I debated putting this question into Casual Conversation, because, as you will see below, it isn't necessarily a race related question. But, then again, maybe it is. Anyway, here goes.

Everyone is familiar with the statements made by Rush on the NFL countdown show talking about how Donovan McNAbb was overrated, and that this was done by the liberal media in an attempt to create a desire for a black quarterback. If you look at Donovan's career and playoff statistics here you can see that, while they're certainly not bad, they're probably average at best. You can see the same for Michael Vick here. Mind you, I don't think their hype is because they're black, rather I think it's because they're mobile, thereby creating defensive containment problems. Neither is known for being particularly accurate, usually the mark of a good (adequate?) quarterback. However, this brings up an interesting question--what about Tim Crouch? Wouldn't he also fit the same mold? I will somewhat answer my own question by pointing out that Crouch passed less than both Vick and McNabb in college, but I also think you could look at his record and say he was an even better runner. Is there perhaps some reverse stereotyping at play here? (or was Crouch, like Akili Smith, simply not good enough?)

First of all, thank you for comprehending what Rush actually said. It seems to me that quite a few people missed the fact that he was criticizing the media (a favorite target of his), not the fact that Donovan McNabb was black in relation to his performance or even black quarterbacks in general. Although this element of the Limbaugh saga has died down in favor of his admitted drug addiction, I could not stand the way that people consistently brought the point back to the fact that Rush said "black".

Now, on to the comments themselves. I think Rush was right. I believe that the media, and liberals in general, have a strong desire to see minorities, blacks in particular, succeed. Nothing wrong with that at all. The problem is: they go too far, to the point of being unfairly biased at times. What's worse is that it isn't a genuine investment of hope, but rather a tactic to get votes (at least this is the case for politicians). That, however, is not the topic at hand. The motive for the media is fear. The sports media are afraid that if they don't cover black athletes close enough, there will be the usual cry of "racism!". To make sure that this doesn't happen, the media tend to overcompensate in this effort. With goons like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, with their unfortunately high influence, hot on the trail of even the most remote racial insensitivity, this fear is well-founded, lest these media companies face boycotts or other overreactive measures. I say "yes", Rush was right and the media are biased in this respect, even if they are "bullied" into this stance, so to speak.

Something isn't right about that, if you ask me. Credit should be given where credit is due, and if we're "all the same", regardless of race, then why is one color more due than another?

I was merely defending Rush's position (which I share, in this case) as I thought that was what Hobbes was after: to see who felt he was right and who felt he was wrong. But, if I'm wrong about that, then all apologies. No harm done, I hope, eh?

First of all, I have to ask the question: Is everyone INSANE???

It seems that people love to blame black people for playing "the race card" when they defend any comment made belittling anyone who is of that color. What is reverse discrimination anyway? If a black person makes it into a college, it's affirmative action, not his or her skills. If a black person becomes a Supreme Court Justice or Attorney General, it is the desire of the president to "show his diversity". And now you are actually defending the statement that Rush believes blacks are getting special treatment in sports? Come on! Maybe if you stuck with Donovan McNabb, some people who know nothing about sports may understand, but venturing off into Michael Vick??? Vick single-handedly turned the Falcons team around, and ANYONE can tell you that. He is known for being PRETTY accurate as well as EXTREMELY quick, willing to take a hit (unlike many other quarterbacks). If anyone believes Michael Vick, Warren Sapp and - I'll even say it - Donovan McNabb doesn't deserve any of the publicity they are getting, then YOU DON'T KNOW FOOTBALL. PERIOD.

I am definitely not arguing for people to bow down in support of black people, because most people won't even admit there is a discrepancy in privilege, but when a black person is known for doing well in something, PLEASE atleast give him/her the benefit of the doubt that he/she may actually be good at it. That's all we're asking.

And another thing...Michael Vick???

First of all, I never named names. I said that, in general, the media has a tendency to do that. Donovan McNabb is, unfortunately, a good example of how an underperforming player (c'mon, he's the highest paid athlete in the NFL, he should play like it) can be overrated because of race. I've already explained why this is possible, if not probable. I never said a thing about other players, and I agree that Michael Vick has, thus far, played very well. But, your response has proven a very important point about preferencial programs like Affirmative Action and biased reporting. Even though it is probable that fewer minorities are helped by AA than those that are, because the program exists for the purpose of helping minorities, it becomes a question of which minorities gained success on their own and which were boosted by unfair methods that they may not have even needed. That just isn't fair to those that worked hard to get where they got, like everyone should. But, you never know do you? THAT'S the real problem I see with AA in the first place. Giving people the benefit of the doubt only goes so far, because eventually you realize that you're being ignorant to a real problem.

McNair is better than either one of them. He gets less attention because he plays for a team located in the Midwest. The same reason Bob Gibson is not universally proclaimed as Mr. October.

I think this topic should actually be moved to casual conversation because Hobbes asked a football question...but to answer.

Nebraska's offense is 75% run 25% pass. They rely heavily on the play action fake for long passes and historically have been terrible when down by many points late in the game because they can not spread the field with the pass and move the ball. Quaterbacks that usually run their offense are really runningback hybrids (a back with a good arm). Tim Crouch had no chance to play QB in the NFL. Winning the Heismann means nothing in terms of being NFL ready. As a pure QB I don't think any team would be willing to take a chance on him because of his unproven arm...the Rams were hoping they could transform him like Pittsburg has done with Antoine Randle El. But Vick and McNabb proved they could spread the field in college and both have tremendous arms.

