NewTSN

[Thinking Skins]

Banks' performance could lead to QB controversy

August 26, 2001 Print it

A look at the Redskins heading into the season:

After the Cleveland game, the team could breath a sigh of relief. Tony Banks, with just a week's worth of practice, played well. He ran the offense; stayed poised; went though his progressions and found open receivers; scrambled and gave receivers time to get open and then found them; and, most important of all, directed scoring drives.

Marty Schottenheimer denies that it will happen, but each solid performance by Banks adds to the chance that a quarterback controversy will develop.

Jeff George showed a lot of rust against Cleveland, which was understandable -- he had essentially practiced just once in almost three weeks. Still, George's performance will be scrutinized. He got the ball deep down the sideline on two occasions. The bad news was both passes were incomplete. The good news was that his arm didn't bother him on the throws. ...

Whether Matt Campbell is the answer as the backup left tackle now is in question. Campbell had a rough night against the Browns. Schottenheimer's solution is to have Chris Samuels healthy. That's fine, but injuries are difficult to control. The team might try Ben Coleman if Samuels can't play Thursday against New England. It must also be determined whether Dave Szott or Campbell will move to the right guard spot and replace Derrick Fletcher. The only sure way to know is to play both there during the New England game.

SOURCES OF STRENGTH

After struggling with its passing game last season, the team has taken dramatic steps to improve its corps of wide receivers. If he can stay healthy for the season, Michael Westbrook should be the deep threat and a big target over the middle. When Westbrook is focused and happy, he's difficult to defend.

Gardner is everything the team thought he would be -- he's big, has good hands, is very competitive going after 50-50 balls and has enough speed to get downfield. Kevin Lockett is fast, bright and experienced. Darnerien McCants has been a pleasant surprise -- he has size, speed and athletic ability. If Westbrook misses any time, the other receivers will be able to pick up the slack this season, unlike last year.

The running game should be the offense's strong point. Stephen Davis is capable of becoming the first player in team history to have three consecutive 1,000-yard seasons. He will also be a threat to catch more passes out of the backfield. And there is an adequate backup at running back this year -- Ki-Jana Carter has shown quickness and that he can be an effective north-south runner. Now all he has to do is show that he can have an injury-free season.

SOFT SPOTS

The team's best pass rusher is Bruce Smith, who is 38 and entering his 17th season. He's already missed time with a sprained shoulder, and no one can be certain how Smith will hold up over the course of the season. That leads to questions about the team's ability to put pressure on a passer.

The offensive line might be alright, but many of the players are new. There have been all kinds of problems with both guard spots, and the team hopes moving either Szott or Campbell to the right side will solve the problems. Another concern is depth. If either of the tackles, Samuels or Jon Jansen, gets hurt, the dropoff is dramatic.

There are signs that the special teams' problems will continue. The kicking game, particularly the protection, needs to be improved. The team seems capable of fixing the problems that arise each week on special teams -- but as soon as one problem is fixed, another occurs.

PIVOTAL PLAYER

LaVar Arrington was drafted with the idea that he would be a dominant player from his outside linebacker spot. While he had his moments as a rookie, he did not flourish. The team needs him to flourish. If he can have a big season, some of the other shortcomings on the defense will not be as noticeable.

BOTTOM LINE

It is not a good sign when a team hits the fourth week of training camp and is still looking for players. This does not happen to teams that are in contention for playoff spots and title shots.

Add to that the uncertainty of George's shoulder injury, a rebuilt offensive line and a defensive line that is having difficulty pressuring quarterbacks, and you have a recipe for disappointment. Optimism reigns because Schottenheimer is on the job, but that's not nearly enough. If all goes well, the team is looking at a 7-9 season.

[TennesseeCarl]

I can see where the writer would feel that way. Obviously our preseason performance isn't going to win over critics.

So we'll go into the season as an underdog. I can live with that. It'd be refreshing to see us OVERachieve for a change.

