In case there was any doubt, Alfred Morris is still awesome

In case you were wondering that first-year success would change Alfred Morris, you don't have to worry. He's still smart, humble, and willing to put in the necessary hard work.

In a recent interview with Shutdown Corner's Doug Farrar, Morris drops plenty of knowledge, including his advice to this year's rookie class, his willingness to learn and improve every day, how grateful he is that Mike Shanahan gave him the opportunity to compete for the job and eventually start, and some nuggets on Robert Griffin's III's progress. Here's a sample:

"I'm going to run hard and give you 100 percent on every play because every play could be my last, but I left a lot of yards on the field last year. Looking back on film, a lot of it was my aiming points in certain runs, or I was too tight and I couldn't get outside. Being more patient with my cutbacks -- I tended to cut back too soon. I was blessed, and I definitely don't take it for granted. Last year's behind me -- I'm beyond that."

I can't remember a single example of Morris not saying the "right thing" or giving a thoughtful, levelheaded response to any question. He's sort of like Griffin when he was first drafted by the team and gave countless flawless interviews, except RGIII is now saying things like "In a land of freedom we are held hostage by the tyranny of political correctness" on Twitter. If Morris ever said something like that, I think my head would explode. Then again, when you're an NFL quarterback and a superstar athlete, I guess everything you do or say is news. No pressure, no diamonds, and all that.

Anyway, Griffin is fantastic and is insanely talented, but I prefer the previously unheralded Morris. Not only is he a powerful and skilled running back, but he's still holding onto his 1991 Mazda for dear life: "It's in the shop right now -- just a little maintenance on the radiator when the season ended, and I'm getting the axle fixed. . . . I know that eventually, I'll have to park it, but I want to keep it as long as possible. I know people call me cheap, but I'm being smart. There's no reason to go out there and waste money -- instead of spending that on me, I can help bless somebody else."

That's more like it.

More proof that Alfred Morris is awesome

Alfred Morris is probably my favorite current D.C. athlete. He had a fantastic 2012 season, breaking the Redskins' single-season rushing record -- as a rookie. But he's not just a fan favorite because of his talent, but also because of his work ethic, charity work, and especially the love of his car (his 1991 Mazda). The latter has been the subject of multiple enjoyable stories and quotes, and that was the case yet again yesterday.

Here's what Morris had to say after teammates joked (possibly) that his car would never make it to Florida if he drove there during the offseason:

“And I was like, ‘Don’t make me prove a point,’” Morris recalled. “Because my baby is durable, and she’ll make it down to Florida. It definitely is a reflection of who I am: dependable, humble, down to earth, not flashy at all. It fits me perfectly…It’s all manual. A little extra exercise never hurt anybody. So I don’t have a radio in it, I don’t have speakers. I thought about putting some in one time, but I was like, ‘Nah.’ I kind of just ride to my thoughts. I might sing a song or something if it do get too quiet, but I like riding in silence, so it works out perfectly.”

That's right: "I kind of just ride to my thoughts." Don't ever change, Alfred.

A quick look at Panthers-Redskins

Like the Redskins, the Panthers have mostly played close games. At 1-6, their only win of the season came in a 35-27 victory over the Saints, and they've been blown out just one time: in a Thursday night game in Week 3 against the Giants, when they lost by 29 points. The Redskins (3-5) just suffered their worst loss of the season, falling 27-12 to the Steelers. Besides that, though, they've been in every single game. So it's no surprise that the Redskins, at home, are favored by just three points.

Washington has the superior offense. They score more points per game (26.6 to 18.3) and gain more yards per game (387.4 to 347). The Panthers average slightly more passing yards per game (232.6 to 221.1), but they also throw the ball more often -- Cam Newton has just nine fewer pass attempts despite playing in one fewer game (bye week). And the Redskins, who are second to the 49ers in the league in rushing yards per game by just 0.3 yards, average 166.3 yards on the ground to the Panthers' 114.4.

Still, the Redskins' defense is one of the worst in the league, while the Panthers' unit is slightly better. The Redskins have allowed 28.4 points per game (28th) and are ranked last in pass defense; the Panthers have given up 23.9 points per game (21st) and are 15th in pass defense.

It's hard to examine this game without looking at the quarterbacks. And Robert Griffin III has also outplayed Cam Newton up to this point. Griffin has completed nearly 10 percent more of his passes (66.8 to 57.1) while throwing for slightly more yards (1,778 to 1,701). Griffin's quarterback rating of 97.3 is also seventh in the NFL; Newton's rating of 75.2 is 28th. But while Newton has accounted for eight total touchdowns (5 passing, 3 rushing), Griffin has 14 touchdowns (8 passing, 6 rushing), has rushed for 166 more yards, and has turned the ball over just five times (3 interceptions, 2 fumbles). Newton, meanwhile, already has eight interceptions and has lost four fumbles.

The Redskins didn't do a good job of it last week, but they need to shut down the Panthers' running game and force Newton into some tough throws. The front seven has not provided much pressure on opposing quarterbacks, but if they do so with Newton, he's demonstrated that he'll turn the ball over. Unless Redskins' receivers drop 10 more passes (or however many the official number was), they should be able to put up at least 20 points on a better, but still middle-of-the-road, Carolina defense.

Unfortunately for the Redskins, their horrid pass defense keeps opposing teams in every game. But fortunately, they also have Griffin, who gives the Redskins a chance to score every time he takes the field. It's not an ideal situation, but it could certainly be much worse.

Hall's time in Washington has been embarrassing

The DeAngelo Hall era (which should end after this season, since he's not due any guaranteed money in 2013) has not gone well. The Redskins, as is usually the case, thought they were getting a better player in Hall than they actually signed. But besides his poor covering abilities, Hall has been a consistent source of embarrassing and bizarre behavior both on and off the field.

Let's take a look back at both how we got here and the weird, foolish things Hall has done or said in his time with the Redskins.

Nov. 8, 2008: The Redskins sign Hall.

Nov. 9, 2008: Via Pro Football Talk: “Adam Schefter reported on NFL Network’s NFL GameDay Morning that Redskins executive vice president of football operations Vinny Cerrato called Kiffin, who was fired as the Raiders’ coach four games into the season, and asked for his opinion on Hall. Per Schefter, Kiffin told Cerrato that he thought Hall had been humbled and would be a good fit.”

That whole paragraph is amazing. And extremely sad.

Feb. 27, 2009: You'll never believe it, but the Redskins decided to spend a boatload of cash in free agency. They signed Hall to a six-year, $55 million deal, with $23 million guaranteed.

