McNabbOf course he’d help, but ESPN’s John Clayton has an interesting column on the topic. Clayton thinks McNabb would make Oakland – which has lost 11 or more games for seven straight years, an NFL record – better, but not good enough.
- There is no doubt McNabb could make a major impact on the Raiders. He's a 60 percent thrower, so you figure he would add a lot of efficiency to the Raiders' offense. But the Raiders' offensive line has problems, so McNabb might be sacked 45 times instead of the 35 he had in Philadelphia last season.
Still, McNabb would give the Raiders about 231 net passing yards a game. Compared to the team's 159.8 yards a game last year, McNabb's presence should be worth three to maybe four more wins. Unfortunately for Raiders fans, three to four wins may not make enough sense for the team to give up a second-round choice for a chance at an eight- or nine-win wild-card run. The move would not be similar to the Rich Gannon signing of 1999, because getting McNabb might not be a long-term solution. The Raiders signed Gannon when he was 33 to a four-year contract.
All seem like valid points. I agree. I think McNabb will help, but overall, it may not be worth Oakland’s time considering it has other needs, McNabb’s age, cost and contract status.
Meanwhile, the rumor page on ESPN.com notes that there is now room for Nnamdi Asomugha in Philadelphia’s secondary. ESPN.com reported last week that Oakland would be willing to make Asomugha part of a package in a deal for McNabb. Despite this latest development, I’d be surprised if Asomugha goes anywhere this year.