Accuracy has never been the mark of a good QB. It is actually TD to INT ratio that says a lot about a QB and if you look at Vick and McNabb they were outstanding in this regard. I believe MdNabb is 4th all time over a 3 year period which is pretty good . Yards, completions, and completion percentage means nothing to scoring TDs and not turning the ball over (two things they do well)...thats how you win games in the NFL...thats why McNabb makes the big bucks.

That is why anyone who knows football took Rush's comments to be racist because he lumps people like Vick, McNair, and Culpepper in a ambiguous statement...but that is for another debate

That's funny, because I thought the whole purpose of AA helping minorities was because of the fact that minorities were not given a fair opportunity, but I don't know how I came to that assumption. I mean, in a time when people still fight for segregated proms, where Supreme Court Justices drop charges on a skinhead for burning crosses in black's mens yards due to freedom of speech, and where states still support the obviously racist rebel flag in states where minorities amount to well beyond 30% of the state, I just don't understand why people would believe Affirmative Action is important. Can anyone explain this to me? I'm pretty sure that if AA was thrown away, the "boss" would not mind at all telling his buddies he can't hire them because he knows this minority deserves it more. Or I'm pretty sure that with AA gone, the admissions couselors of universities wouldn't mind telling the paying alumni who attended their beloved college when it was all white that they will not let their sons and daughters in because it would be biased toward minorities whose parents couldn't attend the college earlier. On second thought...

However, I was not arguing for Affirmative Action. I was arguing that Vick, McNabb, and (I added on my own) Sapp are better than just "average" football players, to those who posted that they are somehow "overrated". Did anyone notice that before Limbaugh's comment, there was no mention of race in the NFL? A good football player was good. Period. But now, no one sees a problem with a guy who knows virtually nothing about football - the "Wanda Sykes" of Inside the NFL - that decided not only that McNabb was overrated (an opinion most sports announcers make about players from time to time) but also that the reason he is overrated has to be because he is black. I am glad that the announcers on Fox Sports called him out on that, because some people want to see sports...and others want to see controversy.

Yes, I agree completely with this. I think the mobility plays a factor in this--QB's that can run out of trouble are less likely to throw passes they really shouldn't. I think you will find a very high correlation between a QB's TD/INT ratio and a team's winning percentage--just as you have with Philly over the last few years. I would add, however, that it does take some accuracy to avoid the INT's.

Michael Vick WAS overrated. Before he had done anything on the field, he was being widely lauded as a great QB in the NFL. (It left a sour taste in my mouth as I didn't/don't have him on my fantasy team.) However, the inflated view of Vick had absolutely nothing to do with race. Vick was overrated because he was exciting to watch.

Similarly, when Randall Cunningham started his career in Philly, he was also overrated. (I did have him on my team.) But again, it was because he was exciting to watch. Football is about entertainment and the media is going to latch on to the most entertaining players. Scrambling quarterbacks are highly entertaining.

Was Rush right? Maybe if he presented evidence to back his claims. In the absence of evidence, he's blowing smoke.

By the way, did you want to compare Eric Crouch or Tim Couch?

M L Iserman

Well judging by the stats for far this year he was right as rain.

In 6 games McNabb has under 900 yards passing, 2 TD's, 6 Ints, and a passer rating of 51.1.

What is even more amazing is the amount of air time he is getting for commercials. Let's see there is: Lincoln Financial, Campbell's Soup, VISA/NFL tickets commercial, another NFL commercial, and one more I cannot recall the product.

Generally when you are doing poorly, advertisers pull your ads until you either get back to form or you are replaced with a player who is doing well. Not in McNabb's case, his air time has increased .

I would think the publicity from the Limbaugh episode has increased the level of ads with McNabb in them. I don't recall seeing any adds this year with McNabb in them until this thing happened.

I don't think Rush was right. McNabb had been a very effective quarterback who led his team to two NFC championship games.

Kurt Warner can't perform very well in the NFL right now and he stunk it up last year, but that isn't because he was an overhyped white guy, he simply can't come up with the goods anymore. It's a brutal league and it is hard to keep putting up numbers. Some shots do permanent damage.

Lincoln Financial, you know the one with Abe cross training McNabb, and the Campbells soup one where they argue who gets to play McNabb on a PS2 game. Both were running before the Rush comment.



You are 100% right Eeyore. But guess what you don't see any commercials with Kurt Warner in them do you .

I don't really understand any of this. McNabb was playing well there for a while. Our guy in town McNair has been playing outstanding for two years and nobody seemed to notice last year. No pro bowl, and he WAS our offense.

The whole Rush incident has me put off because I think both of the sides (the show and Limbaugh) were using the situation simply to gain ratings and publicity.

I agree 100% with you Eeyore. espn hired him exactly for the reasons you gave. They are more to blame then Rush,even though I am not a fan of his.

It makes me sick when people or companies in situtations like this, claim what did I do wrong or claim innonence.

If the media prefers hyping blacks over whites, then explain this controversy with Jessica Lynch and that black gal(Shershana, or something like that that). Who's getting all the hype here?

As far as McNab's play goes, well I 've been listening to Rush for over ten years. His football analysis has always stunk IMHO. Rush needs to get himself cleaned up, and get back to business. If I never see his mug on anything sports related on TV again, it will be too soon.