Shabutie wrote: ... I have not jumped on McNabb. However, you jumped to conclusions by thinking I had it out for him. I PRAISED him after the Texans game. I do not have a bias against him. I do not shower him with compliments after awful performances. I do know outside of the first half against the Texans he is the WORST rated passer in the entire league.
I have no idea if Anthony Armstrong would make an impact with Campbell, nor do you. This system actually would have suited Campbell's abilitites as well as any could.
... You cannot prove to me that this confidence is not a product of the new coaching staff and system.
WHO CARES? - nobody has to "prove anything" - this is a place to express opinions and vent
IMHO we saw what Campbell was like - we are far better off with McNabb - we just look like a different team
now I understand that we've got a new FO, a new set of coaches and added some players but we're still VERY old and we still have some issues BUT this group is playing with a better attitude and it's just looking like they think they can win some games
NOW, I don't know and cannot "prove" what could have been but I think that we have a good idea of what it might have been like AND I'm pretty sure we would not be even close to this
we are a better club with McNabb AND all the other factors that have contributed - I'm good with that and I'm looking forward to seeing this club get back into the top 10 in the NFL in the near future
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
The Hogster wrote:Shabutie. A basic principle in logical reasoning is that it is nearly impossible to prove a negative.
In other words, it is mere hyperbole for you to keep asking us to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of factors other than McNabb's leadership and play.
By the same flawed logic, I could ask you to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of McNabb's leadership and play.
All in all, I think you are bending over backwards to attribute our success to everyone but him. Eerily reminiscent of a Philly fan.
Sounds like Shabootie....ah ah, could be a mole.
Proverbs 27:17 As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.
the stats show that we have the worst defense in yards allowed in the NFL (or close to it) - WHO CARES
without this defense we would not be 3-3 AND actually we could even have a better record with a little luck
we are 4-3 and we're coming off a couple of really bad years - we are a greatly improved franchise
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
The Hogster wrote:Shabutie. A basic principle in logical reasoning is that it is nearly impossible to prove a negative.
In other words, it is mere hyperbole for you to keep asking us to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of factors other than McNabb's leadership and play.
By the same flawed logic, I could ask you to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of McNabb's leadership and play.
All in all, I think you are bending over backwards to attribute our success to everyone but him. Eerily reminiscent of a Philly fan.
People have pointed out that McNabb's stat line is not good, but his leadership has been helping this team win games. That is completely unfounded and without merit. That is people going out of there way to justifying his level of play. I am simply stating facts in regards to his play. The only tangible evidence we have is that McNabb is on the bottom of almost every passing category. The leadership, demeanor, and will to win cannot one way or another be directly attributed to him. Anyone saying McNabb's personal trates have won this team games are purely speculating.
I do not need to prove that it is a result of McNabb's leadership. People are tossing out accolades for him on what they feel. All of that is speculative. All we have is what is in front of us with regards to how this team is playing. Its hard for you to justify his play, when he ranks in the bottom of almost every category.
I am not going bending over backwards to attribute success to anyone. I watch the product we have on the field and make judgments off of that. I don't know what else a fan can do. Digging deep into the phychology and external factors that may or may not effect how the team plays is impossible to know from our persepective.
Shabutie wrote: ... I have not jumped on McNabb. However, you jumped to conclusions by thinking I had it out for him. I PRAISED him after the Texans game. I do not have a bias against him. I do not shower him with compliments after awful performances. I do know outside of the first half against the Texans he is the WORST rated passer in the entire league.
I have no idea if Anthony Armstrong would make an impact with Campbell, nor do you. This system actually would have suited Campbell's abilitites as well as any could.
... You cannot prove to me that this confidence is not a product of the new coaching staff and system.
