www.sfexaminer.com: Donovan article, taking subtle shots at Coach Shanahan

[SirClintonPortis]

Continuing the position which I don't actually hold....

How about a little foresight and research before making a personnel decision that costs a high draft pick and results in the acquisition of a player who clearly just doesn't fit? Would you prefer that? You can't spill the milk and then take pride in how well you clean it up. Well, politicians can, but not football coaches!

Well, if he wants inside info, then Shanahan would have to ask McNabb's former teammates, coaches, and even his current coaches. They all might have their reasons to not say anything bad...or they truly believe that he was a "good guy". Salesmen sometimes don't want to disclose all the information to the buyer; and Mike Shanahan is the buyer here.

[LUCKYMAN]

It's not unfounded. It was a bad move to bring McNabb here.

Overcriticism is the word I use. He should be held accountable for the poor move. But, it was one move. His other moves, as of late, have been much better. He shouldn't be condemned by any stretch of the imagination.

and once again, you have proven to everyone how much of an expert you are in forseeing the past.

[Mad Mike]

To play devil's advocate for a second...

Why should anyone be impressed with his good damage control when he's the one who created the damage?

Because EVERYONE makes mistakes and the true test of a person is how they overcome them.

[KCClybun]

Mike fell for what Andy Reid and everyone else had been selling; McNabb was a class act, a true professional, first one in the building, last one to leave, 100 percent commited. It's tough when that's all you hear about the guy to believe some of the more criticial people of his time in Philly are saying. But Mike had a track record of revitilizing quarterbacks careers. So he took the McNabb bait, hoping he'd landed the big one when all he landed was a guy who was a lot like Albert Haynesworth, only he was better at pretending.

It takes balls to bench Donovan McNabb not once, but twice. Mike pretty much admitted what went wrong without coming right out and saying what went wrong. Undoubtedly it was a bad move on his part. Maybe he should've second guess why Reid was so willing to trade a guy who had bought him so much success. He certainly should've listened to the objection of his scouts and his offensive coordinator. But he took a shot in the dark. It backfired on him.

It's why I don't understand the "Shanahan has a big ego" stuff. Why does he have a big ego? Because he doesn't bend to the whim of some of his team? To me, having an ego would've been sticking with the failed McNabb experiment, taking on his huge contract and trying the fiasco again, constantly trying to "fix" him, refusing to admit his mistake, forcing Kyle to mold and fidget and conform.

It takes a pretty big man to admit he was wrong. Some people get irked because he can't come out and just say "Yes, it was a bad move", but shipping off McNabb and trying to move forward, building his team the right way, seems like a pretty good start to me.

[grego]

Mike fell for what Andy Reid and everyone else had been selling; McNabb was a class act, a true professional, first one in the building, last one to leave, 100 percent commited. It's tough when that's all you hear about the guy to believe some of the more criticial people of his time in Philly are saying. But Mike had a track record of revitilizing quarterbacks careers. So he took the McNabb bait, hoping he'd landed the big one when all he landed was a guy who was a lot like Albert Haynesworth, only he was better at pretending.

It takes balls to bench Donovan McNabb not once, but twice. Mike pretty much admitted what went wrong without coming right out and saying what went wrong. Undoubtedly it was a bad move on his part. Maybe he should've second guess why Reid was so willing to trade a guy who had bought him so much success. He certainly should've listened to the objection of his scouts and his offensive coordinator. But he took a shot in the dark. It backfired on him.

It's why I don't understand the "Shanahan has a big ego" stuff. Why does he have a big ego? Because he doesn't bend to the whim of some of his team? To me, having an ego would've been sticking with the failed McNabb experiment, taking on his huge contract and trying the fiasco again, constantly trying to "fix" him, refusing to admit his mistake, forcing Kyle to mold and fidget and conform.

