Mcnabb is an ##### (1 Viewer)

[glock]

Black on black crime: ...a means to compensate for idiomatic purposelessness, which is operationally defined as a state in which persons have a vacuous sense of self, ie, persons whose sense of significance & importance is extremely marginal & whose development is devoid of, or at best insufficiently grounded in, constant positive affirmation. It is argued that to exchange idiomatic purposelessness for idiomatic purposefulness is to remove a major contributing factor leading to black-on-black crime.

LinkyIt's no secret that TO craves attention. Ironically, while he is actually in pursuit of positive affirmation, the path he takes brings him more negative then positive.In the black community, the process of bringing down another while attempting to move oneself up is referred to as "Black on Black Crime." This dysfunction plays a big role in rap and hip-hop culture and is the basis for all that "Don't diss me, man" stuff. It doesn't have to be criminal in nature. While I don't agree with the assertion that TO intended to do that in taking Irvin's Favre comments and running with them, I certainly can understand McNabb's feelings that the net result was indeed Black on Black Crime. It was.

 

[Jeremy]

It will take more than one comment (however stupid it may have been) to taint my opinion of McNabb.

I think it's silly to form a lasting opinion of a guy based on one stupid comment. It's like people who say they've lost all respect for Favre after the Strahan sack. 15 years of greatness, and it all comes down to that one incident for some people.

I know we put athletes on pedestals, but they're human, and make mistakes sometimes.

 

[BoulderBob]

Most professional athletes are mouth-breathing, morons. This shouldn't shock anyone...

 

[glock]

Most professional athletes are mouth-breathing, morons. This shouldn't shock anyone...

Why is it that that sounds like a "professional athlete?"

 

[JAA]

Rush Limbaugh said that the media wanted him to do well because he's a black quarterback.

TO just said that the Eagles would do better with Brett Favre and made no reference or no hints towards race.

Let's not defend the POS TO, I recall him calling Garcia a homo which in my opinion is pretty f'd up.

He didnt "call Garcia a homo", he wrote about his QB being a homosexual in his biography.

 

[JAA]

On a side note, the real drama is the bigger picture;

T.O. getting a new contract

T.O. being able to keep his mouth shout

Last week Rosenhaus had to be feeling pretty good with all the publicity of other teams coming forward saying they have an interest in T.O. (Denver, KC et al). Now McNabb comes forward and addresses the media during a time it is imperative T.O. keeps his mouth shout.

This is a very well played card by McNabb.

Could you imagine Philly having to play TO twice a year if he went to Dallas?

 

[JAA]

Didn't Irvin suggest Favre, not TO?

that was the first thing that entered my mind when i saw this on ESPN....TO didn't suggest Favre, the interviewer did. #######.

So if somebody calls a woman a whore and then another individual asks me what I think of the comment and I agree, does that mean I am not accountable for calling someone's mother a whore?

Lets get real. It doesn't matter who brought it up, what matters is what comes out of T.O.'s mouth.

You miss the point entirely. Its not that TO thinks Favre is better than McNabb, but the fact that McNabb got upset that TO chose a white QB over a black QB, when in reality, he only answered the choice given to him.

Who is responsible for the words that come out of T.O.'s mouth? It's not like the reporter held a gun to T.O.'s head and said, "You must answer the question in regards to Brett Favre."

Earth to Blue Onion, people can be set up by questions from media professionals (or semi-professionals in this case). In this case, I doubt Irvin was purposely choosing a white QB, but merely using the best QB around, who is a lock for the Hall and a QB that can make a mediocre WR great. Unfortunately for McNabb, cNabb does not appear to have the ability to make a mediocre WR great.TO has done enough to be villified for. This one should be laid at the doorstep of the guy who asked the question and set it up for a comparison between McNabb and Favre rather than McNabb and Aaron Brooks (for example).

I think choosing Favre was more about "never missed a start" and "played injured" just like TO said in the interview ...

 

[jeff_eaglz]

[Rodney King]"Can't we all just get along?"[/Rodney King]This is going to be a looooong offseason.

 

[BlueOnion]

I think choosing Favre was more about "never missed a start" and "played injured" just like TO said in the interview ...

Most likely, and this would make the most sense. But T.O. is notoriously interested in stirring a pot and I am sure he was cognitive that his statement could be misconstrued.

 

[glock]

I think choosing Favre was more about "never missed a start" and "played injured" just like TO said in the interview ...

Most likely, and this would make the most sense. But T.O. is notoriously interested in stirring a pot and am sure IMHO, I think he was cognitive that his statement could be misconstrued.

Fixed.

