Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ahhh Donovan.....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ahhh Donovan.....

    The Juan Castillo of QBs, LOL!

    .
    .
    .
    .


    With Andy Reid loose in his commitment to Michael Vick lately, McNabb — a guest on Daily News Live Thursday — was asked about his benching against Baltimore in 2008 and high-end play upon his return.

    “Well I played pissed off. I played pissed off because I felt like I was the Juan Castillo of the football team,” said McNabb, who led that 2008 team to a 4-1 record down the stretch en route to an NFC Championship appearance. “I felt like I got blamed for a lot of the problems that we were having. You hear rumblings of, ‘Maybe you’ll see a little bit of Kevin Kolb‘ and all of a sudden it happens, and no one has an answer for you when you sit down and talk to them. So I played pretty pissed off.”

    McNabb then searched foe a camera to look into.

    “And if I could send a message for Mike: play pissed off. Because hey, everybody else will begin to understand and see.”

    http://www.phillymag.com/eagles/2012...ay-pissed-off/
    http://shop.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gifOK, let's try this again...

  • #2
    Originally posted by FRESH View Post
    The Juan Castillo of QBs, LOL!

    .
    .
    .
    .


    With Andy Reid loose in his commitment to Michael Vick lately, McNabb — a guest on Daily News Live Thursday — was asked about his benching against Baltimore in 2008 and high-end play upon his return.

    “Well I played pissed off. I played pissed off because I felt like I was the Juan Castillo of the football team,” said McNabb, who led that 2008 team to a 4-1 record down the stretch en route to an NFC Championship appearance. “I felt like I got blamed for a lot of the problems that we were having. You hear rumblings of, ‘Maybe you’ll see a little bit of Kevin Kolb‘ and all of a sudden it happens, and no one has an answer for you when you sit down and talk to them. So I played pretty pissed off.”

    McNabb then searched foe a camera to look into.

    “And if I could send a message for Mike: play pissed off. Because hey, everybody else will begin to understand and see.”

    http://www.phillymag.com/eagles/2012...ay-pissed-off/
    Strangely, I don't think it's that bad of an analogy. The thing is, as much as I love Juan Castillo, I think removing him was the right move. Donovan, on the other hand, got blamed for a LOT of things that were not his fault.

    I don't want to start the gazillionth Donovan McNabb debate, but here's a stat for you. In Donovan McNabb's AVERAGE season he turned the ball over 13 times. Compare that to where Vick is right now through only 6 games!

    Love Donovan or hate Donovan, you have to admit one thing he didn't do was turn the ball over (perhaps to a fault.) (And yes, you can debate that he certainly threw some back-breaking picks in the play-offs.) During the regular season I know I was spoiled by just how infrequently he gave the ball to the other team. Throw in Westbrook who almost NEVER fumbled, and it was quite a decade of QB/RB combination with very few turn-overs.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yeah, I will take some worm-burners over this, any day of the week.
      Don't kid yourself Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd kill you and everyone you cared about!

      Comment


      • #4
        Wait, so by getting benched ... you got pissed off ... and then played better? Sounds like McNabb just completely justified Andy benching him.

        Oh, and I just love hearing McNabb play the victim card. It's so endearing. You know Donnie ... you were basically the last guy let go from the Super Bowl team right? So pretty much everyone else was told, "you're fired!" before you.

        Comment


        • #5
          Akers was the last guy but even he was made a scapegoat for his 2 missed FGs vs the Packers.
          Canada's #1 Eagles fan.

          Comment


          • #6
            This whole discussion just leaves me sad.
            http://shop.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gifOK, let's try this again...

            Comment


            • #7
              I hear you Fresh.

              How long ago it seems now that we lost to the Rams in the NFCCG. I would have bet almost anything back then that we were going to win at least a couple of Super Bowls in McNabb's career. As much as I got tired of McNabb's act, I think we could have stuck him a little longer.

              When the Packers got rid of Favre, they had Rodgers. When the Colts got rid of Manning, they had Luck. What did we have? Kolb which lasted for 1 game and then Vick which looked good at the time but now we are screwed.
              Canada's #1 Eagles fan.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by FRESH View Post
                The Juan Castillo of QBs, LOL!

                .
                .
                .
                .


                With Andy Reid loose in his commitment to Michael Vick lately, McNabb — a guest on Daily News Live Thursday — was asked about his benching against Baltimore in 2008 and high-end play upon his return.

                “Well I played pissed off. I played pissed off because I felt like I was the Juan Castillo of the football team,” said McNabb, who led that 2008 team to a 4-1 record down the stretch en route to an NFC Championship appearance. “I felt like I got blamed for a lot of the problems that we were having. You hear rumblings of, ‘Maybe you’ll see a little bit of Kevin Kolb‘ and all of a sudden it happens, and no one has an answer for you when you sit down and talk to them. So I played pretty pissed off.”

                McNabb then searched foe a camera to look into.

                “And if I could send a message for Mike: play pissed off. Because hey, everybody else will begin to understand and see.”

                http://www.phillymag.com/eagles/2012...ay-pissed-off/
                At least McNabb's 2008 benching wasn't black on black crime.

                BTW, notwithstanding my comment above, I do agree with YourPalChrisMal's last paragraph in post #2 above.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by rspurr View Post
                  I hear you Fresh.

