McNabb a Hall of Famer?
A discussion of Donovan McNabb and the Hall of Fame.
McNabb a Hall of Famer?
Rich Hofmann, Daily News Sports Columnist
Interesting conversation this morning on “Mike and Mike” on ESPN. Mike Greenberg was saying that Donovan McNabb is definitely a Hall of Fame quarterback right now. Mike Golic said he is close, knocking on the door, but not quite there.
Michael Barkann asked me the same question Monday night on “Daily News Live.” What I said, boiled down, is this: I think McNabb is the best quarterback in the history of the franchise but that it’s really hard to get into the Hall of Fame without winning a Super Bowl, that you really need superior stats if you are going to get in without winning and that McNabb’s aren’t at that level.
(I also said that Phil Simms, who won a Super Bowl, says he wouldn’t put himself into the Hall of Fame and that McNabb is in a similar statistical boat. I was wrong there. They played in very different philosophical systems but McNabb’s stats are much better.)
Anyway, on “Mike and Mike,” they compared his stats to those of Troy Aikman and Steve Young. There are a million stats out there, and I have picked out a handful. They reflect my personal measures of what I think is important if you are going to make a stat argument. Anyway:
Aikman…3 SB wins…5 10-win seasons…81.6 QB rating…1.17 TD/Int.
Young…1 SB win…5 10-win seasons…96.8 QB rating…2.17 TD/Int.
McNabb…0 SB wins…4 10-win seasons…85.9 QB rating…2.16 TD/Int.
When you look at it, Aikman is in because of the Super Bowls and I would vote for him every time. If you compare Young and McNabb – who always have been an interesting stylistic match as well – they are very similar players. Young completed a higher percentage of his passes. Young also had a much higher yards-per-attempt – a very instructive stat, but some of which was because he played with great receivers for longer than McNabb did.
They are very, very similar. There are differences, yes, but the biggest difference is the Super Bowl, which is what I said on DNL. You can like it or hate it but that’s just the way the system works.
It’s really a fascinating topic. McNabb is a fascinating player. Because he is the best quarterback the Eagles have ever had, and he also is a guy who was terrible in the middle of this season and played badly enough to get benched (even if Kevin Kolb against the Ravens was not a better option). I don’t think those are inconsistent positions, either. I think they reflect the facts at hand.
In the post-season, the stats have been unremarkable but McNabb has really played well, just commanding the important moments of the game. That’s kind of a nebulous concept, not all that measurable, except by the final score.
And in the end, that is how NFL quarterbacks are measured: by the final score.
Comment removed.
lonewolf: as of right now mcnabb has not played as long as randall and all his numbers are better... so can you please tell me where that logic comes from? Mcnabb is with out a doubt a hall of famer and anyone that understands football knows that... stop with the super bowl talk it takes a team to win.. the hall of fame is an individual achievement and he deserves it.— bleed green forever- Comment removed.
- Shouldn't we wait until he retires to have this discussion? There are still 2 games to be played this season.— Rob
- Kurt Warner has benefited by having excellent skill players around him at St. Louis and Arizona. That is why he has put up such great numbers and won two super bowls. He makes the HOF as a result. In regard to McNabb, if he wins a super bowl, he makes the HOF. Otherwise, he needs to put up some good numbers for another 3-4 years to get in.— PortCity
- I think is way too premature to talk about HOF. Mr. Hoffman, I think you have other/better stuff to write about.— CapitanesFua
- As we know, the press has some say in these things, and this article is a pperfect example of the animous nature of that relationship with McNabb. This reporter choses only to include those stats that McNabb does not surpass the others as an example of why he may not merit selection. It takes the fans in this section to point out that he did all of this without benefit of a game-breaking receiver, and in fact had to do it in many years without even good ones. Philly reporters are the worst!— joeibt
- In his prime, McNabb was feared by his peers. Right now, he is not feared--there is little big play ability left. He never perfected passing above the shins or out in front of a running receiver. I'd say Randall Cunningham was more dangerous for a longer stretch. In the past 10 years, only McNabb, P. Manning, and Brady could be considered. Favre is wayyy overrated. Favre only dangerous for his first 7 seasons, mostly at the expense of awful Bears teams (I live in Chicago, so I relish when the Eagles tromp the Bears and Packers).
- Comment removed.
- Since when winning a championship in any sport is a prerequisite to be in the Hall of Fame or to be a good player for that matter? If that’s the case, the Luis Polonia should be in Baseball HOF because he has like 5 WS rings. Any player, and in this case a QB, can have a great game (ro series) and win a championship. HOF careers are built through the years. McNabb has the numbers to be there, in my opinion. But because of his detractors he may need to win a SB or two to be inducted. It is a shame because he has better numbers than Aikman and similar numbers than Steve Young, in spite of not having future HOFs or good offensive players (besides BrianW and TO for one year) playing along side him like these two.— EL Zorro
- I think if McNabb plays 5-7 more years and continues to win games and put up similar stats he can get in without winning a superbowl... a Superbowl win and he's in!— Philly Dom
- Great story Rich. I think that McNabb is awfully close but that 0 Super Bowl win stat really hurts him. If you consider the fact that he's had no receivers to throw to pretty much his entire career with the exception of 1 or 2 years, you get a feeling for how great a player he is. Unfortunately, when a voter looks at it, they won't be able to get past the 0 super bowl stat. So until he wins a super bowl, I don't think he'll make it. You also have to consider that this is the age of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning so that will hurt him also. If he wins a Super Bowl, it's a different story. Any notion that the defense has helped him is ridiculous. Defense has been good but it doesn't add or take away from his performance. There's also the notion in Philly that he's not good in the playoffs but the reality is that he's been spectacular. Sure, he's lost 3 NFC Championship games, twice to better teams. Overall, he's been good in the playoffs and he's not the sole reason for their losses in the playoffs. If he gets time to throw, he's usually money. Nice topic.— PhillyFanSince86
- Comment removed.
- The jury is still out on McNabb's career. Elway, for example, reached his pinnacle after 35 with 2 SB wins. What happens between now and about 2013 will resolve this debate, which can go either way. This whole argument is premature.— Bobby G
- The jury is still out on McNabb's career. Elway, for example, reached his pinnacle after 35 with 2 SB wins. What happens between now and about 2013 will resolve this debate, which can go either way. This whole argument is premature.— Bobby G
