Holy crap! Vick-to-the-Raiders Rumor

[stevew]

What if Mike Vick agrees to cut the Falcons a check of 10-12 million in order to leave? How does that work against the cap? Cause if he "buys/gives back" some of his bonus money, and gets a brand new contract with the Raiders, it makes a bit more sense.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by VPI97

You must not be paying attention...haven't you heard that Vick is a corn row wearin', pot smokin', herpes givin' running back who doesn't grasp the fundamentals of throwing a football, yet still gets lined up at quarterback despite having an IQ that rivals the mentally challenged. Who cares about how good the team has done with him at quarterback...that was obviously the work of Jim Mora and Dan Reeves.

Jeez...you'd think that you don't read message boards, for goodness sakes.

Don't forgot that he got a minor drunk and had sex with her, stomped on an opposing player, and held up someone at a McDonald's in Hampton.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Synovia

Since Mike Vick became QB, the falcons are a remarkable 47-48-1. That includes the only 2 seasons above .500. I'm sorry, when you have the highest paid quarterback in the league, and continually have a bottom 5 in the league passing game, theres a severe misuse of cap space going on.

In fairness, that tie could've easily been a win and they'd be .500 under Vick.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Synovia

Since Mike Vick became QB, the falcons are a remarkable 47-48-1. That includes the only 2 seasons above .500. I'm sorry, when you have the highest paid quarterback in the league, and continually have a bottom 5 in the league passing game, theres a severe misuse of cap space going on.

Considering that he's only played in 78 NFL games (incl post-season) and you have 96 in your win-loss record, I'm guessing there's a flaw in your calculations somewhere.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Don't forgot that he got a minor drunk and had sex with her, stomped on an opposing player, and held up someone at a McDonald's in Hampton.

Damn...forgot about that. Plus, I think he's the one who murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Damn...forgot about that. Plus, I think he's the one who murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman.

No, but he wrote a book about it.

[stevew]

All that shit happened after Vick hit that lady with a chair outside of that bowling alley. If it weren't for Doug Wilder, he'd still be in jail.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by stevew

All that shit happened after Vick hit that lady with a chair outside of that bowling alley. If it weren't for Doug Wilder, he'd still be in jail.

And after he made the short trip to Baltimore to participate in a drug-related video.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

In fairness, that tie could've easily been a win and they'd be .500 under Vick.

Is .500 under a QB who gets paid more than Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Donovan Mcnabb, etc, something to be proud of? Counting rushing, the two biggest years of Mike Vick's career have been aroudn 3400-3600 yards from scrimmage, and 24 TDs/11 fumbles, and 13 picks. To put that in perspective, Rex Grossman threw for 3200 yards, 24 TDs, and turned the ball over 25 times this year. The best year of Michael Vick (who makes $16m a year)'s career, is pretty much equivalent to Rex Grossman this year: IE, below NFL starter level.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by wade moore

And after he made the short trip to Baltimore to participate in a drug-related video.

Stop Snitchin'

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Synovia

Since Mike Vick became QB, the falcons are a remarkable 47-48-1. That includes the only 2 seasons above .500. I'm sorry, when you have the highest paid quarterback in the league, and continually have a bottom 5 in the league passing game, theres a severe misuse of cap space going on.

Let's see, did you count the games he was injured for in that total? Very judicious use of wording "since Mike Vick became QB", not "Mike Vick's record".

Shameful... you'd think that some Vick haters would have better things to do than deliberately mislead.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by stevew

Stop Snitchin'

That reminds me, you remember when he put out the music video for 2 Legit 2 Quit. Man, that was a hoot!

[DanGarion]

what better vick or pepsi machine?

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Synovia

Counting rushing, the two biggest years of Mike Vick's career have been aroudn 3400-3600 yards from scrimmage, and 24 TDs/11 fumbles, and 13 picks.

Vick has only lost nine fumbles....in his career. What else you gonna come up with?

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

you'd think that some Vick haters would have better things to do than deliberately mislead.

lol. That's a good one.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Vick has only lost nine fumbles....in his career. What else you gonna come up with?