 

[Fumbleweed]

So, let me get this straight....McNabb would NOT have been offended if only TO had said they'd be undefeated with AARON BROOKS as the QB?? AARON BROOKS?I have always liked McNabb, but he revealed something about himself in this interview that I simply cannot stomach. Like someone said, if a white QB had said the same thing, he would have been roasted. This was racism on McNabb's part. How else can you explain that he would have been comfortable with the idea of being placed behind Aaron Brooks, but not Brett Favre?Just ridiculous comments on McNabb's part......

 

[Jason Wood]

As several others have correctly pointed out, T.O. is many things but there was no racial intent to his comment because HE DIDN'T BRING FAVRE INTO THE MIX.A reporter quoted Michael Irvin's statement. McNabb explicitly criticized T.O.'s CHOOSING of Favre instead of Leftwich, Vick, McNair, etc...when in fact T.O. had absolutely nothing to do with the choice of which QB in this instance.It's assinine beyond words.McNabb should be insulted that T.O. challenged his skills and abilities relative to another NFL QB...any competitive guy would be.But the fact he somehow took that as a racist slap in the face? I'm stunned and in complete and utter disbelief.

 

[BlueOnion]

So, let me get this straight....McNabb would NOT have been offended if only TO had said they'd be undefeated with AARON BROOKS as the QB?? AARON BROOKS?

You said that, not McNabb. Just thinking out loud here on what I think McNabb and T.O. were thinking....

I think regardless of who T.O. (via Irvin) would have compared McNabb too, T.O.'s objective was to offend McNabb. Instead of insulting McNabb's quarterback ability (using Brooks), he opted to insult his skin color (using Favre).

Again, we are giving T.O. the benefit of the doubt here that he did not want to offend McNabb, which is our first mistake.

 

[Fumbleweed]

So, let me get this straight....McNabb would NOT have been offended if only TO had said they'd be undefeated with AARON BROOKS as the QB?? AARON BROOKS?

You said that, not McNabb. Just thinking out loud here on what I think McNabb and T.O. were thinking....

I think regardless of who T.O. (via Irvin) would have compared McNabb too, T.O.'s objective was to offend McNabb. Instead of insulting McNabb's quarterback ability (using Brooks), he opted to insult his skin color (using Favre).

Again, we are giving T.O. the benefit of the doubt here that he did not want to offend McNabb, which is our first mistake.

It seems you aren't paying attention. TO didn't "choose" Favre...that's who he was presented with in the question. TO should have backed his QB...the statement was a low blow, but it wasn't racial....there's just no way. And, no, McNabb did say that about Brooks...he included him in a list of guys that he would have been less insulted about being compared to. He did say it. I don't understand your point that he somehow didn't.

 

[BlueOnion]

As several others have correctly pointed out, T.O. is many things but there was no racial intent to his comment because HE DIDN'T BRING FAVRE INTO THE MIX.

Depends on your interpretation. One could realistically interpret the question by the interviewer as 'an open invite to bring Favre into the mix'. And interpret T.O.'s response as the actual act of bringing Favre into the mix.

 

[Jason Wood]

So, let me get this straight....McNabb would NOT have been offended if only TO had said they'd be undefeated with AARON BROOKS as the QB?? AARON BROOKS?

You said that, not McNabb. Just thinking out loud here on what I think McNabb and T.O. were thinking....

I think regardless of who T.O. (via Irvin) would have compared McNabb too, T.O.'s objective was to offend McNabb. Instead of insulting McNabb's quarterback ability (using Brooks), he opted to insult his skin color (using Favre).

Again, we are giving T.O. the benefit of the doubt here that he did not want to offend McNabb, which is our first mistake.

Blue...what are you missing here. Owens didn't choose to use Favre's name. He was asked the following question:23-year old reporter: "Michael Irvin recently said that the Eagles would probably be undefeated if Brett Favre was quarterbacking the team."

T.O. responded: "I would probably agree with that...because of all that he brings to the table."

OF COURSE T.O. was trying to insult McNabb, but he wasn't adding salt to the wound by choosing a white QB, he was taking the chance provided to him by the reporter to suggest that another NFL QB would have better results.

Why are you having trouble understanding this?

 

[Fumbleweed]

As several others have correctly pointed out, T.O. is many things but there was no racial intent to his comment because HE DIDN'T BRING FAVRE INTO THE MIX.

Depends on your interpretation. One could realistically interpret the question by the interviewer as 'an open invite to bring Favre into the mix'. And interpret T.O.'s response as the actual act of bringing Favre into the mix.

I think you're reaching on this hypothesis.......

 

[BlueOnion]

It seems you aren't paying attention. TO didn't "choose" Favre...that's who he was presented with in the question. TO should have backed his QB...the statement was a low blow, but it wasn't racial....there's just no way.

