"My Guy Stinks, Like Your Guy"

I write a monthly column for my hometown newspaper, and this month I offered my take on the 2014 election. The abridged version: Voters were frustrated enough with lying, incompetent, corrupt Democrats that they're willing to see if Republicans are no longer incompetent, irresponsible warmongers.

Responding to my column, Tom Kerner—my college roommate and now a North Carolina lawyer—sent along this comment:

It's like the old saying about how the backup quarterback is the most popular guy in town. The GOP has been named the starter, and when the offense falls apart once again, the people will clamor for the backup. The backup will go in, the offense will stall once more, and on we go. I expect this cycle to remain constant for the remainder of our lifetimes.

"Unitas as a Pittsburgh Steeler"
by Jeffrey Smith

His words should sober still-celebrating members of Team Elephant—which is a good thing. But they can lead to a jaded, cynical view of government: that one group of politicians, or one quarterback, is no better than the next, and we shouldn't expect otherwise. (To be clear, I'm not ascribing this to Tom, but rather saying that his comment can lead some people to think this way.)

This view may be comforting for someone who has grown disillusioned with a once-favored politician or quarterback ("OK, my guy does stink, but so does your guy."), but I think it's both incorrect and dangerous.

To see my point, consider not politicians, but quarterbacks. Specifically, consider a couple of recent media analyses of struggling Washington Redskins starting quarterback Robert Griffin III:

The first, by Washington Post stats jockey Neil Greenberg, looks at the measurables of the three current Redskins quaterbacks, starter Griffin, second-stringer Kirk Cousins, and third-stringer Colt McCoy—each of whom has played at least one complete game this season. Greenberg offers the appropriate caveats about sample size and other variables, but notes that McCoy's numbers are better than the other two QBs and Griffin's are significantly worse.

The second [audio], by former Redskins tight end and radio sports-talker Chris Cooley, offers a film analysis of Griffin's recent performance in Washington's humbling 27–7 loss to the lowly Tampa Bay Buccaneers. WaPo sports blogger Dan Steinberg, who offers a nice abridged version of Cooley's comments complete with screenshots of the plays being discussed, summarizes the analysis as follows:

Cooley said Griffin often looked to the wrong part of the field. He said Griffin repeatedly failed on basic fundamentals. He said Griffin missed what should have been easy reads, didn’t see open receivers, didn’t interpret defensive formations correctly, didn’t understand basic game-management principles, could not allow his team to run any semblance of its offense.

Griffin shouldn't be expected to complete every throw and correctly read every play, of course—not even Peyton Manning and Tom Brady can do that. But Griffin should have a basic grasp of offensive concepts, understand what drops he's supposed to take and what parts of the field he should be reading, have some recognition of what the defense is doing, and show proper footwork and other mechanics.

That level of competency is expected of second-string QBs, not to mention starters. If the starter fails to meet that basic standard, and doesn't have other assets that offset that failing, then of course the team should go to its second-string QB (and third-stringer, if necessary), if only to give other offensive players some opportunities to make plays and improve their game. And if the backups fail to meet that basic standard, then the team should look outside the organization for a QB (and perhaps for a new general manager who can better judge QB talent) rather than accept that the quaterbacking "cycle [will] remain constant," to borrow Tom's words.

After all, some pretty decent quarterbacks were once considered by their teams to not be starter material (or even starters-in-waiting): Johnny Unitas was cut by the Pittsburgh Steelers. Kurt Warner started his career in the Arena League and rode the bench behind Trent Green. Warren Moon started out in the Canadian Football League. And the San Diego Chargers couldn't wait to be rid of Drew Brees.

There is something about political parties and movements that limits their shelf life—the original Democratic-Republicans gave way to Abraham Lincoln and the Republicans, the G.O.P. gave way to Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers, the Democrats gave way to Ronald Reagan and later the Contract with America Republican Congress, George W. Bush and the neo-conservative Republicans gave way to Barack Obama and the progressive Democrats, who in turn are giving way to a new generation of Republicans.

But those transitions shouldn't lead us to think that one president or political movement is no better than another. A president who starts an unnecessary war or ramrods through major legislation that is opposed by more Americans than who support it is like a quaterback who doesn't understand his offense and has bad mechanics—and there are plenty of presidents and quaterbacks who don't have those flaws. Abraham Lincoln was better than Ulysses Grant, just as Johnny U. was better than Chris Weinke.

Instead of resigning ourselves to an endless cycle of Weinkes or Spergon Wynns, we should look for another Lincoln or George Washington, or perhaps just a good Calvin Coolidge or Bill Clinton.