Oakland Raiders: Why Trading for Donovan McNabb Is a Bad Idea
Lately, there is a lot of talk among Raider fans of the possibility of us landing veteran QB Donovan McNabb in a trade.
He would be an instant upgrade at QB over JaMarcus Russell and Bruce Gradkowski. But at what cost and is it worth it?
I say no way.
Along with the Raiders there are other teams who have inquired about Donovan: the SeaHawks, the Rams, the Bills, and likely a few others. With multiple bidders, only the team willing to give up the most will land him. And currently, with the Raiders team full of holes on offense and defense, and already down a 2011 first-round draft pick, they are not in a position to give up much in a trade.
The Eagles are said to be asking for at least a first rounder.
But allegedly the Eagles came to an agreement with the Rams already. The Eagles are allegedly willing to send McNabb to St. Louis for a second rounder (33rd overall) and a player. A second rounder that might as well be a late first rounder.
Only one problem. The Rams will not agree to the terms of the trade unless McNabb agrees to re-sign to a multi-year deal. McNabb wants a ring and to at least play for a contender, something the Rams are not.
The sad reality is McNabb has no say in what team he goes to. But if the Eagles trade him to the Rams or Raiders without a long-term deal, chances are McNabb will play out the one year remaining on his contract and find a contender next year as a free agent.
What's to say this wouldn't happen if he were to sign with the Raiders? Some Raider fans believe the Raiders aren't that far off of being contenders. Good luck convincing McNabb of that.
An early second pick and a player is a heavy price to pay to rent a player for one year. McNabb only has one year on his contract and if the Rams, Raiders, or any other team trade for him nothing is stopping him from finding another team next year. Except for a franchise tag, I guess...
If we were a legitimate contender and merely a QB away, it wouldn't be a bad idea.
But unfortunately we are more than just a QB away and trading for McNabb would only hamper our ability to improve our O-line and run defense.
Next, at 34 years old, McNabb is no spring chicken and has a long history of injury. And with age he will only become more fragile.
Remember Charlie Frye and Bruce Gradkowski? They combined for seven starts, yet were only able to finish four games. How long would McNabb last behind center for the Raiders? Two, maybe three weeks.
McNabb couldn't handle the beating QBs take in Oakland.
Then remember how well McNabb performs under pressure. As Raider fans we all saw it first hand. Sure he threw for 269 yards but he didn't find the endzone once, only completed 22 of 46 passes (less than 50 percent), and was sacked six times. In Oakland he would see that kind of pressure week in and week out.
And don't forget about the pick six McNabb threw to Stanford Routt. Oh wait, that's right—the refs saved McNabb's ass with a phantom pass interference call.
McNabb to the Raiders sounds like a great idea at first, but when you really look at it, it would hurt more than it would help.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?