Snide Debate: Washington Redskins Quarterback Donovan McNabb
Washington Examiner columnist Rick Snider's first Redskins story was in 1983 and his work can be found at the WashingtonExaminer.com and WarpathConfidential.com.
In this week's installment of our regular discussion with Rick Snider, I go back and forth with him on predictions about our new quarterback and team.
Ken: Hey there Rick-no more sparring with the Junior Varsity (Kevin). This week you get the real thing. Care to make any predictions on season stats/totals for Donovan McNabb and the starting receivers (games played, td's, yds, etc.)?
Rick: OK, so now the A Team is coming at me, huh? Better than Player A, I guess. Here we go -- Donovan McNabb will play 14 games. The line will get him whacked at some point. McNabb will throw 23 touchdowns and 12 interceptions with a 90.0 pass rating. The big difference will be 26 passes of 30-plus yards.
Ken: Hmmm...I have made some pretty bold predictions for this team already so I guess I can't back down now. I have a very good feeling about this team in 2010, so if Donovan McNabb only plays in 14 games (during the regular season) it will be because they are resting him in Weeks 16 and 17 to keep him fresh for the playoffs! I think this team is already better than the one that Jim Zorn rode to a 6-2 start two years ago, which means I have to believe that if they can get to the bye week (in week 9) with a .500 record at worst, they won't fold like Kevin Ewoldt in a head-to-head strip poker game against Brad Pitt. To suggest that the first half or the second half of the schedule is easier or harder is not something I think we should waste our time on...I just don't think Mike Shanahan and Donovan McNabb get worse as the season progresses. I will take the over on your 26 TD's prediction. Once this offense gets inside the 30 yard line, I think you will see shots at the end zone. Overall rushing yardage might be up on the season, but I believe Kyle Shanahan will put the ball in McNabb's hands in scoring situations, resulting in 30+ TD passes on the year. McNabb's career passer rating is about 93, so you stayed risk-free on that pick. What's the matter? I thought you did well at the Preakness? Based on his ability to throw a very pretty deep ball as well as the added yards-after-the-catch potential with guys like Fred Davis and Devin Thomas contributing more and more this season, I am giving McNabb 4,000+ passing yards this season. Of course, this is predicated on him being able to walk off the field each week under his own power, but this offense is very quarterback-friendly and McNabb is no slouch. Last season, NOBODY had more 40+ yard passing plays than Donovan McNabb-he had 17. I'm taking the over there this season. The real question is: if you have McNabb in 14 games this season, how many wins are you calling that?
Rick: Wow, what colors are the pills you're taking? And, you shouldn't take so many at once because they're making you delusional. This isn't a playoff team unless the seas part for them, which happens but not for this team. They won't have a winning record by the bye, they won't be resting McNabb the final two games because best record is wrapped up. The 30-plus touchdowns is possible given I said 26 and that's not that big of a difference. I also see rushing up, which means fewer chances for McNabb. This is not the 1991 Redskins where everyone gets lot of touches. As for my win-loss prediction: I feel very generous at 7-9.
Ken: I may very well be delusional, but mine is a delusion born of countless hours spent in the parking lot at FedEx Field over the last decade believing that at any moment, our time would arrive. The beers I consume out there are for medicinal purposes only. The pills are for entirely different...ummmm...issues. Hey, listen-I think over the last 4 or 5 years the playoff field has changed by 50% each season. HALF of the entire playoff field are teams that did not make the playoffs the year before. Granted, some of that turnover is misleading-like when New England sat home after going 11-5 a couple seasons ago. But teams like Washington turn it around every year to become at best a playoff contender and at worst watchable in December. The Redskins have failed to accomplish either of these feats too many times in the last decade. But some of the more substantial reasons (excuses) for our failures-stability on the sidelines, sanity in the front office, proper chain of command up and down the organization, depth at key positions-have been addressed this offseason. Granted, we aren't where we want to be from a depth perspective at certain key positions, but they are being addressed...so we have that going for us, which is nice. Sprinkle in a proven veteran quarterback, a few journeyman veterans that understand how to prepare and compete in this league on a daily basis, a coach that is by all accounts ready to blow his proverbial load all over opposing defenses this season with a re-tooled offensive philosophy and I think there is reason to believe that the Redskins can join the ranks of those teams who go from pretender to contender. See how easy it is to talk yourself into 10-6?
