The Washington Post

What did you make of ‘I would have pulled him’ coming up again?

Let’s first be careful not to imply a rift where there may not be one. I’ll toss the question out there, you take a look at the sit-down interview with RGIII’s father, and tell me if it means something or nothing. Here’s a key excerpt:

James Andrews and Robert Griffin III during the playoff game in Seattle? (Johnathan Newton/The Washington Post) James Andrews and Robert Griffin III during the playoff game in Seattle. (Johnathan Newton/The Washington Post)

“When he threw the ball at the last minute his leg buckled and he fell and then he came back. Then he got up, went back in, threw the touchdown,” he said. “They went up 14-0. I would have pulled him.”

Taken by itself, it’s perhaps innocuous. It’s RGII admitting basically what everyone else has said, with the benefit of hindsight, including RGIII himself. With a 14-0 lead in a playoff game and a gimpy star quarterback, the wise move is to take him out. Easier to say now than in the moment.

If the answer is so clear, why does it keep coming up? Because reporters keep asking? Because the replies from the horse’s mouths are cryptic enough to have not put it all the way to rest? Because there are no games between January and September to provide something new to talk about?

Is this just the price to pay when a rookie not only becomes the face of a franchise, but takes the league by storm?

Mike Jones and Jason Reid have each written about the potential changes in the Redskins’ offense, and Griffin’s desire to protect himself more, because he knows his value to the franchise. Griffin himself has said he sees the mistake in staying in against the Seahawks, and said:

“It’s in the past, we’re moving forward, and just know that I need those prayers and I need that help me get through this rather than people coming to me to start a controversy over he-said-she-said over who’s to blame.”

This is no “controversy.” It is in the past. But it keeps coming up. Is there any way Griffin or the Redskins can actually put it to rest, short of taking the field in Week 1? (There is a chance to try again, speaking to the press tomorrow at OTAs)

In your opinion, do the comments about changing the offense mean there’s a rift, or that significant changes must be made? Do you think those changes will come easily, or go out the window once the whistle blows?

More Redskins and NFL coverage:

Five areas to monitor during OTAs

The Early Lead: RGIII’s father talks about son’s injury, rehab with Channel 7

NFL draft will move from April to May, more changes may be coming

The Early Lead: Urlacher announces his retirement after 13 seasons

The Other 31: Cowboys invest heavily in Tony Romo

Morning Pixels: Jordan Reed struck by RGIII’s humility

D.C. Sports Bog: RGIII in XBox reveal

Photos and early impressions if you’re thinking about going to training camp



Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Show Comments
Most Read



Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Your Three. Videos curated for you.
Play Videos
Making family dinnertime happen
Deaf banjo player teaches thousands
New limbs for Pakistani soldiers
Play Videos
A veteran finds healing on a dog sled
Learn to make this twice-baked cookie
How to prevent 'e-barrassment'
Play Videos
Syrian refugee: 'I’m committed to the power of music'
The art of tortilla-making
Michael Bolton's cinematic serenade to Detroit
Play Videos
Circus nuns: These sisters are no act
5 ways to raise girls to be leaders
Cool off with sno-balls, a New Orleans treat
Next Story
Mike Jones · May 22, 2013