genuswine hoglover wrote:You don't give up two #1s to trade up for a KR.
Even if that KR goes on to become a SB MVP?
Let's put it this way. Suppose the Skins won the SB in 1997 (instead of the Packers) and Howard was the SB MVP for the Skins. Also, supposed that Howard contributed absolutely nothing before or after that one SB (a la Timmy Smith). Would you still consider Howard a bust?
I feel very disappointed about Desmond Howard because he contributed nothing for the Redskins. But I wonder if he was a victim of bad coaching/being on a bad team. At least he went to another team and accomplished a significant achievement. You can't say the same for Shuler and Westbroken.
genuswine hoglover wrote:You don't give up two #1s to trade up for a KR.
Even if that KR goes on to become a SB MVP?
Let's put it this way. Suppose the Skins won the SB in 1997 (instead of the Packers) and Howard was the SB MVP for the Skins. Also, supposed that Howard contributed absolutely nothing before or after that one SB (a la Timmy Smith). Would you still consider Howard a bust?
I feel very disappointed about Desmond Howard because he contributed nothing for the Redskins. But I wonder if he was a victim of bad coaching/being on a bad team. At least he went to another team and accomplished a significant achievement. You can't say the same for Shuler and Westbroken.
To answer your question: Yes, he is still a bust. I could also argue about the accuracy of your statement that "he went to another team and accomplished a significant achievement." I don't think SB MVP is that significant. It means someone had a good game, albeit at the right time. One good game is not enough from a top 4 pick.
I am in a state of ecstasy! Never mind that nonsense about euphoria and so on. It is sheer, unadulterated, uncompromising ecstasy!
