ES: Making memories with McNabb

[Oldfan]

McNabb is misfit for our offense.

Big play offenses are inconsistent, but that was Donovan's game in Philly.

McNabb doesn't have the wheels to extend plays the way he used to. He can still throw deep, but he needs protection for that -- which our O line cannot provide.

He's adept at running the screen pass, but we have no one resembling Westbrook in an open field on our roster.

Our three receivers drafted in 2008 fit the conventional, ball control WCO which McNabb is not suited to run. Our one deep threat, Santana, is on his last legs.

[Skin'Em84]

He's adept at running the screen pass, but we have no one resembling Westbrook in an open field on our roster.

Our three receivers drafted in 2008 fit the conventional, ball control WCO which McNabb is not suited to run. Our one deep threat, Santana, is on his last legs.

Thomas, Davis, Cooley and Moss can all work in a screen pass situation. Not nearly as well as Westbrook, but they all can.

McNabb ran a WCO in Philly for the last 11 years. It only became as much of a big play offense as it is now when Desean Jackson came in with his explosiveness.

[Oldfan]

Thomas' date=' Davis, Cooley and Moss can all work in a screen pass situation. Not nearly as well as Westbrook, but they all can.[/quote']

How WELL it's run is the whole point.

McNabb ran a WCO in Philly for the last 11 years. It only became as much of a big play offense as it is now when Desean Jackson came in with his explosiveness.

We see this differently. In my eyes, Andy Reid hasn't tried to run a conventional WCO since 1999. Donvan's ability to extend plays and to throw deep, combined with his inconsistency on short-to-medium throws, forced Reid to adapt.

[jkypoo]

McNabb is misfit for our offense.

I keep seeing this being written. But how does anyone really know? Our offense hasn't taken even one practice snap yet. And I doubt Kyle is just going to unpack his Houston playbook and give it a go. And I seem to remember something about Shanny wanting to put the talent in a position to be successful. Also, we aren't done wheeling and dealing; the draft hasn't even happened. I just don't see how that point can be supported without reaching for it.

[Mr. Sinister]

I always thought #5 got somewhat of a bad rap in Philly when it came to the inconsistency of their offense. While he made bad throws or would have one of those innacuracy episodes, I always thought that Reids Keystone Cops playcalling had an effect as well. Whenn you have a 60:40 pass ratio, and when your playcaller likes to go deep a lot, that can screw you up a little IMO.

[matthewgc]

I love this trade.

[Brett81]

This has Snyderatto written all over it.

Disagree...we all know you're upset since now Colt's on his last legs with the team and will possibly get cut and sent to the glue factory, so dump the bowl of cheeri-o's (that were pissed in, in your mind) and get you a knew one.

[Oldfan]

I keep seeing this being written. But how does anyone really know?

You quoted me, but you didn't debate my reasons. What do you see wrong with what I wrote?

[Brett81]

You quoted me, but you didn't debate my reasons. What do you see wrong with what I wrote?

He kinda did, but I'll elaborate based on everything I've read and heard.

Let's see where to start...Shanahan for one has said that he will put guys in position to make plays. Pretty sure he did that with a "declining" John Elway. He fit everything to maximize what ever talent and ability Elway still had and I believe he will do that with McNabb.

Mike and Kyle have not worked together before in a HC/OC type of relationship, so with Kyle running the offense (it is his to run, he's got the job) there's no telling what kind of offense the Skins will run. There's obviously a foundation for a WCO, but what type of WCO? Does anybody really even know outside of the men running the show right now? I don't know, and unless you're a Redskins insider of some sort I wouldn't think you would either. At this point the only person on this board I may believe about what the Skins will or won't do about anything is TK.

I don't know what this means for next year, but looking at this season from right now prior to the draft, all I see is Mike, Bruce, and everyone else trying to put forth a team that will win now. No excuses, just win now. I still think the Skins of 2011 will be a better team, but as of this second, the Skins of 2010 are already better than the 2009 team and they haven't even put pads on yet.

[jkypoo]

You quoted me, but you didn't debate my reasons. What do you see wrong with what I wrote?

The fact that your initial supposition that "McNabb is misfit for our offense" is unknowable and unprovable given the current environment of and circumstances surrounding the ball club and roster renders any reasons immaterial. You are basically arguing things that no one can possibly know and, therefore, any debate on the matter is an exercise in futility.

