Poll: Which has contributed the most to the Washington Redskins 3-6 record? Injuries, Lack of Quality Depth, or Coaching?

[MumboSauce]

I think its more a combination of the first two than the coaching. After having some time to cool down and reflect on the season to this point, while you can queston coaching and personnel decisions which all go hand and hand, what glaringly stands out to me is the lack of depth and talent compared to a lot of other teams I've watched.

RG3 was a slice of hope, a band aid on a wound that really requires stitches and an anti biotic. We lack play makers, beasts, explosive players, monsters at a position that teams fear and have to game plan for. Outside of RG3 there are currently no real offensive threats...the defense is also devoid of beasts and play makers...the line backers are slow, the defensive backs are horrid, the down linemen get little to no pressure. This team lacks depth and isn't good enough to overcome the injuries they have sustained. While I don't think the coaching staff is the greatest, I think they are good enough to get the job done if we had the talent to make it go.

Maybe it is a trickle down issue....maybe shanahan does need to be relieved of management and personnel gm autonomy. Maybe the defensive coordinator needs to take a hike, Idk....httr I love RG3 and alfred morris, and I hope they succeed here and their unique talents aren't wasted...RG3 looks like a once a generation or two kind of player....I hope they are properly utilized and get the most out of them.

[darrelgreenie]

I realize that, but I wanted people to have to pick their main one, because how can you objectively put the lion's share of the blame anywhere else after you do that? Which means how do you justify yelling for a coach to be fired, AFTER you admit that Injuries have decimated the team?

If you realize that all factors are connected yet proceed to ask a question about which factor is the singular reason then all you are doing is setting up a disingenuous argument not much different then a strawman.

The NFL injuries are not a question of if but of when. And teams are defined by their ability to withstand injuries through depth and coaching. Personnel and the GM play a huge role in a teams success or failure and for this team the HC is the veritable GM and therefore the both the lack of depth and inability to coach effectively through injury falls squarely in his lap.

[pjfootballer]

You need (d) all of the above.

[pjfootballer]

Where's the option for years of futility in the draft, and wasted free agent signings for nearly a decade or more?

Look, how many of us expected to be 8-8 or 9-7? How many thought we'd make the play offs, or make noise with RGIII? Some of us were excited, but most of us realized this would be a learning year for RGIII. I think RGIII exceeded expectations so much early that even Shanahan began to think we might have a shot this year. But you can't fill all those holes over night. We've done a good job of filling where we can, but we're still a team that's at least a nother year if not two away from being real competitors. That doesn't make Shanahan a failure. It's simply a fact of what we are as a Franchise right now. We are on the up tick I think, but we've not arrived yet, so let's not be throwing in the towel on the skins, just because we are taking our lumkps this year.

I expected us to be 8-8 with no playoffs. Not too godamn much to ask for IMO. Miami, Seattle, Tampa Bay and Indy have all improved. We've regressed. We have a right to be pissed.

I'm frustrated at our lack of a vertical passing game since week 1. I'm not sure how much Garcon being out has to do with that, but our offense has become a predictable dink and dunk bore-fest. Where are the deep shots we were seeing earlier in the season?

Agreed. Luck passed for 400 yards yesterday, Tannehill, 290 and Kyle keeps holding Griffin back, I see it with my own eyes. Kyle is SO scared Griffin is going to make a mistake. Newsflash Kyle. He's a rookie. He WILL make mistakes. You have to take the leash off.

I've never seen such poor coaching in all of my life as this year. As soon as they find something that works on offense, they stop doing it and go to something different. They have improper players in the packages. Why was Royster lead blocker on that 4th and goal at the 2? Why wasn't DY lead blocking?

EVERY single game, we have a 3rd or 4th and 1 and Kyle calls a "stretch" play. Do you know how many times it's worked? I'll give you hint. It looks like an egg. Mark my words. Watch the Philly game and you'll see a short yardage stretch play fail.

[Commander PK]

If you realize that all factors are connected yet proceed to ask a question about which factor is the singular reason then all you are doing is setting up a disingenuous argument not much different then a strawman.

I disagree. I think you can admit that all three are part of the problem, while still identifying the biggest factor out of all of them. If over half of the starting defense is out for the year, how can you objectively judge a Coach? Did he cause the injuries? You can say that the coach/GM should have had "better" depth on the team, but what team has so much quality depth that they can lose half of their starters and still get the same result?

