Analyzing, but not overreacting to, McNabb's benching

As you've undoubtedly heard by now, Donovan McNabb has not only been benched in favor of Rex Grossman for Sunday's game against the Cowboys, but likely for the rest of the season. McNabb will not even serve as the backup in Dallas; that duty will go to John Beck. The decision, handed down by Mike Shanahan, will also presumably end McNabb's brief tenure in Washington.

McNabb may still be with the team for the next few weeks, so it's worth noting that in mid-November, McNabb signed an extension to stay with the Redskins beyond this season. But as Barry Svrluga of Redskins Insider mentions, the only guarantee in that extension was that McNabb would earn $3.5 million if the Skins decided not to bring McNabb back. And with today's events, that outcome seems extremely likely.

There are basically two points to take away from this mess:

1) The decision itself to bench McNabb is absolutely justifiable. That isn't something that I thought I'd ever write, especially considering that on October 27 I discussed this very topic when the Grossman-over-McNabb rumors were rumbling. Here's a sample of what I had to say:

Do fans really want to start someone who has thrown more interceptions than touchdowns in his career just because he's more familiar with the team's offense? Now, I understand that there are some crazy fans with irrational ideas -- mainly the types of fans who routinely call into sports talk radio shows and ramble on and on about random things -- but that type of thinking is just ridiculous.

Regardless of how bad that looks now, I still stand by that statement. At the time, the Redskins were 4-3 after a win -- an extremely ugly win -- over the Bears in Chicago. After that win, though, came arguably the toughest three weeks for Washington this season: a horrible loss in Detroit that included McNabb being benched late in the fourth quarter in favor of Grossman, a horrendously long bye week that included endless discussion of said benching, and then a 59-28 beating on Monday Night Football by the hated Eagles.

Since the Bears win, the Redskins are 1-5. In the first seven weeks, McNabb had six touchdown passes and seven interceptions. In the six games after that, he had eight touchdown passes and eight interceptions. For the season as a whole, McNabb has posted a 77.1 QB rating. So yeah, McNabb has been consistently mediocre the entire season.

That's not to say that the Redskins' poor offense and recent collapse as a team are both his fault -- of course not. He only has a couple of offensive weapons around him, the only young one being 24-year-old Ryan Torain, who has been fantastic -- when he's actually healthy enough to play. The receiving corps, outside of Santana Moss and Chris Cooley (and maybe Anthony Armstrong), isn't anything to get excited about either. And that's not even mentioning the offensive line, which is just a running joke at this point because of how often it has been neglected in the draft.

Benching McNabb in favor of Grossman does not give the Redskins a better chance to win. I think that bears repeating: Grossman starting at quarterback obviously does not present an upgrade at the position. With that being said, if the Shanahans have already decided that McNabb is a) not the quarterback they want to lead this team for the next few seasons, and b) deteriorating as an effective playmaker, then what's the point of running him out onto the field for the next three weeks? Sure, beating Dallas would be great, but with all of the major problems with this team, it's not really that big of a deal at this point. Sure, the idea to give Grossman all the reps is a little strange, considering that Grossman just isn't that good no matter what offensive system his team runs. Starting Beck would provide some intrigue, and maybe that's something that happens before the season ends. It's also entirely possible that no quarterback on this current roster ends up starting under center in Week 1 next season.

But really, if Shanahan wasn't going to bring McNabb back after this season, there's no reason to give him any more snaps. He's seemingly decided to go in another direction, and from what most people have seen this year from McNabb, that doesn't seem like a horrible choice. (That's not to suggest that McNabb won't look much better when he plays on a team next season that's able to surround him with more talent. Getting out of D.C. could be the best thing to happen to McNabb.)

2) The trade for McNabb was/is a complete disaster. In case anyone forgot, the Redskins parted with a second-round pick in the 2010 draft and either a third- or fourth-round choice in the upcoming draft. The Redskins have a ton of holes on offense and defense, and those two picks certainly would have helped. The Redskins could have selected a quarterback with that second-rounder -- who knows.

(Sidenote: Here's a quote from Brian Mitchell in the linked ESPN article above on the McNabb trade:

"In his voice I heard a lot of enthusiasm," Mitchell reported on Comcast SportsNet. "And you know, he may not be exactly like me, but I could hear he had a little revenge in that voice, too. And he wants to go to the Eagles and show them that they made a mistake."

It's nothing that's a big deal, of course, but it's still funny to read after the fact.)