WHO CARES? - nobody has to "prove anything" - this is a place to express opinions and vent
IMHO we saw what Campbell was like - we are far better off with McNabb - we just look like a different team
now I understand that we've got a new FO, a new set of coaches and added some players but we're still VERY old and we still have some issues BUT this group is playing with a better attitude and it's just looking like they think they can win some games
NOW, I don't know and cannot "prove" what could have been but I think that we have a good idea of what it might have been like AND I'm pretty sure we would not be even close to this
we are a better club with McNabb AND all the other factors that have contributed - I'm good with that and I'm looking forward to seeing this club get back into the top 10 in the NFL in the near future
I agree mostly with what you said. So many factors changed with this team during the offseason. If we had just picked up McNabb and had the same coaching staff as last year, it would be a little bit easier to see what effect he was having on the team. At this point, I cannot say what Jason Campbell would have done or not done with the new staff.
The Hogster wrote:Shabutie. A basic principle in logical reasoning is that it is nearly impossible to prove a negative.
In other words, it is mere hyperbole for you to keep asking us to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of factors other than McNabb's leadership and play.
By the same flawed logic, I could ask you to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of McNabb's leadership and play.
All in all, I think you are bending over backwards to attribute our success to everyone but him. Eerily reminiscent of a Philly fan.
People have pointed out that McNabb's stat line is not good, but his leadership has been helping this team win games. That is completely unfounded and without merit. That is people going out of there way to justifying his level of play. I am simply stating facts in regards to his play. The only tangible evidence we have is that McNabb is on the bottom of almost every passing category. The leadership, demeanor, and will to win cannot one way or another be directly attributed to him. Anyone saying McNabb's personal trates have won this team games are purely speculating.
I do not need to prove that it is a result of McNabb's leadership. People are tossing out accolades for him on what they feel. All of that is speculative. All we have is what is in front of us with regards to how this team is playing. Its hard for you to justify his play, when he ranks in the bottom of almost every category.
I am not going bending over backwards to attribute success to anyone. I watch the product we have on the field and make judgments off of that. I don't know what else a fan can do. Digging deep into the phychology and external factors that may or may not effect how the team plays is impossible to know from our persepective.
If the game were played on paper, then you might be right. But, if you watched the games, you would have seen that in the Green Bay game, McNabb played terribly for the first 3 Quarters, but in the 4th Quarter and Overtime, he went 12 for 12 passing for 188 Yards and 1 TD. The team won in OT.
In the Bears game, we were only leading by 1 score. McNabb completed two crucial 3rd Down conversions allowing us to run the clock out.
In the Eagles game, he had a stellar 1st Quarter allowing us to jump out to a lead large enough to allow the defense to secure a win for us. He also converted a crucial 3rd down with his legs late in the 4th quarter.
His stats are not great, but we are a work in progress.
the stats show that we have the worst defense in yards allowed in the NFL (or close to it) - WHO CARES
without this defense we would not be 3-3 AND actually we could even have a better record with a little luck
we are 4-3 and we're coming off a couple of really bad years - we are a greatly improved franchise
We are actually 4-3. That is another speculative statement. We have no idea what our record would be with a different defense. Deangelo Hall has contributed hugely to two games for us on spectacular individual efforts. Scheme wise, this was the most sound the defense has been. He really simplified things and the players responded.
The Hogster wrote:Shabutie. A basic principle in logical reasoning is that it is nearly impossible to prove a negative.
In other words, it is mere hyperbole for you to keep asking us to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of factors other than McNabb's leadership and play.
By the same flawed logic, I could ask you to prove that the team's improvement is NOT a result of McNabb's leadership and play.
All in all, I think you are bending over backwards to attribute our success to everyone but him. Eerily reminiscent of a Philly fan.
People have pointed out that McNabb's stat line is not good, but his leadership has been helping this team win games. That is completely unfounded and without merit. That is people going out of there way to justifying his level of play. I am simply stating facts in regards to his play. The only tangible evidence we have is that McNabb is on the bottom of almost every passing category. The leadership, demeanor, and will to win cannot one way or another be directly attributed to him. Anyone saying McNabb's personal trates have won this team games are purely speculating.
