Has McNabb guaranteed a place in the Hall of Fame

[NewbieJr 540]

I'm sure if Reid had video cameras on opposing sidelines, McNabb's numbers would be better, and he would have a SB ring or two.

 

Too bad those video cameras were being rented out by some guy they call BB in New England.

Don't forget, despite knowing the Eagles' plays and defensive signals, Mr Best QB Ever edged out Philly by three points. In a fair game, the Eagles romp and we wouldn't even be having this discussion since Mcnabb would already have a ring.

[wiffleball 4,639]

In 2006, they had the same exact passer rating.

 

It's always been about Westbrook and the running game. In 2006, Westbrook averaged 13 carries a game when McNabb was QB. When Garcia took over, he average almost 20 carries a game.

 

Now you'll say it was because the Eagles were winning, and they were running out the clock. However, in three victories that season that McNabb was the starter, Westbrook's carries per game were 17, 8, and 11. Westbrook also missed a game when McNabb was still the starter.

 

It's always been about the balance on offense and Brian Westbrook.

 

Yeah, I've had this conversation on this bored before. Hell, it might have been you. No doubt the play-calling changed. But then the NEXT question you have to ask yourself is WHY? And, more importantly, WHY would they go BACK to the play calling that didn't work as soon as McNabb got back and abandon the play calling that DID work?

 

The answer is this: The Quarterback. There's a reason why the play calling changed last year. Garcia was able to VERY effectively run the play action. McNabb? No way. He's lost his mobility from his earlier years. He can't run the play action for shiit. When you can run the PA, you open up all kinds of options in both the passing and running attack. When McNabb came back, the play calling reverted back to accomodate his limitations.

[The Next Generation 10]

Yeah, I've had this conversation on this bored before. Hell, it might have been you. No doubt the play-calling changed. But then the NEXT question you have to ask yourself is WHY? And, more importantly, WHY would they go BACK to the play calling that didn't work as soon as McNabb got back and abandon the play calling that DID work?

 

The answer is this: The Quarterback. There's a reason why the play calling changed last year. Garcia was able to VERY effectively run the play action. McNabb? No way. He's lost his mobility from his earlier years. He can't run the play action for shiit. When you can run the PA, you open up all kinds of options in both the passing and running attack. When McNabb came back, the play calling reverted back to accomodate his limitations.

 

 

Right answer...very WRONG reasoning.

[The Hood 9]

Is TD to Int ratio bullsh!t?

 

Is winning percentage bullsh!t?

 

Is playoff winning percentage bullsh!t?

 

 

Please let us know what you think is important..... Is it only Supoer Bowl wins? let's reserve a spot for Trent Dilfer then.

How about gaudy stats? Well, then Drew Brees and his 8-8 Saints guaranteed himself a spot in the Hall this year.

 

 

While McNabb may have never been the best QB in the league at any point during his career, he was a top five QB for at least half his career and top ten for the rest. Consistency matters.

FYI, Roger Stauback was never the best, nor was Jurgenson, Kelly, Moon, and many, many others.

Culpepper still has a 89.0 QB rating and Trent Green has about the same as McNabb. Romo is at 94.7 Could be why you shouldn't say that is the only "fair" way to compare QB's and he thinks it's bullsh!t.

[wiffleball 4,639]

 

Right answer...very WRONG reasoning.

 

You're gonna have to fill that one out a bit sparky.

[The Hood 9]

Don't forget, despite knowing the Eagles' plays and defensive signals, Mr Best QB Ever edged out Philly by three points. In a fair game, the Eagles romp and we wouldn't even be having this discussion since Mcnabb would already have a ring.

Brady also has a 92.9 rating and a better winning % for his career. Why do you knock him with much better of the stats you feel best show how good a QB is yet want more respect for McNabb? Doesn't make sense.......

[kutulu 1,545]

Brian Dawkins did.

[The Next Generation 10]

You're gonna have to fill that one out a bit sparky.

