I was listening to Mike and Mike in the Morning on ESPN Radio the other day. They were discussing the benching of Donovan McNabb in the last 2 minutes of a game the other week. During their (predictably pro-McNabb) discussion, Mike Greenberg asked Mike Golic if the Redskins were "a better team" with McNabb, and whether they would be "as good without him." Golic replied that they would absolutely not be as good without McNabb as they now are with him.
Really?
Jason Campbell 2009-2010 Stats (16 Games)
QBRat 86.4; Comp Pct 64.5; 226.1 YPG, 7.1 Y/A, 20 TD, 15 INT
Donovan McNabb 2010-2011 Stats (8 Games)
QBRat 76.0; Comp Pct 57.4; 246.4 YPG, 7.1 Y/A, 7 TD, 8 INT
It seems like the Redskins actually got WORSE at quarterback with McNabb.
Lower QB Rating, Lower Comp %, and extrapolate the other stats over 16 games, you end up with 6 less TDs and 1 more INT. I guess Jason Campbell didn't have any "weapons" either.
ReplyDeleteDonovan McNabb = overrated, inaccurate, average QB who benefited for years from a great defense, a system that throws the ball a billion times a game (mostly short screen passes) and a Brian Westbrook who could turn those screens into tons of YAC.
Stats may be significant but your not. Anonymous blog with no followers and comments that you make up yourself. Plus, you write about only one lame topic. No need to come back here.
ReplyDelete... said the anonymous commenter. And it's "you're."
ReplyDelete"comments that you make up yourself"
ReplyDeleteIsn't that what a blog is? Or to be even more general, isn't that any kind of writing not called plagiarism?