Thread: Donovan McNabb to Minnesota Vikings?It makes sense

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093278

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1093187

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093170

o.
Another counter discussion point is......

What happens if we keep Rice and Sully can handle the Ol duties? Then we are back to the team, that in 2008 and 2009, could have carried a youngster that wasn't asked to do to much (ala a Sanchez at the Jets).

Are you proposing that we could have duplicated what success we had in 09 with TJ at the helm?

No, even though I have said that, for this discussion my point is that if we put the 2009 team back on the field in 2011, with a QB like Locker, Stanzi, Newton, GAbbert, we would get back to the playoffs.

Case in point, for this discussion was the Jets and Sanchez. He threw one heck of a bunch of INT's that year and the team still got as far as the Vikes did.

Again, focus is on 2011. Nothing else matters right now no matter what the Noodle crowd tries to spin it as. :P

Yes, but the whole point of the 2009 season, was that we were so close as a team, we just needed a good QB to come in and take us all the way, and we were a few mistakes from doing just that. You may be satisfied with repeating 2008, I"m not.

The Jets had the #1 run game, the #1 pass defense, and a top 5 overall defense. They threw alot of picks, but also made alot of plays through the air as well. in 2008 we didn't throw a ton of picks, but we didn't make alot of plays either. They were by far the better team.

[quote="i_bleed_purple" #1093285][quote="Marrdro" #1093278]

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1093187

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093170

o.
Another counter discussion point is......

What happens if we keep Rice and Sully can handle the Ol duties? Then we are back to the team, that in 2008 and 2009, could have carried a youngster that wasn't asked to do to much (ala a Sanchez at the Jets).

They were by far the better team.

What? I think you better revisit who was the better team. Both, on paper, look about the same.

Yes, but the whole point of the 2009 season, was that we were so close as a team, we just needed a good QB to come in and take us all the way, and we were a few mistakes from doing just that. You may be satisfied with repeating 2008, I"m not.

How did we get back to 2008? The difference between the 2008 team and the 2009 team was alot more than just a QB.

New C, New RT, New WR (2 if you count Rice finally being healthy), Lots of changes on the defensive side of the ball.

The Jets had the #1 run game, the #1 pass defense, and a top 5 overall defense. They threw alot of picks, but also made alot of plays through the air as well. in 2008 we didn't throw a ton of picks, but we didn't make alot of plays either.

By the way, the Jets were 1 in total defense, we were 6th. This year they were third and we were 8th (and that was without any help from the front 4).

And they didn't make alot of "Big Plays through the air. In 2009 the stats say yards avg per attempt - Vikes 7th 8.1 yds, Jets, 17th, 6.6 yds.

In 2008 we were 15th with 7.1 the Jets were the same with 6.6 even though they changed QB's.

[quote="Marrdro" #1093288][quote="i_bleed_purple" #1093285]

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093278

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1093187

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093170

o.
Another counter discussion point is......

What happens if we keep Rice and Sully can handle the Ol duties? Then we are back to the team, that in 2008 and 2009, could have carried a youngster that wasn't asked to do to much (ala a Sanchez at the Jets).

They were by far the better team.

What? I think you better revisit who was the better team. Both, on paper, look about the same.

Yes, but the whole point of the 2009 season, was that we were so close as a team, we just needed a good QB to come in and take us all the way, and we were a few mistakes from doing just that. You may be satisfied with repeating 2008, I"m not.

How did we get back to 2008? The difference between the 2008 team and the 2009 team was alot more than just a QB.

New C, New RT, New WR (2 if you count Rice finally being healthy), Lots of changes on the defensive side of the ball.

The Jets had the #1 run game, the #1 pass defense, and a top 5 overall defense. They threw alot of picks, but also made alot of plays through the air as well. in 2008 we didn't throw a ton of picks, but we didn't make alot of plays either.

By the way, the Jets were 1 in total defense, we were 6th. This year they were third and we were 8th (and that was without any help from the front 4).

And they didn't make alot of "Big Plays through the air. In 2009 the stats say yards avg per attempt - Vikes 7th 8.1 yds, Jets, 17th, 6.6 yds.

