Mike Shanahan is an idiot

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I forgot to count his last game. Damn Wikipedia.

I don't think we're saying Grossman is a good quarterback or is going to be the starter. Obviously, Shanahan doesn't see anything in McNabb that would make him be the starter next year. I can see McNabb going to Minnesota or San Francisco.

 

[Big Sexy]

Really? Because I've seen Grossman reach a Superbowl with his Bears. And his overall stats were..

3,193 yds, 23 TDs, 20 INTs

You mean the year that his completion was a horrendous 54.6 and his rating was nearly 4 points lower then what McNabb's was this year? And don't act like Grossman led the team to the Super Bowl. He was a product of having the best defense in the league and a tremendous running game.

However, again, you said it yourself. McNabb has been having his worst season thus far.. so why continue killing yourself and not do what other teams have and turn to your back-up to simply see what can happen - based on what you have seen happen thus far with the original starter?

Because we've already seen plenty of Grossman throughout the years to know that he sucks. And don't go back to your shitty Brees example. He only sucked for one year in San Diego. He had one decent year, then his shitty one, and he finished his time there with two great seasons.

 

[I Suck Ass]

Well, I guess I was wrong. Grossman did great...up until he threw the pick that cost them the game.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

It didn't cost them the game.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

You mean the year that his completion was a horrendous 54.6 and his rating was nearly 4 points lower then what McNabb's was this year? And don't act like Grossman led the team to the Super Bowl. He was a product of having the best defense in the league and a tremendous running game.

HOLY FUCKING SHIT MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND.

Am I suppose to compair Grossman's best season, to McNabb's worst.. as you ran your mouth about; or am I suppose to believe you meant to say Grossman's best season wasn't as good that year as McNabb's?

Also, 90.9 = Grossman this year. Guess that blows McNabb's out of the water, huh. (now you reply with more shit about how QB rating means nothing because of lack of games which is more contradiction on your part. You want to count it when it helps your cause, and deny counting it when it goes against your random shit.)

Regardless, you talked shit like you do from time to time, and I showed you where Grossman had a decent/best year. I don't care if his Defense lead him to a Superbowl, or his running game bailed him out of shit.

McNabb isn't the sole savior of the Eagles either. Oh, but I suppose since you wanna blame shit on Grossman instead of his team's as a whole - McNabb has blown 3 NFC Championship games and a Superbowl; all off INTs.

Because we've already seen plenty of Grossman throughout the years to know that he sucks. And don't go back to your shitty Brees example. He only sucked for one year in San Diego. He had one decent year, then his shitty one, and he finished his time there with two great seasons.

Drew Brees Superbowl victories in San Diego = 0. In New Orleans = 1. In the end, no one gives a shit about Brees in SD.

Grossman isn't a fucking starter and I'm not even trying to say he should be. I'm merely pointing out that he did more today than McNabb has in this entire month. Thus, Grossman > McNabb as far as this month is concerned and that is why he got the start.

 

[I Suck Ass]

Yeah, but it certainly didn't help.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

I'm still at a loss as to what the debate is over, to be honest. McNabb has shit up the season all year long. He's not the Coach's favorite option. If I recall, he even complained to the media about something team/staff related. (unsure on this, since so much media drama comes out of Washington these days) So.. really, what people are debating on when it comes to why McNabb was benched over Grossman is beyond me.

1. Season's done.
2. McNabb has sucked all year.
3. Grossman got the start, lost because his Defense allowed 33 pts & couldn't stop a back-up. Yet, people will argue that McNabb (who *see #2*) would've done better somehow because he's played the Cowboys multiple times with an entirely different team/staff/unit.

*For the record; Grossman out-did his last performance against Dallas, this time around. Last time he threw 3 INTs and NO TDs.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

Also, 90.9 = Grossman this year. Guess that blows McNabb's out of the water, huh. (now you reply with more shit about how QB rating means nothing because of lack of games which is more contradiction on your part. You want to count it when it helps your cause, and deny counting it when it goes against your random shit.)

....and McNabb's winning percentage blows Grossman's out of the water this year, and since wins are what count, I'd say that gives McNabb the edge.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

Having Grossman start is a pointless move, it dose nothing for the present, and does nothing for the future.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

What future? The Season is 2 weeks away from being over for most NFL teams; including Washington. By the looks of it, McNabb won't be retained either. So since it's highly lightly neither QB is being retained come next year, why does it matter who starts?

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

Why not just start the third string guy and see what you've got with him, that's what Shanahan should of done from the beginning.

I know that McNabbs on the decline and on the way out, and noway grossman stays for anything other than a backup. So why not see what you've got with the unknown guy, instead of giving it to grossman?

 

[Big Sexy]

HOLY FUCKING SHIT MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND.

