Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

Zorn sure did suck as a play caller. I mean i know we've had bad teams before but my god was that man pathetic.

Couldn't ask for a nicer guy, but he wasn't cut out to be a head coach, let alone playcaller.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;705547]Just remember, I did disagree with him on the later part of the statement.

I keep thinking of the Steelers and Bill Cowher. They stuck with him, and he eventually got them the prize.[/quote]

He got them the prize when he finally found a QB that could get the job done. Cowher wasnt the problem, Kordell Stewart was.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=joethiesmanfan;705565]McNabb had to stop running so much. Coaches wanted him to be known as a passer. [B]You miss reads when you run. [/B]IMO a first down is a first down. Okay coach what's your next play, on that one I had to run and get the first down right quick. Zorn would go balistic if Campbell ran and there was an open receiver. I'm like get over yourself and you so-called scheme Zorn, we are not getting first downs your way.[/quote]

I think Gibbs always had him figured out though. Keep McNabb contained and collapse the pocket. McNabb was only a major threat when he ran or rolled out of the pocket cause he was awsome at hitting passing ont he run. I think he will do well in Shanahan's offensive scheme due to the roll outs.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;705566]Zorn sure did suck as a play caller. I mean i know we've had bad teams before but my god was that man pathetic.

Couldn't ask for a nicer guy, but he wasn't cut out to be a head coach, let alone playcaller.[/quote]

I'm guessing your trying to keep it medium?

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=joethiesmanfan;705565]McNabb had to stop running so much. Coaches wanted him to be known as a passer. You miss reads when you run. IMO a first down is a first down. Okay coach what's your next play, on that one I had to run and get the first down right quick. Zorn would go balistic if Campbell ran and there was an open receiver. I'm like get over yourself and you so-called scheme Zorn, we are not getting first downs your way.[/quote]

Yeah good point. He didn't lose the ability to scramble as much as he turned himself into more of a passer than runner. He's still able to get out of the pocket when needed and he's not easy to sack.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=irish;705568]He got them the prize when he finally found a QB that could get the job done. Cowher wasnt the problem, Kordell Stewart was.[/quote]

I am the rare Steeler fan who will disagree with you on Stewart. Just remember how many AFC Championship games he got them to. You could have said the same thing about a lot of QBs who are considered very good.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;705551]Be it veterans or rookies, it takes time for the o-line to gel.[/quote]
This is true, but I'm not sure what veteran on the squad that Hicks should be sitting behind to learn. Ability/athleticism is one thing but who currently on the line can teach him?

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;705555]One reason depth was always such a major weakness for our line was that we had 2-3 veterans who we knew would miss games on a regular basis(Samuels, Jansen, etc.) so we always needed a backup in along the line. In the same span, the Giants line went 3 seasons without an injury. I hope that now that the line is substantial younger we will not be relying on backups all the time.

I am not arguing that backups are not important, only that we hopefully won't rely on them nearly as much.[/quote]Interesting, then, that the two guys who kept their jobs on the OL from last year were not really our best performers, but rather, the two guys who managed to start 16 games each next to each other.

There's probably something to that, I would think.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=johno;705527]imho both artis hicks and trent williams are upgrades.[/quote]Hicks almost certainly won't be a better RT than Heyer. Williams, on the other hand, probably can do about as well as post-probowl/end of career Samuels in his first year.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=GTripp0012;705602]Hicks almost certainly won't be a better RT than Heyer. Williams, on the other hand, probably can do about as well as post-probowl/end of career Samuels in his first year.[/quote]

How can you be so sure about Hicks? Heyer is terrible.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=skinsfan69;705609]How can you be so sure about Hicks? Heyer is terrible.[/quote]Hicks is a 31 year old failed right guard who still has a job because he's a system guy.

Heyer might not be adequate by most standards, but he's an NFL offensive tackle, at the very least. Guys like Mike Williams and Artis Hicks are just blocking others like Lichtensteigher/Rinehart/Fanaika/Edwin Williams/Heyer.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;705555]One reason depth was always such a major weakness for our line was that we had 2-3 veterans who we knew would miss games on a regular basis(Samuels, Jansen, etc.) so we always needed a backup in along the line. In the same span, the Giants line went 3 seasons without an injury. I hope that now that the line is substantial younger we will not be relying on backups all the time.

I am not arguing that backups are not important, only that we hopefully won't rely on them nearly as much.[/quote]

A gang of undrafted free agents for guys who we knew were going to be injured shows the type of football acumen our old front office had when it came to depth. I think its pretty important when i comes to both lines...right now the depth at the same ole spot (both tackles) is where i worry. Would LOVE to see Capers emerge, and what I heard about Heyer this offseason is not good...Right side of Oline is questionable at this point, but hey whats new? Hopefully scheme will help

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;705534]Recently I did an event with someone who has been with the Eagles for decades. We talked about the McNabb deal and we both agreed it was a win-win for both teams since McNabb is a massive upgrade from Campbell.

Where we disagreed was this person with the Eagles felt that McNabb has in the past, and would probably continue to always choke in the big games.[/quote]

There's a need in place now to see McNabb dispel that label. His greatest asset here will be to finally have a consistent running game. If that's not the cure, then there is none.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

I think it's unfair pressure on McNabb really, to all of a sudden be expected to be "the answer". I am not a huge McNabb fan, but i respect him as a person and what he has done for the Eagles, but the truth of the matter is that Campbell was such a poor quarterback here, along with a myriad of other problems, that it places undue expectations on Donovan, who is surely in the twilight of his career.

IMO, they would have gave themselves just as much chance of success this year by drafting a young new QB to go along with the new system that they are building here. Donovan will be good for a year maybe even two, but what worries me the most is that there is nobody behind him that can be a legitimate starter when he goes down. Colt is the only guy i see who could be molded into a starter. Rex was a failed experiment. I dunno about Bartel, or even if he will be here when the season starts.

Re: Positive remark on McNabb
 

[quote=Longtimefan;705623]There's a need in place now to see McNabb dispel that label. His greatest asset here will be to finally have a consistent running game. If that's not the cure, then there is none.[/quote]

There are certain types of fans and media who say that about any player that gets there and doesn't win.