Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Will McNabb's long-term deal get done?

Though the Redskins have more than half their 2010 season remaining, there is perhaps no bigger issue as they head into 2011 than the future of quarterback Donovan McNabb. Given McNabb's uneven play through seven weeks of the season - he is the 24th-rated passer in the NFL, behind Jacksonville's David Garrard, Chicago's Jay Cutler, Tampa Bay's Josh Freeman and Detroit's Shaun Hill - there is some question about whether the Redskins are even pursuing a long-term deal with the 12-year veteran.

Last week, ESPN's Adam Schefter Tweeted a report that contract talks with McNabb were "on track," but that no developments were expected until after the season. McNabb was asked about that on Wednesday, and he chose to joke about it.

"Who said that?" McNabb said. "Things are on track. There could be something in the next hour."

He then broke into a smile before addressing his status more seriously.

"Things will happen," McNabb said. "Whatever sources said that - at the end of the year - I heard that Peyton [Manning] and the Colts wanted to wait till the end of the year, so I guess I was pulled into that whole thing as well. I don't know what they're talking about. But [I'm] just focusing on what we do here to improve our record and get better."

McNabb was then asked whether he would prefer to do something during the season or after it.

"If it was my choice?" he said. "I would have had it [ellipsis] No, just kidding.

"I don't know. That's really nothing that I am concerned with at this particular point. That's something that my agent and Bruce [Allen, the Redskins general manager] and Dan [Snyder, the owner] and those guys have been talking about back and forth. I'm just focusing on what we have to do here."

One factor in any potential deal with McNabb is the Redskins' considerations about how age could be affecting his play. He turns 34 next month, and his offseason - which followed an Easter Sunday trade from Philadelphia - involved many more sessions of organized team activities and mini-camps than he has ever endured before.

"It has been a long offseason," McNabb said. "It's been a long year, one that obviously I didn't have to go through for 11 years, as long as it's been. But yet still, you have to be prepared for any and everything. Our bye week is next week. I think it'll definitely help a lot of us out to recover."

McNabb was asked how he would have handled his physical preparation differently had he not been traded and subjected to the extra team functions that the NFL allows when a new head coach takes over, as Mike Shanahan did in Washington.

"I would've been training, and maybe not putting your body through as much as we did in the offseason," McNabb said. "It's just something that was a routine for me, and every now and then you got to change up your routine and challenge yourself as well as challenge your body. But this is what the cards have dealt me. I look forward to the challenge, and I'm excited about where I'm at."

McNabb's current quarterback rating of 76.0 would be, if it held up, the lowest since his rookie season of 1999, when he started just six games and completed only 49.1 percent of his passes. He has thrown seven interceptions and six touchdown passes thus far. In his career, he has never posted more interceptions than touchdowns.

McNabb was adamant Wednesday, though, that his age had nothing to do with his struggles. More important, he said, was his still-growing comfort level in Shanahan's system, the first new system he has dealt with in his career.

"Age is just something that people can talk about," McNabb said. "So that's really nothing."

By Barry Svrluga  | October 27, 2010; 12:41 PM ET
Categories:  Donovan McNabb  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Are the Redskins winning despite McNabb?
Next: RB James Davis is looking for his chance

Comments

Get healthy, get better, change the tone of this conversation by the end of the year. Good Luck #5, I hope you can do it.

Posted by: tgerbracht | October 27, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

The Redskins should re-sign him now for a budget contract. They have the leverage with his current rating and it being midseason. I think they do it now when they can voice concerns over his play in the future based on his current rating, and then, hopefully, get a few more performance incentives built into the contract. I have no doubt he is a keeper, but he shouldn't be getting Manning money. Now is a good time to negotiate on that point.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | October 27, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

This "story" is 100% about reporters and the media making something out of nothing. It's a non-issue, so stop trying to make an issue by asking the same f-ing questions every interview.

McNabb will be signed by the Redskins for several more years. It has ZERO relevance to anything when the deal is done. People act like it's easy to get 5+ individuals into a room to hash out a deal. We're talking the head coach, GM, owner, pro-bowl player, player's agent, plus salary cap people...all while the team is trying to win games, the GM is trying to build a successful organization, the agent is busy with his other duties, etc.

