Quote:
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.