Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

15 Dec 2005

NAACP Leader: McNabb's Mediocrity Belittles the Real Struggles of Black Athletes

OK, this is just absurd. An NAACP leader in Philadelphia is basically criticizing Donovan McNabb for not being black enough. Apparently, by not scrambling as much, he "belittles the real struggles of black athletes." I wasn't aware that a sports hernia is an injury for white people. J. Whyatt Mondesire also blames McNabb for not giving his bonus money to Terrell Owens to keep T.O. in town. I have four words for Mondesire: NO SOUP FOR YOU. See also original article:

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 15 Dec 2005

137 comments, Last at 03 Jan 2006, 11:39am by PatsFan


by dfarrar777 (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:59am

Stunningly stupid. Right up there with Limbaugh's tripe and Irvin's comment that Favre would have the Eagles undefeated.

What is it about McNabb that attracts such idiocy, when from all public accounts, he avails himself pretty admirably as a person?

by JSR (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:52am

Because arrogant jerks have a need to bring down decent people to their crude level. Disappointing though that McNabb would even dignify this no-name political hack's screed with a response, which is why I suspect this is even still a story at all.

This guy's just trying to make a name for himself in an upcoming campaign year, best to ignore him.

by Ryguy (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:07am

I agree with #1...

I swear I lost intelligence from reading this article...

by big_adventure (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:23am

1 -

What attracts such idiocy to McNabb? Well, I think, personally, that he IS pretty overrated, and more or less always has been, by the mainstream. Not necessarily because of his skin color, or his mother, or his favorite sort of soup. I think that for some people it might be race, for some it is just his game, for many it is precisely because he comports himself well, publically. But after his first and second years in the league, talking heads were calling him the best player in the game. He was not that, he is not that and, probably, he will never become that. What he is is an excellent QB, playing in a great situation for a QB (A.J. Feeley and Koy Detmer have looked more-than-competant in that offense, resting my case...). But he has been called "the best" so often, he has had the bobbleheads gush so much praise on him, that, inevitably, there are going to be those who don't like him or who try to bring him down precisely because of that, regardless of his abilities as a player.

Remember, three years ago, many would happily call Manning the best, but many also would tear him down for taking too long at the snap, for changing too many plays, and for confusing the offense. They railed on him for not being "a winner". The same thing has been true for Marino and even Jerry Rice (early in his career - alleged to have drop problems), and all three of them have legitimate (or obvious...) claims to being the best at their positions (or in the league) for some period of time.

In some of these cases, and in the cases of athletes in other sports, writers look for BS dumps when the raw data doesn't back up their point but they still want to make that point to sell copy. So they come up with "not clutch" or "not a winner" or, in the case of McNabb, they can whip out the Ace of Race. Hence, "he is not black enough." Hell, it MUST be admitted that this card has been played in both directions throughout his career. Net positive or net negative for Donny? Well, I can't say for certain, but he certainly seems to live a pretty good life. I can say with absolute certainty (of opinion, of course) that it is [soapbox] a massive negative for civilized society and shows just exactly how far we have to go before any sort of equality will exist or can exist in the hearts and minds of men, without the force of law backing it up. [/soapbox]

Why do we need him or anyone else to be "the best" (or whatever)? Why not just settle down and admit that he probably has what it takes to be a significant contributor to a championship team and leave it at that?

Oh, yeah, I forgot. That would suck on talk radio, in SI and the on front page of the Philly Inquirer. My bad.

All that said, that was one of the more ridiculous articles I've read. I kept checking the link to make sure I hadn't navigated to a badly-written Onion article instead.


by Ted (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:22am

Re #4, Yeah I think he was overrated early in his career (being a top tier MVP candidate for "single handedly carrying" a team with a really good defense and special teams and a bunch of pro bowlers along the O-line while finishing 17th in QB DPAR would attest to this) but I don't think he's overrated anymore. It's true that the Eagles offense used to be QB friendly and that they used to be able to plug in Koy Detmer and AJ Feeley with reasonable success, but those days are long gone now. This year he was carrying the offense with not much at the skill positions (sans TO) and a declining O-line, and you can't just plug some schmoe QB in and expect success on that team anymore. Over the last couple of years McNabb has actually become all he was (over)hyped to be early in his career. I find it sad but typical of the world we live in that such a great, classy athlete attracts such vicious and ignorant hatred.

by mawbrew (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:32am

Can anyone tell me why McNabb even mentioned race and racial stereotypes when justifying his decision to shut it down? For a guy that everyone agrees generally handles the media pretty well, that seemed really .... odd.

by st pete, FL (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:59am

I read this article this morning in the paper and I didn't feel like it should even be comment-worthy. It's ridiculous.
However, I also read that the NFL is going to give all the players on the Saints an extra $40K because they went through storm related hardship. Now thats worth commenting on! ..giving millionaires $40,000.. grumble, argh! grumble..

by James, London (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:00am

As a white Englishman, I'm probably not best placed to comment on this, but here goes:

1: I've read the article and my eyes are bleeding.

2: Don't the NAACP have more important things to worry about than Donovan McNabb?

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:21am

RE #6:

Because Donovan (and his father) are not above using the race card when it benefits them.

This all started with Rush's truthful comments about McNabb that a part of his over hyping was because the media wanted black quarterbacks to succeed. There is no denying this. The outpouring of defense of McNabb and black quarterbacks in general just showed that the media itself had something invested in the “black QB� succeeding. What Rush’s comments did, however, was open the gates for black quarterbacks to be criticized as equally as anyone else who played the position.

3 years ago, if you would have said Vick was a sucky QB, you would have been considered 1) stupid or 2) racist. Now, you see a lot more people saying it than you would have. Part of it is because Vick still hasn’t improved on basic QB fundamentals. Part of it is because the whole stigma of the “black QB� is fading away. No one really cares if a QB is black or white or whatever. It all depends on how they can play. McNabb, throughout his career, has proven to be a guy who just can’t win the big game and chokes under pressure. He is the black John Elway (pre ’97). McNabb has always had this defense that was put up by the media because of the way Phili treated him when he was drafted, the fact that he is a “black QB� and that the “evil neo-facist racist bigot conservative� Rush Limbaugh said he was good only because he was black. McNabb is finally realizing that the media that built him up to be some kind of untouchable god-king has now decided to tear away his armor and show what he really is: An above average QB that can’t lead a team to a SB ring and chokes when it really matters.

Furthermore, I think Donovan needs to learn what the word “racist� means. It means that one has an opinion that one race is genetically superior than another. It doesn’t mean that someone made a race-tinged comment against you. That is bigotry. The guy who made this comment is a leader in the local NAACP, it isn’t like he is the crazy-eyed old guy from The Boondocks. If he wants to learn about true racism against black QBs, he needs to dial up Warren Moon.

by Darth Goofy (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:29am

First off, not sure why #5s post was not edited. That is truly offensive. Profanity is not necessary.

{rant}Second, I agree that the race card may not have been the best thing to use in the article by JWM, however, DMcN has used the race card previously to dispute certian claims (according to JWM). DMcN also used the race card in his reply to the editorial. As paraphrased, If a white man says it, it is racist. If a black man says it... it is alright but questionable? Why is it not racist if a black man uses the race card as well. This is what I don't get about racism... the double-standard.{/rant}

Now, finally, back to the football topic at hand (did I start on a football topic?), I thing DMcN is overrated. I have thought so and will continue to do so. Not because of his race, but because he seems to have a harder time doing things that other QBs do well. Just my opinion.

And, seriously, #5... clean it up.

by Kevo (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:42am

It's just a word; it can only hurt you if you let it.

by noahpoah (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:11pm

Did McNabb say something about the 'everyone expectats black QBs to rush' when he decided to get his sports hernia fixed, or was it some time ago and related to a more general decision to stop getting leveled on so frequently?

It's amazing that this guy (Mondesire) simultaneously blames McNabb for the decrease in his passing stats while implicitly acknowledging that he needs a better receiving corps around him - else why offer one's own bonus to keep TO in town?

And how does Mondesire know that the race-barrier pioneers all had more enlightened views of race than McNabb? Taking great personal risk to pursue one's ambitions and, in so doing, chipping away at racism when it was still publicly acknowledged and conciously institutionalized and making statements about current attitudes regarding race and sports performance are not readily comparable demonstrations of racial views, I don't think.

by noahpoah (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:13pm

I suppose it's a safe assumption that McNabb never said ‘everyone expectats black QBs to rush’.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:25pm

The outpouring of defense of McNabb and black quarterbacks in general just showed that the media itself had something invested in the “black QB� succeeding.

You mean, ignoring the (idiotic) articles that came out and said "Limbaugh was right", of course. So I guess it's "the media wants black quarterbacks to succeed - except for the media that doesn't, of course."

