Donovan McNabb says if Troy Aikman is in the Hall of Fame, he should be, too

[Revolver Ocelot]

2002

Drew Brees- 3284 yards, 60% 17 Td’s, 16 Int’s

McNabb- 10 games, 2289 yards, 58%, 17 Td’s, 6 ints

2003

Drew Brees- 2108 yards, 57%, 11 Td’s, 15 ints

McNabb- 3216 yards, 58%, 16 Td’s, 11 ints

2004

Drew Brees- 3159 yards, 61%, 27 Td’s, 7 ints

McNabb- 3875 yards, 64%, 31 Td’s, 8 ints

Brees didn’t get drafted until 2001, so what’s the use in comparing anything McNabb did from 99 to 00? That makes as much sense as comparing anything Brees did to McNabb after 2011. I used 2000-2009 because that was his prime years. If I’m comparing someone like Peyton I’m using his best years, why would I use his washed years? If we’re talking about overall careers then it’s not a discussion, Brees was better, but within the time frame I’m talking about, McNabb>>Brees.

I counted both Vick and Brees, what are you talking about? I just said that Brees wasn’t a consistent starter until 2004.

 

[5th Letter]

You trying to sneakily dismiss Brees. From 02-03 Brees was benched for 5 games, but started 27 of their 32 games. He was a legit starter. Stop trying to duck that man.

For Brees comparisons you don't need to count 99-00, but you need to count 10-11. They were both in the league from 01-11. Brees put up better numbers and won a SB during that time.

If he was good why is he being benched?

 

[5th Letter]

You just jumped right in to the convo huh? I can...

 

[Revolver Ocelot]

2002

Drew Brees- 3284 yards, 60% 17 Td’s, 16 Int’s

McNabb- 10 games, 2289 yards, 58%, 17 Td’s, 6 ints

2003

Drew Brees- 2108 yards, 57%, 11 Td’s, 15 ints

McNabb- 3216 yards, 58%, 16 Td’s, 11 ints

2004

Drew Brees- 3159 yards, 61%, 27 Td’s, 7 ints

McNabb- 3875 yards, 64%, 31 Td’s, 8 ints

You sure do keep shortening Mcnabbs good years for this supposed "era" he had.

 

[5th Letter]

You sure do keep shortening Mcnabbs good years for this supposed "era" he had.

Earlier in the thread. I said that McNabb was better than Brees from 01-05, after that Brees was the better player.

 

[Revolver Ocelot]

Earlier in the thread. I said that McNabb was better than Brees from 01-05, after that Brees was the better player.

You also said he was one of the most dominant of his era and used 2000-2009 as his prime years.

But even with that 2 year head start he wasn't as good as Brees.

 

[Bow to Royalty]

Plus McNabb only played 9 games in 2005.

Ya, but McNabb never again put up the TD's or completion % Brees did that year. And only topped the yardage once.

If he was good why is he being benched?

He was playing bad. Doesn't mean he wasn't a starter. McNabb was better than him 4 of the 11 years they were in the league together. Stop ducking that man.

 

[SKPJR]

Just to fuck with these niggas these two would like to have a word about the bold

SMH at you thinking shitty ass Jaworski or injured ass Wentz is better than Mcnabb. I could see if you said Van Buren. Shit I would have laughed but understood if you would said Folds but gtfoh with Jaws and Wentz. Jaws wasn't shit and Wentz can't stay healthy. Mcnabb is clearly better than both. It's disrespectful to even debate that shit.

 

[Bow to Royalty]

This man's "prime" is a decade of him completing under 60% of his passes, and never hitting 4,000 yards (all this during the 2000's) and I'm having to explain why he isn't a HOF'er...

 

[5th Letter]

Ya, but McNabb never again put up the TD's or completion % Brees did that year. And only topped the yardage once.



He was playing bad. Doesn't mean he wasn't a starter. McNabb was better than him 4 of the 11 years they were in the league together. Stop ducking that man.

True, but still McNabb>>Brees 2001-2005.

Actually *5 years. It’s no wonder McNabb’s career wasn’t longer.

 

[Bow to Royalty]

True, but still McNabb>>Brees 2001-2005.

Actually *5 years. It’s no wonder McNabb’s career wasn’t longer.

I say 4, you say 5. Either way we agree Brees was better for most of the 11 years they were in the league together.

 

[Inglewood_B]

Troy Aikman still trash.




Just a reminder while y’all using everybody else to knock down McNabb

 

[Bow to Royalty]

Troy Aikman still trash.




Just a reminder while y’all using everybody else to knock down McNabb

Give me McNabb's best 3 seasons, and tell me how good they are. Elite level of play, very good, good, average. That should let you know how not HoF worthy he is.

 

[Inglewood_B]

Give me McNabb's best 3 seasons, and tell me how good they are. Elite level of play, very good, good, average. That should let you know how not HoF worthy he is.

