Sins of the Father

Yesterday, the NCAA ruled that they had reinstituted Cam Newton’s eligibility after he had been ruled ineligible the previous day. We could spend months discussing the ridiculousness of that, but what I find more asinine and self-righteous is the media’s reaction to the NCAA’s ruling. In the past day, I’ve read a lot of stories about the decision, and all of the authors came to the same conclusion: while protecting the student-athlete, the NCAA set a dangerous precedent and created a loophole supplying a convenient excuse for anyone who faces allegations in the future. I even read one article about USC athletic director Pat Haden’s anger and confusion over the ruling. What no one seems to realize—what they refuse to acknowledge is probably more accurate—is what their stance asks of people.



We are talking about college students. Recruited football players are 17 or 18. In the case of transfers like Cam Newton, they are 18, 19, or 20. Newton was 20 during the time Mississippi State, Auburn, and others were recruiting him last fall.

When Cecil Newton, Cam’s father, requested money in exchange for sending his son to a certain school, he, according to NCAA rules, compromised Cam’s eligibility. According to the technicalities of the rules, whether or not Cam knew what his father was doing is irrelevant to the issue of his eligibility. Frankly, it shouldn’t be relevant. What say does a teenager or 20-year old have over what his/her parents do? Did you govern your parents’ actions when you were that age? Do you govern your parents’ actions now?

Do people actually expect Cam Newton or any other athlete—any other person of that age, for that matter—to stop a parent from breaking a rule? “No mother, no father, do not do that. It is wrong and unfair.” People in the media are actually judging Cam Newton guilty for his inability to speak those sentences to his father and keep his parent from breaking a rule.

In truth, that last point is irrelevant too. According to the rule, once Cecil Newton asked for money, Cam’s eligibility was already compromised. Cam stepping to his father and demanding that he follow all the rules to the full letter would be—again, according to the rule—too little, too late. By that point, the rule was already broken and Cam Newton’s eligibility was already compromised.

It is important to keep in mind that we are talking about an NCAA rule here. No law was broken by Cecil Newton asking for money. It is also important to recognize that, as far as anybody knows right now, no money was actually exchanged. Cecil Newton asked for money from Mississippi State. There are no allegations or accusations that he sought money from any other school. Cam Newton did not go to Mississippi State. The man went to Auburn. In short, no transaction has been made—as far as anybody knows.

Let me ask another question: did your parents tell you everything they were doing? Of course they didn’t. Your parents even kept things that are 100% about you from you. They still do. Yet, the mass media seems to be certain that Cam Newton had to know. Why? What reason would he have to know? Why would Cecil Newton tell his son? If you were doing something against the rules, would you tell your child? If you would, I have little to no respect for your intellect.

David Whitley of Fanhouse wrote, “Only a semi-complete moron could be oblivious to a father like Cecil Newton treating him like an eBay item.” I don’t know. Although I doubt it, this could be a generational or cultural thing. In my house, my parents told me nothing of their plans or financial affairs. I was neither consulted nor notified before we moved; they would just come to me one day and tell me it was time to start packing. I didn’t know ahead of time when they were buying a new car. I have no idea how much money my parents ever earned at their jobs, paid for a car, paid for a house, paid for a vacation, or anything else. It was their money, not mine. It was none of my business. Whatever money Cecil Newton did or did not receive from a college was his, not Cam’s. What reason would Cecil Newton ever have to say anything to his son? And to think that he couldn’t have done all this without his son knowing is akin to calling the man an idiot. Even if Cecil and Cam had lived in the same house, it would be easy for the son to be completely left out of the loop. But let us not forget that the two men did not live together last school year. Cecil was home in Georgia while Cam attended junior college in Texas.

What I also fail to understand is what difference it makes whether Cam knew or not. Say, for instance, that he knew his father’s doings. What exactly was the kid supposed to do? Realistically, what was Cam Newton supposed to do? Was he supposed to call up the NCAA and tattle on his father? Would it really be the right thing for him to bring to light the compromising of his collegiate eligibility? The results of that would have been denying himself an opportunity at a college education—if that happens to be important to him—creating discord in his home, and showing his parents that they cannot trust him. Would that have been the right thing? You wanted him to do that? When not a single law was broken?

In what world do teenagers do this to their parents? In what world to teenagers get anywhere telling their parents what to do? What planet are these people from? I’m from earth, and it doesn’t work that way here.

Taking all of this into account, why would anyone concentrate on whether or not Cam Newton knew what his father was doing?



My issue with the NCAA’s ruling in the Cam Newton case is a little different from the mass media’s. The NCAA reinstated Newton’s eligibility because their current evidence does not show that the player had any knowledge of his father’s seeking money. I believe the athlete’s knowledge of a parent’s rule breaking should have no bearing on whether or not he/she is ruled eligible to play. It makes more sense to me if eligibility is determined by whether or not the player received a benefit.

When a parent, guardian, or anyone else associated with a student-athlete shakes down a coach or booster for money, cars, jobs, houses, and/or other illicit benefits, he/she is acting in his/her own interests. Remember in He Got Game when Jesus Shuttlesworth’s uncle stated his demands for a piece of the pie? What about Blue Chips when Ricky Roe’s father wanted a new tractor. In neither case was there any compensation for the athlete himself.

When the rumors first started regarding Cecil Newton attempting to sell his son’s services, the media jumped on the fact that Cecil Newton’s church was in trouble with the local municipal government. The building faced demolition unless a large number of repairs were made. Most people, including me, believe that Cam Newton went to Auburn because the Alabama school offered more money than did Mississippi State. Yet, there is no car, no new house, no new job, no jewelry—just a church in need of money. Even if we go with the assumption that Auburn paid the Newtons, what benefit did this money provide to Cam?

How can we, as a society, even remotely justify punishing these kids for things that the adults in their lives do? We can’t. Yet, we’re punishing them anyway. Even worse, we’re raging when these kids are not punished.

In justifying the NCAA’s decision to let Cam Newton play, SEC commissioner Mike Slive said, “We must consider the young person’s responsibility.” Whitley’s response to that statement was, “Since when?” The other columnists wrote similar things. The majority of the American sports media feels the same way:

Gene Wojciechowski of ESPN:
Huh? Did the NCAA do what I think it did? Did it basically rule that a father and a third party can actively, brazenly and with impunity shop a player around for hundreds of thousands of dollars—and the worst thing that happens is the father has to lie low and the third party has to disassociate himself from the programs in question?

Did it just get embarrassed by a rules loophole the size of Jordan-Hare Stadium, the gist of it being: Your old man and another guy can put you on the open market, but as long as you don't know about it, you're good to strap it up for the next big game?

The answers: yes and yes.


Dan Wetzel of Yahoo! Sports quotes Sonny Vaccaro:
The NCAA just gave cover to every middle man in the country. The kids never know. In all my years, I've never heard of a kid being involved in the negotiation. You think they ask? Of course not. Their mom asks. Their coach asks. Their cousin asks. This is crazy.


Kalani Simpson of Fox Sports:
I was probably the last guy outside of the state of Alabama to give Cam Newton the benefit of the doubt that maybe he wasn’t being shopped around for cash. But apparently the NCAA is really, really, really giving the benefit of the doubt—yeah, he was being shopped around for cash. But the kid didn’t know about it, so he’s clean.


Thayer Evans, also of Fox Sports quoted an unnamed college football coach:
What they’re saying is as long as the kid has nothing to do with the solicitation then you’re OK. It's a joke, man. This blows everything wide open. Now, it really becomes the haves and the have-nots. It'll be everybody doing the SEC money thing, but all across the country. Here we go. Get ready. With all this, how can they possibly give that kid the Heisman Trophy after we got embarrassed with Reggie Bush? This is just a farce.


Andy Staples wrote of CNNSI.com:
…by doing the right thing based on the available evidence, the NCAA has opened a gaping loophole in its own enforcement process. Any player who is for sale during his recruitment now may shift blame to a parent, an uncle or a crooked family friend and say, “Well, you let Cam Newton play.”

Staples also wrote that Southern California tailback Dillon Baxter, “should be furious.” USC held Baxter out of a game after Baxter was caught catching a golf cart ride onto campus from a classmate who is also a registered agent. The cases of Newton and Baxter are only similar in that they involve current college football players. The scenarios are entirely different.

As stupid as Baxter’s suspension was, he actually received what is considered a benefit. To this day, we still see no benefit that Cam Newton received or was set up to receive. Had a car come into his possession, we would have found out about it by now. We would also know about any other tangible benefit he would have received. If he received cash, where did it go? We all know college students aren’t good at holding onto money. Besides, what use would there be for Cam to receive money if he was just going to save it? This doesn’t make any sense at all.

Whatever happened between Cecil Newton and Mississippi State, Auburn, and whoever else resulted in nothing for Cam. Yet, the college football public is crying loudly for the man to be punished.

Only in America can people cry out injustice because a late teen/early twenty-something is not punished for the sins of his father. Only in America can people fill with rage when a college student who has received nothing goes unpunished when the adults around him try to make a buck.

But comparing it to a slave system would make me the bad guy.

Heisman Quarterblack

When I first heard the reports that surfaced two months ago that Auburn quarterback Cam Newton was suspected to be part of a pay-for-play scheme, I immediately thought about the Heisman Trophy. Newton, both then and now, is the front-runner to win the 2010 award. Although I hadn’t thought about it consciously, but I knew not many Black quarterbacks had won the Heisman Trophy. I looked it up and saw that the number was three. 3. I decided to dig a little deeper, and I found a few interesting things.