Mar. 25, 2009: Hall defends Albert Haynesworth's enormous contract: “Do I feel like he’s the most feared player in this league? Yes I do. . . . I think he’s the best player in the NFL, bar none.”

Oct. 15, 2009: Hall complains about the team's personnel and lack of depth.

(Also included in that link is this self-righteous paragraph by Gregg Rosenthal: "But maybe they wouldn’t be lacking in depth if Hall had taken less than $23 million guaranteed in February. That way, the Redskins would have had more cash and cap space available to acquire better personnel at key backup positions." Completely ridiculous.)
Oct. 20, 2009: Hall questions Jim Zorn's decision to remove Jason Campbell ("I don’t think that was the right move. Coach made that move. Ain't nothing I can do about it. He made that move, he had to live with it.”).

Nov. 6, 2009: Hall publicly criticizes Falcons' GM Thomas Dimitroff the week the Redskins head to Atlanta.

Nov. 8, 2009: In his return to Atlanta, Hall predictably finds trouble during the game, this time in a sideline skirmish with the Falcons and head coach Mike Smith. It should be noted that Hall wasn't fined and that Smith looked rather unprofessional in the incident.

Dec. 22, 2009: From Dan Steinberg: "Early in the fourth quarter, Brandon Jacobs got into a scuffle with DeAngelo Hall. The running back threw Hall to the ground, and then appeared to throw at least one punch. 'I run over there, thought the play was still going, wasn't blown dead,' Hall said, via my colleague Rick Maese. 'I stopped. I get hands put on my face. I got [shoved]. If the refs can't see that, there ain't nothing I can do about that. Just my luck.'"

Yes, just his luck.

Apr. 26, 2010:  Here's what Hall had to say a few weeks after the Redskins regrettably traded for Donovan McNabb (via Steinberg): "We'll dominate our division, off of bringing Donovan McNabb in here, a guy who's dominated the division in the past. So that's just an educated guess." They went 6-10.

Aug. 31, 2010: Hall, standing up for Malcolm Kelly, thinks the team incorrectly diagnosed his hamstring injury: "They thought it was one thing, he ended up finally getting a second opinion three weeks later, and we find out it was something a heck of a lot worse than they ever thought it was. So we're here babying Malcolm, saying, 'He's a baby, he's a baby, get out there and play,' when he has a Grade 2 strain. And they're around here saying it's a Grade 1 and there ain't nothing wrong with him." (I don't have a huge problem with this -- the Redskins' trainers have deserved their share of criticism over the years -- but it was still a controversial issue.)

Sept. 20, 2010: Not pleased after the Redskins coughed up a 17-point lead, allowed a last-minute touchdown pass to Andre Johnson, and lost in overtime, Hall says a few interesting things: (1) "DeAngelo Hall made it clear he’s following the other team’s top receiver from now on and that’s just the way it is"; (2) "It's my team, my defense"; and (3) "I’m going to wherever the f***ing ball is going. Wherever the receiver is going, that’s where the f*** I’m going." (All quotes linked in this PFT piece.)

Hall wanting to follow an opposing team's top receiver? What's the worst that could happen?

Oct. 21, 2010: From Jason Reid: "Cornerback DeAngelo Hall and defensive coordinator Jim Haslett got into a contentious exchange Tuesday over pass coverage instructions, a development Coach Mike Shanahan followed by meeting privately with Hall and singling Hall out at a team meeting Wednesday morning, according to three Redskins employees familiar with the events."

As far as I'm concerned, both Hall and Haslett deserve blame.

Apr. 25, 2011: Hall calls Jay Cutler a "clown" in an interview. Not a big deal, but yeah.

Sept. 21, 2011: Hall, on how he'll attack an ailing Tony Romo: "I want to get a chance to put my helmet on whatever’s hurt. Romo’s ribs -- I’m going to be asking for some corner blitzes. If I know Felix Jones’ shoulder’s hurt, I’m not going to cut him. I’m definitely going to try to hit him up high, so that’s just part of it."

I appreciate Hall's honesty, but that's maybe not the best thing to say heading into a game.

Sept. 26, 2011: Here's Hall, upset with a call in the loss to the Cowboys: "That was a [bleeping] terrible call. I told the ref he’s going to [bleeping] lose his job. I told the ref, 'That might have been the worst call of the game.' He’s going to get some demerit points for that call because that wasn’t no facemask."

Hall also thought Haslett called an ill-timed blitz on a crucial play ("Asked if Redskins defensive coordinator Jim Haslett made the wrong call on the play, Hall said, 'You tell me. The result was a first down.'"). Hall and Haslett: not the best of friends.

Nov. 20, 2011: Hall, after another bad performance: "I can’t point a finger at anybody but myself. The way I’m playing right now, they need to go and cut me, because I’m definitely not worth what I’m getting. It’s frustrating."

That might be the most insightful thing Hall has ever said.

Dec. 16, 2011: In a game against the Patriots, Hall didn't agree with a defensive holding call against him, so he picked up an official's penalty flag and chucked it. He was fined $7,500. In that same game, Hall drew the ire of fans and even "John Keim, the normally mild-mannered Examiner beat writer," for failing to finish a play and instead watch as two teammates failed to tackle Rob Gronkowski.

Apr. 7, 2012: Hall challenges an Olympic gold medalist to a race. Stupid, but good-natured.

June 1, 2012: From a Mike Jones Insider piece on some of the changes in the secondary: "Hall says he expects to take on a role similar to that of Green Bay’s Charles Woodson." DeAngelo Hall and Charles Woodson -- basically the same player, right?

Oct. 14, 2012: Nothing came of it, but Adrian Peterson claims that Hall slapped him in the face after a play in the first quarter.

Oct. 21, 2012: Hall calls out Eli Manning, basically saying that any quarterback could have made the same throw that Manning made to Victor Cruz to beat the Redskins in Week 7. He later backtracks, sort of, and compliments Manning.

Oct. 28, 2012: And, most recently, Hall was ejected in the fourth quarter against the Steelers for "berating an official with an obscenity-laced tirade." He was fined, but not suspended.

-----

Hall has been with the Redskins for just four seasons, and he's done/said all of those things above. Granted, some are worse than others, and if Hall was a star, or even a helpful player, fans would be more willing to put up with his behavior. But that's not the case.

The Redskins, obviously, need to make some changes next season, particularly in the secondary. Getting rid of Hall needs to be one of those moves.

