McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

What do you all think?

Are they already Hall of Famers?

Do either need to win or at least make the Super Bowl to be considered (all this is assuming they retired at the end of the season, which I don't think they would).

Are they not Hall of Famers no matter what happens these next couple of weeks?

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

interesting thought, a few years ago i didnt think warner did "it" long enough to be HOF worthy given that he didnt start in the league until he was what? 30? but he won the qb competition in AZ over a highly touted first round rook in leinart (great call by the AZ coaches to go with the qb who gives them the best chance to win vs not letting a heavy investment sit on the bench) . . i still dont think of warner as a HOfer but he does have a league and SB MVP (does he have 2 league MVPs?) . . not sure about warner. perhaps a SB win with another team might secure it for him. i could see the argument that he has played with explosive offensive teams cutting against him too.

mcnabb should def be in the HOF first ballot, superbowl win or not. if the eagles do win the SB i think he is a lock. he has made that philly team a consistent winner being in the nfc champ game something like 5 out of the past 10 years . .

warner = maybe
mcnabb = yes

go skins!!

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I would say Warner over McNabb. Warner has won a SB and has proven he can play even at his ripe age, if he makes it to another SB; then there's no doubt.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I think both are HoFers. Warner won a SB and has been an MVP winning another SB would really make him a lock. I think McNabb is also a HoFer but IMO he needs a SB win to really secure his spot. I dont think either is a lock but I think both are worthy.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I heard that being talked about somewhere today. I did not realize McNabb's numbers were as good as they are. Both have to be in the discussion for HOF.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

i dont think mcnabb is HOF at all.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I would say Warner for sure. He has thrown for 300+ yards in over 45% of his starts. That's amazing. The next closest player is Dan Fouts at 28%. Plus he has a Super Bowl ring and an MVP.

McNabb is getting close I think. He's steadily been a winner in his career, but he's 1-3 in NFC Championship Games, and has never won a Super Bowl or MVP.

If I had to vote today, I would say Warner yes, McNabb no.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

^ co-sign

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

Another ring for Warner with the season he's had and I would say he's pretty damn close to being a lock, a few years ago I would have said no way. Let's look at his career numbers: 28,591 passing yards, 182 TDs, 114 INTs, 93.8 rating, 3 seasons with over 4,000 yards, 4 seasons with at least 27 TDs, 65.4 career completion %. He's certainly got some good numbers.

With McNabb you've gotta figure he probably has at least 5 more years as a starter. Add a ring to that and he probably will be a Hall of Famer when all is said and done. Some of his career highlights: 29,320 passing yards, 194 TDs, 90 INTs, 5 seasons over the 3,000 yard mark, 4 seasons with at least 21 TDs, and even though he doesn't run like he used to he still has 3,109 yards rushing and 26 TDs over his career.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

For whatever reason I have enjoyed watching DM play and still dislike the eagles. Yes to both.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

Warner should make it to the HOF on his story alone.

His rags to riches NFL story couldn't be better. I don't see why he wouldn't since he has a super bowl ring in tow.


McNabb has to win if he wants in.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I say yes to both. Yes to Warner because of his SB appearances

Yes to McNabb because he has only had a No. 1 reciever once in his career and has still managed to put up the numbers that he has. Outside of Westbrook, he has never had another weapon on the offense. That is HOF worthy if you ask me.

This does not change nor dilute my hatred towards McNabb, I just gotta give credit where credit is due.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

mcnabb is not marino.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=Meks;520084]mcnabb is not marino.[/quote]

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

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=Meks;520084]mcnabb is not marino.[/quote]

Not many guys are comparable to Marino. I don't understand your point.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I think both will definitely get in. I'll go out on a limb and say Warner will be a first ballot. But McNabb will get in eventually.

Both players have bounced back from adversity serveral times only to have career seasons and hoist their teams into the playoffs. Just six weeks ago, we thought McNabb was done and look how he's not only turned himself around but now the entire team seems to be playing at a high level.

Another thing about McNabb, he has consistently gotten it done with very average talent at wideout. Warner on the other hand, has played with future Hall of Famers. This current crop of wideouts included.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I a big Warner fan and I think he's borderline. I just don't think he's got the longevity that it takes to get in. But if Arizizona somehow wins the SB then I think he'll get in. I wish we would've signed him after the 04 season.

McNabb is borderline too. But I think he's gotta win a SB to get in.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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?

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

Warner, it's not a sure thing, but he would definately get my vote.

Though their are a lot of reasons to keep him out, I believe he's one of the elite quarterbacks of the era. He's on a whole level above McNabb.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=44ever;520087]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[/quote]

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.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;520118]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?[/quote]

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.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=dmek25;520090]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[/quote]

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).

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

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?

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;520128]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).[/quote]

Ha ha ha. You're so right about the Goofy smile as well :)

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=Mattyk72;520148]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.[/quote]The numbers also suggest he would have been a really, really bad gunslinger in an offense that wasn't so run heavy. Possibly an NFL bust, but more likely what we think of Jay Cutler today.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

I agree with dmek that on merit of his ability alone, Aikman is no where near a Hall of Famer. Of course, by the same criteria, Elway and Bradshaw are pretty borderline.

I'm okay with the Hall of Fame including lesser players whose teams accomplished so much under their leadership, as long as we don't make them out to be some sort of Manning/Marino type martyr.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;520122]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.[/quote]

Not sure why I'm being quoted here??

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=dmek25;520145]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[/quote]

Good point. Aikman's numbers are not HOF worthy IMO. But the bottom line is he was the QB of 3 SB winning teams. But if Aikman was put in a passing offense he had the ability to put up insane numbers. I don't think Bradshaw has great numbers either. He just played great on the biggest stage and that will get you in.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=Mattyk72;520148]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.[/quote]

I agree 100%. If he would've been in a passing offense his numbers would've been insane. Quick release, powerful accurate arm, good field vision.... he had all the tools to be right up there with the best.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=Dblock804;520079]For whatever reason I have enjoyed watching DM play and still dislike the eagles. Yes to both.[/quote]

In some strange kind of way I'm rooting for McNabb this year. He is getting it done with some very marginal NFL wr's. Pretty impressive.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;520155]The numbers also suggest he would have been a really, really bad gunslinger in an offense that wasn't so run heavy. Possibly an NFL bust, but more likely what we think of Jay Cutler today.[/quote]

I saw enough of Aikman to tell me he was a damn good QB and much better than his numbers indicated. A bust? I really doubt that.

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

so who get HOF? Do you have to be equal or better than Marino???
Does P. Manning get in? Is he better than Marino?

Re: McNabb, Warner, and the Hall of Fame
 

[quote=Mattyk72;520163]I saw enough of Aikman to tell me he was a damn good QB and much better than his numbers indicated. A bust? I really doubt that.[/quote]

Nobody should be suprised of a HOF Aikman. One of the best IMO