What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

** Official ** Eagles 2008 Thread (2 Viewers)

If you had a QB who could manage a game or complete some passes it would make complete sense to throw when they had 8 in the box. Brees or Manning would back them off in a hurry.

 
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?

1. Eagles beat Dallas

2. Chicago lose to Houston

3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland

 
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Chicago lose to Houston3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland
I think it's1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland3. Chicago or Minnesota lose
 
According to the Yahoo tool, they "only" need to beat Dallas and have TB lose to Oak, and EITHER Min or Chi lose.

 
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Chicago lose to Houston3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland
I think it's1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland3. Chicago or Minnesota lose
How about they don't deserve it
While beating the redskins would have been a real simple way that they could have controlled their own destiny, it sould certainly be argued that the Bears, Falcons, Cardinals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Vikings have all played in games this season that would indicate they "don't deserve it". Other than the Giants and Panthers, no team clearly looks like they 'deserve it".
 
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Chicago lose to Houston3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland
I think it's1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland3. Chicago or Minnesota lose
How about they don't deserve it
I understand this, but they had thier own destiny in thier own hands and they couldnt take it to a lousy Redskins team. At this ridicolous coah of ours decided to throw 15 straight times in the 4th quarter to a corp whos best WR is Deasean Jackson. Look I understand they arent going to move Reid, but his philosophy is taking us nowhere.While beating the redskins would have been a real simple way that they could have controlled their own destiny, it sould certainly be argued that the Bears, Falcons, Cardinals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Vikings have all played in games this season that would indicate they "don't deserve it". Other than the Giants and Panthers, no team clearly looks like they 'deserve it".
 
JuniorNB said:
Ignatius Reilly said:
Wooderson said:
eoMMan said:
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Chicago lose to Houston3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland
I think it's1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland3. Chicago or Minnesota lose
How about they don't deserve it
While beating the redskins would have been a real simple way that they could have controlled their own destiny, it sould certainly be argued that the Bears, Falcons, Cardinals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Vikings have all played in games this season that would indicate they "don't deserve it". Other than the Giants and Panthers, no team clearly looks like they 'deserve it".
Every year you can make a case for a num ber of teams that "don't deserve it". What would make the Eagles more "deserving" than any of those other teams? The Eagles haven't been a good team since their superbowl year.
 
JuniorNB said:
Ignatius Reilly said:
Wooderson said:
eoMMan said:
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Chicago lose to Houston3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland
I think it's1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland3. Chicago or Minnesota lose
How about they don't deserve it
While beating the redskins would have been a real simple way that they could have controlled their own destiny, it sould certainly be argued that the Bears, Falcons, Cardinals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Vikings have all played in games this season that would indicate they "don't deserve it". Other than the Giants and Panthers, no team clearly looks like they 'deserve it".
Every year you can make a case for a num ber of teams that "don't deserve it". What would make the Eagles more "deserving" than any of those other teams? The Eagles haven't been a good team since their superbowl year.
Ask Pittsburgh, Atlanta, the Giants, the Cardinals, and Cowboys. I bet they'd all say they're good. :shrug: Also, I never said they're "more deserving". Go reread if you're comprehension is down.
 
JuniorNB said:
Ignatius Reilly said:
Wooderson said:
eoMMan said:
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Chicago lose to Houston3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland
I think it's1. Eagles beat Dallas2. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland3. Chicago or Minnesota lose
How about they don't deserve it
While beating the redskins would have been a real simple way that they could have controlled their own destiny, it sould certainly be argued that the Bears, Falcons, Cardinals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Vikings have all played in games this season that would indicate they "don't deserve it". Other than the Giants and Panthers, no team clearly looks like they 'deserve it".
Every year you can make a case for a num ber of teams that "don't deserve it". What would make the Eagles more "deserving" than any of those other teams? The Eagles haven't been a good team since their superbowl year.
How about "We dont deserve it"Meaning that loyal fans should not be subjected to another crushing playoff defeat this year. Can we just request euthanasia on this team and be done with it?
 
If you had a QB who could manage a game or complete some passes it would make complete sense to throw when they had 8 in the box. Brees or Manning would back them off in a hurry.
Brees has Colston.Manning has Wayne.

