What Allen and Shanahan Have Taught Us

[Rudechain]

Why would I need to do that?

The media has been confirming what seemed obvious to me: McNabb is no longer the threat with his legs that he once was. He can't run and he can't extend plays as he once did.

Did you miss that somehow?

Well Oldfan, it's a little confusing here now. I thought you said

"No, I disregard team stats purported to be QB stats. I judge QBs on what I see." In this post http://extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=7424403&postcount=61

So if your not watching all of McNabbs games, how are you basing your opinion? Highlights? Lowlights? Or as a lemming for speculation?

And as for his legs, Manning, Brady, Warner or Favre were not known for thier legs last season. Even Drew Brees is not known for his legs. A quarterbacks most important traits are his arm and his head. If a quarterback can step to the side and evade the rush, it's just as good as running. So the leg's argument to me carries little weight. ( now if we don't address the line, then it could be more of an issue but I suspect that will be addressed in the draft and continuing free agency.

[prufRock]

The Redskins got value in trading for McNabb. In 1999 the Redskins gave up #1, #2 AND #3 picks to the Minnesota Vikings for Brad Johnson. At the time Johnson at 29/30 had only started the equivalent of 2.5 seasons worth of games for Minnesota and had nowhere near the resume that McNabb brings.

In a more recent example the Dolphins before Parcells arrived gave up a #2 draft choice for Daunte Culpepper who was at that time on crutches after season-ending surgery. As it turned out an injury he never really recovered from.

So, #2 and potentially a #3/#4 in 2011 for a pro bowl quarterback who is coming in healthy and knowledgeable about the system being installed by the new coaching staff is a far different kind of trade than you would have seen Cerrato make.

Compare it to the Jason Taylor deal in 2008. Taylor, 34, was acquired for #2 and #6 picks to play in a system he was ill-suited for by his own admission. An outside backer in a 3-4 at 250, he was placed at DE in the 4-3 and was quickly found out as a liability in the run game by the NY Giants and Dallas.

Agree with everything else you said except this portion of your post. McNabb will be 34 in November, so roughly he's the same age as Jason Taylor was when acquired. While he's arguably a better fit for the Redskins' current offense (such as it is), he's a short term solution. Value-wise, he'll pay dividends for 3-years if we're lucky and beyond that, it's difficult to say.

They've certainly given up less than was the case in the Brad Johnson and Culpepper examples. Keep in mind that both were about 4 years younger than McNabb is now though. On the flip side of the equation is the 4th round pick given up for Brett Favre by the Jets two years ago. Favre was older of course, but also more accomplished. Overall, the value-for-value portion of the trade isn't that bad, but I certainly don't think it's a clear steal by the Redskins.

Where I really have a problem with the trade is in terms of what the team needs now, coming off a 4-12 season, and how this move fits into their overall plan. Up until this point in the offseason, I was okay with everything they did, or had the restraint not to do. However, the McNabb acquisition puts some of their other moves into context.

I was hoping the roster purge was the first step in bringing an infusion of young talent this year and an overall change in philosophy at Redskin Park. Now, I think the players jettisoned just weren't productive or were injured. I'm guessing none of them could have played for the team next year. The Larry Johnson and Willie Parker signings, while frugal, are clearly meant to pay dividends immediately at the cost of acquiring and developing a young, talented game-breaking back in the mold of Darren Sproles. The Philip Buchanon signing is another instance of favoring veterans over the chance to develop young players like Justin Tryon and Kevin Barnes. I'm not saying any of the signings were bad, but now you have to look at them as win-now sorts of moves, which have a cost in terms of the development of your younger players.

The optimists among us will say that by changing head coaches and quarterbacks, you should see a marked improvement. I agree. But from 4-12, they had a long, long way to go and I still don't see this as a playoff team. Sure there's the rest of the offseason and the draft, but right now, you have to evaluate this move on its own and within the context of where the team is and right now, I dont' like it. I still see a half-dozen holes on this team and now we're down another two draft picks.

One last point: Over the next few years, as the window of opportunity with McNabb begins to close, my fear is that the team will be doubling-down to make that investment pay off. They'll reach further and pay more for that "final" piece of the puzzle that will put them in contention and if it doesn't pay off, we'll be in the same position four years from now with an old roster, and a depleted draft stock.