As November transitions into December each year since 2000, I have noticed that the biggest factor in making one a Heisman Trophy candidate seemed to be quarterbacking the national championship contenders. Whether or not that quarterback was good or not—or even played well or not—he was always a candidate. The most ridiculous examples of this are the 2000 and 2001 winners. Chris Weinke and Eric Crouch had absolutely no business winning the Heisman Trophy.

What made the Crouch choice so egregious in my opinion is that he won as a running quarterback who was well below average as a passer. So many Black quarterbacks have come and gone who have been and continue to be criticized for being “running quarterbacks” or guys who “aren’t real quarterbacks.” This racist stigma affected guys like Tommy Frazier, Jamelle Holieway, Darian Hagan, Michael Vick, Donovan McNabb, and many others. This year, two men have been attacked by such innuendo. At the beginning of the season, Denard Robinson of Michigan was the most dominant player in the country. Robinson is the only player in college football history to have at least 200 yards running and 200 yards passing in the same game on more than one occasion. He achieved the feat twice in the first five weeks of the season! On top of that, Robinson’s season also includes two more games with at least 185 yards rushing and 190 yards passing. The point is that Denard Robinson was a beast. Yet, all the talk around the country was that Denard Robinson was not a real quarterback.

As the season progressed, Cam Newton developed and has become, without question, the best college football player in the country. Anything less than winning the Heisman by the five widest margins ever would be criminal. Newton has Auburn on track to play in the BCS National Championship Game despite not being particularly good in any aspect of the game outside of their quarterback.

But, cynical as I am, I’ve been expecting something to happen. I fully expected all the stops to be pulled out. As great as Cam Newton has been this season, his style of play is not overly accepted from a Black quarterback. Like Denard Robinson earlier this season, Newton is viewed as a running quarterback. Running quarterback do not win the Heisman Trophy unless they are White. They just don’t. I’ll put it this way: during his senior year at Purdue, Drew Brees rushed for 182 yards more than did the most prolific rushing Heisman Trophy winning Black quarterback. Drew Bress…182 more yards. Are you kidding me?

This required me to dig even deeper. I went back and looked at every quarterback since 1986 who either finished in the top four of the Heisman voting, played for a national championship, or had an altogether great season that could or should have earned a top four Heisman finish. What I found was interesting. Before I get into the details, here is a list of the quarterbacks who fall into the categories I listed above as well as their respective team and Heisman voting finishes (for years prior to 1998, BCS means that the quarterback’s team played in the Cotton Bowl or one of the four bowls that are now part of the BCS):

Name	Year	College	Team Finish	Heisman Finish
Jamelle Holieway	1986	Oklahoma	Championship Contender	N/A
Jim Harbaugh	1986	Michigan	BCS	3rd
Vinny Testaverde	1986	Miami (FL)	Championship Runner-Up	Winner
Jamelle Holieway	1987	Oklahoma	Championship Runner-Up	N/A
Don McPherson	1987	Syracuse	Championship Contender	2nd
Tony Rice	1988	Notre Dame	National Champion	N/A
Major Harris	1988	West Virginia	Championship Runner-Up	5th
Steve Walsh	1988	Miami (FL)	Championship Contender	4th
Troy Aikman	1988	UCLA	Top 25	3rd
Rodney Peete	1988	USC	Championship Contender	2nd
Darian Hagan	1989	Colorado	Championship Runner-Up	5th
Tony Rice	1989	Notre Dame	Championship Contender	4th
Major Harris	1989	West Virginia	Top 25	3rd
Andre Ware	1989	Houston	Top 25	Winner
Darian Hagan	1990	Colorado	National Champion	17th
Shawn Moore	1990	Virginia	BCS	4th
Ty Detmer	1990	BYU	Top 25	Winner
Ty Detmer	1991	BYU	Top 25	3rd
Casey Weldon	1991	Florida State	Championship Contender	2nd
Gino Torretta	1992	Miami (FL)	Championship Runner-Up	Winner
Tommy Frazier	1993	Nebraska	Championship Runner-Up	N/A
Heath Shuler	1993	Tennessee	Top 25	2nd
Charlie Ward	1993	Florida State	National Champion	Winner
Kordell Steward	1994	Colorado	Championship Contender	13th
Kerry Collins	1994	Penn State	Championship Runner-Up	4th
Steve McNair	1994	Alcorn State	N/A (1-AA)	3rd
Danny Wuerffel	1995	Florida	Championship Runner-Up	3rd
Tommy Frazier	1995	Nebraska	National Champion	2nd
Jake Plummer	1996	Arizona State	Runner-Up	3rd
Danny Wuerffel	1996	Florida	National Champion	Winner
Ryan Leaf	1997	Washington State	BCS	3rd
Peyton Manning	1997	Tennessee	BCS	2nd
Donovan McNabb	1998	Syracuse	BCS	5th
Tim Couch	1998	Kentucky	Minor Bowl	4th
Cade McNown	1998	UCLA	Championship Contender	3rd
Michael Bishop	1998	Kansas State	Championship Contender	2nd
Drew Brees	1999	Purdue	Top 25	4th
Michael Vick	1999	Virginia Tech	Championship Runner-Up	3rd
Joey Hamilton	1999	Georgia Tech	Top 25	2nd
Drew Brees	2000	Purdue	BCS	3rd
Josh Heupel	2000	Oklahoma	National Champion	2nd
Chris Weinke	2000	Florida State	Championship Runner-Up	Winner
Joey Harrington	2001	Oregon	Championship Contender	4th
Ken Dorsey	2001	Miami (FL)	National Champion	3rd
Rex Grossman	2001	Florida	BCS	2nd
Eric Crouch	2001	Nebraska	Championship Runner-Up	Winner
Rex Grossman	2002	Florida	Championship Contender	N/A
Ken Dorsey	2002	Miami (FL)	Championship Runner-Up	5th
Brad Banks	2002	Iowa	BCS	2nd
Carson Palmer	2002	USC	BCS	Winner
Matt Leinart	2003	USC	National Champion	6th
Eli Manning	2003	Mississippi	Top 25	3rd
Jason White	2003	Oklahoma	Championship Runner-Up	Winner
Alex Smith	2004	Utah	BCS	4th
Jason White	2004	Oklahoma	Championship Runner-Up	3rd
Matt Leinart	2004	USC	National Champion	Winner
Brady Quinn	2005	Notre Dame	BCS	4th
Matt Leinart	2005	USC	Championship Runner-Up	3rd
Vince Young	2005	Texas	National Champion	2nd
Brady Quinn	2006	Notre Dame	BCS	3rd
Troy Smith	2006	Ohio State	Championship Runner-Up	Winner
Dennis Dixon	2007	Oregon	Championship Contender	5th
Chase Daniel	2007	Missouri	Championship Contender	4th
Colt Brennan	2007	Hawaii	BCS	3rd
Tim Tebow	2007	Florida	Top 25	Winner
Graham Harrell	2008	Texas Tech	Top 25	4th
Tim Tebow	2008	Florida	National Champion	3rd
Colt McCoy	2008	Texas	Championship Contender	2nd
Sam Bradford	2008	Oklahoma	Championship Runner-Up	Winner
Tim Tebow	2009	Florida	Championship Contender	5th
Colt McCoy	2009	Texas	Championship Runner-Up	3rd

If you really want to see the full statistics on all these guys, check the end of this post. Here is a breakdown:

• 77 total quarterback seasons
  
• 11 White Heisman winning quarterbacks
  
• 3 Black Heisman winning quarterbacks
  
• 6 White Heisman runners-up
  
• 7 Black Heisman runners-up
  
• 25 White quarterbacks who placed 3rd or 4th in Heisman voting
  
• 5 Black quarterbacks who placed 3rd or 4th in Heisman voting
  
• 5 quarterbacks who finished second in Heisman voting to another quarterback
  
• 10 quarterbacks who finished third in Heisman voting to another quarterback
  
• Three cases of quarterbacks finishing first, second, and third in Heisman voting

Since 1986, there have been eleven quarterback seasons I consider the best of the best. Listed in chronological order, these 11 seasons are permanently etched into my memory:

• 1989 – Andre Ware
  
• 1993 – Charlie Ward
  
• 1994 – Steve McNair
  
• 1995 – Tommie Frazier
  
• 1998 – Michael Bishop
  
• 1999 – Michael Vick
  
• 2003 – Matt Leinart
  
• 2003 – Jason White
  
• 2005 – Vince Young
  
• 2006 – Troy Smith
  
• 2007 – Dennis Dixon^*
  
• 2007 – Tim Tebow

^*Dennis Dixon’s season was cut short by an injury. Prior to the injury, he was poised to have, in my opinion, the greatest season ever by any quarterback in Pac-10 history.

The three Black quarterbacks who have won the Heisman Trophy are all on that list. Andre Ware, CharlieWard, and Troy Smith all had transcendent seasons during the years they won the award. Ware threw 46 touchdowns against only 15 interceptions during his Heisman winning season. That represented 1 touchdown less than the record at the time (Jim McMahon threw 47 touchdowns and 18 interceptions in 1980). Ware’s 4,699 passing yards in 1989 also represented an NCAA record at the time. It may not look like much today, but in 1989, Andre Ware’s season represented the very best season any quarterback had ever experienced. As he said during his Heisman acceptance speech, Ware had “a Barry Sanders type season.” There was no choice but to give him college football’s most prestigious honor.

In 1993, Charlie Ward took collegiate quarterbacking to the next level. While leading Florida State to the school’s first national championship, Ward threw 27 touchdown passes and only 4 interceptions while throwing for more than 3,000 yards. During my research, I was unable to find an earlier case of a major college quarterback with at least 25 touchdown passes and five and fewer interceptions in the same season. Ward’s was a truly historic season, and it was rewarded with the second widest (to O.J. Simpson) voting margin in Heisman Trophy history. He was on a level all his own.