And how, exactly, does it prove the point to support someone who's been told that the only reason people think he's good is because of the color of his skin?

Because the reason that people think he's good couldn't have anything to do with the fact that he was winning games at the time. I mean, we've never seen a once-mediocre white quarterback pushed on a pedestal just for "winning games", right?

by Andrew (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:25pm

Okay, to those who think McNabb is overrated, what specific things does he need to improve upon to become a better Quarterback?

If I had one complaint about him, it is consistency. He can show flashes of tremendous brilliance for several games, and then he just falls flat and looks pedestrian in a couple more.

I don't think he "chokes" (whatever that is supposed to mean - does your wideouts dropping passes thrown to them on the numbers or letting them bounce off their hands and into the hands of the DB constitute "choking" by the QB?). I don't think he is congenitally inaccurate. He's smart enough to run a complex offense without the Little Orphan Annie Secret Wrist Play Decoder band. He has the physical talent needed.

When he was being considered for MVP in 2000, lets not forget that he was working with the same defense that while rated #2 by DVOA in 1999, had done little to staunch the bleeding of the Doug Pedersen era. He also was working without a running game beyond his own 2 feet, or a consistent running back, since Duce Staley was out with a Lisdranc injury, and all of Brian Mitchell's value was in 2 early games. Remember the Eagles running game then after Week 5?

Darnell Autry: -9.9 DPAR, -33.8% DVOA
Stanley Pritchett: -0.3 DPAR, -18.5% DVOA

The definition of replacement players!

The only thing these guys were good for was making something out of dump-off passes from McNabb.

The offense was basically McNabb (53.7 DPAR combined passing/rushing, #12 in the league) to Chad Lewis (21.2 DPAR, a nobody who was suddenly a star with McNabb), Charles Johnson (7.5 DPAR), and Jeff Thomason (3.9 DPAR, another nobody who suddenly was camped out in the endzone when McNabb threw to him).

The Quarterbacks with better DPAR in 2000 had much better players like Marvin Harrison, Chris Carter and Randy Moss, Terrell Owens and Jerry Rice, Tim Brown, Rod Smith, Kyle Brady and Keenan McCardell and Jimmy Smith, Tony Gonzalez and Derrick Alexander, Marshall Faulk and Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt. Not quite comparable to Chad Lewis and Charles Johnson!

Lets keep a little perspective here.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:34pm

Yeah, that Elway, wotta choker he was prior to '97! He really choked on that drive in Cleveland, and really, Conference Championships aren't big games at all; everybody knows that!

I wish everyone who accuses an athlete of being a choker would review the relevance of sample size. And anybody who thinks that Montana (who I think is the best all-time QB so far) would have beat Elway if they had switched teams in that epic beat-down, or that Phil Simms would have led the Broncos to a win over the Elway-led Giants, is just not thinking analytically. It wasn't Elway who turned a second-string RB from the Redskins into a Super Bowl record holder. Those Bronco teams were markedly inferior to their opponents, and to call Elway a choker because they didn't win is indicative of a lack of understanding of the game of football.

by Todd S. (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:37pm

#9 See, this is something that always confuses me. Divisional playoff game = not a big game. Conference championship = not a big game. Regular season game against a good team = not a big game. Regular season game to clinch a division title = not a big game.

Super Bowl = big game. So, of the 535 games played in the NFL this year, only one game is a big game? If that's the definitions we're operating under, then give me the BCS where every regular season game can have a big impact.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:38pm

Will: Exactly. The other problem of course is that only good teams get the opportunity to "choke." If you're going to penalize someone for losing in, say, a conference championship game, shouldn't you penalize the QBs who lost during the regular season and never made it there in the first place?

Hey, they choked too. Just much earlier. And you didn't notice it, then.

by Andrew (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:38pm


You mean, ignoring the (idiotic) articles that came out and said “Limbaugh was right�, of course.

Ah yes. The Brad Johnson is better than McNabb articles. Like this article.


And this one.


It was incredibly funny how stupid these people looked by the end of the year.

by James, London (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:38pm

Pat, did you have to link to THAT thread? The way the seedings are lining up, it will probably be thrust upon us all again in a month or so anyway. (shudder)

by Tim Gerheim :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:46pm

Language, campers, it's a family site. I edited comment #5. If you have a problem with that, you can email me at my first name at footballoutsiders.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:50pm

Hey, the comparison with Brady is apt. Go look at DPAR for Brady/McNabb in each year. It's ridiculous how close they are. I mean, really close, especially the DVOA numbers.

And people were overly praising Brady, too - putting too much praise that should've been for the Patriots' defense on Brady. It wasn't until 2004, and now 2005 as well, that Brady and McNabb both really exploded.

It's amazing how idiotic Limbaugh's comments were. Yes, perhaps McNabb was being hyped a little bit more than he should've been at the time. But every quarterback of a winning team gets praised a little more, regardless of color.

But Limbaugh wouldn't say "well, the media is just praising Brady because they want to see a white quarterback succeed", now would he?

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 12:57pm

Oh, and I wonder if some prominent white politician is going to come out and say that Tom Brady is doing a disservice to the white athlete by going out there and throwing so much, and belittling the "game management" that quarterbacks like Kyle Orton typify. He's belittling the real struggles of white athletes!

And what about Byron Leftwich, man? He's gotta feel bad. He needs to step up and say "Hey, I suck at running with the ball! Why aren't I getting my props for belittling the black athlete!"

by michael (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:10pm

#23 - doubly good point there. Especially since, at first, all Brady was asked to do *was* manage the game, when he came in as a nobody replacing Bledsoe. Clearly, he walked away from what made him *him*.

by Todd S. (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:15pm

#17 Oops. I think I meant 523 games. Math is hard.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:22pm

Re #17, 18:

So, tell me what "big games" Dan Marino won? We all now how Warren Moon will go down in history as being a guy you can count on to take your team over the top! Let us not forget about those field generals Randall Cunningham, Bernie Kosar or Ken Anderson!

The fact is that no matter what McNabb does, until he wins a SB, he will be considered an underachiever and a choker. If Elway wouldn't have crossed paths with Terrell Davis and won those Super Bowls, do you honestly think he would have had such a high standing today? No, he would be another QB with big numbers who when the games mattered, got destroyed.

And the whole Brady/Manning argument has no bearing on this conversation. Maybe if you would have put up Trent Dilfer or the sort, it would have been a better argument.

RE #19:

As stupid as those articles were, now would be a bad time to reference them since Minneosta is on a big winning streak. Anyone who hangs here knows that he has less to do with it than people think, but once again, public perception.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:29pm

RE #15:

I think McNabb needs to work on his leadership ability. His humble "let the chips fall where they may" attitude may make him a media darling, but look how many players on the Eagles defended him during the T.O. debacle as opposed to defended T.O.

McNabb doesn't command respect like a Manning or a Brady or a Favre does. Hell, even Vick may hot be the best QB in existance, at least his teammates believe in him and respect him.

Honestly, he needs to watch the GB/Den SB and watch how Elway played. There was a man possesed, a dude that wasn't going to let any force on Earth stop him from winning his ring. He can't show that he has a pair by dissing Favre for talking about Walker's contract situation. He needs to worry about being a leader on the field and in the locker room instead of worrying about being liked and crying when people call him a name. He is the $100 million man, so deal with it.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:35pm

RE #17 (again):

Almost forgot: By your definition of a big game, Chris Chandler, Jake Plummer, and Kordell Stewart would be considered "big game" winners because they have won a divisional playoff game or two. Hell, Chandler got to as many Super Bowls as Marino did(1).

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:39pm

I do find it odd, however, that nobody in this thread seems to have made more hay about the fact that someone at place with the words Advancement of Colored People in the title is basically saying, "Hey, Donovan! People need to remember you're black! Run around in circles really fast! That's what we do! Didn't you read the manual?!?"

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:40pm

Tell ya' what Samurai, why don't you give a detailed definition of "big game"? I understand perfectly that some people, perhaps a lot of people, will believe that McNabb is a choker if he doesn't win a Super Bowl, just as many did the same with Elway. Well, a lot of people believed that Timewarner was a great stock to own at $70/share. So what? Both sets of beliefs indicate a dearth of analytical thinking.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:40pm

Wait, if we're measuring QBs by rings only, does that mean Manning is an underachiever? I guess we should say he's doing white QBs a disservice by audibling too much, we all know white QBs are better at calling plays in the huddle.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:44pm

To me, there are two definations of a "Big Game" The first, which is the more strict defination, is any game where they hand out a trophy to the victor. In Football, that would be a Championship game or the Superbowl.
The second defination, more broad defination would be any game where if you lose, your team's season ends. (This means a game can be a "big game" for one team, but not the other). That would be any playoff game, or any game you need to clinch a playoff spot.

by Will Allen (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 1:49pm

Samurai, the whole concept of "big game" winners is faulty, because there are not, by definition, enough big games to allow a measurement which overcomes randomness, even if one was able to adjust for the quality of the rest of the team that the quarterback plays for, which is itself a very difficult task. People who speak of "chokers" based upon very small sample sizes simply are engaging in emotional opinionating. It can be entertaining, but it has no empirical basis.

by TomC (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:00pm

This all started with Rush’s truthful comments about McNabb that a part of his over hyping was because the media wanted black quarterbacks to succeed. There is no denying this.

