Quick Links

McCoy: 'Our protection failed a lot'

McCoy: 'Our protection failed a lot'

Colt McCoy was not effective at quarterback against the Rams on Sunday. He completed 20 of 32 passes for 199 yards with two interceptions. That comes to a passer rating of 54.

The Redskins got nothing going on offense; they took just one snap in the red zone and got shut out for the first time since the John Beck-led Washington team lost to the Bills 23-0 in 2011.

So what did Jay Gruden have to say about McCoy’s performance after looking at the film?

“Well, he was put in some tough situations,” said Gruden during his Monday news conference. “We continue to punish ourselves with holding calls, false starts, mis-targeting a run, poor technique from time to time and we leave ourselves in third down and too long, and we are not very good on third down obviously. And then in the second half when it became a one-dimensional game, we’re not good enough to overcome those right now at this time. So, unfortunate, it wasn’t all on Colt. Obviously he had some issues with protection. Our backs missed a few, our line missed one or two and it was a tough day for the quarterback.”

Read through that again and see if you can find anything that actually places any responsibility on McCoy for his performance. Maybe the part about “poor technique from time to time”. Perhaps when he said “we are not very good on third down” he put some of the fault on the quarterback. But overall, McCoy got kid gloves treatment by the coach here.

Let’s go back a few weeks to the day after the Redskins’ 27-7 loss to the Bucs in Week 11. Robert Griffin III was not effective in that game with a stat line very similar to the one that McCoy put up against the Rams. Griffin completed 23 of 32 for 207 yards with two interceptions and one touchdown pass.

Here is what Gruden had to say about Griffin’s performance during that game during his day-after press conference:

“Just from Robert’s perspective – you take everybody else out of the picture – Robert had some fundamental flaws,” said Gruden. “He did. His footwork was below average. He took three-step drops when he should have taken five. He took a one-step drop when he should have taken three on a couple of occasions. That can’t happen. He stepped up when he didn’t have to step up, stepped into pressure, he read the wrong side of the field a couple of times. So, from his basic performance just critiquing Robert, it was not even close to being good enough to what we expect from that quarterback position.”

To sum it up, McCoy has a bad game and it’s because “he was put in some tough situations”. Griffin stinks up FedEx Field and he “had some fundamental flaws.” You be the judge.

Fairness dictates that I point out that two days after taking down Griffin, Gruden did say that it was a mistake to do it so perhaps he is taking a kinder, gentler approach with his quarterbacks in public. But to essentially hold McCoy blameless in a shutout while holding Griffin to a much higher standard doesn’t seem to be equitable.

Also in the interest of fairness I need to pass along this quote from McCoy speaking in the locker room on Monday.

“We’re obviously very disappointed,” he told a group of reporters. “We just have to go back to work and figure out the things we can do better, things we can improve. We need get our run game going. Our protection failed a lot yesterday. And I certainly have to play better, too.”

The emphasis is added.

I think you can imagine that there would be quite an uproar if No. 10 had said the same thing, even with the immediate addition that he needed to play better, too.

Personally, I don’t have an issue with either quarterback talking about protection. Both quarterbacks have been at fault for some of the 29 sacks they have taken over the last five games. But the line, backs and tight ends have been awful in protection in recent weeks.

But if one quarterback is going to get called out for throwing his teammates under the bus, shouldn’t the other one get the same treatment for doing the same thing?

Quick Links

The Redskins plan to add multiple new front office positions, according to Bruce Allen

The Redskins plan to add multiple new front office positions, according to Bruce Allen

The Redskins will be adding as many as three new positions to their front office, team president Bruce Allen said on Monday.

Speaking with the media at the Redskins Charitable Golf Foundation, Allen explained that he has spoken with 12 people from outside the organization about possible jobs.

Many wondered if the Redskins would make a hire after the early March firing of former general manager Scot McCloughan.

Reports showed that Allen wanted to promote a new GM from within, and that could still be the case. Doug Williams, Scott Campbell and Eric Schaefer are considered the internal leaders for the vacant position.