It would be thirteen years before another Black quarterback, Troy Smith, won the Heisman. Smith led a Buckeye team that was ranked #1 in every poll every single week of the regular season. That Ohio State team also won two overly hyped #1 vs. #2 matchups during the season, including the single most hyped and anticipated Ohio State vs. Michigan game ever. Smith’s 30 to 6 touchdown to interception ratio and ability to appear in control over everything that happened on the field added to his reputation as college football’s best leader. That team leaned on him for everything, and until the national championship game, he always delivered. By the time December rolled around, Troy Smith was an obvious Heisman choice.

What Andre Ware, Charlie Ward, and Troy Smith all had in common was that none of the three were runners. With 339 yards in 1993, Charlie Ward is the most prolific rushing Black quarterback to win the Heisman. Smith ran for 204 yards during his Heisman winning season. Ware finished 1989 with negative rushing yards. Taking all the stereotypes about Black quarterbacks into consideration, how ironic is it that no Heisman Trophy winning Black quarterback has run for as many as 35 yards per game.

By contrast, 4 of the White Heisman winning quarterbacks rushed for positive yardage. Two of them, Eric Crouch in 2001 and Tim Tebow in 2008, ran for more than 800 yards during their award winning seasons. Crouch ran for 1115 yards and 18 touchdowns while Tebow posted totals of 895 and 23. To his credit, Tebow also passed for 3,286 yards, 32 touchdowns, and 6 interceptions. That stands on its own as a great passing season. Crouch’s passing totals, on the other hand, were far below par: only 1,510 yards, 7 touchdowns, and 10 interceptions. Crouch won the Heisman Trophy during a season in which he was a bad passer.

None of this surprises me. I know that for White quarterbacks, the ability to run is viewed as an added dimension to their games. They are considered versatile. Black quarterbacks who run, however, are seen as athletes playing the quarterback position. They are widely considered unintelligent and unable to read defenses. For them, the ability to run is viewed as a negative. It was that way when I was a kid; it remains that way today. To date, every Black quarterback with a significant number of rushing yards has been denied the Heisman Trophy. The voters have shown no hesitation to vote these men in the top four—some even are voted runner-up—but they are never awarded college football’s most prestigious individual honor. The numbers on this, as detailed in the table below, are overwhelming:

Category	Number	0- yards	0-300 yards	301-500 yards	501-1000 yards	1000+ yards
White Winners	11	7	2	0	1	1
Black Winners	3	1	1	1	0	0
White Runners-Up	6	2	3	0	1	0
Black Runners-Up	7	0	2	1	3	1
White 3rd & 4th	25	8	13	1	3	0
Black 3rd & 4th	5	0	0	1	4	0

Let’s think about this. Black quarterbacks have been criticized for being run-first for decades, yet Eric Crouch and Tim Tebow were hailed for being dual-threat quarterbacks. Guys like Tommy Frazier, Don McPherson, Pat White, and Michael Vick were not rewarded for being as good and, in many cases, better than Crouch and Tebow were.

The statistic that I find most surprising is that there have been more Black quarterbacks than White quarterbacks to finish second in the Heisman voting since 1986. White winners outnumber Black winners 11-3, yet Black runners-up outnumber White runners-up 7-6. By my count, 4 of the 7 Black runners-up should have won the award. A fifth runner-up, Joey Hamilton in 1999, finished ahead of another Black quarterback, Michael Vick, who should have been the rightful Heisman winner.

Five of those 7 runners-up rushed for more than yards than Charlie Ward did during his Heisman winning season. Four of them totaled more than 500 yards. At the same time, only 1 of the 6 White runners-up rushed for more than 500 yards. Among quarterbacks who finished third and fourth in the Heisman balloting, 84% of White quarterbacks rushed for less than 300 yards while 80% of Black quarterbacks rushed for more than 500. It’s as if the criteria for winning the Heisman and merely placing high in the voting are completely different for Black quarterbacks. I do not believe any of this is a coincidence. Black quarterbacks who want to win the Heisman Trophy have to be and play a certain way.

None of this is clandestine or subtle. We can go year by year and see how and when Black quarterbacks were kept out of the Heisman winners club. In fact, let me do that.



Because everything in college football changed drastically when the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) was implemented in 1998, I feel the need to examine the Heisman travesties in the pre BCS and BCS eras separately. In the years between 1986 and 1998, the biggest Heisman injustices occurred in 1987, 1990, 1992, and 1995. The most egregious Heisman decisions during the BCS era took place in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and—based solely on Heisman voting patterns—2007. Yes, I believe there have been ten horrendously awarded Heisman Trophies in the past 25 years. I’ll go through each one of them.

1987 Tim Brown of Notre Dame became the first wide receiver to win the Heisman. Don McPherson of Syracuse was the runner up. McPherson led the Orangemen to an undefeated season despite little offensive talent other than himself. Winning would have made McPherson the first Black quarterback to win the award. Brown’s victory has been criticized as the result of a Notre Dame bias.
1990 Ty Detmer won the award over Raghib Ismail and Eric Bienemy. At the time, many thought Rocket Ismail was robbed of the award, but his placing second was, in my opinion, another result of the Notre Dame bias. As the best player on the nation’s best team, I thought Bienemy should have been the winner during a season with no truly transcendent player. Yes, Detmer threw for over 5,000 yards, but no quarterback who throws 28 interceptions in a single season should ever win the Heisman Trophy.
1992 Gino Torretta won the award because he was the starting quarterback for a Miami Hurricanes team that was poised to complete a second consecutive undefeated national championship season. The truth, however, was that Torretta was the team’s weak link. Running backs Marshall Faulk of San Diego State and Garrison Hearst of Georgia were far and away the most deserving candidates that year.
1995 Eddie George of Ohio State was the 1995 winner. He had a very good season, but it was not great. George did nothing transcendent or memorable that year. Although he came close, he did not surpass the 2,000 yard mark. He had several 200 yard rushing days, but he did nothing truly special. Tommy Frazier, on the other hand, was the best player on what many experts still consider the best team in college football history. A legitimate argument can be made that Frazier is the best college quarterback of the past 30 years. The closest comparison I can make between him and a player from a different sport is Mark Messier. Entering, 1995, Frazier was already a two-time national championship game MVP. During that season, he led the most powerful, dominating, and devastating offense the sport has ever seen. Frazier’s not winning is a clear case of the voters not wanting to give the Heisman to a Black quarterback who was not considered a “real” quarterback.

The BCS brought in an era of guaranteeing that the #1 and #2 teams would meet for the national championship at the end of every season. Under the old bowl system, conference ties were the primary force behind teams’ bowl bids. There were many cases of top three teams in the polls playing in three different bowls. The BCS ended those days. With so much emphasis on the new true BCS National Championship Game, everything else was devalued. This affected the Heisman voters. Only 4 of the 11 Heisman winners in the years immediately prior to the BCS era played for a national championship. 8 of the 12 Heisman winners since have done so.

The first two Heisman winners of the BCS era, running backs Ricky Williams and Ron Dayne, won the award in 1998 and 1999, respectively, after seasons during which they set the all-time Division I-A career rushing record. Williams’ Texas team played in the Cotton Bowl; Dayne’s Wisconsin Badgers played in the Rose Bowl. Carson Palmer won the 2002 Heisman; his USC reached the Orange Bowl. In 2007, Tim Tebow won the trophy and played in the Capital One Bowl. Every other Heisman winner since 1998 played in the BCS National Championship Game that season. As such, it has become commonly accepted that the Heisman is now awarded to either the quarterback of the best team or record-breaking running back and no longer the best skill position player in the country. This, of course, has led to a large number of Heisman voting atrocities:

1998 With over 2,000 yards and 27 touchdowns, Ricky Williams had a great year running the ball for the Longhorns. What Michael Bishop did in Manhattan, Kansas, though, was legendary. Bishop threw 23 touchdowns against only 4 interceptions while running for 748 yards and 14 touchdowns while leading Kansas State to the only undefeated regular season in the program’s history. Only a double-overtime defeat kept the Wildcats from playing Tennessee for the first BCS National Championship. Williams’ winning the Heisman was more of a career award—he broke the career rushing record in the season finale—than for the 1998 season. He was not the most outstanding player in the country that year; he was only the second-best in his own conference.
1999 Like Ricky Williams did one season earlier, Ron Dayne won the Heisman on the strength of breaking the career rushing record during the season. Dayne’s 1999 season was not great. Joey Hamilton’s, on the other hand, was. In 1999, Hamilton completed two-thirds of his passes for over 3,000 yards, threw 29 touchdown passes, and ran for more than 700 yards. He was the runner-up. But even he was not the most outstanding player in the country. That was Michael Vick, who, as a freshman, led Virginia Tech to the brink of a national championship. Vick’s numbers don’t tell the whole story, but he was clearly the best player in the country. Everyone acknowledged as much. Yet he only finished third.
2000 Chris Weinke won because there was no obvious strong candidate and he was the best quarterback among the national championship contenders. Like Gino Torretta before him, Weinke was his team’s weak link. He was the biggest reason Florida State did not win a second consecutive championship that year. In my opinion, Drew Brees was the most deserving candidate. Brees led his Purdue team to the Rose Bowl, but the Boilermakers won a weak Big Ten. At no point were they ranked higher than 9th. This past generation has shown that a Heisman winner will not come from a team that bad.
2001 Eric Crouch may be the least deserving Heisman winner of my lifetime. We’ve already taken a look at his passing statistics. But he did run for more than 1,100 yards on the season. And he had a signature play during Nebraska’s upset of top-ranked Oklahoma when he caught a touchdown pass during a trick play. But his passing was a major liability for the Cornhuskers. This was proven in their season finale at Colorado when the Buffaloes jumped ahead early and Nebraska did not have the passing attack required to catch up. Colorado ended up winning 62-36. In the BCS National Championship Game, Miami made Crouch look like a junior varsity quarterback. I felt that Rex Grossman of Florida and Joey Harrington of Oregon were the most deserving candidates. The excuse given for voting against Grossman was that he was a sophomore and no underclassman had yet won the Heisman. Harrington did not win because of a well-publicized bias against players from the West Coast.
2002 All the talk leading up to the Heisman Trophy announcement was whether or not Carson Palmer was a legitimate candidate to win. That West Coast bias had prevented any player from west of the Rocky Mountains from winning the award since 1981. He wasn’t even considered among the favorites. Willis McGahee, Ken Dorsey, and Brad Banks were expected to finish first and second. I actually expected Penn State’s Larry Johnson to win. I know that McGahee and Dorsey would cancel each other and that Banks couldn’t win. But Palmer won. It stunned a lot of people. It should have annoyed people. Palmer’s season was nowhere near the same level as Banks’. Brad Banks controlled the Big Ten season in 2002. That Iowa team had no business competing in the conference, yet they went undefeated in the Big Ten. Palmer was the better pro prospect and outplayed Banks in the Orange Bowl, but Brad Banks was the best player during the regular season. The Heisman should have been his, but the so-called West Coast bias was broken.
2007 This was Tim Tebow’s Heisman year. How many Heisman taboos were broken with this one? They used to say that no underclassman could win the Heisman. Tebow became the first sophomore to win it. After Ricky Williams won the first Heisman Trophy of the BCS era, no player had won the award without playing in a BCS bowl. Tebow’s Florida team earned a trip to the Capital One Bowl. Tebow also became the first Heisman Trophy winner of the BCS era to play for a team that lost more than two regular season games. A big deal was made about Tebow becoming the first player in college football history to throw for 20 touchdowns and run for 20 touchdowns in the same season. That is a truly great achievement, and Tebow had a great year, but he did not deserve the Heisman. Dennis Dixon was the best player in the nation. But he got hurt in the first quarter of the tenth game of the season—Oregon went on to lose out for the remainder of the regular season—and a player who misses 25% of the season can’t win the award. Pat White also had a great season while leading West Virginia to the Big East championship. White’s numbers weren’t as gaudy as Tebow’s, but he won games. We always hear about how quarterbacks are judged by wins and losses, yet Tim Tebow won the Heisman Trophy during a season in which he led the defending national champions to a 9-3 record and finished 3rd in the SEC East. This man, who became the very first underclassman to win the award and was force fed down our throats as a representative of all that is right and good with this world, is the only Heisman winner of the past 11 years to not play in the BCS. You have to look all the way back to Tim Brown’s season in 1987 to find a Heisman winner to play on a team with as many losses as Tebow’s Florida Gators. How exactly did Tebow win the award? I’m not saying that he didn’t deserve to win it—I probably would have voted for him after Dixon was injured—but the voters had just spent the previous decade establishing criteria that Tebow did not meet.

What has occurred during the BCS era is that only four men have won the Heisman Trophy without playing on a team that played in the BCS National Championship Game. In each of those four seasons, a Black quarterback should have been the rightful winner of the trophy. But we see these things occur over and over every day of our lives. Certain rules apply until they don’t. Michael Vick can’t win the Heisman in 1999 because underclassmen don’t win, but Tim Tebow, Sam Bradford, and Mark Ingram can win as sophomores. There is a West Coast bias keeping players from winning the Heisman, but Carson Palmer can win despite playing one game on national television during a season in which his team was never a contender for the championship. The Heisman goes to the best player on the best team, but Tebow can win despite his team finishing third in its division within its conference. Option quarterbacks can’t win because they don’t throw the ball well enough, but Eric Crouch can win even though he threw more interceptions than touchdowns. Quarterbacks who turn the ball over can’t win, but Ty Detmer can win fairly comfortably while throwing 28 interceptions.

All this is why I fully expected the arrival of controversy regarding Cam Newton. Newton is by far the best player in the nation. He is nearly as obvious a choice for the Heisman as Barry Sanders was in 1988. There is no way to even fabricate an on-field argument for denying him the trophy, so off-field issues are the only way to stop him.

Cam Newton is exactly the kind of Black quarterback who has never been able to win the Heisman. To date, he has a four to one touchdown to interception ration while completing 67.9% of his passes. He has also rushed for greater than 1,300 yards so far. On top of that, he holds the Auburn records for passing touchdowns and rushing touchdowns in a season. He is on the verge of matching Tebow’s 2007 feat of throwing and rushing for 20 touchdowns in a season. And his team, despite a historically bad pass defense, is undefeated. Cam Newton is in the midst of the greatest season by a college quarterback in my lifetime. So, yeah, they were going to come after him. And even though the NCAA has ruled him eligible, some in the media are still coming after him.

How much of the Cam Newton drama is the result of jealous former suitors like Mississippi State and Florida watching him lead a rival to college football’s promised land? How much of this controversy is because people don’t want to see a guy who’s not a “real” quarterback win the Heisman Trophy? How much of this is just the natural occurrence in a sport that is most dominant in the most racially segregated and disharmonious areas of our country? How much of that is because Newton is widely viewed as the anti-Tebow? One year ago, people were making the argument that Tim Tebow was the greatest college football player ever. Now, we see that Tebow was not even the best quarterback in his own conference over the past five years.

And, finally, why hasn’t anyone looked at Cam Newton’s troubles over the past two months from this standpoint? He plays in the SEC, a conference that has only had one non-White head football coach in its history. These folks will be damned before they let a running Negro quarterback win the Heisman Trophy on their watch.

Passing Statistics

Name	Year	Completions	Attempts	%	Yards	TDs	INTs	TD/INT Ratio
Cam Newton	2010	148	218	67.89%	2254	24	6	4.00
Andrew Luck	2010	245	349	70.20%	3051	28	7	4.00
Andy Dalton	2010	194	293	66.21%	2638	26	6	4.33
Denard Robinson	2010	155	250	62.00%	2316	16	10	1.60
Kellen Moore	2010	221	311	71.06%	3269	30	5	6.00
Ryan Mallett	2010	242	364	66.48%	3592	30	11	2.73
Terrell Pryor	2010	196	298	65.77%	2551	25	11	2.27
Colt McCoy	2009	332	470	70.64%	3521	27	12	2.25
Tim Tebow	2009	213	314	67.83%	2895	21	5	4.20
Sam Bradford	2008	328	483	67.91%	4720	50	8	6.25
Colt McCoy	2008	332	433	76.67%	3859	34	8	4.25
Tim Tebow	2008	192	298	64.43%	2746	30	4	7.50
Graham Harrell	2008	442	626	70.61%	5111	45	9	5.00
Pat White	2008	180	274	65.69%	1842	21	7	3.00
Tim Tebow	2007	234	350	66.86%	3286	32	6	5.33
Colt Brennan	2007	359	510	70.39%	4343	38	17	2.24
Chase Daniel	2007	384	563	68.21%	4306	33	11	3.00
Dennis Dixon	2007	172	254	67.72%	2136	20	4	5.00
Pat White	2007	144	216	66.67%	1724	14	4	3.50
Troy Smith	2006	203	311	65.27%	2542	30	6	5.00
Brady Quinn	2006	289	467	61.88%	3426	37	7	5.29
Vince Young	2005	212	325	65.23%	3036	26	10	2.60
Matt Leinart	2005	283	431	65.66%	3815	28	8	3.50
Brady Quinn	2005	292	450	64.89%	3919	32	7	4.57
Matt Leinart	2004	269	412	65.29%	3322	33	6	5.50
Jason White	2004	255	390	65.38%	3205	35	9	3.89
Alex Smith	2004	214	317	67.51%	2952	32	4	8.00
Jason White	2003	278	451	61.64%	3846	40	10	4.00
Eli Manning	2003	275	441	62.36%	3600	29	10	2.90
Matt Leinart	2003	255	402	63.43%	3556	38	9	4.22
Carson Palmer	2002	309	489	63.19%	3942	33	10	3.30
Brad Banks	2002	170	294	57.82%	2573	26	5	5.20
Ken Dorsey	2002	222	393	56.49%	3369	28	12	2.33
Rex Grossman	2002	287	503	57.06%	3402	22	17	1.29
Eric Crouch	2001	105	189	55.56%	1510	7	10	0.70
Rex Grossman	2001	259	395	65.57%	3896	34	12	2.83
Ken Dorsey	2001	184	318	57.86%	2652	23	9	2.56
Joey Harrington	2001	186	322	57.76%	2415	23	5	4.60
Chris Weinke	2000	266	431	61.72%	4167	33	11	3.00
Josh Heupel	2000	305	472	64.62%	3606	20	15	1.33
Drew Brees	2000	309	512	60.35%	3668	26	12	2.17
Joey Hamilton	1999	203	305	66.56%	3060	29	11	2.64
Michael Vick	1999	90	152	59.21%	1840	12	5	2.40
Drew Brees	1999	337	544	61.95%	3909	25	12	2.08
Michael Bishop	1998	164	295	55.59%	2844	23	4	5.75
Cade McNown	1998	207	357	57.98%	3470	25	11	2.27
Tim Couch	1998	400	553	72.33%	4275	36	15	2.40
Donovan McNabb	1998	157	251	62.55%	2134	22	5	4.40
Peyton Manning	1997	287	477	60.17%	3819	36	11	3.27
Ryan Leaf	1997	227	410	55.37%	3968	34	11	3.09
Danny Wuerfell	1996	207	360	57.50%	3625	39	13	3.00
Jake Plummer	1996	179	313	57.19%	2575	24	9	2.67
Tommy Frazier	1995	92	163	56.44%	1362	17	4	4.25
Danny Wuerfell	1995	210	325	64.62%	3266	35	10	3.50
Steve McNair	1994	304	530	57.36%	4863	44	17	2.59
Kerry Collins	1994	176	264	66.67%	2679	21	7	3.00
Kordell Stewart	1994	147	237	62.03%	2071	10	3	3.33
Charlie Ward	1993	264	380	69.47%	3032	27	4	6.75
Heath Shuler	1993	184	285	64.56%	2354	25	8	3.13
Tommy Frazier	1993	77	162	47.53%	1159	12	4	3.00
Gino Torretta	1992	228	402	56.72%	3060	19	7	2.71
Casey Weldon	1991	189	313	60.38%	2527	22	8	2.75
Ty Detmer	1991	249	403	61.79%	4031	35	12	2.92
Ty Detmer	1990	361	562	64.23%	5188	41	28	1.46
Shawn Moore	1990	144	241	59.75%	2262	21	8	2.63
Darian Hagan	1990	75	163	46.01%	1538	11	8	1.38
Andre Ware	1989	365	578	63.15%	4699	46	15	3.07
Major Harris	1989	142	245	57.96%	2058	17	11	1.55
Tony Rice	1989	68	137	49.64%	1122	2	9	0.22
Darian Hagan	1989	48	85	56.47%	1002	4	4	1.00
Rodney Peete	1988	208	338	61.54%	2654	18	10	1.80
Troy Aikman	1988	209	327	63.91%	2599	23	8	2.88
Steve Walsh	1988	233	390	59.74%	3115	29	12	2.42
Major Harris	1988	105	186	56.45%	1915	14	8	1.75
Tony Rice	1988	70	138	50.72%	1176	8	7	1.14
Don McPherson	1987	129	229	56.33%	2341	22	11	2.00
Jamelle Holieway	1987	21	62	33.87%	548	7	4	1.75
Vinny Testaverde	1986	175	276	63.41%	2557	26	9	2.89
Jim Harbaugh	1986	180	277	64.98%	2729	10	11	0.91
Jamelle Holieway	1986	32	66	48.48%	588	6	4	1.50

