Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Donovan McNabb Will Always Love You!!!
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
Curious as to others opinions on this. I'll reply later on:

http://www.975thefanatic.com/teams/eagles/...harry-and-baldy
JaxEagle
http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/700-level/mc...say-no%E2%80%99

I recognize Donovan's weaknesses and his strengths. I am realistic on D Mac. For the most part, I am glad he was our QB and smile upon his tenure as Eagles QB. That said, he has got to understand that even if this is his honest and professional opinion that he is alienating a ton of fans by answering this way. He could have simply answered and said that Foles needs to play a little longer for us to know. That would have been a safe non answer even if his real professional opinion is what he states it was.

STFU Don, you pissed me off. We don't need to hear what you think of NASCAR drivers until you get behind the wheel and we certainly don't need to hear your criticism of Eagles QB's. Sounds too much like you have an axe to grind with the fans. Dammit bro, we supported you a long time.
nephillymike
I agree Jax. He could have said we need to wait a year longer, or he could have asked the interviewer to define the QB's he thinks are "franchise" and judge Foles within that group. His detail of criticism was inaccurate. The things he criticizes Foles for, he does well, and vice versa. He insinuates that because Foles won't repeat what he did last year, he is not a franchise QB. OH, you need to have a top three all-time QB rating to be a franchise QB? Really Donovan?

News Flash for Five and everyone else. Foles will not have near the 27-2 ratio of TD-INT he had last year. Get over it. Trying to say he has to do that again to prove he is good is unrealistic.

How soon he forgets. "The NFC East was never this weak".

2004 NFC East
Us 13-3
DAL 6-10
WAS 6-10
NYG 6-10

Looks weak to me but that couldn't be the case because Donovan always had it tougher, always faced better competition, always was an elite QB etc.

In HIS eyes.

What is behind most of McNabb's commentary, whether it about Foles, new contracts for other QB's, criticisms about other QB's etc, is that Foles is not good enough, nor are the other QB's getting contracts etc because he feels praising those guys diminishes his accomplishments. Praising T.O. diminished himself in DMac's eyes. Giving credit to anyone's leadership skills made him look like a lesser leader. He is all about preserving his version of just how good he was.

To me, it's so transparent. It's a shame. He was one of my favorite Eagles but he makes it sooo difficult to like the guy. From now on, every time you hear him talk about football, pay attention to how he speaks with the purpose of keeping his accomplishments relevant by not praising others.

You can really see his insecurities shining through.
JeeQ
So he said everything every other sports analyst outside of Philadelphia has been saying about Nick Foles...

Oh wait... McNabb said it so fuck that guy! I can't believe that son of a bitch had the nerve to give his opinion even though that's what he's paid to do! The only thing I want to hear from McNabb is that Nick Foles is God and the Eagles are the greatest team ever to play the game of football!
koolaidluke
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Sep 2 2014, 11:41 PM) *
So he said everything every other sports analyst outside of Philadelphia has been saying about Nick Foles...


No he did not. He said, in so many words, that Foles isn't anything special.


And he is right.




what's weird is that Foles essentially is Donovan McNabb except with less arm strength and more accuracy. Both are big play guys who put up great numbers that don't match the eye test. Both never throw picks but struggle to sustain drives. Both hold the ball forever and take a ton of sacks. Both have unusual personalities for QB's.
Zero
DMac's main problem is that his mouth and his brain are connected.
Phits
It appears that (some) Eagles fans are incredibly thin skinned. Foles had a great season, that doesn't mean he is a great QB. This season will determine whether he will be one of the upper echelon QB's or just a statistical anomaly. That being said, he is still the best QB in the division....which McNabb stated. He also put Foles in the 25-28 TD range and 10 INT, which is right about where most people feel he will be. He also said Mark Sanchez looked better in the pre-season that Foles, which is spot on.

Overall, his analysis was on point.
HOUSEoPAIN
Jesus Tapdancing Christ. The guy can't open his mouth without the haters swarming all over him. A summary of what he said:

-After 1 season, we can't call Foles a franchise QB yet
-In the NFC East, the QB rankings should go Foles, RGIII, Romo, Eli
-This could be it for Eli in NY
-Sanchez looks to be a reliable backup should Foles go down
-The refs threw too many flags

OMG!!11!!1!1!

Oh, and this:

QUOTE
How soon he forgets. "The NFC East was never this weak".

2004 NFC East
Us 13-3
DAL 6-10
WAS 6-10
NYG 6-10


Uh, yeah. We cruised to the Super Bowl, and were clearly the best team in the NFC going into that year. Hence, the NFC East of 2004 wasn't as weak as this year, where the division winner will likely go 9-7 and it is obviously the worst division in football.