McNabb has..... a rookie?
Jeff,While I agree that McNabb doesn't have a stud WR, that is all Reid's fault. BTW, I think Housh would be a great fit in Philly.
I'd take Braylon over Housh any day. Braylon already knows how to drop a pass, so he'll it right in. Seriously though, i think Braylon is a much better #1 than Housh.
 
If you had a QB who could manage a game or complete some passes it would make complete sense to throw when they had 8 in the box. Brees or Manning would back them off in a hurry.
Brees has Colston.Manning has Wayne.

McNabb has..... a rookie?
Jeff,While I agree that McNabb doesn't have a stud WR, that is all Reid's fault. BTW, I think Housh would be a great fit in Philly.
Is it? Didn't the Eagles have a stud WR in 2004 signed to a 7 year deal? Wasn't there 'friction' between him and Donny Mac? TO could have run for Mayor of Philadelphia in 2004 and he would have carried every single vote except for Reid's AND McNabb's. I don't want Housh. I don't want another reason to pass the ball even more.

I wonder what the NFL record for most consecutive pass plays called is?

 
I'd much rather have Jacobs than a receiver, although Boldin going over the middle while Jackson stretches the field sounds tempting. I'm not sold on Houshmanzada for some reason.

People are mentioning Winslow, but he strikes me as a self-centered, immature idiot. We tried that once, remember?

 
If you had a QB who could manage a game or complete some passes it would make complete sense to throw when they had 8 in the box. Brees or Manning would back them off in a hurry.
Brees has Colston.Manning has Wayne.

McNabb has..... a rookie?
Jeff,While I agree that McNabb doesn't have a stud WR, that is all Reid's fault. BTW, I think Housh would be a great fit in Philly.
Is it? Didn't the Eagles have a stud WR in 2004 signed to a 7 year deal? Wasn't there 'friction' between him and Donny Mac? TO could have run for Mayor of Philadelphia in 2004 and he would have carried every single vote except for Reid's AND McNabb's. I don't want Housh. I don't want another reason to pass the ball even more.

I wonder what the NFL record for most consecutive pass plays called is?
I still wear my 81 Owens jersey w pride. To make a short story shorter, its my official jinx jersey with a record of 1-0*.* - Youre welcome Giants fans

 
I'd much rather have Jacobs than a receiver, although Boldin going over the middle while Jackson stretches the field sounds tempting. I'm not sold on Houshmanzada for some reason.People are mentioning Winslow, but he strikes me as a self-centered, immature idiot. We tried that once, remember?
would love to see Boldin and Jacobs in green next year. Dont think either will happen though. Plus, i am pretty sure mcnabb would kill boldin with his constant high throws over the middle
 
I'd much rather have Jacobs than a receiver, although Boldin going over the middle while Jackson stretches the field sounds tempting. I'm not sold on Houshmanzada for some reason.People are mentioning Winslow, but he strikes me as a self-centered, immature idiot. We tried that once, remember?
would love to see Boldin and Jacobs in green next year. Dont think either will happen though. Plus, i am pretty sure mcnabb would kill boldin with his constant high throws over the middle
Who would you like to see as their quarterback? Please don't say Kolb.While I realize that McNabb isn't one of the Mannings or Drew Brees, he's still in the 10-15 range of the league's best QBs. That means there are 17-22 teams who would love to have him.Yes, I'd love to have Brees throwing to D. Jackson, Curtis, or Housh/Boldin/Chad Johnson etc., but I haven't heard that he's going to be available. Nor are any of the other QBs who are better than McNabb. So I say they should work on improving at the positions where better guys actually will be out there.
 
Well guys I really wish you would have beaten the Skins and made this a true playoff, win and you move to the next game. Anyways either way I know Philly is going to show up for this game if for no other reason to knock the Boys out. Good luck and if Philly loses will Reid or Mcnabb or both be gone? Just wondering. I know for sure Phillips will be gone for Dallas. What is the mood in Philly for any homers on the board after the loss to lowly Washington?