Rushing Statistics

Name	Heisman Winner Position	Rushes	Yards	Average	TDs	Total TDs
Cam Newton	?	228	1336	5.86	18	42
Andrew Luck	?	51	438	8.59	3	31
Andy Dalton	?	77	407	5.29	5	31
Denard Robinson	?	245	1643	6.71	14	30
Kellen Moore	?	14	-34	-2.43	0	30
Ryan Mallett	?	40	-46	-1.15	4	34
Terrell Pryor	?	120	639	5.33	4	29
Colt McCoy	Running Back	129	348	2.70	3	30
Tim Tebow	Running Back	217	910	4.19	14	35
Sam Bradford	Quarterback	42	47	1.12	5	55
Colt McCoy	Quarterback	136	561	4.13	11	45
Tim Tebow	Quarterback	176	673	3.82	12	42
Graham Harrell	Quarterback	41	-15	-0.37	6	51
Pat White	Quarterback	191	974	5.10	8	29
Tim Tebow	Quarterback	210	895	4.26	23	55
Colt Brennan	Quarterback	82	27	0.33	8	46
Chase Daniel	Quarterback	109	253	2.32	4	37
Dennis Dixon	Quarterback	105	583	5.55	9	29
Pat White	Quarterback	197	1335	6.78	14	28
Troy Smith	Quarterback	72	204	2.83	1	31
Brady Quinn	Quarterback	82	71	0.87	2	39
Vince Young	Running Back	155	1050	6.77	12	38
Matt Leinart	Running Back	51	36	0.71	6	34
Brady Quinn	Running Back	70	90	1.29	1	33
Matt Leinart	Quarterback	49	-44	-0.90	3	36
Jason White	Quarterback	23	-56	-2.43	0	35
Alex Smith	Quarterback	135	631	4.67	10	42
Jason White	Quarterback	42	-150	-3.57	1	41
Eli Manning	Quarterback	48	28	0.58	3	32
Matt Leinart	Quarterback	32	-62	-1.94	0	38
Carson Palmer	Quarterback	50	122	2.44	4	37
Brad Banks	Quarterback	81	423	5.22	5	31
Ken Dorsey	Quarterback	23	-48	-2.09	0	28
Rex Grossman	Quarterback	58	-65	-1.12	1	23
Eric Crouch	Quarterback	203	1115	5.49	18	25
Rex Grossman	Quarterback	34	8	0.24	5	39
Ken Dorsey	Quarterback	12	3	0.25	0	23
Joey Harrington	Quarterback	55	56	1.02	7	30
Chris Weinke	Quarterback	30	-97	-3.23	1	34
Josh Heupel	Quarterback	70	144	2.06	7	27
Drew Brees	Quarterback	95	521	5.48	5	31
Joey Hamilton	Running Back	154	734	4.77	6	35
Michael Vick	Running Back	108	585	5.42	8	20
Drew Brees	Running Back	79	177	2.24	4	29
Michael Bishop	Running Back	177	748	4.23	14	37
Cade McNown	Running Back	75	182	2.43	3	28
Tim Couch	Running Back	64	-124	-1.94	1	37
Donovan McNabb	Running Back	135	438	3.24	8	30
Peyton Manning	Cornerback	49	-30	-0.61	3	39
Ryan Leaf	Cornerback	82	-48	-0.59	6	40
Danny Wuerfell	Quarterback	63	-100	-1.59	2	41
Jake Plummer	Quarterback	85	63	0.74	3	27
Tommy Frazier	Running Back	97	604	6.23	14	31
Danny Wuerfell	Running Back	46	-141	-3.07	2	37
Steve McNair	Running Back	119	936	7.87	9	53
Kerry Collins	Running Back	12	-19	-1.58	0	21
Kordell Stewart	Running Back	122	639	5.24	7	17
Charlie Ward	Quarterback	65	339	5.22	4	31
Heath Shuler	Quarterback	46	73	1.59	3	28
Tommy Frazier	Quarterback	126	704	5.59	9	21
Gino Torretta	Quarterback	34	-24	-0.71	0	19
Casey Weldon	Wide Receiver	38	-30	-0.79	0	22
Ty Detmer	Wide Receiver	75	-30	-0.40	0	35
Ty Detmer	Quarterback	73	-166	-2.27	0	41
Shawn Moore	Quarterback	N/A	303	N/A	8	29
Darian Hagan	Quarterback	138	442	3.20	5	16
Andre Ware	Quarterback	50	-38	-0.76	0	46
Major Harris	Quarterback	155	936	6.04	6	23
Tony Rice	Quarterback	174	884	5.08	7	9
Darian Hagan	Quarterback	186	1132	6.09	17	21
Rodney Peete	Running Back	68	68	1.00	5	23
Troy Aikman	Running Back	78	83	1.06	1	24
Steve Walsh	Running Back	15	-33	-2.20	0	29
Major Harris	Running Back	134	610	4.55	6	20
Tony Rice	Running Back	121	700	5.79	9	17
Don McPherson	Wide Receiver	110	199	1.81	5	27
Jamelle Holieway	Wide Receiver	142	860	6.06	10	17
Vinny Testaverde	Quarterback	46	-103	-2.24	4	30
Jim Harbaugh	Quarterback	94	118	1.26	8	18
Jamelle Holieway	Quarterback	146	807	5.53	10	16

Jesus Wasn't Silent When He Turned the Other Cheek

Anyone who knows me knows that I have plenty of issues with Donovan McNabb as a football player. I also have a variety of issues with him as a person. I have never met the man, but I saw enough during his eleven years in Philadelphia to know what I know.

My biggest issues with McNabb are those things that lead other people to call him classy. I find a great many of his “classy” actions to be passive aggressive, dishonest, and disrespectful. Yesterday, after he was benched in favor of Rex Grossman during the final two minutes of Washington’s 37-25 loss in Detroit, McNabb provided a perfect example of what I find so disturbing about him.

He always does his very best to avoid causing controversy. Donovan McNabb does not want to be seen as a troublemaker. As a result, the man never stands up for himself. It happened in Philadelphia, and now it’s happening in Washington.

If my child responded to disrespect in the manner that Donovan McNabb consistently does, I would be ashamed of him/her. Every time one of these situations pops up, I think about the song, You Gotta Be by Des’ree. The opening stanza is:

Listen as your day unfolds
Challenge what the future holds
Try and keep your head up to the sky
Lovers, they may cause you tears
Go ahead release your fears
Stand up and be counted
Don't be ashamed to cry

This is what McNabb never does. McNabb always publicly makes light of the situation and refuses to challenge the coaches. I will not go so far as to call McNabb a yes man, but he most definitely is a company man. An effective team leader cannot be a company man. It absolutely cannot work. This is why many of the defensive players never fully backed McNabb during his days as the Eagles’ quarterback. This also cost him the full support of the offensive players during his final two years in Philadelphia. In November 2008, he was benched in the second half of a game in Baltimore. He reacted the same way, and from that point on, the skill position players were Kevin Kolb guys. McNabb never publicly admits to being angry or feeling disrespected until he is already removed from the situation. This is not classy. This is prey behavior. He speaks and behaves like a victim; this is the furthest thing from leadership.

