Rumor: Eagles and Rams Finalizing Trade Involving McNabb

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Some one on here said that we'd be lucky to get a third rounder for Campbell, well that would have been true before Charlie Whitehurst got traded to seattle, but after that ridiculous trade for a guy whose never thrown a NFL pass, Jason is probably worth a second rounder now. And if this Mcnabb trade goes through, then expect us to get Bradford and expect Jason to be traded on the same day.

how do you rationalize that jason campbell is worth a second rounder when that is what is rumored to be mcnabbs value? mcnabb has been to several probowls, led his team to multiple NFC championships and one superbowl.... in mcnabbs worst year, he was twice the QB Campbell was in his best year, yet Mcnabb is only worth a 2nd round pick. If we could get the last pick in the 3rd round for Campbell, i'd feel we completely screwed another team over.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

how do you rationalize that jason campbell is worth a second rounder when that is what is rumored to be mcnabbs value? mcnabb has been to several probowls, led his team to multiple NFC championships and one superbowl.... in mcnabbs worst year, he was twice the QB Campbell was in his best year, yet Mcnabb is only worth a 2nd round pick. If we could get the last pick in the 3rd round for Campbell, i'd feel we completely screwed another team over.

So true...and people that harp on JC's experience are missing the point. That experience counts against him because he's played so many games and is still not playing at a level he should be for all that experience. A guy like Whitehurst is worth more to Seattle because he has not played enough to prove he can't. Teams always overpay for what they think is untapped potential. not sure anyone sees JC as anymore then he already is which is just okay.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

how do you rationalize that jason campbell is worth a second rounder when that is what is rumored to be mcnabbs value? mcnabb has been to several probowls, led his team to multiple NFC championships and one superbowl.... in mcnabbs worst year, he was twice the QB Campbell was in his best year, yet Mcnabb is only worth a 2nd round pick. If we could get the last pick in the 3rd round for Campbell, i'd feel we completely screwed another team over.

McNabb is now on the downside of his career. A few years ago he may have fetched a late 1st or early 2nd round pick, but not today. Despite all his accomplishments, his inability of late, to deliver in the big games works just as much against him as his acolades do for him. After watching Donovan's last performance (playoff game against Dallas) one would/
could be led to believe his skills are diminishing. We know that in this league, it's about what have you done for me lately.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

McNabb is now on the downside of his career. A few years ago he may have fetched a late 1st or early 2nd round pick, but not today. Despite all his accomplishments, his inability of late, to deliver in the big games works just as much against him as his acolades do for him. After watching Donovan's last performance (playoff game against Dallas) one would/
could be led to believe his skills are diminishing. We know that in this league, it's about what have you done for me lately.

Thats exactly what I was going to say to you BigHairedAristocrat.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

McNabb is now on the downside of his career. A few years ago he may have fetched a late 1st or early 2nd round pick, but not today. Despite all his accomplishments, his inability of late, to deliver in the big games works just as much against him as his acolades do for him. After watching Donovan's last performance (playoff game against Dallas) one would/
could be led to believe his skills are diminishing. We know that in this league, it's about what have you done for me lately.

yes, and "lately," mcnabb has done more than campbell. Lets compare the performance of the two over the past two years:

Donovan McNabb, Age 33 - 30 starts, 1014 pass attempts, 7469 yards, 45 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

Jason Campbell, Age 28 - 32 starts, 1013 pass attempts, 6863 yards, 33 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

mcnabb may be on the downside of his career, but so is campbell - not due to age, but due to simple suckiness. Three of the best QBs in the NFL last year, Manning, Warner, and Favre, were 34, 38, and 40 respectively. By all appearnances, Favre is returning, Warner could have still kept playing at a high level if he wanted to, and Mannings about to get paid the biggest contrat in NFL history. these guys are all getting it done in their mid-to late 30s. and you think teams should shy away from McNabb because he's 33? I dont think there's a reasonable person here who thinks that McNabb won't outplay Campbell over the next 5 years. McNabb is a great NFL QB who is still getting it done. Campbell is 5 years younger, has never "gotten it done," and there's no reason to think he ever will.

For any team out there, Campbell would buy 1 year - tops - before they needed to have a franchise QB in place. McNabb would buy a franchise 3-4 years minimum.

if it were up to me, i'd trade our 2nd rounder plus Andre Carter for McNabb, feel confident in our QB position for the next 5 years, draft a lineman with our 1st round pick, add more linemen in 2011 and then draft a QB of the future in 2012. Of course, the Eagles would never trade McNabb to a division rival, so the point is moot. Bottom line (in my opinion) - even on the "downside" of his career, McNabb at 33 is a better QB and has MORE upside than Campbell at 28.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

yes, and "lately," mcnabb has done more than campbell. Lets compare the performance of the two over the past two years:

Donovan McNabb, Age 33 - 30 starts, 1014 pass attempts, 7469 yards, 45 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

Jason Campbell, Age 28 - 32 starts, 1013 pass attempts, 6863 yards, 33 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

mcnabb may be on the downside of his career, but so is campbell - not due to age, but due to simple suckiness. Three of the best QBs in the NFL last year, Manning, Warner, and Favre, were 34, 38, and 40 respectively. By all appearnances, Favre is returning, Warner could have still kept playing at a high level if he wanted to, and Mannings about to get paid the biggest contrat in NFL history. these guys are all getting it done in their mid-to late 30s. and you think teams should shy away from McNabb because he's 33? I dont think there's a reasonable person here who thinks that McNabb won't outplay Campbell over the next 5 years. McNabb is a great NFL QB who is still getting it done. Campbell is 5 years younger, has never "gotten it done," and there's no reason to think he ever will.