 
Well guys I really wish you would have beaten the Skins and made this a true playoff, win and you move to the next game. Anyways either way I know Philly is going to show up for this game if for no other reason to knock the Boys out. Good luck and if Philly loses will Reid or Mcnabb or both be gone? Just wondering. I know for sure Phillips will be gone for Dallas. What is the mood in Philly for any homers on the board after the loss to lowly Washington?
Just go back a page or two and read. Everyone feels about the same.....after cruising past Arizoan, the Giants, and Cleveland, we were all anticipating the huge Dallas showdown in week 17. Never in a million years, with as uninspired as Washington had been playing, did we think they'd lose that game. Once the Eagles starting playing well, I think we looked at the Redskins as the second easiest game of our last 5. (Besides the Browns).The dropped balls, the bad play calling. It was all very disappointing. To lay an egg against a .500 team with so much on the line. I also don't think that any of us really think there's any shot at the playoffs. Right now, it's all about keeping Dallas out.
 
Well guys I really wish you would have beaten the Skins and made this a true playoff, win and you move to the next game. Anyways either way I know Philly is going to show up for this game if for no other reason to knock the Boys out. Good luck and if Philly loses will Reid or Mcnabb or both be gone? Just wondering. I know for sure Phillips will be gone for Dallas. What is the mood in Philly for any homers on the board after the loss to lowly Washington?
Just go back a page or two and read. Everyone feels about the same.....after cruising past Arizoan, the Giants, and Cleveland, we were all anticipating the huge Dallas showdown in week 17. Never in a million years, with as uninspired as Washington had been playing, did we think they'd lose that game. Once the Eagles starting playing well, I think we looked at the Redskins as the second easiest game of our last 5. (Besides the Browns).The dropped balls, the bad play calling. It was all very disappointing. To lay an egg against a .500 team with so much on the line. I also don't think that any of us really think there's any shot at the playoffs. Right now, it's all about keeping Dallas out.
I do not think that will be enough of incentive to dig deep and want it more then a team that knows if they win they are in. You never know though, Dallas just has been so self destructive this year Philly may not have want to win this game for the right reasons, to have Dallas just hand the game to them is a real possibilty. I for one am glad I can't see the game this week. I can't handle another game where they beat themselves by missing wide open wr's for td's, terrible drive killing penalties or drive extending penalties for their opponent, missed tackles, terrible play calling, injuries and balls just becoming a magnet to the opponent after fumbles to cut it short. This game should end in a tie. You think Mcnabb will realize that it can happen this time.
 
I'd much rather have Jacobs than a receiver, although Boldin going over the middle while Jackson stretches the field sounds tempting. I'm not sold on Houshmanzada for some reason.People are mentioning Winslow, but he strikes me as a self-centered, immature idiot. We tried that once, remember?
would love to see Boldin and Jacobs in green next year. Dont think either will happen though. Plus, i am pretty sure mcnabb would kill boldin with his constant high throws over the middle
Who would you like to see as their quarterback? Please don't say Kolb.While I realize that McNabb isn't one of the Mannings or Drew Brees, he's still in the 10-15 range of the league's best QBs. That means there are 17-22 teams who would love to have him.Yes, I'd love to have Brees throwing to D. Jackson, Curtis, or Housh/Boldin/Chad Johnson etc., but I haven't heard that he's going to be available. Nor are any of the other QBs who are better than McNabb. So I say they should work on improving at the positions where better guys actually will be out there.
definitely NOT kolb. And i agree, the options out there are like choosing your method of execution. And while my gut tells me that there is no choice but to keep him unless they can swing a trade, i still cant help but to think about the possibilities.. i wouldnt mind bringing back garcia to hold things down for a couple years. Not sure about his contract status and no idea if a trade could be worked out (Eagles play TB at home in '09), but Garica is ideal for this showing a young QB how to play. Maybe trade up to draft a Sam Bradford / Colt McCoy type this year, assuming they come out. Or wait for Stafford (UGA) or a Nate Davis (Ball ST):shrug:i do know this, if F.A.A.R. is still the coach next year, and McNabb is not here, Kolb will be forced into action. Reid is just too stubborn to admit that Kolb is teh sucks. Kolb looks eerily like aj feeley. Rag arm, no running skills, stares down his target. not good.
 