Rick: I guess my delusions are born of countless hours spent in press boxes nationwide watching the Redskins lose. But, the past is the past. Each season is its own animal regardless of how good or bad they were the previous year. You're right that the greatest part of the NFL is everyone gets a chance. I think the Redskins have made some very good moves over the offseason. Larry Johnson is looking great in camps. I just think it will take another year to get the roster where Shanahan wants it.
Ken: The lack of cold beer in the press box is a real problem...I don't know how you do it. You need to get Newgent to work his political connections there. Get it on the ballot! You'll have to hit our tailgate this season for a pre-game sausage and a frosty beverage. You'll find me there rambling on about why we are about to beat whomever we happen to be playing that day. Bring your own pills.
Have a good week Rick. See you next week in the same space.
85 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Are you guys serious with the 30+ TD’s? I’d say a realistic over-under would be something more like 20.5. In fact, I’ll go on record with my McNabb over-unders right now… I may even take some action on a few of these if anyone is interested.
TD passes – 20.5
Yards – 3,390
Completion % – 60
INT’s – 10
Fumbles – 5.5
Times vomited on field – 0.5
Balls thrown in the dirt – 31.5
Balls thrown as hard as he can at receivers less than 10 yards away from him – 16
Formerly Bye, Dawk :(
I agree
and those look strangely like Campbell numbers. Perhaps McNabb, Shanny and a rookie LT alone won’t lead to a massive offensive improvement.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
I don't know the Redskins very well
but it definitely seemed to me that Campbell was not the worst of your problems. I’ll definitely call McNabb an upgrade, but not a world-changing upgrade
"EFF YOU, WE'RE WINNING ANYWAY!!!!!!" (Bye, Dawk)
Wow...gentleman's wager is on
I have the over on your TD passes and yards.
by Ken Meringolo on May 21, 2010 9:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Another consideration
will Campbell have any numbers better than McNabb.
I would say that JC throws for more yards and has a greater comp % than McNabb
by G Fan in England on May 21, 2010 9:09 AM EDT up reply actions
You may be right
Even if he doesn’t beat McNabb’s numbers, Jason will have his best year to date.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
JC will thrive this year.
With Bruce Campbell in there at some point. the double whammy for the Skins.
by brettpedigo on May 21, 2010 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I'll take that bet
JC is a good guy. But he needs to knock the rust off his long ball. He spent the past 4 years thinking that throwing it long more than once or twice a game and/or taking chances were sins. And I think because of it his touch abandoned him. When he DID throw it deep, he was usually way off. I don’t see that changing in one offseason. Sure, he will get the CHANCE to let it fly more this year, but that doesn’t mean he will connect on them.
Don't underestimate our receivers to
give up on the long routs or run them incorrectly. I see no reason why JC can’t get it deep successfully accept that sometimes he doesn’t get enough air under the ball so there is little time for the receiver to adjust.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Somebody like Charley Brown
could adjust on the fly and make a quarterback look good. I hope the Skins have a guy like that on the roster.
by Jefferson1935 on May 21, 2010 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I think
Santana has shown that adjusting on the fly is one of his strong suits, yet they still failed to connect. I put that on JC. Like I’ve said before, I don’t want to bash Campbell, he’s a hell of a guy. But he just simply had no touch on the deep ball these last few years. Or, more to the point of this discussion, McNabb has a much better touch on the deep ball.
practice makes perfect
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
agreed
You took the words right out of my, uh, fingers. They had JC caged up for the past few years, scared to take a shot down field for fear of being the “reason” they lost. Hopefully they will let him play some football in Oakland; I have a feeling Cable will instantly be trusted more to run that offense than Russell was.
"Cable will instantly be trusted more to run that offense than Russell was"
I meant to say “Cable will instantly trust him more”. I should finish my morning coffee before I start posting ;)
It also seemed like
even Campbell’s deep throws were too safe, in that it was always about half a yard out of the field of play.
I literally laughed out loud, for a good 10-15 seconds
Balls thrown as hard as he can at receivers less than 10 yards away from him – 16
by RobtheRedskin on May 21, 2010 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Jimmy
I know you will have done the research…
How many of McNabb’s 17 40+ yard plays were short passes with YAC making up the bulk of the yardage.
At a guess I would say at least 10 were thows of less than 20 yards which Desean etc took for the extra yardage.
by G Fan in England on May 21, 2010 8:36 AM EDT reply actions
Don’t know to be honest, but my guess is that on most of them he hit them downfield. His strength is the deep passing game.
