The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[url=http://www.csnwashington.com/football-washington-redskins/redskins-talk/Ex-Redskins-not-thriving-elsewhere?blockID=726418&feedID=6355]Ex-Redskins not thriving elsewhere[/url]

[QUOTE][B][U]Ex-Redskins not thriving elsewhere[/U][/B]

Many Redskins fans live in fear of their team letting go of a player and having him go on to play well for another team. Meanwhile, their team struggles to replace the player they let walk.

This not an irrational fear. The Redskins’ trash has turned into another team’s treasure on a regular basis. In the past decade we’ve seen the likes of Antonio Pierce, Ryan Clark, and Stephen Davis make the Redskins look bad by playing well on Super Bowl teams after being shown the door in Ashburn.

But check out this nugget from Dan Graziano of ESPN. “Since [Mike] Shanahan took over before the 2010 season, the Redskins have cut 150 players, and only one of those players -- San Francisco's Carlos Rogers -- is currently starting for another team.”

[/QUOTE]

The article goes on to point out Graziano mispoke with that specific claim, but was right on the bigger point. It gives us more reason to temper expectations with Shanahan.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

And in other obvious observations Rich Tandler will be speaking about the sky being blue, grass is green and paint tends to dry slowly.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

That's a weird article. It starts with Rogers as the only guy, then mentions Rocky and Carter. Carter is a definite starter on any team. Rocky will probably start again but I'm happy he's gone. And why don't guys like Gaffney and Stallworth count?

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

Thank you Mr. Tandler

[img]http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/yy302/zeframmann/master_of_the_obvious.jpg[/img]

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

The title of this thread seems to be hyperbole which goes beyond the specific claims of the article.

CRed, here's some non-media hyperbole.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[quote=The Goat;921810]That's a weird article. It starts with Rogers as the only guy, then mentions Rocky and Carter. Carter is a definite starter on any team. Rocky will probably start again but I'm happy he's gone. And why don't guys like Gaffney and Stallworth count?[/quote]

I guess because guys like Gaffney or Stallworth were not originally drafted by the Redskins? Andre Carter isn't an original Redskin, but we'll see how Rocky does in years to come. Carter is gone only because he didn't really fit the 3-4 when the Redskins switched, not because he was a bad player. Although I guess it could be argued that great players can adapted. But anyways, I'm not personally worried about how well someone's career is after they leave Washington. I'm just worried about our current players' production and quality of play.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[quote=The Goat;921810] Carter is a definite starter on any team. Rocky will probably start again but I'm happy he's gone. [/quote]


Carter isn't a starter in any 3-4 defense. Rocky start again? Only if a team is decimated with injuries.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

Wake me when rebuilding is over. :sleep:

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[quote=Lotus;921814]The title of this thread seems to be hyperbole which goes beyond the specific claims of the article.

CRed, here's some non-media hyperbole.[/quote]

Dang warpath, always exaggerating their thread titles... Why I oughta ...:soapbox::censored::rant:

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

its a slllllllllooooowwwwww offseason....count down till training camp....

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

Didn't we let go Pierce and Stephen Davis because they wanted too much money. I know that's why we let go of Pierce but I cannot remember just why we let go of SD. So its not like we let them go and after seeing them thrive we realized we made a mistake.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

I wouldn't go as far as saying there was NO TALENT, but alot of guys we had starting when Shanahan arrived could not start elsewhere, probably much less make an NFL squad. I can think of a few guys offhand, others can help me add to this list:

QB Jason Campbell: a redskins bust, Campbell was sent to the Raiders, where he was discarded in favor of then-retired QB Carson Palmer. Cut from the raiders, and now is a backup working on a one year deal in Chicago.

RB Clinton Portis: Is now retired, after 3 straight injury plagued seasons. Even when Shanahan arrived, he was totally wore out and would have not made it anywhere else.

WR Joey Galloway: It's sad when a 41 year old guy beat out a young player. Is now retired.

OL Mike Williams: Overcame life threatening obesity to return to football, only to be out of football again from a serious heart condition. (no joke there his return was inspiring even though it was brief).

Albert Haynesworth: Enough Said........

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;921885]I wouldn't go as far as saying there was NO TALENT, but alot of guys we had starting when Shanahan arrived could not start elsewhere, probably much less make an NFL squad. I can think of a few guys offhand, others can help me add to this list:

QB Jason Campbell: a redskins bust, Campbell was sent to the Raiders, where he was discarded in favor of then-retired QB Carson Palmer. Cut from the raiders, and now is a backup working on a one year deal in Chicago.

RB Clinton Portis: Is now retired, after 3 straight injury plagued seasons. Even when Shanahan arrived, he was totally wore out and would have not made it anywhere else.

WR Joey Galloway: It's sad when a 41 year old guy beat out a young player. Is now retired.

OL Mike Williams: Overcame [B]life threatening obesity[/B] to return to football, only to be out of football again from a serious heart condition. (no joke there his return was inspiring even though it was brief).

Albert Haynesworth: Enough Said........[/quote]

Wait what? Link?

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[quote=mooby;921894]Wait what? Link?[/quote]

I thought he could have potentially died due to some rare heart condition that finally ended his career, but anyway I really have no idea.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

If JC didn't get injured, the trade for Palmer wouldn't have happened. The Raiders didn't cut him either he was a free agent.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[quote=Mattyk;921901]If JC didn't get injured, the trade for Palmer wouldn't have happened. The Raiders didn't cut him either he was a free agent.[/quote]

And it's the Raiders...things they do aren't supposed to make sense anyway :)

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

It's not terribly shocking that most of the Gibbs-era Redskins aren't in the league anymore, as that was a really old team. It was still pretty talented when Shanahan took over, but the Redskins needed to get younger, no argument. One thing the Redskins have clearly done in the last two years is that they've gotten a lot younger.

That 2010 offseason was really bizarre because the Redskins gutted their roster of established veteran talent and somehow managed to get older. That ended up not being a trend, because no veteran we signed that offseason is still with the team (miss you, Larry Johnson).

The last two offseasons have gone a lot better. It's still difficult to get a feel for the talent level of this team, because our hopes for a successful 2012 sit on the shoulders of a lot of the one year signings the Redskins made this offseason, as well as the development of last years free agents and draft choices, which is not a given. I think amassing talent has been an issue for this administration because you must retain talent as well as develop it, and we've been poor at talent retention the last three years, but I think they've improved leaps and bounds in talent development.

But it has to translate to the field this year.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

[quote=The Goat;921899]I thought he could have potentially died due to some rare heart condition that finally ended his career, but anyway I really have no idea.[/quote]

If he had a rare heart condition, I don't think there's any way he would've ever seen the field. I don't think his obesity was life-threatening though. Was it a problem? Hell yes. Life-threatening? Maybe in the long run but probably not in the short term.

Re: The Redskins had NO TALENT when shanahan took over
 

In Joe Gibbs last season, the Redskins did have talent on both sides of the ball. When Zorn took over, the talent was still there but there were no impact players. Mike Shanahan has done a complete overhaul of the roster since he's been the coach and it's resulted in a much younger team. The Redskins do have talent now. How far are they from competing for a division title? How far are they from being a playoff team? Do they have the correct players in place now that will enable them to have a winning record? If yes is the answer to these three questions then the Redskins would have certainly made progress.