I'd much rather have Jacobs than a receiver, although Boldin going over the middle while Jackson stretches the field sounds tempting. I'm not sold on Houshmanzada for some reason.People are mentioning Winslow, but he strikes me as a self-centered, immature idiot. We tried that once, remember?
would love to see Boldin and Jacobs in green next year. Dont think either will happen though. Plus, i am pretty sure mcnabb would kill boldin with his constant high throws over the middle
Who would you like to see as their quarterback? Please don't say Kolb.While I realize that McNabb isn't one of the Mannings or Drew Brees, he's still in the 10-15 range of the league's best QBs. That means there are 17-22 teams who would love to have him.Yes, I'd love to have Brees throwing to D. Jackson, Curtis, or Housh/Boldin/Chad Johnson etc., but I haven't heard that he's going to be available. Nor are any of the other QBs who are better than McNabb. So I say they should work on improving at the positions where better guys actually will be out there.
definitely NOT kolb. And i agree, the options out there are like choosing your method of execution. And while my gut tells me that there is no choice but to keep him unless they can swing a trade, i still cant help but to think about the possibilities.. i wouldnt mind bringing back garcia to hold things down for a couple years. Not sure about his contract status and no idea if a trade could be worked out (Eagles play TB at home in '09), but Garica is ideal for this showing a young QB how to play. Maybe trade up to draft a Sam Bradford / Colt McCoy type this year, assuming they come out. Or wait for Stafford (UGA) or a Nate Davis (Ball ST):shrug:i do know this, if F.A.A.R. is still the coach next year, and McNabb is not here, Kolb will be forced into action. Reid is just too stubborn to admit that Kolb is teh sucks. Kolb looks eerily like aj feeley. Rag arm, no running skills, stares down his target. not good.
Well, like you, I would love to see an upgrade at the QB position. But as stated, the majority of NFL teams are looking for that special QB. They are just very hard to find. I have this recurring nightmare that we force McNabb out and get stuck with much, much worse.And, no. I would not rather have Garcia.
 
I'd much rather have Jacobs than a receiver, although Boldin going over the middle while Jackson stretches the field sounds tempting. I'm not sold on Houshmanzada for some reason.People are mentioning Winslow, but he strikes me as a self-centered, immature idiot. We tried that once, remember?
would love to see Boldin and Jacobs in green next year. Dont think either will happen though. Plus, i am pretty sure mcnabb would kill boldin with his constant high throws over the middle
Who would you like to see as their quarterback? Please don't say Kolb.While I realize that McNabb isn't one of the Mannings or Drew Brees, he's still in the 10-15 range of the league's best QBs. That means there are 17-22 teams who would love to have him.Yes, I'd love to have Brees throwing to D. Jackson, Curtis, or Housh/Boldin/Chad Johnson etc., but I haven't heard that he's going to be available. Nor are any of the other QBs who are better than McNabb. So I say they should work on improving at the positions where better guys actually will be out there.
definitely NOT kolb. And i agree, the options out there are like choosing your method of execution. And while my gut tells me that there is no choice but to keep him unless they can swing a trade, i still cant help but to think about the possibilities.. i wouldnt mind bringing back garcia to hold things down for a couple years. Not sure about his contract status and no idea if a trade could be worked out (Eagles play TB at home in '09), but Garica is ideal for this showing a young QB how to play. Maybe trade up to draft a Sam Bradford / Colt McCoy type this year, assuming they come out. Or wait for Stafford (UGA) or a Nate Davis (Ball ST):wub:i do know this, if F.A.A.R. is still the coach next year, and McNabb is not here, Kolb will be forced into action. Reid is just too stubborn to admit that Kolb is teh sucks. Kolb looks eerily like aj feeley. Rag arm, no running skills, stares down his target. not good.
Well, like you, I would love to see an upgrade at the QB position. But as stated, the majority of NFL teams are looking for that special QB. They are just very hard to find. I have this recurring nightmare that we force McNabb out and get stuck with much, much worse.And, no. I would not rather have Garcia.
so your vote is to just keep mcnabb and pay him the $10 mil bonus this offseason?
 