Does he put his foot in his mouth sometimes? Yes. Is he cheering for us to bring home a Lombardi trophy? Doubtful, if I put up borderline hall of fame numbers and had to listen to Delta-males like KAL and DRock call into radio shows and talk about how I was a borderline draft bust, I'd be a little bitter too.

If that was Didinger saying the exact same things, nobody would bat an eye. Wipe the foam from your mouths and wait until he actually says something objectionable.
mcnabbulous
I had no problem with his comments.
JaxEagle
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Sep 2 2014, 11:41 PM) *
So he said everything every other sports analyst outside of Philadelphia has been saying about Nick Foles...

Oh wait... McNabb said it so fuck that guy! I can't believe that son of a bitch had the nerve to give his opinion even though that's what he's paid to do! The only thing I want to hear from McNabb is that Nick Foles is God and the Eagles are the greatest team ever to play the game of football!

wrong
D Rock
Every time that asshat opens his mouth, he reminds us ALL why we're glad he's gone. Just go away McNabb. I'm sick of hearing your nasally congested voice. Just. Go. Away.
Birdman420
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 3 2014, 11:48 AM) *
I had no problem with his comments.

HobbEs
After yesterday maybe #5 isn't completely off base after all.
koolaidluke
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Sep 8 2014, 09:16 AM) *
After yesterday maybe #5 isn't completely off base after all.


Foles didn't look any different yesterday than he did last season. He makes slow reads and can't sustain drives but also makes big plays. He is a 10-15 QB and is not anything special and never will be.

What Donovan said was completely true.
Wheeljack
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 3 2014, 10:50 AM) *
Jesus Tapdancing Christ. The guy can't open his mouth without the haters swarming all over him. A summary of what he said:

-After 1 season, we can't call Foles a franchise QB yet
-In the NFC East, the QB rankings should go Foles, RGIII, Romo, Eli
-This could be it for Eli in NY
-Sanchez looks to be a reliable backup should Foles go down
-The refs threw too many flags

Does he put his foot in his mouth sometimes? Yes. Is he cheering for us to bring home a Lombardi trophy? Doubtful, if I put up borderline hall of fame numbers and had to listen to Delta-males like KAL and DRock call into radio shows and talk about how I was a borderline draft bust, I'd be a little bitter too.

If that was Didinger saying the exact same things, nobody would bat an eye. Wipe the foam from your mouths and wait until he actually says something objectionable.



Bingo.
Foles is going to be "insulated" from criticism for the following reasons:

- he's a "pocket passer", not a "runner" (and more importantly, not McNabb, or Vick, polarizing figures they are...)
- the 2013 season stats

but nothing McNabb said was wrong.

Eli Manning is, and always has, sucked. Super Bowls not withstanding. A lucky catch and some lucky turnovers got him some lucky rings. When he's not in the playoffs, he's putting up Vinny Testaverde numbers (particularly in the Interception column). His suckitude has reached levels that not even the most "OMG MANNING CLUTCH" slurpers deny. Even GIANTS fans are saying he sucks now. Nassib would be starting if Eli didn't have the aforementioned Super Bowls and his famous last name right today. Last season was worse than anything Tony Romo ever produced as a Cowboy.

Marc Sanchez will be a solid backup if Foles goes down. Nothing spectacular. But since this is Philadelphia, should this happen, they'll start talking about him the same way they did AJ Feely years ago.

Foles is just a "guy" in the NFL. Not in the same tier as Wilson, Kaepernick, Luck among the "newer" QBs. More like a journeyman who will find a home with the Eagles for several years because they'll be good enough not to be able to pick an elite talent for sometime. A good number of Eagles fans will say otherwise for the reasons listed above, but over time it will become more apparent.

But because Donovan McNabb said it, and some Eagles fans have a push pin stuck in their buttcheeks whenever he speaks....
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Wheeljack @ Sep 8 2014, 08:33 AM) *
Foles is just a "guy" in the NFL. Not in the same tier as Wilson, Kaepernick, Luck among the "newer" QBs. More like a journeyman who will find a home with the Eagles for several years because they'll be good enough not to be able to pick an elite talent for sometime. A good number of Eagles fans will say otherwise for the reasons listed above, but over time it will become more apparent.

But because Donovan McNabb said it, and some Eagles fans have a push pin stuck in their buttcheeks whenever he speaks....



