As a quarterback, McNabb is in the area between serviceable and good. Good enough to win a lot of games for you, but lacking in that ability to put the team on his back and have post-season success. For the Eagles to expect that sort compensation from any team is laughable, given McNabb’s age and record with the Eagles. In McNabb’s defense, success as a QB in the NFL depends heavily on a great offensive line and a talented collection of receivers and running backs. In the end, though, it’s McNabb’s post-season failure that will greatly reduce his value on the open market of NFL trades and free agency.
It’s not fair, it’s the business of professional football.
I agree with much of what you say, but a high-2nd round pick for a QB of McNabb's level doesn't strike me as too much, but we'll see. Consider the 'failure rate' of college QB's take with a similar pick (or even a 1st). With McNabb you know that you are getting a decent QB.
I would agree that McNabb has never had a credible running game. Who knows how good a runner Westbrook might have been in a more balanced offensive scheme?
I personally think that a WR's rep is to a large extent determined by the QB's ability to put the ball in the prefered spot consistently. McNabb's got a strong arm, but his accuracy ranges from 'good' to 'WTF?' depending on the game. I'm not sure better receivers are the answer with him.