In 2008 we were 15th with 7.1 the Jets were the same with 6.6 even though they changed QB's.

marr,
I just don't understand your argument. Why not have the best QB posible lead us into the playoffs. Who cares if the team can carry a rookie Qb? Why would you want that vs. a Qb that can carry his own weight? Draft a Qb and get a vet. Once the rookie is able to play to the level expected of a starting QB....insert him in.

Originally Posted by "Mr Anderson" #1093189

I'd rather drink my own vomit than have Donovan McNabb as our QB.

34 years old. Not that old for a Qb, same age as Peyton,only a year older than Brady. Could play 5 years easy.
Injury prone. Not really missed 2 games the last 3 season.
He's been a turnover machine for the past 3 seasons. Not really 36int, 9fmbles. Peyton Manning(46) and Drew Brees(59) have more.
Benched for Rex Grossman. at the end of the year, when Shanahan decided he was going a different direction
Throws as many bad balls as any QB I've ever seen. Still completes 60% consistantly.
Product of Andy Reid's system. Which is the same system we run.
Another band-aid on the QB position. We need a band-aid, along with a long term solution.
Was never really that great. His numbers were excellent the season he had TO, every other year he was good at best. His career numbers are pretty good, 85.7rating for his career.
When he was able to make plays on the move and was a threat to run, he was dangerous. Now that he has to throw from the pocket and can't evade the pass rush like he used to? He's done. I think most want a pocket passer, he can still move in the pocket.

I'd much, much rather give Webb a chance.Not me. If Webb can beat out good competition fine, but don't just give him a shot because he's the only one on the roster

Originally Posted by "jmcdon00" #1093319

Originally Posted by "Mr Anderson" #1093189

I'd rather drink my own vomit than have Donovan McNabb as our QB.

34 years old. Not that old for a Qb, same age as Peyton,only a year older than Brady. Could play 5 years easy.
Injury prone. Not really missed 2 games the last 3 season.
- He's played 5 full seasons in his career(including games where I assume he was rested[15 games in '04 I counted as a full season, Super Bowl year]) Even when he's not missing games, he's constantly banged up, he was on the injury report for 12 weeks last season. He's torn an ACL and Meniscus, broken ribs, had a sports hernia, broken his ankle, hurt his thumb... play til 39? I don't see it happening, especially not "easily."
He's been a turnover machine for the past 3 seasons. Not really 36int, 9fmbles. Peyton Manning(46) and Drew Brees(59) have more. - Manning, Brees, have individually almost COMPLETED as many passes as he's attempted over the past 3 years. They've thrown the ball significantly more than McNabb has.
Benched for Rex Grossman. at the end of the year, when Shanahan decided he was going a different direction
- Maybe, but he was also benched at the end of a close game in the middle of the season(Detroit, I think.)
Throws as many bad balls as any QB I've ever seen. Still completes 60% consistantly.
- He should complete a lot more. His completion percentage doesn't vary with his receivers. He's the same QB he was in 2000, minus most of the athleticism. His inconsistency as a passer is all that is consistent.
Product of Andy Reid's system. Which is the same system we run.
- Not anymore.
Another band-aid on the QB position. We need a band-aid, along with a long term solution.
- That's fair. I should have said "A Band-Aid that will actually stop the bleeding." If we think Favre looked bad last season, it's hard to imagine how bad McNabb will look on this team.
Was never really that great. His numbers were excellent the season he had TO, every other year he was good at best. His career numbers are pretty good, 85.7rating for his career.
- That is pretty good, but it doesn't change the fact that he's an injury plagued, inconsistent product of a system we don't run, who's career is clearly going downhill.
When he was able to make plays on the move and was a threat to run, he was dangerous. Now that he has to throw from the pocket and can't evade the pass rush like he used to? He's done. I think most want a pocket passer, he can still move in the pocket.
- Sacked 37 times last season. Favre was "only" sacked 22, and it felt like it was happening every other play.
I'd much, much rather give Webb a chance.Not me. If Webb can beat out good competition fine, but don't just give him a shot because he's the only one on the roster
- I don't want to give Webb a shot because he's the only one on the roster either. I want to give him a shot because of everything he showed as a rookie in the midst of so much turmoil. I'd rather have a could-be than a has been out there.

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1093311

marr,
I just don't understand your argument. Why not have the best QB posible lead us into the playoffs. Who cares if the team can carry a rookie Qb? Why would you want that vs. a Qb that can carry his own weight? Draft a Qb and get a vet. Once the rookie is able to play to the level expected of a starting QB....insert him in.

