Race to the bottom: Redskins need a QB

We all know the top priority for the Redskins in the upcoming NFL draft is finding a quarterback. And since the season has been going south for a few weeks now, it's time to start worrying about where the Redskins will be picking in the draft. At 3-6 (currently tied for the third-worst record in the NFL), they seem destined for a top 10, or maybe even top 5, pick.

But since I refuse to root against the Redskins, I'll do something different: hope that teams below them, particularly the ones that need quarterbacks, start racking up some wins.

Here are the 10 teams currently tied with or worse (record-wise) than the Redskins:

Colts (0-10)
Rams (2-7)
Dolphins (2-7)
Panthers (2-7)
Vikings (2-7)
Browns (3-6)
Cardinals (3-6)
Jaguars (3-6)
Eagles (3-6)
Seahawks (3-6)

(Let's all take a moment to mock the Eagles for being included on this list.)

Of all those teams, who will mostly likely not target a quarterback with their first-round pick? Probably the Rams (Sam Bradford), Panthers (Cam Newton), Vikings (Christian Ponder), Jaguars (Blaine Gabbert), and Eagles (Michael Vick). The Panthers, Vikings, and Jaguars all used top-12 picks in last year's draft to select a quarterback, so they probably won't look to take another one so soon. But this is all mostly guesswork, and no one knows exactly what teams will do with top picks, especially when Andrew Luck's name gets thrown into the mix. And that's without factoring in potential trades.

Eliminating those five teams, that leaves the Colts, Dolphins, Browns, Cardinals, and Seahawks -- all of whom would likely select a quarterback with their top pick (again, depending on where that pick is and which quarterbacks are available). The Chiefs (4-5) and Broncos (4-5) may also draft a top quarterback if they tail off and lose a bunch of games to end the season.

So with all of those teams in mind, who should Redskins fans be rooting for this week? Let's take a quick look at some relevant matchups (while hoping the bolded teams win):

Jets vs. Broncos
Jaguars vs. Browns
Bills vs. Dolphins
Seahawks vs. Rams
Cardinals vs. 49ers
Chiefs vs. Patriots

Honestly, it wouldn't hurt if all teams with awful records won a few games, but whatever. I'll admit, this is a little wacky, and it'll all be much simpler if the Redskins continue to lose games, which they probably will. But I'm tired of watching quarterbacks like Rex Grossman and John Beck, and this process is the best way I can hope for a franchise quarterback without rooting against my team. And, really, it's not like they need any extra help to lose games anyway.

Fans want John Beck

When it comes down to Rex Grossman vs. John Beck, Redskins fans are convincingly on Beck's side. Just take look at this poll on The Washington Post's Insider blog:

Out of more than 6,000 total votes, 86 percent want the Redskins to give Beck a chance. After watching Grossman play last week, it's hard to disagree.

It's not about Grossman vs. Beck

It happens a lot. Whenever the Redskins don't look completely terrible to start the season, fans get excited. They start talking themselves into better performances, more wins, and maybe a playoff berth. Most people tempered their expectations because the Redskins weren't able to fill all of their holes in the offseason. But the same thing still happened, when Rex Grossman looked decent, the Redskins seemingly possessed a new and improved running game, and the defense started putting pressure on opposing quarterbacks.

The Redskins got off to a surprising 3-1 start, and some of those things continued. The defense is better than last season and has showcased the ability to generate sacks and turnovers. The offensive line is also better, and the Redskins have run the ball effectively at times. Quarterback, though, is still an issue. And, for some reason, after Grossman's four-interception game against the Eagles, fans are again expressing their disgust with the team's quarterback situation, even though there wasn't much of a chance the Redskins were going to rectify that problem during the season.

Let's step back for a moment. Whenever something embarrassing happens involving the Redskins -- this week's embarrassing performance being Grossman's awful game -- fans express their outrage. That's fine, I guess, and there will always be the crazy fans who come up with bizarre solutions or want the team to go in a completely different direction and start firing coaches left and right. But what exactly changed after the Eagles game? Obviously the injuries on the offensive line are huge concerns, but I'm talking about the quarterback issues. Did fans really need to witness Grossman's four interceptions to know that he was an average to below-average quarterback? He throws the ball well occasionally, but he's a turnover-committing machine. Wasn't that a given going into the season?