In his best season, Vick dropped 10 passes.

Pathetic.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Vick has only lost nine fumbles....in his career. What else you gonna come up with?




lol. That's a good one.

he's good at fumbling and having his team recover?

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by wade moore

In his best season, Vick dropped 10 passes.

Pathetic.

He also missed three game winning field goals.


He's nothing but a loser....a loser with corn rows, to boot.

[wade moore]

FWIW - I think that given the chance, all but say 5-10 teams (guesstimating without looking and counting starting QB's) in the league would love to have Vick as their starting QB. This hatorade is from fans, not football experts IMO.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by VPI97

He also missed three game winning field goals.


He's nothing but a loser....a loser with corn rows, to boot.

Did you know that Michael Vick has lost every coin toss? How can your team win when you're so dumb?!

[Bee]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Vick has only lost nine fumbles....in his career. What else you gonna come up with?




lol. That's a good one.

well nfl.com doesn't agree with either of you.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Bee

well nfl.com doesn't agree with either of you.

lol, a Vick-like arguement.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Bee

well nfl.com doesn't agree with either of you.

Outside of the who's right, NFL.COM is pretty stupid... some great math...

[Bee]

What...when you add 5, 6, 1, 7, 5 and 3 together you don't get 6?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Bee

What...when you add 5, 6, 1, 7, 5 and 3 together you don't get 6?

Well *I* do, but this broken-ass calculator of mine doesn't agree.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Bee

well nfl.com doesn't agree with either of you.

That's what I get for going with espn.com.

Looks like they separate fumbles while rushing from fumbles while being sacked.

The true numbers may be:
While sacked: 36 fumbles, 18 lost
While rushing: 19 fumbles, 9 lost

Either way, I don't see those numbers being out of line with the NFL norms when you view them as separate totals (which I think is appropriate since no one else is going to put stats out that factor in his rushing value when they complain about his passer rating)

[Bee]

Well, nfl.com might be using that fancy math they teach at VPI.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Vick has only lost nine fumbles....in his career. What else you gonna come up with?

He's lost 9 fumbles while rushing. This post is funny since it was followed with a quote about 'Vick haters' trying to mislead, while every one of these discussions has the same 4 Vick supports doing more misleading than the 'haters'.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

while every one of these discussions has the same 4 Vick supports doing more misleading than the 'haters'.

Really? Care to point out any instance where I've deliberately posted misleading numbers, chief?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by VPI97

That's what I get for going with espn.com.

Looks like they separate fumbles while rushing from fumbles while being sacked.

The true numbers may be:
While sacked: 39 fumbles, 18 lost
While rushing: 19 fumbles, 9 lost

Either way, I don't see those numbers being out of line with the NFL norms when you view them as separate total (which I think is appropriate since no one else is going to put stats out that factor in his rushing value)

By comparison...

From 2001-2006 (According to NFL.COM):

Vick - 55 Fumbles, 27 Lost
Brady - 59 Fumbles, 25 Lost
Manning - 31 Fumbles, 10 Lost
Favre - 53 Fumbles, 25 Lost
McNair - 45 Fumbles, 19 Lost


So, I'd say Vick is pretty on-par... yeah, he missed some games, but let's face it - the number of times he runs with it more than balances that out.

Edit: Man my boy Manning's numbers are impressive here. I figure this is probably largely a factor of # sacks, but still.

[larrymcg421]

Judging individual players by the win/loss record of a team that contains 52 other players is one of the most idiotic thing that people do in modern sports discussions.

Seriously, is Tom Brady any worse a QB if Viniateri had missed all those clutch kicks? If his defense gave up an extra 10-20 pts. a game?

[Brillig]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Outside of the who's right, NFL.COM is pretty stupid... some great math...

I take it all back. Daivd Winter is a genius.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by VPI97[I

;1367407]Really? Care to point out any instance where I've deliberately posted misleading numbers, chief?

You're getting your stats from the same place as anyone else accused of misleading, so youre just as responsible when theyre incorrect as anyone else, chief.