I can't believe I'm the first person to jump on this statement. "There is no denying this"?! Bullsh!t. CatSam, I usually enjoy your posts, but until you find me the minutes from the meeting at which the National Association of Bleeding Heart Journalists codified their policy of building up mediocre black QB's, I have to violently disagree with you here.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:01pm

And the whole Brady/Manning argument has no bearing on this conversation.

Really? Have you read through that thread?

The most common phrase in that thread is that Brady is "just a winner". You may have also heard it before in reference to Michael Vick, but Vick happens to have the same skin color as McNabb, and so I guess Limbaugh would once again say "hey, it's media bias that wants Vick to do so well!"

Quarterbacks for winning teams get more praise than they deserve. That's the idea here. And it happens to black quarterbacks, to white quarterbacks, and in a thousand years, to purple quarterbacks and green quarterbacks as well.

The fact is that no matter what McNabb does, until he wins a SB, he will be considered an underachiever and a choker.

By idiots, that is. But that's not a problem. Calling McNabb an underachiever and a choker is fine. People've called Marino the same thing, and Manning one as well - and my God, that's the most inappropriate phrase I've ever heard for those two. Somehow I don't think either of them really cares.

The problem is when you say the only reason the media hypes McNabb so much is because he's black. Why is that a problem? Because there's a much simpler solution staring you right in the face. And if Limbaugh hadn't been so concerned with race, maybe he would've realized that all winning quarterbacks get more praise than they deserve. But instead, he saw a quarterback who was worse than his reputation, and immediately thought "hey, it's gotta be because this guy's black."

As for the NAACP guy, I have no idea what to say. The article is so poorly written that it's impossible to follow any logic in it. First he says wow, in McNabb's first four games, he was great. But then in the next five games, he was less than great - and then says okay, that's due to a sports hernia. And then he says hey, what about that failure during the Super Bowl.

So, as far as I can tell - he's saying that McNabb is mediocre due to his Super Bowl performance.

Well, that's obvious. I mean, no star quarterback ever looked mediocre against the Patriots last year, right?

by doktarr (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:06pm

When I saw this article in the "extra points" tab, I seriously thought it was an Onion article. This is mind-bogglingly dumb.

And yes, McNabb has become a very good QB in recent years, mainly because:

1) He has developed the ability to throw a good pass on the run, even when running left, and

2) He learned to use the threat of scrambling to set up the pass and vice versa.

This year he was still a pretty good QB despite being badly injured. I'd LOVE to have Donnovan as the QB of my team ('skins).

by Kurt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:15pm

The fact is that no matter what McNabb does, until he wins a SB, he will be considered an underachiever and a choker.

Sure, by people that dislike him and know nothing about football. And even if he does win, those people will give all the credit to Brian Westbrook, or whoever else he "crosses paths" with.

The rest of us will probably have a little more perspective.

by Kurt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:18pm

I also didn't think the NAACP guy's comments were *that* bad. He's not criticizing McNabb for not scrambling, he's criticizing him for making a conscious decision to be "less black" by not scrambling. Maybe McNabb would be better off focusing 100% on what gives his team the best chance to win, and not 90% on winning and 10% on overcoming stereotypes.

I'm not sure I agree, but it at least seems worthy of discussion.

by Daniel (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:22pm

This article is mind boggling, but not even on a sports level.

In some sense, I can understand ripping into McNabb for not being "black" enough. If you want to turn the TO situation into a race one between Reid and the white media on one side, and the misunderstood black athlete on the other, then yeah, McNabb picked the wrong side. I don't read the situation that way, but I'm white; I don't share the consciousness of black people, so far be it from me to say how a black person should perceive that conflict.

What troubles me though, is that this is sports, an area where there are clear lines of success and failure, and where blacks have actually succeeded to a disproportionate degree. Why can't he just judge McNabb based on what he does?

by Theo (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:38pm

"National Association for the Advancement of Colored People"

We're all white on the inside. :)

by Dman (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:40pm

This guy from the naacp is just colossally stupid. Throwing the football makes you less black, yeah way to break down those negative stereotypes mr. naacp. Moron.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:46pm

he’s criticizing him for making a conscious decision to be “less black� by not scrambling.

So what's Byron Leftwich? White?

by rk (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:52pm

This guy rips McNabb for not giving part of his signing bonus to his teammates. Has anyone ever done that? Yeah, guys restructure their deals to free up cap space, but the Eagles don't need anymore cap space. Is it even legal in the NFL for a guy to just fork over his signing bonus to a teammate? Then he claims that Tom Brady did it! The only situation the Pats were ever in that could compare at all to the TO mess was the situation with Troy Brown this summer, and I don't recall Brady doing anything to get him back.

On the topic of big-game winners/chokers, how many QB's in the league right now qualify as big-game winners who don't choke? Off the top of my head: Brady, Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer. Favre and Warner each have one big win and one choke, and everyone else must suck, right?

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 2:58pm

Brady did not give some of his salary to his teammates. He just didn't negotiate a higher salary. There's a huge difference, and he just brushes it off entirely.

by Andrew (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:05pm

B #32:

The second defination, more broad defination would be any game where if you lose, your team’s season ends. (This means a game can be a “big game� for one team, but not the other). That would be any playoff game, or any game you need to clinch a playoff spot.

Okay, this gives us something to work with. McNabb is 7-5 in playoff games. Only Brady at 9-0 is better percentagewise among active Quarterbacks.

McNabb is 25-7 in the second half of the season with the playoffs on the line (0.500 or better record at midseason). Only Brady at 31-6 is better.

Manning is 3-5 in playoffs, 36-16 in the second half.

Culpepper is 2-2 in the playoffs, 10-14 in the second half.

Farve is 11-9 in playoffs, 67-29 in the second half.

McNair is 5-4 in playoffs, 34-14 in the second half.

Bledsoe is 4-3 in playoffs, 31-30 in the second half, with the bonus of a tremendous 7-1 performance in 1994 to comeback from a 3-5 record to the playoffs.

Where are all these non-choking QB's out there with so much better no-choke records than McNabb?

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:07pm

How is Brady not a choker? If Brady hadn't choked at the end of the New England-New York Jets game on December 22nd, 2002, the Patriots would've been in the playoffs. I mean, they were only down 3, never having had the lead the entire game. If they drive down for a score, they take the lead. But instead, he went 3 and out (due to a sack- choker!) followed by an interception (choke!) on the next possession (now down 10), followed by a last minute drive which ended with a choke on 4th and 6.

Oh, that's right. It's because choking only happens during games that the whole nation is watching.

God, what an idiotic concept.

by James Gibson (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:14pm

I think McNabb may have been overrated when Rush made his comments, but not because the media wanted a black QB to succeed. With Doug Williams and then Warren Moon and then Steve McNair, who took the Titans to the Super Bowl, aren't we past that point by now? The reason McNabb may have been overrated, IMO, is that his fantasy value was above his real value and fantasy football has crept into the thinking that people evaluate players based on their fantasy stats. And that was in large part due to rushing and rushing TDs.

As for the NAACP guy, I agree, it doesn't make sense. Scrambling = black; pocket passer = white is just stupid. I don't think Steve Young and Byron Leftwich traded skin colors. In fact, in reference to post #38, I think it would be a lot more valid to criticize McNabb for not scarmbling enough than to criticize him for being "less black" by not scrambling enough.

by Starshatterer (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:24pm

Pat (#46 )--

Technically, the Patriots' 2002 season did not end with that Jets game. The next game (against Miami) gave them a chance to get back into the playoffs, and they won it. They were back in the playoffs only for a couple of hours, though, until the Jets (and Browns, I think) won, and thereby eliminated the Patriots by tiebreaker.

Of course, that's been a knock on Brady's game: he inexplicably plays worse in (for lack of a better term) non-choke situations. (cf. @ Miami last season)

IIRC, McNabb himself said something about not wanting to be stereotyped as a running QB. Even so, it's hardly up to J. Whyatt Mondesire, to be the Official Custodian of Just Who's Black Enough Around Here, Anyway.

by Andrew (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:31pm

Pat #44:

What money did Brady hold back on? He signed a deal for 6 years at $60 million. $10 million per year is right there with Culpepper (10 yr-$102M), higher than McNabb's (9 yr-$72M/12 yr-$115M), and just a little behind the silly ones given to Manning (7 yr-$98M) and Vick (10 yr-$130M).