[Commander PK]

The fact that your initial supposition that "McNabb is misfit for our offense" is unknowable and unprovable given the current environment of and circumstances surrounding the ball club and roster renders any reasons immaterial. You are basically arguing things that no one can possibly know and, therefore, any debate on the matter is an exercise in futility.

Agreed

At this point, we have no idea what the new Redskins offense is going to look like.

[Oldfan]

...Shanahan for one has said that he will put guys in position to make plays. Pretty sure he did that with a "declining" John Elway. He fit everything to maximize what ever talent and ability Elway still had and I believe he will do that with McNabb.

I'm sure he will try, but his personnel does not fit one scheme. McNabb has lost the ability to be a threat with his legs. He isn't going run, and he isn't going to extend plays as he once did. His strength is the deep pass. How do you match him up with an O line which sucks at pass protection and a group of receivers who have not shown an ability to get open deep?

I don't know what this means for next year, but looking at this season from right now prior to the draft, all I see is Mike, Bruce, and everyone else trying to put forth a team that will win now. No excuses, just win now.

That's the same plan we've been on for the last 20 years.

[Oldfan]

The fact that your initial supposition that "McNabb is misfit for our offense" is unknowable and unprovable given the current environment of and circumstances surrounding the ball club and roster renders any reasons immaterial. You are basically arguing things that no one can possibly know and, therefore, any debate on the matter is an exercise in futility.

That's nonsense. I gave you reasons. Those reasons are either valid or invalid. Therefore they can be debated.

If you would rather not, that's fine.

.

[planter]

Donavan is definitely an upgrade. And poor JC continues his legacy as the most unlucky QB in NFL history.

Today Detroit traded for a quality offensive lineman (Sims) increasing the chances they will draft defensive T Suh (instead of Okung).

If the Skins do get Okung and somehow improve/draft at RT.... and get a safety to cover passes....

And Haslett adapts to his talent, gradually moving to a 3-4, rather than forcing square pegs (Haynesworth, Carter, Macintosh, Orakpo into square holes.....

We have outside chance at the playoffs!

[Ghost of]

And poor JC continues his legacy as the most unlucky QB in NFL history.

Not at all. He was lucky that Gibbs retired because if Gibbs/Saunders/Williams were back, Collins would have started (and that would have been a better team, possibly even playoffs.) He's been LUCKY in how things have shaked out, no one else would have had 50+ starts, NO playoff appearances in 5 seasons. Everyone else who has led such anemic offenses and made such obviously stupid plays (or left them on the field) has been booted or benched, including Leftwich.

He actually had a better team than guys like Harrington or Carr ever had and he's done ZILCH with it. Based on what we saw in 2007, we could have been a homefield adv team if Collins had started the entire time, we would ahve been better in 06, though not playoffs likely and 2008 would have been a good, if not great year. Basically, Jason has been the albatross, aside from last year where other factors became much more prominent.

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

He won't. It was originally to be part of a bigger trade, but he's here now for good.

TK, you just made me all warm and fuzzy inside. Thank you

....and great article as always. I really believe that the future is now and this shows it. We are a few good OL away from being one hell of a team. Our offense has playmakers across the board at our WR and TE positions. I can't wait for Donovan to help MK and DT go nuts this year.

[SKINchiefer]

The next best thing to happen to JC since Shanahan, unless he's eventually like the wind.

[isle-hawg]

Neon Dieon had a pedigree when we brought him in also. This trade reminds me of that only we had to trade away a 2nd and 3rd round (my guess) pick for him. Is he going to bring us a superbowl before he retires or just get us back to being mediocre for a year or two before he moves on like so many before him? My guess is the later.

This trade would make a ton of sense if we were only a QB away from winning big, but with so many needs it defies logic to me to trade away draft picks to pick up a 34 year old QB that his former team was chomping at the bit to get rid of.

I sure hope I am wrong with my total disgust with this trade but based on past performances I just don't see this as anything more then another opportunity to the Danny to sell a bunch of new McNabb Jerseys.

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

Neon Dieon had a pedigree when we brought him in also. This trade reminds me of that only we had to trade away a 2nd and 3rd round (my guess) pick for him. Is he going to bring us a superbowl before he retires or just get us back to being mediocre for a year or two before he moves on like so many before him? My guess is the later.

