McNabb's agents take aim at the Shanahans, Mike responds...

[juskins]

Originally Posted by Shadowbyte

Here's what the DM5 haters fail to realize. Before the McNabb fiasco happened it was predicted that Shannahan would scapegoat another player due to his failure to bring results.

The biggest failure was his reluctance to bring in better recievers, his switch to the 3-4, and starting a 38 year old reciever and 2 washed up RB's long past their prime. These decisons were more detrimental to the team than DM5's completion percentage.

Completion percentages don't win games, if you don't believe me, look at Kyle Orton's stats. I rest my case.

With that being said, I understand that the fans (most) are always going to side with the coach/management when there's a dispute between them and a player. So I don't put much stock into the negative nannies who continue to harp on McNabb.

Here's one fact that i'll be willing to bet my life on. Next year, DM5's new team will win more games than the Washington Redskins. Just as JC has won more games with this new team. Once this revelation comes to pass, it's going to be gratifying to utter the old adage, "I told you so".

I was delighted to hear Campbell was traded. If McNabb is subjected to the same faith, good luck Donovan.

Here's another revelation surrounding the Washington Redskins: As long as they don't have turn over at key positions they will always be stuck with the under achievers, as mentioned above.

A coach has to change the mind set of this franchise in order to bring a winner to this area. It starts with your QB. Of course there are other positions that must be addressed. But the QB sets the tempo for change.

BTW, Campbell is not doing that well at all. He has always been a game time decision in Oakland. Another example of a head coach taking his sweet time to inform the QBs who will start.

As long as we have the mentality of Jason Campbell and Donovan McNabb in our pilot house we will be mediocre. The QB sets the mindset of a team.

This is the first year of Mike's tenure and I think he never had that many bright spots on this team. Defense was/is his strong suit. Changing to a 34 defense is no big deal if you have speed at the LBer position. You also need a solid pass rush. I have no problem with a coach changing things up as he sees fit to build a better team.

The problem with some fans around here is that they are use to destroying the foundation of the team through impatience and criticism. And an owner who cannot stay the course to see a coaches dream put into reality.

[SirClintonPortis]

The problem with some fans around here is that they are use to destroying the foundation of the team through impatience and criticism. And an owner who cannot stay the course to see a coaches dream put into reality.

Trading away draft picks sure destroyed this team's foundation..yet Shanahan traded them away yet again for Brown and McNabb. Snyder gave Gibbs plenty of time and even gave Zorn one too many years.

[juskins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

It's basic employer-employee etiquette to air complaints and resolve the disputes in private and not go the public humiliation route either by accident or intentionally. I see both sides can't keep their mouths shut. The cardiovascular endurace and inability to run the 2-minute drill comments are both gaffes by Shanahan. McNabb talks nice but then his agent doesn't... major gaffe by McNabb. I see it as both sides trying to win some lame PR war. I find neither side to be fully believable.

Well, Sir Clinton Portis, I watched Donovan under achieved for 11 games and thought the other two games he played in were decent showings. I kept waiting for those good two games to show up in the other eleven games he played in for us.

This is not about an employer=employee dispute at all. When does a player have a say so in professional sports? And, yes, it's my way or the highway in this business. The player doesn't get to dictate his terms of making an adequate performance. Obviously, you can't light a fire under McNabb's ass to motivate him to play better.

Shannahan pulls the strings and he calls the tunes. There's no "can we just all get along" mantra here. This is about making or taking a stand as to whom you support - not trying to point out the short comings of both sides.

[juskins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Trading away draft picks sure destroyed this team's foundation..yet Shanahan traded them away yet again for Brown and McNabb. Snyder gave Gibbs plenty of time and even gave Zorn one too many years.

We are talking about philosophy of the motivational make up of a NFL team. You are purposely getting off track here.

[juskins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

You sure love to accuse people of things just to make your claims look good. I'm glad you aren't company manager because you'd be the perfect douchebag boss who thinks that you're in the right in whatever you do.

First of all, BaltimoreSkins simply saying that Shanahan bungled his managing of personnel matters does not lead to the conclusion that he disagrees with anything.

Next, I'm the one who doesn't have the problem with the benching itself but with the other BS going around. The guy you're responding to may think differently, but of course, you don't care and shove it in here anyway.

And you like to deviate from the initial subject, which is whether McNabb is deliberately mailing it in or not. Rather than provide evidence, you attack the messenger who you think believes "so-and-so" bad things and simply insist with circular reasoning that your interpretation is of course, the correct one.

Who gives a rat's ass about what mistakes Shannahan has made. The problem is with the QB.

[juskins]

To me, this post says it all:


Quote:
Originally Posted by FRPLG View Post
Memo to Donovan. Having your agent do the dirty work so you can still call yourself "professional" is bullsh*t. If you want to take the high-ground then you take it. You don't travel it and send your friends and family the other way. Pathetic...you sucked this year and Shanny sat you. You got what you earned. This organization didn't owe you some magical level of respect for deeds that you did for another team. The Eagles sh*t on your head and you said nothing and neither did your agent. THEY owed you respect for what you did for them. You haven't done crap for the Redskins so don't fool yourself into thinking you have earned one iota of respect from the team or fans. You got your ass outplayed by Rex f'ing Grossman. Get over your diva ass and don' let the door hit ya on the way out.
NICE post F.
DM is a politician....I don't think Shanny gives a damn...I like that.
It's a shame DM's play could not match his..........rhetoric.
__________________
Goodbye Sean..........Vaya Con Dios
thankyou Joe.......

When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty........T. Jefferson

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by juskins

Well, Sir Clinton Portis, I watched Donovan under achieved for 11 games and thought the other two games he played in were decent showings. I kept waiting for those good two games to show up in the other eleven games he played in for us.

This is not about an employer=employee dispute at all. When does a player have a say so in professional sports? And, yes, it's my way or the highway in this business. The player doesn't get to dictate his terms of making an adequate performance. Obviously, you can't light a fire under McNabb's ass to motivate him to play better.

Shannahan pulls the strings and he calls the tunes. There's no "can we just all get along" mantra here. This is about making or taking a stand as to whom you support - not trying to point out the short comings of both sides.

And both sides are coming out with some believable statements and not-so-believable statements, hence I cannot totally trust either account.

While I'm probably sure McNabb is displeased with the benching itself, he is at least giving the appearance that it was the way he was demoted and benched that is the main issue. IF what he claims is true, then it's unprofessional and not exactly best for the team because they should have been totally practicing with Grossman on the first practice day of the week and the head coach should have communicated to him first. IF McNabb is just making shit up, then Shanahan probably handled the situation properly and wasn't unprofessional, disrespectful, etc, and McNabb was just trying to get attention. The benching is not the object of complaint by McNabb, but rather how it was handled. If it was Zorn not informing his QB late in the week, we'd all be skewering his incompetence.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by juskins

Who gives a rat's ass about what mistakes Shannahan has made. The problem is with the QB.

Then Shanahan shouldn't have taken the vet QB in the first place and solely try to get Luck or whoever the next hot QBs are. McNabb has been dirtballing even during his time in Philly and people saw his nonchalance in the Super Bowl. Hell, he helped handed us the season sweep of the Eagles in 2008 thanks to his classic balls in the dirt and the Jamarcus Russell led Raiders did beat the McNabb led Eagles.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by juskins

We are talking about philosophy of the motivational make up of a NFL team. You are purposely getting off track here.

That's a mighty big phrase, but "team identity" should suffice.
The only statement that concerns the "motivational make up" of the team is that the qb gives identity to the team. There are a couple of statements about Campbell that needs to be verfied and then the rest is about the flawed methodology of team building. I just pointed out examples in which they are still making transactions that mortgage away the future and how Snyder has been giving time to coaches ever since Spurrier. Marty was the only one who definitely did not get a fair shot.

[Longtimefan]

Redskins' Kyle Shanahan refutes statement by Donovan McNabb's agent, Fletcher Smith III

[Brody81]

Originally Posted by juskins

Responding again to your same theme about Mike Shannahan showing bad taste in dealing with the benching of Donovan McNabb later on in the week instead of informing him in the earlier part of the same week of Shannahan's decision to go with Rex Grossman is a mute point on your part.

He is the head coach and can say and do what he wants to say, no matter what you and press think. I was surprise like many, but I did not consider it as a disrespectful move. After all, Donovan has disrespected the Redskins by pretending to be concerned about this organization. If he cares then learn everything about the nuances about this offense to make it work.

The story is not about Andy Reid or the media or the leaks coming out of Redskins Park. It's about improving the team.

I guess Shannahan is telling McNabb to kiss his ass. If Donovan does not want to play as he was billed up to be an upgrade over Campbell then sit and run the scout team, in other words, screw you Donovan. Shannahan will deal with him when the season is over.

Who gives a flying shit about the media. The media and people like you are flaming this nonsense. How do you think Sonny Jurgensen felt when he was benched? Or Vince Young? It does not matter who rides the pine but someone has to.

Good post.

[juskins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

And both sides are coming out with some believable statements and not-so-believable statements, hence I cannot totally trust either account.

While I'm probably sure McNabb is displeased with the benching itself, he is at least giving the appearance that it was the way he was demoted and benched that is the main issue. IF what he claims is true, then it's unprofessional and not exactly best for the team because they should have been totally practicing with Grossman on the first practice day of the week and the head coach should have communicated to him first. IF McNabb is just making shit up, then Shanahan probably handled the situation properly and wasn't unprofessional, disrespectful, etc, and McNabb was just trying to get attention. The benching is not the object of complaint by McNabb, but rather how it was handled. If it was Zorn not informing his QB late in the week, we'd all be skewering his incompetence.

Merry Christmas, Sir Clinton Portis, and I hope you and your family received Xmas blessings.

I agree that this has been a PR nightmare, but it's done and just possibly this is how Shannahan handles these issues that displease him.

But, he is the HC and I have to give him the benefit of the doubt. Donovan has been mostly inconsistent in his 13 games and should be benched.

The issue of respect or disrespect, in my opinion, was first mentioned by some of the staff at NFL Network, former players. I just think that these people are wrong by suggesting that Shannahan wanted to single McNabb out by not showing concern for his "feelings".

Why is it that other QBs can be benched and its not considered disrespect? What is their agenda?

[juskins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

That's a mighty big phrase, but "team identity" should suffice.
The only statement that concerns the "motivational make up" of the team is that the qb gives identity to the team. There are a couple of statements about Campbell that needs to be verfied and then the rest is about the flawed methodology of team building. I just pointed out examples in which they are still making transactions that mortgage away the future and how Snyder has been giving time to coaches ever since Spurrier. Marty was the only one who definitely did not get a fair shot.

I believe your concerns are part of this regimes finding the weaknesses at key positions. The way they handle it comes in the form of confrontation of the issues that they see as "disrespectful" to the organization. It may not be tactful but it lets a player know that they will not lie down and be taken advantage of.

First Haynesworth and now McNabb, in the latter case, Donovan cannot get away with his previous habits here in DC. I accept this punishment with a resounding "YEAH!" and hope that they take it to the limit in order to get the best team assembled as possible.

[juskins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Then Shanahan shouldn't have taken the vet QB in the first place and solely try to get Luck or whoever the next hot QBs are. McNabb has been dirtballing even during his time in Philly and people saw his nonchalance in the Super Bowl. Hell, he helped handed us the season sweep of the Eagles in 2008 thanks to his classic balls in the dirt and the Jamarcus Russell led Raiders did beat the McNabb led Eagles.

If they had known what they know now then you are absolutely correct.

There's always that element of "maybe a change of scenery will recoup his desire". I don't think the Skins should go QB with the first pick. We need a blue chip nose tackle and help on the OLine before we select a QB.

[SBXVII]

I said it once and will say it again......

McNabb is a good QB, but he's older now, injury prone, can't scramble to save his life anymore, and throws dirt balls. All this I complained about last Easter Sunday when it was announced the Skins picked him up. He's a HOF no doubt, but that doesn't mean he'll solve our problems. But.... now we have him. We either coach him up on this style/scheme or trade him away.

I'd keep him if he doesn't mind being second fiddle to Grossman until he learns the scheme better but there are major issues then perhaps trading him for whatever we can get is best.

Thebigger key to McNabbs mess would be for him to address the media about what he did say and what his manager has stated. Funny how he avoids the media questions, but supposedly is on the Shanahans side. WTF?
Either admit what was said or put your manager in his place and have "him" address the media about his statements..... and apologize.