McNabb is actually earning less per year on the non-voidable part of his contract than Alex Smith (6 yr-$50M) and Eli Manning (6 yr-$54M).

If anything, McNabb should have been grousing about his pay being undermarket, not Owens.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:44pm

Technically, the Patriots’ 2002 season did not end with that Jets game. The next game (against Miami) gave them a chance to get back into the playoffs, and they won it.

Patriots were a game up on the Jets for the lead of the NFC East (NE 8-6, NYJ 7-7) at that point, and the Patriots held the head-to-head tiebreaker over them. A win would've guaranteed a spot in the playoffs for the Patriots, and the division title.

That game was huge for them, and they did lose it. I can't see how that doesn't fall under "choke" by the "choke" guidelines.

What money did Brady hold back on?

Nono, I agree. But Brady actually said that in response to media questions ("i'd rather the team have it.." blah blah blah), and for some reason the guy from the article was using it to suggest that Brady gave money back. Why, I have no idea (other than because he's an idiot and a terrible writer). I'm betting that Brady thought "hey, 60 mil, that's fine by me!" and that in the end, he's gonna end up making more money than McNabb and others anyway.

by PatsFan (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 3:57pm

Re: #50

Maybe the writer meant that since the Pats (like pretty much all teams, I'd imagine) spend to the cap and since Brady didn't squeeze every last drop out of Kraft, the money Brady left on the table was freed up to go to other people on the team, i.e. Brady "gave" the money to Brown in a figurative metaphorical sense, not a literal one.

Or maybe the writer is just terrible.

by joel in providence (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:02pm

my guess is that the the NFLPA would file a grievance as soon as mcnabb tried to hand his bonus over to T.O. or westbrook. it's not in the union's interest to have players shelling THEIR money out to other players. as a union, you're just chasing your tail when that's happening.

by Bright Blue Shorts (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:06pm

What I've not really understood is why any of these external organisations (senators, NAACP types) are so keen on defending T.O.

He wasn't excluded from the Eagles because he's black, it's because he was deemed a menace to team unity. Read the transcript of the independent mediator and he overstepped the mark like a 3-year-old in kindergarten.

In backing him they make themselves look stupid, and actually set their own organisation back.

BBS :o)

by Adam B. (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:31pm

Here's what you all need to understand: Jerry Mondesire is nuts. He is desperate for attention and influence in a world that has passed him by; he's simultaneously challenging sitting congressman Chaka Fattah for no reason anyone can understand.

by Joe (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:35pm

The concept that McNabb is overrated is totally ridiculous. He's shown the ability to make big plays to win big games both early in the game and late in the game (clutch!). He's had great success statistically, especially 2004 which was a historically good season, and also with extremely bad playmaking options on offense (23 TDs in 10 games in 2002). He has made absolutely sick highlight-reel plays on a regular basis. He's matured from a QB that was successful because of his superior raw physical talent to an elite QB that is successful because he has improved his game to the point where his physical skills combine with intelligence and experience to make him unstoppable except by the very best defenses. He was drafted onto a team that was the worst in the league in 1998 and since becoming a starter his teams have been among the best in the league. He's clearly good enough to lead a team to the super bowl, and if you can get there you can win it - that's the NFL's entire playoff marketing campaign (any given sunday). To his critics, I say: what more do you want? He's not perfect, but nobody is perfect. Speaking objectively and considering the sample sizes involved, there isn't another QB in the league that is significantly better than McNabb at helping his team win football games.McNabb's only problem is that he plays in Philadelphia, where the sad-sack fans and media love to focus on what he can't do. Any sports journalist worth a damn knows that the best way to get mileage in Philly is to talk somebody down. Rush Limbaugh isn't dumb. Pessimism is what sells here. Hell, this town couldn't even appreciate Mike Schmidt while he was posting the best 3B career in the history of baseball. Eagles fans are like pre-2004 Red Sox fans but without the Celtics to fall back on. The first sign of imperfection means doom is on the horizon. McNabb never stood a chance, from day 1 when the sports radio-sponsored pricks booed him on draft day. It would be no different if Peyton Manning or Tom Brady or Brett Favre played in Philly, because they aren't perfect either.

by Kurt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:36pm

So what’s Byron Leftwich? White?

No, but he's doing what he does best. McNabb would be better if he scrambled more, but he thinks there's something wrong with being a scrambler, so he's trying to fit his game into the "white" quarterback mold.

In other words, Mondesire isn't perpetuating the stereotype that blacks are scramblers and whites are pocket passers. McNabb is, and Mondesire is criticizing McNabb for being overly conscious of the stereotype, and assuming there's something wrong with being a scrambler.

(Not my opinion, just Mondesire's argument, which everyone seems to be missing).

by Joe (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:43pm

Re #56: What makes you think McNabb avoids running because he's concerned about stereotypes?

He avoids scrambling because he realizes that throwing the ball is more efficient at gaining yardage than running the ball.

Isn't this a lesson every QB should be learning?

by Daniel (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:45pm

Kurt, I think you're right--but it's silly how he just jumps to that conclusion without taking into account: (1) the Eagles have become more successful since he stopped looking to scramble every play; and (2) he's scrambling even less this season because he's been injured. The truth is, he's cloaking a social comment in a football comment. But the football comment is so facially dumb, that all we're left with is an equally dumb social comment.

by Samuel (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 4:59pm

This NAACP guy thinks McNabb should scramble more. Well, the Eagles once had a scrambling QB. He was alot of fun to watch and he did some incredible things, but he didn't have his best season until years later in Minnesota where he stayed in the pocket more.

Mike Vick, amazing runner. The most fun player to watch in the game until Reggie Bush debuts. He's won games with his legs and the fear and respect the defense has to have for his running. If he didn't get hurt once a week, then there would be no reason for him not to run so much. But, it's easier for a scrambling QB to get hurt.

Young Brett Favre used to run around and scramble, dive head first into linebackers and stuff. He always had that great arm, but he didn't do damage in the playoffs until he became more of a pocket passer, even if he was still unconventional and original.

John Elway used to run around and make athletic plays with his legs. Then he had to face some superior defenses and he couldn't do it anymore. He finally won when he had the best running back and run blockers in the league.

Dan Marino didn't study film 80 hours a week. He had a natural feel for the game like Magic or Gretzky. He was an improvizational QB, and the fake spike is a perfect example of that. You could call him an in-the-pocket scrambler. He was not your typical pocket passer.

Donovan McNabb has the talent to scramble and the arm strength and touch to be a dominant pocket passer. Maybe he's looked at all of the guys who have won the superbowl and realized which way seems to be more effective.

Is he overrated? Last year was the first time he played with a great offensive player. Westbrook is very good at what he does, but he's not great. Who else have the Eagles had? Deuce Staley? James Thrash? Granted, T.O. is a phenomenal hall of fame caliber talent that would make any QB look good, but McNabb was unreal last year. 31 TDs, 8 INTs. The only player in NFL history to throw 30 TDs and less than 10 picks.

McNabb is like a lot of great players. He dominates bad teams and sometimes struggles against good ones. In those conference championship losses, the Eagles weren't as good as the Rams, and then they faced Tampa and Carolina, two really fast and physical defenses.

I'm kind of losing the momentum of point here, and if it makes no sense then I guess it's just like Bobby NAACP or whatever his name is. I never thought I'd hear that a black QB staying in the pocket - which the NAACP guy is basically calling the "white style of QBing" makes someone a race traitor.

by Andrew (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 5:02pm

Joe #55:

Hell, this town couldn’t even appreciate Mike Schmidt while he was posting the best 3B career in the history of baseball.

"Philadelphia is the only town where you can experience the thrill of victory, and the agony of reading about it the next morning." (Mike Schmidt)

by Kurt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 5:14pm

Re #56: What makes you think McNabb avoids running because he’s concerned about stereotypes?

It's clearly what Mondesire thinks and asserts in the column. He doesn't cite any specific quptes, so I don't know whether it's true, but that's what the argument is.

Kurt, I think you’re right–but it’s silly how he just jumps to that conclusion without taking into account: (1) the Eagles have become more successful since he stopped looking to scramble every play; and (2) he’s scrambling even less this season because he’s been injured. The truth is, he’s cloaking a social comment in a football comment.

But Mondesire's criticism isn't based on what McNabb does, but what he said. If McNabb had said he would scramble less because of winning, or injury, or whatever, there wouldn't be a problem. He thinks that McNabb said "everybody expects black quarterbacks to scramble".