Am I suppose to compair Grossman's best season, to McNabb's worst.. as you ran your mouth about; or am I suppose to believe you meant to say Grossman's best season wasn't as good that year as McNabb's?

What the fuck are you talking about? Read what I say. I've always been talking about Grossman's best season vs McNabb this season. This season McNabb's qb rating is still about 4 points higher then Grossman's was back in Rex's best season and McNabb's completion % and yards thrown is also better.

Also, 90.9 = Grossman this year. Guess that blows McNabb's out of the water, huh. (now you reply with more shit about how QB rating means nothing because of lack of games which is more contradiction on your part. You want to count it when it helps your cause, and deny counting it when it goes against your random shit.)

LOL are you fucking serious? You know damn well that a guys qb rating after one fucking game is not relevant at all to the topic we have at hand. I'm not contradicting anything. If Grossman's rating is still at 90 by the end of the season you MAY have something. Although 3 games isn't exactly a huge sample size either. We are comparing season vs season not season vs 1 game.

Regardless, you talked shit like you do from time to time, and I showed you where Grossman had a decent/best year. I don't care if his Defense lead him to a Superbowl, or his running game bailed him out of shit.

You showed me a decent year that still wasn't quite as good as McNabb's season this year. Congratulations on doing nothing.

McNabb isn't the sole savior of the Eagles either. Oh, but I suppose since you wanna blame shit on Grossman instead of his team's as a whole - McNabb has blown 3 NFC Championship games and a Superbowl; all off INTs.

McNabb was the Eagles best player and to argue differently is laughable. He led them to 3 NFC title games and a SB. Grossman was carried to one SB and hasn't done shit besides that.

Drew Brees Superbowl victories in San Diego = 0. In New Orleans = 1. In the end, no one gives a shit about Brees in SD.

You said Brees sucked in San Diego. You were 100% wrong.

Grossman isn't a fucking starter and I'm not even trying to say he should be. I'm merely pointing out that he did more today than McNabb has in this entire month. Thus, Grossman > McNabb as far as this month is concerned and that is why he got the start.

Last week against Tampa Bay Donovann McNabb was 22 of 35 for 228 yards, 2 tds, and 0 interceptions for a qb rating of 100.7. McNabb led them on what should have been a game tying drive late in the 4th quarter, however, the extra point was fucked up and they lost by one point. You say McNabb hasn't done shit in a month yet just last week he had a game better then what Grossman had today. Goddamn it's fun making you look stupid.

 

[Minor League Brian]

What the fuck do you mean "think" I know what I'm talking about? Blache kept the Redskins defense in the top 10 even after Snyder fired one of the greatest defensive minds in the game. Albert complaining about the 4-3? Are you deaf? Have you not heard the amount of bitching he's done since then? Haynesworth's always been a complainer and always will be. Finally, Orakpo back in his natural position?! It's a miracle that he's on track to match his stats from last year. Being an OLB in a 3-4 scheme is nowhere near the same as being a defensive end in a 4-3 scheme (the position Orakpo originally played). Orakpo needs another competent pass rusher in Washington to be as great as all Washingtonians know he can be (the chances of that happening are slim to none).

And I stand proven right. Haynesworth woulda bitched no matter what, so your whole "Maybe they coulda used Haynesworth" argument is bullshit. I wint hat one.

Second. Blache's defense was TERRIBLE. It was a stat machine but it was terrible where it counted. It didn't force turnovers, it couldn't get off the field. The only thing it was better at was pass rush and that was ONE YEAR with Haynesworth and the ONLY reason that happened is cause he forced double teams, which he didn't do at all this year. It was a Paper Tiger and a far cry from Gregg Williams defense. Informed and intelligent and TRUE Redskin fans knew that.

Oh, and Rak is an undersized DE that would have had trouble with some tackles in the league because of his size. He's a perfect OLB in this system and is rushing the passer MORE now as an OLB then the SAM he was in Blache's 43. What a great idea by Blache, right? Play a DE as a SAM.

So, you're essentially praising a defense because one of its defensive backs is having one of the best seasons in the league (oh, let's not forget that he's been injured for a few games as well)? Landry's great, but I'll gladly forgo him for a competent rush defense and a defensive line that isn't abominable. Washington's defense is absolute shit, and it's going to take more than a few personnel changes to make it half-decent again. While I wouldn't complain about this normally, this only compounds Washington's problems as it still has to worry about one of the worst offensive lines in the league and a new receiver, runningback, and (possibly) quarterback.

Except its much like the Pats defense. When it shows up its awesome, when it doesn't its just terrible. Its bad in there first year in a new system. They're building for the future and seeing what they need to get and who can fit as is. There offensive line is bad, but getting better. We've got solid receivers, unlike what people think. A plethora of potential backs for our RBBC, and the new QB will be had this year.