I do not need to prove that it is a result of McNabb's leadership. People are tossing out accolades for him on what they feel. All of that is speculative. All we have is what is in front of us with regards to how this team is playing. Its hard for you to justify his play, when he ranks in the bottom of almost every category.
I am not going bending over backwards to attribute success to anyone. I watch the product we have on the field and make judgments off of that. I don't know what else a fan can do. Digging deep into the phychology and external factors that may or may not effect how the team plays is impossible to know from our persepective.
If the game were played on paper, then you might be right. But, if you watched the games, you would have seen that in the Green Bay game, McNabb played terribly for the first 3 Quarters, but in the 4th Quarter and Overtime, he went 12 for 12 passing for 188 Yards and 1 TD. The team won in OT.
In the Bears game, we were only leading by 1 score. McNabb completed two crucial 3rd Down conversions allowing us to run the clock out.
In the Eagles game, he had a stellar 1st Quarter allowing us to jump out to a lead large enough to allow the defense to secure a win for us. He also converted a crucial 3rd down with his legs late in the 4th quarter.
His stats are not great, but we are a work in progress.
What about the negatives of that? If McNabb plays well in the first 3 quarters against GB, do we even need to comeback?
McNabb missed many wide open receivers in the Bears game, including Santana Moss for a TD. His pick 6 was ill-advised and was a huge negative play. Is this game even close with a decent performance from him? Also, McNabb completed 1 pass for a first down and it was not a 3rd down conversion. I am not sure McNabb had a "stellar" first quarter agianst the Eagles. He missed a wide open Fred Davis for a touchdown, although we did end up getting a TD that drive. His overall day was very, very poor against the Eagles. If the Eagles catch that last hailmary, he is probably getting grilled.
The Hogster wrote:McNabb has had a rough stretch. But, we are winning games. Winning is not easy. And, he deserves credit for his part in that even if it doesn't show up on the stat line.
Players believe in him. When you believe, you tend to do your job at 110 percent. That has resulted in us pulling out several games that we would not have in years past.
That is a theory you have, not factual in any way. NFL players generally play as hard as they can and that is what is so great about this particular sport. Even if they are playing harder, you cannot automatically point to McNabb for that reason. The stat line is pretty important for a QB.
I actually have 2 clients on this team who will tell you that the confidence on offense has made a huge difference. If you have played sports, you will know that confidence and leadership do matter. If you think the stat line carries the day, you obviously have not paid attention to the Cowboys and Chargers this year.
Did they tell you in what way it made a difference? Did they tell you where that confidence came from? That usually comes from the coaches, especially after a big change in philosophy. This is the second time you implied playing sports... Again, I played College football. Anyone on the team that was decent played their hardest every snap. No one said, oh crap Goode is not being a good leader I am going to slack off. Did you slack on and off in football depending on "circumstances"?
You're oversimplifying what he said, and totally ignoring his point about the Cowpies and Chargers having good stat lines but crappy seasons. I have no doubt that you were not conscious of the affect your team's leaders were having on your play, but I can't believe you don't recognize the principle to which he is referring. I see it every week coaching my son's teams. If one player picks up his game, it has a contagious affect on his teammates, and it works the other way too.
You cannot say the Cowboys and Chargers have had bad seasons due to leadership. They both have a lot of turnovers, missed fgs, and mistakes in very close games. Pure speculative to say that is because of lack of leadership. Personally, it never mattered what was going on around me. I played my hardest and best every play. Most players in the NFL do the same thing (Except when a game is out of reach, maybe) Even with that being said, I am not sure McNabb has picked up his level of play.
Not saying the Pies and Chargers are losing because of a lack of leadership. Those were examples of how stats don't tell the whole story. And I said you wouldn't recognize that you picked up your game due to leadership. You think you are playing the same no matter what, but to an objective observer, your game is different.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
So the defense gets 5-6 TOs and you attribute McNabb with credit for the win? Seriously? The offense scored ONE FREAKIN TOUCHDOWN...and you attribute the win to McNabb. Torrain had 125yds rushing and you attribute the win to McNabb? And since McNabb threw a pick 6, the defense only gave up 7 pts. But that's okay, let's attribute the win to McNabb.
