I hate to do this, because I don't like Terrell Owens. But there are some things that need to be pointed out here. First, Owens didn't bring up Brett Favre, the ESPN reporter did. Owens answered the question--which was first speculated on by Michael Irvin before the interview took place. Had Owens been the one to say 'Brett Favre', then maybe things would be different.

Why is it a 'slap in the face' to be compared to Brett Favre? Is it merely racial? Not that race is a small issue; it's much larger and more prevalent in Sports than probably any other facet of our society. It must be racial in this situation, because there's no other way McNabb could be offended. He's a good player, but he's a little like Peyton Manning, he's going to get criticized until he wins the big one. Um, wait...did I just compare him to another white quarterback? Uh-oh.

What you've got to wonder is this: notice how none of McNabb's Eagles' team mates stuck up for him? Even after it was obvious that T.O. was going somewhere else, even after McNabb tried unsuccessfully to play through his Sports hernia, none of the Eagles' spoke up and defended McNabb.

Of the list of quarterbacks up on his list, only McNair has even played in a Super Bowl, and it was only one--like McNabb. Favre's played in two and actually won Super Bowl XXXI. But I'm getting a little off topic, this isn't about Favre and McNabb, it's about McNabb's insinuation that Owens answering in the affirmative to the Favre question makes it a "black on black" crime.

So Owens can, in McNabb's mind, attack his character by questioning his stamina in the Super Bowl last year, he can attack Donovan's abilities as a quarterback and a leader--as long as it's not to a white guy? How are these comments any worse or any less racial than the things Rush Limbaugh said on ESPN in 2003 to get fired? Looking back on it, how much of what Limbaugh said was purely racial and how much of it was wrong because it was racial? How much of it was because Limbaugh was a white conservative radio host offering an opinion on football?

Limbaugh said in the fall of 2003 that McNabb was "not as good as the media precieved him to be." He continued by saying that "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 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."

Limbaugh resigned (though he was basically fired) for his comments. By all accounts, there were racial undertones in those comments that were undeniably wrong. But I've rehashed it for you because I wonder what the difference is between McNabb being offended by Limbaugh's comments and responding in the Philadelphia Daily News that "It's sad that you've got to go to skin color. I thought we were through with that whole deal."

Funny, Donovan, so did we.

Now, McNabb's lost a major portion of his credibility with Sports fans, because he finally gave in and retaliated. Not only did he retaliate though, he brought in race--something he has said often before shouldn't be a qualifier. For months, we've backed him up. We said, as a collective group, we liked how he was a bigger man and didn't need to respond to Owens directly. And by holding his head high, he earned even more respect from his peers and those who cover him.

McNabb still held that stance merely three days ago when he told the New York Times, "My name was thrown around like a cheap rag that just couldn't make it to the washing machine. But sometimes in life you have a learning experience, something you can learn from and hopefully it will make you stronger. With everything that's happened, you sit back now and smile about it and move on."

You can steam and moan in private, but complaining in public is something people don't like.

Here's why: let's say you've got a friend or friends (married) who silently struggle to make ends meat, they work hard, rarely talk about their finances and when asked about it, they might discuss it briefly, but they say little and eventually change the subject. Well, if they started complaining to you about how poor they were, what is the first thing you'd do? Look for some dirt. You would start analyzing how many times a week they go out to eat, what they buy, what kind of car they drive, etc. It's in our nature. Don't throw it in our face if you don't want us to see it.

This is what makes this McNabb retaliation so hard to understand. It was going away. As Sports fans, we were almost there, almost to the point we didn't have to read about it in the newspaper everyday. Almost to the point that Sports Center didn't have a story or expose on it...well, maybe not that. But we were almost to the point were once T.O. was on a different team, it would become a smaller story down the road.

Terrell Owens, with all his hoopla and Drew Rosenhaus mouthpiecing, is by no means now a victim in all of this. But no longer is Donovan McNabb.

Just like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day, we keep living it over and over and over again. Bill Murray in that film represents what we are as Sports fans watching this drama. We can't escape it. We can change the channel or the station or throw out the paper, but it's always there. Just like Bill can drive off a cliff, electrocute himself and step in front of a moving truck. For Sports fans and for Bill, we just keep waking up the next morning to the same song, the same story. The Terrell Owens and Donovan McNabb feud is our Groundhog Day--except we're not the ones who can't get it right.

For Sports With Moore, go to http://sportswithmoore.blogspot.com