Tag: Mike Shanahan (Page 5 of 13)

McNabb’s Agent: Shanahan’s out to get Donovan

Donovan McNabb said earlier in the week that he would like to remain in D.C. in 2011. But his agent Fletcher Smith is making it hard for that to happen.


Fletcher ripped Mike Shanahan
and his son/offensive coordinator Kyle for being “beyond disrespectful” in their decision to bench McNabb. Then he went on to essentially say that the Shanahans have it out for his client.

From ESPN.com:

“I believe there is tension between Donovan and Kyle that’s rooted in the fact that Donovan has suggested modifications to Kyle’s offense based on intricacies Donovan has learned in his NFL career,” Smith wrote. “For example, Donovan has asked all year that the team run more screen passes to help manage the pass rush more effectively. Ironically, Kyle decided to employ Donovan’s suggestions after he unceremoniously benched him on Sunday.”

You have to appreciate Smith coming to defense of his client but is he honestly saying that Mike Shanahan benched McNabb and then Kyle Shanahan employed McNabb’s suggestions with Rex Grossman? As the ESPN article noted – that seems like a bit of an overstatement.

Mike Shanahan has recently fired back at Smith.

“As I stated earlier, when I traded for Donovan McNabb I had hoped that he would lead us to the playoffs,” said Shanahan. “No one wanted him to be more successful than me. When the team was 5-8 and mathematically out of the playoffs, I made the decision to evaluate our other two quarterbacks.

“This was not personal, but strictly professional. The decision was made in the best interest of the Washington Redskins and I stand by my decision. I will attempt to talk to Fletcher Smith directly to clear up every one of his misconceptions.”

If the Shanahans believe that McNabb can’t run their offense, then they did nothing wrong in benching him. If they honestly think Grossman is better than they would be wrong. But at least their reasoning behind McNabb makes sense. (If he’s not going to be here next year, why keep playing him?).

That said, if the Shanahans want McNabb back next year and expect him to compete as a starter, then their decision to bench him for the human turnover machine looks ridiculous. Because even though the Redskins are out of it they would still benefit from McNabb taking as many reps in Shanahan’s offense as possible – especially if he’s struggling to grasp the system. You don’t bench the guy and then say, “But hey, maybe you’ll be better next year. We’ll see you then!”

What a weird situation.

2010 Year-End Sports Review: What We Already Knew

Let’s be honest: Sports bloggers know everything. Just ask us. As part of our 2010 Year-End Sports Review, our list of things we already knew this year includes Brad Childress’ biggest fail, Wade Phillips’ demise in Dallas and John Calipari’s troubles. We also knew Kevin Durant was the next great superstar (who didn’t see that coming?), Roger Clemens is the ultimate windbag and that “Matty Ice” knows fourth-quarter comebacks. We should have gone to medical school…

Contributors: Anthony Stalter, John Paulsen, Paul Costanzo, Drew Ellis and Mike Farley

LeBron is a frontrunner.

We all were a little surprised that LeBron left Cleveland, but the writing was on the wall. Growing up, LeBron didn’t root for the local teams. He followed the Yankees, Bulls and Cowboys, which in the 1990s constituted the Holy Triumvirate of Frontrunning. He wore his Yankee cap to an Indians game and was seen hobnobbing on the Cowboy sidelines during a Browns game. He says he’s loyal, but he’s only loyal to winners…unless they only win in the regular season, of course.

July 08, 2010 - Greenwich, CONNECTICUT, United States - epa02241974 Handout photo from ESPN showing LaBron James (L), NBA's reigning two-time MVP, as he ends months of speculation and announces 08 July 2010 on ESPN 'The Decision' in Greenwich, Connecticut, USA, that he will go to the Miami Heat where he will play basketball next 2010-11 season. James said his decision was based on the fact that he wanted to play with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh.

Brad Childress’ biggest flaw cost him his job in the end.