 

 

Exactly, when Garcia came in the offensive game plan changed to minimize his exposure and maximize his short throws. With McNabb in there, they always seem to think he'll perform miracles and they put way too much on his shoulders week-in and week-out. Lately, though, they seem to be having an epiphany about that. Let's hope it continues.

[Stewburtx8 67]

Yeah, I've had this conversation on this bored before. Hell, it might have been you. No doubt the play-calling changed. But then the NEXT question you have to ask yourself is WHY? And, more importantly, WHY would they go BACK to the play calling that didn't work as soon as McNabb got back and abandon the play calling that DID work?

 

The answer is this: The Quarterback. There's a reason why the play calling changed last year. Garcia was able to VERY effectively run the play action. McNabb? No way. He's lost his mobility from his earlier years. He can't run the play action for shiit. When you can run the PA, you open up all kinds of options in both the passing and running attack. When McNabb came back, the play calling reverted back to accomodate his limitations.

 

 

Wow are you serious? Do you watch the Eagles at all? Just because Donovan isn't taking off running the ball down the field does not mean he is not mobile. He is plenty mobile in the pocket and made quite a few Minnesota defenders miss yesterday. He is also quite capable of running the play action. He is probably still more mobile than Jeff Garcia at this point. The difference is Andy Reid's mentality. For some reason when Donovan is in the game, he wants to put the ball in his hands and only his hands. So you got part of the answer right I'd say. The difference is the quaterback, but none of that is Donovan McNabb or Donovan McNabb's skills fault at this point. You could ask every team in the NFL right now if they'd take McNabb or Jeff Garcia, and I'm pretty sure McNabb is going to be the answer every time. Garcia is a good NFL QB, McNabb has been a VERY good NFL QB.

[NewbieJr 540]

Brady also has a 92.9 rating and a better winning % for his career. Why do you knock him with much better of the stats you feel best show how good a QB is yet want more respect for McNabb? Doesn't make sense.......

Not knocking Brady, I'm using him as a measuring stick. I know that Brady is a first ballot HOFer, even if he never plays another down. The fact that he beat the Eagles, and McNabb, by three measly points under very suspicious circumstances speaks highly of McNabb.

 

People love to talk about how Mcnabb choked in that Super Bowl, but Brady didn't exactly blow his doors off. And we're talking about Mr Clutch here, right?

 

That's my point.

[NewbieJr 540]

 

Wow are you serious? Do you watch the Eagles at all? Just because Donovan isn't taking off running the ball down the field does not mean he is not mobile. He is plenty mobile in the pocket and made quite a few Minnesota defenders miss yesterday. He is also quite capable of running the play action. He is probably still more mobile than Jeff Garcia at this point. The difference is Andy Reid's mentality. For some reason when Donovan is in the game, he wants to put the ball in his hands and only his hands. So you got part of the answer right I'd say. The difference is the quaterback, but none of that is Donovan McNabb or Donovan McNabb's skills fault at this point. You could ask every team in the NFL right now if they'd take McNabb or Jeff Garcia, and I'm pretty sure McNabb is going to be the answer every time. Garcia is a good NFL QB, McNabb has been a VERY good NFL QB.

Week 17, 2008. Jeff Garcia and Donovan McNabb both need a win to lead their team to teh playoffs.

 

McNabb beats the also-playoff-contending Dallas Cowboys, 44-6.

Garcia loses to the second worst team in the NFL.

 

That's the difference. It's also why I laugh at those who claim that McNabb doesn't win big games. He's played six huge games since the Cincinnati tie, and four of them have been against playoff-caliber teams. He's not only won 5 of the 6, he's played extraordinary in them. Hell, he could end up beating the Giants in New York, Carolina in Carolina, and losing the Super Bowl, and the only big game they'll say he played all year is the Super Bowl. That's pretty short-sighted.

[wiffleball 4,639]

 

Now that's just plain stupid. McNabb's immobility was well documented back then. But sure, THIS makes much more football sense: "they always seem to think he'll perform miracles".

