McNabb to Redskins

[slotdirt]

I'm not splitting hairs - Lawrence Taylor was a better defensive player than Reggie White.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

I'm not splitting hairs - Lawrence Taylor was a better defensive player than Reggie White.

So it took you Lawerence Taylor to come up with a better defensive player than White yet you believe McNabb the superior player? Isn't that like making my argument for me?

This is a ridiclous argument. Ok so White is one of the top 10 NFL players in history. Feel better? Again tell me how Donovan McNabb was a more successful Quarterback than Reggie White was a defensive end?

[Smooth Operator]

Let this one go, Cannon

Only a biased idiot would think that McNabb was better than White.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So it took you Lawerence Taylor to come up with a better defensive player than White yet you believe McNabb the superior player? Isn't that like making my argument for me?

This is a ridiclous argument. Ok so White is one of the top 10 NFL players in history. Feel better? Again tell me how Donovan McNabb was a more successful Quarterback than Reggie White was a defensive end?

Its kind of like the time you got on me about comparing Dubai Millenium favorably to Bernardini. It is kind of a silly argument in that they play completely different positions on different sides of the ball and their prime years were seperated by about 15 years.

My point with Mcnabb had more to do with team success. He was the face of the eagles during the most successful period for the team during the modern era. Statisically, the two are impossible to compare although obviously Reggie White will certainly be more memorable 50 years from now.

[slotdirt]

My entire point is that Donovan McNabb probably had the best career in Eagles history. Whether he was a superior player at his particular position than Reggie White is semantics. There are a hell of a lot more quarterbacks in the HOF than defensive ends, so whether or not McNabb was ever the best quarterback in the league at any exact moment in time seems superflous to me, particularly when there were at least two players at his position playing concurrently in Tom Brady and Peyton Manning that would probably make a top ten all-time list before Reggie White ever did.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

Let this one go, Cannon

Only a biased idiot would think that McNabb was better than White.

Thats not nice. I just think they are arguing different things.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

My entire point is that Donovan McNabb probably had the best career in Eagles history. Whether he was a superior player at his particular position than Reggie White is semantics. There are a hell of a lot more quarterbacks in the HOF than defensive ends, so whether or not McNabb was ever the best quarterback in the league at any exact moment in time seems superflous to me, particularly when there were at least two players at his position playing concurrently in Tom Brady and Peyton Manning that would probably make a top ten all-time list before Reggie White ever did.

Excellent point

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Its kind of like the time you got on me about comparing Dubai Millenium favorably to Bernardini. It is kind of a silly argument in that they play completely different positions on different sides of the ball and their prime years were seperated by about 15 years.

My point with Mcnabb had more to do with team success. He was the face of the eagles during the most successful period for the team during the modern era. Statisically, the two are impossible to compare although obviously Reggie White will certainly be more memorable 50 years from now.

No it isnt close to the same. It is really quite simple. White was far superior at his position than McNabb was at his using virtually any measuring tool.

And if McNabb had more to do with his teams success than he also on the other hand takes more of the blame for for its failures of which there have been many. The Eagles success of the last 10 years has not exactly been a legandary run and what are you comparing it to? The past Eagles teams? Well what does the lack of success of the Eagles in the 60's and 70's or 80's have to do with McNabb? If they had won the Super Bowl 3 times in the early 70's does that make Mcnabb less successful? Is Rothelisberger less of a success as a QB because the Steelers were more dominant in the 70's? One thing has nothing to do with another. Perhaps if mcNabb's teams had won a couple Super bowls you could try to make a case. But to me who really doesnt care either way about the Eagles the Donovan mcNabb era will be remembered for missed opportunity than any huge era of success.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No it isnt close to the same. It is really quite simple. White was far superior at his position than McNabb was at his using virtually any measuring tool.

And if McNabb had more to do with his teams success than he also on the other hand takes more of the blame for for its failures of which there have been many. The Eagles success of the last 10 years has not exactly been a legandary run and what are you comparing it to? The past Eagles teams? Well what does the lack of success of the Eagles in the 60's and 70's or 80's have to do with McNabb? If they had won the Super Bowl 3 times in the early 70's does that make Mcnabb less successful? Is Rothelisberger less of a success as a QB because the Steelers were more dominant in the 70's? One thing has nothing to do with another. Perhaps if mcNabb's teams had won a couple Super bowls you could try to make a case. But to me who really doesnt care either way about the Eagles the Donovan mcNabb era will be remembered for missed opportunity than any huge era of success.

Cool

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No it isnt close to the same. It is really quite simple. White was far superior at his position than McNabb was at his using virtually any measuring tool.

