Posted:
#101
ROMO
0
Help solve this argument... Who would you rather have as your QB in 2008?
Posted:
#104
Quote Originally Posted by samuelsosa:
if romo puts that snap down i think this is at least 25-9 ROMO. 
Sport, "if" McNAbb throws one less pick vs the Pats in the SB, we aren't even having this argument. Thanks for "your 2 cents".
Face facts, Romo spit the bit, McNAbb threw the INTS. Simple as that. That is what makes them so comparable to some.
I find it funny we are debating between a playoff winner and kid who's better known for who he's bangin and where he's bangin' her than what he does on the football field.
0
Posted:
#109
I think what's just absolutely remarkable is the number of people that want to continue to live in the past.....this isn't some lifetime achievement or career achievement award, we're talking about this season who we would want starting. We have people talking about the Super Bowl years ago and IF McNabb did this and that. That's all well and good, but, his body has taken its toll (a MAJOR toll, probably more than any other starting QB I can think of) over the years and he's NOT the same QB.
He was NEVER an accurate passer to start with, he has a great arm, but, what made him what he WAS was his elusiveness and his ability to break free from tacklers and still make plays. He no longer has this ability, he's gained a lot of weight, he's lost a step, and his injuries have slowed him down.
I wonder what percentage of his passying yards came off of screen plays and short passes to Westbrook? I'm sorry folks, but, that's not a great QB, that's a great pass-catching RUNNING BACK (Westbrook).
I strongly consider myself objective in these types of arguments and I can't see why anybody would pick McNabb in this scenario with everything considered.
0
Posted:
#113
You speak of this weight gain as if you are weighing in @ Jenny Craig w/him.
He's a thick cat for a QB. Hits the weights fairly hard, no other Qb in football shrugs dlinemen like he does.
It's like you are infatuated w/his weight or something.
BLIND TO THE FACTS?
I'm still waiting to hear what happened in the 2nd game @ Dallas last yr.
Let's hear it big guy. . .
0-2
IT'S THAT SIMPLE.
0
Posted:
#114
Quote Originally Posted by gah824:
McNabb = 3rd in MVP voting behind Brady and Peterson
What's funny here is that in the other thread this guy put Romo in his top 5 and McNabb was nowhere to be found.....
We're changing his vote based on this inconsistency...
UPDATE:
ROMO 26
McNABB 19
0
Posted:
#115
Quote Originally Posted by ltbdubz5:
You speak of this weight gain as if you are weighing in @ Jenny Craig w/him.
He's a thick cat for a QB. Hits the weights fairly hard, no other Qb in football shrugs dlinemen like he does.
It's like you are infatuated w/his weight or something.
BLIND TO THE FACTS?
I'm still waiting to hear what happened in the 2nd game @ Dallas last yr.
Let's hear it big guy. . .
He is a thick cat and that's okay, BUT, he's put on a lot of weight over the past few seasons. Sure, he can shed linemen, BUT, he's a lot slower...that's really the whole point there. His quickness was one of his greatest strengths...and that's now gone. "Infatuated with his weight"????? I listed SEVERAL factors, not just his weight...how does that make me infatuated with his weight? I listed weight, injuries, the overall toll on his body, the fact that he's lost a step, and he's a lot older now (really older than his actual age because of everything his body has endured).
Now as for that game late in the season last year, the 14th game of the season...this from Yahoo Sports pretty much says all that needs to be said about that:
As bad as it sounds for Dallas (12-2), the Cowboys knew before kickoff they’d secured a first-round bye—and that they couldn’t lock up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. So the stakes were pretty low. And they played like it.
0
Posted:
#116
Quote Originally Posted by L8kersFan74:
That's pretty much the whole poing right there.....just don't understand how others don't see this. I guess they're just blind to the facts.
Why is he out of his Prime? Because he was injured or can't play when he is healthy?
Played 14 games last year coming back from that horrible injury that usually takes aprox 2 years to fully recover and from everything I am hearing he is 100% this year. IF he is 100% just like IF Romo is 100% Ill take Mcnabb's talent.
Is Manning or Brady out of their Prime because all 3 Qb's are within 9-12months in age.
0
Posted:
#117
And you cant compare just numbers ...
Romo's game consists of throwing down the field to one of the greatest WR's of all time. While the Eagles O consits of throwing screen passes to a RB.
I am not knocking either O's as they both seem to work and I do have a ton of respect for Bwes and TO I am just trying to look at the whole package from the QB position between them both.
0
Posted:
#118
Quote Originally Posted by ALLABOUTME:
Why is he out of his Prime? Because he was injured or can't play when he is healthy?
Played 14 games last year coming back from that horrible injury that usually takes aprox 2 years to fully recover and from everything I am hearing he is 100% this year. IF he is 100% just like IF Romo is 100% Ill take Mcnabb's talent.
Is Manning or Brady out of their Prime because all 3 Qb's are within 9-12months in age.
That's pretty funny...first off, McNabb's body has taken serious punishment over the years and he's very injury prone, Manning and Brady have stayed healthy and taken very little punishment. Secondly, Manning and Brady are successful because of their unbelievable accuracy and timing, what made McNabb successful was his legs and his legs are not even close to the same as when he was in his prime. Even if McNabb is 100% this season he is still very injury prone, more injury prone than any other top QB I can think of. So again, going into this season would you want a healthy QB with far less miles entering his prime or a QB who is very injury prone who has relied on his legs throughout his career and his legs are clearly not close to what they once were?
The answer is actually very simple. IF you were to ask REAL coaches and GM's in the league the answer would CLEARLY be Romo.
