Was McNabb misused in Minnesota also?

[mooby]

Originally Posted by The Goat

Remains to be seen; however, if I were a betting man I'd say it's 50/50 right now or maybe even slightly in McNabb's favor if we're simply talking about Mike and Kyle's inclination/ability to effectively tailor their esoteric, almost mystical, scheme for the QB first and other players on the roster.

Right, because we don't have Mike's proven decades of history of running plays suited for his qb's style to use as evidence. Haven't we been over this?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by mooby

Right, because we don't have Mike's proven decades of history of running plays suited for his qb's style to use as evidence. Haven't we been over this?

Nope. Never. Not at all. By the way, I also heard that RGIII declined a private workout with the Colts!!

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by mooby

Right, because we don't have Mike's proven decades of history of running plays suited for his qb's style to use as evidence. Haven't we been over this?

No, just no. I have no idea whether you watched Denver while Mike was HC but that offense, even post Elway, doesn't resemble what we've seen thus far by any stretch of the imagination. Namely, Mike's was a run-first offense, even when he had slingers at QB (Elway, Plummer, Cutler). In Washington he's had average at best QB performance yet passed more than ever before, so personnel isn't the difference maker. Kyle is the difference, and (so far) it's his pass first offense we're seeing, which changes the nature of what Mike did for decades, as you say lol, and what he would likely do if this were still his offense.

So it's a bit tricky...hanging our hopes on a legacy coach for what he accomplished but recognizing it's not really his offense we're running. Would I feel more confident w/ Mike's offense? Indeed.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by The Goat

No, just no. I have no idea whether you watched Denver while Mike was HC but that offense, even post Elway, doesn't resemble what we've seen thus far by any stretch of the imagination. Namely, Mike's was a run-first offense, even when he had slingers at QB (Elway, Plummer, Cutler). In Washington he's had average at best QB performance yet passed more than ever before, so personnel isn't the difference maker. Kyle is the difference, and (so far) it's his pass first offense we're seeing, which changes the nature of what Mike did for decades, as you say lol, and what he would likely do if this were still his offense.

So it's a bit tricky...hanging our hopes on a legacy coach for what he accomplished but recognizing it's not really his offense we're running. Would I feel more confident w/ Mike's offense? Indeed.

Your whole argument is that Mike doesn't use his qb's to their strengths. I'm simply saying that past history indicates he does. If your problem lies with Kyle and his control of the offense, than you need to say so.

Personally, I believe Griffin, and even Luck, show the qualities that both Mike and Kyle look for in a quarterback, and they'd be hard pressed to come up with ways that would make Griffin fail. From what I can gather you seem to think that because we've failed with three has-beens at qb that means there's a 50/50 chance we're going to fail with a prospect who does everything we look for in a quarterback, and is also supremely gifted and to top it off, young, malleable, and willing to learn. Aka the perfect combination.

In the end, if Mike and Kyle fail to make this kid into the greatest quarterback DC has seen since Sonny J, by all means you can pull a CultBrennan and gloat about being right until we all tune you out. But I have more faith that the opposite will happen, and so do a lot of people that know a hell of a lot more about the subject than I do.

[The Goat]

[QUOTE=mooby;906523]Your whole argument is that Mike doesn't use his qb's to their strengths. I'm simply saying that past history indicates he does. If your problem lies with Kyle and his control of the offense, than you need to say so.QUOTE]

See my original post bud I say Mike and Kyle, and that's not my argument anyway.

...thanks for the laughs though your post cracking me up.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by The Goat

See my original post bud I say Mike and Kyle, and that's not my argument anyway.

...thanks for the laughs though your post cracking me up.

So what is your argument? I'm having a hard time with what you're trying to say here. Do you think we're doomed to failure with Mike and Kyle at the helm? Is the glass half empty or is it half full? Too many cooks in the kitchen? Do you think they have no credibility, and deserve absolutely no benefit of the doubt based on past history?

Do you think no matter what path they take, be it draft, FA, or otherwise, that we will never be successful no matter what? I don't get it. It seems like every move this franchise makes, you laughably dismiss it as foolish. Why bother watching or following the team if you think we're just doomed to failure. Is it the fascination of watching a train wreck? I don't get it.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by mooby

So what is your argument? I'm having a hard time with what you're trying to say here. Do you think we're doomed to failure with Mike and Kyle at the helm? Is the glass half empty or is it half full? Too many cooks in the kitchen? Do you think they have no credibility, and deserve absolutely no benefit of the doubt based on past history?

Do you think no matter what path they take, be it draft, FA, or otherwise, that we will never be successful no matter what? I don't get it. It seems like every move this franchise makes, you laughably dismiss it as foolish. Why bother watching or following the team if you think we're just doomed to failure. Is it the fascination of watching a train wreck? I don't get it.

Ooof, can't even remember what I said at this point lol. I keed I keed...and now try to answer your ?s which are fair ones with the same honesty! Sorry I don't know how to do the split quote magic trick...would be nice if there was a link to some two step process I've missed all this time...but whatevs.

Admittedly never been a big fan of Mike. I think the various stars (pun intended) of Elway, Sharpe, Davis, and a stellar defense all had to perfectly align for the man who resembles Splinter to win two rings. And his impact on Elway is debatable. John is a hell of a smart guy and was high up the learning curve by the time Mike rode into Denver. That said, he's exponentially more qualified to run the offense than his son, and I think it's pretty obvious Kyle is really calling the game. Therefor I don't implicitly trust Kyle's offense to nurture/develop our best hope for an elite franchise QB in at least two decades.

I've criticized our offense plenty for its slow tempo, sometimes bizarre series of plays, questionable preparedness, and I don't think a rookie QB alone can lead his offense to solutions all around. They wouldn't even need a coaching staff!!

Something I've tried to say in other threads I think the coaching has to improve as much or more than the roster, regarding both talent and execution, to achieve competitiveness. And that's the goal. Doesn't necessarily mean a SB even. Warner's last season w/ the Cards was a thing of greatness and I think over 10 games the Steelers and Cards would have split down the middle. And for all I know one or two other teams that year could have done the same. Let's be competitive...for awhile...at least