Rush, Football And Racism

At lunch today, every TV in the restaurant was breathlessly reporting on the Rush Limbaugh/Donovan McNabb story and Rush's comments about his comments that created the whole furor.

Now I'm no great fan of Rush and I thought that ESPN was really taking a chance bringing him on board. And as it turns out, that decision has come back to bite ESPN in the rear.

But what about Rush's comments? I'm going to hang myself out here and defend him, although maybe not in the way he would have liked.

Rush, in essence, said that McNabb is the phenomenon he is because the media wants to see a black quarterback succeed. And to a large extent this is true. But is it true solely for racial reasons?

I don't think so. I agree that the sports media wants to see a successful black quarterback. But not just because he's black. Sport is the ultimate equalizer. Your success or failure on the field is based solely on merit. I cannot believe that there would be a single person reading this who would knowingly deny someone an opportunity to play QB in the NFL solely because they were black. There is, however, an unspoken and unwritten assumption that the QB position is a white man's position. Think about the great, winning quarterbacks of the game. Do the names Warren Moon or Doug Williams come to mind? Likely not. But they were both solid quarterbacks who were black and who won. Maybe there are some sportswriters who are writing with an agenda of breaking the "white man's position" reputation. If highlighting the successes of a quality black quarterback furthers that goal, good and so be it.

I'm guessing that more often than not, the current crop of black quarterbacks, McNabb included, get so much attention, not because they're black, but because they bring a new dimension to the position. Think about it. McNabb in Tennessee, Daunte Culpepper in Minnesota, Steve McNair in Tennessee, Michael Vick in Atlanta - they are all considered to be special quarterbacks because they bring a real run threat to their position. They bring excitement. They put defenses on their heels and fans on the edge of their seats. Excitement sells, both at the ticket booth on Sunday and on the newsstand on Monday.

And it's not all racially motivated. Jake Plummer, a white quarterback in Denver probably gets more attention than he's earned - because he, like McNabb, Culpepper, etc., brings that added dimension on Sunday. On the other hand, Quincy Carter the black quarterback in Dallas doesn't bring the run threat to the table and he is generally regarded as a run of the mill quarterback. So race really doesn't determine whether or not a quarterback is considered great, solid, or mediocre. It doesn't even determine if they're overrated or overlooked. More often than not, that is all judged on what they bring to the field every Sunday. But again, if highlighting the successes of a black quarterback brings more opportunity that's fine. The ultimate judgment of success in made on the field, not the newspaper. Breaking the "white man's position" stigma equalizes opportunity, not outcome.

Now many of the commentators on the situation have almost seemed to have been accusing Rush as saying Donovan should not be playing the position because he is overrated in the media, which in turn was based on the color of his skin. Now I didn't read anything in those comments that indicated that Rush doubted McNabb's ability to play the position. He only seemed to question the level of regard given to McNabb.

McNabb is a solid quarterback. I remember watching him when he played for Syracuse against the Miami Hurricanes. He has talent. He has leadership ability. He is playing in the NFL because he earned that position.

To determine if he is truly overrated, we have to examine the true job of an NFL quarterback. Part of it is throwing the ball, part is running the ball, but the largest component is leadership.

McNabb is a leader. No one has ever questioned his leadership ability either in Philadelphia or at Syracuse. The players in Philadelphia seem to have faith in him and believe in him. McNabb inspires those around him; he makes them want to play at a higher level. If leadership is the most important aspect of quarterbacking, it can be argued that McNabb is underrated, not overrated.

Obviously he can run the ball, but it is always his passing game that has led to the questions about him. True, McNabb doesn't have the best completion percentage and he can be inaccurate at times, but you really can't hold the poor passing game solely against him. He has never been blessed with a great receiving corps. He has never had a go to guy that could make spectacular grabs as a matter of course, or that could make an average play a great play, a la Jerry Rice. Even given the best receivers in the football, McNabb likely would not have the best passing numbers, but they would certainly be better. The receivers help make the QB, and you can fault the Philadelphia organization for not having surrounded McNabb with better receivers.

So is McNabb overrated? Maybe a little, it depends on how much you want to weight his leadership skills against his passing skills. Has he opened himself to criticism through his action? Probably. His passing game hasn't really improved any during the time he's been in the league. Donovan has a responsibility to himself, to the team and to the fans to work to improve himself. It could be argued that he has failed or possibly even ignored this responsibility. But that still doesn't take away from the fact that he is an NFL caliber quarterback and that, up until this year, he's been a winner.

Defense may win games, but not too many. Offense may win games, but by itself, it won't win too many either. A winning team, which Philadelphia has had, is made up of both a good offense and a good defense. A great defense may reduce the burden of perfection on the offense, but it will never fully eliminate it. And this is where Rush was wrong. Philly's defense never could completely cover for Donovan if he was a failure. He would have been exposed as such in his rookie year, just like Ryan Leaf was.

So what did we learn from the Rush brouhaha? That he's a more astute political commentator than sports commentator - nothing we didn't already know. Politically, he correctly called out the sports media - although for the wrong reasons. Sportswise, he incorrectly placed too much value on physical skills and not enough on mental and intangible skills.

If the end result of all this - the media focusing on successful black quarterbacks and Rush focusing on the media focusing on successful black quarterbacks - leads to more equitable opportunity for black quarterbacks then where is the harm? I don't think that Rush intended his remarks to be racist. I think he was trying to point out that successful black quarterbacks get more press time than similarly skilled white quarterbacks, which I believe is a fair observation. Is it wrong? That's up to each of us to decide.

All I know is that as a football fan I want to see the best possible players playing on Sunday. That's all.

But if the Miami Dolphins ever get a choice between McNabb or Culpepper - they had better take Daunte or they'll be getting a nasty letter from me.