young guys end up taking the roster spots, then Tanier's argument is deeply flawed.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Except he really didn't say "if," he essentially said "when." And at this point things are not that certain. If the young guys end up taking the roster spots, then Tanier's argument is deeply flawed.

Well I think he could have doubled the essay size and wrote something that looked at the other side of the Redskins plight if things start to unexpectedly turn upward in the player development category, and then his piece probably wouldn't have come off on such a negative slant.

The biggest problems are that 1) the pure quantity of young talent isn't that high because of traded draft choices and also because of Vinny's curious tendency to spend mid and late round picks on special teams projects who end up not being able to keep Byron freakin Westbrook off the roster, and 2) the young talent that was drafted under Vinny (outside of Orakpo) appears unlikely to develop. There's still time, of course. It's just not very promising, which is why I don't have my faith invested in the outcome of Devin Thomas/Malcolm Kelly/Chad Rinehart/Kevin Barnes anymore. We could theoretically still get four quality starters from that group. If we got two quality starters, everyone on the board would take that average return from those two 2s and two 3s.

I think it's likely we'll get just one of the four: Kelly.

Barnes and Rinehart are blocked by vets right now (Buchanon and Artis Hicks) which is why I say the team appears uninterested in developing talent when it's so easy to sign a cheap vet and ignore that you ever used a draft choice at the position. Thomas and Kelly are still blocked by the promise of each other, but at least no longer by Randle El. If one or the other can play, we will certainly know by year's end.