Realistically, how is Mike doing on building the roster?

[rick7423]

Of course, it was a rookie quarterback making his first start in the NFL. They can't all be like RGIII

Agreed, but once he 'locked in', man was he good!

[skinny21]

I don't question the McNabb decision.
The results simply didn't meet the expectation but imo the expectations (from the FO/staff) were reasonable.

Well said. I looked at McNabb not as our franchise QB, but as a solid bridge to get this team where they envisioned it. Once we crossed the bridge (or while we were on it) we were going to need to find our future QB. Unfortunately, the wood was rotten under all the paint and it fell apart under us... so we hit rock bottom. Thankfully, that's all water under the bridge.

[TheLongshot]

I understand where you're coming from, but in my mind that's only a good point if you assume that having a QB you know is doing a good job at their position does not affect the evaluation of the other positions. Furthermore, it also ignores the modern day truth of the NFL that QB is the most significant position in terms of being competitive. So when you say that it "makes sense if you think you are a QB away from being competitive", you're neglecting the fact that almost any team can say that in today's NFL. We're seeing more and more the rules and regulations changed to the point where having a poor defense or even poor offensive personnel means little if you have a great QB.

Maybe I should slightly rephrase what I said: would the trade for McNabb make us a Super Bowl caliber team as the team was set up in 2010? IMO, no, it wouldn't. So, the hope is that we are able to build a team in that time that could take advantage of McNabb well enough to get us to the Super Bowl. That didn't seem terribly likely in 2010. In my view, it was a short term move in what looked like (and still does) a long-term project to build this team into a Super Bowl caliber team.

As for his Pro Bowl season, he did have Jackson and Maclin to throw to, and McCoy in the backfield. I've said it before, but a QB's performance doesn't operate in a vacuum. It depends on the players around him, and the system that allows him to succeed. It is a trap we as fans have fallen into time and time again.

[MR2Drift]

This is interesting because you have this as a positive and a negative ... the Beck Grossman experiment happened preciselydont think you c because we did not reach for Gabbertt (although we could have taken Dalton but our pick in the 1st was too high for Dalton (even after the trade down) and he went before we picked again in the 2nd ..

I also dont think you can criticize Shanahan for the cap penalty because not only was there no Cap to circumvent, but the same contracts had been approved in Tampa (Bruce Allen had used the same language in 2009) and all the contracts had been approved by the league office . The cap penalty is ball and everyone knows it .

And as for not developing talent outside the first round - I do not think you can blame him for injuries to promising young players . Robinson was looking good before injury, LeRib looked like a starter when he came in for Lict ... Helu looked like he could be at least a very good 3rd down back before injury, Hankerson (i know people disagree) also is looking good for a developmental player coming off an injury ...

the bottom line is this - We got to the playoffs with a "team" which in year 3 IS Shanahans team - They stepped up when asked and that is not something they have done in the past - The NFL is won by "teams " not collections of high profile stars - Look at the East the Cowboys, Giants and Eagles all have more recognizable talent than we do but (in the case of the Eagles in particular) they are collections of players who wear the same uniform - not teams . (we went 5-1 against these superior talented teams and would have been 6-0 if not for a last second breakdown against some salsa dancer)

We have real talent - Williams, Monty, Garcon, Morris, RGIII, Rack, Kerrigan, Fletcher etc.. but behind that you have guys who have bought in and playing hard - in time the backups become stars, and if you work hard enough you will get the opportunities (look at Morris - slated to be a PS player at the beging of training camp) and so I think with just that mentality Shanahan has done a fantastic job building the roster ...

I can't give credit to Shanny for the QB situation in '11 in the same way we don't give credit to the Colts for never developing a competent back up QB. Both situations put teams in positions to draft generational talents but most of the time you won't be so lucky. Shanny could of got kaepernick in the 2nd and developed him instead of losing and hoping for a draft pick which isn't considered a sign of great coaching or personnel management. But I dont want to go down that rabbit hole because Its difficult to say if we only had done this or that we would be in this place because we get this crazy butterfly effect, I mean would we be better off as a team if Sean Taylor was still around because we need a safety or would his presence completely have changed how this team would look like now.

Regarding the cap penalty, we were warned, we took a calculated risk and it failed. I'm not sure if the risk would of been worth it though. I know we had cap issues but honestly how bad was our cap situation going to be if we didn't do it? What players would we have lost out on vs. potentially gained this year. This would make a great hypothetical topic to pass the off season.

I just had to put Shanny at a negative on drafting players outside the first. I'm not all in on that opinion because it is too early to tell but there is not enough players here that I can say "yeah that guy is legit and will help us win for a long time", outside of three mentioned of course. I don't think three players is enough to put our drafting in the plus category so far. Fans have a horrible bias towards their own players and the reality is that 95% of the time, especially with this team is that those players that don't make it here don't make it anywhere. I fall into that camp sometimes but instead of trying to claim that Jenkins, Minnifield or other hot name we hype has already made it I'll have to see the proof in the regular season. Injuries are unfortunate but that is football and every team has those guys who showed potential and injuries throw a wrench into it. We still need more impact players and without first rounders in the next two years we will find out how good we are at drafting players.

As for your final two points, I agree completely hence my last two points in the plus category and also the chemistry comment. Overall we made plenty of mistakes but we did enough to put us in a better position now than we have been in for a long time.

I don't question the McNabb decision.
The results simply didn't meet the expectation but imo the expectations (from the FO/staff) were reasonable.

We traded for an over the hill QB with a poor attitude. If we can't question that then how can we question Haynesworth who pretty much had the same issue. Both weren't guys that put team first but at least Haynesworth has the excuse of wanting to play in the 4-3 he signed on for while McNabb can't say the same. They might be a major reason for the surge of team captains we acquired after them. It would be one thing if it was injury related like with Brown, that I can understand but not when we get a QB that doesn't even want to learn the offense. I know he told Shanny he would do everything possible to learn the offense but who wouldn't say that when they are out of a job? Also you have the fact that Reid traded him here for not much, that should raise major flags which it seems everyone said. In general it seems that you can't teach an old dog new tricks and Favre showed that with the Jets and Vikings. If we ever go for an aging vet QB that played in a different system then we shouldn't be trading high draft picks for them.

[TD Riggo]

DONE nothing...done....English is your friend.

LOL I don't think his post was IN English!

[2cents]

LOL I don't think his post was IN English!

It was in "uninformed with an agenda".

[BDOG510]

It was in "uninformed with an agenda".

Your comments are in the "douchebag homers with rose colored glasses section" or "internet tough guy" maybe "internet English teacher who feels it's his job to correct everyone's grammar" **** you buddy... I have an opinion just like everyone else, if you don't like it- skip it and move to the next.

[2cents]

Your comments are in the "douchebag homers with rose colored glasses section" or "internet tough guy" maybe "internet English teacher who feels it's his job to correct everyone's grammar" **** you buddy... I have an opinion just like everyone else, if you don't like it- skip it and move to the next.

I'm sorry it is such a shock to you that on a public message board some people have the audacity to disagree with you. Your post are usually wrong, ill informed and not very well thought out. On a public board people will point that out to you and if you can't handle criticizm I suggest you go elsewhere. Oh, and take your own advice, and if you don't like my posts, ignore them.

[zoony]

Your comments are in the "douchebag homers with rose colored glasses section" or "internet tough guy" maybe "internet English teacher who feels it's his job to correct everyone's grammar" **** you buddy... I have an opinion just like everyone else, if you don't like it- skip it and move to the next.

This is now your 4th moderator action since you've been here. Next one will be permanent. This one is 2 months