If John Beck proves he can’t get it done, why should he remain the starter?
Beck replaced Rex Grossman after a four interception loss against the Philadelphia Eagles. Since then, the team’s offense has totally disappeared and it has dropped its last two games against some very suspect defenses.
By no means am I a fan of either one of these guys. But if one is judged a certain way, shouldn’t the other be judged the same way?
Mike Shanahan has told the media he isn’t concerned with what guys did for other teams. including Grossman turning the ball over in Chicago or Beck not having any wins in Miami. He said he would judge them by what they did as a Redskin.
If that’s true, I must be missing something.
Grossman was pulled after five games with a winning record. Many are making the argument that the team won in spite of Rex, and maybe that’s true. But they aren’t winning in spite of Beck. As a matter of fact, they have gone backwards in their ability to compete.
I know: Injuries. The team has too many injuries among its offensive linemen, receivers and running backs. If I recall correctly, though, Kory Lichtensteiger and Trent Williams were injured during the Eagles game , while Grossman was still playing. If that excuse is being lobbed out there for Beck, why didn’t Grossman receive the same benefit of the doubt?
Again, let’s be clear. I’m not a big fan of Grossman’s. But I am one for wins. If Beck isn’t getting the job done, why shouldn’t the guy who was QB when the team was 3-1 and everyone was predicting an NFC East title and a Super Bowl appearance get another shot?
If John Beck is not the future of this franchise, which I’m assuming he won’t be, then why continue to leave him in there and lose games? My feeling is at least try to salvage the rest of the season. I don’t know that either one of these guys can lead them to another victory, but I certainly believe it’s worth trying to see which one can.