Edit: and I didn't ask for the "singular" reason. I asked for the one that has contributed the most.

[RandyHolt]

Coaching.

I don't see any injuries on the OL.

He has had 3 years to put an OL in place that can run block, and wait for it, pass block.

He builds his line to run block. He almost seems short sighted and is living in the past. It's a passing league.

It was foolish to not have pass protection in place in year 3. Shanahan clearly thinks its imperative to have a fleet footed OL. Yet never rolls his pocket to buy his WR time to get downfield, it's all about run blocking. When you don't run to a lead in the first half deferring on the way, you have to pass. And in passing, the OL fails. Miserably, and play calling plays right to our weakness.

[darrelgreenie]

I disagree. I think you can admit that all three are part of the problem, while still identifying the biggest factor out of all of them. If over half of the starting defense is out for the year, how can you objectively judge a Coach? Did he cause the injuries? You can say that the coach/GM should have had "better" depth on the team, but what team has so much quality depth that they can lose half of their starters and still get the same result?

Umm scratching my head we didn't lose half our starters on defense. We lost 2 and a possible, lets call it 3. And I don't for the record blame Haslett.

Plenty of teams lose starters and are still competitive. The Giants and Packers recently won superbowls despite being depleted with injuries. Last year the Texans won a playoff game without their 3rd string QB, a banged up #1 WR and their best pass rusher.

[DogofWar1]

Seriously? Every team has injuries. Good teams deal with it. The Packers won the Superbowl with half their team on the sideline.

Our number of injuries is pretty insane though.

We have 14 inactives, not including the injured players on our roster (Garcon and Meriweather). Only one other team in the NFL has more inactives, the Patriots with 16, but their list is really suspect because they use IR and PUP as a taxi squad for the future and love to play games with injury designations (adding TEs left and right even when they had little reason to, etc.).

Only 6 teams have 10 or more inactives, Patriots with 16, us with 14, Cincy with 13, Jacksonville with 10, Tennessee with 10, and Cardinals with 10.

Comparatively, 18 of 32 teams have 7 or fewer inactives.

And of our inactives 6 (Orakpo, Davis, Helu, Jackson, Brown, and Carriker) would normally be starters. Garcon, if he doesn't heal, might join them. Point is, we have almost as many starters on inactives as the majority of teams have inactives.

We're pretty seriously beat up.

---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 10:54 AM ----------

I don't see any injuries on the OL.

He has had 3 years to put an OL in place that can run block, and wait for it, pass block.

Jammal Brown for one. Perhaps it was foreseeable, but that's where the cap penalty comes in. Winston would probably be our RT right now if not for that.

Also, a lot of it is also the RBs being unable to block. How many times did Royster get demolished yesterday? That somewhat comes back to injuries too, Hightower could block, but was too injured to play.

[Going Commando]

How about another choice: Not enough quality starters.

I agree.

Our expectations got too high after RGIII's sensational start IMO. His brilliant play was masking a lot of our talent deficiencies on offense, as were turnovers and defensive scores.

The one game where we had almost a full deck was the Saints game, and the whole team looked excellent in it.

Even without the injuries though, this team is not talented enough to truly contend.

[kingarthur65]

It's coaching!

I don't care what personnel we have on the field. There is no reason a veteran coach should have a defense that is ranked last in the NFL week after week. How many times does Madieu Williams need to be beat deep before the coach realizes that he needs to change that responsibility? I understand that we don't have anyone else to put back there but why do you keep asking him to cover deep? Move him up to cover the short zones/slants and stop the run. This is just one example of the insanity of our coaches. I believe Williams has been beat deep for a touchdown in every game this year, yet our coaches continue to ask him to cover that part of the field.

No matter what talent or lack thereof, our coaches have not done anything to put our players in a situation to win. Remember the St Louis game? We had all of our starters for that game. Our defense made Amendola look like a perennial all pro. Even the commentators asked the question of why we would continue to play a soft zone defense and allow Bradford to torch our secondary. Our coaches help to define insanity by doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

COACHES

[Commander PK]

Umm scratching my head we didn't lose half our starters on defense. We lost 2 and a possible, lets call it 3.

We lost Orakpo and Carriker after the season started. We lost Neild and Meriweather in pre-season. We lost Jackson to suspension. What if the entire defense was on the field on Day #1 as it was intended to be from the outset? That's five out of eleven players who would have been major contributors if not starters. The loss of Orakpo has crippled our pass rush. We don't know how good the secondary could have been, because they were never all out on the field together at the same time. We basically have people on the field who were never intended to get on the field at all unless something went horribly wrong and it did. "Ok, well sign better depth" Who was better that we could have picked up with capgate?

