McNabb's agents take aim at the Shanahans, Mike responds...

Belichick doesn't publicly humiliate his players nor does he announce his hypothetical plans for the players to the public like saying I'll welcome player X back as a backup. The latter would weaken his leverage in negotiations with other teams for trades. They may feel bad that he let them go too soon and that they still could have contributed to the Pats success, but that's it. Just business.


So, the truth comes out. You can't stomach a head coach (a Redskins HC) telling a veteran QB to go get screwed. I have no problem with it. This is about making the Washington Redskins a better team. Not a personality parade.

Donovan if you feel disrespected, how do you think the defensive team feels when you purposely throw the ball in the ground. Or take an unnecessary sack?

BTW, stop using other teams as a model that the Redskins should pattern themselves after.

Redskins Insider - Kyle Shanahan: Donovan McNabb 'said he didn't say any of that' (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/donovan-mcnabb/kyle-shanahan-donovan-mcnabb-s.html?wprss=redskinsinsider)



I saw and heard what Kyle Shannahan said. I personally think he (McNabb) and his agent are trying to win the day by playing up this disrespectful angle. Don't you?

He can't hack this offense. Just maybe Mike is showing compassion by making it an issue (benching) for McNabb and his agent so they can go elsewhere and talk football.

I realize now that it is not a good idea to trade for a QB within your division. I get the feeling that McNabb has betrayed us by purposely playing badly and keeping our defense on the field.

Responding again to your same theme about Mike Shannahan showing bad taste in dealing with the benching of Donovan McNabb later on in the week instead of informing him in the earlier part of the same week of Shannahan's decision to go with Rex Grossman is a mute point on your part.

He is the head coach and can say and do what he wants to say, no matter what you and press think. I was surprise like many, but I did not consider it as a disrespectful move. After all, Donovan has disrespected the Redskins by pretending to be concerned about this organization. If he cares then learn everything about the nuances about this offense to make it work.

The story is not about Andy Reid or the media or the leaks coming out of Redskins Park. It's about improving the team.

I guess Shannahan is telling McNabb to kiss his ass. If Donovan does not want to play as he was billed up to be an upgrade over Campbell then sit and run the scout team, in other words, screw you Donovan. Shannahan will deal with him when the season is over.

Who gives a flying shit about the media. The media and people like you are flaming this nonsense. How do you think Sonny Jurgensen felt when he was benched? Or Vince Young? It does not matter who rides the pine but someone has to.

You keep on parroting that I have a problem with the benching itself. That's not the big problem. It's the unnecessary extracirricular comments and airing of dirty laundry. But hey, I'm sorry I offended your god and hence you have to make a strawman out of my words in order to enforce your rage. BTW, to repeat so your emotionally weak head can get it, McNabb has been underwhelming and I don't really mind the benching itself, but the extracirricular comments and the like.
So, the truth comes out. You can't stomach a head coach (a Redskins HC) telling a veteran QB to go get screwed. I have no problem with it. This is about making the Washington Redskins a better team. Not a personality parade.

Donovan if you feel disrespected, how do you think the defensive team feels when you purposely throw the ball in the ground. Or take an unnecessary sack?

BTW, stop using other teams as a model that the Redskins should pattern themselves after.

The disrespect is not from the benching itself, but rather the other public comments. Is that clear? Or are you going to continue calling me a McNabb cocksucker? McNabb isn't in the right either because he's too chicken to say the shit himself. They ALL should have kept their mouths shut and just went on with their business after the benching.

I have a feeling that you want to have a power trip and Mike Shanahan is the perfect vector for your emotions. Calling me Donovan is quite funny since I've actually got into an battle with a different member here for not praising McNabb's play this year.

And I say the Stillers know what the hell they're doing far more than we are. Santanio Holmes gets in trouble? Just ship him away and be done with it. None of these silly extracirricular media wars.



And seriously, McNabb with deliberate sabatoge? Did you even see the first Eagles game where he was saying the Eagles made a mistake? The Sheagles sure seemed offeneded enough to proceed to blow us out in the rematch.

I realize now that it is not a good idea to trade for a QB within your division. I get the feeling that McNabb has betrayed us by purposely playing badly and keeping our defense on the field.

So he intentionally played bad to screw the Redskins over? That is way over the top. It is more likely that he had trouble with the system. However, nothing excuses the poor management MS has shown all season in respect to personnel, and McNabb in particular. Imagine finding out that you were getting demoted in a company wide email newsletter, that probably wouldn't sit well with you either. In terms of KS, he has been heavily scrutinized all season for his play calling and IMO hasn't shown knowledge of the talent he has on the roster.

You keep on parroting that I have a problem with the benching itself. That's not the big problem. It's the unnecessary extracirricular comments and airing of dirty laundry. But hey, I'm sorry I offended your god and hence you have to make a strawman out of my words in order to enforce your rage. BTW, to repeat so your emotionally weak head can get it, McNabb has been underwhelming and I don't really mind the benching itself, but the extracirricular comments and the like.