It takes a pretty big man to admit he was wrong. Some people get irked because he can't come out and just say "Yes, it was a bad move", but shipping off McNabb and trying to move forward, building his team the right way, seems like a pretty good start to me.

i think i agree with all of this. nice one. :thumbsup:

[SkinsCrushCowboys]

Last I checked mcgrounder is a Viking..,who cares. Shannys took a chance and it did not work out for either side.

[darrelgreenie]

I think 3 mistakes were made.

o giving up picks with the aim of getting a quick fix win now QB without due dilligence

o no not being willing or able to tweak the system to fit the QB they traded for (remember they traded for McNabb)

o botching the handling/managment of the entire McNabb situation (press conferences, media leaks etc)

[Hitman21ST]

Why not just dust the ol' brain off and give a try? Has Shanahan and his son ever denied being control freaks? It's well documented by this point that they are and there is not a single thing wrong with that if the results support it (which two super bowls and arguably the Texans offense does). Perhaps, just maybe, everyone is right. McNabb couldn't handle the level of control without becoming "robotic" (another way of saying underperforming). The Shanahans didn't like this under performance and weren't willing to customize an offense around the strengths of McNabb, they wanted to run their own system.

There is no law saying every story must include at least one bad guy. Sometimes it's just a bad fit and it's better to move in a different direction.

I'm not trying to say McNabb is the bad guy. But if they're trying to take underhanded shots at Shanahan, then they need to be called on it.

[LUCKYMAN]

Last I checked mcgrounder is a Viking..,who cares. Shannys took a chance and it did not work out for either side.

EXACTLY. Why are some so called fans more concerned with LAST year. What is that about? Let get on talking about John Beck and this years team.

[RedskinsInFebruary]

I think 3 mistakes were made.

o giving up picks with the aim of getting a quick fix win now QB without due dilligence

o no not being willing or able to tweak the system to fit the QB they traded for (remember they traded for McNabb)

o botching the handling/managment of the entire McNabb situation (press conferences, media leaks etc)

Nicely done. Plus I really don't get unnecessarily screwing up the QB situation when we had so many other holes to fill.

[Stadium-Armory]

If you're handed John Riggins and a once-in-a-lifetime offensive line, you adapt your system to fit the players. You don't adapt your system for Mc5.

I for one am glad to see us finally have a 'system'. Something to build players around.

[darrelgreenie]

If you're handed John Riggins and a once-in-a-lifetime offensive line, you adapt your system to fit the players. You don't adapt your system for Mc5.

I for one am glad to see us finally have a 'system'. Something to build players around.

I think its narrow minded to think there is anything wrong with an OC tailoring their offense to suit there players.

Expecially when we're talking about adapting to a QB they themselves sought out and traded to acquire.

A QB with a proven career coming off a pro-bowl season.

[Stadium-Armory]

I think its narrow minded to think there is anything wrong with an OC tailoring their offense to suit there players.

Expecially when we're talking about adapting to a QB they themselves sought out and traded to acquire.

A QB with a proven career coming off a pro-bowl season.

Certainly, some flexibility is usually in order. I guess its a question of how much is reasonable and under what circumstances.

No doubt they should have done some more due diligence before the signing.

[SkinFromNepal]

I am not angry with Donovan for saying this... Our head coach knew that he has been in one system entire his NFL career and it would be hard for him to change drastically. Still they brought him here.. I am not trying to defend Haynesworth, but we, kind of, did the same thing with him... we tried to make him play the position that he is not at all suited for and he doesn't want to play... now NE, eventhough, has 3-4 O will make good use of his abilities... same goes with Donovan. One thing I would say Shanahan did rite was to own his mistakes and let him go.. now we have backups who will follow "my way or highway approach" --- I really hope Beck does a decent job... I am still giving Shanahan, two time champion coach, the benefit of doubt and I think our QB will do a decent job.

[Mad Mike]

I think its narrow minded to think there is anything wrong with an OC tailoring their offense to suit there players.