And if McNabb had more to do with his teams success than he also on the other hand takes more of the blame for for its failures of which there have been many. The Eagles success of the last 10 years has not exactly been a legandary run and what are you comparing it to? The past Eagles teams? Well what does the lack of success of the Eagles in the 60's and 70's or 80's have to do with McNabb? If they had won the Super Bowl 3 times in the early 70's does that make Mcnabb less successful? Is Rothelisberger less of a success as a QB because the Steelers were more dominant in the 70's? One thing has nothing to do with another. Perhaps if mcNabb's teams had won a couple Super bowls you could try to make a case. But to me who really doesnt care either way about the Eagles the Donovan mcNabb era will be remembered for missed opportunity than any huge era of success.

Very true. Good post.

[slotdirt]

My greatest Donovan memory is probably the two separate times he vomited inbetween plays in like the 2004 season. One time was against Jacksonville.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

My entire point is that Donovan McNabb probably had the best career in Eagles history. Whether he was a superior player at his particular position than Reggie White is semantics. There are a hell of a lot more quarterbacks in the HOF than defensive ends, so whether or not McNabb was ever the best quarterback in the league at any exact moment in time seems superflous to me, particularly when there were at least two players at his position playing concurrently in Tom Brady and Peyton Manning that would probably make a top ten all-time list before Reggie White ever did.

And my point is that is just isnt better than Whites. In 8 years White was 1st team all pro 6 times and 2nd team all pro twice. If he had retired after those 8 seasons he goes into Hof 1st ballot.

This isnt a debate over Qb's versus DE's. This is a debate over who was a better football player and White clearly was.

Denigrating White doesnt help your cause. On almost any all time list he is in the top 10. Really it is silly to try to knock Reggie White as a player. he was pretty close to flawless at his position. This is about McNabb. He simply doesnt measure up as a football player to Reggie White.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

My greatest Donovan memory is probably the two separate times he vomited inbetween plays in like the 2004 season. One time was against Jacksonville.

I'll never forget that play where he ran behind the line of scrimmage for like 12 or 13 seconds and threw a bomb to like Pinkston or Mitchell or some crappy reciever for a big play. That was a great play. McNabb made a ton of great plays with his legs. He was a much better mobile QB then he is a pocket passer. When he changed the way he played (stopped running) it took a lot away from his game.

It also would have helped if he had a solid running game. He's not made for the West Coast offense because the short dump passes are basically the same as the running game. Thing is McNabb just isnt good at short dump passes!! Doesnt play to his strengths... and his weakness is accuracy.

I also dont buy the "he never had weapons" excuse everyone always uses. He had a very good O-line the majority of his career. That is the very most important thing for a QB. Sure he didnt have pro bowl recievers, but he had pro bowl O-lines. Much more important for a QB. NFL quality recievers are still good even if they arent Jerry Rice when the QB has a lot of time to throw them the ball. He also had B-West who was one of the most dangerous targets in the league for many years. If that isnt a weapon I dont know what is. The "never had recievers" thing is the most overrated and over used excuse for McNabb. The running game is a valid excuse however.

He's also very physically tough. Played through things that other QB's wouldnt have. Very admirable. I would call his mental toughness a weakness though, because he would very rarely come up big in 2 minute drill situations, REALLY big game situations.. And he has an absolutely terrible record in games decided by less than 7 points. He just cant lead a team down the field to win a game (yeah I know 4th and 26.. but that was one play and a great catch).

Another one of his big issues is that he hold onto the ball for way too long. Get sacked a lot because of that.. and its really not the O-lines fault a lot. He takes sacks instead of getting rid of the ball. That is why he doesnt have many interceptions, so you can make a positive out of that. I think we will see the # of sacks go WAY down with Kolb. Kolb gets the ball out quick.

One of the classiest athletes Philly has ever seen and ever will see. Great for the community and never whined about not being treated fairly. It really was a crappy moment when he was boo'd when drafted. He didnt deserve that and it turns out he was the best pick from that draft. At least with 100 mil in his bank account he probably doesnt worry about that draft day.


See.. thats how I feel about McNabb. I'm not a McNabb "hater". I'll still wear my McNabb jersey proudly... eventhough I really want a Maclin jersey!!

[slotdirt]

Let's be honest though, who's the best receiver Donovan had to toss the pill to over his Eagles career? TO for parts of two years due to injuries, then who, Da'Sean Jackson maybe? James Thrash, Todd Pinkston, and Freddie "the People's Champion" Mitchell weren't exactly Biletnikoff and Lynn Swann.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Let's be honest though, who's the best receiver Donovan had to toss the pill to over his Eagles career? TO for parts of two years due to injuries, then who, Da'Sean Jackson maybe? James Thrash, Todd Pinkston, and Freddie "the People's Champion" Mitchell weren't exactly Biletnikoff and Lynn Swann.

TO and D Jax easily. 3 1/2 years of having a really good #1 QB.. 7 1/2 years of very average WR's.

But like I said, considering the top quality of the O-line, I really think the WR excuse is incredibly overrated. If you asked any QB if they'd rather have a mediocre O - line and great WR's.. or a great O-line and mediocre WR's, I'm sure every one would answer the same way.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

TO and D Jax easily. 3 1/2 years of having a really good #1 QB.. 7 1/2 years of very average WR's.