Formerly Bye, Dawk :(
I checked myself
McNabb was
5 of 9 on throws of 41+ yards
5 of 15 on throws of 31 to 40 yards
5 of 19 on throws of 21 to 30 yards
You would guess that on the 41+ throws the WR has time to adjust to the ball – on the other throws they do not look good. McNabb is at his best on 11 to 20 yards throws where his arm strength guns the ball in but touch is not much of an issue.
by G Fan in England on May 21, 2010 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions
In comparsion
Campbell was
1 for 5 on 41+, 1 for 6 on 31-40 and 11 for 28 on 21-30
by G Fan in England on May 21, 2010 9:14 AM EDT up reply actions
and finally
Drew Brees and this surprised me a little
0 for 10 on 41+, 6 of 11 on 31-40 and 23 for 35 on 21-30.
No comps on deep balls but that is scary in the 21 to 30 range.
by G Fan in England on May 21, 2010 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions
And the one Moss gave up on...
Early in the season, maybe the Giants game. Moss ended up becoming the defender when he realized the ball was comin’ his way. Either way, Campbell doesn’t lead his recievers like Mcnabb does. Campbell throws the ball down the sideline and not in the field where his reciever can adjust to the ball; something I thought shoulda’ and coulda’ been fixed a while ago, oh well.
by Scorin' Scalps on May 21, 2010 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Campbell's
sideline ball was lacking too. At least to Moss. How many times did he overthrow Santana running down the sideline, in essentially the same play McNabb and Jackson capitalized on consistently.
The crazy part for me
Is that JC would hit that pass to DT or MK when they ran it but never to Moss. I guess the big guys gave him a bigger window to stick it in.
by BayAreaBullet on May 21, 2010 4:12 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I find this a little confusing...
What is this from….1 game? the two games against the Skins?….But it does bring up, I think, an important point. We have a lot of talk comparing the very similar stats between JC and McNabb. “Better QB” is largely up to interpretation. The fact that McNabb forte is 21-30 and 40+ yds shows clearly that they are very different QBs. With Donovan the LBs and Safeties are going to have to respect the intermediate passes and the secondary in general will have to respect the deep ball, thereby opening up the running game, that is where I see the upgrade. I see JC doing very well in Oak. and wouldn’t be surprised if they have a very good year. I also think they are a step or two ahead of us rebuilding talent-wise.
Those are stats for the entire 2009 season
for those distances – so you can see that teams are only taking deep shots here and there as evidenced by JC’s 11 throws of over 31 yards in 16 games.
To give the 11-20 stats McNabb was 49 of 79 compared to JC’s 26 of 55 – so McNabb is a clear winner.
In the less than 10 range JC was 260 of 371 and McNabb 183 of 285. Of starting QB’s McNabb has the best 11-20 range but possibly the worse less than 10 comp%.
This does bear out the suggestion that McNabb has the arm but not the touch si it will be interesting to see if the Skins go for the deep throws far more than they did with JC.
by G Fan in England on May 21, 2010 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions
I see one stat above ....
that says 5-9 comp. at 41+, and one saying 17 completions over 40 yards….are your stats discounting YAC? I am sure its out there, seems like a tricky stat to find. (I am a relative novice when it comes to running down stats like that) I think we will throw the ball down the field much more with McNabb….at least try, obviously OL play is a big part of that, but McNabb has a quicker release and far more confidence that JC……and I am sure Shanny has FAR more confidence in McNabb than Zorn had, well, in anybody….including himself.
The stats explained are
The stats I have quoted are based on the distance of the throw measured from the LOS.
The 17 number represents the number of pass plays of over 40 yards irrespective of where the pass was completed. So the 17 would include a screen pass that went for over 40 yards or a ten yard slant that broke for a big gain. Looking at McNabb’s stats 12 of the 17 plays were throws that were less than 40 yards.
Maybe you are right in that they want McNabb to throw in that 11 to 20 range just behind the LB’s.
by G Fan in England on May 21, 2010 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Right On
Doesnt that suggest that the qb has put the ball in the best place for the receiver to make max.progress with….2 me thats putting the ball on the $$
There were also numerous times when both of Phillys (young) receivers ran the wrong routes or didnt run their routes hard enough…they missed sme td catches
A healthy (less than 240lbs) McNabb can be the Skins Big ticket
sbredskinsnabb
by sbredskinsnabb on May 21, 2010 9:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I love all of this speculation about the redskins. Have we not improved almost everywhere. We have a better backfield, much better coaching improvement at TE and WR.
