McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

New thread, same topic. We were close to 1,000 replies in the last thread. Big topic, thought we'd start a new one so posts don't get lost:

Quick Thoughts-

-We didn't outbid Buffalo or Oakland. We had the upper hand because McNabb wasn't willing to go there and Reid showed respect for him by keeping his feelings in mind

-Talked to plenty of impartial people today who think this is a good move for the Redskins. By the same token, they agree that what other moves they make between now and the draft (including the draft) will be the better indicator

-Think people are really undervaluing Devin Thomas

-Mentioned this yesterday, but just a reminder that the press conference will be Tuesday at Noon

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;683192]Quoted for truth, however, this is my point. No winning organization looked at their QB situation and decided trading a 2nd round pick+ for McNabb and thought "this is an opportunity we need to chase". It was met, among winning orgainzations, with a sense of "meh, we've got a guy."[/QUOTE]

So how is that a knock against Donovan McNabb? What winning organization with a quarterback in place was interested in Drew Brees, Brett Favre, Kurt Warner?

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Agreed about DT. He showed a lot and I think he'll be our #1 for a long time if we keep him.

Malcolm Kelly's development should be our focus of WR debate right now.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Kyle Orton, Chad Henne, Joe Flacco, Alex Smith, Matt Leinart, whatever's going on in Minnesota these days.

Mild interest in McNabb at best from those organizations.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;683195]New thread, same topic. We were close to 1,000 replies in the last thread. Big topic, thought we'd start a new one so posts don't get lost:

Quick Thoughts-

-We didn't outbid Buffalo or Oakland. We had the upper hand because McNabb wasn't willing to go there and Reid showed respect for him by keeping his feelings in mind

-[B]Talked to plenty of impartial people today who think this is a good move for the Redskins. By the same token, they agree that what other moves they make between now and the draft (including the draft) will be the better indicator[/B]

-Think people are really undervaluing Devin Thomas

-Mentioned this yesterday, but just a reminder that the press conference will be Tuesday at Noon[/quote]

Talked to all of my Dallas fans at work. They thought it was the best move for them that we could've made.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Wow,

Not about the trade, but the way posting went, That was an incredibly ferocious thread!

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683200]Kyle Orton, Chad Henne, Joe Flacco, Alex Smith, Matt Leinart, whatever's going on in Minnesota these days.

Mild interest in McNabb at best from those organizations.[/quote]

Didn't you say "winning organizations"?

And why would the Dolphins or Ravens be interested in Donovan McNabb.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

This is the way I see the trade....

Campbell + Zorn < McNabb + Shanahan

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;683201]Talked to all of my Dallas fans at work. They thought it was the best move for them that we could've made.[/quote]

They also thought Roy Williams (WR) was their savior and trashtalked when the team drafted a kicker last season.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

SS also has more access to "film guys" than I do, so believe him when he says that there are people out there who do hardcore analysis and support the Redskins in this trade.

And believe me when I say that a lot of really smart people in the know have no idea what we are thinking.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Buster;683207]They also thought Roy Williams (WR) was their savior and trashtalked when the team drafted a kicker last season.[/quote]

Yeah, what the hell do they know anyway!

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Good idea, thanks for starting this.

In a way, this move is somewhat similar to what we did after the 1998 season -- we sucked that year, brought in a fairly successful veteran QB in Brad Johnson then proceeded to win the division in '99.

Hopefully history repeats.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Audi;683204]Didn't you say "winning organizations"?

And why would the Dolphins or Ravens be interested in Donovan McNabb.[/quote]Well, if he's a great quarterback, I'd imagine that they'd be doing it to get a great quarterback at a second round price tag.

Or late first, in the case of the Ravens.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I wonder if Hard Knocks is regretting not picking Washington this year?

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

He can't be any worse than Jason Taylor?

Can he?

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;683201]Talked to all of my Dallas fans at work. They thought it was the best move for them that we could've made.[/quote]

Are they in work release? Most Cowboy fans can't find Dallas on a map let alone put together a coherent sentence on football.

The only Cowboys fan I have respect for is that guy who banged that chick out in the restroom of the JerraDome.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683212]Well, if he's a great quarterback, I'd imagine that they'd be doing it to get a great quarterback at a second round price tag.

Or late first, in the case of the Ravens.[/quote]

Ravens and Dolphins have already pinned their current quarterbacks as Henne and Flacco. Your suggestion that the Ravens and Dolphins should be interested in McNabb makes no sense, as is your argument that it's indicative of McNabb's value as a quarterback, as shown by your lack of response to the mention of Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, and Brett Favre.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683200]Kyle Orton, Chad Henne, Joe Flacco, Alex Smith, Matt Leinart, whatever's going on in Minnesota these days.

Mild interest in McNabb at best from those organizations.[/quote]
Load of economic counterincetives, not lack of ability is why they didn't sell the farm for him.
Oh right, Bretto Favrah the system QB who made that O explode is simply not going to come back. A 99% success rate with quick slants is better than the 60% of JC17
Alex Smith, spread system QB extrodinaire and huge investment given a second chance.
Henne, don't know.
Orton, scheme-fit for McDaniels' ball-control Patriot-lite offense.
Arizona? Screw Arizona. Signing D. Anderson is more than enough to show that they can't really tell a good QB from a bad one.