[Zguy28]

Winning is cure all. Now bring us some good medicine Coach!

[addicted]

Stats are wonderful things, aren't they?

Why did we get rid of Campbell then?

He only threw two fewer TDs and more yards than McNabb last year despite taking 8 more sacks. His rating, 86.4, was only six points lower than McNabb's and was exactly the same as McNabb's was in '08. Why make a move for a much older QB who puts up such comparable numbers?

My guess is because numbers don't tell you everything.

Numbers don't tell the complete story, but when you are looking at players they fill in the missing gaps.

The reason we got McNabb is simple. Look at Jason Campbells win-loss record. No one really thinks that Jason can't play QB in this league, we know he can. What isn't known is if Campbell can win, because he's been a losing QB since day one. His best season 8-8, he's never done anything for the team to get us into the playoffs. His numbers are decent, his record for Wins-Losses suck. McNabb on the other hand wins. It's not that pretty but it works. McNabb wins so he's the QB. That's the number you should sink into if you wonder why we went with McNabb.

That second round pick gives us a future. When teams rebuild, they gather picks. They don't trade them off. As bulldog says we are not rebuilding. I think that's a huge mistake. This team, after YEARS of wheel-spinning, STILL apparently thinks it's a player or two away. That makes me sad.

I'm sorry your sad but in my opinion you lost your mind with this one. You honestly think that Colt McCoy or Tim Tebow is better to have then McNabb? I don't. You think that Campbell 's better to have then McNabb? I don't. Why this insistance on "rebuilding"? Why rebuild when your coach has a life span of 5 years tops? Why put such importance on players who've never taken a snap in this league? Have you forgotten about draft busts? Youth doesn't win out over expirence to me. We just see it differently I guess. This offense needs some linemen and it's set. Pull up the depth chart with our new pieces like I did and take a look. With solid defense and line protection we should be ok

[Commander Adama]

No, I disregard team stats purported to be QB stats. I judge QBs on what I see. I think the Eagles must do the same. That would explain why they were willing to trade McNabb to a division rival.

Why would I need to do that?

The media has been confirming what seemed obvious to me: McNabb is no longer the threat with his legs that he once was. He can't run and he can't extend plays as he once did.

Did you miss that somehow?

So you don't look at stats, instead you use your EYES, but you never watched a game of his last year. Rather than looking for yourself, you take other people's word about his skills as fact, then post it on a forum like you know what you are talking about? Brilliant!

[Henry]

(and with Henry, you have excellent company in your concerns )

I know I know.

I actually lost faith last offseason. I just don't post much anymore because I'd rather not be negative.

I still want this team to win, but, as I said when we signed Hainsworth, I'll need to see it on the field to believe it. I'm done being burned by offseason hype.

McNabb is an upgrade to be sure. I don't have issue with the straight-up upgrade. What I have a problem with is the mentality. It's the mentality that results in high coach and player turnover, which in turn results in lack of continuity which in turn results in mediocrity on the field ... at best. And while bulldog is ready to applaud this mentality, so long as it's coming from Shanahan, I'm over it.

[Oldfan]

Oldfan,Have you seen the reports where after looking at game film from last year, Shanny asked the players "You actually ran THIS for offense?"

No, the only thing I read is a similar comment attributed to Devin Thomas about one play. I paid it no mind because I can't imagine Shanahan having so little class as to put down a fellow coach like that.

You are always harping on how scheme makes the player. Are you of the opinion that the difference in scheme design between Zorn and Shanny won't matter?

I think Zorn's basic strategy was sound. Shanahan's worries me. He had a big play offense in Denver and I fear that he might do the same here. I don't like offenses that are built with the big play in mind because they are inconsistent. They are too easily shut down by good defenses.

[THUNDERDOME]

Jumbo,

These were the kinds of things we were saying about Gibbs 2.0, don't forget.

.

And we went to the playoffs 2 out of 4 years and were becoming a better team.

[Grinder]

Trading draft picks for an old vet is a win-now move, not a bridge to anything.