Let me ask you this, What if somebody compared your mother to Heidi Flice (sp??) and later somebody prompted me if I thought the comment was accurate? If I said, "Yeah, I think Fumbleweed's Mom is just like Heidi Flice."How you interpret my words are not completely encapsulated in the actual words and text of the statement. There may be other actions outside of the comment that influence your interpretation of what I said.

And, no, McNabb did say that about Brooks...he included him in a list of guys that he would have been less insulted about being compared to. He did say it. I don't understand your point that he somehow didn't.

Which I think is accurate. No matter who T.O. compared him too, McNabb is saying T.O.'s objective was to insult him. If T.O. opted to insult his quarterbacking ability by comparing him to another African-American quarterback, he would have been less insulted, but insulted nonetheless.

 

[BlueOnion]

Blue...what are you missing here. Owens didn't choose to use Favre's name. He was asked the following question:

23-year old reporter: "Michael Irvin recently said that the Eagles would probably be undefeated if Brett Favre was quarterbacking the team."

T.O. responded: "I would probably agree with that...because of all that he brings to the table."

OF COURSE T.O. was trying to insult McNabb, but he wasn't adding salt to the wound by choosing a white QB, he was taking the chance provided to him by the reporter to suggest that another NFL QB would have better results.

Why are you having trouble understanding this?

I don't know. For me, the reporter made Brett Favre part of the question; T.O. made Brett Favre part of the answer. I see the two as mutually exclusive of each other.

 

[Rev]

TO insults Garcia (a white man) when playing with him.TO insults McNabb (a black man) when playing with him. TO isn't a racist... he's an equal opportunity insulter.

 

[marinolives13]

"It's different to say, `If we had Michael Vick or Daunte Culpepper or Steve McNair or Byron Leftwich," McNabb said of four black starting quarterbacks. "But to go straight to Brett Favre, that kind of just slapped me in the face like, `Wow ..."'

This comment is more immature than anything that has ever come out of TO's mouth. I'm flabbergasted.

 

[marinolives13]

Black on black crime: ...a means to compensate for idiomatic purposelessness, which is operationally defined as a state in which persons have a vacuous sense of self, ie, persons whose sense of significance & importance is extremely marginal & whose development is devoid of, or at best insufficiently grounded in, constant positive affirmation. It is argued that to exchange idiomatic purposelessness for idiomatic purposefulness is to remove a major contributing factor leading to black-on-black crime.

LinkyIt's no secret that TO craves attention. Ironically, while he is actually in pursuit of positive affirmation, the path he takes brings him more negative then positive.

In the black community, the process of bringing down another while attempting to move oneself up is referred to as "Black on Black Crime." This dysfunction plays a big role in rap and hip-hop culture and is the basis for all that "Don't diss me, man" stuff. It doesn't have to be criminal in nature.

While I don't agree with the assertion that TO intended to do that in taking Irvin's Favre comments and running with them, I certainly can understand McNabb's feelings that the net result was indeed Black on Black Crime.

It was.

No, if T.O. would beat that ### or stabbed the *******, then it would have been black on black crime. A crime is breaking the law, the last time I checked T.O. didn't break the law he just hurt MCwussy's feelings!

 

[glock]

Black on black crime: ...a means to compensate for idiomatic purposelessness, which is operationally defined as a state in which persons have a vacuous sense of self, ie, persons whose sense of significance & importance is extremely marginal & whose development is devoid of, or at best insufficiently grounded in, constant positive affirmation. It is argued that to exchange idiomatic purposelessness for idiomatic purposefulness is to remove a major contributing factor leading to black-on-black crime.

LinkyIt's no secret that TO craves attention. Ironically, while he is actually in pursuit of positive affirmation, the path he takes brings him more negative then positive.

In the black community, the process of bringing down another while attempting to move oneself up is referred to as "Black on Black Crime." This dysfunction plays a big role in rap and hip-hop culture and is the basis for all that "Don't diss me, man" stuff. It doesn't have to be criminal in nature.

While I don't agree with the assertion that TO intended to do that in taking Irvin's Favre comments and running with them, I certainly can understand McNabb's feelings that the net result was indeed Black on Black Crime.

It was.

No, if T.O. would beat that ### or stabbed the *******, then it would have been black on black crime. A crime is breaking the law, the last time I checked T.O. didn't break the law he just hurt MCwussy's feelings!

Reading comprehension down?

 

[-OZ-]

I don't know. For me, the reporter made Brett Favre part of the question; T.O. made Brett Favre part of the answer. I see the two as mutually exclusive of each other.

Let's try this...Pretend a reporter is talking to Brian Urlacher.