 

Geejus, that's not even worth addressing.

 

In McNabb's heyday, he was averaging over 500 yards rushing and scored 14 rushing TD's in 3 years. The last 3 years? Less than 200 yards rushing and 5 rushing TD's in 3 years. Still think his mobility hasn't severely diminished?

 

If you don't "get" that his mobility has taken a HUGE hit. If you don't "get" that Garcia is great out of the pocket and McNabb isn't, there's - that's just common focking knowledge - there's just no point in even addressing it. You'd have to not ever watch football to not know that.

 

But yeah, stick with the intangibles like "they want him to perform miracles." Excellent football analysis.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Is TD to Int ratio bullsh!t?

 

Is winning percentage bullsh!t?

 

Is playoff winning percentage bullsh!t?

Please let us know what you think is important..... Is it only Supoer Bowl wins? let's reserve a spot for Trent Dilfer then.

How about gaudy stats? Well, then Drew Brees and his 8-8 Saints guaranteed himself a spot in the Hall this year.

While McNabb may have never been the best QB in the league at any point during his career, he was a top five QB for at least half his career and top ten for the rest. Consistency matters.

FYI, Roger Stauback was never the best, nor was Jurgenson, Kelly, Moon, and many, many others.

 

As I indicated earlier, McNabb has never been better than 7th in yards for a season. Not once.

 

TD to Int ratio is part of the equation (provided there are enough TD's)

Winning percentage is a component provided that the QB is the one responsible for that and not just a tag-along

Playoff winning percentage is a component, just as the other one is.

 

Trent Dilfer is the guy that you bring up all of the time. How many SB's did he win? One. That does not make a HOF career, but if a guy has the yards, the TD's, the wins, and the gold that puts him above his contemporaries, then he goes into the HOF.

 

I find it funny that there are some talking about cherry-picking of stats, when that is exactly what you are doing. Again, based on the current resume, he probably is not getting in. He is close, which is why we are having the discussion and he may put up better numbers over the course of time, but I don't consider him to be HOF worthy.

[wiffleball 4,639]

 

Wow are you serious? Do you watch the Eagles at all? Just because Donovan isn't taking off running the ball down the field does not mean he is not mobile. He is plenty mobile in the pocket and made quite a few Minnesota defenders miss yesterday. He is also quite capable of running the play action. He is probably still more mobile than Jeff Garcia at this point. The difference is Andy Reid's mentality. For some reason when Donovan is in the game, he wants to put the ball in his hands and only his hands. So you got part of the answer right I'd say. The difference is the quaterback, but none of that is Donovan McNabb or Donovan McNabb's skills fault at this point. You could ask every team in the NFL right now if they'd take McNabb or Jeff Garcia, and I'm pretty sure McNabb is going to be the answer every time. Garcia is a good NFL QB, McNabb has been a VERY good NFL QB.

 

You're mixing apples and oranges here sparky. First off, we're talking about 2 years ago. McNabb only just this year has fully recovered from surgery. You can't bring up what he did yesterday in the context of 2006 for chrissake. Smarten up.

 

Second, To think that McNabb is more mobile than Garcia - Geesus man, do you WATCH football? But more to the point, it's about out of pocket passing. Something that McNabb has in the past seriously struggled with. Garcia? Thrives on it. Mostly because he's like 5'4", but still. That opens up one HELL of a lot of things in the offense. The reason the play calling changed? Because it COULD. Why else would they revert BACK in 2007?

 

Either that, or you have to think that Andy Reid was deliberately trying to shiitcan McNabb by reverting back to the winning play calling under Garcia and deliberately shackling McNabb to make him fail. Do you honestly think that? Because that's your only option.

[NewbieJr 540]

Now that's just plain stupid. McNabb's immobility was well documented back then. But sure, THIS makes much more football sense: "they always seem to think he'll perform miracles".

 

Geejus, that's not even worth addressing.