People call McNabb classy and a nice guy, but I don’t see it that way. It is never right to allow others to disrespect you. When you allow other people to disrespect you, you are admitting to the world that you are not worthy of respect. Due to their circumstances, some people feel as if they must grin and bear it. McNabb should not feel that need. He is an NFL quarterback who people generally like. But, no, he never commands respect from anyone perceived to be at or above his level. Sure, he can criticize Terrell Owens, but he can never stand up to Andy Reid or Mike Shanahan until they are no longer his coach. It’s weak. It’s the way of a victim.

People say they respect McNabb for turning the other cheek. The thought I cannot escape is this: Jesus wasn’t silent when He turned the other cheek. You should never act as if it is fine when people disrespect you. You should never allow people to act disrespectfully toward anyone and then act as if they are not doing so. Allowing disrespect to go unacknowledged is living a lie. Every time McNabb allows this to happen to him, he perpetuates the problem.

And this affects more than him. Think about this: if Donovan McNabb can’t stand up for himself, what Black quarterback can? Because of his stature and accomplishments, McNabb is viewed, more or less, as the standard bearer for Black quarterbacks. If he refuses to stand up for himself, then other Black quarterbacks must follow suit. If he were to speak up and not allow others to publicly disrespect him, the media would grow more comfortable with other Black quarterbacks doing it too. Remember when Vince Young had his episode? People remember that it occurred after Young was benched in favor of Kerry Collins. What is never mentioned anymore is that Young was widely criticized in the media for speaking about how upset and disappointed he was for being benched.

Meanwhile, Aaron Rodgers and Kevin Kolb are praised for their desire to play when they expressed their anger and impatience at having to sit behind Brett Favre and McNabb, respectively. Vince Young was not afforded that same praise. Some of that is attributable to McNabb’s refusal to stand up for himself.

You act like a victim, you become a victim.

McNabb's Return

It looks like it should be an easy Eagles victory on Sunday when Donovan McNabb returns to Philadelphia for the first time since becoming the Washington quarterback. Looking at McNabb and Andy Reid’s history, though, I think McNabb’s team will leave Philly with a double-digit victory. I’m thinking something along the lines of 27-17. Any other result would tell me one of two things: either McNabb really is done or the Eagles team is as much emotionally invested in beating McNabb as he is in defeating them.

Both McNabb and Reid are entering a game they’ve played many times. For the Washington quarterback, this is the game after people started to wonder if he really is the guy, if he still has it. Typically, this game becomes one of McNabb’s two or three best of the season. He looks great in this game. His passes are accurate in this game. This is the type of game that makes people think McNabb is one of the top five quarterbacks in the NFL. He usually immediately follows this game with two or three duds in a row, but this game is almost always his.

McNabb played games like this a lot during his years as an Eagle. If we begin in McNabb’s third season, the year after his first playoff run, we can see how he responds when the hometown fans and media begin to doubt him:

November 29, 2001 The Eagles were coming off a bad loss at home to Washington, which dropped their record to 6-4. The next game was Thursday night game in Kansas City. The Eagles won easily while McNabb threw for 269 yards, 2 touchdowns, and 1 interception. His quarterback rating that night was 112.5. over the next three weeks, the Eagles went 2-1 while McNabb completed less than 55% of his passes.

September 16, 2002 The Eagles blew a double-digit lead in a bad loss to the Titans the previous week. McNabb followed that loss with a great performance in Washington while leading the Eagles to a thirty-point win. McNabb followed this win up with a great performance against the Cowboys. Then he had six bad games in a row.

November 17, 2002 The Eagles won four of the six bad games McNabb played. The final game, however, was a blowout loss at home to the Colts. The whispers about McNabb started popping up again. In the following game against the Cardinals, he completed 80% of his passes and threw for four touchdowns. Unfortunately, he broke his foot in that game and missed the rest of the regular season.

September 28, 2003 It’s easy to forget this now, but the Eagles lost the first two games at Lincoln Financial Field. They scored a combined ten points in those games to begin the season 0-2. The Bills were 2-0, including a 38-0 win over the Patriots. Few gave the Eagles a chance in Buffalo, but they won easily. After that game, it would be another month before McNabb threw for more than 200 yards in a game.

December 27, 2003 A week earlier, the Eagles blew a home game against a bad 49ers team that diminished their chances at gaining home field advantage throughout the playoffs. In the regular season finale in Washington, McNabb led a blowout victory by completing 72% of his passes for three touchdowns and no interceptions. The ensuing playoffs were not good, though.

November 27, 2008 This Thanksgiving night game against the Cardinals came on the heels of a 0-2-1 stretch for the Eagles. McNabb had been benched at halftime of the previous game. If this game had been played on Sunday instead of Thursday, McNabb probably would not have had the chance to start. He did start, however, and completed 69% of his passes for 4 touchdowns, no turnovers, and a 121.7 rating. This game is the one outlier, as McNabb only had one bad game the rest of that season.

McNabb had many other games like this. I identify the 2004 game in Dallas after the Eagles were blown out in Pittsburgh, the 2006 game in San Francisco, the Detroit game in 2007, the 2007 game in Washington, the 49er game in 2008, and last year’s game in Chicago.

This is his pattern; this is what he does. Doubts rise, he plays magnificently, and then he falls back into his normal routine. I’ve seen it a dozen times or more. Now the fans in the District get a chance to see it, too.

For the Eagle head coach, this is the home game against a lesser team immediately following decisive road victory that greatly increased his team’s confidence. Eagle fans will tell you they always dread this game. They often lose this game. When they do win, it’s always closer than it should be. By my count, when Andy Reid’s Eagles have a home game against a team that finishes the season no better than 8-8 the week after a blowout road victory, they are 4-4. Two of those losses happen to be to Washington teams that ended up 8-8.

Maybe Michael Vick and the Eagles young skill players can overcome these trends. If McNabb has anything left, however, he will show it this weekend.

After All We've Done for You

Apparently, Angelo Cataldi is bringing the Dirty Thirty back together. In case you don’t know who Cataldi and the Dirty Thirty are, he is the morning radio host on WIP, one of Philadelphia’s sports talk stations. In the weeks leading up to the 1999 NFL Draft, Cataldi was upset that Andy Reid was looking to draft a quarterback, specifically Donovan McNabb instead of Ricky Williams. He decide to put together a group, the Dirty Thirty, to take on a bus trip up to Manhattan for the draft. His revisionist history may now state otherwise, but when Cataldi auditioned callers for spots in the Dirty Thirty, he had asked them to boo as they would on draft day when they heard McNabb’s name called.

These days Cataldi says that his intention was to put together a group to cheer the newest Eagle draft pick. According to today’s column by Joseph Santoliquito on the website for CBS’ Philadelphia affiliate, Cataldi said, “We weren’t driving a 100 miles both ways to boo the newest Eagle. Now as I wind down my radio career, I’m going to be remembered as the guy who got 30 big fat puking drunks together to boo McNabb—not as an articulate journalist who contributed something.” This statement is entirely false. What Cataldi wanted was to raise a stink and coerce the Eagles into drafting Ricky Williams. He feels his “Honk for Herschel” campaign, during which he asked drivers to honk loudly while driving by Veterans Stadium to show their desire for the Eagles to sign the former Vikings and Cowboys running back, was the primary catalyst for the Eagles bringing Herschel onto the team. In 1999, he thought he could influence the Eagles’ decision-making by vocalizing his disagreement with the idea of drafting a quarterback. When Andy Reid did not appear to budge, Cataldi decided to take his displeasure national. That was the reason behind the Dirty Thirty.

Eleven years later, he’s doing it again. This time, he’s bringing the Dirty Thirty back to boo McNabb during a march to the stadium on Sunday afternoon. Why?

There is plenty of reason for Eagle fans to be dissatisfied by the McNabb era. There was a lot of promise, but ultimately, there was no championship. While McNabb was a very good quarterback, he did not have the best personality for the city in which he played. But there is no reason to boo him on Sunday. He doesn’t deserve it.

McNabb will be booed on Sunday. Some will do it because he did not win a Super Bowl. I disagree with it, but I understand the notion. Others, led by Cataldi and his Dirty Thirty, will boo because McNabb was rather cold and distant to the fans in the city. This faction is asinine. What reason did McNabb ever have to try and bond with these people? The boos of the first Dirty Thirty were his introduction to the city.

By staging his march on Sunday, Angelo Cataldi perfectly embodies societal privilege. When you break this down and actually analyze what occurred in Philadelphia over the past eleven years, McNabb’s crime, in the eyes of Cataldi and his supporters, is that he never embraced the people who shat on him. “After all we’ve done for him…” and “After we cheered for him for throughout his entire career…” are two of the more common phrases I’ve heard from people who agree with Cataldi. If this doesn’t represent privilege, I don’t know what does. This type of attitude is male privilege, heterosexual privilege, able-bodied privilege, and just about every other type of privilege out there,

Cataldi and the Dirty Thirty destroyed what should have been the happiest moment of Donovan McNabb’s first 22 years of life. In an orchestrated—though they’ll never admit it anymore—move, they absolutely crushed the kid. Then, once he got on the field and started to produce, they cheered and adored him.

But because he never thanked and embraced them for it, they now hate him. Because he told them how much they mean to him, they think he doesn’t deserve them. They’ll cover it up by saying he was distant and cold and passive-aggressive. Many of the things they say are true, but they aren’t fooling me. Cataldi and his backers are to McNabb what Dan Gilbert was to LeBron James. He is bitter that the player for whom he grudgingly came to root does not feel grateful for it. After all they did for you, how dare you nigger, I mean, Donovan.

It takes a high degree of privilege to feel entitled to love after treating someone in a disrespectful and indecent manner. I guess a straight, upper-class, pure White Christian man wouldn’t see anything wrong with that, though.