Reporter: "Do you think the Bears would be in the Super Bowl if Michael Vick was your QB"

B.U.: "I think we'd be in the Super Bowl if Ben Roethlisberger was our QB, I don't want to make this a racial issue".

Does that make sense?

 

[BlueOnion]

I don't know.  For me, the reporter made Brett Favre part of the question; T.O. made Brett Favre part of the answer.  I see the two as mutually exclusive of each other.

Let's try this...Pretend a reporter is talking to Brian Urlacher.

Reporter: "Do you think the Bears would be in the Super Bowl if Michael Vick was your QB"

B.U.: "I think we'd be in the Super Bowl if Ben Roethlisberger was our QB, I don't want to make this a racial issue".

Does that make sense?

What is suppose to make sense to me, I don't even think your example is in the same neighborhood as what happen.

 

[-OZ-]

I don't know. For me, the reporter made Brett Favre part of the question; T.O. made Brett Favre part of the answer. I see the two as mutually exclusive of each other.

Let's try this...Pretend a reporter is talking to Brian Urlacher.

Reporter: "Do you think the Bears would be in the Super Bowl if Michael Vick was your QB"

B.U.: "I think we'd be in the Super Bowl if Ben Roethlisberger was our QB, I don't want to make this a racial issue".

Does that make sense?

What is suppose to make sense to me, I don't even think your example is in the same neighborhood as what happen.

It wouldn't happen, you're right. But it's essentially what you're asking TO to have said.

 

[gman8343]

Blue...what are you missing here. Owens didn't choose to use Favre's name. He was asked the following question:

23-year old reporter: "Michael Irvin recently said that the Eagles would probably be undefeated if Brett Favre was quarterbacking the team."

T.O. responded: "I would probably agree with that...because of all that he brings to the table."

OF COURSE T.O. was trying to insult McNabb, but he wasn't adding salt to the wound by choosing a white QB, he was taking the chance provided to him by the reporter to suggest that another NFL QB would have better results.

Why are you having trouble understanding this?

I don't know. For me, the reporter made Brett Favre part of the question; T.O. made Brett Favre part of the answer. I see the two as mutually exclusive of each other.

You are ####### nuts

 

[Joe Bryant]

Personally I found his statements to be assinine. And I'm about as big a DM5 fan as their is.

Jason.I was wondering what you thought there as I know you're close to it.

Just more fuel for the fire after the lessons we learned from Owens this year that the best things most pro athletes can do is avoid interviews.

What a stupid stupid thing to say.

J

 

[BlueOnion]

I don't know.  For me, the reporter made Brett Favre part of the question; T.O. made Brett Favre part of the answer.  I see the two as mutually exclusive of each other.

Let's try this...Pretend a reporter is talking to Brian Urlacher.

Reporter: "Do you think the Bears would be in the Super Bowl if Michael Vick was your QB"

B.U.: "I think we'd be in the Super Bowl if Ben Roethlisberger was our QB, I don't want to make this a racial issue".

Does that make sense?

What is suppose to make sense to me, I don't even think your example is in the same neighborhood as what happen.

It wouldn't happen, you're right. But it's essentially what you're asking TO to have said.

Not sure where you are going here. The reason the comparison it is not even in the same neighborhood is because T.O. has a teammate who has been a lightning rod for racial topics in regards to quarterbacks in the NFL.A more applicable example would be what happen with Dan Marino and Boomer Esiason. Boomer knows what he said, Marino knows what he heard, but because the two have had some history of not getting along, I don't blame Marino for the way he over-reacted.

 

[-OZ-]

I don't know. For me, the reporter made Brett Favre part of the question; T.O. made Brett Favre part of the answer. I see the two as mutually exclusive of each other.

Let's try this...Pretend a reporter is talking to Brian Urlacher.

Reporter: "Do you think the Bears would be in the Super Bowl if Michael Vick was your QB"

B.U.: "I think we'd be in the Super Bowl if Ben Roethlisberger was our QB, I don't want to make this a racial issue".

Does that make sense?

What is suppose to make sense to me, I don't even think your example is in the same neighborhood as what happen.

It wouldn't happen, you're right. But it's essentially what you're asking TO to have said.

Not sure where you are going here. The reason the comparison it is not even in the same neighborhood is because T.O. has a teammate who has been a lightning rod for racial topics in regards to quarterbacks in the NFL.A more applicable example would be what happen with Dan Marino and Boomer Esiason. Boomer knows what he said, Marino knows what he heard, but because the two have had some history of not getting along, I don't blame Marino for the way he over-reacted.

I give up. Believe what you want.