So, to answer this post's hyper-annoying and conspiracy theorist question, "YES."

Posted by: Section104 | October 27, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Landing Macca in that trade from a division rival was the NFL personnel equivalent of pulling a rabbit out of a hat. Instantly made us a competitive team, a team to be taken seriously every Sunday, which hadn't been the case for a long time.

Yeah, we knew there would be bumps along the way. That's part of the deal with Macca. Bouncing passes at receivers, making egregious decisions that lead to picks, etc.

But it's thrilling to watch him play for our team. Absolutely thrilling. I hope we get this deal done so we can have him here for two or three more years.

(And this doesn't even include my doubt that we could possibly land or develop a QB better than Macca for the 2011 or even the 2012 season. That would mean two QB rabbits out of hats in the space of just a few seasons. Not impossible, but unlikely.)

Posted by: NateinthePDX | October 27, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

And until we do, the critical eyes will see that Reid--like a lot of us--are on the mark about McNabb's overall play.

It's good, but not that good.

And it's not good enough for an extension or to be a aprt of a long term, 5 year plan.

Posted by: MistaMoe | October 27, 2010 12:45 PM

So....Now we get down to the get down....

JReid and MistaMoe is on the Shanny payroll to bring down his asking price in an extension.....I see....I see..

Posted by: 4thFloor | October 27, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

WTH? Did the WaPo wake up with a hard on for McNabb?

How 'bout some updates on injuries. Sellers, Cooley. Com on guys, brownwood26 gave you a list of topics to pick from if you have no real ideas or thoughts of your own.

Posted by: Curzon417 | October 27, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

The Monk School of the Arts Code of Conduct:

Posted by: monk811 | October 27, 2010 12:18 PM

No wonder they hate me...I think I broke about five of their rules in the first day alone!

But monk...don't these codes usually come in 10's? What happened to the other three?

Posted by: PlayAction | October 27, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Monks don't count too well, that's why the Monk School of Math didn't last too long!
Plus we love football so much that we like sticking with the number 7, hence the 7 codes. Stubby the Monk likes that cause he only has 7 fingers, stupid bansaw! We made him our official Code Counter!!!

Posted by: monk811 | October 27, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Ok...has this MoFo JReid been watching the SAME MOFO Line that JC17 was playing behind and blamed the line! This MoFo use to always blame the line and backed Jason up. Now, you hear sh!t about the line it is all on McNabb! This negreo McNabb has been getting out of the defensive players grasp damn near every pass play. A MoFo escape artist out there......How many passes has McNabb thrown deep? He leads the League in throwing passes deep. JC was prob last last year....

ATLEAST BE CONSISTENT YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT!

Posted by: 4thFloor | October 27, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Monks don't count too well, that's why the Monk School of Math didn't last too long!
Plus we love football so much that we like sticking with the number 7, hence the 7 codes. Stubby the Monk likes that cause he only has 7 fingers, stupid bansaw! We made him our official Code Counter!!!

Posted by: monk811 | October 27, 2010 1:12 PM

Haha...got it...now lets talk about how McNabb should be benched...and then about his extension.

Posted by: PlayAction | October 27, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

I have my doubts that is the Redskins that are holding up getting an extension done. Why would McNabb want to sign a new deal now, when he could be a free agent at the end of the season? Minnesota, Arizona, and San Francisco are three teams, just off the top of my head, that likely will be looking for a veteran QB at the end of the season and who have the talent to maybe make a deep run in the playoffs. All three arguably have better offensive lines than the Redskins, and certainly Minnesota and Arizona have better receivers. McNabb can always re-up with the Redskins at the end of the season if that's what he wants to do. The Redskins will have no other realistic options -- Rex Grossman? Please -- but McNabb likely will have several teams bidding on his services.

