From Global Security.org:
"Experience in the Vietnam conflict showed the F-4 Phantom II to have maneuvering performance inferior to that of the Soviet-built MiG-21. In response to this finding, the USAF developed a set of requirements for a dedicated air-superiority fighter with a maneuvering capability greater than any existing or foreseeable-future fighter "
"Using lessons learned in Vietnam, the USAF sought to develop and procure a new, dedicated air superiority fighter. Such an aircraft was desperately needed, as no USAF aircraft design solely conceived as an air superiority fighter had become reality since the F-86 Sabre."
My own experience was that MacDac also went to the USAF pilots and extensively interveiwed them as to what they wanted. The answer was power, performance, manuverability, visibility and a gun. They got it all in the F-15.
The F-14 was designed to protect the fleet and homeland by intercepting Soviet bombers with the long range Phoenix missiles.
Again from Global security.org
" The design of the F-14B allows for incredible pitch authority as well as good roll control to produce an extremely agile fighter."
From everything2:
"Specifically, the Vietnam war had taught the U.S. Navy that interceptors could not just be extremely fast missile trucks with low maneuverablility. In fact, although speed was critical, the ability to engage in a 'turn and burn knife fight in a phone booth' with enemy aircraft was also needed."
The F-15 and F-14 were desgned for a single mission, from inception, to be clearly dominant air superiority fghters.
To answer the threat of the MIG-25 Foxbat, U.S. developers designed and fielded the F-4 Phantom.
That's a big fat negative. The Phantom first flew in 1958 and entered service in 1960. The Foxbat didn't even have its first flight until 1964 and entered service in 1970. It's like Hillary saying she was named after the famous Everest climber, even though she was born before the feat.
To their credit, however, they do say this:
The Navy planned to defend the carriers, using the strategy of defense in depth. The attacking Soviet aircraft will be met at long ranges by counterair aircraft based on the carriers. This requirement was initially met by the "Missileer," the name given to an aircraft of proposed in the 1950s. The F6D-1 Missileer was not a fighter at all, as a "fighter" is currently defined. It is merely a platform that launched air-to-air missiles. The theory behind the missileer is that high performance can be put into the weapon instead of the aircraft. On 21 July 1960 the Navy announced that a contract for the development of the Missileer aircraft for launching the Eagle long-range air-to-air guided missile, was being issued to the Douglas Aircraft Corporation. Eventually, the Navy development organizations became convinced that the F6D was too slow, too narrow in application, and too expensive [both the Phoenix missiles and the AN/AWG-9 radar used on its replacement, the F-14 Tomcat, evolved from the abortive Douglas F6D Missileer program].
I am not even sure I totally buy that, since, IIRC, the Phoenix system was made for the F-111's (which we discussed earlier) multi-role platform.
In any event, my origninal sourcing comes from the many volumes of Jane's All The World's Aircraft and other books from their writers I've collected over the years. I'd consider them much more authoritative in the field over GS. That's probably where GS got their F-14 info. How they came up with the other bit is beyond me.