Newton's personality reminds me of.............

[thefuzz]

It's impossible to prove that McNabb was good because of Reid's system.

It is an opinion, and as far as I'm concerned accurate.

Some will say that McNabb is a really good QB, and made Reid look great, that's cool, but it's much harder to prove than my theory.

And to KT, where is the proof on that "legendary tutoring of Vick" stuff?

[HoFBound90]

It's not just McNabb.

You'll never find me in favor of bringing in a WCO quarterback when we don't run a Walsh style system. Hasselbeck, Garcia, Feeley, etc. No interest in any of them.

It's a very QB stat friendly system. We've already got a QB better suited to that style of play on roster. Don't need another.

As to McNabb, he may well be better this season since he'll be returning to that kind of system (under Bill Musgrave) but people taking that to mean that he would have succeeded here will be making an error.

None of my argument was to imply that I wanted a qb like mcnabb in Carolina. I just was simp0ly defending him as a fan.

[theyhateme45]

Several are: The West Coast Offense

Reid's one of the better coaches running it, but he's far from alone.

Exactly!

And my point is that those other teams aren't going to 3 NFC Championships and Superbowls either.

If it's all about the system, then they should be able to... Because what you are essentially saying is they win because of the system and the QB does not matter. Which is not the case, because other teams are running the same system, but can't win.... Key difference... QB Play.

I don't care what system you have. Unless you have a Extremely nasty defense and good Running game, you're not making it that far without a good QB. McNabb did it multiple times... meaning he was a good QB, because their running game was nothing special and their defenses were no ravens.

But to think in this copy cat league, with a much time coaches put in, and coordinators switching teams that Andy is the only coach who can run a successful West coast is Naive.... The difference has been Andy has had the QB to run it. That's why they've succeeded when others have failed.

[HoFBound90]

It's impossible to prove that McNabb was good because of Reid's system.

It is an opinion, and as far as I'm concerned accurate.

Some will say that McNabb is a really good QB, and made Reid look great, that's cool, but it's much harder to prove than my theory.

And to KT, where is the proof on that "legendary tutoring of Vick" stuff?

I believe it is equally hard to prove. Just because Feely put up good #s? Vick is capable of good #s and The judgement is out on Kolb, so in reality there is only 1 qb you can use to back up that argument.

It is impossible to prove on each side but both have their arguments, yet how far has reid gone without mcnabb? Its justas easy for the other side to point out something that is more relevant...imo. Wins and going farther into the playoffs > backup qbs putting up good #s.

As mr. scot uased as his argument earlier, #s during the regular season don't mean much. So I would assume the next category to judge by would be wins. And if you look at how shitty the rest of MCNabbs offense was it is safe to say that he, based on his skills was a huge factor in winning those games.

[Mr. Scot]

Exactly!

And my point is that those other teams aren't going to 3 NFC Championships and Superbowls either.

If it's all about the system, then they should be able to... Because what you are essentially saying is they win because of the system and the QB does not matter. Which is not the case, because other teams are running the same system, but can't win.... Key difference... QB Play.

I don't care what system you have. Unless you have a Extremely nasty defense and good Running game, you're not making it that far without a good QB. McNabb did it multiple times... meaning he was a good QB, because their running game was nothing special and their defenses were no ravens.

But to think in this copy cat league, with a much time coaches put in, and coordinators switching teams that Andy is the only coach who can run a successful West coast is Naive.... The difference has been Andy has had the QB to run it. That's why they've succeeded when others have failed.

Remember the 49ers of the 80s?

For that matter, the team that won the Super Bowl last year runs it too, as did three other teams from last year's playoffs.

McNabb last year went to a team that doesn't run it and wound up benched by season's end. And he's not unique in that. I can't name a single WCO quarterback that went to a team running another attack and thrived. I can name you several that did and failed.

[Mr. Scot]

I believe it is equally hard to prove. Just because Feely put up good #s? Vick is capable of good #s and The judgement is out on Kolb, so in reality there is only 1 qb you can use to back up that argument.

It is impossible to prove on each side but both have their arguments, yet how far has reid gone without mcnabb? Its justas easy for the other side to point out something that is more relevant...imo. Wins and going farther into the playoffs > backup qbs putting up good #s.

As mr. scot uased as his argument earlier, #s during the regular season don't mean much. So I would assume the next category to judge by would be wins. And if you look at how pooty the rest of MCNabbs offense was it is safe to say that he, based on his skills was a huge factor in winning those games.

Reid had never been without McNabb for a full season until last year.

They still went to the playoffs with a 10-6 record but were one and done.

[CRA]

Andy Reid is just about as flawed as John Fox.....drastically different flaws but just as annoying.

McNabb has never gotten the credit he deserved and has taken more crap than probably any QB in the past 20 yrs.

[theyhateme45]

Remember the 49ers of the 80s?

For that matter, the team that won the Super Bowl last year runs it too, as did three other teams from last year's playoffs.

McNabb last year went to a team that doesn't run it and wound up benched by season's end. And he's not unique in that. I can't name a single WCO quarterback that went to a team running another attack and thrived. I can name you several that did and failed.