 

[Keysersoze666]

Two things jump out at me in this thread and they illustrate the basic issue at hand. I will of course retract my statements completely if the two posters I'm about to name are personal friends with McNabb and/or TO and are speaking with insider knowledge. These two things are:CTSU, who's every post is laced with an indignant, noone else in the world understands this but me attitude. CTSU, your attitude is exactly like McNabb's so I guess it's appropriate/ironic you are his defender. Do you speak to Donavan, do you know him personally? Have Chunky Soup at his house? If not, then your comments and certainty that you KNOW exactly what he's thinking and exactly how he feels about all of this are reduced to personal conjecture just like the rest of us. You are free to argue your personal conjecture, just don't act like it's so sanctimonius and correct that the rest of us are idiots.Onion, you show a little more pliability than CTSU does, but you continue to "represent" as though you KNOW TO's every thought and nuance. You KNOW he "purposefully" understood the racial undertones to Irvin's comments and therefore reveled and amplified it's meaning. With all due respect, give me a break. You use the phrase "I think" in several of your own posts which tells me you know that you are simply stating YOUR opinion yet you defend it like its gospel. Again, unless you reveal that you KNOW TO personally, it's simply personal conjecture, nothing more.As for the issue, TO's a jerk and will say almost anything anywhere. DUH. Did he diss Garcia and then McNabb to personally benefit himself? YES, again DUH! Did he blatantly make it racial, I don't see that.McNabb has shown class most of the time and seems to be a standup guy. Does ALL of the critism (some racial, Rush and NAACP) add up and cause him to crack at times, sure, and I don't think alot worse of him because of it. I do think he is being too racially sensitive, ANY comparison to Favre is a positive one for 95% of all QB's who have ever played. I think he's misguided in his TO/racial statements but what I see is a buildup that he let boil over in a silly outburst.DISCLAIMER: BTW, I don't know ANY of the people mentioned in this post personally and it's ALL personal conjecture.

 

[BlueOnion]

Onion, you show a little more pliability than CTSU does, but you continue to "represent" as though you KNOW TO's every thought and nuance. You KNOW he "purposefully" understood the racial undertones to Irvin's comments and therefore reveled and amplified it's meaning. With all due respect, give me a break. You use the phrase "I think" in several of your own posts which tells me you know that you are simply stating YOUR opinion yet you defend it like its gospel. Again, unless you reveal that you KNOW TO personally, it's simply personal conjecture, nothing more.

This is fair, not the first time someone has pointed this out in my writing style. But those I am arguing with are using the same tact as I am; as if they know T.O. didn't have any racial undertones in his comment. I use the expression 'I think' because I believe McNabb when he said there were racial undertones and I am trying to imagine how this would happen.

 

[valhallan]

I really hate when someone starts a thread like this and never participates in it.

 

[ren hoek]

I fail to see where TO made this a racial issue.

Unless you can show me that T.O. had no pre-existing knowledge of any controversies regarding McNabb and the topic of black quarterbacks, than I fail to see how this could not be construed as a racial issue.

Either you're a McNabb apologist, or you're on the most pathetic fishing trip I've ever seen.

 

[Family Matters]

As several others have correctly pointed out, T.O. is many things but there was no racial intent to his comment because HE DIDN'T BRING FAVRE INTO THE MIX.

A reporter quoted Michael Irvin's statement. McNabb explicitly criticized T.O.'s CHOOSING of Favre instead of Leftwich, Vick, McNair, etc...when in fact T.O. had absolutely nothing to do with the choice of which QB in this instance.

It's assinine beyond words.

McNabb should be insulted that T.O. challenged his skills and abilities relative to another NFL QB...any competitive guy would be.

But the fact he somehow took that as a racist slap in the face? I'm stunned and in complete and utter disbelief.

Agree completely. It's shameful when people cry wolf. Using the race card inappropriately is a total embarrassment IMO. I thought he was a little smarter than that. Guess I was wrong.

 

[cstu]

um, can someone help me understand how the use of the phrase "black on black crime" means that McNabb is racist?

Mcnabb took Owens' choice of Favre as disrespectful to McNabb as an African-American quarterback (yes, I know Irvin brought up Favre's name...).

He was quoted as saying: "It was definitely a slap in the face to me. Because as deep as people won't go into it, it was [a] black-on-black crime. I mean, you have a guy that has been criticized just about all his career and now the last criticism is that I'm selling out because I don't run anymore, by an African-American [J. Whyatt Mondesire, the NAACP chapter president who ripped McNabb in a column that appeared in the Philadelphia Sun].