Here’s the thing... Personally I always thought he was borderline. Whether he gets in or not, any argument for or against him I can be swayed.

He played with bum weapons almost his entire career. The one season he had a legit #1 receiver he lit it up. (I fucks with DJax but he ain’t ever been a true number 1)

And even with trash receivers they had deep playoff runs just about every year.



My point. MY ONLY POINT, in this entire thread... was that I agreed with him about Troy Aikman.

He got rejected and like any major athlete they have egos and he went looking at the HOF list to gauge where he felt he should be...


He scrolled down and seen Troy Aikman, and RIGHTFULLY SO, said... “I know good god damn well that I’m better than THIS BUM ASS NIGGA!!!”


And I agree.

 

[Natural Born Sinners]

Better comparison to McNabb’s career would be Romo, and neither of them are getting in

That s a good comparison. I'll take it further and say McNabb was the Dwight Howard of the NBA and Aikman was David Robinson. Dwight was more dominant and hit a higher ceiling, but Robinson was more consistent and got them chips, as well as a beast in his own right. IMO

 

[SKPJR]

Warner was healthy for the most part in 2002 what happened? Healthy in 2004 what happened? 05, 06 again what happened? I credit Warner for his late career resurgence after looking like he was done.

Gannon’s 2002 was the only I’d say was better than McNabb during the early 2000’s. McNabb was putting up close to the same numbers with average at best receivers. Gannon had more talent around him. McNabb was the better passer and more accurate, McNair the better runner although McNabb wasn’t a slouch in that department, McNabb’s numbers were better. Culpepper had 2 really good years 01 and 04 and 1 meh year 2002 and a terrible 2003. McNabb was overall more consistent during those years.

I wasn’t comparing Brees to McNabb just pointing out that in their first few years McNabb was the better quarterback.

Kurt Warner was not healthy in 02. He started 6 games. In 04 he was with the Giants when they drafted Eli. He was only there to keep the seat warm until Eli was ready. And he had a hand injury or something if I'm not mistaken. Either way Warner was never meant to shine in 04.

Mcnabb never threw more than 31 TDS. Culpepper threw 33 his first year as a starter. Mcnabb only had that one season with 30+ tds. Culpepper did it twice in 5 years. Culpepper had a higher career completion percentage and that includes his post injury years. Culpepper had a higher career qb rating and that also includes his post injury years. There is no question that when healthy Dante Culpepper was a better player.

 

[Dwayne]

Aikman playoff stats is some of the worse shit ever

 

[Natural Born Sinners]

Take away Aikmans 3 rings McNabb would have a legitimate complaint

Yea...but you can't. Take away Jordan's 6 rings and the LeBron debate is a different conversation. No having ring ass mothafuckas always tryinta downplay tha importance of the hardware. Take away those 5 nfccg appearances and we gonna say Phillip Rivers had a better career than McNabb?

 

[Natural Born Sinners]

Here’s the thing... Personally I always thought he was borderline. Whether he gets in or not, any argument for or against him I can be swayed.

He played with bum weapons almost his entire career. The one season he had a legit #1 receiver he lit it up. (I fucks with DJax but he ain’t ever been a true number 1)

And even with trash receivers they had deep playoff runs just about every year.



My point. MY ONLY POINT, in this entire thread... was that I agreed with him about Troy Aikman.

He got rejected and like any major athlete they have egos and he went looking at the HOF list to gauge where he felt he should be...


He scrolled down and seen Troy Aikman, and RIGHTFULLY SO, said... “I know good god damn well that I’m better than THIS BUM ASS NIGGA!!!”


And I agree.

So 3 time super bowl starting QB bums. I get what McNabb saying. But troy was the starting QB on 3 Superbowl winning teams n he wasn't no game manager. Michael Irving was getting goos passes thrown to him...ALOT. I think McNabb should be in the Hall, but he know damn well what got Aikman in there

 

[Bow to Royalty]

Here’s the thing... Personally I always thought he was borderline. Whether he gets in or not, any argument for or against him I can be swayed.

He played with bum weapons almost his entire career. The one season he had a legit #1 receiver he lit it up. (I fucks with DJax but he ain’t ever been a true number 1)

And even with trash receivers they had deep playoff runs just about every year.



My point. MY ONLY POINT, in this entire thread... was that I agreed with him about Troy Aikman.

He got rejected and like any major athlete they have egos and he went looking at the HOF list to gauge where he felt he should be...


He scrolled down and seen Troy Aikman, and RIGHTFULLY SO, said... “I know good god damn well that I’m better than THIS BUM ASS NIGGA!!!”


And I agree.

I get that and McNabb was better. But Aikman did achieve the ultimate team goal 3 times, and that's the only reason he's in. McNabb is making a quality of play argument when quality of play isn't what got Aikman in. Dude just sounds bitter.