- The Washington Times - Tuesday, October 24, 2006

As the Washington Redskins enjoy their bye week, their fans will spend the next few days wondering why lineup changes won’t be made, why Joe Gibbs seems determined not to give Jason Campbell a shot and why there have been no signs of improvement.

Q: Here we go again, only worse. Talk about embarrassing. Chris Samuels should be the first to be benched. Mark Brunell would be second to hit the pine. The Redskins need a major spark from their field general. I never thought in my lifetime I would ever question Coach Gibbs’ decision making. The sooner Jason Campbell is thrown to the wolves the better the Redskins long-term. — Roger

A: Samuels isn’t going anywhere. He actually hasn’t played that bad in pass protection this year, but doesn’t have a lot to add in the run game. Everybody knows how yours truly feels about who should be playing quarterback.

Q: How much worse could Jason Campbell possibly play? Do the coaches honestly believe that he couldn’t possibly complete a 3- or 4-yard screen pass? Also, I’m curious, why don’t reporters give Coach Gibbs harsher follow-up questions? — Mike

A: Campbell would probably throw more interceptions than Brunell, but he would also take more chances downfield and make more plays. And he would put more velocity on the screen passes so the receivers could do more after the catch.

As for us reporters: Follow-up questions rarely accomplish anything because Gibbs is masterful at running an end-around and framing an answer that sounds good at first blush but is useless later on.

Q: Do Redskins fans recognize they are owned by an arrogant egomaniac in the mold of George Steinbrenner, who will put the team in salary cap purgatory with his outrageous free agent spending? — Tom Bullinger

A: I wouldn’t place all of the blame on Dan Snyder for this mess. By all accounts, he has deferred to Gibbs and his staff when it comes to personnel. Snyder probably outbid himself to sign Adam Archuleta and Andre Carter. The outrageous thing about the way this team was constructed is how the Redskins show no interest in building depth via the draft. That should be the one primary area Gibbs, the team president, addresses this offseason.

Q: No pass or run blocking, no pass rush, no defense of any kind, no kicking game. This team will go down as one of the worst Redskins team since the 1960s. Do you agree? — Terry

A: Three seasons since 1992 match this season in terms of failing to meet expectations.

In 1993, following Gibbs’ retirement, the Redskins, with an aging team, went 4-12 under Richie Petitbon. In 1998, they had just missed the playoffs and had signed Dana Stubblefield and Dan Wilkinson — they started 0-7 and went 6-10. In 2000, a year after winning the NFC East and reaching the second round, the Redskins added Bruce Smith and Deion Sanders and went 8-8 and Norv Turner was fired late in the season.

Q: With all the supposed top coaches the Redskins have, how is that the offense and defense seem to play like they’re playing together for the first time? It’s like one player has no idea what the others are doing. It’s unorganized to put it mildly. — Donald Tucker

A: The offense is working in a new system with two new receivers and the defense has played most of the season with three new players. But the transition should have been made quicker. This goes back to the issue of getting more snaps in the preseason. Who knows if it would have made a difference, but it’s something for Gibbs to ponder come next summer.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide