The Ultimate NFL Depth Chart

[724Skinsfan]

Hopefully, he won't bounce back. I don't really want any NFC east opponent to do well. You can't argue that he won't bounce back without someone countering that he will bounce back. I think it's favorable for him to be back in a West Coast style offense on a well coached team. His decline can attributed to a lot of factors (2003 49ers , 2004 Browns , 2005 Lions ).

Listen, I'm not a Garcia fan but he has already shown that he can play at the NFL level. Find me two or three more current backups that have had a better career than Garcia.

[Hail2theskins]

all valid points, i just dont want to believe the eagles are that solid in the posistion

[724Skinsfan]

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

I'd say a career 85.8 QB rating along with 19k passing yards and 126 TD passes makes for a fairly reliable backup QB in a familiar West Coast offense.

If Garcia can still play, which I don't know if he can, he's more than capable of McNabb numbers in the west coast.

[Mc2guy]

When I watched the 6:30pm Sportscenter the skins were ranked #3 for Recievers, with only Arizona (WTF?) and Indy ahead of us. This was with Golic, Salsbury, and Schlereth ranking them. Dallas was as #5 and the Giants were at #6. All three were given the Skins pretty heavy props for an awesome offseason...then Wingo had to pipe in with "but the Skins always win in the offseason, it's the field where it counts."

Fu*&in' Tre' ...couldn't let a moment go by without dousing the pro-skins comments.

I didn't see the RB session.

[MTK]

I can easily see Arizona ahead of us.

They one of the best 1-2 tandems in the league in Boldin and Fitzgerald.

Right now we don't have a proven #2 guy.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If Garcia can still play, which I don't know if he can, he's more than capable of McNabb numbers in the west coast.

Garcia capable of McNabb numbers??

Which McNabb do you mean? The one that put up huge numbers in 2004 or the one that struggled with injuries in 2005?

Garcia is definitely past his prime. He's a very capable backup, one could certainly do much worse. But he's no longer capable of putting up big numbers over the course of an entire season.

[firstdown]

On espn the comitators had use ranked 3rd for depth at WR. They had the Colts at #1 and the Cards at #2. I did not catch what they had to say or did I get a chance to see who they had in the top 10. I believe they had the Boys around #7 and we know that was based on TO.

[724Skinsfan]

Here's the list on ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sport...ory?id=2502031

They have us ranked 14th in QB depth, giants are 16th and the 'boys are 19th. Overall we rank better in those three categories better than everyone except the Seahawks.

[MTK]

I'm actually a bit surprised we're so high at pass catcher.

I love our depth and explosiveness, but we're still a bit unproven. We know what we have with Moss & Cooley, but we still don't know exactly what we've got in Lloyd & Randle El.

Nice to see us getting some respect though.

[Mc2guy]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I can easily see Arizona ahead of us.

They one of the best 1-2 tandems in the league in Boldin and Fitzgerald.

Right now we don't have a proven #2 guy.

I see the talent in Boldin and Fitzgerald, but the ranking was supposed to include "ALL" pass catchers, including TE's and RB's who catch passes. With our depth at WR and with Cooley (who they gave some nice compliments to) and Portis, I think our package is more complete than Arizona.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Mc2guy

I see the talent in Boldin and Fitzgerald, but the ranking was supposed to include "ALL" pass catchers, including TE's and RB's who catch passes. With our depth at WR and with Cooley (who they gave some nice compliments to) and Portis, I think our package is more complete than Arizona.

Edge > Portis in the passing game.

I agree that I like our overall package better, but I can see why they rated them higher mainly because of Boldin/Fitz who both had over 100 catches last year.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Looking at these rankings I can see why they picked the Cowboys to win the NFC East.

[MTK]

These rankings don't take into account the extreme man-crush the media has on the Tuna.

Man-crush = insane predictions

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Garcia capable of McNabb numbers??

Which McNabb do you mean? The one that put up huge numbers in 2004 or the one that struggled with injuries in 2005?

Garcia is definitely past his prime. He's a very capable backup, one could certainly do much worse. But he's no longer capable of putting up big numbers over the course of an entire season.

That's just it. McNabb put up monsterous numbers in 2004, but outside of that one season he's nothing special. Good, just nothing special. His comp. % for example:

'00-58.0
'01-57.8
'02-58.4
'03-57.5
'04-64.0
'05-59.1

So hes a 58% career passer, and had an aberation year in 2004. 58% certainly isnt bad, but lets take a look at Garcia's #'s (under Mariucci in the west coast) over the same time period.

'00-63.3
'01-62.7
'02-62.1
'05-59.0

This is pretty interesting. It looks like in the years where both men had Owens, they complete a significantly high %. In any situation, the numbers are quite comprable. Of course, the Lions are a far more problematic team than the Eagles, so we really don't know if Garcia has lost a step (he's 36). Gannon was at the top of his game at age 37. George Blanda was past 40 and winning games. I should point out that Owens wasn't the only factor that contributed to McNabb's high '04 numbers, as QB's across the league put up career highs that year.

So in conclusion, a long post to prove my point, but I believe that Garcia is still capable of McNabb numbers or better if he has to play. McNabb's intangibles mean so much to that team that there is no controversy at all. It's just that historically, Garcia is the better passer.