First, its not an arguement my friend. Its a discussion. During a discussion you weight several possiblities.

Of course I would want to have a vet come in and lead the team. I've been wanting that for along time. Probably longer than some on here have been Vikings fans.

Problem is, the pickings have been pretty slim of late. This year, however, there is some light at the end of the tunnel. Question is, will the Vikes go out and get that help. Options are:

a. Kolb. Probably gonna be a bidding war for this kid. My guess at least a 1rst and a second, possibly another latter round pick, lets say a 4th. Pretty expensive, but if it solves our QB problems, I think it is worth it, mostly cause this guy would be a long term solution. My guess, the staff doesn't agree with me in that respect.

b. Orton. Probably a 2nd or possibly a 3rd could get this guy away from Denver but it would depend on what they do in the draft. My guess is he won't even be on the market like some think he will be.

c. Hassleback. Not sure why everyone likes this guy. Its been along time since he posted the numbers he's posted in 2007. Could some of that be the team around him? Possibly, but your talking about a guy carring a team were I am talking about a team carrying a guy. Maybe it would work out but I sure don't like his numbers or his injury record.

d. McNabb. Again, I was pretty high on him about this time last year. Discussion could support that alot of his issues last year were directly related to the team change. Who is to then say he won't have those same issues when he changes to become a Viking? He would cost us, probably a 4th to a 6th rounder to get him and would, IMHO waste valuable reps it would take to get a kid like Locker ramped up in a year.

Because of that, I look at the strenghts and weaknesses of this team and I believe that this team could carry a rookie if it had to. Again, not saying that is my preference, just saying I think it could happen if the staff doesn't think one of these guys are a viable option.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093364

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1093311

marr,
I just don't understand your argument. Why not have the best QB posible lead us into the playoffs. Who cares if the team can carry a rookie Qb? Why would you want that vs. a Qb that can carry his own weight? Draft a Qb and get a vet. Once the rookie is able to play to the level expected of a starting QB....insert him in.

First, its not an arguement my friend. Its a discussion. During a discussion you weight several possiblities.

Of course I would want to have a vet come in and lead the team. I've been wanting that for along time. Probably longer than some on here have been Vikings fans.

Problem is, the pickings have been pretty slim of late. This year, however, there is some light at the end of the tunnel. Question is, will the Vikes go out and get that help. Options are:

a. Kolb. Probably gonna be a bidding war for this kid. My guess at least a 1rst and a second, possibly another latter round pick, lets say a 4th. Pretty expensive, but if it solves our QB problems, I think it is worth it, mostly cause this guy would be a long term solution. My guess, the staff doesn't agree with me in that respect.

b. Orton. Probably a 2nd or possibly a 3rd could get this guy away from Denver but it would depend on what they do in the draft. My guess is he won't even be on the market like some think he will be.

c. Hassleback. Not sure why everyone likes this guy. Its been along time since he posted the numbers he's posted in 2007. Could some of that be the team around him? Possibly, but your talking about a guy carring a team were I am talking about a team carrying a guy. Maybe it would work out but I sure don't like his numbers or his injury record.

d. McNabb. Again, I was pretty high on him about this time last year. Discussion could support that alot of his issues last year were directly related to the team change. Who is to then say he won't have those same issues when he changes to become a Viking? He would cost us, probably a 4th to a 6th rounder to get him and would, IMHO waste valuable reps it would take to get a kid like Locker ramped up in a year.

Because of that, I look at the strenghts and weaknesses of this team and I believe that this team could carry a rookie if it had to. Again, not saying that is my preference, just saying I think it could happen if the staff doesn't think one of these guys are a viable option.

Sorry,
I missed this response.
I think missing the first year should be a mandatory for all rookie Qb's.
Give them a year to come up to speed with the life of an NFL player before having to deal with being thrown into a leadership role.

The skins are a wreck and I don't think any Qb can have sucess with Moss and no one else as your weapons. McNabb can get this team to the Superbowl.

I have no problem with McNabb coming in. Think he would be able to help our young QB draftee the ropes and at the same time give us a chance at winning THIS year.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093115

Although Minnesota Vikings coach Leslie Frazier and player personnel VP Rick Spielman are noncommittal about their starting quarterback when next season begins, it's looking more and more as if it could be veteran Donovan McNabb.