---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 12:08 PM ----------

What if Helu or Hightower was in rotation with Morris instead of Royster? Now the offense is having issues. We have seen what they can do when Garcon and Davis are on the field.

---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 12:10 PM ----------

I'm not saying there is no blame to be laid anywhere else, I'm just wondering how we can possibly objectively judge anything else with all the injuries this team has suffered this year. We are not seeing the "vision" executed to it's full potential.

[darrelgreenie]

Point of fact. We did not lose half our starters.

[MattFancy]

I'd say mainly injuries. We're without Orakpo, Carriker, Merriweather, Garcon, Davis, and Brown. That's 6 starters right there. Now I don't think Haslett has done a great job coaching by any means, but the injuries have certainly hurt us. RG3 is without his 2 big receiving threats and its starting to show. Morgan, Robinson, Hankerson, and Moss are just complementary guys, none of them are a #1 WR.

[Commander PK]

Point of fact. We did not lose half our starters.

Now we are talking about semantics. The bottom line is we lost several key contributors at least 4 of which were going to be starters. That's a lot of people whether it's actually half or not.

[FrFan]

Tandler discussing the Redskins right now http://hqplayer.nbcsports.com/Player.html?PID=86

[JoeSkins]

Wish there was an "All of the Above" option...

The lack of depth shows from the injuries, and the coaches can't overcome injuries like others can (see: Pitt, G-Men). So, I guess I'll go with injuries, since seven starters is a lot. That said, an all of the above option would be best.

[Fat Stupid Loser]

For me I go with the Injuries as the single biggest contributing factor. I think the depth we have is the best we could get because of capgate, which I don't blame the organization one iota for, and I don't blame the coaches as the single biggest factor either. I don't believe that Haslett is the answer, and I am definitely hoping he is replaced at or by the end of the year, but I don't think Dick Lebeau could turn this group into a solid defensive unit. They just aren't talented enough.

I'm starting to think that this team has just had a horrid run of bad luck, and isn't catching any breaks. They just can't seem to break out of this rut no matter what they do.

I agree. Key injuries to starters on a team that wasn't very good to start with.

[Commander PK]

an all of the above option would be best.

an all of the above is like another poster said too easy, because like I said for example. If you acknowledge that injuries have crippled the team, which everyone pretty much universally has acknowleged...then how can you say that it's poor talent evaluating or coaching that brought us to this. You don't have to believe that they don't exist at all as problems to admit that one is more the problem than the other two. Truth is, we really don't know how good this team would have been without the injury bug, predominantly on defense.

[Diesel Hog]

I agree. Key injuries to starters on a team that wasn't very good to start with.

Yep.

I think we'd at least be 5-4 if Merriweather and Garcon had been playing this whole time. Our receivers are on the whole pretty average (that's being nice), and the secondary is terrible. It's really a combo of injuries, lack of depth, lack of starter talent, and coaching.

Honestly I'm surprised anyone thought this team would be good this year. After watching the pre-season, I thought 7-9 at best, and I'm sticking with it. I also said Chicago and Atlanta will be the best teams in the NFC, so basically I'm right and everyone else is wrong!

[JoeSkins]

on all of the above is like another poster said too easy, because like I said for example. If you acknowledge that injuries have crippled the team, which everyone pretty much universally has acknowleged...then how can you say that it's poor talent evaluating or coaching that brought us to this. You don't have to acknowledge that they don't exist as problems to admit that one is more the problem than the other two. Truth is, we really don't know how good this team would have been without the injury bug, predominantly on defense.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean it to be critical of the poll's design, because you're right, easy questions yield easy answers with nothing to talk about. You're also right that the point had already been made ad nauseum.

My call is the injury bug, because it's not only losing seven starters, it's what was expected from them. The best two receivers, the best pass rusher, the best interior pressure, both safeties at once, and a huge dropoff at RT. A team could easily survive losing Meriweather, Carriker and Brown, but compounding it to the degree this team has suffered is deadly. Morgan is turning into a really good second WR, playing first. Paulsen is a good blocker who is a sneaky receiver, but not a first option like Davis. Jackson is smart and versatile but not the athlete Rak is. Polumbus, Doughty, and Williams just aren't NFL starters. They are all at home and productive in the spots they were brought in to occupy. Think of Morgan getting to match up with an opposing team's nickel corner, which he doesn't get to now. Think of Paulsen being ignored as a blocker, only to slip out to the flat, which he can't do now. Think of Jenkins being part of the two-deep instead of having to start. Think of the coverages that would be different with experienced, starting caliber safeties on the field, or the alleviated coverage burdens with Rak in. That's why my pick was injuries.

