Newton's personality reminds me of.............

[Mr. Scot]

Ok I just want to figure something out. Regardless of system, coach, blah bla blah. mr. Scot, how good do you think mcNabb WAS, not now.

you can do it on a scale from 1-10, you can rank him among the 32 qbs in the league. Its pretty generic but I want to know if you give him any credit at all basically, or if you think he was JUSt average.

I'm not into rankings or numbers. I grade QBs on a scale of Poor, Moderate, Good, Very Good, Great and Elite.

McNabb? In a WCO, very good. In anything else, moderate.

You can win a Super Bowl with "good" or better, but the higher your QB is on that scale, the better your chances.

[HoFBound90]

I get that, but by throwing so much couldn't his stats just as easily be much worse. Not so much he would get replaced, but more ints, less compl % and so on. This does not seem to be the case.

[HoFBound90]

I'm not into rankings. I grade QBs on a scale of Poor, Moderate, Good, Very Good, Great and Elite.

McNabb? In a WCO, very good. In anything else, moderate.

Ok, was just wondering. I would say Great in a WCO and we will see in anything else with the Viks this year. Not willing to judge on 1 year with the skins. Although I feel he won't get his fair shake because of age now.

[Mr. Scot]

Nobody is calling McNabb bad, or terrible, just that he is overrated because of the system that he played in.

I have, and will continue to say the same thing about Vick.

IMO Reid's system is a very very QB friendly system, possibly the easiest in the league, and because of his propensity to throw the ball 60% of the time, stats of his QB's is way out of proportion.

That's all.

On ability, pretty much.

On the topic of personality, I'll say again what I said before. McNabb's not exactly been the world's best teammate. There are lots of other guys I'd rather see Newton emulate.

[theyhateme45]

Actually, he is built for it.

What you want most in a West Coast QB is a guy with good short to mid-range accuracy so he can get it to his receivers and backs and let then run after the catch. If he has the arm to chuck it downfield once in a while too, that's good but not a necessity (McNabb does, Montana didn't). Mobility is also not an absolute need, but it is a big plus because the system rarely keeps backs in to block, choosing instead to send them out on pass routes.

McNabb is pretty much an ideal fit for that system.

But last year he played outside of it, under a coach that was considered a QB guru (his worthiness for that title is a debate of its own) and wound up benched. This year he's going back to it, and if he suddenly looks like his old self again I won't be surprised.

So if a running back thrives in a zone system, can he not be a great RB or receive credit? If a QB thrives in a Play Action system can he not be a great QB or receive credit? If a Wr thrives in a timing system, can he not be a great WR ore receive credit???

Because to say that just because Mcnabb fits well into a particular style of offense doesn;t deserve any credit is ludacris IMO.

I Don't care what system you are in... YOU STILL NEED TO PERFORM AND EXECUTE to win!!! Point blank period.... It's not like he had one lucky run.... the man did it multiple times, with less than some other QB's! Give the man some credit.

As far as the playoff thing, like I said, I've watched all his playoff games. Can you really look back at that Super Bowl performance (especially the two minute drill) and say that was a guy playing lights out? Heck, look back at his 2003 game against us. Are we going to say that 100% of the blame for all three of his picks was on his receivers?

Is McNabb good? Sure he is. Great? Debatable. Elite? No.

So the guy goes to multiple title games and you pick out a few portions of those games to generalize his whole body of work?? I mean countless other QB's have done less than McNabb, but still gets credit for what they did.

Like I said, people just knock players anyway they can when they don't like them...

I tell you what.... Let Cam go to a superbowl, a couple of title games, regardless if he had a top defense, great running game ect... because people like him, he will get the credit! Let it be The Golden Calf of Bristol, Bradford, or any other QB people like and they will get the credit.... But for some reason when it comes to Mcnabb, because people don't like him they find every way to bash the guy and give him no credit.

I'm not a McNabb fan, I just dislike the hypocricy people show when it comes to players, especially if they don't like them.

[CRA]

On ability, pretty much.

On the topic of personality, I'll say again what I said before. McNabb's not exactly been the world's best teammate. There are lots of other guys I'd rather see Newton emulate.

but you convienently ignore this QB has been shiat on like few QBs. I don't think McNabb is a bad teammate....I think he has unfairly been under the microscope his entire career and constantly forced to defend himself like few others (and usually takes the high road in most cases).

[thefuzz]

Ok, was just wondering. I would say Great in a WCO and we will see in anything else with the Viks this year. Not willing to judge on 1 year with the skins. Although I feel he won't get his fair shake because of age now.

Less than a 60% completion %.

25 TD's or more 2 times in his career.

Played in 16 games 4 times.

YPA 6.9.

Not basing everything on these numbers, but this to me smells like good, maybe really good, but not great.

[Mr. Scot]

So if a running back thrives in a zone system, can he not be a great RB or receive credit? If a QB thrives in a Play Action system can he not be a great QB or receive credit? If a Wr thrives in a timing system, can he not be a great WR ore receive credit???

Because to say that just because Mcnabb fits well into a particular style of offense doesn;t deserve any credit is ludacris IMO.

I Don't care what system you are in... YOU STILL NEED TO PERFORM AND EXECUTE to win!!! Point blank period.... It's not like he had one lucky run.... the man did it multiple times, with less than some other QB's! Give the man some credit.

So the guy goes to multiple title games and you pick out a few portions of those games to generalize his whole body of work?? I mean countless other QB's have done less than McNabb, but still gets credit for what they did.

Like I said, people just knock players anyway they can when they don't like them...