Posted by: boohyeah | October 27, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

I would feel better if he was signed sooner rather than later. The closer he gets to free agency the more green the grass is going to look elsewhere. IF the Skins continue to win that is a plus. But McNabb could be good fit in Minnesota, KC if they decide that Cassel isn't the answer and a couple other places. Better to lock him up now than copy the Nats approach to Adam Dunn.

Posted by: Pensfans | October 27, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

"Will McNabb's long-term deal get done?"


I agree... 5-3 would be huge going into the bye week.

Posted by: 4-12 | October 27, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

It is really strange that Shanahan is messing with the footwork of a QB of McNabb's age. It hasn't shown positive results. I assume that Shanahan plans on Grossman for his long-range quarterback.

Posted by: jhough1 | October 27, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Why would McNabb want to sign a new deal now, when he could be a free agent at the end of the season?

Posted by: boohyeah | October 27, 2010 1:24 PM

Right, but he runs the risk of being franchised too.

Posted by: PlayAction | October 27, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

It is really strange that Shanahan is messing with the footwork of a QB of McNabb's age. It hasn't shown positive results. I assume that Shanahan plans on Grossman for his long-range quarterback.

Posted by: jhough1 | October 27, 2010 1:27 PM |

It's strange that a coach is trying to make a player better, that's what there supposed to do.

If you think Shanny wants Grossman as his long term starter you're nuts.

Posted by: Flounder21 | October 27, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Haha...got it...now lets talk about how McNabb should be benched...and then about his extension.

Posted by: PlayAction | October 27, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

The extension will come in due time, I'm not pushing it. He'll DEFINATELY get a contract, we wouldn't have given up multiple draft choices for him otherwise.

I don't think he should be benched. He's only had 7 games in a new offense, he'll be better by the end of the year after getting more reps and knowing his receivers better.

Posted by: monk811 | October 27, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Davis beep peeps.

Posted by: Curzon417 | October 27, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Haha...got it...now lets talk about how McNabb should be benched...and then about his extension.

Posted by: PlayAction | October 27, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

The extension will come in due time, I'm not pushing it. He'll DEFINATELY get a contract, we wouldn't have given up multiple draft choices for him otherwise.

I don't think he should be benched. He's only had 7 games in a new offense, he'll be better by the end of the year after getting more reps and knowing his receivers better.

Posted by: monk811 | October 27, 2010 1:32 PM

I agree...just thought it was pretty funny that we had a post suggesting he should be benched...followed by a post talking about his extension...haha

Beeps fellas

Posted by: PlayAction | October 27, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Hard not to overpay McNabb when you have a $100 Million slacker. If McNabb gets too greedy sign VICK.

Posted by: jercha | October 27, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I heard rumors that Jerry Jones is ready to pay Donovan next year to deliver the championship that he and Donovan both want. Possibly pairing McNabb with Tony Dungy as HC next year in Big D. The Vikings will also be calling, so Donovan just needs to stay healthy and he is in the driver's seat. Minnesota and Dallas have a much better chance at a championship in the next two years than do the Skins. That's the reality. McNabb is likely a Hall of Fame guy on his career so far, but a Super Bowl win would make it a sure bet.

Posted by: bfjam | October 27, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I for one am glad they have not yet inked him to a long term deal, as that has been the past behavior that has saddled the team with so many large contracts for old players. Love McNabb's leadership and ability to make the big play, but don't want to see him starting for us more than two more years. Any contract that allows an out after that, or maybe a third year as a mentor/backup would be a wise move. What is interesting in this case, is that McNabb has leverage to go elsewhere. Both AZ and MN are attractive to him and will be in the market for a starting QB next season.

If we don't extend McNabb, then the cost in draft picks was way to high to rent him for a single season; one in which most fans will be content with 8 wins.

Posted by: SeanTM | October 27, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Okay, J Reid really needs to be fired.

It's officially out of control.

He has a major problem with this regime.

He could not be more biased against it.

I seriously think it all goes back to his close relationship with Jason Campbell.