Expecially when we're talking about adapting to a QB they themselves sought out and traded to acquire.

A QB with a proven career cut from his former team for an unproven QB like Kolb

Fixed that for ya. :evilg:

I think there is a difference between adapting your system to fit players and throwing the system out the window because your QB refuses to do his part.

The fact is that adapting your system to a player means that you are still running your system. You adjust what you do within the system to take advantage of his strengths and hide his weakness. I have no doubt that adjustments were made for McNabb. I have every doubt that McNabb failed to do his part.

[KCClybun]

I think its narrow minded to think there is anything wrong with an OC tailoring their offense to suit there players.

Expecially when we're talking about adapting to a QB they themselves sought out and traded to acquire.

A QB with a proven career coming off a pro-bowl season.

McNabb's definition of Kyle adapting seemed to mean "let me improvise outside the confines of our offense", or completely change the way it works. That's what makes Bill Musgrave so great apparently; McNabb's going to have "input".

And Kyle never wanted him. He essentially was forced to deal with a guy he knew wasn't going to be able to do the things he wanted. That was Mike's move. Kyle knew it was going to work.

[redskins55]

Funny.. So many Redskins fans bash the comments by Musgrave and McNabb but our very own Joe Gibbs did exactly what they mentioned. He did the same thing to win most of his games in his career. Gibbs tried to install his high flying offense when he first got here with Theisman and Riggins but he lost games. So he changes the offense to a run first philosophy to fit the personnel and we dominate.Then he changes the offense back to a pass offense when he gets the posse. And he never had a hall of fame QB. That's the difference between Shanahan and Gibbs. Shanny had a hall of famer leading his team to two Super Bowls but after that mistook his team's greatness for his system and thought he could bring in lesser players just to run his system. Not to mention he played in a weaker division than Gibb's teams and it showed when they played the Colts, Steelers or Patriots in the playoffs. Teams that coincidentally adopted their systems around their players.

If Shanny would've been more like Gibbs maybe he consistently makes the playoffs and conference championship games in the toughest division in football like Gibbs did over a decade. But instead he tries to adapt desired skill set players around his system instead of adopting his system around flat out good players.

[KCClybun]

Funny.. So many Redskins fans bash the comments by Musgrave and McNabb but our very own Joe Gibbs did exactly what they mentioned. He did the same thing to win most of his games in his career. Gibbs tried to install his high flying offense when he first got here with Theisman and Riggins but he lost games. So he changes the offense to a run first philosophy to fit the personnel and we dominate.Then he changes the offense back to a pass offense when he gets the posse. And he never had a hall of fame QB. That's the difference between Shanahan and Gibbs. Shanny had a hall of famer leading his team to two Super Bowls but after that mistook his team's greatness for his system and thought he could bring in lesser players just to run his system. Not to mention he played in a weak division and it showed when they played the Colts, Steelers or Patriots. Teams that coincidentally adopted their systems around their players.

If Shanny would've been more like Gibbs maybe he consistently makes the playoffs and conference championship games in the toughest division in football like Gibbs did over a decade. But instead he tries to adapt desired skill set players around his system instead of adopting his system around flat out good players.

Riiiggght.

How many Super Bowl's did John Elway win before Mike Shanahan? Oh right, he got blown out in all of them. Must've forgotten. Not saying Elway's not great. He is. But let's not act like Mike lucked his way into getting two Super Bowl rings just because he had Elway.

Gibbs "changed" his system for one season. One. The next season, Theismann was right back to the Air Coryell style of offense. Theismann threw for 3,714 yards and 29 touchdowns and won league MVP. It's kinda hard to believe that Theismann threw for that much yardage and that many touchdowns on a "run-first" football team. We went run-first because 1.) it was strike shortened season and 2.) Theismann threw more interceptions than touchdowns the year prior. The core of Joe Gibbs offense was always the aerial attack, with a strong run game to help. The foundation of the offense, it's core principles, never changed.

