THE HAMMER'IN HOG Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I'm not sure the McNabb part should be a concern.You said it yourself: "at his age, being moved out of a very QB friendly passing offense," in other words, "moved away from a really pass happy offense." I think at his age, it will benefit him to be in an offense that's much more dedicated to the run. I have a lot of reservations about this upcoming year with the Redskins, mainly on the defensive side of things, but I'm pretty confident in McNabb with Mike/Kyle Shanahan building things around him. I think he'll be a really good fit in this offense, and we're going to see QB play like we haven't seen on the Skins in a very long time. I think you greatly misunderstood what I was getting at, this notion that McNabb had it tough with Philli because he passed more than they ran is being distorted by everyone trying to see McNabb for more than what he really is, that passing game that Philli impliments is an extention to the running game, very high percentage passes are designed to allow for a high completion percentage [which McNabb does not have] with the big yardage coming from the run after the catch, Westbrook was huge with very short passes, screens, and shovel passes, yes MS runs a WCO but it's different from Philli, it requirs more downfield passing coupled with more running, and to make it simple McNabb looked pretty pathetic against the Cowboy's late in the year, so yes I am concerned we may be putting to many eggs in 1 basket in a player who may be washed up at this point in his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted July 13, 2010 Author Share Posted July 13, 2010 I only have 2 areas of concern' date=' 1 is Hazlets ability to run a defense, and 2 McNabb at his age being moved out of a very QB friendly offense in Philli.[/quote']I think Haslett is a solid coach and will be a solid defensive coordinator. M only concern about McNabb is his health and having Rex Grossman as a back-up. this notion that McNabb had it tough with Philli because he passed more than they ran is being distorted by everyone trying to see McNabb for more than what he really is...........................................yes MS runs a WCO but it's different from Philli' date=' it requirs more downfield passing coupled with more running,[/quote']I completely disagree. McNabb did have it rough in Philly for several reasons. o for the majority of his time in Philly there was a dearth of talent at the WR position he was getting it done with the Todd Pinkstons, Freddie Mitchells and the Jame Thrashes of the world. o while a QB can have great success in a WCO its not by normal definitions a QB friendly offense, Kyle Shanahan's offense, much like Mike Shanahan's offense, is well known for being QB friendly. Its known as a QB friendly offense because the reads are well defined almost like a Norv Turner(Coryell) style offense or a Charlie Weis/McDaniels Erhardt-Perkins offense. The WCO is typically predicated on the QB and the receivers making several reads based on several different possiblities. Its a decision intense offense. o the Andy Reid led Eagles have had very little commitment to running the ball and have thusly had very little success in the running game o the result is a one dimensional offense where defenses know that the Eagles are going to pass and they know for the most part the passes are gonna be short/medium high percentages passes which result in a dinky offense short on big plays and the onus is on McNabb to win or loss the game more times then not and to make it simple McNabb looked pretty pathetic against the Cowboy's late in the year, so yes I am concerned we may be putting to many eggs in 1 basket in a player who may be washed up at this point in his career. I don't see how you can really think McNabb may be washed up based on those 2 performances? Every QB that plays poorly and loses a play-off game cannot be washed up because there would far to many QBs that would fit into that group. Because often times when a team losses in the playoffs their QB doesn't have a good game(Flacco, Phillip Rivers, Romo sits to pee etc), heck sometimes when teams win their QB doesn't have a good game(Rothlisberger 1st SB). I think that you're taking a small sample size with specific cirmcustances to jump to the conclusion McNabb might be washed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebster21 Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 did you guys forget that McNabb brought the eagles to NFC Championship games wiht no body WR's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE HAMMER'IN HOG Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 did you guys forget that McNabb brought the eagles to NFC Championship games wiht no body WR's? What worries me is we also saw an absolute garbage QB have success in that same offense when McNabb has been hurt. The success AJ Feeley had in McNabbs absense should scare everyone about McNabbs real value in a different offense other than Philli. I still can't believe that the Eagles would remotly even consider a trade within the division if they were not positive that McNabb was finished! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLredskin Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 20 snaps a day? Try 200. It's all he is on the team for. poor guy...RIP to long snappers backs in other news today is Tuesday so i'm getting family size pasta from Pizza Hut...what is the total sodium count on that??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.