McNabb a franchise QB?
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
McNabb a franchise QB?
Sheil Kapadia, Philly.com
Any time we write about Donovan McNabb here at MTC, it usually results in the comments section being flooded with insults, name-calling and personal attacks.
But we're going ahead with this post anyway.
Matt Bowen of the National Football Post writes about a topic that Eagles fans have argued about in this city for years: Is McNabb a franchise quarterback?
Here is Bowen's definition of the term:
In my definition, a franchise quarterback can walk into any huddle in the NFL, pick up a football and have immediate success. By saying that, these guys aren’t defined by the system they play in because you don’t have to build a system around them to make them effective. They do it because they can make any throw, run any offense and succeed with any coach and with any type of offensive personnel around them.
Bowen lists five guys he considers franchise quarterbacks: Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Carson Palmer and Philip Rivers.
So where does McNabb rank? In the next group of guys "on the fence" behind Ben Roethlisberger. Here's Bowen's justification:
McNabb is great because he plays in the west coast system in Philly. However, I don’t see him having the success — or the ability to make all the throws — in another offensive system. His accuracy is always a concern, and I question if he could thrive in a vertical attack.
Other guys in the 'On the Fence' group: Kurt Warner, Tony Romo, Eli Manning, Matt Hasselbeck and Jay Cutler.
I would argue that McNabb belongs among the franchise quarterbacks. Before I get to the reasoning, let's take a look at the other guys on Bowen's list.
There's no question that Tom Brady and P. Manning belong in a class of their own. Any team in the league would swap QBs with the Patriots or Colts and immediately improve. That's just a fact.
I'm a big Brees guy, and he certainly has an edge over McNabb when it comes to accuracy. But Brees also throws a lot more interceptions. He and McNabb belong in the same category.
I don't think Palmer has a place among the upper tier at this point in his career. He played in four games last season and threw 20 interceptions the year before. While Bowen excludes winning from his criteria, it's tough to ignore the fact that Palmer has never won a playoff game. Maybe the 2005-06 version of Palmer would be up there, but not the 2009 version.
There are a lot of things to like about Rivers. He takes care of the football. He makes plays without a great receiver (although he has good weapons at RB and TE). And he had a monster 2008 season. But if you put him on the Eagles right now, would you confidently say they'd have a better chance to win in 2009 than they do now? I'm not so sure. And that's what Bowen's definition of a franchise quarterback would indicate.
As for his evaluation of McNabb, I think we can all agree that he'll never be among the most accurate quarterbacks in the league. Bowen argues that McNabb might struggle in a vertical attack, which I disagree with. The Eagles ask McNabb to make plays down the field every week. He completed 52 passes of 20 yards or more last season. That was the third-best mark in the league. McNabb has success stretching the field, when he has the weapons. It's the short slants and screens that give him problems.
The first part of Bowen's definition says the QB should be able to walk into any NFL huddle and have immediate success. I think you could say that about McNabb, which is why the rumors of him playing elsewhere seem to emerge every offseason. If the Birds decided to cut ties with him, several other teams would be interested.
So, based on Bowen's definition listed above, what do you think? Is McNabb a franchise quarterback?