But GG yo.

 

[Minor League Brian]

Why not just start the third string guy and see what you've got with him, that's what Shanahan should of done from the beginning.

I know that McNabbs on the decline and on the way out, and noway grossman stays for anything other than a backup. So why not see what you've got with the unknown guy, instead of giving it to grossman?

He'll be seeing times during the Jags and Giants game. Its why McNabb will be the 3rd QB, to let Beck play.

 

[justinsayne]

Why not just start the third string guy and see what you've got with him, that's what Shanahan should of done from the beginning.

According to Shanahan he plans to do just that, he wants to use this time to see what all his QBs have to offer, McNabb will likely be moving onto Min, SF, or Miami at some point in the off season according to Peter King

 

[Big Sexy]

According to Shanahan he plans to do just that, he wants to use this time to see what all his QBs have to offer, McNabb will likely be moving onto Min, SF, or Miami at some point in the off season according to Peter King

San Fran gives McNabb the best opportunity to make the playoffs. Minnesota is probably the team with the most talent.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Why not just start the third string guy and see what you've got with him, that's what Shanahan should of done from the beginning.

I know that McNabbs on the decline and on the way out, and noway grossman stays for anything other than a backup. So why not see what you've got with the unknown guy, instead of giving it to grossman?

Who's the 3rd string guy? I was unaware they even had one (unless you mean Brennan - which, I liked him, but don't think he's the answer either)

What the fuck are you talking about? Read what I say. I've always been talking about Grossman's best season vs McNabb this season. This season McNabb's qb rating is still about 4 points higher then Grossman's was back in Rex's best season and McNabb's completion % and yards thrown is also better.

McNabb has 1 more INT than he does TD. Better rating or not, Grossman's best year he was 3 TDs to the good. The QB rating is based on passes being completed as well.

Grossman worked with complete shit at WR. (CHI) McNabb actually had decent options. (WAS) Explain that one.

I'm not contradicting anything. If Grossman's rating is still at 90 by the end of the season you MAY have something. Although 3 games isn't exactly a huge sample size either. We are comparing season vs season not season vs 1 game.

This is all one big contradiction. First you say I may have something, then you turn it around to save your own ass incase it happens by saying (more or less) that it shouldn't count.

McNabb was the Eagles best player and to argue differently is laughable. He led them to 3 NFC title games and a SB. Grossman was carried to one SB and hasn't done shit besides that.

Once again.. format it to work best for you, but then turn it around when I work it against you.

I'm sorry, I was completely unaware McNabb dominated (alone) on offense, then came out and forced turnovers and held opposing teams in check, on defense - all to be the sole reaosn his team made Championship games and a Superbowl.

Mind you - McNabb did lose all of those same Championship/Superbowl games you've mentioned, by throwing picks. (one of which I fondly remember, against Carolina - in which he broke his ribs and still stupidly tried playing only to hurt his team worse)

You said Brees sucked in San Diego. You were 100% wrong.

Brees & Superbowl Championships in SD = 0.

In NO = 1.

Yes, he was worse in SD.. so sorry the word "sucks" came out instead of worse, half point to you for being anally literal.

I tell you what, because you've wasted minutes of my life with a pointless argument over nothing.. let's call it and say you won an internet because like I said earlier - I have no clue what our debate or argument is even over again.

McNabb sucked, they benched him. It hasn't been the first time a team has done that, it won't be the last. End of discussion, really.

 

[Big Sexy]

McNabb has 1 more INT than he does TD. Better rating or not, Grossman's best year he was 3 TDs to the good. The QB rating is based on passes being completed as well.

The only stat that Grossman had on McNabb in the comparison of the seasons is td to int ratio. Yards, completion %, and qb rating all go to McNabb and he wasn't even given the entire season. McNabb in 13 games had more yards on less attempts then Grossman had in 16 games.

Grossman worked with complete shit at WR. (CHI) McNabb actually had decent options. (WAS) Explain that one.

Who exactly does McNabb have? An aging Sanatana Moss, a completely done Joey Galloway, and a bunch of nobodies. I'll take Mushin Muhammed and Bernard Berrian over that.

This is all one big contradiction. First you say I may have something, then you turn it around to save your own ass incase it happens by saying (more or less) that it shouldn't count.

There's no making you happy. I personally don't believe that 3 games is enough of a sample size but I know that if I would have said that then you'd have jumped down my throat and bitched about it.

I'm sorry, I was completely unaware McNabb dominated (alone) on offense, then came out and forced turnovers and held opposing teams in check, on defense - all to be the sole reaosn his team made Championship games and a Superbowl.

You really do have a reading problem don't you? When did I say McNabb dominated alone? I said he was their best player and the biggest reason why they succeeded as much as they did. He wasn't the only reason but certainly the biggest.