[Commander PK]

I'm sorry, I didn't mean it to be critical of the poll's design, because you're right, easy questions yield easy answers with nothing to talk about. You're also right that the point had already been made ad nauseum.

No reason to apologize at all, I knew that would be an issue brought up and it has been. Some people really feel that it's all three equally, and that's their perogative. For me, I don't. I feel it's probably about 50% injuries, 40% lack of quality depth, and 10% coaching.

My call is the injury bug, because it's not only losing seven starters, it's what was expected from them. The best two receivers, the best pass rusher, the best interior pressure, both safeties at once, and a huge dropoff at RT. A team could easily survive losing Meriweather, Carriker and Brown, but compounding it to the degree this team has suffered is deadly. Morgan is turning into a really good second WR, playing first. Paulsen is a good blocker who is a sneaky receiver, but not a first option like Davis. Jackson is smart and versatile but not the athlete Rak is. Polumbus, Doughty, and Williams just aren't NFL starters. They are all at home and productive in the spots they were brought in to occupy. Think of Morgan getting to match up with an opposing team's nickel corner, which he doesn't get to now. Think of Paulsen being ignored as a blocker, only to slip out to the flat, which he can't do now. Think of Jenkins being part of the two-deep instead of having to start. Think of the coverages that would be different with experienced, starting caliber safeties on the field, or the alleviated coverage burdens with Rak in. That's why my pick was injuries.

I agree completely.

[Warhead36]

Combination of awful talent and awful coaching.

Take away RG3 and we'd be on pace for 0-16.

[darrelgreenie]

Now we are talking about semantics. The bottom line is we lost several key contributors at least 4 of which were going to be starters. That's a lot of people whether it's actually half or not.

Its not semantics its about accuracy. You said we lost half our starters on defense. That statement is simply incorrect. My post that you replied

Umm scratching my head we didn't lose half our starters on defense. We lost 2 and a possible, lets call it 3. And I don't for the record blame Haslett.

Plenty of teams lose starters and are still competitive. The Giants and Packers recently won superbowls despite being depleted with injuries. Last year the Texans won a playoff game without their 3rd string QB, a banged up #1 WR and their best pass rusher.

certainly contained more then the correction of your factual error but you chose to focus on trying to argue against a simple and rather obvious point of fact as opposed to responded to the rest of the post about teams overcoming injuries

[Commander PK]

Its not semantics its about accuracy. You said we lost half our starters on defense. That statement is simply incorrect. My post that you replied certainly contained more then the correction of your factual error but you chose to focus on trying to argue against a simple and rather obvious point of fact as opposed to responded to the rest of the post about teams overcoming injuries

Ok, you want me to concede that we did not actually lose HALF of the defensive starters. Fine, I concede that, but we lost a lot of key contributors. Most of which would have been the clear starters.

Yes, teams have won with injuries. Some have won big despite them. I guess the other question to ask is in year 2 of the actual "rebuild" since most have admitted that the first year was a throw away, should we have expected to be so deep with quality talent that we could overcome so many injuries?

Edit: and in addition, those teams that do overcome them have usually had the same front office personnel and scouting personnel for several years, and have been able to fill the team with players they know can contribute to what they will ask of them. Sometimes it's just luck. For quite a while, LUCK has not been on the Redskins side. I once read a quote that said something to the effect of "Luck is when preparation meets opportunity"

Have they had enough time to build a team from top to bottom with depth players that could take advantage of their opportunity?

[DogofWar1]

For injuries, we lost:

Offense: Helu, Hightower, Garcon, Davis, and Brown

Defense: Carriker, Orakpo, Jackson, and Meriweather (and Neild)

Let's imagine, for a moment that the Texans lost:

Offense: Ben Tate, Justin Forsett, Andre Johnson, Owen Daniels, Derek Newton (RT)

Defense: Watt, Barwin, D. Manning (SS), and Glover Quin (FS)

In those circumstances how would you expect them to perform?