For any team out there, Campbell would buy 1 year - tops - before they needed to have a franchise QB in place. McNabb would buy a franchise 3-4 years minimum.

if it were up to me, i'd trade our 2nd rounder plus Andre Carter for McNabb, feel confident in our QB position for the next 5 years, draft a lineman with our 1st round pick, add more linemen in 2011 and then draft a QB of the future in 2012. Of course, the Eagles would never trade McNabb to a division rival, so the point is moot. Bottom line (in my opinion) - even on the "downside" of his career, McNabb at 33 is a better QB and has MORE upside than Campbell at 28.

I think the whole argument started because of the whole Charlie Whitehurst trade. Although I think this argument is a bit flawed because of the details of the trade. The Seahawks traded their 2010 2nd rounder (top 10 I think) and an undisclosed 2011 pick for a Whitehurst and their later 2010 2nd round pick.

Now the rumored McNabb trade is basically the first pick in the 2nd round and OJ Atogwe. Now, is JC worth more than McNabb? No. But, the Whitehurst trade probably gives you an idea of how much more Campbell should cost, which I would say right now at least a 3rd rounder.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

yes, and "lately," mcnabb has done more than campbell. Lets compare the performance of the two over the past two years:

Donovan McNabb, Age 33 - 30 starts, 1014 pass attempts, 7469 yards, 45 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

Jason Campbell, Age 28 - 32 starts, 1013 pass attempts, 6863 yards, 33 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

mcnabb may be on the downside of his career, but so is campbell - not due to age, but due to simple suckiness. Three of the best QBs in the NFL last year, Manning, Warner, and Favre, were 34, 38, and 40 respectively. By all appearnances, Favre is returning, Warner could have still kept playing at a high level if he wanted to, and Mannings about to get paid the biggest contrat in NFL history. these guys are all getting it done in their mid-to late 30s. and you think teams should shy away from McNabb because he's 33? I dont think there's a reasonable person here who thinks that McNabb won't outplay Campbell over the next 5 years. McNabb is a great NFL QB who is still getting it done. Campbell is 5 years younger, has never "gotten it done," and there's no reason to think he ever will.

For any team out there, Campbell would buy 1 year - tops - before they needed to have a franchise QB in place. McNabb would buy a franchise 3-4 years minimum.

if it were up to me, i'd trade our 2nd rounder plus Andre Carter for McNabb, feel confident in our QB position for the next 5 years, draft a lineman with our 1st round pick, add more linemen in 2011 and then draft a QB of the future in 2012. Of course, the Eagles would never trade McNabb to a division rival, so the point is moot. Bottom line (in my opinion) - even on the "downside" of his career, McNabb at 33 is a better QB and has MORE upside than Campbell at 28.

I can't argue your assessment.....I wasn't thinking of Donovan in comparison to Jason Campbell, only in terms of his long vs, short term value to the Rams, a team in position to draft for their long term success if they're on board with the hype surrounding Sam Bradford. Personally, I hope the Eagles keep McNabb, I fear Kevin Kolb more at this stage of his development that I do McNabb.

I'm not sure the Rams are a team that's ready to win right now, or improved to the extent an established QB like McNabb is enough to get them over the hump....or, how much further his skills will have diminished by the time they reach that point. If there's a team in the top five that need/should draft a QB it's the Rams.

[SBXVII]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I could have sworn there was a topic on how none of the most recent playoff/SB teams didn't have a top 1st round LT. and perhaps the same could be said of QB's but it amazes me how much people are playing on the fact that "we have to have a top 1st round LT." Especially with several considerations...

1- Shanahan gets equivilant level of play out of mid to late round OL talent.
2- The proto typical zone blocking LT's coming out of the draft are not seen as worthy of a 1st or 2nd round pick.
3- Originally I had heard Okung was not fit for a team utilizing zone blocking. Supposedly he had bad lateral movement and was more built for man-to-man blocking. Most recently some of these reports have softened.

Then theres the lets trade back for more picks theory...

1- Someone has to want to trade (unless as someone put it to me...we simply force another team to take the deal. ).
2- We are willing to except taking a player who's figured to go mid to late round zone blocker late in the first round.
3- Possibly willing to take lesser talent QB like JC and hope he can be developed possibly within a year if JC decides to leave.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I could have sworn there was a topic on how none of the most recent playoff/SB teams didn't have a top 1st round LT. and perhaps the same could be said of QB's but it amazes me how much people are playing on the fact that "we have to have a top 1st round LT." Especially with several considerations...