 

In McNabb's heyday, he was averaging over 500 yards rushing and scored 14 rushing TD's in 3 years. The last 3 years? Less than 200 yards rushing and 5 rushing TD's in 3 years. Still think his mobility hasn't severely diminished?

 

If you don't "get" that his mobility has taken a HUGE hit. If you don't "get" that Garcia is great out of the pocket and McNabb isn't, there's - that's just common focking knowledge - there's just no point in even addressing it. You'd have to not ever watch football to not know that.

 

But yeah, stick with the intangibles like "they want him to perform miracles." Excellent football analysis.

To his credit, many running quarterbacks would never be able to make the change to a successful pocket quarterback after sustaining the injuries McNabb has. He's really had two seperate careers.

 

While he'll never again have a 500 yard rushing year, he's much more mobile than he was last year. He's not much of a runner, but he's still very mobile and elusive.

[Eagles Green 34]

The very fact that we are seriously discussing McNabb being traded (and have every offseason for years) is a clear indication that he is not HOF worthy. You don't hear the Colts talking about trading Manning do you? Pats with Brady (assuming the knee goes ok).

 

You don't trade a HOF QB in his prime. The fact that McNabb always seems to be on the block shows that he aint HOF worthy.

 

Seriously, does anyone here seriously think that McNabb is in the top 5 QB's in the league right now? I don't.

Really?

 

 

Who led the league in passing yardage this year?

 

 

 

 

 

Drew Brees.

[Stewburtx8 67]

Now that's just plain stupid. McNabb's immobility was well documented back then. But sure, THIS makes much more football sense: "they always seem to think he'll perform miracles".

 

Geejus, that's not even worth addressing.

 

In McNabb's heyday, he was averaging over 500 yards rushing and scored 14 rushing TD's in 3 years. The last 3 years? Less than 200 yards rushing and 5 rushing TD's in 3 years. Still think his mobility hasn't severely diminished?

 

If you don't "get" that his mobility has taken a HUGE hit. If you don't "get" that Garcia is great out of the pocket and McNabb isn't, there's - that's just common focking knowledge - there's just no point in even addressing it. You'd have to not ever watch football to not know that.

 

But yeah, stick with the intangibles like "they want him to perform miracles." Excellent football analysis.

 

 

McNabb does not put up those rushing totals anymore because he CHOOSES not to. With his history of injuries, why open yourself up to taking more hits? He has turned himself in to a pocket passer and is always looking downfield. Earlier in his career he did not do this and would just take off if he didn't have an open receiver on his first or second read, of if their was any sign of pressure. Donovan McNabb not running as much anymore is more about maturity than him losing his mobility. He is still VERY mobile in the pocket. And the Eagles still do run a ton of play action. You don't have to be outside of the pocket to run a play action pass. But in the games where the Eagles choose to not try to run the ball, the play action pass becomes pointless because who is buying the fake anyways. The difference is Andy Reid's mentality when Donovan McNabb is playing QB. He wants the ball in #5's hands all the time for whatever reason. It has nothing to do with McNabb's skills or mobility, or lack thereof.

[NewbieJr 540]

As I indicated earlier, McNabb has never been better than 7th in yards for a season. Not once.

 

TD to Int ratio is part of the equation (provided there are enough TD's)

Winning percentage is a component provided that the QB is the one responsible for that and not just a tag-along

Playoff winning percentage is a component, just as the other one is.

Yeah, McNabb never played much of a factor in his winning seasons and winning playoff games. He's was usually riding the coat tails of Freddie Mitchell, James Trash, Todd Pinkston, and his other all-star cast of receivers.

 

FAYLE

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Yeah, McNabb never played much of a factor in his winning seasons and winning playoff games. He's was usually riding the coat tails of Freddie Mitchell, James Trash, Todd Pinkston, and his other all-star cast of receivers.

 

FAYLE

 

You are really slow on the uptake. I was not speaking specifically of McNabb. His winning percentage in the regular season AND playoffs is a plus for him. No question about it. I was saying that there are a lot of parts to it and you are just picking the ones that you think make him a no-brainer. I think that the other components, like his individual stats put him on the outside looking in.

