Is Donovan McNabb a Hall of Famer?

[da ThRONe]

Quote: Originally Posted by rangerrick012

Miami already has Moore who wasn't awful last year, and signed Garrard as well. Don't see him fitting in there. The ironic thing is, he may have entered the T.O. category as far as teams not wanting him because of the distraction he'd cause in the locker room. When he left Minnesota they said he was late to practices and meetings and not studying the playbook well enough.

I forgot about the Garrard signing.

I didn't hear anything about his "issues" with the Vikings. If true than I could definitely see him being "black balled".

[rangerrick012]

Quote: Originally Posted by da ThRONe

I forgot about the Garrard signing. I didn't hear anything about his "issues" with the Vikings. If true than I could definitely see him being "black balled".

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...t-in-the-time/

[da ThRONe]

Quote: Originally Posted by rangerrick012

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...t-in-the-time/

Maybe all of that has made McNabb more focused. I think the whole situation with the Eagles took his spirit to play. I wish him the best he's been a model citizen pretty much all his career hate to see it stained with the last two years.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

I'm not even sure what the argument is anymore. Are you debating whether or not he deserves to be in the HOF? Because that's never really been a question. Your last sentence is what really confuses me. Maybe you meant "Anybody, unless you're putting up elite numbers year in/out." In which case, not winning a SB still is a negative to your HOF resume, it's just not enough to keep you out. In the same sense I disagree that it's a big deal to lose those games and I just don't think I'm explaining my reason well enough. In short, the number of QBs that have been in position to win or lose those games is pretty small. So, imo, it should only be an accomplishment to get there and presumptuous to assume that the average QB to have the success to get that many opportunities should be expected to do better. This is especially true bc had the Eagles won more of those games, McNabb would likely be a HOF lock. All I'm saying is for what he is (just on the outside of the HOF level) these are accomplishments. In other words, had they not played in those games and the only long run was to the SB that they lost, his case doesn't become better. Those games were a chance for him to improve his resume and he failed to do that. It's a big case of semantics... I guess at this point either you understand what I mean or you don't. Not that big of a deal.

I understand what you mean.

You think going 1-4 in Conference Title Games is not a big deal and shouldn't really matter, while I think it is something you definitely cannot ignore.

Quote: Originally Posted by ThePPL

Home field advantage is overrated. Nearly every year a team with a first round bye and has home field advantage will be one and done. You look at the Packers last season and they were one and done. 2010 season: #1 seed Falcons, one and done. #1 seed Patriots, one and done. 2009 season: #2 seed Chargers, one and done. 2008 season: #1 seed Giants, one and done. #2 seed Panthers, one and done. #1 seed Titans, one and done. 2007 season: #1 seed Cowboys, one and done. #2 seed Colts, one and done. What the Bills accomplished is a big deal and is something that happens possibly once in a life time. But I don't think home field advantage means much. Look at the Packers home field advantage in the playoffs in 08 and 12. And then you look at 2011 where they played every playoff game away and won the Super Bowl. As for McNabb, he is 1 of only 9 quarterbacks to have made 5 or more conference championship game appearances. That sounds pretty historic considering how many quarterbacks have played the game (But because he hasn't won a lot of them or the "big one", he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame).

2000-01: #1 Seed NY Giants make the Super Bowl
2001-02: #1 Seed St. Louis makes the Super Bowl
2002-03: #1 Seed Oakland makes the Super Bowl
2003-04: #1 Seed New England makes the Super Bowl
2004-05: #1 Seed Philadelphia makes the Super Bowl(I guess HFA was overrated here too huh )
2005-06: #1 Seed Seattle makes the Super Bowl
2006-07: #1 Seed Chicago makes the Super Bowl
2007-08: #1 Seed New England makes the Super Bowl
2008-09 No #1 Seed makes the Super Bowl
2009-10: Both #1 Seeds make the Super Bowl
2010-11: No #1 Seed make the Super Bowl
2011-12: #1 Seed New England makes the Super Bowl.

So how exactly is HFA overrated when there's only been 2 instances in the last 12 years where the team with HFA didn't make it to the Super Bowl?

As for the second bolded point, what's his record compared to the other 9? Matter of fact, what were his numbers like in those games compared to the others? Guarantee it's nowhere near as good as the other 8 QBs.

Either way, no matter what kind of arguments you want to make, dude ain't no HOF QB. Period.

[Heroiczero13]

It pains me to think of it like this, but I don't think he ever gets into the Hall. Being an Eagles fan my whole life and having seen his career and rooting for him constantly I want to give him every benefit of the doubt but he just doesn't have the credentials. The last few years especially have really knocked him down the pegs. During his last year in Philadelphia I thought "A few more years like this and I think he can get it", but after the debacles in Washington and Minnesota I don't know how he will get a chance to prove he can do it. He'll always be one of my favorites but I do not believe he will be in Canton when everything is said and done.

