Washington Redskins Fans Giving Donovan McNabb Benefit Despite Double Standard

The Washington Redskins are on a bye week following the loss to the Detroit Lions and the fourth-quarter benching of starter Donovan McNabb.

Fans and experts alike have jumped to McNabb's defense and placed the blame on head coach Mike Shanahan for the way he has handled the matter.

To show their support, fans and experts have attributed McNabb's poor play to the poor offensive line play and a lack of reliable receivers or a running game.

Where was this support when Jason Campbell was facing these exact same circumstances last season?

I can hear the Redskins faithful groaning already, but it is impossible to deny the double standard being enacted in this situation. McNabb's benching has yet to be explained clearly, but it comes down to either his health or his ineffectiveness.

Campbell faced a similar fate in a game against the Kansas City Chiefs, where he was benched for ineffectiveness.

The majority of Redskins fans rejoiced, and cheered the entrance of career back-up Todd Collins into the game.

Collins, for all the unwarranted love fans had for him, managed just six completions for 75 yards to go along with a 60.1 passer rating and two fumbles.

The common defense is that McNabb is an elite quarterback, and the Redskins don't have the proper talent on the offensive line or in the receiving corps to support his typically high level of play.

Campbell couldn't use the lack of consistency in the offensive scheme as an excuse, so why are we excusing McNabb, who is clearly struggling to adapt to the Shanahan offense?

His line isn't any better or worse in Washington than it was in Philadelphia. He has never been consistently surrounded by elite talent, but he still made it to six Pro Bowls, five NFC Championship games and a Super Bowl.

Is it possible that McNabb's success is just as much a product of the system in Philadelphia as it is his own abilities, if not more so?

McNabb's stay in Philadelphia coincided with defensive coordinator Jim Johnson's time with the team 1999 to 2009.

During those 11 years, the Eagles touted a top 10 defense in all but four of McNabb's seasons.

During that time, McNabb had just three 1,000 yard receivers in Terrell Owens, Kevin Curtis and DeSean Jackson.

Is it McNabb's fault that the Eagles didn't give him the proper receivers to excel? No, but it didn't stop him from cementing himself as one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL.

McNabb has been sacked 379 times during his regular season career, 22 of which have occurred with Washington this season.

For comparison, Peyton Manning is considered THE elite quarterback in the NFL. He has played one more season than McNabb and has been sacked just 222 times.

Consider that McNabb is substantially more mobile than Manning while Manning has attempted nearly 2,000 more passes, yet McNabb has been sacked more.

No one is questioning McNabb's physical abilities, and he has performed at a so-called elite level without any consistent weapons or an offensive line with any merit.

Networks used to love flashing the visual on the screen about how the Eagles had the biggest offensive line in the NFL. Does it matter that they couldn't block to save McNabb's life?

Being traded from Philadelphia to Washington didn't offer much change in terms of available offensive weapons or offensive line quality. Why the poor play?

Last year, Campbell had five games with a completion percentage below 60-percent. McNabb already has six games below that mark and there are eight games left in the season.

Campbell had nine touchdowns to eight interceptions after eight games, whereas McNabb has seven touchdowns to eight interceptions.

Neither line is particularly good, but Campbell had more touchdowns and interceptions at the halfway mark of last season yet McNabb is getting the benefit of the doubt.

Why can Redskins fans forgive McNabb, who has done nothing outside of Philadelphia, all the room for error in the world but place all of the failures of last season squarely on Jason Campbell's shoulders?

McNabb is far and away a better leader, or at least a more experienced and vocal leader. Campbell adopted a "lead by example" attitude, and the wasn't good enough for fans.

He got knocked down and continued to get back up and give it his best on the next play. Is it a matter of experience that gives McNabb the benefit of the doubt?

Is the Redskins roster so different from last year that it is now the fault of the team around McNabb instead of being McNabb's fault?

Last year, Campbell was sacked 43 times and threw 20 touchdowns against 15 interceptions. Again, not stellar but not as abysmal many fans would like to think.

Many fans highlighted his poor decision-making and lack of pocket presence as their reasons for not thinking he was good.

McNabb is on pace to have fewer touchdowns and more interceptions, but it is the poor protection and poor receiving group that is to blame?

Not to harp on those key points, but where were these excuses last year? When did McNabb become untouchable? He has never been an accurate quarterback and yet it is suddenly the receiver's fault for not catching the ball when it is incredibly far behind him, over his head or in the dirt.

If anything, McNabb has less of an excuse to be playing this poorly because he doesn't have the inept Jim Zorn making a mess of the offense.

Shanahan was supposed to be the perfect fit for McNabb at this phase in his career, and he has not lived up to even the most realistic of expectations this season. It has amounted to a 4-4 record and the lowest touchdown percentage of McNabb's career.

McNabb seems like the only one capable of losing a game without being held accountable for it.

He threw two interceptions against Indianapolis, but it was his fourth quarter pick with the game in reach that sealed the Redskins loss.

Yes, the defense dropped a few potential interceptions, but that is hardly McNabb's fault is it?

Of course it isn't, but fans were just fine blaming Campbell for a close loss last season when he outplayed eventual Super Bowl MVP Drew Brees and the Saints.

It came down to a pair of blown coverages on defense late in the game that allowed the Saints the opportunity to tie the game and send it to overtime.

Then, fullback Mike Sellers fumbled the ball in overtime, which ultimately led to the Saints kicking the game-winning field goal.

But because Campbell wasn't a better leader, his 367 yards, three touchdowns and 111.9 passer rating were the clear reason for the loss.

Granted, one game does not a career make, but that was just one example of fans failing to realize that it was a team failure. This season, they are comfortable taking the opposite stance in the exact same circumstances.

Redskins fans are mercurial, but that is ridiculous even by their standards.

This is not my way of saying Campbell is better than McNabb.This is my way of asking why the double standard? There is no good answer that does not rest on his career to this point.

Why can we use McNabb's past successes as reason to give him a chance and not have given Campbell that same chance while citing the constant change around him?

It does no good to live in the past, so bringing up Campbell's tenure as a Redskins is no more productive than bringing up McNabb's success in Philadelphia.

Neither argument is valid in this season, and they certainly don't have any bearing on how the Redskins are playing at this moment.

Just consider the idea that perhaps Shanahan isn't off his rocker, and his benching of McNabb was warranted for whatever reason.

This is no time to place blame on one person or player, let alone the ones tasked with leading the Washington Redskins out a dark decade.