 

FALE!

[wiffleball 4,639]

To his credit, many running quarterbacks would never be able to make the change to a successful pocket quarterback after sustaining the injuries McNabb has. He's really had two seperate careers.

 

While he'll never again have a 500 yard rushing year, he's much more mobile than he was last year. He's not much of a runner, but he's still very mobile and elusive.

 

Absolutely agree with virtually everything you posted. He's made a full switch from relying too much on his legs to being a deep pocket passer I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say VERY mobile and elusive, but he can be when he needs to. Somewhere in here you'll see a post by me saying McNabb would have one of his best years in a long time this year. The surgery he had really takes 2 years to heal properly and he was nowhere NEAR healed last year.

 

 

Like I said originally, I like the guy. His fans? A little too Favre-like in many regards - too quick to apologize, too quick to cannonize. But DMac has always been a class act in the toughest sports ton in the league. In the context of the QB's who've been inducted recently, I don't know that numbers alone - either stats or post-season gives him enough "oomph" to get into the HOF, but he's not done yet. I'd hope he could get to the Vikes, but I don't see that happening. I don't see McNabb leaving Philly, but maybe they can get rid of Reid. Like Shanny, I think after 10 years, you tend to get stale. It'd be better for all to see him go IMHO.

 

[The Hood 9]

Not knocking Brady, I'm using him as a measuring stick. I know that Brady is a first ballot HOFer, even if he never plays another down. The fact that he beat the Eagles, and McNabb, by three measly points under very suspicious circumstances speaks highly of McNabb.

 

People love to talk about how Mcnabb choked in that Super Bowl, but Brady didn't exactly blow his doors off. And we're talking about Mr Clutch here, right?

 

That's my point.

 

0 INT's vs 3 INT's

 

That is the difference in "clutch" vs "choke." Same turnover story in many of McNabb's Conf. Champ. losses too.

 

 

Don't really want to pile on him because he gets WAY too much crap and other than Brady and Manning and have to say Warner is probably is the 4th best QB of the last 10 years and 4-5 more years of good numbers I would not be surprised if he does get in the HOF. Don't think he deserves it but neither did Kelly or Moon in my eyes. QB's get in way too easy.......

[9-Route 0]

Dude, if you want to side with those who don't think he'll get in, that's fine. The opinion seems to be split. But to claim he's got zero chance would be to completely disregard his career passer rating, winning percentage, and playoff winning percentage, makes you sound like an idiot.

 

Also, McNabb's top twenty career totals will undoubtedly go up once he's actually played an entire career.

 

the point was made whether sunday's performance/this season solidified his HOF candidacy, and it is a high% 'no' that that particular performance solidified/increased any credentials for the HOF. sunday was a relevantly nonspectacular road playoff win in the first round, and this season was not anything special, on top of being bad at times, showing poor game knowledge, and being benched---not the credential pushing dramatic vote changing event for a HOF induction.

 

the HOF is more than just winning playoff games, passer ratings, etc. at this point, he is a zero chance, period. what differentiates him from several other candidates? nothing. like i said, he currently is a 10yr qb who has had some success, but does not have a HOF tally [stats] nor HOF superlative credentials [multiple rings].

 

when you add your corollary of "a few more seasons" or "ever", then the equation changes obviously. surely, if he attains more career stats and adds some impressive credentials to his resume, his candidate package gets better looking; however, there are several candidates at his position with better career totals and credentials who are not in, or are better candidates to get in. [the entirely different argument has not even started yet between significant players from "3 ring" teams versus very good zero-ring players.]

 

at this time, he is a zero chance [to me], and probably 1-20% chance among HOF voters based upon the current candidate pool and his current resume compared to inductees. there is nothing to standout as a HOFer. when voters open the folder on him, the first two things noted are 1] 4 conf chmp games, 1 SB, 0 rings; and 2] despite all the drama/discussion/analysis, his best season was 2004, and for whatever reason, he has never reached those marks since that time

[NewbieJr 540]

That is the difference in "clutch" vs "choke." Same turnover story in many of McNabb's Conf. Champ. losses too.

