redman Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 There has been a lot of discussion about McNabb's containment in the pocket during yesterday's game. Redskins fans have had a tendency to attribute that to the D-line's stellar and, more importantly, disciplined play in maintaining their pass rush lanes. There have also been attributions to Lavar shadowing McNabb during the game, and even suggestions that McNabb was too scared by Lavar to run out of the pocket. Philly fans (per the message boards) have predictably veered away from crediting the Redskins, and have instead piled onto Andy Reid's play-calling and his (alleged) insistence that McNabb stay in the pocket. For example, many Philly fans remember that Reid defied their (and the Philly mayor's) desire to draft Ricky Williams in the first round in 1999, and therefore wanted to validate his selection of McNabb by showing that he's come of age as a legit pocket passer. I believe the truth lies in the middle somewhere. I do believe that our d-line was likely the biggest reason for McNabb having problems, as they were able to apply pressure (particularly Big Daddy) without being overly aggressive and rushing right past McNabb, freeing him up to scramble. However, I'm not sure that Arrington was as big of a factor in containing McNabb as we'd love to think. Sure, he did what he was supposed to do and shadowed him. But it sure didn't look to me like McNabb even seriously tested him by scrabling. And I'm disinclined to think that McNabb, who is universally respected for his leadership and tough play if not his outright QB skills, was scared into staying in the pocket. The point is that I think I see Andy Reid's fingerprints on a lot of this, and I'm going to be very curious to see what differences exist in the Philly offensive gameplan three weeks from now as opposed to the one we saw yesterday. [ by redman on November 26, 2001.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 I don't think he was scared so much as he probably realized the futility of it. Think about it. The rush was keeping him boxed in. There were no open lanes in the middle in which to run. If there was, a big, fast LB would have been waiting for him. To scramble, he would of had to have taken a roundabout path, again with a big, fast LB chasing him. He might have made a play or two, but he probably would have gotten blasted a couple of times, as well. And, by focussing too hard on scrambling and not enough on the defense, he might have thrown a pick or two. Philly is going to have to deal with this style of defense until McNabb shows he can beat it. At this point, he can't. They might be able to beat some of the weaker sisters on the schedule, but any team with a competent defense will stop them cold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 Redman: "However, I'm not sure that Arrington was as big of a factor in containing McNabb as we'd love to think. Sure, he did what he was supposed to do and shadowed him. But it sure didn't look to me like McNabb even seriously tested him by scrabling." I dunno, that one play where McNabb raced to the sideline sure looked like he was trying to get away from Lavar to me. Usuallly he finds a way to turn it upfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 hell yeah he wasn't going to turning up field and I bet inside Aikmans battered brain he was screaming "RUN RUN!" ------------------ <IMG SRC="http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20011125/amdf91063.jpg" border=0> -"Give it up for the Comeback kid!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted November 26, 2001 Author Share Posted November 26, 2001 Terry, I didn't forget about the play you mentioned. But that's not really what I'm addressing. That was one of the rare plays when McNabb left the pocket, even if he didn't end up challenging Lavar in the open field (and no one can blame him for that). The point is that he just didn't leave the pocket much at all, even if it was for four yards and a baseball slide or a run out of bounds as opposed to the normal slashing runs that we've become accustomed to from him. It was rather wierd. ------------------ "Loosen up, Sandy baby. You're just too damn tight!" - John Riggins to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor ---------------------- "I fear we've awakened a sleeping giant, and filled him with a terrible resolve." - Japanese Imperial Admiral Yamamoto, after hearing that the Japanese declaration of war failed to reach the U.S. government before the attack upon Pearl Harbor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 Passing lanes and scrambling lanes are basically the same thing. McNabb drove you crazy because you'd have the receivers covered but he'd scoot through those lanes for the first down. Last year with no shadow, we went zone to handle McNabb's running (and didn't do that well) and paid for it. The props should go to the d-line and LA's shadow that kept those lanes closed and our coverage (a team d). Since our coverage was so good, McNabb had to put his passes were only the receiver could catch them and with no lanes, he could only throw them underneath or try to drop them down the 'chimney', no running. He's not accurate enough to drop them in like that consistently (how many times did he over-throw his recievers?). Question is that now a couple of teams have exposed this weakness, can Philly overcome it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 I am still waiting to see the McNabb that everyone in the media and Philly fans are calling the next great QB. I just dont see it at all. Last year they made excuses about his receivers so they replaced them all, but this year it's been much of the same. Slow reads, telegraphed passes, inacurate throws. Plus his absolute fear of being labeled a running QB keeps him in the pocket long enough for other teams to sack him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 Kilmer: I tend to agree. Going into the season, I really liked McNabb as a young, developing QB. His running is phenominal, and I thought he really showed some strides as a passing quarterback a year ago. But it's almost as if he's regressed this season. Or, at the very best, certainly hasn't improved. I was amazed at how the Eagles could not complete a pass for over 10 yards. I was also amazed by how inaccurate McNabb was even on the shorter passes. He's starting to remind me more of a McNair type -- and I'm not a huge fan of McNair. A talented QB with a good arm and great running ability, but just can't generate a downfield passing attack. Jaworski analyzed McNair one week talking about how he would mis-read the defense and miss open receivers down field, choosing to run instead. I'm not sure if McNabb has this same problem or not, but his inability to throw an intermediate pass down the field on target is alarming for one of the "best young QBs in the game". I may be being a tad harsh here, because there are I'm sure other factors involved. Such as good coverage by the Redskins corners, offensive playcalling, etc. But when you're dubbed some of the titles McNabb has, the expectations are high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markrc99 Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 i too found mcnabb to look absolutely pitiful..it seemed as though he threw 25 passes for 5 yds or less..and even alot of those were run dead by the time he got it out there..i agree w/tom jackson and boomer, philly never challenged washington up the field, even though it was something they stressed as being pivotal..it would've been stupid to go down trying?..please i think i saw staley run with some damn @$$ authority maybe once..he hesitated, not knowing where to go, seemingly every time..he probably ended the day having made 15-20 un/poorly blocked defenders miss him clean..for whatever that's worth.. to me, the skins have improved to the extent that even a good team has to play their best football to beat them..however, i have serious reservations beyond that.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted November 26, 2001 Share Posted November 26, 2001 Did McNabb stay in the pocket by design or necessity? A quick glipmse at Eagle message boards would have you believe it was by design. They believe Andy Reid knew the Skins were going to employ a "spy scheme" and gameplaned for it. However, the gameplan didn't necessarily suit the talents of Donovan McNabb. Effectively 'handcuffin' McNabb from doing what he does best... running and making plays. But... If a defense uses a limited pass rush to maintain the pocket... do the Eagles even have a choice? Seriously. And if you're receivers can't get open against the secondary... all you can really do as an offense is rush the ball. And they tried. ------------------ Accept that some days you're the pigeon and some days the statue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBTD Posted November 27, 2001 Share Posted November 27, 2001 The Eagles game plan was to come out and try to lose, we just realized we need a few more pieces, so the Eagles figured they'd go back to the drafting board, by losing the rest of their games, and then trading up. Umm, I think that's what I heard, or saw. You tell me, the Redskins kicked their behind, what happened there? OK obviosly I'm making that up, but I believe Donovan was sick, I don't know I'm trying to come up with something here. Oh well, Go Cowboys!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.