                  How long ago it seems now that we lost to the Rams in the NFCCG. I would have bet almost anything back then that we were going to win at least a couple of Super Bowls in McNabb's career. As much as I got tired of McNabb's act, I think we could have stuck him a little longer.

                  When the Packers got rid of Favre, they had Rodgers. When the Colts got rid of Manning, they had Luck. What did we have? Kolb which lasted for 1 game and then Vick which looked good at the time but now we are screwed.

                  It's more than just Donovan, it's Dawkins, its Jim Johnson, it's....a missed opportunity. We had a strong club and a weak division and multiple opportunities. Good grief.......
                  http://shop.cafepress.com/content/global/img/spacer.gifOK, let's try this again...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by FRESH View Post
                    It's more than just Donovan, it's Dawkins, its Jim Johnson, it's....a missed opportunity. We had a strong club and a weak division and multiple opportunities. Good grief.......
                    We had the best QB other than Farve (and Farve was always hurt) that gave us the huge advantage. Our division was horrid. A monkey could have coached us to a SB. Of course, the weasel killed any chance for us to add the few key players to put us over the hump/
                    "Hey Giants, who's your Daddy?"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by FRESH View Post
                      It's more than just Donovan, it's Dawkins, its Jim Johnson, it's....a missed opportunity. We had a strong club and a weak division and multiple opportunities. Good grief.......
                      The thing that pisses me off about the 2000s Eagles is they were probably the best team in the NFC for the decade as a whole, particularly the first half of the decade, and they only appeared in one Super Bowl. Quite frankly, they should have appeared in at least three Super Bowls (after the 2002, 2004, and 2008 seasons; I know some people disagree about me including 2008 and excluding 2003, but that's an argument for another thread). I'm not sure they win any of those Super Bowls, but 1) you have a much better chance of winning a Super Bowl when you play in three of them than if you play in one of them and 2) I'd still prefer being the early 1990s Buffalo Bills, the late 1980s Denver Broncos, or the 1969-1976 Minnesota Vikings than being the 1970s Los Angeles Rams (the last of which is probably the team most comparable to the 2000s Eagles in the Super Bowl era; they also only appeared in one Super Bowl). Heck, even those 1970s Rams have the semi-legitimate excuse of needing to get through legitimately excellent teams in the Dallas Cowboys (Super Bowl appearances in 1970, 1971, 1975, 1977, and 1978 ) and/or the aforementioned Vikings (Super Bowl appearances in 1969, 1973, 1974, and 1976) just to make the Super Bowl. By contrast, there really wasn't another NFC team at the same level as the 1970s Cowboys or Vikings (or 1970s Rams) that the Eagles had to beat; the Eagles were the only NFC team at that level. I mean, losing NFC title games to the 2003 Carolina Panthers (albeit without their most dangerous and arguably best offensive player in Brian Westbrook), who were a good but not great 11-5 and had one other winning season/playoff season (2005) between 1997 and 2007, and the 2008 Arizona Cardinals, who were 9-7 and had only a two year run (2008 and 2009) when they were fairly good (and even then went no better than 10-6) and were mediocre at best for a number of years both before and after that? That's an absolute joke. Though the 2002 Buccaneers were a much more legitimate team than the 2003 Panthers or 2008 Cardinals, they definitely weren't at the same level as the 1970s Cowboys or Vikings either.

                      It's a fucking bad joke that the 2000s Eagles only made one Super Bowl appearance (and did not win a Super Bowl).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Eagle60 View Post
                        We had the best QB other than Farve (and Farve was always hurt) that gave us the huge advantage. Our division was horrid. A monkey could have coached us to a SB. Of course, the weasel killed any chance for us to add the few key players to put us over the hump/
                        Favre wasn't hurt that bad at any point; he always started every game (remember his consecutive starts streak). Regardless, Favre was an overrated player for pretty much the entire 2000s decade (excluding 2009).

                        On a related side note, most of the very best quarterbacks during the decade were on AFC teams.

                        As for Banner preventing the Eagles from getting to the top, I disagree. IMO, it was the defense oftentimes not playing to its regular season level and the key offensive players either not stepping up or failing to play to their normal level that prevented the Eagles from winning a Super Bowl (or at least appearing in more Super Bowls). Let's also keep in mind that the Eagles under Andy Reid have gradually gotten away from bringing in "character guys" who in some cases were also leaders, relative to the first few years of the Reid era; that IMO is one of their bigger problems now. That move away from bringing in high character guys IMO started when they signed Terrell Owens prior to the 2004 season.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Think about it Chip. Reid coached against an aging Joe Gibbs, Steve Spurrier, and who could forget DAVE CAMPO? How quickly you forget to the answer to our MLB problems was lardass Lavon Kirkland. All the weasel had to do was sign the team leader Trotter and the Lombardi was ours, nevermind never (outside of Owens on the cheap) addresssing wr needs. The refusal to fire the cannon sqaundered a couple of SB shots, and he will be out of Cleveland before you know it too.
                          "Hey Giants, who's your Daddy?"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Jeremiah Trotter was never the same player after he left the Eagles the first time around IMO.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The "we're fine there" approach to WR will piss me off until I die.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X