Ok...here is where you lose me.....saying Foles is just a guy is just plain idiotic, I am sorry. He had a terrible game and still threw for 322 yds and 2 TDs. Did you happen to see Brady's 2nd half yesterday? Every bit as bad as Foles' first half if not worse and he lost. It can happen to the best. The fact that Foles was able to get it together and play a better 2nd half speaks volumes. It is not like Brady was playing a monster team either. I don't get what the guy needs to do. He has started 17 games and is 9-2 in his last 11. That is not just a guy. He averaged nearly 270 yds per game and 2 tds.....Take out his only bad game against Dallas and it goes even higher.....again...not just a guy....What he needs is more time with his 2 WTs who missed preseason games.....

I guess it is the fact that the guy is not a bigmouth or flashy or a quote machine that makes him just a guy....just a guy who is pretty damn good and that is coming from a guy who never liked him or the pick.....but you cant argue with the facts....
nephillymike
He was bad in the first half yesterday. The guys in the press who were there said there were guys open all over the place and Foles didn't see them. They said Maclin was open behind CB's at last three other times prior to the TD.

Last year vs. Dallas all over again, but the difference this time was that he didn't get concussed and was healthy enough to play in the 2nd half and recover to make it an average day.

His half yesterday and the Dallas game was about the worst QB play I have seen but the rest of his career is record setting efficiency.

Give him credit for hanging in there and coming back.

Hopefully he'll rebound like he did last year.

I think the toughest thing about yesterday was the two lost fumbles. If he just took dumb sacks and not the fumbles, then at least his struggles wouldn't have been so costly. IMO, Chip, realizing Foles' struggles should have definitely ran the ball on first and second down from the five. A combination of the above, would have given the Eagles a 7-3 lead at half as opposed to the dismal 17-0 deficit we had.
Phits
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Sep 8 2014, 09:21 PM) *
I think the toughest thing about yesterday was the two lost fumbles. If he just took dumb sacks and not the fumbles, then at least his struggles wouldn't have been so costly. IMO, Chip, realizing Foles' struggles should have definitely ran the ball on first and second down from the five. A combination of the above, would have given the Eagles a 7-3 lead at half as opposed to the dismal 17-0 deficit we had.

You'll have to explain how we could have had a lead at the half? Foles fumbled on our 6th play on our first drive (3 pass plays, 3 running plays). 4 plays later JAX had their first score. Next possession, 3 (consecutive) running plays, a holding penalty and then the fumble....2 plays later JAX has their 2nd TD (JAX 14-PHI 0).
HobbEs
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Sep 8 2014, 09:21 PM) *
I think the toughest thing about yesterday was the two lost fumbles. If he just took dumb sacks and not the fumbles, then at least his struggles wouldn't have been so costly. IMO, Chip, realizing Foles' struggles should have definitely ran the ball on first and second down from the five. A combination of the above, would have given the Eagles a 7-3 lead at half as opposed to the dismal 17-0 deficit we had.


The two fumbles were bad but the blame for those should be on Jason Peters. He got beat badly on both of those plays and it was his man that caused them.
Phits
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Sep 9 2014, 09:20 AM) *
The two fumbles were bad but the blame for those should be on Jason Peters. He got beat badly on both of those plays and it was his man that caused them.

Foles held the ball for an eternity. The fumbles were his fault.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 9 2014, 07:09 AM) *
You'll have to explain how we could have had a lead at the half? Foles fumbled on our 6th play on our first drive (3 pass plays, 3 running plays). 4 plays later JAX had their first score. Next possession, 3 (consecutive) running plays, a holding penalty and then the fumble....2 plays later JAX has their 2nd TD (JAX 14-PHI 0).

I am saying that if he just takes the sacks and doesn't fumble, they don't score either of those TD's. If we run the ball from the five, I believe we score a TD instead of the Interception. That is how we get to a 7-3 lead at halftime.
Phits
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Sep 9 2014, 08:29 PM) *
I am saying that if he just takes the sacks and doesn't fumble, they don't score either of those TD's. If we run the ball from the five, I believe we score a TD instead of the Interception. That is how we get to a 7-3 lead at halftime.

Ahhh....now I see. My apologies.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Sep 8 2014, 08:21 PM) *
He was bad in the first half yesterday. The guys in the press who were there said there were guys open all over the place and Foles didn't see them. They said Maclin was open behind CB's at last three other times prior to the TD.

Last year vs. Dallas all over again, but the difference this time was that he didn't get concussed and was healthy enough to play in the 2nd half and recover to make it an average day.

His half yesterday and the Dallas game was about the worst QB play I have seen but the rest of his career is record setting efficiency.

Give him credit for hanging in there and coming back.

Hopefully he'll rebound like he did last year.