Before the season started and people started getting a little too wrapped up in how well the Redskins played at times in the preseason, I wrote a few quick notes for things to remember about this season. Here they are:

1. Nothing wrong with being excited about the team's young talent.
2. Don't up on some of those young players if they start slow.
3. Beck/Grossman doesn't mean a whole lot.
4. Going to draft a QB to develop; Beck/Grossman stepping up would help make that transition easier.
5. Getting a few wins shouldn't mean a change of direction.
6. Revamped defense and offensive weapons to eventually be aided by better quarterback and offensive line play = long-term goal.

So let's break these thoughts down:

1. The Redskins committed to the draft, and they've been rewarded for doing so. No, they didn't draft a quarterback and will have to do that next year, but they did add some much-needed, young talent to the roster. Ryan Kerrigan has been outstanding, and Roy Helu has been solid. Other rookies, such as Niles Paul, Chris Neild, Markus White, DeJon Gomes, and Leonard Hankerson, have either brought something to the table that the team lacked or have given the Redskins depth at a few positions. And that's not even counting Jarvis Jenkins, who had the best preseason of all the rookies before being lost for the season. Hopefully the Redskins embrace this strategy again in next year's draft.

2. This may really only apply to Hankerson, who has yet to play in a game yet. But it's not like the Redskins have a plethora of explosive weapons at wide receiver, so Hankerson should get his chance soon.

3. Rex Grossman is not the answer at quarterback. Neither is John Beck, regardless of what the Shanahans have said. This has not changed.

4. It's possible that the Shanahans really believed one of the quarterbacks would play adequately this season. There's still time for that to happen. But since they didn't select a quarterback in last year's draft, taking one next year is on the team's to-do list. There should be several quarterbacks to choose from then, and then the Redskins hopefully have their quarterback of the future. Still, Grossman or Beck playing better would be important to eventually bridge that gap until that young quarterback is ready, but then again, that's what happens when a team relies on quarterbacks like Grossman and Beck.

5. This is almost impossible for fans to avoid. The Redskins started 3-1, and some fans inevitably thought the team was on pace for something special. Eventually, they may be. But unless the defense transforms quickly into a shutdown, turnover-forcing unit that scores points or routinely sets the offense up with scoring chances and great field position, the Redskins will struggle to put points on the board. That's what happens when quarterbacks don't play well, receiving options aren't as skilled as they need to be, and when the offensive line doesn't block all that well or a few talented linemen get hurt. Over a full season, these things happen. That's why improving roster depth through the draft EVERY season is so important. Just ask the Packers.

6. As stated before, the Redskins still have holes. Considering how flawed the roster has been for several seasons, how could they not? But all of those problems can't be fixed with a single draft, even if every single drafted player exceeds expectations. The goal is to build a consistent winner.

It's important not to overreact to a few wins or losses here or there. Yes, the Redskins are a better team than last year. But no, Grossman or Beck probably are not good enough to lead them to the playoffs. Not much has changed besides the Redskins pulling out an unexpected win or two. It's not time to change course or overreact and make a hasty trade (like what the Raiders probably did by acquiring Carson Palmer).

Redskins face their first must-win against Rams

Heading into the season, most people figured the Redskins (2-1) would be an average to below-average team. I can recall only one analyst (NFL Network's Michael Lombardi) picking them to make the playoffs, and, predictably, he faced lots of criticism for doing so. Then the season started and the Redskins won their first two games.

Were they overly impressive wins? That's hard to tell, considering it's so difficult to accurately judge teams so early in the season. They beat an injury-depleted Giants team 28-14 in Week 1 and looked decent, though they needed an interception return by rookie linebacker Ryan Kerrigan to seize the lead in the third quarter and take control of the game for good. In Week 2 against the Cardinals, the Redskins again looked decent, racking up 455 yards of total offense and rushing for 172 yards. But they were also down 21-13 late in the fourth quarter and needed an 18-yard touchdown pass to Santana Moss on a fourth down play and a crucial 34-yard Graham Gano field goal to pull out the 22-21 victory.