Posted by: MylesMonroe | October 27, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

McNabb is the best quarterback we have had since J Thiesman. This article is disrespectful and ridiculous. Who cares what his freaking rating is? That is actually a statistical rating of the offensive line capability, the hands of the recievers, the quality of the defense (ie are you playing from behind all the time), etc. We have no receivers and no running back that can catch. He has nothing to work with except a above average slot receiver and a good tight end

Posted by: vincentc | October 27, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

They are not going to give him a long term deal -- he'll be in Arizona or Minnesota next year.

Posted by: dbunkr | October 27, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

section104 said: "This "story" is 100% about reporters and the media making something out of nothing. It's a non-issue, so stop trying to make an issue by asking the same f-ing questions every interview."

Exactly right. Washington Post, try a little harder please. It sucks to come here for a little in depth Skins information and find lazy stuff like this. That last post, about "some readers think McNabb should be benched" was one of the silliest things I've seen in a long time. And the accompanying poll makes it even worse.

Posted by: bigfoot1 | October 27, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

When you're winning and showing leadership on and off the field, statistics are pretty meaningless.

Posted by: dc1120008 | October 27, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

How soon we forget - Jason Campbell.

Posted by: Trout1 | October 27, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

I'm calling it now: 4 years at about 45 mil, with 30 guaranteed.

Posted by: DCLeisurist | October 27, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

This "story" is 100% about reporters and the media making something out of nothing. It's a non-issue, so stop trying to make an issue by asking the same f-ing questions every interview.

McNabb will be signed by the Redskins for several more years. It has ZERO relevance to anything when the deal is done. People act like it's easy to get 5+ individuals into a room to hash out a deal. We're talking the head coach, GM, owner, pro-bowl player, player's agent, plus salary cap people...all while the team is trying to win games, the GM is trying to build a successful organization, the agent is busy with his other duties, etc.

So, to answer this post's hyper-annoying and conspiracy theorist question, "YES."

Posted by: Section104 | October 27, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Section104....you said all I needed or would have said on this subject....NOW let us FOCUS on the Detroit Lions this Sunday...

Posted by: ejharrisjr40 | October 27, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

I'd offer him a two year deal, with the option to terminate after one year...ONLY AND ONLY if you plan on drafting a qb in a year or two.

What they should do is keep their eyes on a viable number two, because Grossman should be released and there should be a nother qb in the pipe line. Hopefully we can draft a half way decent qb late, if we don't draft one right off the bat in round 1

Posted by: impervious99 | October 27, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Both sides want to wait. IMO,McNabb will not be here next year.Book it!

Posted by: vexed50verizonnet | October 27, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

McNabb is feeling Minnesota.

Posted by: loux24 | October 27, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

Yeah he sucks.

Posted by: Dog-1 | October 27, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Should re-sign him. Or should we go through the list of starting quarterbacks we've had here since 1994? Hmmm, Friesz, Shuler, Frerotte (in Gus we trust), George, Banks, Matthews, Wuerffel are names that come to mind. We had Brad Johnson, but we managed to scare him off only to win a Super Bowl. We had Trent Green, but we didn't offer up enough for him so he went on to success in St. Louis and Kansas City. Oh hell, let's bring Jason Campbell back, I heard he had a good game last week! Give me a break. If we run McNabb off we deserve to fail.

Posted by: corky1031 | October 28, 2010 8:07 AM | Report abuse

OK, I'm done with the "5" bashing. Regretfully JC and the 2 picks (the WR and OL we REALLY needed) are gone and here we are at/around .500 - Gotta be pleased with that!

Let 5 play the season out and we (hopefully) enjoy it BUT...JUST SAY NO to any extension right now. He has not proven he's worthy of any longer term commitment. No way. I gotta believe Allen and Shanny won't commit the same sins that the past Kingdoms have?!

And if 5's auditioning for Minnesota...oh boy. Of course with that mess they have up there they'd would get younger and better.

Posted by: kone | October 28, 2010 8:09 AM | Report abuse

And everyone keeps posting McNabb to Minnesota and I wonder why? Oh yeah, the Childress connection. What is it exactly that would make one think the Vikings are keeping him there next year? If they miss the playoffs (they are currently 2-4 I believe), he's gone. McNabb wants to have this thing done yesterday. If they want to wait to get the best price on him as possible at the end of the season, fine. But if they let him go, that's just as bad a move as any Cerrato move over the last 10 years.