I think the toughest thing about yesterday was the two lost fumbles. If he just took dumb sacks and not the fumbles, then at least his struggles wouldn't have been so costly. IMO, Chip, realizing Foles' struggles should have definitely ran the ball on first and second down from the five. A combination of the above, would have given the Eagles a 7-3 lead at half as opposed to the dismal 17-0 deficit we had.


There is no debate he was bad in the first half....just like there is no debate that Brady was worse in the 2nd half against Miami on a game NE lost....

Now when you go to the extremes of saying it was the worst Qb play you have seen I have to ask if you are serious....McNabb had clunkers....does Kevin Kolb ring a bell? especially post Philly....there has been plenty of horrendous QB play over the years....and They won a game he threw fo over 300 yds and 2 TDs....

Noy horrible considering he had a bad day....
Zero
From Jaws via 24-7:
QUOTE
“I felt that one of the great traits last year of Chip Kelly was getting Number One open. In other words, when you call a play, you design to get the ball to Zach Ertz and he pops open. If you’re designing a play to get the ball to Jeremy Maclin, he pops open. And he was really, really good at that," Jaworski said during an appearance on 97.5 The Fanatic. "I thought for the most part [on Sunday], especially in the first half, Jacksonville kind of knew what they were doing. They were taking away where Nick wanted to go with the football. And he wasn’t getting the ball out of his hand quick enough when Number One wasn’t open. That was the big difference in Week 1 to me.”


Josey affect? Possible Chip was telling it true when he added his name to the poor-first-half-performance list. Maybe he was at the top of the list.
Wheeljack
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Sep 8 2014, 08:19 PM) *
Ok...here is where you lose me.....saying Foles is just a guy is just plain idiotic, I am sorry. He had a terrible game and still threw for 322 yds and 2 TDs. Did you happen to see Brady's 2nd half yesterday? Every bit as bad as Foles' first half if not worse and he lost. It can happen to the best. The fact that Foles was able to get it together and play a better 2nd half speaks volumes. It is not like Brady was playing a monster team either. I don't get what the guy needs to do. He has started 17 games and is 9-2 in his last 11. That is not just a guy. He averaged nearly 270 yds per game and 2 tds.....Take out his only bad game against Dallas and it goes even higher.....again...not just a guy....What he needs is more time with his 2 WTs who missed preseason games.....

I guess it is the fact that the guy is not a bigmouth or flashy or a quote machine that makes him just a guy....just a guy who is pretty damn good and that is coming from a guy who never liked him or the pick.....but you cant argue with the facts....


Dallas and the 1st half of this game aren't his only stinkers. (Actually, he wasn't too great during the 2nd half numbers aside, it's just Jacksonville's defense broke down long enough for his passes to reach the ball).

Snow Bowl, the playoff game against the Aints last year, and still has yet to beat a playoff team in all the time he has started (he will have his chance at least 3x this regular season, starting next week).

Nick Foles doesn't have to do anything to justify his starting position right today; when I say he's just a "guy" I'm saying that he's NFL starter average (i.e. "just a guy"). He's not going to do anything -special- to beat a team.

I think it's more of an achievement of Chip Kelly that not only he can minimize his issues but maximize what he does well. On another team I think Foles would be somewhere below Matt Schaub (not last year's Schaub) on the totem pole.

Reality Fan
QUOTE (Wheeljack @ Sep 10 2014, 12:11 PM) *
Dallas and the 1st half of this game aren't his only stinkers. (Actually, he wasn't too great during the 2nd half numbers aside, it's just Jacksonville's defense broke down long enough for his passes to reach the ball).

Snow Bowl, the playoff game against the Aints last year, and still has yet to beat a playoff team in all the time he has started (he will have his chance at least 3x this regular season, starting next week).

Nick Foles doesn't have to do anything to justify his starting position right today; when I say he's just a "guy" I'm saying that he's NFL starter average (i.e. "just a guy"). He's not going to do anything -special- to beat a team.

I think it's more of an achievement of Chip Kelly that not only he can minimize his issues but maximize what he does well. On another team I think Foles would be somewhere below Matt Schaub (not last year's Schaub) on the totem pole.


His 2nd half was not epic but it was not horrible. He didn't throw for 322 yards by accident.

And you say in all the times he has started? Really? You realize Sunday was the first time he was the opening day starter and it is the beginning of his 3rd year? It was his 17th start and the first 6 were on a 4-12 team that mailed it in while decimated with injuries.

He has thrown for over 250 yards in half of his starts....like I said, I was never a fan of this guy but he is far batter than just a guy....and he is just getting started. He has a terrific arm and he rebounds well...I would not want to be in the Indy secondary...
koolaidluke
What does Josey have to do with anything?