Then there's McNabb's PERSONAL incentive. He WANTED to be here and wasn't going to have it any other way.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=wilsowilso;683214]He can't be any worse than Jason Taylor?

Can he?[/quote]Taylor started 8 games, so that's where the bar is set.

Shanahan>Blache

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;683219]Load of economic counterincetives, not lack of ability is why they didn't sell the farm for him.
Oh right, Bretto Favrah the system QB who made that O explode is simply not going to come back. Still 99% success rate with quick slants is better than the 60% of JC17
Alex Smith, spread system QB extrodinaire and huge investment given a second chance.
Henne, don't know.
Orton, scheme-fit for McDaniels' ball-control Patriot-lite offense.
Arizona? Screw Arizona. Signing D. Anderson is more than enough to show that they can't really tell a good QB from a bad one.

Then there's McNabb's PERSONAL incentive. He WANTED to be here and wasn't going to have it any other way.[/quote]Or 57% from McNabb, you know. Love me some Favre watch.

The market did not really react to McNabb being available, at least using the Cutler trade as a comparable. It's probably fallacious to suggest that Cutler will have a better career than McNabb, we simply don't know at this point, but at his age, he only had 3 or 4 suitors. And we unquestionably had the best QB of us Oakland and Buffalo, no matter how much lobster Gradkowski bought for you on your date last night.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Redskins_P;683205]This is the way I see the trade....

Campbell + Zorn < McNabb + Shanahan[/quote]

Simple yet effective post

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683222]Or 57% from McNabb, you know. Love me some Favre watch.

The market did not really react to McNabb being available, at least using the Cutler trade as a comparable. It's probably fallacious to suggest that Cutler will have a better career than McNabb, we simply don't know at this point, but at his age, he only had 3 or 4 suitors. And we unquestionably had the best QB of us Oakland and Buffalo, no matter how much lobster Gradkowski bought for you on your date last night.[/quote]

And how many teams were interested in Jay Cutler? Or are you just making things up now.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Audi;683217]Ravens and Dolphins have already pinned their current quarterbacks as Henne and Flacco. Your suggestion that the Ravens and Dolphins should be interested in McNabb makes no sense, as is your argument that it's indicative of McNabb's value as a quarterback, as shown by your lack of response to the mention of Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, and Brett Favre.[/quote]If the last two years have taught me anything, it's that a current QB is only a current QB until the second a better option becomes available. Miami and Baltimore have decided that they are better off with Henne and Flacco respectively, than either would be with McNabb. I neither agree or disagree with their conclusion, but this is how the sound organizations reacted to McNabb being available: "second round pick? ttyl"

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Audi;683224]And how many teams were interested in Jay Cutler? Or are you just making things up now.[/quote]5 that I know of.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I can't get over the idea of rooting for a guy that I have pulled against for the last 10 years. I have legitimate concerns about his short to intermediate accuracy, but I think that Shanahan's offense could be a very good fit, since it seems to favor those with a big arm, which McNabb has.

As much as I have previously disliked McNabb, i think i'm starting to warm to this considering he didn't pull a Favre and force his way out of town and he's done nothing but win with the Eagles. Assuming he's got 3-4 yrs in the tank, this could be a huge get for the Skins. But it's going to be weird seeing him in burgundy and gold.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;683223]Simple yet effective post[/quote]Draft picks retained: not relevant.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683226]If the last two years have taught me anything, it's that a current QB is only a current QB until the second a better option becomes available. Miami and Baltimore have decided that they are better off with Henne and Flacco respectively, than either would be with McNabb. I neither agree or disagree with their conclusion, but this is how the sound organizations reacted to McNabb being available: "second round pick? ttyl"[/quote]

That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about your claim that because teams such as Miami and Baltimore weren't interested in acquiring Donovan McNabb, that it is indicative of his value as a quarterback.

Why weren't more teams, particularly "winning organizations", as you put it, interested in Drew Brees, Brett Favre, and Kurt Warner?

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I just e-mailed this link to the Eagles fan who claims they'll follow McNabb to Washington and has given up on Philly. :)

[url=http://shop.redskins.com/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductDetailIndexName=CategoryDetail_500&CategoryID=500&ProductID=41177]Washington Redskins[/url]

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683222]Or 57% from McNabb, you know. Love me some Favre watch.

The market did not really react to McNabb being available, at least using the Cutler trade as a comparable. It's probably fallacious to suggest that Cutler will have a better career than McNabb, we simply don't know at this point, but at his age, he only had 3 or 4 suitors. And we unquestionably had the best QB of us Oakland and Buffalo, no matter how much lobster Gradkowski bought for you on your date last night.[/quote]
In a playcalling syntax which overemphasized the pass and emphasized the big play.
But Shanahan's system requires big plays to complement a good-to-elite running game and shorter passing game so that the O becomes incredibly difficult to scheme against O. Henne, Orton, etc are not big play QBs. Smith is spread or bust. JC is inconsistent at best. McNabb is a consistent big-play QB. Philly lived and died by the big play, but why did they emphasize it in the first place when the WCO was historically more ball control oriented? Because their QB is better suited for that.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683227]5 that I know of.[/quote]

So 5 for Jay Cutler and 4 for Donovan McNabb is a huge difference in market reaction?

