What Will Donovan McNabb's Legacy Be?

**HiloVulcan** · 07-13-2010, 04:41 AM

Originally Posted by DannyMilk

I think even with a ring he isn't a HOFer...It's so hard, in the current state of anything, to think ahead and look back. Say 2025 comes around...will there be an argument...Who deserves to be a Hall of Famer more...Donovan McNabb, or Mark Brunell...easy answer, right? OBVIOUSLY MCNABB!!! Well, not really as of today. I know McNabb will tally more yards before his career is over, but as of right now, their stats are very very similar. So yes, he's had a good career, but unless he gets a ring, and tallies a couple more 3,000 yard seasons, I don't see it happening.

Look at the number of playoff wins v. Brady, Manning. Obviously those two have rings but the number of all three will surprise you. Look at Brunell's record as a starter v. McNabb's as well as Pro Bowls. Then again, compare to Manning and Brady. I also don't remember Brunell ever finishing 2nd in MVP voting. He's barely above .500 as a starter. Finally, look at who are the winningest QB's since McNabb's been in the league. The winning percentages and names of those in the top 3 will surprise you. And I'm sure I don't need to throw in the td-int ratio all time.

If none of the aforementioned came as a surprise to you, then I don't know how you could say their stats are very very similar. Unless of course you are only looking at passing yards because McNabb has a whole season's worth of TD's more than Brunell, and, you guessed it, fewer career picks.

**DannyMilk** · 07-13-2010, 05:12 AM

I'm not saying McNabb's not better than Brunell...I'm just trying to look into the future, because some players seem invincible and **** now, but in the history of the game, maybe they aren't in that top tier, which would be the Hall of Fame. Also, keep in mind, Brunell was on a Jacksonville team that was a franchise...should be a credit to him that they ever got to the playoffs. He had 10 career playoff games, McNabb has 16...so that makes him a Hall of Famer? Brunell was .500 as a playoff starter, McNabb's a game over at 9-7. Listen, I'm not arguing the fact that McNabb is better...it's a fact. I'm just saying, when you look back in 15-20 years, when there are 30 more quarterbacks with the same if not better stats, is he a Hall of Famer or just a really good player?

**HiloVulcan** · 07-13-2010, 04:14 PM

I think the true test is asking yourself, "would he have been dominant in any era?". I think with McNabb the answer to that question is yes. Along with Brady and Manning. In fact, a younger McNabb would've ripped up those slower secondaries of yesteryear. If you really think about it, McNabb was what people thought Vick would become - the perfect blend of mobility against the rush, threat to run and pocket passing ability. His rushing yardage is among the highest in NFL history at the QB position, and his passing statistics are also in the upper tier. I still remember the 00-01 season before they drafted Westbrook. He accounted for 70% of that year's offense. That was the year he finished 2nd in MVP voting to Faulk in his first year as a starter. I'm not so sure there's ever been a QB who's done more with less throughout his career.

If I were McNabb, I would take any mention of Brunell's name and mine in the same sentence as an insult.

Can't just be a stats monkey. Schaub just passed for 4,700 yards, and no one can tell me they think this guy is dominant and can take over games. You're going to get inflated numbers with the rule changes, and changes in offensive philosophy. It becomes more important to look at the complete picture at that point.

**DannyMilk** · 07-13-2010, 06:06 PM

Funny thing is that I'm not a stats guy all that much really haha. I think McNabb was very good. He was groomed to be that way. The high school he went to is an athletic POWERHOUSE (as much as I hate them), and he proved himself. I'm just trying to make a point that I'm not quite sure if he DOES stand out enough, as far as the big picture goes. As far as cultural impact, is it bigger than Cunningham even though Cunningham did it first in a way? And I agree with the Vick thing, although, well, Vick gets his own category. And I will say, playing as Vick in Madden was one of the most fun times of my life haha. As of now I don't feel he's a HOF...next few years will be deciding factor in my opinion.

Nice avatar btw...good work.

**HiloVulcan** · 07-13-2010, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by DannyMilk

Funny thing is that I'm not a stats guy all that much really haha. I think McNabb was very good. He was groomed to be that way. The high school he went to is an athletic POWERHOUSE (as much as I hate them), and he proved himself. I'm just trying to make a point that I'm not quite sure if he DOES stand out enough, as far as the big picture goes. As far as cultural impact, is it bigger than Cunningham even though Cunningham did it first in a way? And I agree with the Vick thing, although, well, Vick gets his own category. And I will say, playing as Vick in Madden was one of the most fun times of my life haha. As of now I don't feel he's a HOF...next few years will be deciding factor in my opinion.

Nice avatar btw...good work.

Good words... thanks bruh.