JuniorNB said:
Ignatius Reilly said:
Wooderson said:
eoMMan said:
So, what exactly do the Eagles need to make the playoffs? Is this right?

1. Eagles beat Dallas

2. Chicago lose to Houston

3. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland
I think it's1. Eagles beat Dallas

2. Tampa Bay lose to Oakland

3. Chicago or Minnesota lose
How about they don't deserve it
While beating the redskins would have been a real simple way that they could have controlled their own destiny, it sould certainly be argued that the Bears, Falcons, Cardinals, Cowboys, Buccaneers, and Vikings have all played in games this season that would indicate they "don't deserve it". Other than the Giants and Panthers, no team clearly looks like they 'deserve it".
Every year you can make a case for a num ber of teams that "don't deserve it". What would make the Eagles more "deserving" than any of those other teams? The Eagles haven't been a good team since their superbowl year.
Ask Pittsburgh, Atlanta, the Giants, the Cardinals, and Cowboys. I bet they'd all say they're good. :lmao: Also, I never said they're "more deserving". Go reread if you're comprehension is down.
I don't even understand the point of this statement. First off, the Eagles haven't beaten all of the teams that you listed (I'm pretty sure they haven't beaten the Cowboys yet). Yes the Eagles have beaten many good teams but in the end, they're a little over .500. Since the SB year, they've made the playoffs once and that was primarily because they got on a hot run with a backup qb. I never said they were a bad team.........just not a good team IMHO.
 
which was what?

I am curious to see a few things this offseason.

1. Will McNabb be the scapegoat and get cut/traded?

2. Will Marty M be back at OC?

3. Will Reid be fired from alot of his duties? ( GM, player personal, HC )

 
which was what? I am curious to see a few things this offseason.1. Will McNabb be the scapegoat and get cut/traded?2. Will Marty M be back at OC? 3. Will Reid be fired from alot of his duties? ( GM, player personal, HC )
Nobody is mentioning that from what I hear it's not the Eagles FO choice to keep McNabb, apparently he is livid after the Baltimore benching and wants out. Feels like he doesnt get any respect - yadda yadda yadda. If that's the case they may have to trade him regardless. I see this getting alot worse before it gets better. Either way I don't see it getting better on the fat mans watch.
 
4 of our 8 wins have come against the NFC West, which is the worst division I can remember in a very long time. So maybe the team isn't even as good as its record.

We get the NFC South next year, which won't be anywhere near as kind.

 
which was what? I am curious to see a few things this offseason.1. Will McNabb be the scapegoat and get cut/traded?2. Will Marty M be back at OC? 3. Will Reid be fired from alot of his duties? ( GM, player personal, HC )
Nobody is mentioning that from what I hear it's not the Eagles FO choice to keep McNabb, apparently he is livid after the Baltimore benching and wants out. Feels like he doesnt get any respect - yadda yadda yadda. If that's the case they may have to trade him regardless. I see this getting alot worse before it gets better. Either way I don't see it getting better on the fat mans watch.
If I'm Banner, I'd deal McNabb to the highest bidder & make Reid install an OC who would run a more balanced offense. McNabb has no basis for asking for more guaranteed money at this point. He didn't guide the Eagles to their last playoff win; he was injured yet again. His definition of "playing great" is a joke. He was turning the ball over like his name was Ryan Leaf in the games leading up to the Baltimore & that first half that lead to his benching. He has issues taking accountability for anything. He's a self-absorbed phony with an overinflated opinion of his ability. I love his whole "You'd never see this happen to Peyton or Brady" routine...yeah ok Donovan. I think it's best for both sides to move on. I am tired of his passive aggressive bullsht & propensity of coming up short when the game is on the line. 10 years in the league & he still exhibits zero compentency in running a 2 minute offense. I may be in the minority, but I don't think he irreplaceable by any stretch. There are plenty of teams with new quarterbacks under center this season that are playoff bound. You can win with a balanced offense & good defense. The Eagles aren't obligated to give McNabb any assurances other than as long as he continues playing well, he's the starter. He's under contract & giving him a new deal would likely limit their flexibility. If Kolb sucks as bad as all of the armchair quarterbacks have been able to determine in his protracted appearances, why would McNabb feel threatened by this scenario?I'd love for DH to check in on this one to see what he's hearing.
 
