Should Shanahan have pulled R.G. III earlier?

[zulater]

I thought it was quite evident that R.G. III agravated his existing knee injury on the play before the Redskins second touchdown. He obviously couldn't put his full weight on the one leg and it was clearly affecting his ability to throw.

Cousins isn't awful by any means. I think if he would have been put in while the Skins still had the lead they would have had a much better chance to win that game.

Anyway I have to laugh at all the NFL talking heads circling the wagons to protect Shanahan. The only one I've heard with the balls to question his decision was Brian Billick, who pointed out there's a difference between playing hurt and being too injured to perform effectively.

Of course no one ever wants to go on record and criticize a coach. But to me if you're ever going to give credit to a coach then they must also be willing to lay blame when it's due.

[GodfatherofSoul]

I think it's a false controversy. They were down 7 pts in the 4th until his knee went out on a bad snap. That being said, they hadn't put any points up for a long time, but Cousins was getting clobbered behind that line. It's not like he would've been some panacea.

[NJarhead]

I like what Charlie Casserly had to say and I agree; They were up 14-0. If Shannahan pulls him then and they lose, he'd be questioned too. It was a no win situation for Shannahan.

Note: I am the last person who would support Mike Shannahan, but that's my unbiased opinion.

[Crow-Magnon]

I like what Charlie Casserly had to say and I agree; They were up 14-0. If Shannahan pulls him then and they lose, he'd be questioned too. It was a no win situation for Shannahan.

Note: I am the last person who would support Mike Shannahan, but that's my unbiased opinion.

Agreed. Whether you like Shanny or not, he was in a lose/lose situation there.

[zulater]

I like what Charlie Casserly had to say and I agree; They were up 14-0. If Shannahan pulls him then and they lose, he'd be questioned too. It was a no win situation for Shannahan.

Note: I am the last person who would support Mike Shannahan, but that's my unbiased opinion.

They were up 14-0 in large part because R.G. III played at a high level on the first two series. He clearly reaggravted his injury on the play before their final touchdown.

After that he played like a different player. One who could no longer perform at a high enough level to get his team a score.

[Count Steeler]

He should have given Cousins a series or 2 and let RGIII get some work on his leg. After that he could have made a better evaluation on whether to put RGIII back in or let Cousins ride it out.

[zulater]

I think it's a false controversy. They were down 7 pts in the 4th until his knee went out on a bad snap. That being said, they hadn't put any points up for a long time, but Cousins was getting clobbered behind that line. It's not like he would've been some panacea.

Cousins came in with less than 5 minutes to go in the game, down two scores, and with lousy field position. His plight was made even worse when a first down pass he completed was negated by a holding call.

So how can anyone quantify how Cousins would have performed if he had been put into the game earlair?

[GBMelBlount]

I see this decision as similar to the ones Tomlin had to make with regard to playing Ben injured the last two years.

Only difference is Tomlin had plenty of time and information before making the completely boneheaded decision each and every effing week to continue to play Ben the past two years and subsequently completely blow both of our last two seasons.

Just my humble opinion of course.

[zulater]

Agreed. Whether you like Shanny or not, he was in a lose/lose situation there.

How so? It was fairly evident that R.G. III agravated an existing injury and on exactly what play.There was a cleal line of delineation as to performance before and after that one given play. So if Shanny determines 3 or 4 series after that play that his qb's ability has been diminished to the point that he no longer feels he can move the offense effectivley, then who's going to question him and on what basis?

[Count Steeler]

I see this decision as similar to the ones Tomlin had to make with regard to playing Ben injured the last two years.

Only difference is Tomlin had plenty of time and information before making the completely boneheaded decision each and every effing week to continue to play Ben the past two years and subsequently completely blow both of our last two seasons.

Just my humble opinion of course.

I was thinking along the same lines GB. Cousins did have a decent outing earlier this year.

[NJarhead]

How so? It was fairly evident that R.G. III agravated an existing injury and on exactly what play.There was a cleal line of delineation as to performance before and after that one given play. So if Shanny determines 3 or 4 series after that play that his qb's ability has been diminished to the point that he no longer feels he can move the offense effectivley, then who's going to question him and on what basis?

Are you saying he wouldn't have faced any criticism had he made the change to Cousins after, say, the first half?

[Nadroj 20]

I thought it was quite evident that R.G. III agravated his existing knee injury on the play before the Redskins second touchdown. He obviously couldn't put his full weight on the one leg and it was clearly affecting his ability to throw.

Cousins isn't awful by any means. I think if he would have been put in while the Skins still had the lead they would have had a much better chance to win that game.

Anyway I have to laugh at all the NFL talking heads circling the wagons to protect Shanahan. The only one I've heard with the balls to question his decision was Brian Billick, who pointed out there's a difference between playing hurt and being too injured to perform effectively.



Of course no one ever wants to go on record and criticize a coach. But to me if you're ever going to give credit to a coach then they must also be willing to lay blame when it's due.

