Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-05-2010, 02:15 PM   #91
Playmaker
 
Trample the Elderly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Three Chopt Virginia
Age: 37
Posts: 2,906
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Let's turn this into a Tripp vs. thread. We're talking about McNabb and what we all think of the trade, not Tripp's opinion of it.
I would have kept the pick and given Philly the finger.
__________________
A funny thing happened on the way to the temple. The moneychangers bought the priesthood.
Trample the Elderly is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-05-2010, 02:16 PM   #92
Pro Bowl
 
SirClintonPortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Burden of proof is on you, dude. It's your claim that Reid's offense was so unbalanced that it make McNabb's job difficult, not mine. As a hypothesis, I think it's legit, but you might as well put "I think" before it because I don't have to agree with every distant assumption you make, just like you don't have to agree with the way I use completion percentage and sack rate to show value.

In the absence of personal expertise on what makes the Shanahan offense click, your entire argument is valueless. You critique me for appealing to my own expertise, but I'm very forthright in where I'm deriving my opinions. You just write stuff seemingly to make me read it.
Yes, you back off like a little coward once your "moral superiority" assumption against me went down the drain, now did it?

Then you seem unable to comprehend that every play's outcome can be broken down into two categories: Success or failure.

Running the ball effectively forces the opponent to call anti-pass plays with greater reservation, thus increasing the probability that when a pass play is called, the opponent will have an unsuitable defense to deal with it and a big play will occur.
Sure, you could have enough talent that you'll hit a big one, but the chance of that is still lower since the opponent can commit everything to just stopping the pass via blitz, double coverage, bracket coverage. Run the ball effectively, and the opponent has to commit their linebackers and quite possibly more just to stop the RB, which leaves means the CBs will be stuck in man or something more often, which in turn can be exploited by running a passing play out of the same formation. The opponent now has to guess, and one wrong guess can mean the difference in the game.
SirClintonPortis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:18 PM   #93
Registered User
 
wilsowilso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 41
Posts: 2,841
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Let's put it this way. If we somehow get very lucky and win it all sometime in the next three years with McNabb as the QB it will be the ultimate FU to Philly fans.

I can live with that.
wilsowilso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:20 PM   #94
Playmaker
 
over the mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: close to the edge
Posts: 3,813
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

yeah, i wanted to talk aobut mcnabb this morning. . . now, after this cock measuring contest, im kinda tired out on the subject already. freak it, i got work to do or im gonna be working all night.
over the mountain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:20 PM   #95
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,402
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis View Post
Load of economic counterincetives, not lack of ability is why they didn't sell the farm for him.
Oh right, Bretto Favrah the system QB who made that O explode is simply not going to come back. A 99% success rate with quick slants is better than the 60% of JC17
Alex Smith, spread system QB extrodinaire and huge investment given a second chance.
Henne, don't know.
Orton, scheme-fit for McDaniels' ball-control Patriot-lite offense.
Arizona? Screw Arizona. Signing D. Anderson is more than enough to show that they can't really tell a good QB from a bad one.

Then there's McNabb's PERSONAL incentive. He WANTED to be here and wasn't going to have it any other way.
In all fairness, given the choices of Buffalo, Oakland, or even the Rams, I'd want to come here too. McNabb wanted to come here to pay back Philly, unfortunately we play 14 other games besides the Philly games.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:23 PM   #96
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,105
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-..._1021281_n.jpg
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:24 PM   #97
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 27
Posts: 15,994
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis View Post
Yes, you back off like a little coward once your "moral superiority" assumption against me went down the drain, now did it?

Then you seem unable to comprehend that every play's outcome can be broken down into two categories: Success or failure.

Running the ball effectively forces the opponent to call anti-pass plays with greater reservation, thus increasing the probability that when a pass play is called, the opponent will have an unsuitable defense to deal with it and a big play will occur.
Sure, you could have enough talent that you'll hit a big one, but the chance of that is still lower since the opponent can commit everything to just stopping the pass via blitz, double coverage, bracket coverage. Run the ball effectively, and the opponent has to commit their linebackers and quite possibly more just to stop the RB, which leaves means the CBs will be stuck in man or something more often, which in turn can be exploited by running a passing play out of the same formation. The opponent now has to guess, and one wrong guess can mean the difference in the game.
Okay, well stated. Do you have any actual evidence for these claims, or will a simple "I still think you're overrating the effect of a generic running game commitment on passing efficiency" suffice?