ALLABOUTME, you are obviously an Eagles fan and you love Donovan McNabb...that's fine and I respect that, BUT, you are not looking at the big picture and you are not being objective. You are letting your love for your Eagles and McNabb blind you to the facts.
0
Posted:
#120
Quote Originally Posted by L8kersFan74:
That's pretty funny...first off, McNabb's body has taken serious punishment over the years and he's very injury prone, Manning and Brady have stayed healthy and taken very little punishment. Secondly, Manning and Brady are successful because of their unbelievable accuracy and timing, what made McNabb successful was his legs and his legs are not even close to the same as when he was in his prime. Even if McNabb is 100% this season he is still very injury prone, more injury prone than any other top QB I can think of. So again, going into this season would you want a healthy QB with far less miles entering his prime or a QB who is very injury prone who has relied on his legs throughout his career and his legs are clearly not close to what they once were?
The answer is actually very simple. IF you were to ask REAL coaches and GM's in the league the answer would CLEARLY be Romo.
ALLABOUTME, you are obviously an Eagles fan and you love Donovan McNabb...that's fine and I respect that, BUT, you are not looking at the big picture and you are not being objective. You are letting your love for your Eagles and McNabb blind you to the facts.
First they are accurate because their unbelievable Offensive Line plus being accurate. We seen what happened last year in the superbowl when Brady didn't have his O-Line.
You are going back to the injury prone thing again any person who steps out on the field and plays as much as QB's plays would make any person injuried prone on any play.
You mention McNabbs legs ... I agree they aren't like when he was in his 20's but in my opinion that can only make him better. Its called adjustments and the one thing we all know who knows the game a QB cant run and win consitently win so Mcnabb days of running 50-100 yards a game are done but more of a reason to watch him the next 3-5 years as he is a very smart QB that will adjust.
I am not a GB or Coach I am ME and as ME I gave you my honest answer as 1 an Eagles fan and 2 as mentioned before a NON MCNABB fan.
0
Posted:
#121
Quote Originally Posted by L8kersFan74:
I really like that avatar though ALLABOUTME......that is one sick ass hit!
Wish I could say the same for yours however he is a piece of shit.
PS this arguement should end as the numbers will end somwhere around 40-60% either way and not because onne is right or wrong just people who have their own opinion.
0
Posted:
#122
Quote Originally Posted by ALLABOUTME:
Wish I could say the same for yours however he is a piece of shit.
PS this arguement should end as the numbers will end somwhere around 40-60% either way and not because onne is right or wrong just people who have their own opinion.
I'm gonna have to catch up with this late Sunday night or Monday morning. I'm hittin' the road to Phoenix to hang out with some friends tonight and then watch my Dodgers face the D-Backs tomorrow afternoon. Have a good weekend fellas!
0
Posted:
#123
Quote Originally Posted by L8kersFan74:
I'm gonna have to catch up with this late Sunday night or Monday morning. I'm hittin' the road to Phoenix to hang out with some friends tonight and then watch my Dodgers face the D-Backs tomorrow afternoon. Have a good weekend fellas!
Enjoy and drive safe.
Hopefully 1 of those 2 teams can win the divison by playing above .500 ball
0
Posted:
#124
Quote Originally Posted by ltbdubz5:
You speak of this weight gain as if you are weighing in @ Jenny Craig w/him.
He's a thick cat for a QB. Hits the weights fairly hard, no other Qb in football shrugs dlinemen like he does.
It's like you are infatuated w/his weight or something.
BLIND TO THE FACTS?
I'm still waiting to hear what happened in the 2nd game @ Dallas last yr.
Let's hear it big guy. . .
0-2
IT'S THAT SIMPLE.
Eagles fan poking fun at a Cowboys fan for a POSTSEASON record. 
. Yeah, does anyone else remember what happened to McChoke when he played in a superbowl? He was too busy throwing up all over himself when his team needed him most to make a play. He played on GREAT teams. Awesome defenses, and the Westbrook or Westcoast offense whatever you want to call it, doesn't rely on your QB to do much other than throw screen passes and passes to the flats. McCrap can thank Wesbrook for all his good numbers.
| Receiving Stats | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2002 | PHI | 15 | 9 | 86 | 9.6 | 20 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| 2003 | PHI | 15 | 37 | 332 | 9.0 | 38 | 4 | 17 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
| 2004 | PHI | 13 | 73 | 703 | 9.6 | 50 | 6 | 30 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| 2005 | PHI | 12 | 61 | 616 | 10.1 | 62 | 4 | 27 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
| 2006 | PHI | 15 | 77 | 699 | 9.1 | 52 | 4 | 30 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| 2007 | PHI | 15 | 90 | 771 | 8.6 | 57 | 5 | 31 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| Career | 85 | 347 | 3207 | 9.2 | 62 | 23 | 139 | 4 | 4 | ||||||||||
yeah, those are Brian Westbrooks RECIEVING stats, McNabbs RUNNING BACK
0
Posted:
#125
Links
The numbers don't lie. If you've ever watched McNabb in a live game, try and make an accurate pass to a reciever enroute, he either sails it over his head, or bounces it at the defenders feet in front of him.
McNabb does deserve some credit for his accomplishments. He has one of the best win pct. of any QB ever o play the position. BUT he's not even a half decent QB when it comes to the prototypical passer. He's inaccurate as hell in games/pressure situation. He relied on his legs, strength, defense, backfield recievers, and system to get to where he is today. If him and Tom Brady would have been put into one anothers shoes to start their careers, McNabb may of never seen the field in NE, but Brady sure as hell would of bettered McNabbs career as an Eagle.
0
Hot Forum Topics