Posted by: corky1031 | October 28, 2010 8:13 AM | Report abuse

let mcnubb go, another mark brunell clone. bring on the next has-been...hasselbeck? farve? bulger?

Posted by: PaulK2 | October 28, 2010 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Look, I understand people are happy with where this team is but...where is all the love for DM coming from? What are you seeing here? You really think his presence has anything to do with us being 4-3? In what way? His leadership?

C'mon now, really??? (wow, lots of question marks!)

I see this more as a Shanahan (+Allen and even Snyder letting go) deal. To me, the whole culture of the club has been changed (maybe DM has some responsibility for that) by bringing in a coaching staff that demands hard work and discipline. This team isn't much better talent-wise than last year's club, they just play harder, smarter, and seem to have a much sharper edge. Hard to describe.

Posted by: kone | October 28, 2010 8:58 AM | Report abuse

I agree with Kone,

I am not saying bench DM necessarily either. I am saying that he has not done what he was brought to DC for. He has not delivered and running around avoiding sacks is great but damn it, those ground balls and overthrown balls drive me crazy. Nothing to do with scheme or O-line problems. Accuracy problems. Also, would it kill the guy to sustain a winning drive at the end of a freaking game?????!!!! We keep relying on the D and on the kicker every week. And do not gimme silly little examples about hw he takes care of the ball. He has to win and not MERELY manage the game. JC could have managed the game with the personnel and coaching staff we have now. Where is the upgrade?? It's gonna comeback to bite all of us in the ass. That's all I am trying to say. Dude needs to play better. If you think that he is playing as well as he is going to play all year and you are OK with that then you not know football. Wake up. It's not about loyalists and getting defensive because you like the guy. I am talking about his lack of production. I am saying he needs to get better. WHO DISAGREES WITH ME???

Posted by: mustang_johnny1 | October 28, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

New coach, new scheme, mediocre line, mediocre WRs. He makes plays we haven't seen in years. He has been willing to throw up 60 yd hail mary jump balls at the end of a half or game. He has 2 picks from these. He's unselfish and tough. He makes enough plays for us to win, and will get better if the team improves around him.

Every year the sports media in DC tries to stir up controversy and drama, and then blames the fans for being fickle.

Posted by: Chigliak | October 28, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Chigliak said: He makes plays we haven't seen in years. He has been willing to throw up 60 yd hail mary jump balls at the end of a half or game. He has 2 picks from these. He's unselfish and tough. He makes enough plays for us to win,
------------------------------------------
Ok, I'll give that to ya. Do thse things earn him a 4 yr many-multi-million $ deal?

Heck, Randle El could've done that...uhh...wait...you mentioned tough. Ignore what I said.

Posted by: kone | October 28, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

If the Deal is not done,McNabb will just go to Minnesota,Favre will not be there and there is someone there who is very familiar with McNabb.He will be complimented with a Running Back and Wide Receivers.While we still Have McNabb with the team,he must first remember that he do not have it the way he did in Philidelphia.He should stop throwing the ball 50-60 yards.Have the players to run at least 10 yards pass and then (YAC),My opinion!!!

Posted by: joeyjust4u21 | October 28, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

McNabb does not have laser arm....but with an O-line and a receiver he's a 62-64% passer arguably. He's been finding Cooley and Moss twice as much as the other receivers..so you can't say he's missing every receiver. He's really been missing Galloway for the most part

If the Skins don't want him, then another team will and they won't have to give up picks for him. This is the problem with some Skins fans...instead of being patient they're already willing to throw him out. He's having his worse year since his rookie year...obviously it's much more than him just sucking if he's been playing much better for a long time. McNabb won't always be precise but a broken down line messes up rhythm. I find it kind of amusing that McNabb hardly gets the O-line excuse...perhaps he should have protected his stats this season and take sacks...he'd be sacked 40 times by now if that was the case

Posted by: smooth700 | October 30, 2010 11:50 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company