Don't really want to pile on him because he gets WAY too much crap and other than Brady and Manning and have to say Warner is probably is the 4th best QB of the last 10 years and 4-5 more years of good numbers I would not be surprised if he does get in the HOF.

I disagree on Warner. Warner's had some VERY ideal situations. PThrowing to Holt and Bruce in Martz' crazy offense (indoors), and throwing to Fitzgerald andBoldin in sunny Arizona. When he went to the Giants, he was average or even below-average. When his Cardinals travel to bad weather, he's way below average.

 

McNabb has played his entire career on the East coast. If Warner had stayed a giant, he'd probably be out of football.

 

Warner's just a guy who puts up great numbers if all conditions are perfect. He's good, but he certainly has never been tested like McNabb has.

[Stewburtx8 67]

You're mixing apples and oranges here sparky. First off, we're talking about 2 years ago. McNabb only just this year has fully recovered from surgery. You can't bring up what he did yesterday in the context of 2006 for chrissake. Smarten up.

 

Second, To think that McNabb is more mobile than Garcia - Geesus man, do you WATCH football? But more to the point, it's about out of pocket passing. Something that McNabb has in the past seriously struggled with. Garcia? Thrives on it. Mostly because he's like 5'4", but still. That opens up one HELL of a lot of things in the offense. The reason the play calling changed? Because it COULD. Why else would they revert BACK in 2007?

 

Either that, or you have to think that Andy Reid was deliberately trying to shiitcan McNabb by reverting back to the winning play calling under Garcia and deliberately shackling McNabb to make him fail. Do you honestly think that? Because that's your only option.

 

 

OK yes i was looking at McNabb of 2008. Obviously, in 2006, coming off the injury, he was not as mobile as he is again today. A healthy Donovan McNabb is still VERY mobile. The play calling was different because the Eagles did not trust Garcia to run the same offense. The ran the ball and played defense, and asked Garcia to make a few clutch throws a game. When Donovan is in there, they revert back to a throw first offense. Do I agree with it? Not usually, but for whatever reason it's Andy Reid's philosophy.

[Stewburtx8 67]

the point was made whether sunday's performance/this season solidified his HOF candidacy, and it is a high% 'no' that that particular performance solidified/increased any credentials for the HOF. sunday was a relevantly nonspectacular road playoff win in the first round, and this season was not anything special, on top of being bad at times, showing poor game knowledge, and being benched---not the credential pushing dramatic vote changing event for a HOF induction.

 

the HOF is more than just winning playoff games, passer ratings, etc. at this point, he is a zero chance, period. what differentiates him from several other candidates? nothing. like i said, he currently is a 10yr qb who has had some success, but does not have a HOF tally [stats] nor HOF superlative credentials [multiple rings].

 

when you add your corollary of "a few more seasons" or "ever", then the equation changes obviously. surely, if he attains more career stats and adds some impressive credentials to his resume, his candidate package gets better looking; however, there are several candidates at his position with better career totals and credentials who are not in, or are better candidates to get in. [the entirely different argument has not even started yet between significant players from "3 ring" teams versus very good zero-ring players.]

 

at this time, he is a zero chance [to me], and probably 1-20% chance among HOF voters based upon the current candidate pool and his current resume compared to inductees. there is nothing to standout as a HOFer. when voters open the folder on him, the first two things noted are 1] 4 conf chmp games, 1 SB, 0 rings; and 2] despite all the drama/discussion/analysis, his best season was 2004, and for whatever reason, he has never reached those marks since that time

 

Very well put. As a huge Eagles fan and Donovan McNabb supporter, I have a hard time disagreeing with this. My case is that he WILL have the HOF type career numbers with another 2-3 solid years. He would be over 40,000 total yards with over 250 total TD's, and over 100 wins on his resume. Also very low interception numbers. I would agree though that RIGHT now he is not quite there yet.

