Fan in Chicago

Well written post, Bill. I concur with your assessment of what transpired but I too struggle with why it happened. My take is that RJ just had the physical tools and coaching would not have changed what he was missing. This is contrary to what happened with JP and Trent. I think both suffered from having too many coaches, put into the fray well before they were ready and had a woeful OL. Without these factors to hinder them, I think either of them would have been adequate QBs for us and a good coach would have covered up their inadequacies (slow thinking for JP and gun-shy nature of Trent). I suppose we should take this argument back to when Todd Collins was drafted. Perhaps we should have developed him better and we wouldn't have been in this absolute disaster of a QB situation since Kelly. I am in favor of drafting a QB high a few years before your franchise QB is spent. As an example, I would think both the Pats* and Colts ought to be thinking replacements in the next 2 drafts. Groom a new one for 2-3 years when Brady and Manning are close to retirement. Which is what we should have done 2-3 years before the end of Kelly's career

So which move of the current regime is the equivalent of cutting off your arm (as your analogy implies) ?

I would call it being decisive. Chan, the QB savior, probably saw there was nothing to salvage here and probably infuriated that the promise of the pre-season went up in smoke in a matter of 2 games to the point where it became difficult to evaluate the rest of the personnel on offense. Holding on to Trent would serve no purpose and probably drag the organization down.

Didn't know Arizona had a beach

And somewhere JP Losman snickers with a Molson EX in hand.

I was thinking the Pats* but they kick our rears without inside information as it is so don't know why any divisional rival would even bother.

Methinks it was not 'just a hunch' unless its on your back and you are from Notre Dame.

Me too. Its official.

Wow ! That will be stunning if true.

I suppose the original title and lack of new thought deserved its own thread. Just don't know why.

Not if the armchair GMs frequenting this board trade Evans to Minnesota.

I don't see any new news here. Speculation and some analysis about why it makes sense. Also, no justification or support about said 'talks intensifying'.

Your statement may be true in more ways than one. One thing that stood out to me in the Green Bay game is how Trent was sitting by himself and Steve Johnson was moping after the first INT. A leader would have gone up to SJ and boosted him up. He just does not appear to rally the troops or inspire confidence in him.

I suppose Gailey was up all night watching game tape. He must have seen a recurring and irreversible pattern in Trent's play that forced him to bench TE so early in the season.

Saved me the trouble of a reply, Beer. It is immaterial where we pick irrespective of the quality of the scouting department. A good scouting group can ensure years of lower picks after a string of good early picks.

Same here. I also thought this was not the year to switch D schemes. We should have bulked up on D & shored up our OL at a minimum this off-season. Also, going BPA is not a luxury we could afford yet. Next year we could have concentrated on switching schemes and getting a QB. It appears that with a slavish adherence to the long term view, the FO lost sight of the fact that we need to be half way competitive this season.

I did not but I suppose it was because he was always beyond the LOS where we dont throw

You have to wonder if this was a good year to change our D scheme considering we were already so low on talent. Could have taken baby steps with the D, bolstered the O a bit and we would have an overall half way competent team

Did Gailey call that TO ? I thought it was Trent. Not sure tho

I think we will now see an aggressive D

No i really think we are showcasing Lynch

Anybody know the link for the IRC chat ?

As with the pre-season I hope we bounce back from the first game debacle

With our OL and McNabb's general ineptitude and penchant for choking, we would have been no better off. Plus we would have added drama which this team certainly does not need. McNabb would be a Donahoe-type move which is little more than a marketing ploy. The good GMs know when to say no and I am firmly in Nix's camp on this one.

Funny