MORE REDSKINS: Who will stand out this season and who will disappoint?

Want more Redskins? Click here to follow JP on Facebook and check out @JPFinlayCSN for live updates via Twitter! Click here for the #RedskinsTalk on Apple Podcasts, here for Google Play or press play below. Don't forget to subscribe!

ROSTER BATTLES: Left guard | Tight end Nickel cornerback  | Inside linebacker | Running back

Quick Links

What — if anything — can Redskins learn from Patriots' situation with Jimmy Garoppolo?

What — if anything — can Redskins learn from Patriots' situation with Jimmy Garoppolo?

Despite reports of a highly motivated trade market for Jimmy Garoppolo, the New England Patriots decided to hold on to their backup quarterback this offseason. It's easy to dismiss the notion of keeping Garoppolo as just one part of the unique genius of Pats coach Bill Belichick, but that might be overly simplistic.

In an article last week for MMQB.com, Albert Breer writes that New England ultimately decided there is more value in a QB a team trusts than a package of draft picks, even high draft picks.

Your off-season lesson for this week: Having a good young quarterback on your own roster is more important than what he’s worth as an asset.

The emphasis belongs to Breer, and it could be an interesting lesson for Redskins fans. 

A vocal part of the fan base believed that Washington should have moved QB Kirk Cousins before the draft. The logic went that since the Redskins can't get a long-term deal done with Cousins, the organiztion should maximize the value with the passer and trade him, potentially for the first or second overall pick in the 2017 draft.

Breer's argument, however, might poke holes in that theory. 

Belichick and the Pats decided to keep Garoppolo despite plenty of reasons to move the young signal caller. The first - and super obvious - reason being a healthy Tom Brady. That needs no explanation.

Beyond Brady, Breer explains that it seems more likely Garoppolo's stock will actually decrease in 2017, just because it's so high right now. Looking ahead to the 2018 draft, a number of quarterbacks are expected to be worth high selections, starting with USC quarterback Sam Darnold.

If there was a time to move Garoppolo, it would have been this offseason. And Belichick didn't do it. That suggests the Patriots want to keep the former Eastern Illinois product playing in Foxborough, especially if age ever catches up to the 39-year-old Brady. 

One more note on Garopollo - he is slated for free agency in 2018. Just like Cousins. It's entirely possible Jimmy G walks in free agency next season, and the Pats get no compensation. The exact same possibility is in play for Cousins and the Redskins. New England could franchise Garoppolo too next offseason, as has been the case for Cousins the last two seasons in Burgundy and Gold. 

The truth is Garoppolo has thrown less than 100 passes in the NFL. Cousins threw more than 600 just last season. There is no true comparison for Cousins' situation, just as there isn't for Garoppolo's. Both players have great value. Cousins has proved he's an NFL starter. Garoppolo certainly looked like one in two starts in 2016. 

One key takeaway: Belichick opted to keep Garoppolo this year, even though the Patriots could have recouped a lot of value, and knowing that the 2018 QB market should be significantly better than the 2017 crop. And that's with a very uncertain contract future for Garoppolo and the organization.

In some ways, the Redskins and Bruce Allen made the same decision with Cousins. It could certainly backfire. Cousins might leave next offseason and Washington gets nothing in return. Still, the Redskins will have their passer for 2017, and with an improved defense, should be an NFC playoff contender. It also remains possible the team finalizes a deal with Cousins before the July 15th deadline. It's not probably, but definitely possible. 

But in a league where most can only hope to emulate the success in New England, maybe, just maybe, Washington is following the Patriots handbook. 

<<<NFL POWER RANKINGS: WHO GOT BETTER AFTER THE DRAFT>>>

Want more Redskins? Click here to follow JP on Facebook and check out @JPFinlayCSN for live updates via Twitter! Click here for the #RedskinsTalk on Apple Podcasts, here for Google Play or press play below. Don't forget to subscribe!

ROSTER BATTLES: Left guard | Tight end Nickel cornerback  | Inside linebacker | Running back