[kutulu 1,545]

If he gets to another Superbowl and chokes on his own puke again, I'd put that yellow jacket order on hold.

[Foghorn Leghorn 0]

Yeah, I've had this conversation on this bored before. Hell, it might have been you. No doubt the play-calling changed. But then the NEXT question you have to ask yourself is WHY? And, more importantly, WHY would they go BACK to the play calling that didn't work as soon as McNabb got back and abandon the play calling that DID work?

 

The answer is this: The Quarterback. There's a reason why the play calling changed last year. Garcia was able to VERY effectively run the play action. McNabb? No way. He's lost his mobility from his earlier years. He can't run the play action for shiit. When you can run the PA, you open up all kinds of options in both the passing and running attack. When McNabb came back, the play calling reverted back to accomodate his limitations.

 

That was me. As for why they've switched back, I can't answer that. I would, however, postulate that it's because they're trying to get the ball into their playmaker's hands. I find this odd, since that playmaker should be Westbrook and not McNabb, especially when considering the widely held opinion that McNabb has had little talent to throw to. Two other points:

 

1) What does mobility have to do with play-action? Boomer Esiasion was renowned for his play-action fake, as is Peyton Manning - two QBs that I wouldn't exactly describe as mobile. Good play-action occurs when there is an effective running game. By definition, that's difficult to do if they're giving the ball to McNabb so often that the threat of the run isn't taken as seriously.

 

2) Jeff Garcia put up some wonderful numbers for the Niners....when he was playing against weak opponents. Take it from this Niner fan - when the chips were down or when Garcia was playing a stronger team, he shat the bed - badly (much like his game against Oakland this year). I'd take McNabb over Garcia any day of the week, and would never compare them apples to apples.

 

That being said, I'm not sure sure he's HOF worthy (yet). He has had early round playoff success, but I think he still needs that feather in his cap (read: Super Bowl) to make him at least eligible. I think Patriotsfatboy1 hit the nail on the head regarding how he measures against his contemporaries, such as Manning, Brady, and (gulp) even Favre. I think he's been a very good QB since he's come into the NFL, but HOF? Maybe by career's end but at this point....

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

That being said, I'm not sure sure he's HOF worthy (yet). He has had early round playoff success, but I think he still needs that feather in his cap (read: Super Bowl) to make him at least eligible. I think Patriotsfatboy1 hit the nail on the head regarding how he measures against his contemporaries, such as Manning, Brady, and (gulp) even Favre. I think he's been a very good QB since he's come into the NFL, but HOF? Maybe by career's end but at this point....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A broken clock is right twice a day

[redtodd 7]

Do you need to know basic NFL rules (i.e. ties) to be in the HOF?

[Joey Gladstone 33]

I like McNabb, but I dont think he gets in (as of right now)

 

And I'm too lazy to look up stats, but McNair was a much better QB, especially in the clutch.

[Foghorn Leghorn 0]

A broken clock is right twice a day

 

And a broken digital clock (on army hours) only once.

[Stewburtx8 67]

I like McNabb, but I dont think he gets in (as of right now)

 

And I'm too lazy to look up stats, but McNair was a much better QB, especially in the clutch.

 

 

Google is a fascinating search engine. It's pretty damn close right now. Give McNabb another 2-3 good seasons, and statistically he will be pretty far ahead of McNair.

 

McNabb

 

128 starts, 82 wins, 58.9% completion, 29,320 pass yards, 194 pass td's, 90 int's, 3,109 rush yards, 26 rush td's

 

McNair

 

153 starts, 91 wins, 60.1% completion, 31,304 pass yards, 174 pass td's, 119 int's, 3,590 rush yards, 37 rush td's

 

 

So as I've stated previously...McNabb is not there yet. BUT if he has another 2-3 good seasons posting 3,500 pass yards and 20 TD's, then look where he stands among all-time QB's in the NFL. I think it would put him right there statistically. You could be looking at a guy with over 100 career wins, maybe close to 40,000 passing yards, close to 250 passing td's with low interception numbers. Throw in maybe 3500 yards rushing and 30 rushing TD's. I think that would get him in the HOF. But right now...he isn't quite there yet I don't think.