Yep, a bridge player would be more like a Jeff Garcia. A vet with West Coast O experience that could be had on the cheap for a year or two w/o trading high picks.

Once again we seem to be trying to circumvent the rebuilding process in order to tread water at 8-8 for another year. Just good enough to miss the playoffs and end up with a mediocre draft pick.

Maybe the other shoe will drop and he's traded in a package for the top pick and youth will actually be served. Otherwise we're the kid who kicks and screams and refuses to take his medicine and never gets any better.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I think Zorn's basic strategy was sound. Shanahan's worries me. He had a big play offense in Denver and I fear that he might do the same here. I don't like offenses that are built with the big play in mind because they are inconsistent. They are too easily shut down by good defenses.

Are you sure about that? Shanahan's Broncos and Reid's Eagles were consistent winners over the past 10-15 years. I'm sure they had some bad games, but I wouldn't say that either of those offenses were ever "easily shut down" by anyone.

[Oldfan]

Well Oldfan, it's a little confusing here now. I thought you said. "No, I disregard team stats purported to be QB stats. I judge QBs on what I see." So if your not watching all of McNabbs games, how are you basing your opinion?

Obviously, I based it on watching some of his games. If you can't tell when a QB like a Mark Brunell or a Donavan McNabb's legs have gone, and he is no longer the threat that he once was, after watching him play a couple of games, then all I can say is: I can.

And as for his legs, Manning, Brady, Warner or Favre were not known for thier legs last season. Even Drew Brees is not known for his legs. A quarterbacks most important traits are his arm and his head.

Have you noticed that all QBs don't have the same abilities? Some make their livings as pocket passers, others are a threat to use their legs, sometimes to run, sometimes to extend plays.

[authentic]

Nice writeup Bulldog. The unpredictability is one of the best attributes of the FO. the next 3 weeks will be very exciting.

[Oldfan]

Are you sure about that? Shanahan's Broncos and Reid's Eagles were consistent winners over the past 10-15 years. I'm sure they had some bad games, but I wouldn't say that either of those offenses were ever "easily shut down" by anyone.

I'm too lazy to look it up, but I'd be willing to bet that if you combined Reid's and Shanahan's records over the past decade, they have lost more games in the playoffs than they have won. That's because big play offenses fatten up on their offensive stats against the weaker defenses that they won't meet in the playoffs.

I think of it this way: If they both have grade A talent, the offense which emphasizes ball control will probably beat the big play offense by keeping it off the field.

The Oakland Raiders with Plunkett was the only big play offense ever to win back-to-back super bowls.

[Mahons21]

Yes, we do.

Other than Oldenburg and Hicks, all are carry-overs from last year. Do you really think our OL was good last year?

Not only that, but Hicks isn't "depth" in the truest sense. He'll be likely replacing either Randy Thomas (departed) or Heyer (demoted).

-I don't think it was as bad as some are making it out to be. Your neglecting a.) Rhino was playing well prior to his injury, b.) BMW looked much more natural at guard.

-If Hicks takes over at RT, than we'll have a Heyer/Oldenburg/Robinson as depth.

-We need some starting talent to add to this line, but I don't agree that we're in that bad a position as far as depth is concerned.

[SkinFromNepal]

They have taught us that they love to buy things that are on sale provided we have need for it or not... like a friend of mine bought several sets of shoes of all different sizes and none fit him coz they were on great sale... he end up giving most of them to his friends for free... it is another thing that we had to help him cut couple of trees in his backyard.

[Mahons21]

Thomas has not shown a consistent ability to get open deep so far. Santana has in the past, but he's showing signs of wear.

-I personally can't ever go to games, but I've heard more than a few people say that Devin Thomas got open downfield much more consistently than some of us believe. He just never had the ball thrown his way. I watch the games on TV, and have no way of knowing the validity of the previous statement, but I do believe it could hold some truth.

Our O line would have looked worse if Zorn hadn't game planned to get the ball out quick. Donovan will need one helluva lot of "presence" if we don't make some serious improvements.

