Lost Some Faith In Shanahan

[BigHairedAristocrat]

To me, the discussion surrounding what Shanahan should and should not have done with RGIII during the game is really divided into two seperate categories:

1) Should RGIII have been removed from the game at some point to protect his health?
2) Should he have been removed from the game at some point due to his poor performance?

Regarding #1) The more information that comes out about the injury RGIII suffered vs. Baltimore, and how he's performed since, I think the Redskins completely mismanaged the situation. He shouldnt have been cleared to play until his knee was strong enough to play without the brace. You can argue that if he can play with the brace, you play him with the brace, but Sunday proved the error of that logic. By all appearances, RGIII suffered the knee injury because the brace slipped out of place. If its possible a brace can slip out of place during normal gameplay, then it doesnt offer sufficent protection. If he can't play without the brace, he shouldnt play at all.

Regarding #2), I have changed my opinion on this. During the game, i was screaming for Robert to be benched for ineffectivenes. And i felt rightly so. He couldnt run, he couldnt plant his foot, so he couldnt throw accurately... he was essentially useless. Kirk Cousins showed how effective he could be - starting Cousins seemed to give us the best chance to win.

After a few days of thinking about it, i've completely changed my mind on this argument. RGIII is not just a starting quarterback. He's our FRANCHISE quarterback. Just like Tom Brady, Just like Aaron Rodgers, Just like Peyton Manning. You dont bench a franchise quarterback because he's ineffective. It doesnt matter if its a regular season game, a playoff game, or the superbowl. You just dont do it. If you do, you undermine the leader of your team and the face of your franchise... not just to the fans, but more importantly, to his teammates. RGIII got this team to the playoffs - you dont bench him for performance. He's not Alex Smith. He's not Mark Sanchez. Bench those guys - they are "just guys." RGIII is our Tom Brady. All of you who think he should have been benched for performance, including BHA of 2 days ago, are dead wrong.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

To me, the discussion surrounding what Shanahan should and should not have done with RGIII during the game is really divided into two seperate categories:

1) Should RGIII have been removed from the game at some point to protect his health?
2) Should he have been removed from the game at some point due to his poor performance?

Regarding #1) The more information that comes out about the injury RGIII suffered vs. Baltimore, and how he's performed since, I think the Redskins completely mismanaged the situation. He shouldnt have been cleared to play until his knee was strong enough to play without the brace. You can argue that if he can play with the brace, you play him with the brace, but Sunday proved the error of that logic. By all appearances, RGIII suffered the knee injury because the brace slipped out of place. If its possible a brace can slip out of place during normal gameplay, then it doesnt offer sufficent protection. If he can't play without the brace, he shouldnt play at all.

Regarding #2), I have changed my opinion on this. During the game, i was screaming for Robert to be benched for ineffectivenes. And i felt rightly so. He couldnt run, he couldnt plant his foot, so he couldnt throw accurately... he was essentially useless. Kirk Cousins showed how effective he could be - starting Cousins seemed to give us the best chance to win.

After a few days of thinking about it, i've completely changed my mind on this argument. RGIII is not just a starting quarterback. He's our FRANCHISE quarterback. Just like Tom Brady, Just like Aaron Rodgers, Just like Peyton Manning. You dont bench a franchise quarterback because he's ineffective. It doesnt matter if its a regular season game, a playoff game, or the superbowl. You just dont do it. If you do, you undermine the leader of your team and the face of your franchise... not just to the fans, but more importantly, to his teammates. RGIII got this team to the playoffs - you dont bench him for performance. He's not Alex Smith. He's not Mark Sanchez. Bench those guys - they are "just guys." RGIII is our Tom Brady. All of you who think he should have been benched for performance, including BHA of 2 days ago, are dead wrong.

Yes, but he was ineffective because he knee was hanging by a thread. Everyone saw it. Benching him keeps him out of harms way AND gives us the best chance to win. It's not like he was 100% healthy and just having an off day. If that was the case, of course you don't take him out.

[milellie111]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Yes, but he was ineffective because he knee was hanging by a thread. Everyone saw it. Benching him keeps him out of harms way AND gives us the best chance to win. It's not like he was 100% healthy and just having an off day. If that was the case, of course you don't take him out.

Exactly GMScud. Exactly!

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Yes, but he was ineffective because he knee was hanging by a thread. Everyone saw it. Benching him keeps him out of harms way AND gives us the best chance to win. It's not like he was 100% healthy and just having an off day. If that was the case, of course you don't take him out.

You're combining two arguments that, in my mind, are competely seperate.

From a health perspective, I dont think RGIII should have played to begin with. He should have been inactive. However, since Shanahan decided to start him, at that point, you stick with him just like you would if he were 100% healthy. You only remove him if an injury that prevents him from playing.

[milellie111]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

You're combining two arguments that, in my mind, are competely seperate.

From a health perspective, I dont think RGIII should have played to begin with. He should have been inactive. However, since Shanahan decided to start him, at that point, you stick with him just like you would if he were 100% healthy. You only remove him if an injury that prevents him from playing.

??
Both of those arguments are related to each other. It is simple. RG3 could not run, neither could he plant his feet to make effective throws because he WAS NOT healthy. His inefectiveness was due to him being injured.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Twice (that I saw) during playing time Griffin left the side lines to go into the stadium for evaluation and came back out. I would assume he under went another evaluation during half time. He came back onto the field of play. In my mind he was either cleared to play, which could mean a number of things, or he was not cleared and he or Shanny or both took the initiative to continue playing. Unfortunately we don't have and may not have for a while all of the information.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

You're combining two arguments that, in my mind, are competely seperate.

From a health perspective, I dont think RGIII should have played to begin with. He should have been inactive. However, since Shanahan decided to start him, at that point, you stick with him just like you would if he were 100% healthy. You only remove him if an injury that prevents him from playing.

Well, essentially the injury was preventing him from playing. It wasn't preventing him from taking the field, but after the 1st quarter it was preventing him from doing anything close to resembling effective QB play. At that point he should have been yanked.