I tell you what.... Let Cam go to a superbowl, a couple of title games, regardless if he had a top defense, great running game ect... because people like him, he will get the credit! Let it be The Golden Calf of Bristol, Bradford, or any other QB people like and they will get the credit.... But for some reason when it comes to Mcnabb, because people don't like him they find every way to bash the guy and give him no credit.

I'm not a McNabb fan, I just dislike the hypocricy people show when it comes to players, especially if they don't like them.

Let me put it to you this way. How would you feel about signing Colt Brennan to be our starter? After all, his execution looked great in college.

The term 'system quarterback' exists for a reason. Jeff Garcia was a prime example. When he played for WCO teams, he looked like a world beater. Take him out of that system though? Heck, he wound up third string on the Lions (and justifiably so).

Like I said in the other post, I'll give you 'very good' with McNabb as long as he's in a WCO, but great quarterbacks step up on the big stage, and McNabb folded. I can't attach a label of 'great' to that.

[thefuzz]

So if a running back thrives in a zone system, can he not be a great RB or receive credit? If a QB thrives in a Play Action system can he not be a great QB or receive credit? If a Wr thrives in a timing system, can he not be a great WR ore receive credit???

Because to say that just because Mcnabb fits well into a particular style of offense doesn;t deserve any credit is ludacris IMO.

I Don't care what system you are in... YOU STILL NEED TO PERFORM AND EXECUTE to win!!! Point blank period.... It's not like he had one lucky run.... the man did it multiple times, with less than some other QB's! Give the man some credit.

So the guy goes to multiple title games and you pick out a few portions of those games to generalize his whole body of work?? I mean countless other QB's have done less than McNabb, but still gets credit for what they did.

Like I said, people just knock players anyway they can when they don't like them...

I tell you what.... Let Cam go to a superbowl, a couple of title games, regardless if he had a top defense, great running game ect... because people like him, he will get the credit! Let it be The Golden Calf of Bristol, Bradford, or any other QB people like and they will get the credit.... But for some reason when it comes to Mcnabb, because people don't like him they find every way to bash the guy and give him no credit.

I'm not a McNabb fan, I just dislike the hypocricy people show when it comes to players, especially if they don't like them.

God Damn.

No one is saying that he isn't a good QB, just that he isn't nearly as good as everyone makes him out to be.

He ain't Manning, but he sure as hell isn't JP Losman either.

Calm down.

[theyhateme45]

Nobody is calling McNabb bad, or terrible, just that he is overrated because of the system that he played in.

I have, and will continue to say the same thing about Vick.

IMO Reid's system is a very very QB friendly system, possibly the easiest in the league, and because of his propensity to throw the ball 60% of the time, stats of his QB's is way out of proportion.

That's all.

Nobody is talking about stats.... Isn;t winning what we always talk about, and doing it consistently. (That's why Jake and Fox was bashed... they were not consistent enough).

Well Mcnabb was consistently winning, and playing while other QB's were at home watching or done for their season.

Philly is not the only QB friendly system... But I don;t see other teams with the system winning on a consistent basis with just "average" qb play.

I'll like to see another "Average" so called system QB win as often as Mcnabb did, and have that kind of consistent success. I want to know another QB???? Everybody who consistently won doesn;t get bashed like Mcnabb does.

Hell Jim Kelly lost 3 SB's (according to Mr. Scot that's chocking) and he's a Hall of Famer. I didn't hear all the out rage for him. Nobody whoes consistently gotten his team to title games get's this kind of bashing. Period.

[theyhateme45]

Let me put it to you this way. How would you feel about signing Colt Brennan to be our starter? After all, his execution looked great in college.

The term 'system quarterback' exists for a reason. Jeff Garcia was a prime example. When he played for WCO teams, he looked like a world beater. Take him out of that system though? Heck, he wound up third string on the Lions (and justifiably so).

Like I said in the other post, I'll give you 'very good' with McNabb as long as he's in a WCO, but great quarterbacks step up on the big stage, and McNabb folded.

So Jim Kelly is not great? Dan Marino is not great?

[Mr. Scot]

So Jim Kelly is not great? Dan Marino is not great?

Trent Dilfer has a Super Bowl ring. Is he great?

Kelly and Marino performed well even though their teams didn't win.

Can you really look at McNabb's championship performances and call those "great"?

[thefuzz]

Nobody is talking about stats.... Isn;t winning what we always talk about, and doing it consistently. (That's why Jake and Fox was bashed... they were not consistent enough).

Well Mcnabb was consistently winning, and playing while other QB's were at home watching or done for their season.

Philly is not the only QB friendly system... But I don;t see other teams with the system winning on a consistent basis with just "average" qb play.

I'll like to see another "Average" so called system QB win as often as Mcnabb did, and have that kind of consistent success. I want to know another QB???? Everybody who consistently won doesn;t get bashed like Mcnabb does.

Hell Jim Kelly lost 3 SB's (according to Mr. Scot that's chocking) and he's a Hall of Famer. I didn't hear all the out rage for him. Nobody whoes consistently gotten his team to title games get's this kind of bashing. Period.

To look only at wins when talking about how "great" a QB is, is foolish...IMO.

Do you think that Brees, Rodgers, and Brady are as good as the media would have you believe?

Open your eyes a little.

[HoFBound90]

Less than a 60% completion %.

25 TD's or more 2 times in his career.

Played in 16 games 4 times.

YPA 6.9.

Not basing everything on these numbers, but this to me smells like good, maybe really good, but not great.

Ok but what were his overall qb ratings. How bout rush yards + tds ( I usually don't like these stats for qbs, but its just to show how much McNabb did overall), and how about total wins over his career.

I agree those numbers alone don't show great...but if the whole package is put to gether I think you can say he had a pretty damn great career for a qb, #s wise, accompishment wise, and impact wise.