Redskins' confidence in RGIII paved way for Cousins pick

I've gone back and forth on the Redskins' selection of quarterback Kirk Cousins in the fourth round (No. 102 overall) of the NFL Draft, and I'm still not sure which side I'm on. I can see both sides:

• Mike Shanahan wanted Cousins because he thinks he's one of the best quarterbacks in the draft and believes he was too talented to let him pass in the fourth round. It was all about value.
• The Redskins had (and still have) holes they needed to fill in the draft, and instead of picking Cousins, they should have taken another position of need.

Maybe the Redskins should have chosen a different position. They certainly could use more talent on the offensive line and in the secondary. But they made the bold move of gambling on Cousins instead. 

Does it make sense? It seems ridiculous to have to say this, but Robert Griffin III will be given every opportunity to shine and start from day one. Unlike what some analysts like Ron Jaworski have speculated, there will be no quarterback controversy unless Griffin is absolutely atrocious and Cousins is phenomenal -- which is not realistic. And if that ends up being the case, the real concern will be why Griffin is playing so poorly -- not who the backup quarterback is. Because if Griffin fails, the Shanahan coaching experiment fails.

Redskins fans have been thrilled about the prospect of taking Griffin ever since the team made the deal for the No. 2 overall selection with the Rams, and having Cousins on board will not eliminate that excitement. Even after the Redskins drafted Cousins, no one is hurriedly crafting or looking to order a Kirk Cousins Redskins jersey. Griffin has already won fans over. 

One thing that makes little sense to me, though, is how this all is somehow a slap in the face to Griffin. Honestly, this move suggests the exact opposite. The Redskins and Mike Shanahan must be so impressed with the talent level and maturity of Griffin that they'd even think about making this type of draft choice. If you've heard Griffin speak or read some of his quotes from various interviews, do you really think he's the type of person who's going to get rattled by a little competition (and I use that word loosely)? Griffin has handled everything beautifully and is clever enough to know to stay focused on the job at hand. In essence, he's been the starting quarterback of the Redskins for several weeks now: He's done everything in interviews but been introduced as the starter of this team only because that's not really how the process works. But just like the starting quarterback in Indianapolis is already Andrew Luck, Washington's quarterbacking job is Griffin's to lose. Still, on-field play is whatever matters, which Griffin is aware of.

And by the way, players get hurt, and there's no way to always adequately prepare for it. But having Cousins on the team will help. The Redskins already parted ways with John Beck, and Rex Grossman will really only be the backup because he's the only quarterback on the roster with NFL experience heading into this season. If the Shanahans learned anything from last season, it's that Grossman/Beck is not the answer. That's why they made the move to get Griffin. And getting Cousins may not have been on their to-do list, but the opportunity was too good to pass up. Maybe the Redskins hold on to Cousins and he backs up Griffin for several years. Maybe Griffin fails to live up to the hype and flames out in a couple seasons, with Cousins there to take the job. Or maybe the Redskins trade Cousins after a season or two, allowing them to restock some of the picks lost in the trade for Griffin. Or maybe something else happens entirely.

Here's the point: The Redskins believe taking Cousins was the right move. They think he's talented, and talent equals value. Regardless, I doubt the Redskins would have made a similar move with a quarterback who they weren't absolutely sure was the guy they wanted to play quarterback for the next decade. If anyone is going to be able to withstand the pressure of impatient fans calling for his job after a rough patch or know exactly the right things to say when asked difficult questions, it's Griffin. And the Redskins know that.

Redskins select G Josh LeRibeus in third round

Unquestionably, the Redskins' biggest move of this draft was the trade up for and subsequent selection of Robert Griffin III. The future of the Redskins is basically in his hands, and his development over the next couple of seasons will be the deciding factor in how far this team can truly go. But the Redskins still have several other holes on the roster, and they tried to take a small step last night by filling an area of weakness in the third round.

Originally, the Redskins had the sixth choice in the third round, No. 69 overall, but they swapped picks with the Bills and moved down two spots. By doing so, they also picked up a seventh-round pick (No. 217). Then with pick No. 71, the Redskins picked guard Josh LeRibeus from SMU.

Whenever the Redskins pick an offensive lineman with the Shanahans around, his fit into the team's zone-blocking scheme is important. Predictably, LeRibeus should fit that scheme well. Here's John Keim, writing for Sporting News:

How he fits: Leribeus adds depth inside, something the Redskins desperately need. He started two seasons at left guard, but also played right guard and worked out at center for teams before the draft. Leribeus played in a man-blocking scheme at SMU, but will play in a zone scheme with Washington. However, he said he felt more comfortable in the zone scheme he played in during the East-West Shrine Game. He’s not considered a great athlete, but has good footwork.

Next, here's ESPN's Dan Graziano on the pick:

Not among the highest-ranked guards on the Scouts Inc. draft list, LeRibeus appears to be a pick the Redskins took for scheme-specific reasons rather than because of particularly good measurables. He's had some issues with his weight and has had to lose dozens of pounds to get down to his current 312. And he didn't [grade] out especially well as a blocker. But the Redskins look for specific characteristics in their offensive linemen because their running game relies on a zone-blocking scheme. And LeRibeus' strengths, according to the scouting reports, are his initial quickness, his awareness of what's going on around him and his ability to pick up and direct scheme changes. He was a team captain at SMU and, given the right amount of time to develop in and learn the scheme, could be the kind of guy who's a leader on the offensive line.

Here's a quick scouting report via CBS Sports:

Strengths: Understands body positioning and angles. Quick-footed with the ability to pull and cover a large area. Gritty attitude and competitive drive. Brute strength and raw power. Strong hands to take defenders where he wants. Stayed football-focused as a senior and had very good senior year. Nice job sinking his butt to anchor. Weaknesses: Missed all of 2010 (academics). Weight needs to be monitored after dropping over 75 pounds prior to senior season. Stiff hips and body movements. Lacks burst off the snap and is more of a one-speed player. Doesn't show the lateral quickness to shuffle in a flash. Needs to be more aggressive at the point of attack.

NFL Network's Mike Mayock also had this to say about LeRibeus: "He's a tough guy. Short arms, but he's got a nasty disposition."

The Redskins arguably reached for LeRibeus, but they must believe he's an ideal fit to what they're doing offensively. And because of what they ask their linemen to do in the running game, it's harder to accurately judge how a player will fit on their offensive line. Some places had LeRibeus as a third- or fourth-round prospect, while others had him as a fifth-rounder or later. It's also not great news to find out that he was academically ineligible in 2010 and that he's had some weight issues. But he also seems like a funny, good-natured guy, so as long as he works hard and picks up the Redskins' schemes relatively quickly, it's at least possible that he finds himself starting by the end of the season.

