Tim Murray


Tim: Yeah, was thinking about that question on Monday; good timing. Vick’s character concerns don’t seem to be a problem in the locker room, so I doubt that would be an issue. He seems – and I stress seems – to be doing and saying the right things. Vick is a more dynamic QB at this stage; Hasselbeck just turned 35 and is a banged-up QB. No thanks. But if fundamentals are an issue with McNabb, I’m not sure how that would change with Vick, though maybe this time we’d hear comparisons not to John Elway as we did with McNabb but to Steve Young – a guy, like Vick, who relied on his legs until later in his career and who was coached by Shanahan. Vick has never been a high-percentage passer; some of that stems from going long, but his career yards per attempt is only 6.7. But of the two, give me Vick. I think he’d last longer. Don’t forget, any QB likely will be playing behind another rebuilt line.

JK

John: During the Bears game McNabb came off the field after one particular series and started talking with Kyle Shannahan.  Donovan seemed to be arguing with Kyle before walking away and quickly running into Mike Shannahan who seemed to be explaining something to him—Donovan’s body language was very respectful and he seemed to be listening.  In the Lions game I saw Kyle throwing his hands up *before* a certain snap as if to say “what the hell are you doing?” Question: Is Donovan calling audibles to overrule Kyle so often that they think he is refusing to follow his O-coordinator’s lead? If so, no wonder he was benched.

Sean Cook

Sean: Yeah, I saw that too. But I have not heard that this is an issue. I do believe that the benching was in part injury-related; in watching the game again McNabb did not use his legs on many throws, leading to inaccuracy and slow throws. But obviously if he’d been playing well vs. Detroit he would have remained in the game for the final two minutes even if he was hurt and getting knocked around.

JK

John: What you see with this offense are a couple of things that consistently doom the Redskins:

1. Play calling that does nothing to mitigate a pass rush: no draw plays, no screen passes, a dearth of play action. Every time they run some play action it works, so why not do it more?

2. Donovan McNabb on a second and long on a critical drive heaving it downfield into double coverage when there is always a receiver sitting wide open on the outside 8-12 yards.

This is absolutely unacceptable.  On the drive that could have given the ‘Skins a field goal to tie, they get the penalty on first down. Then on first and 20 they complete the pass for ten yards to Moss. Then instead of trying a screen pass or a draw or a play action, to get, say, seven yards for a manageable third down, McNabb wastes a play down field, overthrowing Armstrong by 10 yards while he’s being double covered and while I think it was Galloway standing wide open 12 yards downfield.

Who is to blame for this? It seems to me it’s both McNabb and Kyle S.?

Best Regards,

Tom Wiggin


Tom: They do run a decent amount of play-action, though that varies from game to game. Also depends who is in the game; if Keiland Williams is in, it’s a waste to run play-action; who would believe it? They’ve run some screens, though I was surprised they didn’t run more last week (did get a TD on one). Problem is, Donovan hasn’t been accurate on them and other times the backs are slow getting away from protection. I think No. 2 is a problem, too. McNabb tends to get a little greedy; against the Packers he tried to hit Joey Galloway inside the 10 for a huge play rather than hit a wide open Santana Moss for the first down before the missed 51-yarder. McNabb even admits he gets a little greedy. The coaches do as well, but they will say there are times when McNabb must find the open guy rather than force the issue. Have to agree. Guess it’s all part of the process and it’s why they’ve completed seven pass plays for 40 yards or more. But despite those big plays they average 10th in yards per attempt at 7.12. Still not bad; but if there was more consistency on intermediate routes it would be higher.

JK

John: I am not understanding all this talk about McNabb leaving after 1 year.  Is that possible? Of course it is, but my point is that we can prevent that, right? Can we franchise him? Work a sign and trade? It would be fiscally irresponsible to let him walk away after giving up a lot to acquire him.

What’s with Kyle Shanahan? I am not sure that I fully buy into him.  He and his father are a bit thick-headed for me.  How about adjusting the offense to fit the skill set of McNabb?

I have to seriously question some of the personnel moves Mike has made.  I mean does Joey Galloway actually represent a viable weapon for McNabb? Even in the Detroit game, he appeared to go lame on the pass across the middle.  We could have T.O., or maybe should’ve made a stronger push for TJ Hous or Brian Westbrook.  Part of McNabb’s problem is that he does not have the weapons he needs to be successful.  And, for that, you’ve gotta feel for the guy.  This was the same case in Philly (minus the DeSean Jackson of Maclin years).

I agree with you the Rabach is the biggest problem on the o-line.  As a fan, I’ve seen this for at least 3 years (incl. this year).  He is bad, and back to my point in #3, you have to question why we didn’t upgrade here in the offseason.  Rabach is very bad, man, and I don’t see why they think so highly of him.

Thanks for any insights,

Michael Lindsey

Michael: Yes, it is possible. Until they sign him, it’s very possible. But it’s probably more their call than McNabb’s, so franchising him would not be an option. Like I said in an earlier answer, they should have known everything about McNabb so that when you trade for him you know what you can and can’t accept and you sign him to an extension. Otherwise you surrender picks on a one-year experiment. It’s a bit too soon to judge Kyle Shanahan as an offensive coordinator considering the inconsistency in the talent base. Of course, that could apply to the players as well. It takes a looong time to get a new offense going and couple that with a revamped line, one proven receiver and a banged-up backfield, it’s hard to generate much offense Not saying he shouldn’t be criticized and I do agree on fitting the offense to what you have rather than forcing a bad fit. Arrogance can trip up many a coach; guys don’t change this late in their career. Find a way to make it work with who they are.

I agree on the personnel moves. Never understood Galloway’s signing; he was done a couple years ago and receivers do not improve at age 38. But McNabb does have a good starting point with Chris Cooley and Santana Moss. The problem is, the dropoff from those two is significant. I do like Armstrong, but as a No. 3.

Coaches like Rabach because he’s a very smart center and excels with line calls etc.; the intangibles of the position. But he has struggled, no doubt. Defensive tackles are getting too much penetration on some stretch plays. The hard part with the line is that they might need to replace as many as three starters; and right tackle is probably the biggest issue. Not sure that’s going to improve this season.

JK

Hi John:  I love your work … . I know the SKINS lack WR depth/talent & it is very frustrating that we have two useless & unproductive WR’S on the roster in Joey Galloway & Roydell Williams. I would like to see them take a shot at signing another vet who is on the street in Antonio Bryant if his knee is healthy. I would also like to see them promote Terrence Austin from the practice squad. To tell the truth I would rather have any 2 WR’s on the planet on the 53 man roster besides 84 & 87. Any news on the possibilities of a shakeup to the REDSKINS WR’s? THANK YOU.

Mike Souza San Jose, CA.

Mike: Thank you… I don’t get what Joey or Roydell adds right now. I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point Terrence Austin is promoted, but I’d imagine it would be in place of Galloway just because Williams offers some size. Not that it’s actually mattered. Austin has quick feet and you would think would play with more hunger than Galloway has shown. I know they’re telling him to be patient so we’ll see what happens. There’s no magic answer to this group; at this stage of the season it’s doubtful someone such as Antonio Bryant would come in and make much of a difference. If Anthony Armstrong continues to develop it would help more than the addition of another guy. This offense needs a lot right now for it to become good. A consistent ground game would help immensely. There’s no go-to aspect of the offense.

JK

Follow me on Twitter @John_Keim