[scottb]

Gotta agree with you there TC. One half of decent football (by the second string no less) isn't going to dazzle skeptics. We have to realistic on our part as well. New coaches, new system, and lots of new players. This is not the same team that underachieved last year. Hence, it's not a matter of going out and playing their game. It's more learning how to play and then proving it on the field. It may take awhile.

[Sailor]

I'm a little surprised at Woody's pessimistic take on things. From all the previous articles I've read, I would have expected a more balanced approach. It seems like Woody has gotten caught up in the negativity resulting from these 3 preseason games. Expected, maybe, from the fan on the street but not from a seasoned sportswriter like Woody.

It is not a good sign when a team hits the fourth week of training camp and is still looking for players.

One thing Marty has shown is his willingness to tinker with the lineup to find the best players. I'll take this approach over the Norv approach of chiseling the starting lineup on stone tablets and playing them until they got carried off the field.

I remember being surprised when Marty signed Albright to replace Zalenka. I didn't think Zalenka was that bad. No one was blaming him for our 8-8 season. But Marty saw a chance to make a small upgrade and he took it.

Why not give Marty credit for giving the younger players a chance while knowing from experience that good quality vets would be available late in the preseason?

Add to that the uncertainty of George's shoulder injury,

Can anyone compare George's tendinitis to the season ending injuries to Westbrook, Raymer and Johnson last year? And we'd have made the playoffs anyway if we'd had a kicker.

a rebuilt offensive line

What was Leeuwenberg, Fischer and an injured Sims? Did Woody want us to bring them back? Now I like Jay Leeuwenberg, but he sat around for a long time before somebody signed him. And can an injured Sims be that hard to replace? And Fischer is still with us and reportedly playing better than last year.

Marty has been taking a look at all the linemen in game situations. But once he picks the starters I expect them to come together and be better than last year's "rebuilt offensive line"

and a defensive line that is having difficulty pressuring quarterbacks,

C'mon. Who's missing from last year? Stubby? Was he singlehandedly responsible for our pass rush last year? Maybe we made a big mistake in letting him go

Marco hasn't played much, Bruce not at all, and this year we have the option of playing LeVar as a pass rusher with Jones taking his place at OLB. I think maybe we might have a little bit of a pass rush after all.

[shamaran]

This article from Woody is a perfect example of what can look so obvious (as pure objectivity)to me, looks like negativism to others.

I've known Woody for years. He's not a homer, yet he does have a soft spot for the 'Skins. He's always been objective, never overtly negative.

He , again, has nailed the Current Status of the team, IMO. Anyone that truely can't see that, might try to read it again with an open mind.

The team may address the lack of pass rushers on the D-line if some released players offer more than what we have. Personally, I hope so. I think the D-line is the weakest spot on the team. Most here have focused on our need for DTs since April. So, it's no big surprise.

I just don't see where anyone can interpret this recent Woody pc. as anything but a fair, truthful assessment of the team AT THIS POINT. Go figure?

[Henry]

I agree with pretty much everything Woody wrote except the very last line. 'If all goes well' to me means George plays well and doesn't implode, the OL gels nicely and is at least an average unit, Stephen Davis, Michael Westbrook and our DEs stay healthy, the Lang experiment works out, Green hangs in there another year (or Smoot comes on strong) and the Arrington/Barber duo is the real deal.

If ALL goes well, this team will be a LOT better than 7-9. But that's asking a lot.

------------------

"Men, there's nothing to get excited about. The situation is normal; we are surrounded."

[Art]

Shamaran,

Woody's piece is both solid and weak. It has good points, and poor ones. For those looking to see it as an objective piece of journalism, they can do so and be strengthened by certain facts in the article. For those who tend to look for slights or negativity, there is that as well.

Woody is, as you've described him, a guy that generally doesn't have a vendetta against the Redskins. He is a cynic, but, that's ok. Like with most things, it's hard to find total fault or total clarity with most pieces. There are very solid points in Woody's piece. There are also very large weaknesses, as pointed out.

------------------

Doom is in the box.