I think (if true) there's a basis for criticism there. If LeBron James came out and started shooting nothing but 15-17 foot set shots, because "everybody expects black players to run and jump and dunk", he'd be crucified.

by Andrew (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 5:20pm


Regarding McNabb giving up money for Westbrook or whoever. There is no reason for him to do so. The Eagles have about $25 million in cap room heading into next offseason (assuming normal RFA offers or contract extensions for Mikell, Hood, and Johnson), needing to resign or replace Runyan and Chad Lewis, find a starting DE, a DT to eventually replace Thomas, a #1/2 OLB, #2 RB to replace Buckhalter, #5 CB to replace Wynn (see ya!), and save money for locking up LJ Smith and Michael Lewis, and thinking about what to do with Koy Detmer and Billy McMullen. It looks like they'll have more money than they know what to do with, even with those tasks.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 5:25pm

McNabb would be better if he scrambled more

You mean, like he did in the seasons where they didn't go to the Super Bowl, and where they didn't have one of the most prolific offenses in the NFL?

That's the problem - Mondesire's argument is predicated on the fact that McNabb is better when he scrambles, when in fact, the best season the Eagles' offense had is when McNabb scrambled less.

In other words, he's still an idiot.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 5:37pm

But Mondesire’s criticism isn’t based on what McNabb does, but what he said.

Actually, his first statement was "I'll pass if that's what we need to win."

A later statement (much more recently) was that he wasn't scrambling because I wasn't physically capable of it.

To quote:

I tried to run in the game. You're just not running as fast as you used to.


There were a lot of times where I wasn't able to run. I tried to move and I'd get caught by a defensive tackle or defensive end.

Mondesire's statement's just not consistent with any of McNabb's previous statements. In the beginning, he didn't run because he wasn't getting separation and other guys were, so he passed to them. In the end, he ran, but wasn't effective because he couldn't get separation because of the injury.

by Kunk (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 5:41pm

Let me start by saying I'm an Eagles fan. There have been many times watching Donovan that I have thought he should really try to scramble more. I've always believed that it was an attempt on Donovan's part to overcome the stereotypes placed on him that an African-American quarterback has a tendency to run. However, Donovan has proved to not be a stereotype ad nauseum. He is an effective passer and scrambler, and is a proven winner. To me, this is exactly what the NAACP wants...an African-American rising above racial stereotypes and just being another person (albeit an exceptionally gifted person).

So why does a supposed 'high-ranking' NAACP member have a beef? Beats me, but most of it seems to be on a personal level. This guy (a Philadelphia native) just does not seem to like the fact that the Eagles are having a poor year. His specious reasoning and poor syntax gives me a headache...I'm sure it did the same to others. Why, then, does this get national exposure? Especially 3 weeks after it was first published??

I feel bad for McNabb that he has to endure this much negative publicity. I admire him for staying above it all. Now that's something the NAACP should write about.

by Starshatterer (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 5:47pm

Pat (#50 )--

I was just going by B's definition up at #32. The Patriots still ha a shot at the playoffs after the Jets game. You want to broaden the definition to make your point, fine.

In any case, by B's stricter definition, McNabb is no choker, since he won a game after which they award a trophy. I think the Official Definition of Choker is one who *never* wins a trophy game, so all those critics can leave Dan Marino et al alone.

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:04pm

Not only does not scrambling on purpose make him a bad black man, it also makes him a bad Orangeman. Seriously, everyone knows that guys from Syracuse are scramblers. Scoff.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:05pm

I don't want to muddy up my definition, but I think the Pats/Jets 2002 game should qualify as a big game for the Pats, because they needed to win the game to guarantee a playoff slot.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:10pm


Yah, but that was kinda my point - effectively, the Patriots' season did end there. I guarantee that the Patriots knew that they were in serious trouble for the playoffs if they lost the Jets game, and yet they still lost it.

That's why the whole "losing the big game" bit is stupid, because I can't imagine that when you're the first place team, with a one game lead, playing a second place team basically at the end of the season, that it's not a "big game".

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:11pm

B: So Brady's a choker too, now. Whew! Glad someone else has seen the light. I'm telling you, guy chokes all the time. It's insane. Choke-o-matic. Choke-central.


by Todd S. (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:31pm

#28 First of all, where do you see my definition of a big game? I did not suggest one. You assume too much.

#26 How many big games did Dan Marino win? Zero. How many has Tom Brady won? Zero. The Miami Dolphins lost in the one Super Bowl they went to during Dan Marino's tenure there. The New England Patriots have won 3 of the last 4 Super Bowls with Tom Brady as their QB. Even accepting that QB is the most important position on a football team, it is still only one of at least 24 players who start. Assigning all of the blame and/or kudos to the QB is inane.

#27 I saw that same "possessed" player help defeat the Browns twice in the AFC Championship game (back when Cleveland was my favorite team). The differences in the Super Bowls that the Broncos won were an improved rushing game and improved defense. Finishing as the 2nd-best team in a highly competitive league should not earn the label of "bunch of chokers."

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:37pm

Especially when you don't give that same label to the players on the #3-#32 teams.

by Independent George (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:44pm

As a Giants fan, let me throw my full support behind Mr. Mondesire's brilliant and insightful analysis. I, too, wish Donovan McNabb would go back to sprinting out of the pocket at the drop of a hat. The old McNabb almost singlehandedly turned Jason Sehorn (speaking of overpraising a player because of his race...) into a Pro-Bowler; just think of what he could do for Curtis DeLoatch!

BTW, didn't Kordell Stewart intentionally stop scrambling to break the stereotype of a black QB? Of course, Kordell was bad whether he was in the pocket, or out of it...

by Vern (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:46pm

This is as simple as TO. The NAACP, and others (Jessie Jackson for one) have decided to use TO as a victim for playing the race (and labor/union) card.

To be on TO's side, you pretty much have to undercut McNabb. Since he's also black, he must then not be doing "enough" to help black folks.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 6:50pm

It should be noted that the NAACP president just stated today that the Mondesire is out of his freaking mind.

So it's not the NAACP. It's the insane rantings of (yet another) moronic Philly fan.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 7:03pm

I don't think we can define a choker simply as somebody who lost a big game. To me, to choke is to single-handedly or nearly single-handedly, through your own abnormally lousy play, cause your team to lose a big game. Throwing 3 picks in a playoff game, that's a choke. Throwing three picks because your receivers allowed the defenders to take the ball away, that doesn't count. Also, if you lose your helmet on gameday, that counts as a choke.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 7:06pm

I forgot to add this, but if Kyle Orton throws 3 picks in a playoff game, it's not a choke because that's the level we expect him to play. The one advantage of being a lousy player is you're excempt from the choke label.

by PhillyCWC (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 7:27pm

It really frustrates me that some of us still consider the color of one's skin an issue. You know what would be great? If we could just consider people talented or not talented, period, end of story.

As an Eagles fan, I still couldn't be more pleased that we have a player of #5's caliber on our team. Yes, even after this lousy, disappointing season. It has nothing at all to do with the color of his skin or whether he's "too black" or "not black enough" (what does that even mean????).

Gah, this guy Mondesire is a lunatic.

by Paytonrules (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 7:30pm

For the record Kyle Orton has at times this year been hyped as a rookie of the year candidate because his team keeps winning, in spite of his poor passer rating.

Clearly - he must be black.

Seriously how come this comes up with McNabb all the time, but not nearly so much with Vick, Leftwich, Brooks, McNair, Chaz Batch, Shaun King, Kordell Stewart, et. al. Heck several of those players were hyped at one time or another, in most cases due to a team winning or in Kordell's case because he was exciting when "on". No, it's always McNabb, and I can't think of a reason why. I never hear a quote of him bringing it up, although several people have claimed he does here without evidence, and yet he's always the target. McNair won an MVP for crying out loud was he overhyped?

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 7:49pm

RE #71:

So I assume you show everyone your Scott Norwood autographed helmet and your Ernest Byner autographed jersey every time you have company, right?

by Todd S. (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:09pm

#80 Yes, that is as good an assumption as the one you made in #28.

by Collective Bargaining Bouillabaisse (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:12pm

#64 touched on this point, but I'd like to expand.

What we have here I think is either a fuzzy memory by Mondesire or a blatant disregard for the truth that has resulted in the propragation of a myth created by the media. Early in his career, McNabb scrambled freuently and adeptly. As went McNabb's legs, so went the offense. On the heels of a team quitting on Ray Rhodes and a half-year with Doug Pederson, it was exciting. It was refreshing. More importantly, it was GOOD.