Okay... so if it was just the system then why does Joe Montana get so much credit? Why did Aaron Rodgers get so much credit???

Then also look at the fact those teams where much better all around... Green Bay, top defense, millions of WR's... San Fran Top everything, hall of famers.... Both teams had their defense make key plays to help win a title.

So for Mcnabb to go to title games as often as he did and get 0 credit from you guys is unjustified hate IMO.

So Mcnabb is built for that offense??? What does that mean? If Aaron Rodgers isn't as dominate in another offense that doesn;t play to his strenght is he now garbage? Or he should get no credit for his success in Green Bay?

[theyhateme45]

Reid had never been without McNabb for a full season until last year.

They still went to the playoffs with a 10-6 record but were one and done.

So then by following your definition, they chocked with out Mcnabb... right?

[CRA]

Okay... so if it was just the system then why does Joe Montana get so much credit? Why did Aaron Rodgers get so much credit???

Then also look at the fact those teams where much better all around... Green Bay, top defense, millions of WR's... San Fran Top everything, hall of famers.... Both teams had their defense make key plays to help win a title.

So for Mcnabb to go to title games as often as he did and get 0 credit from you guys is unjustified hate IMO.

So Mcnabb is built for that offense??? What does that mean? If Aaron Rodgers isn't as dominate in another offense that doesn;t play to his strenght is he now garbage? Or he should get no credit for his success in Green Bay?

add Tom Brady....

Belichick went 11-5 with a guy that last played QB in a game in high school.

[Mr. Scot]

Okay... so if it was just the system then why does Joe Montana get so much credit? Why did Aaron Rodgers get so much credit???

Then also look at the fact those teams where much better all around... Green Bay, top defense, millions of WR's... San Fran Top everything, hall of famers.... Both teams had their defense make key plays to help win a title.

So for Mcnabb to go to title games as often as he did and get 0 credit from you guys is unjustified hate IMO.

So Mcnabb is built for that offense??? What does that mean? If Aaron Rodgers isn't as dominate in another offense that doesn;t play to his strenght is he now garbage? Or he should get no credit for his success in Green Bay?

Actually, he is built for it.

What you want most in a West Coast QB is a guy with good short to mid-range accuracy so he can get it to his receivers and backs and let then run after the catch. If he has the arm to chuck it downfield once in a while too, that's good but not a necessity (McNabb does, Montana didn't). Mobility is also not an absolute need, but it is a big plus because the system rarely keeps backs in to block, choosing instead to send them out on pass routes.

McNabb is pretty much an ideal fit for that system.

But last year he played outside of it, under a coach that was considered a QB guru (his worthiness for that title is a debate of its own) and wound up benched. This year he's going back to it, and if he suddenly looks like his old self again I won't be surprised.

As far as the playoff thing, like I said, I've watched all his playoff games. Can you really look back at that Super Bowl performance (especially the two minute drill) and say that was a guy playing lights out? Heck, look back at his 2003 game against us. Are we going to say that 100% of the blame for all three of his picks was on his receivers?

Is McNabb good? Sure he is. Great? Debatable. Elite? No.

[HoFBound90]

Ok I just want to figure something out. Regardless of system, coach, blah bla blah. mr. Scot, how good do you think mcNabb WAS, not now.

you can do it on a scale from 1-10, you can rank him among the 32 qbs in the league. Its pretty generic but I want to know if you give him any credit at all basically, or if you think he was JUSt average.

[thefuzz]

Nobody is calling McNabb bad, or terrible, just that he is overrated because of the system that he played in.

I have, and will continue to say the same thing about Vick.

IMO Reid's system is a very very QB friendly system, possibly the easiest in the league, and because of his propensity to throw the ball 60% of the time, stats of his QB's is way out of proportion.

That's all.

[CRA]

Actually, he is built for it.

What you want most in a West Coast QB is a guy with good short to mid-range accuracy so he can get it to his receivers and backs and let then run after the catch. If he has the arm to chuck it downfield once in a while too, that's good but not a necessity (McNabb does, Montana didn't). Mobility is also not an absolute need, but it is a big plus because the system rarely keeps backs in to block, choosing instead to send them out on pass routes.

McNabb is pretty much an ideal fit for that system.

But last year he played outside of it, under a coach that was considered a QB guru (his worthiness for that title is a debate of its own) and wound up benched. This year he's going back to it, and if he suddenly looks like his old self again I won't be surprised.

As far as the playoff thing, like I said, I've watched all his playoff games. Can you really look back at that Super Bowl performance (especially the two minute drill) and say that was a guy playing lights out? Heck, look back at his 2003 game against us. Are we going to say that 100% of the blame for all three of his picks was on his receivers?

Is McNabb good? Sure he is. Great? Debatable. Elite? No.

McNabb's accuracy has always been iffy....his athletic ability largely early on allowed it to work.

his poor performance in that 2005 game realistically could be largely contributed to getting hurt before throwing the first one.....injurying McNabb played a huge role in the outcome of that game IMO.