McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame

Niether is Warner but they are all HOF quality QB's. Warner was amazing and now is unbelievable. McNabb didn't play on the Rams. But did an amazing job with the Eagles. Like him or not, definatly HOF

Marino got in without a ring because he was an amazing, incredible and sometimes jaw-dropping passer.

Warner has somewhat rejuvinated his career and shown that he was not just a fluke of the Rams offense but, rather, an integral and necessary part of it. A prolific passer who will always make the yards. I kind of see him as a Warren Moon, Jim Kelly, Dan Fouts type but with a ring.

McNabb has shown himself to be a decent passer with good numbers whose main attribute is that he is a good qb on a consistently winning team (due in part to his ability) comparable to an Aikman, Bradshaw or Len Dawson type but without the ring.

I am not sure either of them gets in b/c I they both strike me as candidates for the Hall of Very Good. But if I had to choose one, I'd go with the ring.

I think they are both deserving of the HOF. Warner has the chance of going to his second SB, is a SB MVP, and league MVP. From what people are posting in this thread, sounds like he will have very good numbers. I would say a second SB win for Warner would increase his chances.

McNabb has made the Eagles very successful, despite not having a good wideout group. McNabb does have Westbrook, but except for T.O., he has not had much help in in receivers. Like Warner, a 2nd SB appearance and/or win would greatly increase his chance.

Someone mentioned Manning and Brady on this thread, and these guys are going to affect the likes of McNabb or Warner in the HOF voting. If you have Manning and/or Brady are up for HOF contention the same year that either McNabb or Warner, I think the voters will go with Manning and Brady, before they vote a McNabb or Warner.

Mike Greenberg called McNabb a hall-of-famer on Mike and Mike this morning, which is probably the stupidest thing said about football this year. And that would include some of the things said around here about Zorn/Campbell.

His basis for doing this is that:

1) Donovan McNabb will have better numbers than Troy Aikman when he retires.
2) Donovan McNabb will have better numbers than Steve Young when he retires.
3) Both Troy Aikman and Steve Young are Hall-of-Famers.

He also says that Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady are the sure-fire Hall-of-Famers from this era. Does McNabb belong in the same category with these guys?

There is no doubt that players in the current era will have the strongest passing statistics of players in any era ever. So the direct comparison to Young/Aikman is already imperfect.

I'll get to Aikman/McNabb in a minute. Here's Young vs. McNabb in career rate totals.

Completion Percentage
Steve Young 64.3
Donovan McNabb 58.9

Yards per Attempt
Steve Young 8.0
Donovan McNabb 6.8

TD Rate
Steve Young 5.6%
Donovan McNabb 4.5%

Sack Rate
Steve Young 7.94%
Donovan McNabb 6.96%

INT Rate
Steve Young 2.6%
Donovman McNabb 2.1%

Passer Rating
Steve Young 96.8
Donovan McNabb 85.9

I included stats where McNabb was better to show how close it was in comparison to Young, and without coming up with a complicated era regression multiplier to normalize the numbers. On all stats that don't pertain directly to negative plays, McNabb is clearly inferior to Young, and it really isn't even all that close. I don't have any idea how Greenberg is claiming that McNabb has better numbers than Young. Even ignoring the elephant in the room -- the fact that McNabb played in a big passing era on a big passing team -- he's still not even remotely comparable to Steve Young on merit.

But since "compares well to Steve Young" is not necessarily a hall of fame criteria, let's look at Greenberg's other comparison: Troy Aikman.

McNabb actually compares much better to Aikman.

Completion Percentage
Troy Aikman 61.5
Donovan McNabb 58.9

Yards per Attempt
Troy Aikman 7.0
Donovan McNabb 6.8

TD Rate
Troy Aikman 3.5%
Donovan McNabb 4.5%

Sack Rate
Troy Aikman 5.21%*
Donovan McNabb 6.96%

*Well above average for the time, but again, Aikman's protection was particularly outstanding, perhaps the best in history. McNabb's had very good protection by current standards, but nothing like Aikman.