As McNabb became more familiar with the intricacies of the passing offense, his scrambling frequency dipped. When asked why he wasn't scrambling as much, McNabb always answered that he wanted to be thought of as a "QB," not a "scrambling QB." Significantly, he never claimed his motive for this was because he didn't want to be pigeon-holed as a black QB (which I would hope was not the case-his job is to win football games, not raze stereotypes). Rather, it was the media that attributed this motive to him and then derided him for it. I don't know if it has ever been a national story before Mondesire chimed in, but the entire argument is based on the faulty premise that his motive for not scrambling is anything other than his desire to give his team the best chance to win.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:27pm

RE #81:

I just figured you were the president of the Scott Norwood Fan Club, since football is a team sport and no one person can lose a game. I mean, it would be stupid of me to blame someone for his shanking of a field goal in the closing seconds during the biggest game of his career.

by thad (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:28pm

hey i have a question.
In the article the guy said that Eagles players were taking Owens' side. Is this true?
I totally missed that.

by thad (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:35pm

Also i missed something else.
In the 80's there were three well known black qb's
I only remember Randell is being the scrambler, not the other two.
When did black qb's become synonomous with running?

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:36pm

I mean, it would be stupid of me to blame someone for his shanking of a field goal in the closing seconds during the biggest game of his career.

What about blaming the rest of the team for not scoring a touchdown instead? I mean, c'mon, they couldn't score a touchdown in the closing seconds during the biggest games of their career. How lame is that? CHOKERS!

by Kurt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:39pm

I just figured you were the president of the Scott Norwood Fan Club, since football is a team sport and no one person can lose a game. I mean, it would be stupid of me to blame someone for his shanking of a field goal in the closing seconds during the biggest game of his career.

Yeah, you're right - the other 44 Bills all did their jobs perfectly, only to have it all undone on a 47 yeard chip shot, which after all is basically an extra point. I'm sure the 9 point favorit Bills were delighted to be losing by one, with a few seconds left and their kicker a scant 47 yards away. That was exactly the game plan. I'm sure the defense's game plan going in was to let the Giants control the ball for 40 minutes or so, and then to let the Giants go ahead with two minutes left. I'm sure the offense, coming off a 51-3 pasting of the Raiders, was perfectly satisfied to score 17 points.

It's just a shame that all that perfection was undone by the only kicker in the history of football who ever missed a 47 yard field goal.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 8:51pm

RE #84, 85:

It has been implied by the actions of those in the Eagles' locker room that T.O. is being defended before McNabb is. You really don't see anyone coming out defending McNabb, but you see guys wanting T.O. back or attending his birthday bash. If they really respected the guy, they would at least tell T.O. to STFU about McNabb.

Also, with the black scrambling QB thing, I would have to guess that came along with Cunningham being hyped as a secret weapon and more college QBs being black to take advantage of percieved speed and athletic advantages over white QBs who ran the option game. That is my best guess.

RE #86:

Ya know, you are right. We should never blame any one person for losing a game. Heck, we shouldn't acknowedge one person for being the reason a team wins. We should probably get rid of MVPs and Pro Bowls since it acknowledges individual achievement. Heck, I don't consider guys like Ryan Leaf and Curtis Ennis "busts" because it is obvious that it was the team's fault that they sucked, not theirs. Heck, I think FootballOutsiders's DVOA and DPAR scores should be all changed to the base line since no one person helps a team win or lose.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:06pm

Yah, because DPAR blames one and only one player for the loss, and gives credit to one and only one player for the win. I mean, it's obvious, right?

Come on. DPAR measures individual contributions to a win. You're trying to give all credit or blame to a player.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:10pm

You really don’t see anyone coming out defending McNabb, but you see guys wanting T.O. back or attending his birthday bash.

They were. The media just didn't cover it. Go check out the Eagles' press conferences if you doubt me.

Plus, just because someone attends a birthday party doesn't mean they "support Owens over McNabb". Maybe they just don't want to be a part of it. Hollis Thomas definitely doesn't want to be a part of it, if you saw his interview.

by Kurt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:14pm

From 83:

"I just figured you were the president of the Scott Norwood Fan Club, since football is a team sport and no one person can *lose* a game."

From 89:

"Heck, I think FootballOutsiders’s DVOA and DPAR scores should be all changed to the base line since no one person *helps* a team win or lose."

Keep moving those goalposts, junior.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:15pm

RE #89:

No, I'm not. What I'm saying is that a guy who was the #2 overall pick in the draft, has a $100 million dollar contract, has had a good relationship with the media no matter what he has done and is the face of a professional sports francise to start whining because people talk about him because he can't win most important games is absurd.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 9:20pm

RE #91:

Sorry, dad. I forgot that they didn't teach you about hyperbole during the wooly-mammoth hunting classes.

by putnamp (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:08pm

Just a few thoughts:

- Whether the media wants a black quarterback to succeed or not is not really a relevant question. Who cares if they do? Hell, I want a black quarterback to succeed, because (1) it is just more ammunition to diffuse the idiotic stereotypes that plague black athletes (Air Force, anyone?), and (2) it provides role models for young children who are looking for a black leader to look up to. So what if the media, or at least the majority of "the media", *wants* a black quarterback to succeed? Good for it.

- The knock against Rush was that he said *Donovan McNabb was not as good as people thought he was* and that his race played a factor in that. It was blatant and obvious flamebait. Nobody wanted to know what Rush Limbaugh thought about race. Of course, Rush was just playing the same character he did before he worked as a commentator, and the people who really should be taking responsibility for it are the idiots who brought him in in the first place. "Gosh, we brought in an attention-whoring loud-mouth shock-jock of a political pundit, and he said something offensive. How were we supposed to see that coming?"

- I am not black, so it is awkward and hopefully not inappropriate to try to speak about what little I know of contemporary African American issues. That said, one of the reasons that I suspect Donovan McNabb is such a popular target is because as a public figure, he represents something very relevant to African American social issues - a succesful leader and role model - and something disturbingly sought-after by (older) white Americans - a soft-spoken, likable, and palatable black athlete. He isn't decoared in tattoos, he doesn't have a record deal, he isn't doing things that scared white people might be shocked by. In another age I wonder if he might've been unfairly accused of being an Uncle Tom, but as far as I can tell, he's just being himself. To hell with anyone who has a problem with that, and to hell with folks like Rush Limbaugh for ultimately using that fact against him.

- This may or may not hold true with other "younger" fans like myself (I'm 25), but I've never thought of Donovan McNabb, Byron Leftwich, et. al., as anything but quarterbacks who happened to be black. Some of the first games I remember watching were between the Seahawks and the Oilers during Warren Moon's tenure, and then later with Warren Moon at the helm. Hell, Jake Plummer is the only quarterback in the NFL that looks out of place to me, and that's because the guy looks like Jesus. The white Jesus, I mean. The one that didn't really exist.

- If anything, it seems that a quarterback like Michael Vick does less to fight typical stereotypes against black athletes than Donovan McNabb. McNabb's mobility is a key factor, but his passing game isn't seen as the liability that Vick's is. When I think of a cerebral quarterback, I think of one that excels at passing, recognizing coverage, calling plays, and making passes while scrambling, not one that can run like a bat out of hell whenever he gets in trouble. But screw that - Michael Vick is no less of a human for playing the way he does. What's sad is that anyone would take it upon themselves to heap such social responsibility on someone who is doing everything in their power to play one of the toughest positions of any sport in the world.

by putnamp (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:18pm

Also, from a strictly political standpoint, I think Donovan McNabb may be more recognizable and more relevant than any other black athlete, including Michael Vick.

By the way, Bernie Kosar was an awful QB who could never win the big one.

by Kevo (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:37pm

I don't know precisely how it connects to the argument, but it popped into my head while reading putnamp's comment about Mike Vick, as well as McNabb's ability to connect to a white audience. Of the black athletes in the NFL, who sells the most jerseys?

This information comes from a USA Today. Click the link.

Top-selling NFL jerseys

B. Roethlisberger, QB, Steelers
Michael Vick, QB, Falcons
Terrell Owens, WR, Eagles
Donovan McNabb, QB, Eagles
Warren Sapp, DL, Oakland
Priest Holmes, RB, Chiefs
Tom Brady, QB, Patriots
Brett Favre, QB, Packers
Clinton Portis, RB, Redskins
Peyton Manning, QB, Colts

Source: Reebok

Roethlisberger's easy. The Steelers fans had their first "franchise" QB since Terry Bradshaw and his jerseys flew off the shelves.

Now, after that, you have Mike Vick, who, while an incendiary athlete, isn't exactly a "winner" or a "field general" in the mold of say, Tom Brady. He's kind of like the Allen Iverson of the NFL. Then, you have Terrell Owens, who is more famous for running his mouth than he is playing football. He fits the loud, brash black stereotype better than anyone in pro sports.

Then, finally, you have McNabb, followed by another black player who's known less for his on-field athleticism than his troublemaking.

It seems that football fans like to embrace the black stereotype a little more than the one who rises above it, in my opinion.