There were many reasons why the Vikings decided to fire head coach Brad Childress roughly a year after they signed him to a contract extension. One of the reasons was because he lost with a talented roster. Another was because he never quite figured out how to best utilize Adrian Peterson, which is a sin given how talented AP is. But the main reason “Chilly” was ousted in Minnesota was because he didn’t know how to manage NFL-caliber personalities. He didn’t know how to handle Brett Favre, which led to blowups on the sidelines and multiple face-to-face confrontations. He also didn’t have a clue how to deal with Randy Moss’ crass attitude, so he released him just four weeks after the team acquired him in a trade from New England. Childress was hired in part to help clean up the mess in Minnesota after the whole “Love Boat” scandal. But the problem with a disciplinarian that hasn’t first earned respect is that his demands fall on deaf ears. In the end, Childress’ inability to command respect from his players cost him his job. You know, on top of the fact that he was losing with a talented roster, he didn’t know how to best utilize Adrian Peterson, he…

Love him or hate him, George Steinbrenner will forever be one of baseball’s icons.

You may have hated his brash attitude, the way he ran his team or the way he conducted his business. You may even feel that he ruined baseball. But regardless of how you may have felt about him, there’s little denying that George Steinbrenner will forever be one of Major League Baseball’s icons. Steinbrenner passed away in July of this year. He will forever be a man known for helping revolutionize the business side of baseball by being the first owner to sell TV cable rights to the MSG Network. When things eventually went south with MSG, he created the YES Network, which is currently the Yankees’ very own TV station that generates millions in revenue. During his tenure, he took the Yankees from a $10 million franchise to a $1.2 billion juggernaut. In 2005, the Yankees became the first professional sports franchise to be worth an estimated one billion dollars. While many baseball fans came to despise the way he ran his team (mainly because he purchased high priced free agents with reckless abandon due to the fact that he could and others couldn’t), don’t miss the message he often made year in and year out: The Yankees are here to win. He didn’t line his pockets with extra revenue (albeit he generated a lot of extra revenue for his club) – he dumped his money back into the on-field product. Losing wasn’t acceptable and if the Bombers came up short one year, you could bet that Steinbrenner would go after the best talent in the offseason, regardless of what others thought of the approach. How many Pirates and Royals fans wish they had an owner with the same appetite for victory?

Continue reading »

Donovan McNabb benched – is he done in Washington?

Donovan McNabb hasn’t played like the second coming of Y.A. Tittle this year, so let’s not act as if he’s the difference between the Redskins finishing this miserable season 3-0 or in a fiery blaze of their own hell. (They’ll probably choose the latter.)

But for crib’s sake, he’s still light-years better than Rex Grossman, whom Mike Shanahan will start against the Cowboys this Sunday.

Once again, the Redskins have befuddled the masses. Both McNabb and Shanahan say that McNabb is healthy, yet Grossman received an increased amount of reps this week practice and has been named Sunday’s starter. But why? Because he gives the Redskins their best chance of winning? That can’t be it. Grossman can hold his own when he plays on a team that employs the top ranked defense and a returner that sets his offense up at midfield every possession. But last time I checked, the Redskins had neither of those at their disposal.

So if McNabb isn’t hurt and Grossman doesn’t give the Skins their best chance of winning, then why start him? The only logical explanation is that they know McNabb won’t be around next year and therefore, are trying to see what they have in Grossman. They signed McNabb to an extension in mid-November but only committed $3.5 million more in guaranteed money so they aren’t tied down to him financially. They could release him and only lose $3.5 million in the process, which is chump change when it comes to a starting quarterback.

Thus, that must be the reason Grossman is starting on Sunday – because McNabb’s days in Washington are numbered. They have to be, or else why start the human turnover machine? Because McNabb still doesn’t have a feel for Kyle Shanahan’s offense? If he’s going to be a part of the Skins’ long-term future, then both Shanahans would want McNabb to get as much playing time as possible in preparation for the future. They wouldn’t bench him so he could take cues from Rex freaking Grossman.

Yep, that has to be it. McNabb is done in Washington. No coach in his right mind believes Rex Grossman gives his team its best chance of winning. He may play well for a quarter, a half or even an entire game, but over the course of a season Grossman is not the answer. If Shanahan knows this, then he must also know that McNabb’s time in D.C. is up.

Update: Rich Campbell reports via his Twitter page that Shanahan has informed McNabb that there’s no guarantee he’ll be brought back in 2011. ESPN’s Adam Schefter also says that, “It’s obvious that Donovan McNabb will not be back in Washington this season.”

This is a downgrade to the entire Washington offense: Santana Moss, Chris Cooley, Anthony Armstrong…even Ryan Torain, who is going to get even more attention as the Cowboys dare Rex Grossman to air it out. I see Moss and Torain as fringe WR2 and RB2, respectively, while Cooley becomes a fringe TE1 play.