McNabb is a horrible game manager and HAS TO GO. You can say Manning has Wayne and Brees has Colston but we could argue chicken or egg forever on those. Would Wayne or Colston be who they are without Brees or Manning?

TO was the only WR that could make McNabb throw for 64%. He's been 57-59% his entire career. Brees and Manning are more like 65 to 68% without TO. McNabb has never trusted WR's. This is the 1st year he's let it go more often. He has stated this.

Reid's O is often in the top half of the league and looks awesome when it's going good. McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.

I have no clue how good Kolb is but he's never had a training camp or practiced with the 1's. You can't judge him until he does. While he did throw the awful pick to Reed in the Baltimore game he also drove them down the field on the same drive.

I'm done arguing McNabb. Lots and lots of people love him but to me he's an awful game manager, a terrible leader and an average QB. That probably won't change.

 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
Quarterbacks are judged on championships that they win. Until Peyton Manning won the superbowl, he was considered one of biggest chokers in the game. Do you think he never had any "big" regular season wins? Given the fact that McNabb hasn't won a superbowl coupled with his recent failures on 2 minute drives, he will not be considered a big-game qb until he wins it all.
 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
I said the biggest of games. You added the "big games" and "haters". McNabb lovers can never admit they were wrong or he is bad at anything.
 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
Yeah he was real brilliant against those defensive stalwarts Arizona & Cleveland (they sure closed all those red zone trips). He's always brilliant when he gets to ride the coat tails of a healthy Westbrook. When is the last "big" playoff win he's had? 2004. Hardly a candidate for a large upfront signing bonus.
 
I've got no issue with starting to work on Plan B at QB and at head coach, but you better bring me a better option before cutting either one loose for 2009.

 
I've got no issue with starting to work on Plan B at QB and at head coach, but you better bring me a better option before cutting either one loose for 2009.
I'd cut McNabb loose in a heartbeat if the price was right. If I'm Banner I'd also relieve Reid from playcalling input, fire Marty and bring in a new OC from outside the organization that will pay the run game more than lip service. Kerry Collins will be playing football in January this year because of the running game & defense; we've got a great head start on both of them. The only way I'd keep McNabb is under the current deal & the flexibility it provides.
 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
I said the biggest of games. You added the "big games" and "haters". McNabb lovers can never admit they were wrong or he is bad at anything.
And McNabb haters refuse to acknowledge that anyone else on the field cost the Eagles the game, no matter how wide open the reciever was who dropped the ball.McNabb is not perfect, he's not a first ballot sure-fire HOFer...but he's well above the average, and QB's like that are very, very difficult to replace. McNabb is NOT the piece holding back the eagles.
 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
I said the biggest of games. You added the "big games" and "haters". McNabb lovers can never admit they were wrong or he is bad at anything.
And McNabb haters refuse to acknowledge that anyone else on the field cost the Eagles the game, no matter how wide open the reciever was who dropped the ball.McNabb is not perfect, he's not a first ballot sure-fire HOFer...but he's well above the average, and QB's like that are very, very difficult to replace. McNabb is NOT the piece holding back the eagles.
Wow. Guess you haven't watched him in the biggest of games. He beat a Packers team with a horrible D and then beat the Falcons when that Packers DC went there. Other than that, he's come up brutally small. The D gets absolutely worn out in those games. The WR's don't see any balls in those games. Do you not see him way below the greats in comp pct? Do you not see his low YPA? Do you not see that lost look in his eyes? He's the worst leader of any QB I've ever seen. Did you see the throw up? Did you see the Washington game when he had to put his winter coat on until the ball was nearly snapped? Did you see the look in the D's eyes after 8 straight 3 and outs? My gosh, look around for other excuses if you want but the QB gets it every play.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
I said the biggest of games. You added the "big games" and "haters". McNabb lovers can never admit they were wrong or he is bad at anything.
And McNabb haters refuse to acknowledge that anyone else on the field cost the Eagles the game, no matter how wide open the reciever was who dropped the ball.McNabb is not perfect, he's not a first ballot sure-fire HOFer...but he's well above the average, and QB's like that are very, very difficult to replace. McNabb is NOT the piece holding back the eagles.
So would you give him an extension with guaranteed upfront money if he continues to push the issue?
 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
I said the biggest of games. You added the "big games" and "haters". McNabb lovers can never admit they were wrong or he is bad at anything.
And McNabb haters refuse to acknowledge that anyone else on the field cost the Eagles the game, no matter how wide open the reciever was who dropped the ball.McNabb is not perfect, he's not a first ballot sure-fire HOFer...but he's well above the average, and QB's like that are very, very difficult to replace. McNabb is NOT the piece holding back the eagles.
Wow. Guess you haven't watched him in the biggest of games. He beat a Packers team with a horrible D and then beat the Falcons when that Packers DC went there. Other than that, he's come up brutally small. The D gets absolutely worn out in those games. The WR's don't see any balls in those games. Do you not see him way below the greats in comp pct? Do you not see his low YPA? Do you not see that lost look in his eyes? He's the worst leader of any QB I've ever seen. Did you see the throw up? Did you see the Washington game when he had to put his winter coat on until the ball was nearly snapped? Did you see the look in the D's eyes after 8 straight 3 and outs? My gosh, look around for other excuses if you want but the QB gets it every play.
There are certainly a few QBs in the league who are better, but do you see Philly having a shot at any of them?He's miles away from being as bad as you seem to think he is, and awesome, high-percentage completion, Mr Clutch quarterbacks aren't often on teh waiver wire.I don't care if the Eagles have a plan to replace McNabb, but to suggest letting him walk and roll the dice with Kolb, or sign some bum like Derek Anderson or Rex Grossman would set teh franchise back.What's your plan?
 