Because you can't change your system when you have so many quarterbacks running it in the span of a decade. You just can't. It doesn't work that way. You tweak. Of course you adjust to your teams strengths. But this idea that Joe Gibbs, great as he was, as deserving of a place in the Hall of Fame, was some sort of master of flip-flopping his offense around depending on who was under center isn't true. It just isn't. Gibbs, like Shanahan did in Denver for a while, had a system and weapons in place where, arguably, it didn't matter who you played at quarterback. How many times did Doug Williams come off the bench to relieve Jay Shroeder of duty? And you're telling me everytime that happened, that what? Joe put down his Jay playbook and picked up his Doug playbook?

By time Mark Rypien became the starter he had to know that playbook in and out, and he certainly couldn't have if it was tweaked and adjusted and changed as much as people think.

Gibbs changed the way he did things once in 1982. Once. He had a system that worked.

And part of the downfall of and inconsistency of Gibbs 2.0 was the constant changing of offensive coordinators, was the constant tweaking, the complete lack of continuity as Gibbs had to adjust to Ramsey and then Brunell and then back to Ramsey and back to Brunell and then Campbell.

Mike had to be doing something right, because he got three Super Bowl rings running the system he did (one as OC), and then he managed to win a lot of football games with the likes of Brian Griese and Jake Plummer and Gus Ferrotte and Steve Burlein and Bubby friggin' Brister. (Ironically, part of the reason Bubby wasn't allowed to take over after Elway is because he improvised and made crap up as he went along.)

We're not talking about getting run heavy to help out our quarterback. We're talking about a guy in McNabb who wanted to do his own thing. A guy who, while in Philly, wouldn't execute the gameplan. Would call his own plays, not because they were better, but just because. A guy who didn't want to work on footwork and fundamentals because he did it that way. How often did you see screens in Houston when Kyle was OC there? McNabb wanted screens, he got screens. He got his check downs. And he still couldn't be trusted to throw a five yard pass, throwing it three yards short into the dirt instead.

McNabb didn't want adjustments, he didn't want tweaks. He wanted to do his own thing. He wanted the offense like it was in Philly. Kyle couldn't meet him halfway, because a guy who was clearly struggling to lose the offense STILL had a high enough opinion of himself to think he knew better.

And you'll notice Bill Musgrave (coincidentally, a former Redskins assistant) has a startling lack of Super Bowl rings. And now he has a quarterback who will make up his own plays, go against the gameplan, and smile like a dummy when he underthrows Percy Harvin while he's wide open, or can't complete a ten yard pass without hitting Kyle Rudolph in the knee caps first.

[KDawg]

and once again, you have proven to everyone how much of an expert you are in forseeing the past.

Listen, you're a newbie here. Don't pretend like you know my posting history, k?

I have always been against the McNabb move.

Where I was guilty is I thought he would be an upgrade over Campbell at the very least. Wow, that was stupid.

[Cpt.Chaos47]

How many rings does Donovan have? The coach is the boss you do what he says and shut your damn mouth. Two of the greatest QBs in history John Elway and Steve Young say that Shanahan made them better and got them rings, so who gives a damn what McNabb thinks.Maybe if he would have done what Shanny asked instead of thinking he knows it all he would have ended up with a ring, but he was too worried about wristbands and looking stupid. Im sick of everybody dogging Shanny for the way he treated McNabb and people saying McNabb is a great guy who deserves respect. McNabb is an ego maniac that hides behind his agent.Atleast guys like James Harrison, TO and CP when he was here had the balls to say what was on their mind and not hide behind someone else.

[darrelgreenie]

I think there is a difference between adapting your system to fit players and throwing the system out the window because your QB refuses to do his part.

The fact is that adapting your system to a player means that you are still running your system. You adjust what you do within the system to take advantage of his strengths and hide his weakness. I have no doubt that adjustments were made for McNabb. I have every doubt that McNabb failed to do his part.