Andy Reid's Offensive Line

On September 23, I read Paul Domowitch’s column in The Philadelphia Daily News. (Link to column) "Offensive line is real reason why Eagles picked Michael Vick over Kolb” is the headline above the column. While I do not fully buy into Domo’s theory, I do believe the offensive line played a major part in Andy Reid’s decision to start Vick over Kevin Kolb. The sieve of the Eagles’ offensive line is largely responsible for Kolb’s concussion on Opening Day, and Vick has the mobility to elude a great deal of the pressure Eagle quarterbacks will face for the rest of this season.

If I was head coach of the Eagles, I would have announced Vick as the four-week starter at quarterback. I would have given Kolb a month to recover from his concussion and brought him back to start on October 17 against the Falcons. As it is, Reid has decided to start Vick for the rest of the season. Whatever role the offensive line played into his decision, Andy Reid is responsible for the wreck that unit has become. As the coach himself often says, this one’s on him.

Early in Reid’s tenure with the Eagles, the offensive line was a strength. The line has been in steady decline ever since. Isn’t this ironic? People often refer to the fact that Reid’s job immediately prior to becoming head coach of the Eagles was as the quarterback coach of the Green Bay Packers. They don’t realize that he only spent one season in that role. Prior to that, he worked exclusively on the offensive line. Andy Reid played offensive tackle and guard at Brigham Young. From 1983 through 1991, Reid was an offensive line coach at four different colleges. He then went on to become an offensive assistant and then offensive line coach for the Packers. In 1997, Reid was employed as the team’s tight ends coach. It was not until 1998 that Reid served under Mike Holmgren as Brett Favre’s quarterback coach. The man spent over twenty years working exclusively on offensive lines; one would think he understood the unit’s importance to a football team.

Let’s look at the how the Eagles’ poor offensive line of 2010 came to be:

For nearly a full decade, the Eagles had possibly the best pair of tackles in the National Football League. Tra Thomas, Ray Rhodes’ final first round draft pick, started at left tackle in Philly for eleven years before the Eagles let him leave as a free agent after the 2008 season. Jon Runyan arrived in 2000 as a free agent from Tennessee and started at right tackle in every game the Eagles played from the day he showed up through the 2008 postseason, when the Eagles allowed him to leave via free agency. When their Eagle careers ended, Thomas and Runyan were 34 and 35, respectively. Amazingly, despite knowing both tackles’ contracts ended after 2008 and that their ages would keep the Eagles from trying to retain either of them, the team had no solid plan for replacing the bookends of the offensive line.

In 2009, the Eagles allowed 38 sacks. That was only the third time the Eagles gave up that many sacks since 2003. The other two years were 2005 and 2007. 2005 was the year the Eagles suffered from Super Bowl hangover and finished in last place in the NFC East. 2007 was a different story. Tra Thomas missed the September 30 game against the Giants due to injury. The team’s second-round draft pick from 2006, Winston Justice, made his first NFL start that night. Not so coincidentally, the Eagles allowed twelve sacks that night. Osi Umenyiora, whom Justice spent most of the night attempting to block, was credited with six of them. Winston Justice started every game at right tackle for the 2009 Eagles.

How did Justice come to be the Eagles’ starting right tackle last season? Oh, boy, what a mess. Like most messes, this story is not a simple one, and it revolves around uncertainty. It starts on April 24, 2004, the first day of the NFL Draft. In the first round, the Eagles traded up from the 28th pick to the 16th pick. At the time of the trade, everybody knew the Eagles made the trade so they could draft Steven Jackson, the running back from Oregon State. Instead, Andy Reid surprised the entire football world by selecting Shawn Andrews, an All-American tackle from Arkansas. Because Thomas and Runyan were on the team, Reid envisioned Andrews as a guard. Although a broken leg cost him the final fifteen games of his rookie season, Andrews quickly became the best guard in the league.

In 2008, it became apparent that Shawn Andrews was falling apart. In June of that year, he abruptly left the team for “personal issues.” He did not show up to training camp the next month. On August 4, The Philadelphia Daily News published an article in which Andrews spoke about dealing with depression. Six days later, he showed up at training camp. Andrews started playing again and began the 2008 regular season starting at right guard for the Eagles. In the second game of that season, Andrews left with a herniated disc. The Eagles didn’t expect him to miss the rest of the season, but he did. About six weeks after initially sustaining the injury, Andrews went under the knife.

With his physical problems supposedly corrected, Andrews was expected to return to the Eagles starting lineup in 2009. Andy Reid was still worried about the depression, so he sought to do what he could to make sure the Eagles became the ideal atmosphere for his Pro Bowl right guard. In late February 2009, the Eagles signed Stacy Andrews, Shawn’s older brother, to a six-year, $38.9 million contract. Stacy Andrews was a fourth round pick of the Bengals in the same year in which the Eagles drafted Shawn. Stacy had been Cincinnati’s starting right tackle in 2007 and 2008. It would have been reasonable to assume that Stacy would take on that role for the Eagles and replace Jon Runyan in 2009 except that he had torn his anterior cruciate ligament in his second-to-last game as a Bengal. As a preemptive move, Andy Reid switched the Andrews brothers’ positions; Shawn became the starting right tackle and Stacy was named the starter at right guard. It was a move to guard against the limited mobility Stacy would probably experience coming off the torn knee ligament. Still, the Eagles expected Stacy Andrews to be healthy enough to start the 2009 season (familiarize yourself with this concept). As it turned out, Andrews was neither healthy enough nor pass blocking well enough to warrant playing time. Stacy was benched after the season opener and only started one other game the rest of the season. In order to avoid being cut, he accepted a reduced salary in March 2010. He was then traded to Seattle for an undisclosed 2011 draft pick. Max Jean-Gilles and Nick Cole started the other fourteen games at right guard.

Reid’s creation of a comfortable environment for Shawn Andrews did not end with the signing of the player’s brother. A week before the 2009 draft, the Eagles traded their first and sixth round picks for Jason Peters, Shawn’s college roommate. Peters had gone undrafted in 2004, but had worked his way onto the Buffalo Bills’ roster and had been selected to the Pro Bowl following both the 2007 and 2008 seasons. Peters had been involved in a contract dispute with the Bills for a year, which is why he was available. After the trade, the Eagles signed him to a six year, $60 million deal. Although he was selected to three consecutive Pro Bowls—he was voted as the NFC’s starting left tackle after his first season as an Eagle—Peters’ play has been inconsistent since he became a starter in the league. In 2008, Peters led the league by allowing 11.5 sacks, despite playing only thirteen games. In Peters’ first year as an Eagle, he was rated the worst starting left tackle in the NFL by Football Outsiders. I don’t think you’d find many Eagle fans who would disagree with that assessment. Peters started every game at left tackle for the Eagles in 2009. He is still the starter at that position.

As poorly as Reid’s acquisitions of Shawn Andrews’ brother and college roommate turned out, Shawn’s situation ended up worse. His back never felt good enough to allow him onto the football field in 2009. The Eagles released him in March 2010. Since Shawn was unable to play, Winston Justice was the Eagles’ starting right tackle throughout the entire 2009 season.

Todd Herremans was slated to start at left tackle in 2009. He missed the season’s first five games due to a stress fracture. When he returned, he started at that position. Nick Cole started at left guard during Herremans’ absence. When Herremans was healthy enough to play, Cole took over at right guard for Max Jean-Gilles, who is more of a run blocker than a pass blocker.

Until tearing his ACL in the fifteenth game of the season, Jamaal Jackson started at center. Although he was never drafted, Jackson is a very good NFL center. In my opinion, he is one of the top three or four centers in the NFC. The problem is that Andy Reid and the Eagles have never acquired a legitimate center to back up Jackson. After Jackson injured his knee, Nick Cole took over as starting center in the final game of the regular season and the wild card game. Both of those games were road games against the Cowboys. The Cowboys recorded four sacks in each of those games. The Eagles weren’t able to run the ball in either contest. Jay Ratliff, the Cowboy nose tackle who always abuses the Eagles, looked like Joe Greene against Nick Cole. The poor offensive line play was the primary reason the Eagles managed to score only fourteen points combined in the two games.

Actually, the offensive line was responsible for a lot that went bad for the Eagles last season. I already explained how the players on the line were put together. Let me now look at them as a unit. The Eagles’ 2009 starting offensive lines broke down like this (from left tackle to right tackle):

Jason Peters, Nick Cole, Jamaal Jackson, Stacy Andrews, Winston Justice – 1 game (Game 1)
Jason Peters, Nick Cole, Jamaal Jackson, Max Jean-Gilles, Winston Justice – 4 games (Game 2-5)
Jason Peters, Todd Herremans, Jamaal Jackson, Nick Cole, Winston Justice – 9 games (Games 6-8, 10-15)
Todd Herremans, Nick Cole, Jamaal Jackson, Stacy Andrews, Winston Justice – 1 game (Game 9)
Jason Peters, Todd Herremans, Nick Cole, Max Jean-Gilles, Winston Justice – 2 games (Game 17, Wild Card Playoff)

Including the playoff game against Dallas, the Eagles had 85 starts on the offensive line. 17 of those starts were made by a player drafted in the second round. 20 starts were made by players drafted in the fourth round. The remaining 48 starts were recorded by players who were not drafted. Granted, two of the three undrafted players who started on the offensive line were Jason Peters and Jamaal Jackson, who have played at a very high level in the NFL. But Peters has severely regressed since having an excellent year in 2007. The other undrafted starter was Nick Cole, who is serviceable. Cole is mediocre, at best. The second round pick is Justice. While Justice is not as bad as he was in that infamous start against the Giants, he is another mediocre, at best, lineman. True, the Eagles expected Shawn Andrews to start; he would have been the only first round pick on the line. So the line the Eagles put together included one first rounder, a bad second rounder, and a bunch of fourth rounders and undrafted free agents.