This trade would make a ton of sense if we were only a QB away from winning big, but with so many needs it defies logic to me to trade away draft picks to pick up a 34 year old QB that his former team was chomping at the bit to get rid of.

I sure hope I am wrong with my total disgust with this trade but based on past performances I just don't see this as anything more then another opportunity to the Danny to sell a bunch of new McNabb Jerseys.

What are we missing? A viable OL?

We are close...very close.

[Ghost of]

The fact that your initial supposition that "McNabb is misfit for our offense" is unknowable and unprovable given the current environment of and circumstances surrounding the ball club and roster renders any reasons immaterial. You are basically arguing things that no one can possibly know and, therefore, any debate on the matter is an exercise in futility.

Great post, not merely because of agreement on my part but the logical and eloquent way in which you expressed yourself.

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

The fact that your initial supposition that "McNabb is misfit for our offense" is unknowable and unprovable given the current environment of and circumstances surrounding the ball club and roster renders any reasons immaterial. You are basically arguing things that no one can possibly know and, therefore, any debate on the matter is an exercise in futility.

This reminds me of something that Jumbo would post. They both share an ability to tell you that what you said was stupid, but the wording makes it okay.

[Oldfan]

The fact that your initial supposition that "McNabb is misfit for our offense" is unknowable and unprovable given the current environment of and circumstances surrounding the ball club and roster renders any reasons immaterial. You are basically arguing things that no one can possibly know and, therefore, any debate on the matter is an exercise in futility.

Great post, not merely because of agreement on my part but the logical and eloquent way in which you expressed yourself.

His post was eloquent nonsense.

I gave reasons why McNabb's game is misfit for our offense. My reasons are debatable. You, or anyone else, could prove me wrong by explaining how the Shanahans could possibly fit the pieces together into a viable scheme.

What is "unknowable" here? It does not matter that we don't know what scheme they have in mind. My position is that the parts can't be made to fit any scheme well.

As for "unproveable," I'm not even sure what he means by that. What do you think he means? What has to be proven?

[themurf]

His post was eloquent nonsense.

I gave reasons why McNabb's game is misfit for our offense. My reasons are debatable. You, or anyone else, could prove me wrong by explaining how the Shanahans could possibly fit the pieces together into a viable scheme.

What is "unknowable" here? It does not matter that we don't know what scheme they have in mind. My position is that the parts can't be made to fit any scheme well.

As for "unproveable," I'm not even sure what he means by that. What do you think he means? What has to be proven?

Gentlemen, Oldfan is a known commodity at this point. For those that are newer around here:

1. He only speaks in definitive statements.

2. If you do not agree with his point completely, you are wrong.

3. No matter what you say, he will not change his stance.

4. He knows more than you, so it'd be best for everyone involved if you don't even question him.

For these reasons, I skip over his posts. I don't hate the guy. It's just a waste of time to even attempt to engage him. He's not interested in an intelligent football conversation or even a debate. He's only interested in letting you know he's right and you're wrong. If you're here to actually have a conversation and maybe even listen to differing viewpoints, then I'd recommend you follow a similar strategy.

[onnie007]

I love the move but I still know that all these QBs and RBs do us no good if that OL is not upgraded big time.

[Oldfan]

Gentlemen, Oldfan is a known commodity at this point. For those that are newer around here:

1. He only speaks in definitive statements.

2. If you do not agree with his point completely, you are wrong.

3. No matter what you say, he will not change his stance.

4. He knows more than you, so it'd be best for everyone involved if you don't even question him.

For these reasons, I skip over his posts. I don't hate the guy. It's just a waste of time to even attempt to engage him. He's not interested in an intelligent football conversation or even a debate. He's only interested in letting you know he's right and you're wrong. If you're here to actually have a conversation and maybe even listen to differing viewpoints, then I'd recommend you follow a similar strategy.

Brian, when you engage in debate on this board, is your goal to persuade your opponent that he is wrong? It isn't mine. When I debate I imagine that impartial minds will be reading my words and I make my arguments with them in mind.

I don't care if my opponent is a stubborn fool and won't admit he's wrong. So, I don't know why anyone with a brain should heed your warning that I'm a stubborn fool.

Anyone with a brain should also realize that your warning to others about me does not spring from an altruistic motive. You are pissed with me because I've burned you in debate and bruised your fragile ego. We know that because people who win debates don't get angry with their opponents and go around taking cheap shots.