The disrespect is not from the benching itself, but rather the other public comments. Is that clear? Or are you going to continue calling me a McNabb cocksucker? McNabb isn't in the right either because he's too chicken to say the shit himself. They ALL should have kept their mouths shut and just went on with their business after the benching.

I have a feeling that you want to have a power trip and Mike Shanahan is the perfect vector for your emotions. Calling me Donovan is quite funny since I've actually got into an battle with a different member here for not praising McNabb's play this year.

And I say the Stillers know what the hell they're doing far more than we are. Santanio Holmes gets in trouble? Just ship him away and be done with it. None of these silly extracirricular media wars.



And seriously, McNabb with deliberate sabatoge? Did you even see the first Eagles game where he was saying the Eagles made a mistake? The Sheagles sure seemed offeneded enough to proceed to blow us out in the rematch.



Please tell me what the extracurricular remarks you are talking about? You don't get it, do you? I never called you a McNabb butt eater or whatever you said I called you. And when did I call you Donovan?

The benching and the explanations that followed by Mike are part of coaches and players trying to explain their side of the dispute. Move on.

Lets hope we win tomorrow, how's that?

So he intentionally played bad to screw the Redskins over? That is way over the top. It is more likely that he had trouble with the system. However, nothing excuses the poor management MS has shown all season in respect to personnel, and McNabb in particular. Imagine finding out that you were getting demoted in a company wide email newsletter, that probably wouldn't sit well with you either. In terms of KS, he has been heavily scrutinized all season for his play calling and IMO hasn't shown knowledge of the talent he has on the roster.


Well, he sure didn't look good not winning for us. You are so upset with the way Shannahan has handled all aspects of his coaching, right?

He played Donovan in 13 games and then bad mouthed him. And what did Donovan do in those 13 games? Lets see, he kept the defense on the field and gave the offense a rest. Obviously, Shannahan was pissed at the franchise QB who can't learn his offense.

I would bench him too. Oh, it's not about the benching but the lack of respect for McNabb. His game sucks and thanks for providing no gamesmanship or character as a player on the field. It sure does seem as if he screwed us. Balls under thrown or overthrown and the unnecessary sacks. What do you think?

I have no respect for that aspect of his unprofessional game.

Here's what the DM5 haters fail to realize. Before the McNabb fiasco happened it was predicted that Shannahan would scapegoat another player due to his failure to bring results.

The biggest failure was his reluctance to bring in better recievers, his switch to the 3-4, and starting a 38 year old reciever and 2 washed up RB's long past their prime. These decisons were more detrimental to the team than DM5's completion percentage.

Completion percentages don't win games, if you don't believe me, look at Kyle Orton's stats. I rest my case.

With that being said, I understand that the fans (most) are always going to side with the coach/management when there's a dispute between them and a player. So I don't put much stock into the negative nannies who continue to harp on McNabb.

Here's one fact that i'll be willing to bet my life on. Next year, DM5's new team will win more games than the Washington Redskins. Just as JC has won more games with this new team. Once this revelation comes to pass, it's going to be gratifying to utter the old adage, "I told you so".

Please tell me what the extracurricular remarks you are talking about? You don't get it, do you? I never called you a McNabb butt eater or whatever you said I called you. And when did I call you Donovan?

The benching and the explanations that followed by Mike are part of coaches and players trying to explain their side of the dispute. Move on.

Lets hope we win tomorrow, how's that?
It's basic employer-employee etiquette to air complaints and resolve the disputes in private and not go the public humiliation route either by accident or intentionally. I see both sides can't keep their mouths shut. The cardiovascular endurace and inability to run the 2-minute drill comments are both gaffes by Shanahan. McNabb talks nice but then his agent doesn't... major gaffe by McNabb. I see it as both sides trying to win some lame PR war. I find neither side to be fully believable.

Well, he sure didn't look good not winning for us. You are so upset with the way Shannahan has handled all aspects of his coaching, right?

He played Donovan in 13 games and then bad mouthed him. And what did Donovan do in those 13 games? Lets see, he kept the defense on the field and gave the offense a rest. Obviously, Shannahan was pissed at the franchise QB who can't learn his offense.

I would bench him too. Oh, it's not about the benching but the lack of respect for McNabb. His game sucks and thanks for providing no gamesmanship or character as a player on the field. It sure does seem as if he screwed us. Balls under thrown or overthrown and the unnecessary sacks. What do you think?

I have no respect for that aspect of his unprofessional game.
You sure love to accuse people of things just to make your claims look good. I'm glad you aren't company manager because you'd be the perfect douchebag boss who thinks that you're in the right in whatever you do.

First of all, BaltimoreSkins simply saying that Shanahan bungled his managing of personnel matters does not lead to the conclusion that he disagrees with anything.

Next, I'm the one who doesn't have the problem with the benching itself but with the other BS going around. The guy you're responding to may think differently, but of course, you don't care and shove it in here anyway.

And you like to deviate from the initial subject, which is whether McNabb is deliberately mailing it in or not. Rather than provide evidence, you attack the messenger who you think believes "so-and-so" bad things and simply insist with circular reasoning that your interpretation is of course, the correct one.