[I have no idea what i'm doing 0]

Don't forget, despite knowing the Eagles' plays and defensive signals, Mr Best QB Ever edged out Philly by three points. In a fair game, the Eagles romp and we wouldn't even be having this discussion since Mcnabb would already have a ring.

[NewbieJr 540]

Do you need to know basic NFL rules (i.e. ties) to be in the HOF?

I think they'll allow both players who don't know there can be ties and players who cheat.

 

HTH

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I think they'll allow both players who don't know there can be ties and players who cheat.

 

HTH

Why the hell not? They let in guys who cut off their ex-wife's head.

[NewbieJr 540]

Google is a fascinating search engine. It's pretty damn close right now. Give McNabb another 2-3 good seasons, and statistically he will be pretty far ahead of McNair.

 

McNabb

 

128 starts, 82 wins, 58.9% completion, 29,320 pass yards, 194 pass td's, 90 int's, 3,109 rush yards, 26 rush td's

 

McNair

 

153 starts, 91 wins, 60.1% completion, 31,304 pass yards, 174 pass td's, 119 int's, 3,590 rush yards, 37 rush td's

So as I've stated previously...McNabb is not there yet. BUT if he has another 2-3 good seasons posting 3,500 pass yards and 20 TD's, then look where he stands among all-time QB's in the NFL. I think it would put him right there statistically. You could be looking at a guy with over 100 career wins, maybe close to 40,000 passing yards, close to 250 passing td's with low interception numbers. Throw in maybe 3500 yards rushing and 30 rushing TD's. I think that would get him in the HOF. But right now...he isn't quite there yet I don't think.

Actually, seeing Mcnabb and McNair's stats together shows, quite easily, that Mcnabb is the better QB.

 

To make the playing field level, Mcnabb needs to play in 25 more games. He'd only have to go 9-16 to equal his win-loss percentage. He'd have to throw more than an interception per game, average only 80 yards passing per game, and, somehow, lose twenty TD passes.

[wiffleball 4,639]

Okay, this nonsense about "well, if we fantasize about another 3 years, he's a lock For Sure!" has to end.

 

The thread title is "has mcnabb guaranteed a place in the HOF", not WILL he.

 

For pete's sake, prior to this season, there were three straight years where he didn't play the whole season due to injury. He's had 2-3 major injuries/surgeries and he's in his tenth season. If anything, there's a far more arguable case that he WON'T be able to play for 3 full straight seasons. He never has.

 

Again, I like the guy, hope he does well. Hope he gets outta Philthy and into the Vikes, but you can't start a thread talking about whether he's done something in the present then when faced with the stats say "well, hey now, in three years....."

 

[Joey Gladstone 33]

Why the hell not? They let in guys who cut off their ex-wife's head.

 

Heyyyyy now! They let him in before he cut her head off.

[Joey Gladstone 33]

Actually, seeing Mcnabb and McNair's stats together shows, quite easily, that Mcnabb is the better QB.

 

To make the playing field level, Mcnabb needs to play in 25 more games. He'd only have to go 9-16 to equal his win-loss percentage. He'd have to throw more than an interception per game, average only 80 yards passing per game, and, somehow, lose twenty TD passes.

 

I wasn't talking just stats. McNair was more of a leader. He was always a rallying point for his team. And if they weren't playing Fisherball with Eddie George the first several years of his career McNair's stats would have been even better. Plus injury wise, the dude was always hurt but almost always played.

 

Oh, and the clincher is that McNair is best friends with Jesus Christ himself. They're fishing buddies.

[redtodd 7]

Do they let in players who are incapable of running the two minute drill?