...any given Sunday....
RIP #21 Sean Taylor. You will be loved and adored by Redskins fans forever!!!!!
GSPODS:
The National Anthem sucks.
What a useless piece of propagandist rhetoric that is.
If the game were played on paper, then you might be right. But, if you watched the games, you would have seen that in the Green Bay game, McNabb played terribly for the first 3 Quarters, but in the 4th Quarter and Overtime, he went 12 for 12 passing for 188 Yards and 1 TD. The team won in OT.
Sorry, but playing well for one quarter doesn't excuse playing like crap for the first three. That's completely illogical.
In the Bears game, we were only leading by 1 score. McNabb completed two crucial 3rd Down conversions allowing us to run the clock out.
We were only leading by one score because (1) McNabb's pick 6 gave the Bears half of their total points for the game and (2) his poor play (despite amazing field position) resulted in our offense not scoring more points. Not to mention the fact that the Bears would have had 21 points due to another McNabb pick 6 except for McNabb getting bailed out by a penalty that he caused by not paying attention to the play clock.
VetSkinsFan wrote:So the defense gets 5-6 TOs and you attribute McNabb with credit for the win? Seriously? The offense scored ONE FREAKIN TOUCHDOWN...and you attribute the win to McNabb. Torrain had 125yds rushing and you attribute the win to McNabb? And since McNabb threw a pick 6, the defense only gave up 7 pts. But that's okay, let's attribute the win to McNabb.
Why not just go 10 on 11. McNabb has made no difference this year. Let's just hike it directly to Ryan Torrain and save Cap Space.
Shabutie wrote:At this point, I cannot say what Jason Campbell would have done or not done with the new staff.
It's called "intangibles." You can't quantify it, but you know it when you see it. JC didn't have it, McNabb does.
He has intangibles, but his physical skills are certainly in question at this point.
Was I arguing that?
Not at all. But intangibles only get you so far if you're physical skills are diminished. Mark Brunell is a perfect example of that.
Brunell didn't have McNabb's intangibles either. And I don't agree that McNabb's skills have diminished as much as you do. He still can chuck the ball 70 yards, avoid rushers in the pocket, and scramble for a first down when healthy. I think he is playing hurt right now, which is slowing him down some, but he has always thrown balls in the dirt.
Last edited by Deadskins on Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:27 am, edited 2 times in total.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
Shabutie wrote:At this point, I cannot say what Jason Campbell would have done or not done with the new staff.
It's called "intangibles." You can't quantify it, but you know it when you see it. JC didn't have it, McNabb does.
He has intangibles, but his physical skills are certainly in question at this point.
Was I arguing that?
Not at all. But intangibles only get you so far if you're physical skills are diminished. Mark Brunell is a perfect example of that.
So what is your point Cane Skins, Shabutie, Vet Skins. You guys sound like desperate housewives living in your husband's mansion, spending his money, but complaining to each other about not getting flowers.
What is your point? Do you want to go screw the Pool Guy? (Rex Grossman) Or, do you want to stop complaining and enjoy what you've got, albeit as "imperfect" as it is.
Shabutie wrote:At this point, I cannot say what Jason Campbell would have done or not done with the new staff.
It's called "intangibles." You can't quantify it, but you know it when you see it. JC didn't have it, McNabb does.
He has intangibles, but his physical skills are certainly in question at this point.
Was I arguing that?
Not at all. But intangibles only get you so far if you're physical skills are diminished. Mark Brunell is a perfect example of that.
So what is your point Cane Skins, Shabutie, Vet Skins. You guys sound like desperate housewives living in your husband's mansion, spending his money, but complaining to each other about not getting flowers.
What is your point? Do you want to go screw the Pool Guy? (Rex Grossman) Or, do you want to stop complaining and enjoy what you've got, albeit as "imperfect" as it is.