I've always maintained that both parties share blame.

But, in your post above you assume that McNabb 'refused' to do his part and you also assume that Kyle 'no doubt' made adjustments.

These assumption allow you to place all the blame McNabb.

But given McNabb's career I don't agree with either assumption.

And I can completely understand if Kyle was rigid with his scheme.

It's his first time installing his offense with a new team.

Its a lot harder to try to adapt scheme while your still trying to teach it to everyone else on the team.

And I can understand McNabb's struggles in a new offense as rigid as Kyle's, many QBs that change teams struggle in year one.

But, to get bent out of shape over these comments by Musgrave and McNabb imo shows a certain level of lack of objectivity and insecurity.

---------- Post added August-7th-2011 at 05:22 AM ----------

McNabb's definition of Kyle adapting seemed to mean "let me improvise outside the confines of our offense", or completely change the way it works. That's what makes Bill Musgrave so great apparently; McNabb's going to have "input".

And Kyle never wanted him. He essentially was forced to deal with a guy he knew wasn't going to be able to do the things he wanted. That was Mike's move. Kyle knew it was going to work.

I think your take is a very broad stokes view that allows you to blame only McNabb.

We don't know how McNabb felt or what changes he asked for or how Kyle felt and how rigid Kyle was or wasn't its all opinion/specualtion.

And even using your own speculation there are several QBs in the league that play outside the confines of their offense.

Their called playmakers and you don't trade for a Ben Rothlisberger then complain that he ad-libs or hold the balls too long.

But, I don't believe McNabb's input would have amounted to simply being allowed to improvise.

I think he thought he would have input like any veteran QB would have their OC.

I've used this quote several times because I think its a good example of a functional OC/QB relationship:

The thing is you can have a playbook a foot thick,'' Weis said. "You can have your system, whatever it is. But it better fit what your quarterback can do because if you're asking him to do things he can't do, forget it.''

In that regard, Weis would sit down with Vinny Testaverde when Weis was with the Jets and go over the playbook and what was going to be taken from it for the upcoming game. After several days of practice, they would revisit those plays on Thursday or Friday, and Weis would listen to Testaverde's viewpoint.

"If Vinny didn't like a play, whether I liked it or not, we'd throw it out,'' Weis said. "Vinny, [quarterback coach Dan] Henning, and I would sit and talk about the plan and rather than be hardheaded about it because it was my idea, if the quarterback wasn't confident in it, we'd throw it out.''

[JoeSkins]

Well, if he wants inside info, then Shanahan would have to ask McNabb's former teammates, coaches, and even his current coaches. They all might have their reasons to not say anything bad...or they truly believe that he was a "good guy". Salesmen sometimes don't want to disclose all the information to the buyer; and Mike Shanahan is the buyer here.

This is a fair point. There are no consumer protection suits in NFL transactions so it really is caveat emptor. My devil's advocate train is slowing down a bit...

---------- Post added August-7th-2011 at 09:33 AM ----------

Because EVERYONE makes mistakes and the true test of a person is how they overcome them.

Fair, but I don't care about Mike as a person. I care about him as a coach who should have dealt with the problem more efficiently or not created it in the first place. For example, remember that old line about "taking his and beating yours and then taking yours and beating his?" After his treatment of Haynesworth and McNabb, I (don't really but for argument's sake) have serious doubts about whether Mike is a good coach. Being unable to utilize talent that has been proven elsewhere demonstrates a commitment to pride rather than winning. It's great that he's owned up to his mistake and dealt with it, but if this was a corporation the shareholders wouldn't be too happy that the mistake was made in the first place. The year was wasted.

[grego]

I've always maintained that both parties share blame.

But, in your post above you assume that McNabb 'refused' to do his part and you also assume that Kyle 'no doubt' made adjustments.

