• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

It's Deja Vu All Over Again

myself ... don't you think Donavan feels he has something to prove....the guy practicly took the eagles to 5 NFC championship games with very little supporting cast.... I think Donovan will feel like he has something to prove...You ever think he may have kinda wanted out of Philly... I mean hell he was booed when they drafted him ...(the city wanted Ricky Williams).. those last couple of games against Dallas last year he was running for his life just like Jason was and the Eagels kinda have "o" line problems just like us.. a lot of Philly fans were calling for his departure for the past few years...Donovan will be motivated and says he is extreamlly excited about coming to Washington. (u got to remember we haven't had a QB with his ability in along time)the more I think about it the better I feel ...It just floored me that they traded him to the Redskins.
 
In re Riggins: Who plays Sandra Day O'Conner in this version?

EDIT: Didn't read the post closely enough; desire for levity outwitted my better judgment for reading before posting. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jimbo said:
After reading about how McNabb pretty much dictated this move to the Skins, I just don't see how we could possibly trade him again. He doesn't need the money so he'd be more likely to retire than play for the Rams, Raiders, Bills or any other scrub team. He wanted the chance to play for Shanahan and that's exactly what he got. Now we have to go out and build him a line.
Click to expand...


I'm seeing it as him not wanting to retire, but not willing to move out of the area. Truth of the matter is, until the Redskins prove themselves on the field, they are a scrub team, and really no better then the Rams, Raiders, or Bills. Way I see it, we still need a QB, because McChoke isn't the answer for more then a season, if he can actually make it through one at this point.

I'm so sorely disappointed with this move.
 
Miles Monroe said:
I'm seeing it as him not wanting to retire, but not willing to move out of the area. Truth of the matter is, until the Redskins prove themselves on the field, they are a scrub team, and really no better then the Rams, Raiders, or Bills. Way I see it, we still need a QB, because McChoke isn't the answer for more then a season, if he can actually make it through one at this point.

I'm so sorely disappointed with this move.
Click to expand...

You don't think we're better than the Rams, Raiders, or Bills Pete?

Seriously???
 
Jimbo said:
Kinda takes the suspense out of our first round pick now, doesn't it? While THIS was a shocker, I'd be even MORE shocked if we picked anyone besides Okung or Bulaga.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. If we don't want whichever QB falls to #4, that would present an awfully tempting trade up option for somebody....perhaps even a somebody with two first round picks. Add in a trade of Fat Albert/CPo/JC/Carter or any of our other "tradeables" and we could still end up with enough draft picks to get a bit of headway in rebuilding the line.

What still worries me though is, who do we put behind McFlabb....'er McNabb (man that's going to take some getting used to) as the QB of the future?
 
Boone said:
You don't think we're better than the Rams, Raiders, or Bills Pete?

Seriously???
Click to expand...

Honestly bro, I don't think we're any better. As always, we look better on paper then those teams, but you know as well as I do, the game aint played on paper.

Everything indicates we're generally better then those teams in all areas, but we've been down that road so many times before, and until I see something consistent on the field, I see us as bottom feeders. Hope I'm wrong, but the acquisition of ol Donnie is an instant gratification move in my book. He's been on the down hill slide for more then a season. While it hopefully lets us build the O line, we still need a QB to take us into the future, and having McNugget just prolongs the inevitable job of finding and grooming that person. The longer Donnie plays, the longer a future QB will have to wait to get up to real game speed.

I rather take my lumps with youth, then do a typical Snyder Redskins attempt to fix things in one swift move. It hasn't worked yet, so I can't be anything but skeptical after this signing.
 
We could have gone after a Bradford, Teebow, or McCoy and started a youth movement. Problem is there is no guarantees with them. For every Peyton Manning there are several Ryan Leaf's.

Trading for McNabb gives us a know commodity. McNabb won't need to be taught NFL passing principles or the WCO. We will draft this or next year a young QB to learn from him.

It has been said that it takes 3-4 years to fully understand the WCO. You have McNabb running the offense at a high level so a young buck can watch and learn.

I agree we're better than Rams, Raiders, and Bills. We're better on many different levels. I don't think we're that far behind most other teams. Difference is now we have a coach that will bring accountability.

If this trade had happened under Vinny's and Zorn's watch then I would be concerned.
 
riggins44 said:
We could have gone after a Bradford, Teebow, or McCoy and started a youth movement. Problem is there is no guarantees with them. For every Peyton Manning there are several Ryan Leaf's.

Trading for McNabb gives us a know commodity. McNabb won't need to be taught NFL passing principles or the WCO. We will draft this or next year a young QB to learn from him.
Click to expand...

I don't see why we still can't do both. Acquiring McNabb doesn't prevent us from taking any of the QBs you mentioned, it only impacts the one you might go after. Had we needed a young QB to hit the ground running, Claussen appears to be the better choice. If you have the luxury of a QWB like McNabb already on the roster, you might think about McCoy or Tebow or even make a play for Bradford.
 
Terry said:
I don't see why we still can't do both. Acquiring McNabb doesn't prevent us from taking any of the QBs you mentioned, it only impacts the one you might go after. Had we needed a young QB to hit the ground running, Claussen appears to be the better choice. If you have the luxury of a QWB like McNabb already on the roster, you might think about McCoy or Tebow or even make a play for Bradford.
Click to expand...

Or you could use your 4th round pick on somebody like Dan LeFevour (assuming he's still there).

http://blogs.buffalonews.com/billboard/2010/03/draft-watch-dan-lefevour.html
 
I'm with you Terry - in fact, I think given that McNabb isn't made of iron and might take a beating this coming season (even if we upgrade on the line, they will almost surely struggle early to play as a unit), we almost have to bring his eventual hoped for replacement on board.
 
I think we're going to be getting a pick for JC and that's being disregarded or forgotten by many in this equation.

Oh and no way Bradford falls now that Bulger has been cut so what makes the most sense is drafting Okung and looking for a QB in the 2nd with what I'm assuming will be the pick we get for JC. Or keep JC as backup and wait till next year when there us supposedly going to be a better QB crop.
 
I discount the argument that McNabb must be fading b/c otherwise the Eagles would never have traded w/in their own division argument.

First, the Skins apparently made the best offer (and were probably willing to b/c McNabb signaled his willingness to sign a long-term deal here, rather than Buffalo or Oakland, so it made sense for us to offer mroe). Second, the trade is presumably approximately market value in the abstract, w/ each team valuing what they're receiving as at least slightly more valuable than what they're giving up, given their own particular situation.

Thus, the Eagles are helped more by getting better draft picks for McNabb than in an alternative trade scenario (given the direct benefit to them) than they are harmed by the extent to which a division rival is made better by the trade.
 
romberjo said:
I discount the argument that McNabb must be fading b/c otherwise the Eagles would never have traded w/in their own division argument.

First, the Skins apparently made the best offer (and were probably willing to b/c McNabb signaled his willingness to sign a long-term deal here, rather than Buffalo or Oakland, so it made sense for us to offer mroe). Second, the trade is presumably approximately market value in the abstract, w/ each team valuing what they're receiving as at least slightly more valuable than what they're giving up, given their own particular situation.

Thus, the Eagles are helped more by getting better draft picks for McNabb than in an alternative trade scenario (given the direct benefit to them) than they are harmed by the extent to which a division rival is made better by the trade.
Click to expand...

Also, you are just describing the mechanical aspects of the trade. There are usually other things involved, team politics, personality clashes, contract issues, etc... that might force a move where there otherwise might not be one. Those types of issues often skew the perceived value for one team or the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friends 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, and 'Posse Lover', Michael Huffman, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you guys ❤

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top