Last week's 18-16 loss to the Cowboys on Monday, which the Redskins could have won if they had taken advantage of several opportunities throughout the game, was more of a typical Redskins game. But fans are well accustomed to those kinds of ugly, underwhelming performances, particularly on Sunday or Monday night games.

The Cowboys and Giants are both 2-1, and the Cardinals are 1-2. But no one has a handle on exactly how good those teams are just yet -- just like the Redskins.

So how bad are the 0-3 Rams? They've lost by double digits in all three of their games, but they've also faced some strong competition in the Eagles, Giants, and Ravens. But if the Redskins are truly a decent team, they'll go to St. Louis and beat a winless team, which would put them at 3-1 going into their bye week.

To prove the critics wrong and actually have a chance at a 9-7 or a 10-6 season, the Redskins must throw everything they have at the Rams and win this game. Essentially, it's a "kitchen sink" game for them. Not only would it be awful to lose going into a bye week, but if they do lose, there will be two weeks of negative talk about the team, focusing on all the things this team hasn't done and trying to come up with answers even if there aren't any. If Rex Grossman has a bad game against the Rams, I also expect a ton of talk about benching him in favor of John Beck. Whether or not that actually happens is another thing, but no one would be surprised to see Beck get a chance if the Redskins struggle in yet another important game. No one thought that Mike Shanahan would bench a healthy Donovan McNabb in favor of Grossman last season, so going from Grossman to Beck wouldn't that surprising of a move.

With a loss, all of the positives surrounding the 2-0 start will disappear. That means, basically, it would be another long, Redskins-like season. The Redskins have shown flashes, particularly on defense, of being an improved team. And after a disappointing loss to the Cowboys, they need to score early and often against a bad, wounded team. Anything less would be, well, expected.

Beck fails to separate himself from Grossman

To be honest, I don't care that much who gets the starting nod under center for the Redskins. I believe that John Beck and Rex Grossman give the Skins about the same chance to win, though I do think Beck is the somewhat more interesting choice because he hasn't thrown a pass in a regular season game since 2007-2008 with the Dolphins. Beck didn't impress then, and there's been no real reason since to think he'd catch on somewhere else and succeed.

Last night, the Redskins played their fourth and final preseason game, which basically gave a lot of back-ups, subs, and players who won't make the team a chance to see the field. Interestingly enough, Grossman sat out, while Beck played the first half. Beck didn't play all that well, though, which is discouraging because not only did the Redskins start their first-team offensive line in the game, but Tampa Bay's first-team defense did not play. The Redskins' better skill position players (Tim Hightower, Santana Moss, etc.) also sat out, but by most accounts Beck seemed pretty ordinary. So what exactly were the Shanahans thinking when they started Beck? Were they:

• trying to give Beck a chance to win the starting job by having a solid final game;
• already convinced that Grossman is going to be the starter (considering that he's played better in the preseason);
• or simply allowing Beck to get more snaps in general, considering how inexperienced he is?

No one knows what the Shanahans' thinking on this matter is for sure, but they're running out of time to make a decision. Assuming, you know, that they haven't already done so.

Be quiet, Rex Grossman

It's one thing for the Redskins to go into a season with Rex Grossman and John Beck as their top two quarterbacks when they're overhauling the roster and getting younger and better. Fans don't have to like it, but sometimes such things are necessary. But because Grossman and Beck have a high expectancy to embarrass (and just flat out play poorly) on the field, they should be doing whatever they can not to embarrass the team off of it. Unfortunately, Grossman didn't receive that memo:

"We’re fine being the sleepers right now," Grossman said . . . "We’re just waiting in the wings ready to take over the NFC East. Nobody’s talking about us, it’s right where we wanna be. You look at us from top to bottom out here, there’s a bunch of great players. And we don’t need people saying we’re the best right now. But when it’s all said and done, I really feel like this team’s gonna win the [NFC] East."

