Quote:
Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis
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.
|
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.