"And to say if we had Brett Favre, that could mean that if you had another quarterback of a different descent or ethnic background, we could be winning. That's something I thought about and said, 'Wow.' It's different to say if we had Michael Vick, Daunte Culpepper, Steve McNair, Aaron Brooks, Byron Leftwich. But to go straight to Brett Favre, that slapped me in the face, like what I've done and what I set out to do…"

Sounds to me like he feels he is being discriminated against (I don't agree with that by the way), but I see no racism at all in what he said....it's more defensive than anything else.

I think McNabb's dead worng here and that there is nothing racial at all being thrown at him. I also think he's over sensitive due to Limbaugh and Mondesire's comments.

And the idiot who agrees that a Favre lead 2005 eagles team makes the playoffs is out of his mind. The eagles defense was a huge problem in 05 and even with a high powered offense (which was desimated by injuries mind you) they were missing the playoffs this year.

Don't try to reason with these people, they don't understand that McNabb is a human being and could possibly take an insult by TO more personally that maybe he should. Regardless, TO is a jerk and terrible teammate. I've never seen a guy hated more than McNabb for nothing next to nothing to deserve it.

 

[Iron_Far]

....But hey, Donovan's hair looked great with those specs last night....

 

[cstu]

As several others have correctly pointed out, T.O. is many things but there was no racial intent to his comment because HE DIDN'T BRING FAVRE INTO THE MIX.

A reporter quoted Michael Irvin's statement. McNabb explicitly criticized T.O.'s CHOOSING of Favre instead of Leftwich, Vick, McNair, etc...when in fact T.O. had absolutely nothing to do with the choice of which QB in this instance.

It's assinine beyond words.

McNabb should be insulted that T.O. challenged his skills and abilities relative to another NFL QB...any competitive guy would be.

But the fact he somehow took that as a racist slap in the face? I'm stunned and in complete and utter disbelief.

Agree completely. It's shameful when people cry wolf. Using the race card inappropriately is a total embarrassment IMO. I thought he was a little smarter than that. Guess I was wrong.

Uh huh, it's so inappropriate when he's had to deal with race situations with Rush and his own NAACP. So what if he's wrong in feeling that way? After all he's been through, it's no surprise at all that McNabb would take TO's comments as a slam on him as a black QB.

 

[cstu]

Two things jump out at me in this thread and they illustrate the basic issue at hand. I will of course retract my statements completely if the two posters I'm about to name are personal friends with McNabb and/or TO and are speaking with insider knowledge. These two things are:

CTSU, who's every post is laced with an indignant, noone else in the world understands this but me attitude. CTSU, your attitude is exactly like McNabb's so I guess it's appropriate/ironic you are his defender. Do you speak to Donavan, do you know him personally? Have Chunky Soup at his house? If not, then your comments and certainty that you KNOW exactly what he's thinking and exactly how he feels about all of this are reduced to personal conjecture just like the rest of us. You are free to argue your personal conjecture, just don't act like it's so sanctimonius and correct that the rest of us are idiots.

Nope, I've never met McNabb and I'm not even really a fan of his since I root for the Cowboys. However, I can see where an upstanding guy is getting railroaded by people who want to cause controversy. I'm not defending McNabb's statement since I think he did misinterpret TO's comments, but excuse me if I am indignant about people judging others without spending a day in their shoes.

 

[Popinski]

I've lost plenty of respect for McNabb after these statements. The TO comments about Favre have no proven racial undertone, so why should we assume there is any? That's a heck of a leap of faith to make that assumption. And McNabb has apparently taken that leap.If we are to assume something which has no proven basis to be true, then when does it stop? Should I believe that the black man at the cash register yesterday who gave me back $4.50 in change instead of the correct $5.50 did so purposely because he is racist towards non-blacks?

 

[Popinski]

Clearly, the racist in this situation is Brett Favre.

Yup, if this story proves anything, it is that Favre continues to be an attention whore.

 

[Family Matters]

As several others have correctly pointed out, T.O. is many things but there was no racial intent to his comment because HE DIDN'T BRING FAVRE INTO THE MIX.

A reporter quoted Michael Irvin's statement. McNabb explicitly criticized T.O.'s CHOOSING of Favre instead of Leftwich, Vick, McNair, etc...when in fact T.O. had absolutely nothing to do with the choice of which QB in this instance.

It's assinine beyond words.

McNabb should be insulted that T.O. challenged his skills and abilities relative to another NFL QB...any competitive guy would be.

But the fact he somehow took that as a racist slap in the face? I'm stunned and in complete and utter disbelief.

Agree completely. It's shameful when people cry wolf. Using the race card inappropriately is a total embarrassment IMO. I thought he was a little smarter than that. Guess I was wrong.