McNabb just clams up in the biggest of games. He almost looks like he's drugged by the opponent.
You know, after the Baltimore game, every game has been a big game. They were essentially in the playoffs at that point, and any looss would most-likely mean the end of their playoff hopes.McNabb proceded to play great (not good, mind you, but GREAT) in three of those four games. Granted, he didn't play very well at Washington (aided by three huge drops by receivers), but against Arizona, the Giants, and Clevelenad, he was brilliant.McNabb-haters have a very strange habit of pointing out his bad performances in "big games" and totally ignoring his great performances in 'big games'. Why was the Redskins game bigger than the Giants game? Or teh Arizona game? or the Cleveland game?And why were all his playoff losses considered chokes, but his playoff wins considered non-important?
I said the biggest of games. You added the "big games" and "haters". McNabb lovers can never admit they were wrong or he is bad at anything.
And McNabb haters refuse to acknowledge that anyone else on the field cost the Eagles the game, no matter how wide open the reciever was who dropped the ball.McNabb is not perfect, he's not a first ballot sure-fire HOFer...but he's well above the average, and QB's like that are very, very difficult to replace. McNabb is NOT the piece holding back the eagles.
So would you give him an extension with guaranteed upfront money if he continues to push the issue?
Let him push. He's under wraps for 4 more years.The NFL is a one-year contract league aside from the salary cap implications. If there is no cap in 2010, he can be out of PHilly and there's no salary cap penalty if there's no salary cap.
 
If Garcia were available, I'd love to see them deal McNabb for picks, trade for Garcia, and draft someone to compete with Kolb as heir apparent. I would also love to see a new OC. Garcia may have a weak arm, but he puts more heart into one game than McNabb does in a season. For my money our offense could use a bit of that heart and some guts.

 
You let McNabb walk then you are clearly setting this franchise back even further. The recent frugal years have hurt enough, every year we are $10-20 mil under the cap. Give the guy some decent weapons, sign some key players, spend cap money at least. All you McNabb haters what is your better alternative out there? Develop a QB so when he is ready to contribute Westbrook is completely done? Then what? Garcia? Please. McNabb is not the problem. The lack of talent around him is.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top