INT Rate
Troy Aikman 3.0%
Donovman McNabb 2.1%

Passer Rating
Troy Aikman 81.6
Donovan McNabb 85.9

Aikman, statistically, is a much better McNabb comparable. Although era-adjusted Aikman would put McNabb to shame, Aikman's best years are concentrated in the six best years in the history of the Cowboys franchise: 1991-1996. In those seasons, he never posted a completion percentage below 63.7. Outside of those seasons, he never got above 59.5. That's unheard of, and probably had everything to do with the talent around him. Aikman's 61.5% career figure is one he not ever came within two points in any single season. Astounding.

But here's the point: A random player with Troy Aikman's numbers is NOT a hall-of-famer. That's the big point here. Troy Aikman is in Canton because and because he won three Super Bowls, not because he was a particularly great passer. Donovan McNabb is also not a particularly great passer, and happens to have no Super Bowls. If he can win his next two games, he will have a single Super Bowl. And he still won't have anywhere near Aikman's credentials for hall-of-fame selection.

Although, if you want to use the innovator angle on McNabb, he is widely credited with bringing the bounce pass to football. That's got to be worth something, right?

Look, Donovan McNabb is a good player. But if he goes in the Hall-of-Fame for any reason but sympathy, then what do you tell Jeff Garcia?

Or Mark Brunell?

Or Rich Gannon?

Or Chad Pennington?

Or Steve McNair?

Or Trent Green

Or Marc Bulger

Or Matt Hasselbeck?

Most, if not all, of those guys will never make the hall of fame. But if Donovan McNabb deserves it, don't all those guys deserve at least the same honor, if not a greater one?

See, this is why I don't post that much. Everyone else is much smarter and says the things I want to say much better better than I. Nice work GTripp.

Let them get a ring first then we can talk...these two guys aren't in the same league as Marino. Marino set the NFL on fire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Marino#NFL_records_set_by_Dan_Marino) in terms of the numbers he has put up.

good thread. if you would tell someone that McNabb has better career stats then Warner, they wouldn't believe you. i say yes to both. McNabb has done more with less talent then probably anyone in the game. and Warner, minus the Giant season, has been nothing short of amazing his whole career

So with you there. Both should be pretty much locks. Warner has had great supporting casts and McNabb has done a lot with a little.

The ONLY knock for me on McNabb is that Reid does get a little pass-happy and that makes his stats improve a lot. Not only that, think of how many three yard pass plays Westbrook turned into eighty yard TDs... After saying all that, he's definitely played well with his arm and his feet to be deserving (and I ABSOLUTELY HATE HIM WITH A PASSION AND THAT GOOFY ASS SMILE).

Warner would have been a mortal lock had the Rams not crapped the bed against the Patriots. I still think that both with get in. McNabb has tremendous raw numbers, and could really help his cause with a Super Bowl win.

going back to gtripps post, i also think that people would be shocked to see Aikman's career stats. to me, no way he should be in the hall. captain of a juggernaut of a football team. yes, he was a darn good qback. hall worthy? i dont think so

I think both of them are borderline leaning towards in at this point. If Warner wins another one, he's a lock because of his numbers, his wins and also his story (although that's not supposed to matter) is a great one.

McNabb has been a winner his entire career, never had great WR except one year with TO and has consistently put up solid numbers. With a SB ring he strengthens his case.

I doubt either one will be a first ballot, but they both will get in.

Aikman's numbers don't tell the whole story. He could have been a gunslinger in an offense that wasn't so run heavy. And at the end of the day 3 rings gets him in easily.

If McNabb wins this season AND wins next season, he gets in under the winners clause, which basically says that you can't keep a multiple time SB winner out of the Hall.

I also think that's stupid for the same reason London Fletcher can't get voted to the pro bowl, but it definately exists.

Warner's in right now on merit, and I think winning the title this year makes him a stone cold lock. He'll get in even if he loses this week, IMO. I know there are no multiple time SB winning QBs left outside of the Hall, but what about multiple time MVPs?