Uh huh, it's so inappropriate when he's had to deal with race situations with Rush and his own NAACP. So what if he's wrong in feeling that way? After all he's been through, it's no surprise at all that McNabb would take TO's comments as a slam on him as a black QB.

Should I assume 2 wrongs make a right? IMO-there is never a justification because someone else did. I had held McNabb in high regard when he handled this in a classy manner by not lowering himself to TO's level. But now he has and he's not much better.

 

[BlueOnion]

I fail to see where TO made this a racial issue.

Unless you can show me that T.O. had no pre-existing knowledge of any controversies regarding McNabb and the topic of black quarterbacks, than I fail to see how this could not be construed as a racial issue.

Either you're a McNabb apologist, or you're on the most pathetic fishing trip I've ever seen.

I just belief if anyone is knowledgeable enough to comment on the issue it would be Donovan McNabb, being he has had more exposure to T.O. than anybody here or anyone in the media.

 

[Keysersoze666]

Hey Onion, that's a fair answer. I don't read all of that into Owen's words, I think you give him way too much credit for being that sharp.CTSU, so you Have walked a mile in Donavan's shoes? When I read the thread I see lots of opinions all across the spectrum but you were the only one so frustrated that you said you wouldn't post any more because we are all so short-sighted. I think McNabb is feeling like the victim here and projecting more drama onto himself than is required. I have no problem with him or you expressing an opinion I just think you are both overdoing it. For the record I agree with you that he has generally been an upstanding guy, that doesn't make him about reproach and this isn't his shinng moment.

 

[BlueOnion]

Hey Onion, that's a fair answer. I don't read all of that into Owen's words, I think you give him way too much credit for being that sharp.

I am not sure if people are aware, I do love T.O. He may be a jerk, but he is a very intelligent jerk. His touchdown celebration in Dallas was funny, but what was hysterical is how he tried to play the angle that he was 'praying to God' through the roof of the stadium.T.O. is a lot of things, most of which people say is probably true. But he doesn't get enough credit for being intelligent.

 

[mervis]

It may not have been an accident, but what black QB could he have used and made the comment as accurate? (assuming for the sake of argument that the comment had to be said in the first place) Favre played like crap this year, but for their career, who would you take?

You don't get it do you? TO comments had NOTHING to do with who he really wanted at QB (he would have said Manning if that was the case) but this was just his way of giving it to McNabb for being a bigger star in Philly than him. TO is nothing but scum and it sickens me that people will use any excuse to put down a guy like McNabb who has done of better job of remaining classy that probably anyone on this board could have done.

Yeah, I get it. I didn't look at it from a race perspective at the time and most didn't. McNabb did, I understand why. I'm just a little sick of everyone assuming race is the only thing that matters. The fact that Brett plays hurt has something to do with the comment, otherwise he could have used Hasselbeck, Ben, Eli, or a slew of other, lesser QBs. The fact that he chose to use the ironman as in his comment means more to me than race, as I think it did for most fans.

Look, TO's comments were a veiled insult! The question of who TO would rather have a quarterback had nothing to do with career stats but was pointed toward THIS year, the here and now. Farve had a terrible year and anyone that thinks that the Eagles would have been undefeated, or even better off, with Farve at the helm are smoking some quality stuff. Farve was probably the worst QB in the league this year. Injuries do not account for Farve constanly tossing the ball up for grabs even without pressure on him! It seem like many are seeking to give Farve a pass concerning his poor play this year but the fact of the matter is he sucked!

TO's comments were meant to be, and in fact were, an insult to McNabb.

As far as the black on black crime goes, I think that Mcnabb has a point. TO picked the worst white QB, according to the early stats (and latter stats for that matter), to make his point. The fact that the white QB was Farve only gave the insult some momentum fwd due to the subsequent media appeal. (these guys aren't stupid)

Now then, I do think that much of this mess was orchastrated by TO to help him get a new deal. TO was going for more $$$ and many of his comments seemed to me to be a tad disingenious. Be that as it may, the Eagles and Mcnabb did not handle the situation very well. TO is all about the money and that means a new contract with a new signing bonus. Any team that is foolish enough to give TO a new contact with large $$$$ upfront, are likely to have the same problem. With out question this is what TO and his agent are going after but the fact of the matter is that the suiters are probably not going offer the upfront $$$ that TO wants.

That is unless they are fools.

TO is a very media savey, selfish, money grabbing fool, that has no regard for those around him. However, with the right contract ....... that can be used to ones advantage. The question is can anyone land TO with the "right contract" with all of the teams competing for his services? Maybe, maybe not, but we shall see what transpires.

Go Steelers!!