As is the case with most Redskins trades, many fans focused on the veteran the team traded for instead of the value of the draft picks. The Redskins fan base's disdain for trading away draft picks is definitely growing -- and will continue to grow until these types of trades stop happening -- but there were a ton of excited fans when the news of the McNabb trade broke. And I'll be honest, my immediate thought that was I didn't like the trade, particularly because the team was again giving away more draft picks, but as the season got closer I did feel a little better about the Redskins having an established quarterback under center. But that obviously didn't change much about the team, and here we are now.

For what it's worth -- and believe me, I don't like to quote myself very often, let alone twice in the same post, but I think it's constructive in this case -- here was my reaction to the trade:

I understand why the Redskins made this move, and I think most fans can see the rationale behind it. If the Redskins are able to find a young quarterback they like in this year's draft or next year's, then McNabb isn't a bad choice to be the team's quarterback until then. However, the Redskins really need to stop trading draft picks. It's downright laughable at this point. There probably isn't another team in the NFL that values draft picks less, and it's not surprising to understand why the Redskins don't have adequate depth at most positions.

Although McNabb is a little more mobile than Campbell, he still needs an offensive line to give him time. Even if the Redskins take a left tackle at No. 4, there's still work to be done to significantly improve the line.

The move made some sense at the time; it would be a bit of revisionist history to suggest that it made no sense at all. But the Redskins didn't adequately address the offensive line woes and also didn't bring in enough offensive weapons around McNabb. Oh, and McNabb didn't turn out to be the quarterback that the Shanahans thought they were getting.

Determining the winner and loser of this trade was always going to depend on how well McNabb played in Washington. Well, he didn't play all that well, and now it looks like he's on the way out. The McNabb trade is just another failed move, and now it's back to the drawing board for Shanahan and Co.

Boswell thinks the Redskins are 'close'

I've already picked on Thomas Boswell once this month for a peculiar column, and it's not something that I'm going to make a habit of doing. But after watching yesterday's frustrating 17-13 loss against the Vikings, how can Boswell say that the Skins "are getting closer" to much of anything?

Granted, I'll give the team credit for playing hard. And at 5-6, they already have more wins than last season with a shot to get a couple more. But yesterday's game can be used as a precise example of why the Skins are not close.

Even though Donovan McNabb was not the reason the Redskins lost the game, he did not make enough plays to win it. Boswell is right when he blames the lack of a running game, the poor offensive line play, and a few dropped balls by the team's receivers -- and a huge block-in-the-back call on Perry Riley -- but those are also all problems that the team needs to address. They are huge team weaknesses, not just a single week's problems that can easily be corrected after just one offseason.

Keiland Williams has had a few decent games, but he's not really an explosive player and shouldn't really be viewed as NFL starting running back material. James Davis deserves some more carries to see what he can bring to the table, but he didn't do anything special yesterday either. And Ryan Torain has also had a few strong performances, but he can't stay on the field.

Then again, maybe the lack of a running game can be blamed on the offensive line, which not only failed to protect McNabb (four sacks), but didn't open up any holes in the running game either. Trent Williams, the team's most recent first-round pick, is undoubtedly the best offensive lineman on the team, but there's little else to get excited about in terms of blocking.

And yet, when the blocking gave McNabb enough time, he did make several accurate throws. For the game, he was 21-35 for 211 yards, one touchdown, and one interception. As Boswell mentions, the interception was not McNabb's fault; it was Santana Moss who dropped the pass and had the ball deflect into the air for an interception. But McNabb did finish the game with a 74.8 quarterback rating, which has been about his average this season. It would be nice to get McNabb a ton of weapons and a huge offensive line that blocks every defender in sight, but the Redskins traded for McNabb so he'd be able to win games like this. Unfortunately, he didn't get much help.

And then, Boswell writes this uplifting paragraph: "This game also underlined the area where the Redskins have made the most significant improvement: in the game-breaking speed of Banks, who had a 65-yard kickoff return, and Anthony Armstrong, who caught a 45-yard bomb and now has 545 yards receiving."

I'm not going to debate the worth or skill level of Brandon Banks, who has been phenomenal in the return game and has easily been the team's most exciting player. But Armstrong? Yes, he has caught some long passes, and he even did so in yesterday's game (two catches, 53 yards). But even though he's not an old guy, he's still 27 years old. Has he really shown enough to be relied upon week in and week out? And is he really a big part of the team's future? The Redskins also have two seemingly reliable tight end options in Chris Cooley (28) and Fred Davis (24), but Santana Moss (31) is a free agent after this season and may end up on another team next season. It sure seems like more help will be needed in the receiving game.