Robert Griffin III on the Redskins' offense and McNabb

Don Banks of Sports Illustrated recently spoke with Robert Griffin III, and like most people who do so, came away very impressed with the 22-year-old quarterback. You should certainly read the whole piece, but there were a couple of quotes from Griffin that I found particularly interesting.

First, on what he's learned about Kyle Shanahan's offense:

"It's pretty tough to gauge how much of it I know already," he said. "By no means did I know what they wanted to do with me specifically within that offense after our session. But I know the offense has a lot of formations, a lot of motion, and they're going to try to disguise things. You can get a base feeling on an offense, but you can't say within three hours I'm familiar with their offense.

"It's an offense that asks the quarterback to specifically stay within the system. I think a lot of good systems do that. If you're going to one-hitch throw here, you do a one-hitch throw here. But once everything breaks down, and you go through all three or four of your reads, that's where you can be creative. I think whenever you can work within the system out, rather than outside the system in, it's better for you. That's what I tried to do at Baylor."

With Griffin's strong arm, accuracy, and athleticism, it's hard not to get excited every time he discusses the Redskins' offense. Griffin also commented on Donovan McNabb's recent critical comments of Mike Shanahan and the Redskins:

"All respect to Donovan McNabb, he had a great career," said Griffin, when I asked him if he understood McNabb's point. "He was one of my dad's [favorite] quarterbacks when he was a Philly fan. He's not a Philly fan any more, because I'm about to get drafted. But what [McNabb] said probably did come from a place of just bad taste. He had a bad taste in his mouth from his experience with Coach Shanahan, and I understand that. He never said anything bad about me, he was just trying to warn me, trying to say, 'Don't let egos get in the way.'

"But that's part of the job at quarterback, to be able to manage different types of egos and different types of people. So I'm looking forward to going up there and managing whatever it is that needs to be managed. All respect to Donovan, but it just didn't work out for him in Washington, and that's why he thought it didn't work out."

It's hard to think of a more perfect response to McNabb than that. Well done, RGIII. (Or is it RG3? This really needs to be settled.)

Also: You should read the outstanding article of Griffin's legacy by ESPN's Tom Friend. Fantastic insight.

After dealing for No. 2 pick, Redskins covet a top WR

The Redskins must wait until Thursday, April 26 (the first night of the NFL Draft), to officially select their quarterback of the future -- likely to be Robert Griffin III -- with the recently acquired No. 2 overall pick, but they're going to need (at least) another downfield option for Griffin to utilize. Cue the team's interest in Vincent Jackson.

If signed, Jackson, 29, would give the Redskins an unquestioned No. 1 receiver in an offense that sorely lacks one. Santana Moss is no longer that guy and hasn't been for a few seasons. And unlike Moss, Jackson brings another element to the table: Not only is he fast, but at 6'5, he can win jump balls against opposing defensive backs. That's a pretty valuable trait for someone who could be receiving lots of deep targets from the strong-armed Griffin.

Washington will have lots of cap space to work with, so signing Jackson wouldn't be too difficult if they completely set their sights on acquiring him. (Worth noting: The 2012 cap is expected to be $120.6 million.) But the Redskins, by using this year's first-rounder to select a quarterback and forfeiting their second-round pick, will now have to plug another hole or two that they may have been able to cover in the draft. That probably means signing an offensive lineman or two while at least looking at linebackers, defensive backs, and defensive linemen. And that's not including re-signing guys like London Fletcher, Tim Hightower, and Adam Carriker.

But signing Jackson to a huge contract would not be without its risks. Drafted in 2005 in the second round by the Chargers, Jackson has had some off-the-field issues. In 2006, he pleaded guilty to a drunken driving charge and received probation. Then in January 2009, he was again arrested on suspicion of drunken driving. He pleaded guilty to that DUI charge in February 2010 and received a four-day jail sentence and five years probation. Jackson has also had issues with driving with both a suspended license and expired tags. Because of his two DUIs, in July 2010 Jackson was suspended for three games for violating the NFL's personal-conduct policy.

Jackson has been seeking a long-term, lucrative contract for a while, which the Chargers have understandably refused to give him. While serving his three-game suspension for the 2010-2011 season, Jackson also held because of a contract dispute. He ended up playing in only five games that season and catching just 14 passes. The Chargers franchised him the following season, and he played in all 16 games, catching 60 passes for 1,106 yards and nine touchdowns.

Still, Jackson's talent is undisputed. In seven seasons, he's caught 272 passes for 4,754 yards and 37 touchdowns. And even though he seems to be either questionable or a game-time decision routinely because of nagging injuries, he's played in 15 or 16 games in five of those seven seasons. So signing Jackson makes sense, but like most potential moves, it's not without its risks.

If Jackson isn't the guy, other free agent receiving options include Pierre Garcon, Marques Colston, Reggie Wayne, and Mario Manningham.

Redskins acquire No. 2 pick, likely to be Robert Griffin III

When the Redskins traded with the Rams in order to get their hands on the No. 2 overall pick in the upcoming NFL Draft, they announced to the league and their fans that they're tired of looking for stopgap options at quarterback.

That's basically what this blockbuster trade boils down to. And, of course, this current regime believes they'll hit a home run by selecting Griffin, because if they don't, the Shanahans and Bruce Allen won't be around to deal with the aftermath.

The price for acquiring the second overall pick is enormous: it includes swapping first-round picks this season (No. 6 for No. 2), a 2012 second-rounder, and first-round picks in 2013 and 2014. Not only is that a ton, but it may be unprecedented. According to Sports Illustrated's Peter King: "It's believed that no team has ever traded three first-round picks for a draft choice in NFL history." Until now, that is. (Another offseason champions benchmark, fellas.)

Acquisitions and signings like Donovan McNabb, Rex Grossman, John Beck didn't work out and were rather embarrassing for both the team and for fans. So the Redskins decided to go in a different direction and pay that steep price in order to bring aboard the 22-year-old Griffin, who the team hopes to build a dynamic offense around. (Worth mentioning: There's a minute chance that the Colts could select Griffin instead of Andrew Luck. Regardless, the Redskins will be thrilled to have either one.)

This move feels a bit foreign because it involves the Redskins trading draft picks away for a young player instead of aging, past-their-prime veterans. Then again, the Redskins have again traded away valuable draft picks, which is something they can't stop themselves from doing for more than a season or two at a time. Right or wrong -- OK, mostly wrong -- the Redskins don't mind shipping away draft picks.

