Brett Favre Reportedly hasn't decided to retire (AGAIN)

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

^ DM has 3-4 more pro bowl type years left. Let's sign him to a 5 yr deal

I'd say a 3 year extension is more like it.

[12thMan]

I wonder why people make McNabb's age and longevity such an issue, but not Peyton Manning, who is also 34 years old, or Tom Brady who turned 33 years old today?

It's just a little annoying. And as far as injuries go, both Brady and Manning have had their share of injuries, although I think Manning is the probably the most durable of the three.

Point is, if Brady and Manning are about to ink long-term deals with their respective teams, I see no reason why we can't offer the same deference to Donovan McNabb who has had a stellar career in his own right.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Other than what we gave up I wouldn't mind having McNabb as a one year rental provided we could pull somebody else in next year. I don't think that it will play out that way though.

Yeah because QB carousels have proven to be so successful in the NFL.

We finally get a top level QB and you'd be good with a one year rental?

[SmootSmack]

Vikings definitely pose a threat for McNabb's services, but no more than they did yesterday. No one really expected Favre to play beyond this year anyway

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'd say he's got 3-4 years left easily. He's a QB, not a RB and QB's can play at a high level well until their late 30's. The guy trains hard and keep himself in tip top shape. 34 isn't what it was 30 years ago.

There's evidence of players playing that long, of course, but those players were year to year as well. Look at Boomer Esiason, Steve McNair, or Troy Aikman. Each one of those players had a pretty good career, one comparable to McNabb. Not one of those players signed a major extension for future value close to their 34th birthday.

Year-to-year doesn't mean retirement is imminent, but if McNabb is unwanted as a starting QB at age 36, is he the kind of guy who is interested in sticking around as a backup just to make it to age 40? I'm not sure he's interested in extending his career the way Favre has.

Now, I believe if we do so well this year that we start to produce grandiose visions of winning a super bowl under Shanahan, I think McNabb will re-up for that and try to help us win in 2011 and 2012. And in the perfect situation, I think he can. But I do think he's more of a hired gun at this point than a Redskin 4 lyfe. And that's why I think year-to-year is an apt description of where he is in his career.

It seems like an act in insanity to suggest that McNabb is going to be a productive Redskins quarterback in 2013 playing up to his massive contract, but there are people who believe this is going to be the case.

[12thMan]

How happy is Fat Al today though? LOL

[saden1]

Fellas, ESPN is having a Special on Favre at 3:30 ET today...be sure to tune in!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I wonder why people make McNabb's age and longevity such an issue, but not Peyton Manning, who is also 34 years old, or Tom Brady who turned 33 years old today?

It's just a little annoying. And as far as injuries go, both Brady and Manning have had their share of injuries, although I think Manning is the probably the most durable of the three.

Point is, if Brady and Manning are about to ink long-term deals with their respective teams, I see no reason why we can't offer the same deference to Donovan McNabb who has had a stellar career in his own right.

12th, you can't seriously be suggesting that the injury records of McNabb and Manning/Brady are similar. Manning got sacked 10 times last year. 10. Not only has he yet to miss a game in his career, but he's getting hit less now than ever before. Brady's got a very good health record with the lone exception of the knee injury -- although in his case, he's getting hit more now than at any point of his Pats career.

Plus, I'd imagine that Brady and Manning can both decline physically a little bit before we would even be able to notice that any decline is occurring. McNabb, by all reports, is in excellent shape, but just a little bit of physical decline could be hazardous for his game. He gets hit a lot and relies on his cannon right arm to create a lot of plays. That's not going to age particularly well, just being honest.

The other obvious point here is that Brady and Manning are staying in the same system they've always played in, where experience can really help them overcome a few physical errors. McNabb had that consistency for a very, very long time in Philadelphia, but this next phase of his career takes him further away from the Brady/Manning category than he has ever been before.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'd say he's got 3-4 years left easily. He's a QB, not a RB and QB's can play at a high level well until their late 30's. The guy trains hard and keep himself in tip top shape. 34 isn't what it was 30 years ago.

I agree. 3-4 years is reasonable enough for a guy that keeps himself in top shape. Shanahan is going to protect him with a running game too. The days of throwing 70% of the time are over for him.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by saden1

Fellas, ESPN is having a Special on Favre at 3:30 ET today...be sure to tune in!

Of course they are...probably had it recorded and ready to air since Feb 2009.


Hopefully it is better than LeBron's hour.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

There's evidence of players playing that long, of course, but those players were year to year as well. Look at Boomer Esiason, Steve McNair, or Troy Aikman. Each one of those players had a pretty good career, one comparable to McNabb. Not one of those players signed a major extension for future value close to their 34th birthday.

Year-to-year doesn't mean retirement is imminent, but if McNabb is unwanted as a starting QB at age 36, is he the kind of guy who is interested in sticking around as a backup just to make it to age 40? I'm not sure he's interested in extending his career the way Favre has.

Now, I believe if we do so well this year that we start to produce grandiose visions of winning a super bowl under Shanahan, I think McNabb will re-up for that and try to help us win in 2011 and 2012. And in the perfect situation, I think he can. But I do think he's more of a hired gun at this point than a Redskin 4 lyfe. And that's why I think year-to-year is an apt description of where he is in his career.

It seems like an act in insanity to suggest that McNabb is going to be a productive Redskins quarterback in 2013 playing up to his massive contract, but there are people who believe this is going to be the case.

I don't know I'd use Esiason, McNair and Aikman as comparisons. Esiason was well into journeyman status by 34, McNair's injury history was more extensive than McNabb and Aikman was chronically suffering from concussions at the same age as McNabb is now. While D-Mac hasn't always been the picture of health he's healthier than 2 examples and simply better than the third.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Yeah because QB carousels have proven to be so successful in the NFL.

We finally get a top level QB and you'd be good with a one year rental?

If it meant us getting a top flight QB or rookie yes. With the rookie though it would be good to still have McNabb or someone for him to learn under.

It's not the ideal situation but if it happens, it does.

[sandtrapjack]

Originally Posted by saden1

Fellas, ESPN is having a Special on Favre at 3:30 ET today...be sure to tune in!

It's a repeat.

They showed it last summer.

And the summer before that.

[skinsfaninok]

Rumor is the Viks are willing to pay Favre more than his 13M that was due this season. Wow talking about a player holding a team hostage...

[SmootSmack]

I remember when last year the Vikings sent players like Jared Allen down to convince Favre to play, would imagine they're doing the same now. T Jack must feel wonderful