hypothetical (not buck)

MURP · 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.

T_Section224 · August 24, 2005, 05:08:17 PM

start feeley

PhillyGirl · August 24, 2005, 05:11:45 PM

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.

MadMarchHare · August 24, 2005, 05:34:54 PM

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.

Geowhizzer · August 24, 2005, 07:40:15 PM

I'd say 9-7, Wildcard (maybe still NFC East champs, considering the competition). One and done in the playoffs.

jeffreyjpa · August 24, 2005, 07:48:35 PM

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.

Don Ho · August 24, 2005, 09:49:25 PM

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

Don Ho · August 24, 2005, 09:53:06 PM

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.

QB Eagles · August 24, 2005, 10:33:29 PM

----> See 1991 Eagles.

Sgt PSN · August 24, 2005, 11:01:42 PM

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.

QB Eagles · August 24, 2005, 11:10:02 PM

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.

TexasEagle · August 25, 2005, 01:34:23 AM

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.

Feva · August 25, 2005, 06:39:31 AM

9-7... mayyybe 10-6.

I think we could still take the division, but come the playoffs... we'd be screwed.

ice grillin you · August 25, 2005, 07:57:58 AM

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