This alone is worth a extra 4-6 games in the win column for us. I think some of you guys actually still think that Zorn was not really that bad. Zorn was a moron and I have been screaming this for a while now. We now have a coach that is more than just competent. We will be at the very least a Wild card team this year.
Agree...I just doubt a bit since our schedule is exponentially more difficult
ie – we’re not starting the season against 6 straight winless teams.
Hogs Haven. On Twitter. And Facebook.
by Kevin Ewoldt on May 21, 2010 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed at a tougher schedule....
but how much tougher is yet to be seen, Giants seem to be slipping and we get them at the end of the year both times so we can’t say where they will be by then, and we (hopefully) should be gelling by then, Nobody really knows about Kolb. We have the OC that made Houston so dangerous last year (plus Cushing will be out). Chicago doesn’t scare me. I definitely don’t see Min recapturing what they had last year, they are going to miss Chester Taylor and even Favre comes back I don’t think he can come close to last year again, not a shot at Favre. Detroit and StL are going to better this year, but so are we and I am really hoping for a better mind set and better playcalling this year. I think we can compete.
then again ......
we might spend the first half of the season looking like we are auditioning for “The Keystone Kops Play Ball”
Don't forget the gold pants
That should give us at least one extra win….
by brettpedigo on May 21, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm wary of saying we have an improvement at TE
I just have trouble saying that a team improves at a position only because somebody comes back from an injury. “Improvement” in my eyes means a straight up better player than the previous one OR an increase in quality depth. Getting somebody back from an injury is nice, but it is somebody we had for the first half of the season last year and it net more wins than when just that one player was in.
Just an opinion, if that made any sense.
but I think its safe to say we are pretty solid at tight end....
improvement is possible through hard work and improvement around them.
4-6 wins!?
Zorn was one of the worst coaches in the league, but you are dramatically over-stating how much influence coaches have.
Our back-up RBs are marginally better, we got an elite QB, a journeyman OL to replace Heyer, and a rookie LT. Otherwise this is the same offensive (mediocre) offensive talent from last year.
You can add in a full season from Cooley and assumed improvement of the Redshirt pass-catchers.
But 4-6 wins? You’re crazy.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
no one thing improves us 4-6 wins....
but I don’t think the possibilty of us ending up 8-8 to 10-6 is just “crazy”
10-6 is crazy, IMO
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
ten wins is a fantasy this year.
But…. As of now, our 2011 schedule will be a cake walk… Especially if we finish 4th in our division this year.
by brettpedigo on May 21, 2010 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
10 is a huge stretch.....I like my kool-aid....
but I am not predicting that…..but if we catch a little roll at the right time thats all it takes to make a difference…..its not the impossible dream
Ken predicted 12-4, seriously.
Hogs Haven. On Twitter. And Facebook.
by Kevin Ewoldt on May 21, 2010 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
We are +2 wins over last year just because we don't have Suisham
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
That's not actually how football plays out
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
he pays for the booze!
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
sign me up......cessary!!!
Tailgate and afterparty in Jax ….HH exclusive!!! Christmas with the Skins fans!!!! I can throe down some serious foodstuffs We have some Jax following here. I think it is story that needs to be covered……seat warmers and mittens not necessary!!!
WHOA...
12-4 is just silly…10-6 sounds good to me
by Ken Meringolo on May 21, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
and our schedule last year was ridiculously easy
My doublestuffed oreos fell on the floor of my mom's basement. Save me swagman!
by SomebodyBuyAustinaSteak on May 21, 2010 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
and I think that might be getting to much attention....
yeas we lost to some bad teams……at least 2 of those can be handed to Zorn directly (thats generous) Dallas and Philly were both 11-5, the Giants started strong and Oak finished strong (they whooped Philly) plus SD and NO and we were competitive in most of those games. I big part was just conditioning on defense and play calling on offense. This team+last year is 10-6, which i still no playoffs, but better….adding wins per additions makes no sense because….well many reasons, but you don’t know where hese teams will be this year.
and Suisham
don’t forget Suisham cost us a couple of games all on his own.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
beg to differ
you are dramatically over-stating how much influence coaches have.
usually I would agree with you. But DO YOU REMEMBER the circus around here last year? Zorn was one of the worst coaches ever. He had no command of game-planning, which is why they brought in ‘B-7 Sherm’. Then hilarity REALLY ensued. Anyway, the point is, I don’t think YOU CAN overstate how much influence a change in coaching will have. Truthfully, I don’t even look at it as a “change.” To me, you have to have coaching to change FROM in order for there to be a change. What we had was closer to a ‘Three Stooges’ or ’I Love Lucy" episode.