That is exactly what RG3 said on ESPN. He said that yes he was hurting but he wasn't "injured" (clearly he was, yes) and wanted to continue to play. I understand the decision is still on Shanahan but it would make that decision much harder when your star QB is telling you he can do it.

I did notice a difference in RG3 and he progessively got worse as the game went and I'll admit I thought to myself maybe Cousins would do better in this situation.

Hind sight. Who knows what would have happened I guess.

- - - Updated - - -

[zulater]

Are you saying he wouldn't have faced any criticism had he made the change to Cousins after, say, the first half?

Yeah I'm saying exactly that.

His answer would have been easy. Something along the lines of...

We noticed Robert had aggravated an existing injury significantly on the second to last play of our second series. Robert wanted to keep playing and said he was able, so we gave him the initial benifit of the doubt. But as the game progressed it became obvious that despite Robert's best efforts he just wasn't physically able to perform anymore at the level that was needed for him and the offense to succeed. Plus we also needed to consider Robert's ability to protect himself on the field and the chances of even aggravating his injury further. So I made the decision to pull him when I did, and stand by that regardless of result.

So you tell me. How can anyone question that?

[NJarhead]

Yeah I'm saying exactly that.

His answer would have been easy. Something along the lines of...

We noticed Robert had aggravated an existing injury significantly on the second to last play of our second series. Robert wanted to keep playing and said he was able, so we gave him the initial benifit of the doubt. But as the game progressed it became obvious that despite Robert's best efforts he just wasn't physically able to perform anymore at the level that was needed for him and the offense to succeed. Plus we also needed to consider Robert's ability to protect himself on the field and the chances of even aggravating his injury further. So I made the decision to pull him when I did, and stand by that regardless of result.

So you tell me. How can anyone question that?

Answer to what? Criticism?

[zulater]

Answer to what? Criticism?

What's to criticize?

R.G. III started the game able to play at a high level. He aggravated an existing injury, which was fairly evident to anyone with eyes. His performance dropped from that point on.

So you weren't wrong to start him as evidenced by the first two series.

He did reaggravate the injury. That happens in the NFL all the time. So where is the coach wrong to this point?

His play diminished to an extreme degree after aggravating the injury. So if you take him out after determining that his play was being adversly affected by his injury, where does any legitimate criticism come into play?

[Chidi29]

If Washington wins, no one gives Shanahan any flack for keeping him in. Sports celebrates playing through pain. Emmitt Smith, Michael Jordan, Byron Leftwich, all iconic games that were one of the highlights of their career (granted, in Leftwich's case, not a strong field).

Yes, Griffin was in pain. No, he wasn't his usual self. But he hadn't been his usual self the past two weeks and that was evident just watching him. But it wasn't so bad that he couldn't move around. He could still flex his knee and move around somewhat (having a brace and getting re-taped also restricts ability to bend your leg, maybe making it look worse than what it was before the botched snap).

If the doctors cleared him (which they must have since he went back and got an MRI when he originally got hurt) and Griffin said he was good, I have no qualms playing him. Of course, I wouldn't have been too critical had Shanny benched him either.

It's much easier for the fan to say what the decision should have been after Griffin's leg snaps.

[NJarhead]

What's to criticize?

Do you just get off on playing devil's advocate, disagreeing with the populous, or are you really that naive?

[zulater]

Do you just get off on playing devil's advocate, disagreeing with the populous, or are you really that naive?

I guess I'm a fucking idiot then. Because outside of total morons, no one with half a brain could have critisized Shanahan if he had pulled R.G.III at halftime for the reasons previously stated.

[GodfatherofSoul]

So how can anyone quantify how Cousins would have performed if he had been put into the game earlair?

So, what you're saying is there's no point in second guessing Shanahan's decision since we can't know one way or the other?

[zulater]

If Washington wins, no one gives Shanahan any flack for keeping him in. Sports celebrates playing through pain. Emmitt Smith, Michael Jordan, Byron Leftwich, all iconic games that were one of the highlights of their career (granted, in Leftwich's case, not a strong field).

Yes, Griffin was in pain. No, he wasn't his usual self. But he hadn't been his usual self the past two weeks and that was evident just watching him. But it wasn't so bad that he couldn't move around. He could still flex his knee and move around somewhat (having a brace and getting re-taped also restricts ability to bend your leg, maybe making it look worse than what it was before the botched snap).

If the doctors cleared him (which they must have since he went back and got an MRI when he originally got hurt) and Griffin said he was good, I have no qualms playing him. Of course, I wouldn't have been too critical had Shanny benched him either.

It's much easier for the fan to say what the decision should have been after Griffin's leg snaps.

He couldn't throw the ball with any consistent accuracy after aggravating the injury. He couldn't and didn't move the team after aggravating the injury on a specific play. That is the sole basis for my belief that he should have been removed from the game earlair than he was.

[NJarhead]

I guess I'm a fucking idiot then. Because outside of total morons, no one with half a brain could have critisized Shanahan if he had pulled R.G.III at halftime for the reasons previously stated.

See, that's your problem. You think the media and the fan base has morals.

