Piling on No. 5

J. Whyatt Mondesire, President of the Philadelphia NAACP and publisher of the Philadelphia Sun, recently blasted Philadelphia QB Donovan McNabb in an editorial. Among other nuggets, Mondesire called McNabb a "mediocre talent" who cheats his fans by not running the ball as often as he could, and consciously made the decision not to run because, in McNabb's mind, this would somehow make him less of a field general.

Reaction ran the gamut. Michael Wilbon of ESPN's Pardon the Interruption and The Washington Post, called the article "hateful" and blasted Mondesire. John Smallwood of the Philadelphia Daily News had this to say:

If McNabb were Caucasian, I am positive white people would not have been motivated to call into talk radio shows and debate whether the quarterback was a true white man.

But debating Donovan McNabb as a true black man is exactly what a good number of African-Americans in Philadelphia are doing since the Owens-McNabb flap became the focal point of the Eagles' demise.

It's fascinating that this has spiraled way beyond the confines of a football debate. And don't tell me it hasn't, when terms such as sellout, token, company man, Uncle Tom and other racially charged ones have been thrown into the debate.

What this black-on-black verbal violence has caused me to wonder is: Who gets to determine who is truly African-American and what is or isn't a part of African-American culture?

Stephen A. Smith of ESPN's Quite Frankly and The Philadelphia Inquirer interviewed Mondesire for today's Inquirer:

Q: How do you feel about the ramifications, how this has affected the life of Donovan McNabb? Black and white folks are now opining on McNabb's blackness because of a column written by you.

A: I'm not sorry it happened, because I felt strongly about it. I think you've seen in the latter part of my piece that we were disappointed in the way he failed to step up in a leadership role. I raised the issue at the end of the piece about why he wouldn't share some of his dollars with either T.O. or Westbrook.

Had McNabb chosen to do that, they would have circled the wagons around him, run through hot coals barefoot for him. It would have cemented the team, kept the T.O. debacle from growing into the massive scandal that it became, and kept the team concentrated on winning football games.

Q: So you're saying Donovan McNabb should have taken a portion of his salary and given it to T.O.?

A: Or offered to do so. The same way Tom Brady did with New England.

Kind of. The difference was, McNabb was already under contract and Brady was negotiating a new contract. And I don't see Brady's teammates backstabbing their QB, either. If a teammate's throwing grenades at you, you don't throw money at him.

And this is how Smith opined about McNabb's season:

Balls were repeatedly underthrown or overthrown. At times, there was no rhyme or reason to his lack of production. His accuracy and timing were sporadic at best.

2005? Yes. But Smith could have just as easily been talking about any other season in McNabb's career, save for last season. McNabb is not mediocre. But he's not the greatest QB since Elway and Montana, either.