I just don't see it in our offensive personnel
OL: one of the worst in the league in ’09, hopeful expectation for ’10 would be mediocrity.
QB: upgraded to elite, yet will probably miss a few games
WRs: still underwhelming or unproven
TE: amazing, yet unfortunately possibly the least important position on offense
RBs: Probably a trio of 3 over the hill RBs.
= mediocrity at best.
=/= 10-6
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
I can;t get away from the domino effect from Zorn and the attitude.....
AH did not show up…..everybody else did….thats huge, when was the last time that happened…we have talent
Every team has talent
on the balance ours is average, especially on offense.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
on the balance, yes we seem to be average....
we have some stand-outs in key positions……..I have my concerns….I worry about Mc Nabb throwing back accross his body, and the field when he rolls out is his new offense, I am hoping that some of our players have the hunger to turn he tide….it is contagious….talent at TE with an exp QB is huge when the OL breaks down…..if talent is avereage then it is drive that wins games.
hahaha
Rick: Wow, what colors are the pills you’re taking? And, you shouldn’t take so many at once because they’re making you delusional. This isn’t a playoff team unless the seas part for them, which happens but not for this team. They won’t have a winning record by the bye, they won’t be resting McNabb the final two games because best record is wrapped up. The 30-plus touchdowns is possible given I said 26 and that’s not that big of a difference. I also see rushing up, which means fewer chances for McNabb. This is not the 1991 Redskins where everyone gets lot of touches. As for my win-loss prediction: I feel very generous at 7-9.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Jumping 4-6 wins is crazy?
Not as crazy as some of us seem to think. Miami jumped by +10 wins with CHAD FREAKIN PENNINGTON. Quick, name the best OL on the Dolphins in 2008? Exactly. The best WR? Did they have any? Fasano as a pass-catching weapon? Every year, at least one team jumps 5-6 wins. Every single year. Alot of years, there is more than one team. And, as has been previously stated, the playoff field turnover is ~50% from year to year.
Redskins DVOA was almost exactly even, aka higher than Tennessee’s (an 8-8 team, with, shall we say, offensive potential) last year. 4-12 was not an accurate indication of our play (special talent for snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, no doubt). It could have just easily turned out as 6-10, 7-9, or even 8-8, apparently, with those numbers. 4-12 is definitely an outlier based on our metrics, so we got unlucky. And we are always attracted to doing new, unique, dumb, dumb stuff. The legacy of the 2000’s ’Skins.
It is realistic to think that an elite QB adds 2-3 wins, nearly by himself, just because he can execute in the 4th quarter. Those of you looking for way in which JC and McNabb differ despite somewhat similar numbers: McNabb has won games in the 4th quarter before, whereas with JC this almost never happened.
It is realistic to say, therefore, that we were more like a 6-10 team last year, and that with McNabb + OldPeopleGrabBag’o’tricks we could have enough roster talent/depth to expect an increase of 3 wins. That puts us firmly in the 9-7 camp. 10-6 is not that much of a stretch.
by CapitalDominion on May 21, 2010 3:46 PM EDT reply actions
Of course it happens
but it’s uncommon that bad teams jump to 10-6 or better, and my money is certainly not on it happening.
Miami’s OL in ‘08 and ’09 was good (Jake Long was their best player both years), and that’s the reason they got by with average talent at the skill positions. It is precisely the reason I’m down on our offense.
OL’s can make mediocre skill players look good. The reverse is mostly untrue. McNabb can avoid a few sacks and make a few plays, but he’s not going turn our OL into an effective one.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
didn't miami make the switch the the wildcat that year?
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Didn't the Skins switch to a zone-blocking scheme in 2010?
by CapitalDominion on May 21, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought you were implying that Miami surprised everyone and got more wins as a result of a scheme switch, despite a lack of talent. I buy that. While the Skins may not be making a drastic switch like that, there is still no film on the 2010 skins offense, and with such sweeping change and unpredicability there is a chance for either a big jump in production, or spectacular failure. I am hoping its the former.
by CapitalDominion on May 21, 2010 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I was originally asking if they did make the switch that year
and they did, which does make me think that it was a scheme change. Not saying that they didn’t have talent, pennington put up some good numbers that year. but that o-line, as stated above was very good.
add that to an already accurate passer in pennington, and a offensive scheme that no one really knew how to deal with and you’ve got yourself a nice little story of bottom-dwellers going to top of the crop in one year.
on the other hand, you have an o-line that sucked last year, add a rookie and a journeyman, still have no real depth for that line and I’m supposed to automatically think the line is gonna play better?
