Would you take McNabb?

Should the Skins "take" Donovan McNabb? Of course they should. He would immediately be the best QB on the roster AND he could be a mentor/advisor to all of the other QBs on the roster. Please do not delude yourself into thinking that anyone under contract to the Redskins is comparable as an NFL QB in 2010.

Put aside any knee-jerk reactions to the fact that he plays for the Eagles. He has been in the NFL since 1999 and has been to the playoffs 8 times and led the team to the conference championship game 5 times. That is impressive; there just isn't any other way to look at that. I think that the team he joined in 1999 was 2-14 the year before - so it isn't as if he walked into a team filled with Hall of Fame candidates.

Now to reality...

The Redskins would pay a significant price in a trade for Donovan McNabb and there is the rub. If you are on a 5-year plan to become a perennial contender in the NFC, please do not count on Donovan McNabb being an integral part of that plan in Year Five. Father Time is coming after him and Father Time hasn't missed a tackle yet - - Brett Favre and George Blanda notwithstanding.

If McNabb only cost the Skins a 3rd round pick, they should take him in an instant. But the Eagles will likely want more than that - - particularly from a Division rival.

No. Overrated. Always has been. And the last thing the Redskins need is an overpriced vet on the down slide of his career. Can we please draft a young QB, develop him and have patience to let him flourish?

McNabb sucks.

I'd take him in a hartbeat

As good as I think that McNabb is at times I don't think that he really fits what Shanny wants in a QB. I could be wrong though. You would have to take the good with the bad with him also. He can connect on some big plays but he is streaky and gets sloppy with his footwork, especially when he is playing from behind. His sloppy footwork causes him to be less accurate in key moments of games. In other words he is not the best candidate if you're playing from behind.

Oh yeah, get McNabb, and give up picks for a guy that will choke when the game(season) is on the line. Don't we already have a starting QB that is suspect in that area? No to McNabb, we need all the picks in the draft we can get and we need to groom a guy for the future or just stick with Jason and "ride him out". If we had a kickass line JC would be a perennial pro bowler even with his mechanical faults.

Why is McNabb a story? He's gonna be in Philly next year. I think we have a better shot getting Vick :).

How about Pennington? I mean it's totally outside Shanny's style...he's the type to draft and groom a guy rather than find a vet for one or two years. But seriously Chad has the highest completion % of any active QB and certainly will not be back in Miami

Oh yeah, get McNabb, and give up picks for a guy that will choke when the game(season) is on the line. Don't we already have a starting QB that is suspect in that area? No to McNabb, we need all the picks in the draft we can get and we need to groom a guy for the future or just stick with Jason and "ride him out". If we had a kickass line JC would be a perennial pro bowler even with his mechanical faults.

I swear we could get off this mentality...we can't groom a guy for the future until we have a line. Look at the Jets, they built the o-line and didn't have to groom a guy for the future, they brought in a rookie and won right away.

THat is my point, keep the picks, get a line build and groom a guy.

THat is my point, keep the picks, get a line build and groom a guy.

Just re-read your post...and I agree with you (I misread it before). This whole thread though continues that mentality of "let's get a QB no matter what" (in this case McNabb), without any thought of building the line.

I guess that it makes me feel better that our new HC is known for building o-lines.