Players are supposed to be confident, and many of them make wild predictions at inopportune times. It happens every season. And if Grossman would have stopped in the middle of that quote, it would have been fine -- there's nothing wrong with using the "no respect" angle if that's what it takes to get motivated.

But let's get real: The Skins (for one season, at least) appear to be rebuilding -- whether they want to call it that or not -- and they have their share of holes. They finally held onto their draft picks and picked up several young players, but all of them aren't going to perform well from day one, regardless of how talented they are. And even though the Redskins will be better in the long term because of the youth movement, there's certainly no guarantee that they'll improve on last year's 6-10 record.

I'm glad that Grossman is confident, and I'm sure he's a nice guy. But he shouldn't be making any kind of bold predictions about the Redskins winning games when he is looking at a fair share of starts under center. Talent trumps confidence, and the Redskins lack the former at the quarterback position.

A great sign: Redskins lose the offseason

If you look at the Redskins' depth chart, there aren't a ton of exciting, well-known names -- especially at quarterback. The roster is filled with youth and inexperience. But for once, the Skins are actually building an actual roster, you know, with things like talent and depth. Intriguing strategy, fellas.

The best sign of all seems to be that Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen are the guys running the show, not Daniel Snyder. There haven't been any particularly flashy moves made, and the Skins also got rid of their two biggest headaches, Albert Haynesworth and Donovan McNabb. The McNabb acquisition seemed like a Snyder move; going into the season with John Beck as the starter does not.

But this season really isn't about Beck. It is, in a sense, I guess. Shanahan keeps going on and on about Beck's potential, which may be necessary to keep fans involved and coming to games. Fans don't seem to be as interested in going to training camp this year, which can partly be tied to having Beck and Rex Grossman as the top two quarterbacks on the roster. But that's more of a combination of things like the lockout, unbearable weather, a lack of marquee names, Snyder backlash, and the fact that the Redskins have been poorly run for a long time. It's a little early to overreact about that, but it's difficult to expect fans to keep showing up when the team has been so inept. Oddly enough, even though Beck appears to be the likely starter, this would be the perfect time to support the Redskins. They drafted well and didn't do anything ridiculous in free agency. Isn't that what fans want?

I'm not buying all of the Beck stuff. Sure, there's a chance that he plays competently enough, but there's an even smaller chance that he actually plays well. Shanahan has to know that; then again, maybe I don't understand just how big Shanahan's ego is. But even if Beck does OK, the Redskins are still going to be a bad team. The ceiling is probably the record they had last season, 6-10, though they're probably a win or two worse than that. Regardless, they're still going to pick a quarterback in the first round next year, and if Beck (or even Grossman, somehow) proves that he can fill in without doing a terrible job, he'll give that young quarterback a little more time to mature. That's not the most ideal strategy, but Shanahan and Allen certainly discussed something along those lines heading into last year's draft. Did they want to take a quarterback then? It's possible. But they also could have looked at the options, saw that several quarterbacks were being taken way too early, and decided to go in a different direction. That's the type of thinking that could eventually turn the Redskins around. That is, if the other players they drafted are actually good.

I'm not saying that Shanahan, or anyone in the organization, wants to intentionally lose games or tank. But there's nothing the Redskins could have done to not be a bad team this season -- even if they had signed Nnamdi Asomugha, Cullen Jenkins, Matt Hasselbeck, Santonio Holmes, Braylon Edwards, or any other combination of the top free agents available. That would have been more of the same, and the Redskins still would have finished no better than 8-8.

Whether or not the Skins are actually rebuilding remains to be seen. The defense seems improved and should be better at putting pressure on opposing quarterbacks, but the offense has plenty of question marks -- not just at quarterback, but also on the offensive line. Again, it's still a bit early. But if they do go through this season and find that they've put together a decent roster filled with young, improving talent, well, then it will only look better if/when they're able to add a young, skilled quarterback to the mix.

But first things first: Let's find out which of these young guys can actually play.