Camp tour: Nod to McNabb, but Westbrook's The Man in Philly

Eagles: Five things to know | Judge

BETHLEHEM, Pa. -- Look, I'm not going to get caught up in another debate on the merits of quarterback Donovan McNabb and his value to the Philadelphia Eagles. I like the guy, and I think he's critical to the success of his team.

But I don't think he's the Eagles' most valuable player. Running back Brian Westbrook is, and here's why: The Eagles can win without McNabb; they can't without Westbrook.

It's as simple as that.

The Eagles have not won with Brian Westbrook out. (US Presswire)

Look at last year. The Eagles won the division without McNabb. They did it in 2002, too, when he missed the final six regular-season games.

Now look at the 2003 playoffs. They lost to Carolina in the championship game with McNabb but without Westbrook. A year later they won that same game -- this time against Atlanta -- without star receiver Terrell Owens.

One reason: They had Brian Westbrook.

I think you can see where this is going. Westbrook is invaluable to the Philadelphia Eagles because he can do what others can't -- namely, win games running or catching the football.

Heck, he can beat you as a returner, too, if the Eagles allow him to catch punts -- which they did in 2003 when he beat the New York Giants on an 84-yard return with 1:34 left.

Essentially, he's Tiki Barber without the durability and New York press. There is nothing the guy can't do, and that includes move a pile. A year ago he lobbied coach Andy Reid for more carries, basically telling him he could handle a rushing attack once shared by a committee of backs.

So Reid fed him the ball a career-high 240 times, and Westbrook responded with personal bests everywhere -- including 1,217 yards rushing and 79 catches.

He led the team in scoring during the regular season, and he led them again in the Eagles' two playoff appearances. He had six 100-yard games rushing in 15 regular-season starts, then added another two in the playoffs.

In short, he was the Eagles' most effective weapon. Again.

"I truly believed that if I had the opportunity I would make the most of it," said Westbrook, "and I proved to myself that I could do it."

He proved it to everyone else, too. Before last season the rap on Westbrook was that he was a marvelous but fragile talent who had to be used carefully. He might not withstand the punishment of a 16-game season, and he certainly couldn't handle the ball 20-25 times a game -- particularly if he had to carry it between the tackles.

Or so the argument went. Then Westbrook touched the ball an average of 21.1 times per start, scored 25 percent of the team's offensive touchdowns and produced 31 percent of Philadelphia's offense. Most important, he missed only one start.

"I know for a fact that I can get it done between the tackles," said Westbrook, "and I know for a fact I can make people miss in the open field.

"For me, you need touches. And if you can't give the ball to playmakers where they can have success you're not going to have success.

You can never accuse the Eagles of not finding Brian Westbrook. He led the team in touches last season. And the season before that. And in 2004 when the club went to the Super Bowl. And again in 2003.

"He puts tremendous stress on the defense in multiple ways," said offensive coordinator Marty Mornhinweg. "He does an excellent job running inside or out. His pass blocking is excellent. We don't ask him to run block a lot, but when we do he's outstanding. And he can catch the ball anywhere on the field. Plus, he has decent power and excellent speed."

Stop. I'm sold.

"He's so good for us," said general manager Tom Heckert, "because he's such a dynamic weapon. If you talk to coordinators they think he's the hardest guy to defend."

I have no doubt about that. What I don't understand is why Westbrook isn't appreciated more for what he is: The glue that helps keep the Eagles' offense together, especially when McNabb bows out.

He has been named to one Pro Bowl in five seasons. One. And it wasn't last year, when none of the league's top 10 finishers in yards from scrimmage averaged more per touch than Westbrook.

"It's tough because I'm not a vocal guy," said Westbrook. "I'm not doing touchdown dances. I'm not a first-round pick. I didn't go to the big school. I'm not causing a lot of controversy. And I play on a team with a superstar.

"And we had a superstar wide receiver as well that gained a lot of attention. That's not to say those guys aren't guys who can get it done. They can. And they did. But they overshadow a lot of people on this team."

Now, before I go farther let me make one thing clear: Westbrook isn't jealous of the attention given McNabb. Heck, he recited McNabb's pre-injury numbers from last year, pointing out how the quarterback was an early -- and deserving -- choice for league MVP.

"He's the guy," he said. "He's our man. We know what he can do and that he can carry the team by himself."

I don't doubt that. But the Eagles can survive without Donovan McNabb. They did it last year. They did it in 2002. But they can't do it without Brian Westbrook. Who would replace him? Correll Buckhalter? Ryan Moats? Tony Hunt?

The bottom line is this: For all the speculation about McNabb and his future with the Eagles, the club already demonstrated what it can do when it must live without the guy.

The same can't be said about Westbrook.

So let the public debate what happens if McNabb suffers another injury. I already know what can happen. I also know what can happen if Westbrook bows out, and, trust me, Eagles fans: It's worse than the loss of your quarterback.