-If we could get a LT like a BB, or Okung I think our o-line really would have a chance of making a turn around this year. Dockery is solid, not good, not bad. Rabach is descent but nearing the end of his career, but we also have E. Williams ready to take over the reigns at C. Rhino and BMW both looked half descent at RG in the relative short period of time they got to play. We could put either Hicks/Heyer at RT, and consistently give them help with either a TE/RB.

[Oldfan]

So you don't look at stats, instead you use your EYES, but you never watched a game of his last year. Rather than looking for yourself, you take other people's word about his skills as fact, then post it on a forum like you know what you are talking about? Brilliant!

Where did you get the idea that I "never watched a game?" I think you need to read more carefully. I was asked if I had watched every game McNabb played and I replied that I hadn't.

[Oldfan]

--If we could get a LT like a BB, or Okung I think our o-line really would have a chance of making a turn around this year. Dockery is solid, not good, not bad. Rabach is descent but nearing the end of his career, but we also have E. Williams ready to take over the reigns at C. Rhino and BMW both looked half descent at RG in the relative short period of time they got to play. We could put either Hicks/Heyer at RT, and consistently give them help with either a TE/RB.

I watched games last season in which Campbell was run over as soon as his back foot hit on a five-step drop. I find it hard to believe that one good addition will do much to solve the O line problem.

[SkinFromNepal]

I watched games last season in which Campbell was run over as soon as his back foot hit on a five-step drop. I find it hard to believe that one good addition will do much to solve the O line problem.

His five-step drop was like a seven-step drop... not decisive when he had the ball... he was better when he was trying to save his ass and throw the ball at the same time... he is a good person, but as a QB he is not someone who should start.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I watched games last season in which Campbell was run over as soon as his back foot hit on a five-step drop. I find it hard to believe that one good addition will do much to solve the O line problem.

It's dishonest to call that one addition when we've signed two FAs and will be changing our scheme. We don't really know how our current players will play in the new scheme. I will admit we can't expect Rabach, Williams, and Dockery to be Pro Bowlers, but maybe they'll flourish a little more with the new system. Add to that Okung (an assumption on my part), Hicks, and that interior lineman that we brought in very early in Shanahan's tenure and there's no reason to believe we can't be serviceable.

[bulldog]

mercifully this debate will be over very soon when Campbell is dealt to another club.

people can argue about how much Zorn and before him the Gibbs/Saunders dysfunction stunted Campbell's growth but the truth is that Shanahan has made a decision he is not going to go forward with Jason as his starting quarterback.

And considering that he coached Steve Young and John Elway during his NFL career as a coordinator and head coach, one would think that he is well qualified to make that decision

[Commander Adama]

And considering that he coached Steve Young and John Elway during his NFL career as a coordinator and head coach, one would think that he is well qualified to make that decision

Not over these computer GM's that are here at ES. They knew more than Gibbs and now apparently, they know more than Shanahan.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Not over these computer GM's that are here at ES. They knew more than Gibbs and now apparently, they know more than Shanahan.

Just wait until we have 2 consecutive 3-and-outs for the first time this year. The masses will REALLY believe they know more than a 30-year old Kyle Shanahan.

[Warpath11]

I think Zorn's basic strategy was sound. Shanahan's worries me. He had a big play offense in Denver and I fear that he might do the same here. I don't like offenses that are built with the big play in mind because they are inconsistent. They are too easily shut down by good defenses.

I would hesitate to call the Denver offense big play (it may have become moreso with Jay Cutler) but traditionally, under Shanny, Denver's bread and butter was running the zone play with that great zone blocking scheme developed by A. Gibbs. Generally Denver had offenses that were pretty balanced (after all they did have a 2000 yard rusher with a HOF QB, yet they still ran the ball really well).

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I would hesitate to call the Denver offense big play (it may have become moreso with Jay Cutler) but traditionally, under Shanny, Denver's bread and butter was running the zone play with that great zone blocking scheme developed by A. Gibbs. Generally Denver had offenses that were pretty balanced (after all they did have a 2000 yard rusher with a HOF QB, yet they still ran the ball really well).

I also still find it hilarious that Oldfan thinks Zorn's strategies (and 12-20 record) were sound yet finds flaws in a Super Bowl-winning coach's plan.