I'm well versed in game-theory, so you can save the lecture. There's obviously some effect of run-pass balance on play efficiency, but I don't think there's a major effect to be found there. Just my opinion.

Also, how many Brownie Points do I get for breaking your composure with just a little bit of logical reasoning? Some? I'll settle for some.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:24 PM   #98
Playmaker
 
Trample the Elderly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Three Chopt Virginia
Age: 37
Posts: 2,906
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
GD that's ugly. Well at least he's better than JC, for now.
__________________
A funny thing happened on the way to the temple. The moneychangers bought the priesthood.
Trample the Elderly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:25 PM   #99
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 84,974
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
I was just thinking I need to update my Skins roster and try them out. McNabb definitely adds some fun to the equation.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:25 PM   #100
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,402
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redskins_P View Post
This is the way I see the trade....

Campbell + Zorn < McNabb + Shanahan
Unfair comparison since Zorn is no longer here.

Campbell + Zorn < Campbell + Shanahan

The coaching changes and the improved o-line are gonna be the difference this year.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:31 PM   #101
Registered User
 
SBXVII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,766
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
The OT at #37 may not have been worth selecting at #37. In other words, we may have just been taking an OT just to take an OT in that scenario
I just don't get it. I understand the assigned value for players, but if you need an OL why not pick the next best one on the list or which ever one you think will do well in zone blocking. Instead you want to wait till the next round then said OL get picked by someone else. Then we decide on another OL and again we are too high to draft the OL or the value doesn't fit. So we wait then someone else gets him.

In the long run we get no OL cause when it's time for us to pick we don't like the value. Just fill our needs and stop with the BPA BS.
SBXVII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:34 PM   #102
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 27
Posts: 15,994
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audi View Post
Either way, you still have a lot of explaining to do.

I'll give you one to start with, and maybe you can type slower to make sure you don't commit anymore fallacies.

What "winning organizations" were interested in Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, and Brett Favre that makes you believe the lack of perceived interest from "winning organizations" in Donovan McNabb is indicative of anything?
Allen/Gruden was interested in Favre to replace Garcia. Oh, and Minnesota. Brees, by all reports, had a choice between Miami and New Orleans before Miami traded for Culpepper. I don't know if I would call Miami under Saban a "true winning" franchise, but for the purpose of answering a cherry-picked example of a guy with a wrecked shoulder, they will suffice as an organization who people thought had direction.

I think you might have me on Warner (of course, I had thought of him before as a potential positive McNabb example). There were like, two teams interested in him as a backup, Arizona was the only team that was going to give him the starters role. But again, Josh McCown beat him out for the starting job in 2005. That's no different than if Grossman beat out McNabb for us this year: no one wants to see that happen. Warner's such an odd case. He's more proof that I'm wrong: anything can happen, as opposed to I'm wrong: McNabb is being underrated.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:37 PM   #103
The Starter
 
Mechanix544's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fort Bliss, TX
Posts: 2,277
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

-GTripp-
These columnists aren't the people I've been discussing takes on the trade with. They're just mainstream sources. For every columnist who doesn't like it for the Redskins, there are two who do. But I'm also not citing columnists as experts here. I'm just telling you that people that I have reached out to are "lukewarm" about what the Redskins are receiving.

There's no anger: these are not Redskins fans. It's just being panned as more of the same from a franchise that has come to deliver it on a consistent basis. And I tend to agree.-------------------------------------------

Dude, first off, let me say this. I love the passion. You are a fan, and that is great. Passion is great to see, whether u agree or not, Im sure you will be rootin for old #5 in Sept. whether JC has comparable stats or not. That said-----

I think your anonymous "sources" are anonymous because they are f*ckin' made up, kinda like a 4 year olds make believe imaginary friend, only your "sources" spout football statistical nonsense that could be tilted to either side given the change of a variable or two. I think you are just full of it, and trying to make it seem like your knowledge is superior than all of ours because "YOU GOT THE INSIDE TRACK, dude.....". some of your posts and spouts have come off as plain foolish.

I call BullShit.
Mechanix544 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:37 PM   #104
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 31
Posts: 12,514
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Draft picks retained: not relevant.
we're going to compare wasting away draft picks when it comes to Campbell vs McNabb? That's ironic.
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 02:37 PM   #105
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 27
Posts: 15,994
Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

But the lack of interest in Warner suggests that no one, even winning organizations, thought him capable of his 2007-2009 seasons. Does that make McNabb likely to repeat it? Doubtful. But Warner surprised everyone, myself and plenty others included.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.32766 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25