Redskins lose to Bucs on botched extra point attempt

The ball sails over Washington Redskins' kicker Graham Gano's head as holder Hunter Smith misses the snap costing the Redskins the game during the fourth quarter against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers at FedEx Field in Landover, Maryland on December 12, 2010. The Buccaneers defeated the Redskins 17-16.  UPI/Kevin Dietsch Photo via Newscom

Think Mike Shanahan will try to blame Sunday’s 17-16 loss to the Bucs on Albert Haynesworth, even though the massive defensive tackle was at home suspended?

Despite getting a 173-yard rushing effort out of Ryan Torian, the Redskins found a new way to lose when a high snap slipped through the fingers of holder Hunter Smith on what should have been a game-tying extra point attempt in the final seconds of the game. Donovan McNabb had just engineered a late scoring drive that was capped on a touchdown pass to Santana Moss but due to Washington’s inability to do anything right this season, the botched extra point cost the Skins the game. Their ensuing onsides kick failed and the game was over.

This season couldn’t end fast enough for Shanahan. Everyone knew it would take a while for him to turn things around in D.C., but this season has been marred by controversy and embarrassment. No matter what side of the debate you’re on in the Haynesworth debacle, the bottom line is that Shanahan failed to perform damage control at the start of the season and now Haynesworth is at home and the Skins are still losing. He’s a lazy malcontent of a player, but Haynesworth was by far Washington’s most productive defensive lineman and Shanahan never had control of the situation. (Or maybe Haynesworth would have continued to be a pain in the ass and it wouldn’t have mattered. Whatever.)

As for the Bucs, they kept their playoff hopes very much alive and with home games coming up against the Lions and Seahawks the next two weeks, anything could happen. They certainly seem to have a better chance than the Packers, who have the same 8-5 record but have a much tougher road ahead. They’re at New England next week before hosting the Giants and Bears in the final two weeks.

Thanks to a botched extra point attempt on Sunday, the Bucs’ fairytale ride isn’t over yet.

Kudos to the Redskins for suspending Albert Haynesworth

GLENDALE, AZ - SEPTEMBER 02: Defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth  of the Washington Redskins stands on the sidelines during preseason NFL game against the Arizona Cardinals at the University of Phoenix Stadium on September 2, 2010 in Glendale, Arizona. The Cardinals defeated the Redskins 20-10. (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images)

When it comes to the ongoing battle between Albert Haynesworth and the Redskins (especially head coach Mike Shanahan), I often feel as though the team should just cut its losses and move on. After all, Haynesworth doesn’t want to play for Shanahan, he doesn’t want to play in a 3-4 and obviously he’ll continue to be a distraction until he gets out of D.C.

But after giving it more thought, I actually like how the Redskins are handling the situation. Haynesworth reportedly showed up hungover to Friday’s practice and he also missed a team meeting. He apparently told GM Bruce Allen on Monday that he’s no longer speaking to Shanahan, who issued a statement saying that Haynesworth “refused to play in our base defense or on first-down or second-down nickel situations” and “refused to follow the instructions of our coaches both during weekly practices and during actual games.”

So the Redskins suspended him the final four games of the season without pay. Haynesworth will no doubt appeal the suspension and he may win after the NFLPA makes a case that the Redskins have no basis to stop paying him. But no matter how this situation ends (his tenure in Washington is almost surely over), kudus to the Skins for not giving in to what Haynesworth ultimately wants (i.e. to be released).

Shanahan has a massive ego and he is partly to blame for the way things turned out. Could he have handled the situation better and maybe turned a negative into a positive? Yes, but that ship has sailed now. It’s time for the Skins to put up a collective front.

They’ve already paid Haynesworth $36.5 million for two seasons and he’s done very little to earn that money. So why reward him by cutting him and giving him the opportunity to play elsewhere? If the Redskins aren’t getting what they want (i.e. a productive defensive tackle who doesn’t moonlight as a pain in the ass), why should he get what he wants?

Chances are this situation won’t go down smoothly but I applaud the Redskins for digging in their heels and not releasing him. Granted, it may be a stubborn move and let’s not overlook the fact that this is all Daniel Snyder’s fault for paying this guy millions of dollars upfront when Haynesworth had a history of being a malcontent. But at this point, I like what the Skins are doing.

« Older posts Newer posts »