stinky finger

I am with you on everything but...........this

Makes me wonder how the hell the Blues have managed to stay alive.

Undoubtedly a firtst ballet HOfer. One of the best pure passers I've seen. I always liked him and found it easy to root for him.

While I respect an opinion, this one is really.......really dramatic. geez.....

When you procure a set, come see me. I'll oblige.

If he's brought in, it has to be with the idea that we intend to win now. I submit we're at least 2 years away. Why bother exhausting the valuable resources it would take? By the time we're ready to take off, it'll be over for him.

First of all, leave my recreational practices outta this! Secondly, I didn't ASK for him. Lastly, welcome to the board.

All 3 QBs you mentioned are, IMO, considerably better than McNabb. If you believe (not saying you do, MDH) that DM has anywhere between 3-5 "good" years remaining, and Philly is in "win now" mode, why not stay the course with DM? I understand Philly's philosophy of jettison the good player a year early than a year late, but don't you think they have gone as far with him as they could?

whack-a-mole?

Agreed. Problem is, Philly realizes their best shot at success comes with the kid. They realize DMs best days are behind him. If DM can't be their savior, he certainly can't be ours. Otherwise, why would they dangle him?

Not in Buffalo he doesn't. Minny would be his fit. Childress and McNabbs familiarity with the offense plus they're ready to win. McNabb is not the missing piece in Buffalo. We're much further away. I think the question is, those who want McNabb, do you think we can win now? I think we're a good 2 real good drafts and offseason acquisition seasons away.

You're missing the point. I don't want either. If you're looking for a seat warmer, Vick would be the guy because he costs less. I don't think McNabb is the answer.

McNabb is the long term answer? Stop with the bandaid mentality. Very loserish.

I guess you're right. Matter of fact, lets give them a decades worth of 3rd's. We'll only @$% them up anyway, right?

Ahhhhh HA! Something we agree on, matter2003.

No. I don't think that by simply inserting McNabb he would have made that difference. A different offense behind an awful line that would have pressured him into far too many inaccurate passes that he is renowned for. Sorry, he's just not that good.

Lynch and a 3rd?!? Just So McNabb could keep the seat warm for a 1st round QB? What the.......

With all due respect, the only thing more wrong than Mcnabb being at LEAST worth 3 games by himself is the fact that you'd not trade a 1 for that. Come on, now.....

Well played!

Are you outta your mind?!?!?

yeah, great leader.....like in the SB vomitting at crunch time. You can have McNabb. I'll pass. Draft a QB and stick him in there ala Ben, Eli and Philip and hope they guessed right just like the organizations that drafted the 3 I referred to. They were fortunate, we can be too. Screw the "grooming" crap.

I'm not fond of either. However, I don't want to give up a 2nd for McNabb. I think Reid made him. I don't care where he ends up, his best days are behind and remove him from that offense and I'll show you a completion percentage drop like an anvil. Inaccurate as hell. That being said, the difference between the two isn't much, IMO.

Ummmmmm.....the way the Iggles D it up, maybe they WANT him in the NFC.

If we're going down this road, I'd rather trade for Vick. I'd think he'd cost less than McNabb.

Indeed. I used to be in the "move down and acquire more picks camp" but maybe we should stay put and select someone with more impact. I understand it's a crapshoot either way.