I'm just saying PB, is that whenever critics and skeptics have a chance to knock McNabb down a peg, they do just like they do Vick. Of active players, I would say only Favre, Brady, and ROethlisberger have accomplished as much or more than McNabb by the age of 30. In 7 years in the NFL, he's been to 5 Pro Bowls, 4 NFC Championships, and 1 Super Bowl. He carried the Eagles through the first 4 years of his career the same way that Vick has carried the Falcons for the past 4. He never had great receivers, never had a powerful running game to back him up. Besides 2004, he essentially has been their entire offense, and still has had overwhelming success.
No he's not classically accurate QB. He throws better on the run and off his backfoot than he does when he stands flat-footed in the pocket. Sounds like someone else we know right?
Thru his first 4 years as a starter, he put up solid, but unspectacular numbers. Go and look at McNabb's numbers from 2000 to 2003. Really look at them, and you can't help but see how similar they are to that of Vick's from 2002 to now.
McNabb is not a running QB, very true. He basically put on 15 pounds of muscle within the first 2-3 years of his career that contributed a lot to make him more sedentary. I'd be surprised if Vick has put on more than 4 pounds of muscle since joining the league. But injury aside, anyone that saw Vick last year should realize he no longer is the great runner he was in 2002. When you compare his acceleration then to what it is now, it's a huge gap. I'd really be surprised if even a healthy Vick could clock a 40 time below 4.4 nowadays. Still very fast for his position, but with so many DL and LB entering the league nowadays that are running sub 4.5s, the gap between him and the competition is minimal.
But it doesn't matter what they do with their legs, does it? Vick doesn't get criticized for what he can do on the ground, it's in the air. Sure, McNabb is a golden boy in some media circles, but I can't help to think what the media would have said had the T.O. issue been with another QB. Did the media care that much that T.O. threw Jeff Garcia under the bus? No, it was more a joke. But when he it did it to Donovan, why did it become the biggest story since the Beatles broke up? Why was McNabb's leadership abilities constantly questioned all last season and to this day? Does anybody ever question Peyton Manning's leadership abilities before/during/and after he chokes in the playoffs? Nope. Shouldn't they? Yes! McNabb - 71, Manning - 63, Vick - 62. McNabb - 58, Vick - 50, Manning - 33. Those are the winning percentages of those 3 respective QBs in the regular season and then in the playoffs.
McNabb can't win when it comes to critics, just the same as Vick. Vick runs, they say throw more. He throws, they say run more. McNabb leads, oh no but he needs to lead better. He needs to be like Peyton and be the general that commands respect from his teammates. Yes, a general that chokes every year in the playoffs? If you look at their on-field accomplishments, McNabb is far more deserving than Manning in getting into the Hall IMO. But we all know that even if Manning doesn't ever get to a Super Bowl for the rest of his career (which if he doesn't do so this year seems quite likely IMO), as long as he has another 4000 yard/30 TD season he's guaranteed a spot in. As it stands in Philly, it's doubtful that McNabb ever puts up the type of numbers in his career that he did in 2004, just by looking at the fact that in the forseeable future he's doubtful to have a receiver the caliber of Owens or a running game that can truly enhance his play. Just the same as its doubtful Vick is ever going to put up huge numbers himself. If you ask me, Vick's ceiling in terms of his statistical production is probably on par with the numbers McNabb put up in 2001: 57.8% completions, 3233 yards, 25 TDs, 12 INTs, 84.3 rating. For Vick in this offense, that would be an outstanding year for him. But if he accomplished it, would he silence critics? Nope. Just like McNabb will never silence his critics.
Basically, for the same reasons that people defend Vick (as a guy that just wins football games), I don't understand how you can be so critical of McNabb, who does the exact same thing. I've heard Falcon fans for several years gripe constantly at how McNabb is overrated. IMHO, McNabb and Vick are not the same but in the same group of QBs that like Randall Cunningham before them, don't fit into the round hole or whatever that the majority seems to think about when it comes to evaluating and judging QBs.
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.