Luckily, no one knows if this is a smart or terrible choice. The overwhelming consensus seems to be: awesome trade if Griffin pans out; horrible trade if he stinks. I'm not quite sure it's that simple, but if it is, a 50/50 chance doesn't seem so bad after some of the indefensible, free-wheeling moves this team has made in the past. And at least this time they're gambling on a promising, young quarterback, who some scouts even seem to prefer over Luck.

I could probably write thousands of words on Griffin and the new direction of this franchise, but I'd rather just watch this NFL.com video of Griffin being interviewed by Steve Mariucci (which is hard not to be impressed by) and hope he's the star the Redskins have needed for decades.

Have the Redskins really changed?

Do you know a single Redskins fan who had a problem with the team's offseason strategy? OK, so maybe relying on Rex Grossman and John Beck wasn't the best of ideas, but not selecting a quarterback is also what enabled the Redskins to end up with several quality picks while selecting 12 players in last year's draft. The other moves?

- Dealt Albert Haynesworth to the Patriots for a fifth-round pick in 2013.
- Traded Donovan McNabb to the Vikings for a sixth-round pick in 2012 and a conditional pick in 2013.
- Signed Oshiomogho Atogwe to a five-year, $26 million deal ($9 million guaranteed).
- Signed Stephen Bowen for five years, $27.5 million ($12.5 million guaranteed).
- Re-signed Jammal Brown for five years, $27.5 million ($8.25 million guaranteed).
- Acquired Tim Hightower from the Cardinals in exchange for Vonnie Holliday and a late-round draft pick.
- Agreed to terms with Chris Chester on a five-year, $20 million contract ($6.5 million guaranteed).
- Signed Barry Cofield for six years, $36 million ($12.5 million guaranteed).
- Traded Jeremy Jarmon to the Broncos for Jabar Gaffney.
- Brought back Santana Moss with a three-year, $15 million deal ($6 million guaranteed).
- Signed Josh Wilson to a three-year, $13.5 million deal ($6 million guaranteed).
- Signed Sav Rocca.

I believe that's most of the Redskins' non-draft moves last year. Nothing too horrible, right? Getting anything of value for Haynesworth and McNabb was surprising given their awful tenures in Washington. The Atogwe signing doesn't look that great, and he may end up as a cap casualty (in part because of the presence of DeJon Gomes). It also doesn't help that he hasn't been able to stay healthy. Moss took a step back last season and finished with the lowest receiving yards in a season (584) since 2002-2003 when he had just 433. He also missed four games with a broken hand. Brown wasn't that special either and could be replaced if the Redskins draft a tackle or sign one via free agency.

But the Bowen, Cofield, Wilson, and Rocca signings were all upgrades, and Chester played competently at times in the Redskins' stretch-running attack. They also picked up Hightower and Gaffney for basically nothing since Holliday and Jarmon weren't going to make the final roster anyway.

So are you buying the argument that the Redskins aren't the "same old" team? ESPN's Dan Graziano argues that point and also that signing Peyton Manning wouldn't require a shift in this new, different philosophy:

In the meantime, there is free agency, and although the Redskins didn't make a big splash last summer, they did very well in free agency. Shanahan targeted specific players in the 27- to 29-year-old age group -- guys he believed were already established but still young and hungry enough to grow and develop with the team. He plans to use the same formula this year to address wide receiver, offensive line and the secondary. He's not after the biggest name out there. He's after the specific types of players he believes his team needs in order to build a consistent, year-to-year winner.

Which brings us back to Manning, one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time. Shanahan's not going to give Manning a big, five-year, huge-money deal. I don't think anyone is, given the health concerns, but if the market gets that crazy, I don't expect the Redskins to play in it. It just wouldn't be smart. Bringing Manning in on a one-year or two-year deal with incentives to allow him to prove he's healthy is smart, because if Manning is healthy, he's worth as much as any quarterback in the league.

I'm on record as being against a potential Manning deal, but I also agree with Graziano that bringing in Manning could work, depending on the contract, its length, and whatever other moves the Redskins make in free agency and in the draft. If the Redskins do sign Manning, they also must draft a young quarterback at some point, along with not going overboard by simply building the team around Manning. After all, his career could be over in the near future, if it's not already over (which hopefully is not the case).

At the moment, I'm on board with the direction of this team. The Redskins weren't much fun to watch last season, but they also are building a young, talented nucleus -- something they haven't done for a long time. I loved just about everything from the 2011 offseason, but I won't be completely convinced in the direction of this team until seeing what they do in the next few months. There are several important choices to make, primarily what exactly to do at quarterback, but that's also why Shanahan is making big money.

Should the Redskins sign Peyton Manning? No.

The last few days/weeks, I've been reading countless comments on whether the Redskins should consider signing Peyton Manning when he's inevitably released by the Colts. As you are more than likely aware of, quarterback hasn't been a Redskins' strength for a very long time now, and things didn't go well with Donovan McNabb, Rex Grossman, and John Beck the last couple seasons. Many are convinced that not only is a major upgrade needed, but that it's immediately necessary. Enter Peyton Manning.

For the most part, these are the categories that opinions on this topic can be divided into:

1) Yes, the Redskins should do whatever it takes to sign Manning. They'd be crazy not to.

2) As long as he's healthy, Manning would provide a significant upgrade at quarterback. It's a risk, but it's worth the gamble.

3) No, it's not worth the risk, and it may harm the team's rebuilding movement.

I'm on board with group No. 3, which I'll get into below. I'm going to ramble a bit; hopefully you can follow what I'm getting at.

First, let's all agree on one thing: Quarterback is the most important position on the field. I think we're at a point where all football fans would agree with this. It's ideal to find a quarterback that's good enough to win with, and then to build a team around that guy. It doesn't always work that way and teams can still win games without elite quarterbacks -- just look at the 49ers and Alex Smith, who no other team was rushing to acquire -- but the rest of that team must be very talented, both on defense and special teams. Excellent coaching doesn't hurt either. It's always important to keep upgrading other phases of the team.

Still, people who are against signing Manning don't necessarily disagree that having a top-shelf quarterback is a must. He may still be that guy, but he also turns 36 in a month and a half and is continuing to recover from a neck injury that's required multiple surgeries. It's also not a positive sign when someone's condition needs weekly, or even daily, updates. Manning will probably continue to heal and get stronger, but is that an issue the Redskins really want to be concerning themselves with? The roster still needs to be improved in other ways, and it won't help if their quarterback is one neck-targeted hit away from never playing football again.