That's a really interesting viewpoint by Jaws. I never thought of it that way but you could really see on Sunday how aggressive the Jags were about shutting down the first option of every play. Those runs and screens were getting stuffed outside of one big Sproles run.
nephillymike
I saw some game film today on Philly Sports Talk on comcast that said that even though Foles was bad in the first half and had plenty of guys open on vertical routes, that that look is a different look than they would be in man coverage. From a QB's perspective, Foles had DB's and LB's dropping back all the time and all the WR's and TE's were going vertical, which creates different lanes and makes it appear as they're running right into the coverage. They said Chip could have helped his struggling QB by calling some comebacks and button hooks that were wide open the entire half, but instead of HR's they would have hit the 5-10 yard hooks that may have built confidence in a shaky start.

Seemed to make sense. Not exonerating Foles from blame, but it may have helped him snap out of his funk earlier.

They said Indy is a pure man to man defense.
koolaidluke
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Sep 12 2014, 10:15 PM) *
They said Indy is a pure man to man defense.


Who said this? Indy was in zone virtually the entire second half against the Broncos.


I'll tell you this much, if Indy tries to play the Eagles the way Jax did then Foles is going to drop 35 on them.
nephillymike
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Sep 12 2014, 11:25 PM) *
Who said this? Indy was in zone virtually the entire second half against the Broncos.


I'll tell you this much, if Indy tries to play the Eagles the way Jax did then Foles is going to drop 35 on them.


Jeff Mosher and Ike Reese on PST yesterday.
koolaidluke
Those guys know their football and indeed the Colts are *usually* a mainly (not exclusively) man team but they essentially played nothing but zone in the 2nd half against the Broncos.

My prediction: the Colts inability to cover tight ends and Foles struggles against the Jags (and Vikings, and Cowboys, and Saints...) zone means the Colts will go with a zone heavy plan. It will fail miserably and teams will go man heavy against the Eagles from here on out.
nephillymike
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Sep 13 2014, 10:17 AM) *
Those guys know their football and indeed the Colts are *usually* a mainly (not exclusively) man team but they essentially played nothing but zone in the 2nd half against the Broncos.

My prediction: the Colts inability to cover tight ends and Foles struggles against the Jags (and Vikings, and Cowboys, and Saints...) zone means the Colts will go with a zone heavy plan. It will fail miserably and teams will go man heavy against the Eagles from here on out.


As they were saying it on the show I was thinking why not just go to zone? Ike answered the question saying that is they do that, then the Eagles have already won a battle in that they're forcing Indy to do something they normally don't do. I was thinking because we don't play well vs zone we won a battle? That was a little convoluted IMO.
koolaidluke
I have to agree. If the Colts decide to go zone heavy, they will be doing it to take advantage of the perceived weakness of Foles against zone coverage, not because they can't play man.

It is important to emphasize that any Eagles struggles against zone coverage are the fault of Nick Foles, not the offensive system. The "Chip Kelly Offense" opens up huge holes in zone coverage (as demonstrated by Michael Vick in the first two weeks of last season). The problem is that Foles doesn't have the short throw time of zone killers like Manning or Brady or the strong arm of other zone killers like Vick or McNabb.

If you don't have a strong arm, you need to get rid of the ball quickly to beat zone. This is where Foles indecisiveness kills him.

Mark Sanchez on the other hand, would have dropped 28 points on the Jags in the first half alone had he played last week.



Foles is still the better option, but until he can force teams to play man he is going to struggle.
nephillymike
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Sep 13 2014, 02:38 PM) *
I have to agree. If the Colts decide to go zone heavy, they will be doing it to take advantage of the perceived weakness of Foles against zone coverage, not because they can't play man.

It is important to emphasize that any Eagles struggles against zone coverage are the fault of Nick Foles, not the offensive system. The "Chip Kelly Offense" opens up huge holes in zone coverage (as demonstrated by Michael Vick in the first two weeks of last season). The problem is that Foles doesn't have the short throw time of zone killers like Manning or Brady or the strong arm of other zone killers like Vick or McNabb.

If you don't have a strong arm, you need to get rid of the ball quickly to beat zone. This is where Foles indecisiveness kills him.

Mark Sanchez on the other hand, would have dropped 28 points on the Jags in the first half alone had he played last week.



Foles is still the better option, but until he can force teams to play man he is going to struggle.

Foles missed open seam routes that would have killed Jax for sure no doubt. But I think if you saw the game film they showed on the PST, you would have seen how button hooks would have been a slow death of what Jax was doing. Foles self critique pointed to how him not stepping up into the clean pocket prevented him from the time and vision to hit those HR's
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.