How does Andy Reid expect to have a credible offensive line when he’s building the unit with players no one expected to be good? The success of the Eagles’ offensive line is based on getting lucky with unheralded players. That is no way to plan for winning. While it is true that drafting is an inexact science, players are drafted in the first and second round for a reason. Andy Reid does not seem to understand this. If he did, he would have learned from the mistake of 2009 and built a better offensive line for 2010.

In the offseason, the Eagles did not sign any offensive linemen who were projected to make the two-deep depth chart. They went into the draft with thirteen picks—they drafted zero offensive linemen. Think about this: the offensive line was a disaster last season, especially in the final two games against the rival Dallas Cowboys, yet the Eagles did not add a single offensive lineman.

Furthermore, although Jackson tore his ACL two days after Christmas 2009, the Eagles expected him to be fully recovered by the start of the 2010 season; therefore, they signed no true backup center. Unlike Stacy Andrews the year before, Jackson actually was healthy enough to play at the start of this season. Unfortunately, he tore his right biceps in the season opener against Green Bay and will miss the rest of the season. This time, Mike McGlynn, a fourth round pick in the 2008 draft who played tackle in college, took over Jackson’s starting center spot.

I understand that teams can’t really afford to sign backups who only play center. At the same time, I think it behooves every team to have at least one reserve offensive lineman who has played center before. Two seasons in a row, the Eagles have cost themselves by not having a credible center to take over after Jamaal Jackson was injured.

The offensive line in general is just terrible. Barring more injuries, the Eagles’ starting offensive line for the rest of the season will be (from left tackle to right tackle) Jason Peters, Todd Herremans, Mike McGlynn, Nick Cole, and Winston Justice. Awful. Through three games this year, they have already allowed fourteen sacks—who knows how many sacks they would have given up if not for Vick’s superior mobility—despite playing two of those games against Detroit and Jacksonville (by contrast, the Eagles three opponents this year have recorded a total of twelve sacks in their five other games). This line was a problem last year and the Eagles have done absolutely nothing to make it better this year.

This also explains how and why this is the second year in a row that the Eagles’ starting quarterback suffered an injury in the opening game. Yes, McNabb suffered in injury in 2009 Week 1 that forced him to not play in Weeks 2 and 3. Kevin Kolb was concussed in Week 1 this season and missed Week 2 due to that injury.

If we’ve learned nothing since 1999, it is that Andy Reid does not learn well. This offensive line does not seem likely to improve in 2011. Very strange for a team coached by a man who has spent the majority of his life on the offensive line.

Reid Wrong for Vick

I know there are a lot of people out there who believe Andy Reid made the right call in electing to start Michael Vick over Kevin Kolb for the foreseeable future. There are a seemingly equal number of people who believe Reid is making a huge mistake. I am about ninety percent into the latter camp. I think the coach made the wrong decision, but I don’t think it matters much. No matter the quarterback, I fully believe the Eagles are incapable of winning the Super Bowl as long as Andy Reid makes the team’s football decisions.

Those who believe Vick should be the starter do so for the following reasons: based on his track record as quarterback of the Falcons, Michael Vick is a winner in the NFL; Vick has played spectacularly through six quarters this season while Kolb had a pretty bad beginning to his 2010 season; the Eagles’ offensive line is awful, especially injury replacement center Mike McGlynn, and Kolb’s limited mobility will get him hurt again; Vick gives the Eagles the best chance to win ten or eleven games this year and make the playoffs; and, frankly, Kolb has not shown anything to forcefully prove that he should have been starting over Vick anyway. I cannot disagree with any of those reasons; they are all one hundred percent correct. Still, I believe Kevin Kolb should be the Eagles’ starting quarterback.

The Kolb supporters tend to subscribe the following: after three years of grooming Kolb and five months of propping him up as the starter, two quarters is not enough time to determine that he’s not the right guy for the job; Kolb shouldn’t lose his starting job because of an injury; Kolb is much better suited to run Reid’s West Coast Offense than Vick; Kolb played good-to-great in his two starts last season, so Reid should have more confidence in him; and it undermines Kolb’s standing with his teammates for him to lose his starting job so soon. I cannot disagree with either of these arguments either.

What the people in both camps are neglecting to do is take the coach into consideration. We have seen Andy Reid for eleven years; we know him by now. From what we know of Reid, Kolb should be the guy. Let me count the ways:

1. Michael Vick is 30 years old. Anyone who’s followed the Eagles during Jeffrey Lurie’s ownership tenure knows that this organization does not like signing or extending players in their thirties. Some might think the quarterback position would be immune to this, but the Eagles have not yet shown this to be true. The Eagles drafted Kolb just as McNabb turned 30. At the time, the effective portion of McNabb’s contract was set to run out after the 2009 season, when he would be 33. Due to their organizational philosophy, Eagles can see Michael Vick as nothing but a short-term fix. This was not a move for beyond 2010.
   
2. The Eagles have wanted Kevin Kolb to be the starting quarterback since November 2008. I will always believe that when Andy Reid benched McNabb for Kolb at halftime of the Eagles’ 2008 game in Baltimore, he anticipated never playing McNabb again. Had Kolb led a second half comeback victory, that most certainly would have been the case. The Eagles last that game, however, and Kolb’s most infamous highlight was throwing a pass that Ed Reed turned into the longest interception return in NFL history. Still, I think Reid was ready to make a permanent move to Kolb. Unfortunately for the young quarterback, the Eagles had a short week because of a game Thanksgiving night. It would have been an unfair and impossible situation to put a guy in the position of starting his first NFL game without a week of practice preceding it. In that Thanksgiving game, McNabb went out and had one of his three best games since the Super Bowl year of 2004. Then, the Eagles went to the NFC Championship Game. Losing in the previous round may have made Kolb the starting quarterback in 2009.
   
3. Michael Vick is not the type of quarterback you want Andy Reid to trust. People in Philadelphia have often remarked that Reid called a more balanced offense when McNabb was out due to injury. I think this is because Reid did not trust the backup quarterbacks the way he did McNabb. He trusted McNabb. When that trusted quarterback played, Reid called fewer running plays than any other coach in the league. If Vick gains Reid’s trust as the starter, Reid will be inclined to revert back to his throw throw throw days. While you do not want any quarterback to play in that type of system, but I cannot think of a one less suited to play that style than Michael Vick.
   
4. The decision to start Vick effectively breaks the bond that Kolb had established with the Eagles’ young core of offensive players. In this regard, Kolb had succeeded with the Eagles’ recently drafted skill position players in a way that Donovan McNabb had not. Although McNabb put up decent numbers throwing to DeSean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, and Brent Celek and handing the ball off to LeSean McCoy, they were actually Kevin Kolb’s guys. They bonded with him and believed in him. More so than McNabb, Kolb had the confidence of the team’s young nucleus. The move to start Vick, especially since Andy Reid said that Kolb’s injury had nothing to do with the switch, undermines that. Kolb and the rest of the young guys had been looking forward to this as their time. They were coming up together. Now those guys play for Vick. Who is Kolb? What is his role? In his press conference this morning, Reid said that he cannot predict if Kolb will still be on the Eagles’ roster after next month’s trading deadline. That tells the team, especially the skill players with whom he had bonded, that the team does not believe Kolb is ready. What reason do those guys have to believe it now?

Michael Vick gives the Eagles the best chance to win the NFC East this year, but what about 2011 and beyond? The Cowboys were the only team in the division to beat the Eagles last year, but they are now 0-2. Nobody in Philadelphia believes that McNabb’s Redskins are a threat. The Giants looked like a mess Sunday night and their offense looks to be in shambles. The division is there for the taking. Going with Kolb means growing pains. While I believe the Eagles are a 2010 playoff team with Kolb as the full-time starter, not many in the city or organization agree. The general consensus is that they would be a better team in December than in September and October. Vick is more experienced, more seasoned, and has proven that he can win playoff games with under-talented teams. I just don’t believe this is a smart approach to the development of the football team.

Naming Vick the starting quarterback is all about right now. The only outcome that can justify this move is the Eagles winning the Super Bowl this coming February in Arlington. At the very least, they need to play in that game. I don’t think this is a Super Bowl caliber team, though. It would be one thing if Vick became the Eagles’ long-term starting quarterback, but I’d be very surprised if we see him wearing midnight green on Opening Day 2011.

This reminds me very much of the mistake the Packers made by allowing Brett Favre to come back in 2007. Yes, Green Bay reached the NFC Championship Game that season, but they neither won nor reached the Super Bowl. In the end, the only thing that was accomplished that season was delaying Aaron Rodgers’ development by one year. 2007 could have been that year of transition, 2008 could have been about getting a taste of the playoffs, and 2009 could have been a Super Bowl year. If the Eagles really do keep Kolb and intend to start him in the future, this year of starting Michael Vick will only delay Kolb’s development and waste a year of Jackson, Maclin, Celek, and McCoy’s careers.

Trading Kolb would be a bad move, too. It would be akin to starting over one year after…starting over. If Reid and the rest of the Eagles hierarchy did not fully believe in Kevin Kolb, they should have drafted another quarterback high this year’s draft. They could have even acquired Jason Campbell in the Donovan McNabb trade. They could have done something. Vick is not their answer. He’s too old for their eyes. We know this.

For the 2010 Philadelphia Eagles, it is Super Bowl or bust. I think it’s going bust.

If I was an Eagle fan, I’d be very upset today. This is a sign that the Eagles organization, once again, is settling for merely competing.