The Manning question looms large because of the limited quarterback choices this offseason. In reality, the Redskins were unlucky. Matt Barkley returning to USC for his senior season really threw a wrench into the Redskins' dreams of being able to acquire one of Andrew Luck/Robert Griffin III/Barkley. There's no guarantee one of those three would have been available at No. 6, but the odds were better. At this moment, the choices seem to be signing Manning or Kyle Orton, or trading up to draft Griffin. Drew Brees and Alex Smith are likely staying in New Orleans and San Francisco, respectively, and other teams seem to be better fits for Matt Flynn. Another name may be tossed in, but Manning/Orton/Griffin seem to be the realistic options.

Signing Orton would present a slight upgrade over Grossman, but he'd still be a stopgap option. If the Redskins sign Orton, they'd also likely select a quarterback in the first few rounds of the draft. If they're able to identify a young quarterback they believe is a fit, Orton could play for a while until the rookie is eventually ready to take over.

The thought of trading up for Griffin rivals the popularity of signing Manning. A trade for Griffin would demand at least two first-round picks and probably another high-round pick or two. But by paying that steep price, the Redskins would obtain their franchise quarterback to build around. Griffin turns 22 in a couple days, and to some he's not all that far behind Luck in terms of a pro quarterback prospect. Like Manning, there's no guarantee that Griffin would work out. But there's a huge difference between worrying about how Griffin will develop and learn to play the position in the NFL than believing Manning's career could be over every time he absorbs a hit from an opposing defender. And while the Redskins' offensive line was a bit better this season, they're far from a dominant unit.

Other than his injury -- which is the chief concern -- what are my reservations about signing Manning?

1) He would alter the team's upcoming draft strategy. I've heard some people disagree with this, and I'm not quite sure why. If the Redskins sign Manning, they'll have to do everything in their power to make sure the offensive line protects him. They will also need more offensive firepower. Those are two of the team's important needs regardless, but with Manning, they may focus on trying to upgrade those two areas early in the draft. It's also possible they reach for a few players in those spots to plug holes instead of valuing talent over position. With Manning on board, the Redskins could also wait much further to take a quarterback than they would if they signed someone like Orton. It's not a guarantee that would happen, but it's at least a mild concern.

2) The Redskins may shift to win-now mode, which means bad free agent signings. For the most part, last offseason was the ideal offseason for how most (levelheaded) fans want the Redskins to rebuild. The Redskins selected lots of players in the draft and didn't throw a ton of money at old players coming off career years. Oshiomogho Atogwe was probably the worst signing, but guys like Barry Cofield, Stephen Bowen, Josh Wilson, etc. (all well under 30) played well and should be able to contribute a lot going forward. But if the Redskins sign Manning and start worrying about winning now at all costs, that could mean switching that free agent mentality back to that old Dan Snyder-type thinking, which means taking chances on older players whose best days are behind them. That could mean reuniting Manning with Reggie Wayne or Jeff Saturday -- that type of signing. They may not be terrible moves, but they are ones that (hopefully) this franchise has learned from.

3) A clash between Manning and the Shanahans. This point is the main reason why I don't think it makes much sense for Manning to come to DC. With Manning around, Kyle Shanahan would essentially be superfluous. Manning is one of the NFL's all-time gifted offensive minds, and while Kyle Shanahan obviously brings a lot to the table, there's little reason for them both to be around at the same time. Would Mike Shanahan be willing to get rid of his son to bring in Manning? Would Manning and Kyle somehow be willing to coexist? And what type of offense would that team run? It's all very confusing, and it would be a huge mess to sort out.

Those are all legitimate concerns for me, though I don't have a perfect solution to the team's quarterback conundrum. I'm against them signing Manning, but I'm also not sure giving up valuable picks to bring Griffin aboard is infinitely wiser. In that situation, the team would likely still be pretty bad, so would Shanahan be able to keep his job heading into year four? And if the Redskins decide to bring in Orton and also draft a quarterback semi-early, that team would likely be no better than 8-8. And again, would Shanahan survive that?

Really, there's no obvious answer. But heading down the Manning road seems like something the Redskins have tried before. It didn't work with McNabb -- yes, Manning is better, but he's not really a much better fit than McNabb was -- and the Redskins wouldn't even commit to him longer than one season, which was pretty funny considering they gave up two draft picks for him. They've taken the sign-the-aging-veteran route all too many times in the past.

Just because the Redskins wouldn't have to surrender any draft choices for Manning doesn't mean such a move won't have any lasting effects on this team. If they're going to choose that option, they should understand the very real consequences that it'll blow up in their faces.

Revisiting the Redskins' draft choices the last few years

Every time fans or talking heads suggest the Redskins should trade draft picks away, it makes me laugh. Not only because the Redskins are deficient in overall team talent, but because they've been trading away draft selections for years, and it hasn't been an effective strategy. Dan Snyder and the team's front office has (until recently, hopefully) completely refused to hold onto their allotment of draft picks.

Is it really surprising that the team's most successful draft in years may end up being last year's draft, when the team traded down a few times and selected 12 players? Time will tell how good those 12 players are, but most of them contributed at least something this season, which is a lot more than can be said about most of the team's drafts in the last decade-plus.

Mike Shanahan may have the final word on personnel decisions, but the Redskins' scouting and personnel departments haven't changed that much. Besides the departure of Vinny Cerrato, the guy previously calling the shots, things aren't much different. And that should be reason enough to hold onto as many picks as possible: More picks mean more chances.

Let's take a look at the last three drafts (2009, 2010, and 2011). In those drafts, starting with 2009, the Redskins had six, seven (third-rounder used in 2009 supplemental draft), and 12 draft choices, respectively. Take a guess which one's better.

2009:

1st: Brian Orakpo
3rd: Kevin Barnes
5th: Cody Glenn
6th: Robert Henson
7th: Eddie Williams
7th: Marko Mitchell

2010:

1st: Trent Williams
3rd: Jeremy Jarmon (2009 supplemental pick)
4th: Perry Riley
6th: Dennis Morris
7th: Terrence Austin
7th: Erik Cook
7th: Selvish Capers

2011:

1st: Ryan Kerrigan
2nd: Jarvis Jenkins
3rd: Leonard Hankerson
4th: Roy Helu
5th: Dejon Gomes
5th: Niles Paul
6th: Evan Royster
6th: Aldrick Robinson
7th: Brandyn Thompson
7th: Maurice Hurt
7th: Markus White
7th: Chris Neild

Again, who knows how all of those 2011 picks will pan out. But it's probably a good idea to stick with the 2011 strategy over the other two years. Yes, I know that this analysis is only looking back at the last three drafts, and the Redskins have obviously picked some talented players in previous drafts. But they've done so without stockpiling picks, which has also prevented them from creating depth at key positions.