Mervis

 

[Csonka4life]

I agree if it wasn't Brett Favre operating the Packers this year would he have survived this year as the starting qb for the Packers? He was horrendous, he looked like Vinnie Testaverde back in the Bucs days. When TO came up with these comments Favre looked out of sink but not Bledsoe like though........

 

[Dr. Malo]

"It's different to say, `If we had Michael Vick or Daunte Culpepper or Steve McNair or Byron Leftwich," McNabb said of four black starting quarterbacks. "But to go straight to Brett Favre, that kind of just slapped me in the face like, `Wow ..."'

This comment is more immature than anything that has ever come out of TO's mouth. I'm flabbergasted.

Yes, McNabb is just plain weird. He reminds me of Herman Edwards. They both are paranoid and have a me vs world attitude.There is never a reason to say what McNabb said, its just childish. Just shut up and play. No one cares for conspiracy theories and race relations.

Before last year's Superbowl I heard McNabb on a local Chicago radio interview, since he is from Chitown, the problem with McNabb is that he views his job in the NFL as some type of proselethizing for black athletes. He thinks he is representing the black race, he is representing the black QB, if he wins the superbowl, he would be the second black qb to win, and that he is doing his race a favor. He just seemed too focused on his blackness and not on the game. He was saying this not me. He would not stop talking about his blackness, like he had a chip on his shoulder.

Secondly, to call out people and use the race card is simply irresponsible and childish. He needs to grow up. Not everyone views everything in black and white.

If he really wanted to be the bigger man and show that TO is irrelevant, he should not dignify him with this kind of trash response. Honestly, when you read these kinds of comments you feel sorry for him. Any time he gets into a difficult situation, he plays the race card. He did this with Rush Limbaughs comments too. Rush's comments were in not overtly racist, (just not politically correct) but Donovans response was overtly "race card".

Here are limbaugh's comments for those that don't remember or just follow what the media buffoons say:

"Sorry to say this, I don't think he's been that good from the get-go," Limbaugh said. "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."

McNabb suffers from the same Paranoia that Herman Edwards has. They both have this delusion that everyone is out to get them, me vs the world and that he has to defend everytihng he says. Herm is a complete idiot too. Anyone who heard his KC headcoach acceptance press conference has to be wondering where the black helicopters are that are following him. He is another subject though.

McNabb needs to gain some leadership abilities and stop making up for that lack by whimpering and calling everyone racist. I can understand him calling Rush a racist, that's easy... Rush is a White Republican... easy target, but still a very low blow. Now that he is calling other blacks racist... and the reference to black on black crime.... wow. What a shame! It's really sad.

This guy is spiraling into a disaster. He probably feels the world closing in around him and that he needs to build this pseudo force field around him by keeping everyone far away by calling them all racist and dulling their teeth so they can't hurt him.

 

[marinolives13]

Black on black crime: ...a means to compensate for idiomatic purposelessness, which is operationally defined as a state in which persons have a vacuous sense of self, ie, persons whose sense of significance & importance is extremely marginal & whose development is devoid of, or at best insufficiently grounded in, constant positive affirmation. It is argued that to exchange idiomatic purposelessness for idiomatic purposefulness is to remove a major contributing factor leading to black-on-black crime.

LinkyIt's no secret that TO craves attention. Ironically, while he is actually in pursuit of positive affirmation, the path he takes brings him more negative then positive.

In the black community, the process of bringing down another while attempting to move oneself up is referred to as "Black on Black Crime." This dysfunction plays a big role in rap and hip-hop culture and is the basis for all that "Don't diss me, man" stuff. It doesn't have to be criminal in nature.

While I don't agree with the assertion that TO intended to do that in taking Irvin's Favre comments and running with them, I certainly can understand McNabb's feelings that the net result was indeed Black on Black Crime.

It was.

No, if T.O. would beat that ### or stabbed the *******, then it would have been black on black crime. A crime is breaking the law, the last time I checked T.O. didn't break the law he just hurt MCwussy's feelings!

Reading comprehension down?

I didn't realize the NFL was the black community! A black on black crime is a black man breaking the law against another black man! CRIME IS BREAKING THE LAW! Don't bring that bull#### about it being about the black community, because the last time I checked the NFL was about white and black.

 

[Daywalker]

Wilbon on PTI put it into perspective. McNaab takes a lot of flak from many in the black community for not being "street" enough. McNaab's "black on black" crime analogy was that, an analogy. McNaab is just incensed that TO would not have his back considering a lof the bs (Rush) he has had to endure. TO stating that the Eagles would be better off with Favre played to that.Race issues have followed McNaab for year's to jump on McNaab for addressing them is weak.I don't get all the McNaab bashing in this thread. When he said he was insulted that TO would choose Favre over him he wasn't impugning Favre whatsoever.