That's what makes the most sense.

Donovan McNabb to Minnesota Vikings? It makes sense

It makes sense to who?

Any chucklehead with half a brain can take a look at how the draft will probably go and see that the Vikes should be able to get a talented QB at 12 that should be able to start right away.

Will he be flawless? No, but he would be better than Webb right now and would have alot more upside that a guy like Dnabb.

By the way, I think, based on what I've read and heard, QB's are going to be over valued this year. Here is were I have the top 10 QB's going this year in my mock draft.

Does it mean they will go there? No, but I think I do a good enough job on this that one could assume that the Vikes won't have much of a choice at one if we don't take one at 12.

1 1. Carolina Baine Gabbert, QB
3 3. Buffalo Cam Newton, QB
12 12. Minnesota Jake Locker, QB
15 15. Miami Andrew Dalton, QB
25 25. Seattle Christian Ponder, QB
35 3. Cincinnati Colin Kaepernick, QB
39 7. Tennessee Ricky Stanzi, QB
41 9. Washington Ryan Mallet, QB
12. San Francisco Greg McElroy, QB
103 6. Arizona Pat Devlin, QB

Long story short, if they are going to go after a Vet, why go after Dnabb? Why not go after Kolb?

Both know the system. Both would slide right into the system because they both know it.

Only difference I see is one is older with less upside the other has a future in the league with lots of upside.

LOL WHAT?!

NO QB drafted at 12 should start ESPECIALLY with no OTAs, training camp, and possibly preseason. That would be the dumbest shit on earth. Any football fan with a half a brain should know that.

McNabb makes perfect sense and is > than Kolb. We draft Locker and get McNabb. Sounds like a perfect plan to me.

Wow.

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1094080

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1093115

Although Minnesota Vikings coach Leslie Frazier and player personnel VP Rick Spielman are noncommittal about their starting quarterback when next season begins, it's looking more and more as if it could be veteran Donovan McNabb.

That's what makes the most sense.

Donovan McNabb to Minnesota Vikings? It makes sense

It makes sense to who?

Any chucklehead with half a brain can take a look at how the draft will probably go and see that the Vikes should be able to get a talented QB at 12 that should be able to start right away.

Will he be flawless? No, but he would be better than Webb right now and would have alot more upside that a guy like Dnabb.

By the way, I think, based on what I've read and heard, QB's are going to be over valued this year. Here is were I have the top 10 QB's going this year in my mock draft.

Does it mean they will go there? No, but I think I do a good enough job on this that one could assume that the Vikes won't have much of a choice at one if we don't take one at 12.

1 1. Carolina Baine Gabbert, QB
3 3. Buffalo Cam Newton, QB
12 12. Minnesota Jake Locker, QB
15 15. Miami Andrew Dalton, QB
25 25. Seattle Christian Ponder, QB
35 3. Cincinnati Colin Kaepernick, QB
39 7. Tennessee Ricky Stanzi, QB
41 9. Washington Ryan Mallet, QB
12. San Francisco Greg McElroy, QB
103 6. Arizona Pat Devlin, QB

Long story short, if they are going to go after a Vet, why go after Dnabb? Why not go after Kolb?

Both know the system. Both would slide right into the system because they both know it.

Only difference I see is one is older with less upside the other has a future in the league with lots of upside.

LOL WHAT?!

NO QB drafted at 12 should start ESPECIALLY with no OTAs, training camp, and possibly preseason. That would be the dumbest shit on earth. Any football fan with a half a brain should know that.

McNabb makes perfect sense and is > than Kolb.

Wow.

While I agree that drafting a QB at No. 12 and throwing him out there is not the best idea ... I still like it better than McNabb.

I also like Kolb much more than I like McNabb.

McNabb has always been a very good QB, never been an elite QB and is definitely showing major signs of slowing down. I am glad he ended up in Washington last season, because I was much more on the Donavan bandwagon back then than I am now.

I would not hate McNabb starting and Locker/Ponder/Dalton etc. as the backup. But my favorite move would be to find a way to get Kolb.

I think Kolb has what it takes to be very successful in this league, and definitely has a chip on his shoulder. McNabb has nothing left.