These assumption allow you to place all the blame McNabb.

ive made the same assumptions, but, they are based mainly in some of the info that came out about mcnabb. it may be that those assumptions are wrong, but i'm not so sure. they seem to make sense, esp when it comes to why shanny would give up on a QB that he gave up alot to bring here.

[Wyvern]

A couple of points:

1. The Skins were simply gambling that McNabb would be a good fit in Shanahan's offense. They were looking for someone elusive and durable enough to survive behind the Skins sub-par O-line, and accurate enough on the deep throws AND the timing patterns. They were looking for an experienced (Pro-Bowl caliber?) team-leader to manage the offense, someone who would help usher in the Shanahan offense and help in the evaluation of the receiving corps and o-line with a time-tested QB performance. They realized they'd be asking McNabb to adjust and so some things differently, but on tape, Donovan showed he had all the tools he needed to do so.

Reality was that the gamble didn't work out. While he was elusive, the line was worse than expected. And Donovan's age, conditioning (?), and previous injury history diminished his durability in 2010. He picked up nagging injuries that hampered his passing accuracy, and wasn't that good on timing accuracy. Most importantly, he wasn't able to adjust fully to what the Shanahan's were looking for a QB in their system, and couldn't be the 'leader' they were looking for.

2. Considering the 2010 season was essentially going to be conducted under a ' transition and evaluation' theme, the Shanahans have a right to be insistant on adhering to their own system. They probably felt a strong need to set a baseline offense firmly in the other players minds. There wasn't going to be too much room for customization of this baseline, to suit a single player's preferences. After all, it's their jobs on the line, to ensure the Skins has effective coordinated teamwork within time-tested game-plans, before their grace period with Snyder expires. They probably couldn't afford too much tinkering with the offensive gameplan to accomodate McNabb, and simply wanted him to execute what they'd drawn up.

This didn't sit well with McNabb, who had a very different style of handling under Reid. Reid essentially let Donovan be Donovan, and eventually game-magic would be made. But Reid already had a great core of experienced players, and a decent offensive line -- allowing McNabb time to 'make that magic.' In contrast, with the Redskins O-line, McNabb was reduced to quick passes and pedestrian short-yardage increases, because that's all the time that was available. And when McNabb's accuracy went down --- the team had 3 & outs. This had to be frustrating to McNabb and it impacted his performance and decisions.

3. McNabb will do better in Minnesota, but it's not about the Shanahan coaching system. It's because the Vikings have a better O-line than the 2010 Skins and Adrian Peterson instead of Redskin back-up RBs. So McNabb should have more time to play his style of game -- and should see better results.

I also think inwardly Donovan has acknowledged he now needs improve himself on all fronts and step up his game if he wants to stick in the NFL. He realizes he needs to be extremely well-conditioned to counteract the effects of age, and to ensure his throwing is strong and accurate. Mentally, he'll probably be more flexible now -- he's now a year removed from being "THE QB" with the Eagles -- and maybe a little less rigid on having things his way. Musgrave is a very QB-friendly OC, with a great track-record -- perfect fit for McNabb. McNabb's on a mission to redeem his standing and should perform well, especially early in the season, for the Vikings.

Bottom Line: McNabb is in the ideal place to rebound and have a few good remaining years. He fits better with the Vikings, but candidly, still isn't what the Skins need as they continue their transition. But overall, I suspect the Redskins will be the better franchise within two years, for having the courage to let McNabb go.

[bigricky3469]

I don't honestly believe that when Shanny arrived in Denver and told Elway, "either play my way or I'll have your ass shipped out of here". But now after having some success his ego is too big to see the bigger picture and why make a trade for McNabb if you weren't willing to to try to tailor some of your offensive strategy to fit his strengths. Who in the world tries to tweak a veteran QB with McNabb credentials this late in his career. IMO Shanny uked up, screwed up, and needs to shut up. Shanny is no long a humble man willing to make small concession in his coaching in order to get the best out of his players and when he retires I don't want his spoiled ass son no where around the head coach table.