[JimboDaMan]

First the complaints: I'm disappointed in Woody for resorting to the sensationalism of a phony quarterback controversy. Its not his style to stoop to such cheap writing. Mebbe by midseason Tony Banks will have beaten out Jeff George for the starting spot, stranger things have happened. Mebbe even by next week at this time we'll promote Banks to the starting spot . But to say "each solid performance by Banks adds to the chance" when he's played so little is asinine.

Also, of course, the team may well finish 7-9 but in that case all will not have gone well. And I don't know what he means about playoff-caliber teams not looking for players. If he said 'looking for starters' I'd agree, but everybody keeps their eye on the waiver wire.

But overall I agree with his weak and strong points.

[Terry]

Woody talks about a rebuilt O line, but as Skins fans we know that that isn't always a bad thing.

After the '98 O line debacle, we got rid of guys like Patton and Shar. We got Heck, a gimpy old vet with a bad back from the Bears to play left tackle for us. We put in a rookie, Jansen, at right tackle. We had Simms, plummetting from his glory years and essentially on his way out of the league until we got him and tried to resurrect his career, playing right guard. And we had the inconsistent, oft injured Tre at the other guard slot. The only consistent holdover was Raymer.

I'd say that O line did pretty well that year.

It's not like the O line can't undergo a major overhaul and still perform at a high level that season.

The only difference this time might be that the '99 starting group was penciled in from the start and got a lot of reps together in pre-season, but I really don't remember.

[ by Terry on August 27, 2001.]

[redman]

Originally posted by Henry:

I agree with pretty much everything Woody wrote except the very last line. 'If all goes well' to me means George plays well and doesn't implode, the OL gels nicely and is at least an average unit, Stephen Davis, Michael Westbrook and our DEs stay healthy, the Lang experiment works out, Green hangs in there another year (or Smoot comes on strong) and the Arrington/Barber duo is the real deal.

If ALL goes well, this team will be a LOT better than 7-9. But that's asking a lot.

Amazing Henry, I was about to write that I agreed with everything except his record prediction (which I think is 9-7 if all goes well). I too am disturbed, as I previously stated in a couple of posts, about the amount of personnell shuffling that we continue to do during this preseason. Perhaps that goes with the territory with at team that both cut salary and changed coaching staffs (and consequently offensive and defensive systems) during the same offseason. But like all of you, I root for this team to succeed every year, and I'm having a hard time believing they can reach the playoffs this year with this many question marks this late in the preseason.

This isn't a negative article. In fact the last line is the only place in the article that really has the writer's opinion stated in it. The rest is just statement of the facts, and an accurate one at that.

------------------

"Loosen up, Sandy baby. You're just too damn tight!" - John Riggins to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

[bulldog]

to be successful in the NFL you have to have stability and production at qb on offense and the DL on defense.

without those things you can have pro bowlers elsewhere and never truly contend for a title.

right now, qb and the defensive line are perhaps the two areas of the team with the biggest question marks.

On the offensive line we have the talent it just needs to gel together.

George is 33, Banks has been here for one week and Rosenfels is not ready.

Bruce Smith is 38, Coleman is 32 on the line. That's the limit on the high level performers. Wilkinson, 29 and Lang 27 are question marks right now. Can Wilkinson be a anchor in the middle? Physically you would say yes. History says no, he will merely be a slight bit better than average. Lang is a guy that needs to convince HIMSELF first that he can succeed at DT.

There is no depth on the line at all. Ham showed he can't play. Boose is a waiver quality player. Bankston is 31 and like Harrison last year a player on the downside. Cowsette and DeLoach are bodies, what can be made of them over time is anyone's guess. Few guess though that either will be the team's long-term solution at the position.

So, that is part of the reason for the pessimism.

If George, Smith and Coleman play regularly and are productive the team dodges a bullet until next year and comes away from this season with a chance to compete for a playoff spot.

If they don't the team could be sub .500 even with the softer schedule.

Those are the tea leaves as they come to rest at the bottom of the cup.