I wouldn't have criticized him myself either way. But there is no question he was in a no win situation.

[polamalubeast]

It was a playoff game, I have no problem with the decision of Shanahan because RGIII is your best player

[zulater]

So, what you're saying is there's no point in second guessing Shanahan's decision since we can't know one way or the other?

I'm saying he played a quarterback that was willing but unable to compete at a high enough level to help his team score points.

How Cousins would have played is anyone's guess?

How R.G. III was playing after reaggravating his injurywas readily evident to anyone willing to accept the obvious.

[Chidi29]

He couldn't throw the ball with any consistent accuracy after aggravating the injury. He couldn't and didn't move the team after aggravating the injury on a specific play. That is the sole basis for my belief that he should have been removed from the game earlair than he was.

It's just really difficult to be in that moment and pull your starting guy. The player you've put out there hurt for the past two weeks, the one who has been cleared and wants to play. The guy who has practiced all week and the player you've put the gameplan in for.

And as bad as it sounds (and this is a pretty bad thought) as long as he doesn't tear his ACL, he'll have plenty of time to recover from during the offseason. It's not as if they were guaranteed to play next week.

I still saw him spin the ball pretty well, too. His INT was launched what, 50-55 yards?

[zulater]

See, that's your problem. You think the media and the fan base has morals.

I wouldn't have criticized him myself either way. But there is no question he was in a no win situation.

It's easy to ignore those that don't have a valid point to offer. There was no valid criticism for removing R.G.III after it became evident that he was no longer able to play at an acceptable level. Head willing, body not. Real simple answer.

[zulater]

It's just really difficult to be in that moment and pull your starting guy. The player you've put out there hurt for the past two weeks, the one who has been cleared and wants to play. The guy who has practiced all week and the player you've put the gameplan in for.

And as bad as it sounds (and this is a pretty bad thought) as long as he doesn't tear his ACL, he'll have plenty of time to recover from during the offseason. It's not as if they were guaranteed to play next week.

I still saw him spin the ball pretty well, too. His INT was launched what, 50-55 yards?

Throwing far and throwing accurate are different matters entirely. If you don't have a good throwing base and can't step into your throws you wont throw the ball accurate.

You have any idea what his stats were after the second series?

This from a guy who was completing near 70% of his passes a month ago?

I give up. I hope every fucking coach in the league plays his starters until their limbs fall off from now until the end of tuime.
There's never a common sense reason to pull a guy who wants to play even if his body and quality of play are screaming that his body can't cash that check.

I'm done on this thread.

Good move Shanahan.

[Chidi29]

Well sorry people didn't agree with you. Is that what you were looking for? Praise for your wisdom?

[zulater]

Well sorry people didn't agree with you. Is that what you were looking for? Praise for your wisdom?

No, just not a complete dismisal I suppose when my points are all valid.

Like I said before, don't ever take out a starter again for the rest of time no matter how poorly he limps around the field and plays. No reason for a coach to exercise judgement based on changing events on the field if a guy says he can play he can play.

[Nadroj 20]

Throwing far and throwing accurate are different matters entirely. If you don't have a good throwing base and can't step into your throws you wont throw the ball accurate.

You have any idea what his stats were after the second series?

This from a guy who was completing near 70% of his passes a month ago?

I give up. I hope every fucking coach in the league plays his starters until their limbs fall off from now until the end of tuime.
There's never a common sense reason to pull a guy who wants to play even if his body and quality of play are screaming that his body can't cash that check.

I'm done on this thread.

Good move Shanahan.

Zu you make good points. However, how would any of us respond in a situation like that? Heat of the moment in the middle of the game when there are other concerns to be had. I sure as hell don't know how I would respond. It is a tough call to make and it is only human to lean toward the guy that has played all year at a high level even if he is struggling.

I will point out that if Shanahan DID make the move to pull out RG3 I surely would not have been critical of the decision. But who am I?

At one point in the game the annoucer said I don't think you can consider pulling RG3 at this point can you? and I turned around and told my buddy how can you not consider putting Cousins in? But the difference is I was sitting on my couch not in the heat of battle.

I don't know, I did know this would be talked about for awhile now and the media would go crazy playing with all the different possibilties.

I just hope the injury isn't serious and RG3 can be ready for next year because he is a special player and I'd like to see him continue is good play.

[Chidi29]

No, just not a complete dismisal I suppose when my points are all valid.

Like I said before, don't ever take out a starter again for the rest of time no matter how poorly he limps around the field and plays. No reason for a coach to exercise judgement based on changing events on the field if a guy says he can play he can play.

And I never said they weren't valid. They are good points. A lot of QBs get benched at that point.

But I don't think he was as hurt as some think after that second serious. Was he in pain? Yes. But he could still move around enough to drop back in the pocket and play from there. Then his knee gives out and then everyone calls for Shanahan's head, as if he had a crystal ball or something.

And again, the doctors had to have cleared him. Griffin went back to the locker room after that second series with the doctors to get an MRI. Obviously nothing too serious came up in the results. No tears.