Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
He now has a year experience sitting on the bench, he should know the playbook and if he practices enough he should have a good showing. Booty could be a long term investment, but try developing him now. He will take his bump and bruises but it'll be a learning experience. Even if he plays "alright" Minny should be able to make up for his mistakes, much like the Ravens did for Flaccos mistake. I don't have a problem with them looking at a FA QB but none of them stick out.
They might of saw something, but so far it isn't working out. If a QB isn't working out in fucking practice, how the hell is he going to transition to the game? At least the Cassel's and Romo's looked decent. T Jack and Gus Ferotte were called upon and playing horrendously and the name John David Booty was never even thought about or thrown out that. That obviously means he isn't ready and won't be for awhile.
They need to get someone with experience if they want to get to the NFC title game of Super Bowl.
For the simple fact that Jackson wasn't the answer, let him go elsewhere or let him leave the game. He's already demonstrated that he has no leadership ability, and all the other little intangibles that make a good QB. Gus is up there in Age, so you need to get younger, and there isn't an easier way to get younger outside of the NFL draft. I could see if Pennington was available but he isn't. Take a chance, it isn't like they could be much worse than anyone else on the teamIf Booty was as good and deserved a shot as much as you make him out to, then why would you draft another young QB?![]()
He now has a year experience sitting on the bench, he should know the playbook and if he practices enough he should have a good showing. Booty could be a long term investment, but try developing him now. He will take his bump and bruises but it'll be a learning experience. Even if he plays "alright" Minny should be able to make up for his mistakes, much like the Ravens did for Flaccos mistake. I don't have a problem with them looking at a FA QB but none of them stick out.
For the simple fact that Jackson wasn't the answer, let him go elsewhere or let him leave the game. He's already demonstrated that he has no leadership ability, and all the other little intangibles that make a good QB. Gus is up there in Age, so you need to get younger, and there isn't an easier way to get younger outside of the NFL draft. I could see if Pennington was available but he isn't. Take a chance, it isn't like they could be much worse than anyone else on the team
As has been stated, there's not point in taking a risk on a young QB that hasn't even looked good when you're a decent QB away from being a legit contender.
Leftwich sticks out with what he's done in Pittsburgh, would be a upgrade over T Jack and has experience. Derek Anderson should probably get another look elsewhere. I'd take either one of them right now over a young QB who's looking awful.
McNabb and Philly are having a rocky relationship. Call them.
If T Jack doesn't have a heavy contract, I'd just keep him around as a 2nd or 3rd stringer, shitcan Ferotte, pick up another QB and keep Booty.
Makes things easier, and there'd be a pick you could trade...
Damn, I forgot all about Garcia. Would be a nice fit considering he usually steps in, leads and wins. Arm strength won't be that huge anyway, he'd just need to step in and manage the game, sorta like what Collins did for Tenn. Peterson ftw.
Though if McNabb wants out of Philly, I know the Vikes will be all over that.
meh, Emmit Smith wasn't the greatest, he's statistically the greatest, but I think both Jim Brown and Barry Sanders were better backs.
intangibles define a player, and Marshall Faulk was the more complete back. Marshall Faulk was gritty, wasn't a coward, could catch, could block, and his team could rely on him. Unlike LT. Who takes a seat on the bench when things aren't going his way. He did that against the Steelers this year in the playoffs and against the Pats a couple of years ago. Those backs I ranked ahead of them were team players, heavily relied on, and most of the success relied upon them. LT isn't needed to win anymore, they can do just fine with Sproles and Rivers at the helm.
intangibles define a player, and Marshall Faulk was the more complete back. Marshall Faulk was gritty, wasn't a coward, could catch, could block, and his team could rely on him. Unlike LT. Who takes a seat on the bench when things aren't going his way. He did that against the Steelers this year in the playoffs and against the Pats a couple of years ago. Those backs I ranked ahead of them were team players, heavily relied on, and most of the success relied upon them. LT isn't needed to win anymore, they can do just fine with Sproles and Rivers at the helm.
Yeah right, a healthy LT is the best back in the league.