Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

[ QUOTE ]
This article doesn't even deserve coment it is so absurd it should just be ignored. As far as top five QB's go I don't know how to rank them but McNabb is close if he is not in and how does Farve (I know he's just about done and the pack sucks but still) not even get mentioned?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh come on, you want me to mention Favre, too? Do you want me to get lynched?

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Plummer & Bledsoe on the same level as McNabb? OK now I know you've been drinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bledsoe's kind've tough to figure out. He had below average years his last two in Buffalo, but he's always been pretty good aside from that; certainly better than what McNabb always turned in pre-2004. As a Cowboy, he's returned to those levels.

Plummer's also a weird case. He's finally come around the last two years, but whether or not that has to do completely with Denver I'm not sure. Seeing as though Denver isnt' exactly a great pass-blocking team, I think we can say it isn't all Denver.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you look at Bledsoe's tenure in NE it was certainly not better than McNabb pre-2004. His postseason performances were atrocious. The year they went to the SB the Pats defense gave up 0 TD's in the AFC playoffs and the offense did squat other than 200 rushing yards by Curtis Martin vs. Pittsburgh. Against Jacksonville they're up 13-6 late in the 4th when the defense scores to ice it. The one offensive TD came after the Jags fumbled on their own 5. Drew really did nothing and that was by far his BEST postseason, and this was with a HOF RB, legendary coach and great TE.

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bledsoe's kind've tough to figure out. He had below average years his last two in Buffalo, but he's always been pretty good aside from that; certainly better than what McNabb always turned in pre-2004. As a Cowboy, he's returned to those levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

????

Before this year, Bledsoe has been mediocre to bad every year since 1998 with the exception of 2002. He really only had a 3 year run from 1996-1998 when he could be considered a top-notch quarterback.

McNabb's 2004 is far better than anything Bledsoe ever did, and his 2001 and 2002 are in the same ballpark, if perhaps slighly worse, than Bledsoe's peak, with much less talent to work with. He was also having a season this year that would have compared well with Bledsoe's best years. Basically, the guy is in his prime and his probably better now than Bledsoe ever was, much less than Bledsoe is currently (although he's having a surprising and probably aberrantly good season).

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

Good post - I would also like to add that he sucked in the 2nd half of 2002, though he played well enough in the first 8 games to give him good looking stats for the season.

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

McNabb's 2001 and 2002 "are in the same ballpark" as his 2004? 2004 is far and away better than anything's he's ever done or will ever do again. In fact, Bledsoe's 2002 was better than McNabb's. So was his 2000. 2001 obviously doesn't come into play, but McNabb was playing better. However, Bledsoe played better in 2005 than McNabb.

I really don't understand why everyone thinks McNabb has been so good. He hasn't. He rode a good defense and a good running game (partially due to him) in a weak conference and division to the nfc championship game. It took Terrell Owens for him to have a great season, and they still fell short in the Super Bowl. Why doesn't anyone outside of Philly say "Donovan McNabb can't win the big game?" Or Michael Vick for that matter?

TO made Jeff Garcia look good, too.

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

[ QUOTE ]
McNabb's 2001 and 2002 "are in the same ballpark" as his 2004?

[/ QUOTE ]

I said McNabb's 2001 and 2002 were in the same ballpark as Bledsoe's peak between 1996-1998. McNabb's 2004 is clearly better than anything Bledsoe has ever done. He is still a youngish quarterback arguably in the middle of his prime. TO might have helped him last year, but he has had terrible skill players to work with in previous years, especially at the WR slot. I'm not arguing that he's great, but he's certainly a lot better than Drew Bledsoe.

With Bledsoe you have 13 years to draw from. He has never had a dominant season and before this year had one good year in the last six.

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

[ QUOTE ]
Both of them were pretty average QBs their whole career until they got a top WR, and now they've suddenly found life.

Well, okay, my point was a lot stronger before Randy Moss was hurt but Collins was insane the first couple of weeks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kerry Collins has average numbers almost his whole career because he is an average QB. But McNabb's numbers are still a lot better than Collins. He has a a 2/1 TD/INT ratio while Collins has been almost exectly 1/1. He has a much better QB rating than Collins does. His completion % has even been higher. Bledsoe has a little bit better numbers than Collins but still not as good as McNabb's career numbers.

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Both of them were pretty average QBs their whole career until they got a top WR, and now they've suddenly found life.

Well, okay, my point was a lot stronger before Randy Moss was hurt but Collins was insane the first couple of weeks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kerry Collins has average numbers almost his whole career because he is an average QB. But McNabb's numbers are still a lot better than Collins. He has a a 2/1 TD/INT ratio while Collins has been almost exectly 1/1. He has a much better QB rating than Collins does. His completion % has even been higher. Bledsoe has a little bit better numbers than Collins but still not as good as McNabb's career numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are we looking at career numbers? What Kerry and Bledsoe did pre-2000 really has no bearing on today. Kerry post-2000 looks a lot better than Kerry pre-2000 (for a myriad of reasons, the biggest of which is probably no longer playing drunk).

Kerry's 2002 was pretty close to McNabb's 2004. It's important to take into account the huge jump in offense last year. Comparing 2002 to 2004 is like comparing baseball in 86 to 87.

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

You say McNabb only did well with TO, but if you say that you have to consider.
Peyton without Marv and Reggie
Carson without Chad
Roethlisberger without Hines
etc.

Re: Donovan Mcnabb and the NAACP
 

Peyton is just in his own stratosphere in terms of production. Couple that with scouting, etc, and I think we can agree that Peyton isn't Peyton because of Harrison.

With Chad and Hines we can see their effects on other QBs. Maddox and Batch were horrible this year (and Maddox was horrible last year), so have a pretty decent idea that Roeth isn't just a product of the people around him. Kitna was off and on as the Bengals QB. Palmer was only above avrage last year with mostly the same people; I think Palmer represents either a true fluke or a step forward.

I dunno, am I making sense here? McNabb had pretty much set a level of performance and then TO came along and his performance spiked.