Mind you - McNabb did lose all of those same Championship/Superbowl games you've mentioned, by throwing picks. (one of which I fondly remember, against Carolina - in which he broke his ribs and still stupidly tried playing only to hurt his team worse)

McNabb with broken ribs is better then Koy Detmer, AJ Feely, or whoever the fuck the Eagles back up was at that time. McNabb isn't going to pull himself from a championship game. If Andy Reid really thought the back up was a better option then he would have pulled him.

Yes, he was worse in SD.. so sorry the word "sucks" came out instead of worse, half point to you for being anally literal.

Anally literal? "Sucks" and "Worse" are no where near the same meaning. There was no other way to take that statement.

I tell you what, because you've wasted minutes of my life with a pointless argument over nothing.. let's call it and say you won an internet because like I said earlier - I have no clue what our debate or argument is even over again.

I said McNabb was still having a better season this year then Grossman has ever had. You disagreed.

McNabb sucked, they benched him. It hasn't been the first time a team has done that, it won't be the last. End of discussion, really.

I'm just a little confused on the timing considering McNabb was coming off his second best game of the season.

 

[gd]

McNabb > Grossman. Now stop this silly argument.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

And I stand proven right. Haynesworth woulda bitched no matter what, so your whole "Maybe they coulda used Haynesworth" argument is bullshit. I wint hat one.

What the fuck are you on about? I never said they could have used Haynesworth, you idiot. My statement was meant to convey to you that Haynesworth complains ALL the time. How could he be a credible source on the defense when he has nothing to offer but criticisms that all originate from injustices that he alleges to have suffered?

Second. Blache's defense was TERRIBLE. It was a stat machine but it was terrible where it counted. It didn't force turnovers,

Turnovers don't mean a fucking thing if you can force 3 and outs or field goals in the red zone.

it couldn't get off the field.

This is what happens when your offense is consistently done after 3 downs...I don't make the rules, the NFL does. Maybe you can write to them and ask them to up the down count per series.

The only thing it was better at was pass rush and that was ONE YEAR with Haynesworth and the ONLY reason that happened is cause he forced double teams, which he didn't do at all this year. It was a Paper Tiger and a far cry from Gregg Williams defense. Informed and intelligent and TRUE Redskin fans knew that.

Where the hell are you getting this paper tiger shit from? Were they a statistically better defense? Yes. Did they allow less points than this defense? Fuck yes they did. Does Blache have a better record than Haslett? For one season, yes (Redskins are heading for a 5-11 season this year, so that's only one game better than what Blache did last year, and Blache didn't have the privilege of being led by a two-time SB winner).

That two mediocre RBs and an aging, journeyman QB scored 33 points against Washington's defense today speaks volumes about how shit it really is. Dallas was an offensive juggernaut for two seasons prior to this one; somehow though, Blache's defense only allowed them to score more than 20 points once out of four meetings.

Oh, and Rak is an undersized DE that would have had trouble with some tackles in the league because of his size. He's a perfect OLB in this system and is rushing the passer MORE now as an OLB then the SAM he was in Blache's 43. What a great idea by Blache, right? Play a DE as a SAM.

Yeah, what a great idea; he only managed to make it to the Pro Bowl as a strong-side linebacker in a 4-3 defense.

I'll reply to your "intelligent and informed" comment here. Obviously, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about when you claim I'm not informed. All of 106.7 The Fan's personalities, all of CSN's football analysts, and all of The Washington Post's football columnists have said the same things I have. Apparently, I pay a lot more attention to the analysis of the game than you do, thus making me a shit ton more informed. Ultimately, you're just coming off as an moronic homer with your comments here. But, hey, I'll take a ******ed Redskins fan over a ******ed fan for any other NFL franchise any day of the week.

Except its much like the Pats defense. When it shows up its awesome, when it doesn't its just terrible. Its bad in there first year in a new system. They're building for the future and seeing what they need to get and who can fit as is.

Big difference between the two being that the Pats defense is young, the Redskins defense is mainly composed of past-their-prime players accustomed to playing in a 4-3 (also, any defense can play well for 3 games out of 14; that this defense played well in a disappointing minority of its games this season is better attributed to certain players having career-best games rather than the defense having any chemistry). At least 4, if not 5, pieces will need to be added to the Redskins' defense this upcoming off-season to make it half as less laughable than it was this year. As I said before, this wouldn't be a problem if we didn't already need a runningback, at least one wide receiver, a quarterback, and at least three new offensive linemen. That's about 10 personnel changes that are going to need to be made. Face it: this defense is shit, Blache's was better. The only fact you have in your favor is a lack of turnovers for Blache's defenses, but this never really mattered that much since making it to the red zone wasn't something teams did against Washington in years past.