The only players from 2009 and 2010 who have really contributed are Orakpo, Williams, and Riley. Barnes has received playing time, but he hasn't been very good. He also may not be on the roster next season because of his overall ineffectiveness. Austin and Cook haven't done much either. Of those 13 picks, only those six are still with the team -- which is hilariously bad. The worst pick of the bunch is probably Jarmon, selected in the 2009 supplemental draft. The Redskins forfeited a third-round pick for Jarmon's services, and right now he's out of the league. Jarmon was originally selected as a defensive end when the Redskins utilized a 4-3 defense, so the selection was at least defensible at the time. But after being traded to and subsequently released by the Broncos earlier this season, Jarmon may not get another NFL opportunity. Either way, I guess, that pick was wasted.

-----

If you're on board with the Redskins trading away future draft picks in order to get Andrew Luck (unlikely) or Robert Griffin III (more possible), that's just fine. I'd be extremely happy if the Redskins finally acquired/drafted a franchise quarterback. That's the team's biggest need. But trading away multiple draft choices, particularly first- and second-round picks, is not something that I agree with, especially when examining the team's draft resume the last few years. Obviously it's a requirement to analyze each trade individually, but trading up in the first few rounds is rarely cheap.

Yes, the NFL is a quarterbacks' league; most great teams have outstanding quarterbacks. But I shudder at the thought of the Redskins giving up the farm for a quarterback who ends up with the skills of someone like Mark Sanchez. Give me 2011's strategy instead, even if that means missing out on Luck and Griffin.

John Keim's weekly Redskins Report is excellent

In my opinion, Washington Examiner reporter John Keim does the best job covering the Redskins. He's efficient on Twitter and is extremely informative on his Redskins Confidential blog. But if you're not receiving Redskins Report, his weekly e-mails containing Redskins information, stats, and scouting reports, then you're missing out.

Here's an example from this week's report:

If it’s first-and-goal from the 6-yard line or closer, the Redskins have scored eight touchdowns and kicked three field goals. From beyond the 6, they’ve scored four touchdowns with four field goals and two interceptions. That contrasts with how their opposition has fared. From the 6 and in, they’ve scored three touchdowns, kicked three field goals and thrown a pick. From beyond the 6, it’s six touchdowns, two field goals and one interception.

Is that mind-blowing information? No. But informative? Definitely. And that's just a snapshot; the report this week also has interesting notes on rookies Ryan Kerrigan and Roy Helu.

This post is really just a heads-up more than anything. I'm sure lots of people already receive the weekly e-mails, but for those who don't, it's certainly worth it.

Another reason to like Roy Helu

There's an amusing tidbit on Roy Helu in Thomas Boswell's column on the Redskins rookie running back:

No doubt you, and the Redskins themselves, will watch Helu on TV replays as he stiff-arms Patriot tacklers or makes them miss, staggers and stumbles for extra yards or bursts through a hole for 15 yards in a blink. But Helu probably won’t, because he probably can’t.

“I don’t think Helu even has a television. He didn’t get a computer until very late, if he even has Internet access,” said linebacker London Fletcher, chuckling approvingly. “It seems like he never leaves the facility [Redskins Park]. That’s rare for a young man. I appreciate the way he takes care of his body first and stays on top of his job before anything else.

“Sometimes you feel like saying: ‘Get away, man. Go home,’ ” Fletcher said. “But the vet doesn’t actually say it. “We are relying on him a lot.”

Hard worker? Check. Has the approval of London Fletcher? Check. Averaging 4.7 yards per carry? Check.

Oh, and he may not have a TV or Internet access. Solid work, Roy.

Race to the bottom: More wins to come?

After last week's win over the Seahawks, the Redskins, now 4-7, seem to have demonstrated that they're not in the same class as some of the truly horrible teams in the NFL. Sure, the Redskins can't take much solace in that fact -- teams with fewer wins do receive higher draft picks, of course -- but no one wants to cheer for a winless team, regardless of whether Andrew Luck or any other potential savior is right around the corner.

Including the Seahawks' 17-point thrashing of the Eagles on Thursday night, here are the current standings for the under-.500 teams (worst records first):

Colts 0-11
Rams 2-9
Vikings 2-9
Dolphins 3-8
Panthers 3-8
Jaguars 3-8
Eagles 4-8
Browns 4-7
Chiefs 4-7
Buccaneers 4-7
Chargers 4-7
Cardinals 4-7
Redskins 4-7
Seahawks 5-7
Bills 5-6

I continue to marvel at the rapid demise of the "Dream Team" Eagles, who are now in the running for a top 10, or even top 5, pick. No team is going to catch the Colts, who have all but locked up that top slot. However, there's quite a logjam at 3-8 and 4-7, so there's plenty of time for almost any of these teams to keep losing and rocket up (down?) the list.

With that Eagles-Seahawks game out of the way, here are the relevant games to the Redskins' (hopeful) selection of a quarterback in the upcoming NFL draft. (Fans should want the bolded teams to win.)

Titans vs. Bills
Chiefs vs. Bears
Raiders vs. Dolphins
Broncos vs. Vikings
Panthers vs. Buccaneers
Ravens vs. Browns
Cowboys vs. Cardinals
Rams vs. 49ers
Chargers vs. Jaguars

I didn't include the Colts-Patriots game, because, again, the top-pick ship has sailed. Good luck, Colts.

It's pretty cut and dried this week. There are still worse-record teams out there who need quarterbacks, but not much of this matters if the Redskins win a few more times in their next five games.

As a reminder, these posts are not about cheering against the Redskins; I absolutely refuse to do that. But I can sort of understand the thinking of those fans who are rooting for the Redskins to lose the rest of their games to secure the highest pick possible. At the end of the day, those fans, even if they're sort of annoying, are really only concerned with the best interests of the Redskins and their future, which requires a massive upgrade at quarterback (and, to be honest, a few other positions). If you could guarantee me that the Redskins will identify a franchise quarterback and select him with that higher pick, then I wouldn't mind stomaching a few more losses this season. But that's why the draft is so popular and intriguing: There are no sure things. Prospects like Luck are as close as a college player can get to being a no-brainer, future star type of selection. But he also may end up as a mediocre NFL quarterback. No one can predict the future. Not even Vinny Cerrato.