1- Shanahan gets equivilant level of play out of mid to late round OL talent.
2- The proto typical zone blocking LT's coming out of the draft are not seen as worthy of a 1st or 2nd round pick.
3- Originally I had heard Okung was not fit for a team utilizing zone blocking. Supposedly he had bad lateral movement and was more built for man-to-man blocking. Most recently some of these reports have softened.

Then theres the lets trade back for more picks theory...

1- Someone has to want to trade (unless as someone put it to me...we simply force another team to take the deal. ).
2- We are willing to except taking a player who's figured to go mid to late round zone blocker late in the first round.
3- Possibly willing to take lesser talent QB like JC and hope he can be developed possibly within a year if JC decides to leave.

I'm sure that's the case w/ Indy. New Orleans original starter was hurt (IR?) so while i'm pretty sure he was a 1st rd pick it doesn't really count. Outside of that I think most playoff teams had/have 1st rd LTs.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I could have sworn there was a topic on how none of the most recent playoff/SB teams didn't have a top 1st round LT. and perhaps the same could be said of QB's but it amazes me how much people are playing on the fact that "we have to have a top 1st round LT." Especially with several considerations...

1- Shanahan gets equivilant level of play out of mid to late round OL talent.
2- The proto typical zone blocking LT's coming out of the draft are not seen as worthy of a 1st or 2nd round pick.
3- Originally I had heard Okung was not fit for a team utilizing zone blocking. Supposedly he had bad lateral movement and was more built for man-to-man blocking. Most recently some of these reports have softened.

Then theres the lets trade back for more picks theory...

1- Someone has to want to trade (unless as someone put it to me...we simply force another team to take the deal. ).
2- We are willing to except taking a player who's figured to go mid to late round zone blocker late in the first round.
3- Possibly willing to take lesser talent QB like JC and hope he can be developed possibly within a year if JC decides to leave.

I keep seeing this like Shanahan doesn't need talent on the o-line. Why did he draft Ryan Clady in the first round? That would be pretty stupid for a guy that can get the same level of play from a mid to late rounder wouldn't it?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

I keep seeing this like Shanahan doesn't need talent on the o-line. Why did he draft Ryan Clady in the first round? That would be pretty stupid for a guy that can get the same level of play from a mid to late rounder wouldn't it?

I stayed up and watched the "America's Game" of the 1998 Broncos season, and it was exciting to watch Shanahan coach up a bunch of 6th, 7th and UDFA's on that line as Terrell Davis ran for 2000 yds. I don't think the point is that you want to only have late rounders/UDFA's but more so, that as a coach, MS has shown the ability to get the most out of them. The show made me even more confident that whoever and however Shanahan brings in, he and his staff will get the most out of them, and we won't see a repeat of the 2008-2009 debacles.

I really recommend watching that NFL Channel video if you want to get excited about Shanahan's "upside".

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I stayed up and watched the "America's Game" of the 1998 Broncos season, and it was exciting to watch Shanahan coach up a bunch of 6th, 7th and UDFA's on that line as Terrell Davis ran for 2000 yds. I don't think the point is that you want to only have late rounders/UDFA's but more so, that as a coach, MS has shown the ability to get the most out of them. The show made me even more confident that whoever and however Shanahan brings in, he and his staff will get the most out of them, and we won't see a repeat of the 2008-2009 debacles.

I really recommend watching that NFL Channel video if you want to get excited about Shanahan's "upside".

I have no doubt that Shanahan gets the most out of his o-linemen, I don't see that as an excuse not to draft the best you can get. Apparently he felt the same way when he drafted Clady.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

I have no doubt that Shanahan gets the most out of his o-linemen, I don't see that as an excuse not to draft the best you can get. Apparently he felt the same way when he drafted Clady.

I must be reading something wrong...... you say Shanahan drafted him, yet on Wiki it says he was drafted in 08. Shanahan was fired prior to the 08 draft, or am I incorrect?

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

I keep seeing this like Shanahan doesn't need talent on the o-line. Why did he draft Ryan Clady in the first round? That would be pretty stupid for a guy that can get the same level of play from a mid to late rounder wouldn't it?

Hogs Haven recently posted this graphic:

2010 Pro Bowl - Offensive Line Rosters:
- Of the 15 OL - 9 were 1st rd picks - 5 of those were selected in the first seven picks.
- 5 of the seven Tackles were 1st rd picks (3 being top 4 picks)
- 5 of the 11 qb's (including reserves & alternates) were 1st rd picks.

2009 Pro Bowl - OffensiveLine Rosters:
- of the 16 OL - ten were 1st rd picks
- 6 of the 8 Tackles were 1st rd picks
- 4 of the 7 QB's were 1st rd picks.

History shows that L/T has become the new money position. Eight teams drafted an O/T in the first round last April, as many as five could go in the first round this year, possibly four in the first ten selections.

Quarterbacks may be considered cornerstones of franchises, R/B's provide punch...W/R make flashy plays, but the games guts is still rooted in the O/L. No R/B survives long without holes to run through....No W/R catches a pass if the QB dosen't have time to throw it.

History further shows that the likelyhood of drafting a bust at QB in the 1st round far outweighs that of an O/T.

[MTK]

Shanahan drafted Clady.