briefly describe the eagles season this year without mcnabb...
overall record???
complete implosion?
500?
playoffs??
superbowl??
how would you see it going down
I think we could win maybe 9-10 games with McMahon in there. But only because the rest of the NFC sucks really bad.
Based on our schedule (and the general suck of the competition within the division) I think we'd still win the East. 10-6 doesn't seem like too much of a stretch. Playoffs, on the other hand, one and done.
who knows, depends on how well McMahon would play with the starters. obviously.
Reid is great coach and there are enough studs on the team to take em into the playoffs I think.
I'm not so sure about the playoffs being one and done, because the NFC still sucks. A lot. No chance of winning the SB if we got there though.
Hypthetically, Buckhalter would shoulder the workload at QB, throwing long bombs to Westy and himself, only when he wasn't busting off 90 yard "big plays".
I'm not so sure about the playoffs being one and done, because the NFC still sucks. A lot. No chance of winning the SB if we got there though.
so the only real difference btwn mcnabb and mcmahon is in having a chance to win the superbowl
15-1. Super Bowl win.
This team would be better without McNabb. Get Ricky Williams!
But seriously, I think we'd be looking at 9-7 or so. Either miss the playoffs or be a non-factor.
Quote from: ice grillin you on August 24, 2005, 04:36:06 PM
I'm not so sure about the playoffs being one and done, because the NFC still sucks. A lot. No chance of winning the SB if we got there though.
so the only real difference btwn mcnabb and mcmahon is in having a chance to win the superbowl
No. If McMahon was the starter the entire time, and Westbrook, or Owens, or LJ went down or were doing bad it would be
brutal. McNabb can carry the team on his shoulders.
i dont know im looking at more like 6-10...7-9
mcnabb>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>mcmahon
and thats just their talent level...not counting leadership knowing the offense ect....
Quote from: ice grillin you on August 24, 2005, 04:40:46 PM
i dont know im looking at more like 6-10...7-9
mcnabb>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>mcmahon
and thats just their talent level...not counting leadership knowing the offense ect....
I don't think anyone's going to disagree, but I think our defense and leadership would carry us further than 7-9. But with something like that, who knows.
Nobody knows McMahon's true potential. He's never played with such a talented group.
The results would be variable...We could go 14-2 and lose the first game or back-door our way in and run the table. McMahon is much more daring w/ his passes than McNabb; taking those type of risks can lead you to DelHomme-ville or AJ-ville.
I think the difference would be in the size of the victories. With McNabb the Eagles can get a handful of blowouts while with McMahon those same games would be quite close. I do think that with Reid and this defense they could obtain a winning record and possibly make the playoffs. I dont think they would go very far in the playoffs though. It wouldnt be the first time a very good team with a so-so QB did something in the postseason.
Without McNabb this year would be a lot different than being without McNabb 2 years ago. Love him or hate him, but TO would make Detmer, McMahon or even Bobby effin Hoying look good. The defense would still keep the Eagles in every game and if the QB (regardless of who it is) can play "Trent Dilfer" like football and limit his mistakes while making one or two big plays a game, then the Eagles would be fine. I'd say they could still win 10, possibly even 11 games w/o McNabb.
if McNabb went down early -I'd think another vet QB would be brought in
8-8 at best with McMahon
Quote from: BobbyT on August 24, 2005, 04:52:37 PM
if McNabb went down early -I'd think another vet QB would be brought in
I bet your thinking AJ... arnt ya? just say it.
start feeley
Quote from: MURP on August 24, 2005, 04:55:17 PM
Quote from: BobbyT on August 24, 2005, 04:52:37 PM
if McNabb went down early -I'd think another vet QB would be brought in
I bet your thinking AJ... arnt ya? just say it.
Nah, he was thinking Bobby Taylor...best CB in the game.
No, I'm not saying they'd be a lock for the SB without McNabb. Just that they wouldn't be a lock for a quick playoff exit. With the defense as stout as it is, they should be able to pull out close games within a subpar NFC - I'd say McMahon is better than AJ, and he managed 5 wins in this same scenario.
I'd say 9-7, Wildcard (maybe still NFC East champs, considering the competition). One and done in the playoffs.
I think they'd win the East with 9 or 10 wins because of the D, but because they have no ball control running game (like Dilfer had), they wouldn't get far in the playoffs. Maybe win a first round game against a wild card team (if it was in Philly), and that's about it.
McMahon's performance has been uneven so far in preseason, so I'm not really sold on him yet...I re-watched some of the Ravens game last night, and thought Jaws related a good observation from (I think) Mohringweg, in saying that McMahon "Plays the game at too high a speed at times." He needs to calm down a bit and relax, let it come to him, all the cliches. He has a bit of a "chicken with his head cut off" look about him so far, from what I've seen. He shows flashes, but makes me nervous that he's going to make a hasty mistake at any moment.
Koy sucks.
Quote from: MURP on August 24, 2005, 04:55:17 PM
Quote from: BobbyT on August 24, 2005, 04:52:37 PM
if McNabb went down early -I'd think another vet QB would be brought in
I bet your thinking AJ... arnt ya? just say it.
Casey Weldon
Quote from: Dillen37 on August 24, 2005, 04:37:59 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on August 24, 2005, 04:36:06 PM
I'm not so sure about the playoffs being one and done, because the NFC still sucks. A lot. No chance of winning the SB if we got there though.
so the only real difference btwn mcnabb and mcmahon is in having a chance to win the superbowl
No. If McMahon was the starter the entire time, and Westbrook, or Owens, or LJ went down or were doing bad it would be brutal. McNabb can carry the team on his shoulders.
That's the diference. McNabb could carry this team if another key offensive weapon went down. Detmer, McMahon could get us to 10/11 wins. As stated by Murp, there have been a lot less talented QB's that have not only lead their team to the Super Bowl but won it.
----> See 1991 Eagles.
Quote from: QB Eagles on August 24, 2005, 10:33:29 PM
----> See 1991 Eagles.
That is a valid point. They won 10 games without Randall but still missed the playoffs that year I beleive. But at the same time though, the NFC, especially the East, was much more balanced and competitive back then. Hell, the NFC East was sending 3 out of 5 teams to the playoffs around that time which just goes to show how strong the division was back then. 10 wins is almost a gauranteed playoff birth in the NFC today and division champ in at least 2 of the 4 divisions.
I think it evens out somewhat because, as good as our D will likely be this year, I doubt they will be as dominant as the great 1991 squad. On the offensive side of things, we have more non-QB weapons than in 1991, but from what I've seen so far I think our backup QBs are worse.
I think it'd depend more on the play of the D than the play of McMahon. I can see the D getting a lot of turnovers and short fields this year making the offensive workload much easier to bare.
9-7... mayyybe 10-6.
I think we could still take the division, but come the playoffs... we'd be screwed.
I think it evens out somewhat because, as good as our D will likely be this year, I doubt they will be as dominant as the great 1991 squad. On the offensive side of things, we have more non-QB weapons than in 1991, but from what I've seen so far I think our backup QBs are worse
the current D is not even in the same league as the 91 squad....furthermore mcnabb is far superior to randall...losing donovan would be a much bigger hit...randall made big spectacular plays but he would also lose games for you...donovan goes out and wins games...and because of that the crrent team would be hurt more
good point about more weapons now though
funny that both teams back-up qb share a name...actually now that i think about it that kinda scares me :paranoid