Sumdum...by your logic, did Dan Marino suck?— elektrika
Comment removed.- Matt Bowen is a joke. He contradicted himself as dragon6 pointed out with the Manning and Brady statement. Not only that both QBs for the most part hae played with a great supporting cast. We can't say that about #5. And I also disagree with Bowen's statement that McNabb would not have sucess in another system, especially in one that uses the vertical attack.— EL Zorro
- Bowen needs to figure out his criteria first. All the QB's played in the same system except Warner Brees and Hasselback. Warner and Hasselback lost in the SB although Warner won the SB with the Rams. Without the weapons none of the above QB's would have the same success. You put any of those QB's in the Eagles' system with the sane WR's and they have maybe the same success, you put the WR's the Eagles have had during McNabbs tenure on any of the other teams and they don't have the same success except for maybe Brady, NE won a SB with Gaffney. Now if McNabb had in thier prime Marvin Harrison, Tory Holt, Isaac Bruce, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark Steve Smith or Anquan Bolden and Larry Fitzgerald, you don't think McNabb and the Eagles would have won a SB by now? The only WR that was on any Eagles team during the last 10 years that was in the same class as these WR's was T.O. and the Eagles went to the SB and almost won had NE. not known the plays. Now think, when T.O. was on that SB team if any of the above mentioned WR's lined up on the other side of the field what defense would have been able to cover them? NONE. Considering the weapons that was on the teams the last 10 years, is McNabb a franchise QB? Of course.Please this guy Bowen should never have wasted his time asking such an idiotic question.— VegasEagleFan
- Bowen needs to figure out his criteria first. All the QB's played in the same system except Warner Brees and Hasselback. Warner and Hasselback lost in the SB although Warner won the SB with the Rams. Without the weapons none of the above QB's would have the same success. You put any of those QB's in the Eagles' system with the sane WR's and they have maybe the same success, you put the WR's the Eagles have had during McNabbs tenure on any of the other teams and they don't have the same success except for maybe Brady, NE won a SB with Gaffney. Now if McNabb had in thier prime Marvin Harrison, Tory Holt, Isaac Bruce, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark Steve Smith or Anquan Bolden and Larry Fitzgerald, you don't think McNabb and the Eagles would have won a SB by now? The only WR that was on any Eagles team during the last 10 years that was in the same class as these WR's was T.O. and the Eagles went to the SB and almost won had NE. not known the plays. Now think, when T.O. was on that SB team if any of the above mentioned WR's lined up on the other side of the field what defense would have been able to cover them? NONE. Considering the weapons that was on the teams the last 10 years, is McNabb a franchise QB? Of course.Please this guy Bowen should never have wasted his time asking such an idiotic question.— VegasEagleFan
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Right in the middle of the off-season with the Phillies playing good ball and in first place, someone brings up Donovan McNabb. Hard to believe, Harry.
- All the QB's named in the article are franchise QB's almost all starting QB's are franchise to their team,even new rookies are called franchise Matt Ryan Joe Flacco and Sanchez,but a tier one QB is very limited the QB has to have lead his team to atleast one superbowl win,only exception is Dan Marino,the eagles #5 QB is a second tier QB he has to win a superbowl to make the top tier of QB's.— jack russell
- Why was this article written. We all know McNabb is a franchise QB. Palmer on the other hand, Im not so sure.— dmac2002
- I agree with mikemike. McNabb drives me crazy at times, but I think he would have been viewed as a much better QB if he wasn't stuck with this Andy Reid offense his entire career. The guy's weakness is the short dump offs, and that's mainly all we have. Also, it is much harder to play that position when the D knows that you are going to drop back and pass every friggin play.— Reid Must Go
- "Matt Bowen of the National Football Post writes....." Who is Matt Bown and why would his opinion mean anything? Are there any credentials here that make him an expert on QBs?— NC Dennis
- Sheil...how can you say it is a "fact" that Brady and Manning would make any other team better? They never had the opportunity to prove that, so indeed, all it is, is speculation. Conversely, Matt Bowen's theory is flawed as well. Obviously, he has not watched McNabb. For Matt to write a collumn about something and not research it even a little, just makes him a bad journalist. He needs to give back some money! Speculation = Opinion...and we all know what they say about opinions! LOL!— extremebeat
- What a ridiculous question! McNabb wins a Super Bowl and he's a Hall of Fame QB. How can a potential Hall of Fame player not be a franchise QB and yet there are guys on there who have achieved nothing. McNabb is the best QB in Eagles' history. Accuracy a problem? That's debatable. His low interception percentage is due to him placing the ball where it can't be intercepted. They are at the receiver's feet for a reason. Maybe he's someone who should take a few more chances. I'd say Manning and Brady are better. That's it though.— MikeP
- Comment removed.
Follow
Sheil on Twitter. And become
a fan of Moving the Chains on Facebook.
Download our NEW iPhone/Android app for even more Birds
coverage, including app-exclusive videos and analysis. Download it here.