Also, how can Boswell use speed as a positive and fail to mention the team's lack of speed in the Eagles game just a few weeks ago? The Redskins looked like they were playing on a different level -- a much, much lower level -- while the Eagles were running up and down the field with ease.

Anyway, my point is that the Redskins have a ton of holes to fill and not enough draft picks to fill them all adequately. Free agency will likely be the team's go-to option when it comes to bringing in more talent, but the past several years have shown that that strategy is far from reliable and may only create more future headaches for Mike Shanahan and the team's coaching staff.

Right now, the Redskins don't look as bad as they did last season, but they aren't really that much better either. I'm just not sure that I understand all of the excitement.

Joey Galloway vs. the league

If you're a Redskins fan, you've likely heard a lot of discussion about Joey Galloway. Most of the talk hasn't been very positive and has been along the lines of, "Joey Galloway shouldn't be on an NFL roster"; "Why is Galloway starting?"; "Why don't the Redskins start Devin Thomas instead?" etc. Those seem like fair points/questions, especially since through three games, Galloway has just three receptions for 88 yards (all coming in the Houston game).

Now, obviously the Redskins' two best receivers are Santana Moss and Chris Cooley. Fred Davis, the No. 2 tight end behind Cooley, is probably the third-best receiver. Galloway isn't necessarily the fourth-best option, and he may not even be in the top five.

Anyway, I decided to take a look at how Galloway stacks up against other No. 2 wide receivers in the NFL (ranked by receiving yardage). Granted, not only have just three games been played, but several teams have solid receiving options at tight end and running back, meaning they all don't need to have great No. 2 options at wide receiver. Still, I figured it was worth a look.

Teams' No. 2 receiving leaders (WR)

1) Indianapolis Colts: Reggie Wayne: 18 catches, 260 yards
2) Houston Texans: Kevin Walter: 16, 207
3) Dallas Cowboys: Roy E. Williams: 12, 191
4) Denver Broncos: Jabar Gaffney: 17, 189
5) New York Giants: Steve Smith: 18, 181
6) San Diego Chargers: Legedu Naanee: 10, 177
7) St. Louis Rams: Danny Amendola: 16, 162
8) Cincinnati Bengals: Jordan Shipley: 13, 161
9) New Orleans Saints: Marques Colston: 14, 154
10) Arizona Cardinals: Larry Fitzgerald: 12, 152
11) Pittsburgh Steelers: Hines Ward: 10, 151
12) Miami Dolphins: Davone Bess: 13, 149
13) Philadelphia Eagles: Jeremy Maclin: 11, 147
14) Oakland Raiders: Darrius Heyward-Bey: 10, 140
15) Jacksonville Jaguars: Mike Thomas: 12, 139
16) New England Patriots: Randy Moss: 9, 139
17) Buffalo Bills: Steve Johnson: 9, 137
18) Green Bay Packers: Donald Driver: 18, 129
19) Tennessee Titans: Justin Gage: 7, 113
20) Chicago Bears: Devin Hester: 6, 110
21) Seattle Seahawks: Deion Branch: 12, 102
22) Washington Redskins: Joey Galloway: 3, 88
23) Baltimore Ravens: Derrick Mason: 7, 82
24) San Francisco 49ers: Michael Crabtree: 6, 81
25) Kansas City Chiefs: Dexter McCluster: 5, 78
26) Atlanta Falcons: Harry Douglas: 6, 71
27) Carolina Panthers: Brandon LaFell: 3, 66
28) New York Jets: Jerricho Cotchery: 8, 64
29) Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Michael Spurlock: 3, 59
30) Minnesota Vikings: Greg Lewis: 5, 56
31) Cleveland Browns: Mohamed Massaquoi: 3, 55
32) Detroit Lions: Bryant Johnson: 2, 28

Some of the names on the list are No. 1s (Wayne, Moss, Colston, Fitzgerald) who are routinely doubled by opposing defenses and may not be on the list as the season progresses.

If not for a 62-yard bomb from Donovan McNabb in the Houston game, Galloway would be near the bottom with Bryant Johnson. Also, Galloway's three catches are tied with LaFell, Spurlock, and Massaquoi for second fewest.

I'm not sure why Galloway has started all three games. Maybe he's a nice guy who knows all of the plays, plays hard, and runs his routes correctly at all times. But he's not much of a threat, and when he's on the field, he makes it easier for opposing defenses to focus more on Moss and Cooley. Unless something is seriously wrong with Devin Thomas, like he's completely forgotten how to play wide receiver or catch the ball, he seems like a much better option at this point than Galloway. So does Anthony Armstrong.