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:37pm

and is the face of a professional sports francise to start whining because people talk about him because he can’t win most important games is absurd.

Yah. You're right. Which is why he didn't.

"If you talk about my play, that's one thing," McNabb said. "When you talk about my race, now we've got problems."

I've got a feeling he's probably cares a little bit more about someone claiming that he's "belittling the black athlete" than some idiot whining about his football performance.

by putnamp (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:40pm


Look at who buys the jerseys, though - I bet its mostly kids. If it is, well, kids like the guys with attitude, so no surprise. I wouldn't draw too much from that until I knew more about who those sales were comprised of.

by MdM (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:43pm

re winning quarterbacks vs black quarterbacks.

Thank you. That was a great post. I hope some people learn from it.

by brady (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 10:55pm

Pat really has it out for Brady. Going back to 2002, Brady led the entire league in touchdown passes but they lost several games that year because they only had rookies to throw the ball to, and every game that Brady could have won, the rookies simply dropped passes everywhere. That was also the year that Antwain Smith crawled back into his shell. Brady did not have a healthy Troy Brown and we all know how much the Redskins love 'little play' Dave Patten. Brady plays behind undrafted linemen, and all the good players on the team are on defense, but somehow people like Pat fail to recognize that Brady is not the problem with the Patriots offense. He had one
bad game against the Raiders, and if anyone saw the hostility in that game towards Brady, I think it got to him for once.
During the Titans game, Brady's shoulder was seperated by Jevon Kearse, an injury that lasted into the jets game and actually until he won the superbowl the following year. He still would have possibly beat the jets if his rookie 7th round pick, Dave Givens had not dropped the pass at the goal, but that was the story in all their losses that year.
People seem to think that Brady gets all this amazing attention all the time. All I hear about on ESPN, FOX, CBS and everywhere else is about how great Manning or Vick or McNabb, or Culpepper or formerly Steve MCNair is. Brady and the Patriots are not treated by anyone as some sort of glamour team. The reason Brady's stats are not always tops in the league has always been a lack of running game, and mediocre receivers, as well as a year and a half with a badly seperated throwing shoulder as well as a bursa sack torn in that throwing elbow by the jets, all of which he played through with no media attention, and won a superbowl.
Brady won his big bowl games in college, and was overlooked due to his skinny size and the fact that Michigan had a lot of star QBs. Nobody criticized him back then or now for playing the game. He leads the nfl in passing this year, with no running game until last week . With a decent receiver taller than 5'9", Brady would be able to do a lot more, or maybe more than one or two drafted O-Lineman, who can actually block. Does anyone notice the big shots he takes week after week? He doesn't roll around and cry like Vick, so people seem to think that he doesn't get hit. He gets hit a lot.
Oh well, people like Pat aren't interested in being objective about Brady so why bother?

by Sid (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:22pm

McNabb never brought up race. The NAACP idiot did.

The NAACP heard that one of its members was criticizing a black role model, so the head issued a statement:


by Sid (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:23pm

Here's a question:

Why didn't Mr. Desirous give up some of HIS money to make TO happy?

by Sid (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:24pm

"Obviously, if it's someone else who is not African American, it's racism," McNabb said. "I always thought the NAACP supported African Americans and didn't talk bad about them."

What the heck is that supposed to mean?

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:31pm

Pat really has it out for Brady.

While I'm... impressed (and... a little scared) by the dedication, no, I don't have it out for Brady. But he was overhyped as a passing quarterback until 2004. Note that I think the same about the quarterback of the team that I actually like.

All I hear about on ESPN, FOX, CBS and everywhere else is about how great Manning or Vick or McNabb

Um, you do know that Brady was voted sportsman of the year by SI, right?

There's a thread I linked to up there that might be more appropriate. Thanks! :)

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Thu, 12/15/2005 - 11:46pm

RE #94:

I love how you think ESPN is accountable for bringing in someone for flamebait and then you do it yourself. The DailyKos school of internet arguments is paying off.

by Fnor (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 12:02am

Behave, guys. It's okay to talk about overrated quarterbacks, it's okay to debate the "chokiness" of quarterbacks, it's okay to talk about race, but it is NOT okay to start mixing the three together into one overchokracial discussion, because things get incindiary.

What we have here is a stupid guy writing a stupid letter about an athlete we can all agree is pretty darn good. Do some of us think he's overrated? Okay, you can think that. But bringing up the spectres of 2002 and "the media wants black quarterbacks to succeed" is absolutely ridiculous. Not only is it completely unfounded by anything other than "well, they sure do puff up Vick and McNabb a lot!" but it ignores cases like Kordell Stewart and now Daunte Culpepper, where the whole thing came crashing down. There were very few in any media outlet making apologies there.

Keep it in focus. Don't let your personal animosities and foibles play into reasoned discussion. This is an objective site, remember? And most of all it's a fun site, so get the heck away from each others' throats!

by Joe (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 12:03am

Re #103: It means that McNabb is surprised and disappointed that an African-American would link his football performance to his race.

In particular, he's disappointed that a leading member of the NAACP, an organization supposedly dedicated to the advancement of African-Americans, would suggest that his under-performance this year had anything to do with his race.

by Basilicus (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 12:30am

By the same logic regarding scrambling, doesn't that mean that Byron Leftwich is setting the struggles of African-Americans back by 100 years? 31 carries for 67 yards? That's it? Good job denying your blackness, Byron.

by putnamp (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 2:16am


I don't see where I posted any sort of flamebait, I'm not being paid to post here, I'm not a public figure who claims to have unique political insight, and I never said I agree with any of the blatant and headline-grabbing nonsense that's been spewed out, either in 2002 or 2006.

So uh.. sure, whatever you say.

by morganja (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 2:48am

Frankly, it is ridiculous to claim that professional athletes are suffering from rasicm. Its an insult and belittlement to all the non-millionaires out there who are struggling to feed their families, pay their bills while being subjected to real racism. This is just another pathetic attempt to turn athletes into heros when they aren't. I don't blame the athletes. I blame the people who profit from marketing them as such.

by bravehoptoad (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 4:13am

Shoot, if you're a black football player, you better have a pretty dance ready for your next trip to the endzone, or the NAACP is going to come down on your arse for being too white.

Seriously, I'm surprised the NAACP hasn't done more than apologize to McNabb. This lovely gentleman from Philly has given them more press than they've had in a while, and it sure isn't the kind they want. "Oh yeah, NAACP, they're the ones who make sure you're playing your position 'black enough.'"

Why are they tolerating this Mondesire guy? Are his the kind of opinions they want in their organization?

by putnamp (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 4:45am

Racism doesn't care about social standing or paycheck size. Don't marginalize the people who are in the spotlight, it's not easy for them either. It's harder when you're poor, absolutely, but that doesn't mean it isn't hard when you aren't.

by Raul Amargosa (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 6:47am

When can McNabb go from being a "black quarterback" to just being a quarterback?

by admin :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 9:38am

Re: 96. It is interesting that Roethlisberger sells the most jerseys, because his jerseys cost twice as much to cover the cost of the extra letters.

Re: 111, see 75. The national president of the NAACP apologized for the stupid Philly guy.

PHILADELPHIA (AP) - The chief executive officer of the NAACP criticized the president of its Philadelphia branch Thursday for racially charged comments made about Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb.

Bruce Gordon, who heads the Baltimore-based National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, issued a statement calling McNabb "a great quarterback, an excellent role model and a class act" and said he intended to apologize for denigrating remarks made by Philadelphia chapter president J. Whyatt Mondesire.

"The NAACP has many civil rights issues that require our attention," Gordon said. "Criticizing Donovan McNabb is not one of them."

by Paulo Sanchotene (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 9:40am

Come on, dfarr777 (#1). Please, don't compare the stupidity subject of this debate with the Limbaugh's opinion about McNabb, that was, I dare say, correct. McNabb was overrated because he's black. The thing is, we must see a player based on his skills and caracter. Period. McNabb was a very "common" QB with a superstar's midia coverage just because he was a black starter QB in Philadelphia... Now, he has a much more solid game, even recognized by Limbaugh. So, it's end of story.

To bring back this skin color stuff just let us with one option: No comments. I wish to live long enough to see the day a man's color being completely unimportant...

by DavidO (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 11:27am

I've long been astounded at the abuse that Donovan has taken throughout his career - from draft day on, he's been nothing but a class act, and gets so much grief.