[ThePPL]

Quote: Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan

2000-01: #1 Seed NY Giants make the Super Bowl 2001-02: #1 Seed St. Louis makes the Super Bowl 2002-03: #1 Seed Oakland makes the Super Bowl 2003-04: #1 Seed New England makes the Super Bowl 2004-05: #1 Seed Philadelphia makes the Super Bowl(I guess HFA was overrated here too huh ) 2005-06: #1 Seed Seattle makes the Super Bowl 2006-07: #1 Seed Chicago makes the Super Bowl 2007-08: #1 Seed New England makes the Super Bowl 2008-09 No #1 Seed makes the Super Bowl 2009-10: Both #1 Seeds make the Super Bowl 2010-11: No #1 Seed make the Super Bowl 2011-12: #1 Seed New England makes the Super Bowl. So how exactly is HFA overrated when there's only been 2 instances in the last 12 years where the team with HFA didn't make it to the Super Bowl?

Ok. I see the way you're trying to twist it.

2000-01 #1 seed Titans one and done
2001-02 #1 seed Steelers lose to Patriots
2002-03 #1 seed Eagles lose to Buccaneers
2003-04 #1 seed Eagles lose to Panthers
2004-05 #1 seed Steelers lose to Patriots
2005-06 #1 seed Colts one and done
2006-07 #1 seed Chargers one and done
2007-08 #1 seed Cowboys one and done
2008-09 #1 seed Titans one and done
2008-09 #1 seed Giants one and done
2010-11 #1 seed Patriots one and done
2010-11 #1 seed Falcons one and done
2011-12 #1 seed Packers one and done

There are a surprising amount of teams that were one and done with #1 seeds. It doesn't seem like HFA has the same benefit for every team. You would think more quarterbacks can help their team make it to more conference championship games, but I guess they couldn't even win at least a post-season game before getting eliminated.

I'll be honest. #1 seed benefits some teams. (11 #1 seeds in the last 12 years made it to the Super Bowl). But in some cases, it can do absolutely nothing for some teams as well (9 #1 seeds in the last 12 years were one and done).

Quote: Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan

As for the second bolded point, what's his record compared to the other 9? Matter of fact, what were his numbers like in those games compared to the others? Guarantee it's nowhere near as good as the other 8 QBs. Either way, no matter what kind of arguments you want to make, dude ain't no HOF QB. Period.

McNabb has a better record than 2 out of 8 of those guys. In fact, Only 11 quarterbacks have more regular season wins than Donovan McNabb.

McNabb's passer rating:
2002 CCG: 73.1
2003 CCG: 58.5
2004 CCG: 19.3
2005 CCG: 111.1
2009 CCG: 97.4

Stabler's passer rating:
1974 CCG: 76.2
1975 CCG: 52.0
1976 CCG: 50.3
1977 CCG: 116.7
1978 CCG: 75.3

Favre's passer rating:
1996 CCG: 84.0
1997 CCG: 107.3
1998 CCG: 98.1
2008 CCG: 70.7
2010 CCG: 70.0

Kelly's passer rating:
1989 CCG: 35.1
1991 CCG: 126.6
1992 CCG: 31.6
1993 CCG: 71.0
1994 CCG: 79.2

Staubach's passer rating:
1972 CCG: 67.6
1974 CCG: 19.8
1976 CCG: 112.2
1978 CCG: 71.8
1979 CCG: 59.8

Brady's passer rating:
2002 CCG: 84.3
2004 CCG: 76.1
2005 CCG: 130.5
2007 CCG: 79.5
2012 CCG: 57.5

Elway's passer rating:
1987 CCG: 74.9
1988 CCG: 114.4
1990 CCG: 120.7
1992 CCG: 49.9
1998 CCG: 86.8
1999 CCG: 65.0

Bradshaw's passer rating:
1973 CCG: 70.8
1975 CCG: 59.7
1977 CCG: 61.7
1977 CCG: 44.5
1979 CCG: 89.7
1980 CCG: 90.8

Montana's passer rating:
1982 CCG: 81.4
1984 CCG: 91.2
1985 CCG: 60.0
1989 CCG: 136.0
1990 CCG: 125.3
1991 CCG: 103.0

I think the only guy that looks a lot better than the other quarterbacks was Joe Montana (and maybe Favre). The rest of the guys had their fair share of bad games.

Like I said all along. I don't think McNabb is a Hall of Famer. The victories he's had has helped him get a least some discussions on whether he should be in the HoF or not. But after some examination, you and I are on the same page on whether he should be in or not.

[Patriots#12]

It's really kind of sad as I've always respected McNabb as a really good player and person. I beleive if the Eagles had gone all the way in '08 and won the superbowl he would have a better chance.

McNabb overcame a huge halftime deficit and gave his team the lead late in the game but the defense couldn't hold it. If they had beaten the Cardinals I was pretty certain they could have beaten Pittsburgh as both teams played earlier in the season and the eagles dominated that earlier match up.