But like I said, considering the top quality of the O-line, I really think the WR excuse is incredibly overrated. If you asked any QB if they'd rather have a mediocre O - line and great WR's.. or a great O-line and mediocre WR's, I'm sure every one would answer the same way.

Great point...although I think it would depend on the QB. A mobile QB like Mcnabb probably could have done better with more talented receivers and a less skilled o-line. Manning would probably take the better line.

[SniperSB23]

LOL at this thread I missed

Skins win more games than the Eagles next year.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

LOL at this thread I missed

Skins win more games than the Eagles next year.

HAHAHAHA! What, have you been smoking crack during your layoff from DT?

Eagles won 11 games last year, with a piss poor defense. Skins won 4.

No QB is worth a 7 game difference. Especially McNabb. He's not going to be much of a change from Campell or Cambell however it was spelled. Skins are still old and have no Offensive Line. McNabb gets sacked more than average cause he wont throw the ball away, he's going to be sacked all the time next year. Shanahan will make the Skins improve a little... McNabb, not so much, or the Eagles wouldnt have traded him to the Skins (that tells you a lot right there). Kolb will be more productive than McNabb next year. McNabb will be similar to Jason Cambell in the results department. The only thing that will help McNabb this year is that Washington actually runs the ball. The Eagles offensive weapons are so much better than Washingtons.

Eagles have issues, at the moment I see them as a 9 game winner next year. The current players like Kolb more than McNabb, they respect him as a leader, one who leads by example. The defense is just too young and the O - line has some question marks so I dont see the Birds making the playoffs.

Skins will be a little better because Shanahan. I can see them improving to a 6 win, possibly 7 win team. There is no fucl<ing way that they win more games than the Eagles next year. I'm willing to bet a night on the town at the Spa on that (dinner and drinks whenever I make it to Toga again).

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

HAHAHAHA! What, have you been smoking crack during your layoff from DT?

Eagles won 11 games last year, with a piss poor defense. Skins won 4.

No QB is worth a 7 game difference. Especially McNabb. He's not going to be much of a change from Campell or Cambell however it was spelled. Skins are still old and have no Offensive Line. McNabb gets sacked more than average cause he wont throw the ball away, he's going to be sacked all the time next year. Shanahan will make the Skins improve a little... McNabb, not so much, or the Eagles wouldnt have traded him to the Skins (that tells you a lot right there). Kolb will be more productive than McNabb next year. McNabb will be similar to Jason Cambell in the results department. The only thing that will help McNabb this year is that Washington actually runs the ball. The Eagles offensive weapons are so much better than Washingtons.

Eagles have issues, at the moment I see them as a 9 game winner next year. The current players like Kolb more than McNabb, they respect him as a leader, one who leads by example. The defense is just too young and the O - line has some question marks so I dont see the Birds making the playoffs.

Skins will be a little better because Shanahan. I can see them improving to a 6 win, possibly 7 win team. There is no fucl<ing way that they win more games than the Eagles next year. I'm willing to bet a night on the town at the Spa on that (dinner and drinks whenever I make it to Toga again).

I see both teams as 7 win teams with the Redskins having more upside. They were 4-12 last year but they were outscored by 70 points. Jacksonville was outscored by 98 last year and went 7-9. They don't have to improve that much to win 3 or 4 more games, they just have to pull out a few close ones and that is where Campbell to McNabb is huge.

And don't overlook those two receivers going into their 3rd years, that is a huge breakout season for receivers and adding McNabb/Shanahan is only going to help them. Couple them with Fred Davis and there is a nice young group of receivers to throw to. At that point anything you get out of Cooley and Moss is just icing on the cake. Yeah, the running backs are pathetically old but there are three of them and maybe you can still get some production out of them with McNabb to take some pressure off. And I think we can all agree that the defense wasn't bad at all last year, a lot better than 4-12.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I see both teams as 7 win teams with the Redskins having more upside. They were 4-12 last year but they were outscored by 70 points. Jacksonville was outscored by 98 last year and went 7-9. They don't have to improve that much to win 3 or 4 more games, they just have to pull out a few close ones and that is where Campbell to McNabb is huge.

And don't overlook those two receivers going into their 3rd years, that is a huge breakout season for receivers and adding McNabb/Shanahan is only going to help them. Couple them with Fred Davis and there is a nice young group of receivers to throw to. At that point anything you get out of Cooley and Moss is just icing on the cake. Yeah, the running backs are pathetically old but there are three of them and maybe you can still get some production out of them with McNabb to take some pressure off. And I think we can all agree that the defense wasn't bad at all last year, a lot better than 4-12.

Check out McNabb's record in games decided by 7 points or less. Its pathetic. He's not a clutch guy.

Yes I agree that Washington's D isnt too bad, but the offense will be terrible again.

So you wanna take that friendly wager?