In fact, I think that the whole situation has the makings of an excellent sitcom...
Mediocre at Best -- Pilot Episode f.k.a “
Everybody Hates Donovan� - damn you Chris Rock...)
Scene: a rainy, wet day in suburban Philadelphia.
Donovan limps up the front walk, spent from his warrior's effort in a 31-30
Philly defeat to the New England Patriots, in which Eagles head coach Any Reid
elected to order a field goal on 1st and goal from the NE 4 yard line, down by
4 points, with 1:58 remaining and no time outs ("You
take the points", he explained to a sycophantic media horde afterwards).
Enraged fans blame McNabb for the loss.
Donovan opens the front door and staggers in. His dog eagerly trots up to his faithful Master...
Donovan: Minestrone! Hey, man, I'm glad to see ya buddy...
The dog turns, lifts his leg, and pees on Donovan’s shin.
Donovan: Et Tu,'Strone?
Minestrone (walking away): Wait until he sees what
I left in his slippers! {riotous laugh track}
Donovan sighs and shuffles painfully into the kitchen, where Mama is cooking at the stove. An
Eagles number 81 jersey is clearly visible underneath her apron. {Wild Applause
of the kind usually reserved for popular presidents at the State of the Union
Donovan: Hey Ma...
Mama: GET YOUR OWN DAMN SOUP! {laugh track, combined
with the sort of ovation hitherto unknown since the Beatles' invasion in the
early Sixties (this is Mama's signature line and will be the only dialog she
ever utters in the show...)}
Donovan, scraping the remaining shards of his shattered dignity into a little pile to be dealt with
later, heads upstairs to change. As he enters his bedroom, he is shocked to
find his wife in bed with superagent Drew Rosenhaus.
Donovan: What the...
Mrs. McNabb:
Honey, we really need to talk about this whole "until death do us
part" thing. I think that it's pretty obvious that I've outperform...
Drew Rosenhaus(interrupting, shouting, and inadvertently elbowing Mrs. McNabb out
of the bed): Look, prenup schmenup, if my client is still bound by this sham of a
"partnership" by 8:00 tomorrow morning, she's gonna be very
unhappy...{laugh track, hysterical applause, and... scene.}
Next week on “Mediocre at Best� – Eagles kicker David Akers gets his cleats caught in the turf while
attempting a 1st Quarter field goal, and snaps his fibula in two.
Enraged Eagles fans blame Donovan for putting Akers in the position where he
had to kick the figgie in the first place…

by Kevo (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 11:34am

Paulo just set the blackness of this thread back about 100 posts by saying Limbaugh was right. Please, read the whole thread and then retract your statement, as you are clearly wrong.

by Kevo (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 11:36am

116, that was brilliant.

by Catholic Samurai (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 11:57am

If Leftwich wanted to appease the guys at the NAACP and act more "black", he should come out with a foot-tall Eraserhead hairdo complete with his number shaved in the back of his head, A.D.I.D.A.S. jogging suit with matching untied tennis shoes, and big gold rope necklace.

by big_adventure (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 12:41pm

Wait, wait, wait...

...McNabb is BLACK?


by big_adventure (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 12:41pm

I gotta get my TV fixed.


by Pat (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 1:01pm

Paulo just set the blackness of this thread back about 100 posts by saying Limbaugh was right.

Limbaugh's trick usually seems to be making a statement that's factually true, and then shoehorning it into something that's totally ridiculous afterwards. If all Rush had said "McNabb is overrated", I wouldnt've argued with him at the time. As I said above, quarterbacks on winning teams are almost universally overrated. But he said (paraphrasing) "McNabb is overrated. The only reason he gets so much attention is because he's black." First part? True. Second part? Shoehorned ridiculousness. It's retarded.

The problem is that since he's using something factually true to support a ridiculous statement, a lot of people say "hey, he got flak for saying something that's true." So let me clear this up, although as Kevo said, it's been clearly stated before.

1: McNabb was probably overrated at the time.
2: It's not because he was black. It's because he's a quarterback on a winning team.

Oh, and just to pull the topic back on track:

3: "Mediocre at best" is a ridiculous statement for a hack writer to make, especially when said "mediocre" quarterback is coming off of a record-breaking season.

by Craig B (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 1:01pm

a foot-tall Eraserhead hairdo complete with his number shaved in the back of his head, A.D.I.D.A.S. jogging suit with matching untied tennis shoes, and big gold rope necklace.

Wrong organization, CatSam... you're thinking of the National Association for the Advancement of 80s Throwbacks.

by Minestrone (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 2:12pm

Re: 116

Keep my name out of your mouth.

by putnamp (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 3:39pm

Just wanted to clarify my earlier statement:

The error in Limbaugh's statement was that he took a few correct statements and tried to put them together (as #122 said). If McNabb is overrated, so what, he's not the first QB to be overrated. If individual members of the media wants to see a succesful black quarterback, so what, there's nothing terribly wrong with that, either. It was when he tried to correlate the two that he went off the deep end.

It also frustrates me to no end how difficult it is to have a productive discussion about race without one of the following happening:

a) someone with a bone to pick diving in head-first to take shots at anyone and everyone so they can feel better about their own insecurities
b) someone else saying "hey, guys, this is a sensitive topic, maybe we should tiptoe around how we really feel?"
c) everyone becoming deathly afraid of being labeled, correctly or not, as ignorant racists, to the point that they begin mincing every single word and becoming borderline unintelligible as they ramble on about an already convoluted topic

by Keith Cockrell (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 5:09pm

Okay, I have to admit I stopped reading the comments. But, my goodness, 125 (ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TWENTY-FIVE!) comments on something this stupid. Obviously we're all still a little sensitive.

by putnamp (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 5:46pm

127 now..!

by JMK (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 6:20pm

This is like two weeks old. Good job to ESPN for rehashing old stories.

by BillWallace (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 7:20pm

Kurt is right to point out that most of you guys aren't evaluating this guy's argument on its merits, just misreading a strawman and then killing it. The guy is saying that if McNabb is intentionally not scrambling because he doesn't want to be stereotyped, then that is wrong. His evidence is that McNabb said something that implies that he is doing just that. To me this is a reasonable argument, and the conclusion follows from the assumptions. But there is lots of evidence that contradicts the assumptions, and I think that the attack is unwarranted. But you should consider what the guy is actually saying before you strike it down, not just see race, and start blindly whacking at the strawman. The same thing was true of Limbaugh. His argument was logical, and not necessarily racist, it was just probably wrong.

by Pat (not verified) :: Fri, 12/16/2005 - 7:44pm

His evidence is that McNabb said something that implies that he is doing just that.

Except for the fact that McNabb never said anything near that, and that McNabb has said things that are directly contradictory to that over, and over and over.

Plus, he did, in fact, call McNabb mediocre - and tried to justify it in a ridiculous way. Yeah, he might've gotten his shorts in a knot because he believed "McNabb wasn't scrambling because that's what black quarterbacks do", but that doesn't change the fact that he felt compelled to spew a bunch of completely unjustifiable opinions along with his misunderstood belief.

by big_adventure (not verified) :: Sat, 12/17/2005 - 4:37am

Fortunately, the solution appears on the horizon!

It looks like another, REAL black QB is available. I bet they could swing a trade straight up for him. Would that make Mondeshire happy?

Click me name if you don't get it already...

by ChicagoScott (not verified) :: Sat, 12/17/2005 - 1:19pm

Since this guy is clearly enough of a football EXPERT to call McNabb medicore, when will he grace us with more brilliant articles? Such as...

Brady vs Manning-The NAACP Viewpoint

Comparing the 4-3 & 3-4 Defenses-The NAACP Viewpoint

Why The Texans Suck-The NAACP Viewpoint

Matt Millen, The Smartest Man In The Game-The NAACP Viewpoint

Is Their Crying In Football-The NAACP Viewpoint (co-author Dick Vermeil)

by bravehoptoad (not verified) :: Sat, 12/17/2005 - 3:39pm

RE: 114

The NAACP is apologizing for Mondeshire. I'm wondering why that's all they're doing. And your point is...?

Mondeshire has made more press than anyone else in the NAACP for a long time. Is that the face you want people putting on your organization?

by Sid (not verified) :: Thu, 12/22/2005 - 3:28am

RE: 107

But his statements implied that it's only racist if a white person says it.

by Sid (not verified) :: Thu, 12/22/2005 - 6:49pm

What would have been more logical would be to bash Ron Mexico for giving herpes simplex 2 to people and for perpetuating the stereotype of running black quarterback."
But, no, that makes too much sense.

Maybe Mondesirous is angry at McNabb because he doesn't fit into the stereotype of the black athlete.

by Sid (not verified) :: Thu, 12/22/2005 - 9:04pm

RE: 94

The stereotypes surround black athletes because blacks are generally more athletic than whites, and also tend to commit more crimes than whites.

by PatsFan (not verified) :: Tue, 01/03/2006 - 11:39am

Looks like the Tank McNamara comic strip is about to take on the whole ridiculous "black" quarterback/"white" quarterback thing. See today's (3 Jan) strip.