Originally Posted by VPI97

Either way, I don't see those numbers being out of line with the NFL norms when you view them as separate totals

The guy fumbles the ball every 27 carries - that's just when he rushes. He averages about 7 rushes a game, so he fumbles the ball atleast every 4 games. This isn't including the other 39 fumbles, some which are guaranteed to be behind the scrimmage. Some which could be attributed to his 'Vick-like' ability, and if you factor in those - he averages nearly a fumble a game (every 9 carries).

[EagleFan]

A barely over 50 percenbt comnpletion percentage, a laughable quarterback rating for someone that's supposed to be a star, has the highest sacks per 16 game season total among active quarterbacks, averages almost 12 fumbles per 16 games (and that's based off his entire games played and not just starts), and one of those rare quarterbacks who opposing teams would love to see stand in the pocket all game long.

Yeah, I can see that whole formula for greatness.....

[albionmoonlight]

83 posts in the thread and 23 members viewing.

Love Vick or hate Vick, you have to admit that he peaks our interest in a way that few athletes do.

Call me crazy, but I don't think that a "Holy crap! Kitna-to-the-Texans Rumor" thread would reach 2 pages of replies.

[Ksyrup]

That's because it is beyond argument that Jon Kitna represents the future of the Detroit Lions.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

You're getting your stats from the same place as anyone else accused of misleading, so youre just as responsible when theyre incorrect as anyone else, chief.



The guy fumbles the ball every 27 carries - that's just when he rushes. He averages about 7 rushes a game, so he fumbles the ball atleast every 4 games. This isn't including the other 39 fumbles, some which are guaranteed to be behind the scrimmage. Some which could be attributed to his 'Vick-like' ability, and if you factor in those - he averages nearly a fumble a game (every 9 carries).

Originally Posted by EagleFan

A barely over 50 percenbt comnpletion percentage, a laughable quarterback rating for someone that's supposed to be a star, has the highest sacks per 16 game season total among active quarterbacks, averages almost 12 fumbles per 16 games (and that's based off his entire games played and not just starts), and one of those rare quarterbacks who opposing teams would love to see stand in the pocket all game long.

Yeah, I can see that whole formula for greatness.....

All of these stats about fumbles you're throwing out do sound so terrible.

However, let's really frame them correctly as I have done above. His stats are clearly NOT out of line with other NFL QB's. If you have some stats that tell differently, please present them. I'm by no means a major Vick fan, I just don't like seeing people throwing out misleading/deceptive information.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by wade moore

By comparison...

From 2001-2006 (According to NFL.COM):

Vick - 55 Fumbles, 27 Lost 67 starts
Brady - 59 Fumbles, 25 Lost 94 starts
Manning - 31 Fumbles, 10 Lost 96 starts
Favre - 53 Fumbles, 25 Lost 96 starts
McNair - 45 Fumbles, 19 Lost 83 starts


So, I'd say Vick is pretty on-par... yeah, he missed some games, but let's face it - the number of times he runs with it more than balances that out.

Edit: Man my boy Manning's numbers are impressive here. I figure this is probably largely a factor of # sacks, but still.

Doesn't really look on par to me. Last I knew a fumble was a fumble whether you were behind the line of scrimmage or past it. His fumble rate while running is worse that Tiki Barber's was when he had the reputation of being a fumbler (before his style change).

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

83 posts in the thread and 23 members viewing.

Love Vick or hate Vick, you have to admit that he peaks our interest in a way that few athletes do.

Call me crazy, but I don't think that a "Holy crap! Kitna-to-the-Texans Rumor" thread would reach 2 pages of replies.

That's sort of like saying Love Hornsmaniac or hate Hornsmaniac, you have to admit that he peaks our interest in a way that few idiots do.

Vick just happens to be an easy discussion and there are always atleast 5-10 members from the Virginia/Atlanta area that are heavily supporting him in the discussion despite everyone else knowing the truth.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Doesn't really look on par to me. Last I knew a fumble was a fumble whether you were behind the line of scrimmage or past it. His fumble rate while running is worse that Tiki Barber's was when he had the reputation of being a fumbler (before his style change).