As a fan, hope is par the course but common sense won’t let me believe that things will SIGNIFICANTLY change in one year (like with the Dolphins).
Donovan will be good for a couple more wins I think, but he can only win if he’s in the game. No one’s betting on him making it through the season, and I cringe at the though of Sexy Rexy having to pull out some wins for us.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Don't forget that they
also got Parcells and a new HC and achieved total buy in from the players. The parallels with us this year are interesting and are reason for hope and even speculation that we will improve dramatically.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
hinging hopes on parallels
is not something I’m into. Give me something concrete to grasp and we’re talking about something different. You could list every parallel you want, but at the end of the day we’re talking about different coaches, and different players that will respond to things in different ways.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
I agree with Rekka, for the most part....
The parallel I do choose to accept is, bringing better/more competent football people will result in a better/more competent football team.
in the long run
I’m not expecting a complete and utter turnaround in one year. But I do agree with that.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
nor do I (worst to fist turnaround)
but a man can dream can’t he?……..besides I am hoping for a steady turnaround that will last for a while, not a quick flash and back to the load of crao we have been wading through for the last decade.
But that O-Line’s play was predicated on one rookie draft pick, a couple of holdovers from a suspect, lose-alwhole-lot unit the year before, and a couple of FAs. Sound like a unit you know?
I didnt want to throw on the “unless our OL still sucks alot” disclaimer, because it is obvious, and well stated. My point was OLs improve all the time, and in fact most lines “come out of nowhere” to start playing better as a unit, even with players that have sucked on previous OLs. That is where coaching comes in.
by CapitalDominion on May 21, 2010 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Yurp...
No one could name the Patriots O-Line in the ’90s and then all of a sudden they gel, bond together as not only teammates, but as friends off the field due to Belichick and proper instruction…next thing you know their whole line is making Pro Bowls. They pick up the slack for eachother and play as one unit much like the strings on a guitar…same thing Miami did with Sparano and Parcells.
Shanny knows O-Lines and this one will become a cohesive unit at some point this season to surprise us all. McNabb has had good O-Lines and will demand their full attention and respect because he does not want to have his ribs shattered in the middle of the end zone like Week 1 last year.
My prediction is 9-7.
You guys are undervaluing the prexisting talent on both of those teams.
“whether people have heard of them” is a useless metric.
Miami had two good tackles in 2008 – Carey & Long, mixed with solid, not-old veterans. If someone couldn’t name them, that’s their problem.
New England’s 2001 line had a number good players on it, or future good players. Guys like Light, Andruzzi, Jones and Damien Woody.
We know who four of the Redskins probable linemen are. They’re not unknown, and they don’t have untapped potential. Rabach, Dockery, MW and Hicks aren’t going to shock anyone. And they’re all worse than guys like Justin Smiley, Matt Light and Joe Andruzzi.
Magical coaching might turn these mediocre/bad linemen into a good unit, but it’s highly unlikely.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Some other Miami O-linemen that played in 2008
Andy Alleman| G, Rd3 2007 ps88, games 15 starts 4; Brandon Frye | OT, Rd5 2007 ps163, games 7 starts 0;
Al Johnson | C, games 4, starts 0; Ike Ndukwe | G, UDFA 2005, games 16, starts 15 (former Skins); Justin Smiley | G, Rd2 2004 ps46, games 12 starts 12.
There had to be another center. Both Carey and Long were early 1st round picks.
by Jefferson1935 on May 21, 2010 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Hoping the Skins...
breakaway from poor judgemental logic. The Skins have some talent that needs to be handled the right way. The trust is what Allen and Shannahan will provide. Since our RBS have no major knee injuries only the Portis concussion it is possible McNabb can fill the air with TDS and might open the running game. Thats the game plan I see and it will take Kelly and Thomas to prove themselves this year otherwise it will be a bad kool-aid year. It won`t hurt me if they draft some more O-Line next year to fix what has been not attended too for years.

by 






