The point is that McNabb is playing poorly and needs to start playing better. We traded multiple picks for a guy that pretty much all of us thought could start for 2-3 years. That, however, is certainly in question at this point and if he struggles like this the rest of the season we are going to be in a very difficult position come next offseason. Many here were wondering why the Eagles were willing to trade McNabb within the division, well I think the answer to that question is starting to become clear.
Shabutie wrote:At this point, I cannot say what Jason Campbell would have done or not done with the new staff.
It's called "intangibles." You can't quantify it, but you know it when you see it. JC didn't have it, McNabb does.
He has intangibles, but his physical skills are certainly in question at this point.
Was I arguing that?
Not at all. But intangibles only get you so far if you're physical skills are diminished. Mark Brunell is a perfect example of that.
So what is your point Cane Skins, Shabutie, Vet Skins. You guys sound like desperate housewives living in your husband's mansion, spending his money, but complaining to each other about not getting flowers.
What is your point? Do you want to go screw the Pool Guy? (Rex Grossman) Or, do you want to stop complaining and enjoy what you've got, albeit as "imperfect" as it is.
The point is that McNabb is playing poorly and needs to start playing better. We traded multiple picks for a guy that pretty much all of us thought could start for 2-3 years. That, however, is certainly in question at this point and if he struggles like this the rest of the season we are going to be in a very difficult position come next offseason. Many here were wondering why the Eagles were willing to trade McNabb within the division, well I think the answer to that question is starting to become clear.
Really? He's still on pace to throw for over 4 thousand yards this year. His career win percentage is still over 60%, and we're currently winning at just about that rate. Do you know the last Redskins QB to throw for over 4 Thousand Yards?? Mark Rypien. (I'm going off of pure memory, but I don't think anyone has done that for us since the early nineties)
What difficult position will we be in? Do you expect another 4,000 yard, .600 win percentage QB to come available all of a sudden? Or, do you think we draft a Rookie with one of our first 2 picks who can come in and do that?
You see, it's one thing to say he needs to play better. Everyone on the team does. It's quite another to complain about our QB play, when there isn't a whole lot better out there.
Shabutie wrote:At this point, I cannot say what Jason Campbell would have done or not done with the new staff.
It's called "intangibles." You can't quantify it, but you know it when you see it. JC didn't have it, McNabb does.
He has intangibles, but his physical skills are certainly in question at this point.
Was I arguing that?
Not at all. But intangibles only get you so far if you're physical skills are diminished. Mark Brunell is a perfect example of that.
So what is your point Cane Skins, Shabutie, Vet Skins. You guys sound like desperate housewives living in your husband's mansion, spending his money, but complaining to each other about not getting flowers.
What is your point? Do you want to go screw the Pool Guy? (Rex Grossman) Or, do you want to stop complaining and enjoy what you've got, albeit as "imperfect" as it is.
The point is that McNabb is playing poorly and needs to start playing better. We traded multiple picks for a guy that pretty much all of us thought could start for 2-3 years. That, however, is certainly in question at this point and if he struggles like this the rest of the season we are going to be in a very difficult position come next offseason. Many here were wondering why the Eagles were willing to trade McNabb within the division, well I think the answer to that question is starting to become clear.
Really? He's still on pace to throw for over 4 thousand yards this year. His career win percentage is still over 60%, and we're currently winning at just about that rate. Do you know the last Redskins QB to throw for over 4 Thousand Yards?? Mark Rypien. (I'm going off of pure memory, but I don't think anyone has done that for us since the early nineties)
What difficult position will we be in? Do you expect another 4,000 yard, .600 win percentage QB to come available all of a sudden? Or, do you think we draft a Rookie with one of our first 2 picks who can come in and do that?
You see, it's one thing to say he needs to play better. Everyone on the team does. It's quite another to complain about our QB play, when there isn't a whole lot better out there.
I think we could possibly find a 14 TD, 16 INT QB that throws at a 57% completion rate. You found the only statistic that McNabb is decent in.
In 1986.