Not that it changes that much, but NFL.com shows 74 games over that time, and I'm unaware of any games Vick played but didn't start.

So, I do see your point there a bit. However, I would argue that if you compared times hit->fumbles it would be about equal. In addition, it appears to me like he had a really bad year in 2004 and has improved.

Anyway.. if a few extra fumbles is your key argument against Vick, well, I feel for you.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by wade moore

All of these stats about fumbles you're throwing out do sound so terrible.

However, let's really frame them correctly as I have done above. His stats are clearly NOT out of line with other NFL QB's. If you have some stats that tell differently, please present them. I'm by no means a major Vick fan, I just don't like seeing people throwing out misleading/deceptive information.

All ths stats about fumbles? In the post you quoted I had one stat about fumbles, the rest were sacks, rating and completion percentage.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by wade moore

All of these stats about fumbles you're throwing out do sound so terrible.

However, let's really frame them correctly as I have done above. His stats are clearly NOT out of line with other NFL QB's. If you have some stats that tell differently, please present them. I'm by no means a major Vick fan, I just don't like seeing people throwing out misleading/deceptive information.

His numbers in comparison would be even better than some of those you listed if it weren't for his inability to read defenses, react quickly and pass the ball. He does alot of nice plays, but he also creates alot of problems for himself by thinking he can turn something into nothing everytime.

Also all of the QBs you listed played in more games than Vick (Favre and Manning played in EVERY game).

[rkmsuf]

never seen so much talk about an average nfl starter for an average nfl team

[EagleFan]

Vick is probably the most overrated athlete in the NFL (yesterday, today and tomorrow).

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

never seen so much talk about an average nfl starter for an average nfl team

average NFL team? that's being nice for a team that has never had back to back winning seasons.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

You're getting your stats from the same place as anyone else accused of misleading, so youre just as responsible when theyre incorrect as anyone else, chief.

So you're not going to try and backup your accusation that I've deliberately attempted to mislead people with actual links?

The guy fumbles the ball every 27 carries - that's just when he rushes.

Brady fumbles once every 17 rushes.

This isn't including the other 39 fumbles, some which are guaranteed to be behind the scrimmage. Some which could be attributed to his 'Vick-like' ability, and if you factor in those - he averages nearly a fumble a game (every 9 carries).

Vick fumbles once out of every 5.19 sacks, Brady fumbles once out of every 4.04 sacks.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

That's sort of like saying Love Hornsmaniac or hate Hornsmaniac, you have to admit that he peaks our interest in a way that few idiots do.

Vick just happens to be an easy discussion and there are always atleast 5-10 members from the Virginia/Atlanta area that are heavily supporting him in the discussion despite everyone else knowing the truth.

This seems to point to me.

Like I said, I really don't care one way or another about Vick. I personally feel that there is a group that gives him way too much slack and a group that gives him way too much hatred.

When it comes down to it, I think he is a guy that like I said, all but around 10 teams would love to have as their starting QB in the NFL. Combining his pluses and his minuses, I think he is a guy that many, many teams would love to have over the starting QB they have now - including the Bears (someone mentioned Grossman above).

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Vick has only lost nine fumbles....in his career. What else you gonna come up with?




lol. That's a good one.

What the hell you talking about? He LOST 5 in 2001, 6 in 2002, 1 in 2003, 7 in 2004, 6 in 2005, and 3 in 2006. That being said, fumble recoveries are random. Fumbles are not.

[EagleFan]

Of course the per sack number will be better when you get sacked so many more times in a season, and for someone who is supposed to be such a great runner...

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

All ths stats about fumbles? In the post you quoted I had one stat about fumbles, the rest were sacks, rating and completion percentage.

Yeah, probably my fault.

I don't feel like digging up the Sack numbers, but it seems hard to believe that he is the worst out there. Although if he is, I think it speaks more to his line than to him.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I think he is a guy that like I said, all but around 10 teams would love to have as their starting QB in the NFL.

That's how I tend to see it. I know everyone likes to tout passer rating, but AFAIK, the only place I've seen QB's evalued in both rushing and passing is here. That's jives with your 'all but 10' statement.