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683229]Draft picks retained: not relevant.[/quote]

Colt McCoy: not relevant.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

How do we know the Ravens and Dolphins didn't also talk to the Eagles? I would guess that, based on how these things usually go, every team except maybe the Saints, Falcons, Colts, and Pats had some conversation with the Eagles. All teams talk all the time

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Redskins_P;683205]This is the way I see the trade....

Campbell + Zorn < McNabb + Shanahan[/quote]


Get ready for some differential calculus from GTripp how not only is this incorrect but that Reid + wet ham sandwich - the bite he takes out of it > Shanny + McNabb / Zorn's increased knowledge after watching Cooley's ankle surgery + a healthy sesamoid

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I find the rumored trade involving Albert Haynesworth to be interesting. I was told by a Bronco fan that Shanahan has a tendency to run people out of town that don't agree with him. He cited Larry Coyer, John Lynch and Dominque Foxworth as examples. Of course do we know if it was the Eagles asking for Haynesworth and Landry or the Redskins offering them?

Re: McNabb a Redskin (Part II)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;683195]New thread, same topic. We were close to 1,000 replies in the last thread. Big topic, thought we'd start a new one so posts don't get lost:

Quick Thoughts-

-We didn't outbid Buffalo or Oakland. We had the upper hand because McNabb wasn't willing to go there and Reid showed respect for him by keeping his feelings in mind

-Talked to plenty of impartial people today who think this is a good move for the Redskins. By the same token, they agree that what other moves they make between now and the draft (including the draft) will be the better indicator

[B]-Think people are really undervaluing Devin Thomas[/B]

-Mentioned this yesterday, but just a reminder that the press conference will be Tuesday at Noon[/quote]

I think so too. But I think people are undervaluing Marko Mitchell even more so.

Im excited to see Devin, Marko, Santana, and hopefully Cooley and Davis and even Kelly playing with McNabb. I hope he brings the best out of all of them so we will know what kind of recievers we really have.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;683232]In a playcalling syntax which overemphasized the pass and emphasized the big play.
But Shanahan's system requires big plays to complement a good-to-elite running game and shorter passing game so that the O becomes incredibly difficult to scheme against O. Henne, Orton, etc are not big play QBs. Smith is spread or bust. JC is inconsistent at best. McNabb is a consistent big-play QB. Philly lived and died by the big play, but why did they emphasize it in the first place when the WCO was historically more ball control oriented? Because their QB is better suited for that.[/quote]I don't know why you think that getting a QB who is incapable of producing when he throws 45+ times a game is so self-evidently awesome, and I think if you want to show that McNabb can benefit by inheriting a running game that, if nothing else, will take a lot of his passing attempts, you should try to go and build that case.

So far, I'm gathering that you think it's easier for any QB to be successful in the Shanahan system than in other systems. Anyone except Jason Campbell, of course, because that would completely ruin your already "interesting" argument.

I kind of agree with you that McNabb is a little bit out of place in the stat-inflating system that is the WCO. I'm sure glad that he's in a system now that has limited WCO elements. Oh, wait.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I cant decide if I like this trade or not.This smells of the Brunell signing.Does Mcnabb have to pass a physical? Just cant believe philly would trade Mcnabb to us unless they know something we dont.If Mcnabb is 100 percent healthy then its a good trade for both teams,I dont think we gave up to much for him

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;683236]Get ready for some differential calculus from GTripp how not only is this incorrect but that Reid + wet ham sandwich - the bite he takes out of it > Shanny + McNabb / Zorn's increased knowledge after watching Cooley's ankle surgery + a healthy sesamoid[/quote]

Don't forget the T-Analysis and six sigma reports.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;683240]I find the rumored trade involving Albert Haynesworth to be interesting. I was told by a Bronco fan that Shanahan has a tendency to run people out of town that don't agree with him. He cited Larry Coyer, John Lynch and Dominque Foxworth as examples. Of course do we know if it was the Eagles asking for Haynesworth and Landry or the Redskins offering them?[/quote]

The segment I saw on ESPN said that the Redskins offered Haynesworth as part of a trade for McNabb and the Eagles declined.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;683240]I find the rumored trade involving Albert Haynesworth to be interesting. I was told by a Bronco fan that Shanahan has a tendency to run people out of town that don't agree with him. He cited Larry Coyer, John Lynch and Dominque Foxworth as examples. Of course do we know if it was the Eagles asking for Haynesworth and Landry or the Redskins offering them?[/quote]

Allen and Shanahan both aren't afraid to get rid of people. I believe Landry and Haynesworth were part of early conversations, though it would have involved more from the Eagles beyond McNabb. Not positive though. This trade really snuck up on just about all of us here. We've been so focused on other rumors.