If the Redskins do end up winning a few more games and pick 10th in the draft, or somewhere near there, I'm confident that they can do what they did last year and find a way to acquire what they need. Maybe that means they'll make a few trades and move up or down a few times during the draft. It will make things more difficult, certainly, but identifying undervalued talent in the draft is far from impossible. Teams do it every year; the Redskins seem to have done it last year. Maybe they can have a repeat performance.

Apparently it's hard to root for the Redskins these days

Did you know that it's hard to be a Redskins fan? Examiner columnist Thom Loverro does, and he isn't a fan of what's happening on the field. In this column, he mentions that the on-the-field product is still very bad, but he's more concerned with this question: "Are the 2011 Redskins the least likable squad this franchise has fielded in a long time?"

Loverro discusses the showboating of Fred Davis, the jawing of Trent Williams and DeAngelo Hall, Jabar Gaffney's recent Twitter controversy, and he even fits in Stevie Johnson's recent touchdown celebration that mocked Plaxico Burress.

But that's it. That's why it's hard to root for the Redskins. I'll admit, I sometimes cringe when Santana Moss spins the ball when the Redskins are down a few touchdowns, or when LaRon Landry celebrates a huge tackle after surrendering a first down or a big play. But don't most teams do similar things? The Redskins are hardly the only team with players who celebrate tackles, first downs, touchdowns, or anything. And frankly, some of those moments are the most exciting for the Redskins, considering that winning the game each week isn't a viable option. I guess part of Loverro's argument could be that it's a mind-set thing -- the whole act like you've been there before thing, or how to be a professional, or whatever. But the Redskins aren't losing games because some of them like to dance when they get in the end zone.

There are plenty of players fans should enjoy rooting for, and Hall, Williams, Davis, and Gaffney are probably on that list. Here are some others:

Roy Helu
Santana Moss
Brandon Banks
Darrel Young
Ryan Kerrigan
Lorenzo Alexander
London Fletcher
Perry Riley
Brian Orakpo
DeJon Gomes
Josh Wilson
Sav Rocca

Yes, I included Rocca, the punter, who is having an amazing season. And that's not counting Chris Cooley and a couple of youngsters who should be able to contribute next season: Jarvis Jenkins and Leonard Hankerson.

I'd argue that any team that includes London Fletcher can't possibly be mentioned as any kind of "least likable squad," but that's just one opinion.

Race to the bottom: Crucial Week 12

(Note: I had this post nearly finished yesterday but didn't post it for some reason. Anyway, have a Happy Thanksgiving and be safe out there.)

If you didn't read the first post in this series -- which I'll continue each week unless the whole thing becomes irrelevant or tiresome -- I recommend you check that out first. But, basically, the entire goal of each of these posts is to identify the weekly matchups that are important to the Redskins' chances of obtaining of higher draft pick.

Last Sunday's painful 27-24 loss to the Cowboys was hard to stomach, but at the end of the day, it still moved the Redskins a little closer to a potential franchise quarterback. Now 3-7, the Redskins are still tied for the third-worst record, so other bad teams still need to do plenty of losing for the Redskins to continue moving up (or down?) the ladder.

Here are the games including teams that are 3-7 or worse this week (again, while hoping the bolded teams win):

Dolphins vs. Cowboys
Vikings vs. Falcons
Panthers vs. Colts
Cardinals vs. Rams
Texans vs. Jaguars

It would also be beneficial if a few of the 4-6 teams won as well, but we'll be able to sort that out on a week-to-week basis, obviously depending on if the Redskins win. The Dolphins and Jaguars are both 3-7 and the Vikings are 2-8, so wanting them all to win is a no-brainer -- and that's not even factoring in that Miami plays Dallas later today. Both the Vikings and Jaguars took quarterbacks in the first round last year, but if the goal is to get the highest pick possible, more wins by them would be nice.

The other two games were more difficult to decide who to root for. The Panthers and Rams, both 2-8, don't need quarterbacks and would probably go in a different direction in the first round, but as a commenter pointed out the other day, they could always trade the pick to a team who desperately seeks a quarterback. It's impossible to predict trades, but I guess the higher the draft pick, the better. Either way, there are positives if the Cardinals or Rams win, or Panthers or Colts win. The Colts are likely too far ahead in the Andrew Luck sweepstakes, but until they've completely locked up that top spot, anything's possible.

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.

Hankerson suffers torn labrum, is placed on IR

A bright spot of watching a bad team is getting the chance to see that team's young players. The hope is that they'll learn quickly and develop, in the process transforming from talented prospects into productive players. Unfortunately for the 3-6 Redskins, one of those intriguing, young players, WR Leonard Hankerson, has been placed on injured reserve after suffering a torn labrum and a hip injury in Sunday's loss to the Dolphins.

The loss of Hankerson is a crushing blow to the Redskins, not only because of their shortage at wide receiver, but because Hankerson just had the best game of his young NFL career, catching eight passes from Rex Grossman for 106 yards.

Hankerson joins defensive lineman Jarvis Jenkins, the Redskins' second-round pick, as the second of the team's draft picks to be lost for the season.

Redskins sign WR David Anderson, who likes to dance

Seeking a veteran wide receiver, the Redskins have signed David Anderson, a 28-year-old receiver who was released by the Texans earlier this season. So why Anderson? Mostly because he's familiar with Kyle Shanahan's offense, which should allow him to contribute more -- at least that's the goal.

Anderson was a seventh-round pick by the Texans in 2006, and he's spent his entire career in Houston. In his best season, 2009-2010, he had 38 receptions for 370 yards. For his career, he has 82 catches for 895 yards and three touchdowns. But in two games this season, he only has one catch for nine yards. But at least it was for a first down!

Because of the injuries to Santana Moss and Niles Paul, Anderson's likely nothing more than a temporary fill-in. But there are (at least) three interesting things about him: 1) Per Wiki, his middle name is Kent; 2) he likes Conan O'Brien; and 3) he enjoys dancing after touchdowns. The last two are connected: Take a look at his touchdown celebration in a 2008 game against the Bengals.



Yup, that's Conan's patented string dance. Nice work, David. Unfortunately, he's only scored one touchdown since that Bengals game -- against the Vikings the very next week, in fact -- so he may not be doing much dancing in Washington. Then again, the Redskins not scoring touchdowns will hardly be Anderson's fault. They're already excellent at that.