Michael Vick Discussion Thread

[JBH3]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Salutations - You're off your rocker dude...

There's no bigger fan of Vick on these boards than me. Being that I'm from the 757. I never saw Vick's abilities as being a "cheeser", and yea by your post I'm a "sim guy" .

The Jesus reference is so far off it's unfathomable. I mean I can't turn my back on a man because I despise what he's done? I'm a Judas now because of that?

The league is still very much a passing league. If Vick's lost what made him great, being his legs, his running abilities, then he's nothing more than a backup QB.

There is a precedent to this and they are Randall Cunningham and Donovan McNabb. They went from scramblers to passers because they showed that ability, they honestly always showed that ability.

Vick had an arm, speed, agility, and no accuracy. You can't develop on something that you don't possess.

[JBH3]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Oh no a coach adjusted to his player's strengths! He's more likely to make an impact at a position that he's had success at in the league rather than switching him to something completely different just because he's fast. Why not just move him to corner or safety? That would make just as much sense as saying that a fast quarterback=wide reciever. If Tavaris Jackson had Michael Vick's ability he would be doing alot better than he is right now, regardless of whether the coaches are trying to turn him into a passer or not. I never said that he was the best quarterback ever but at his position he was obviously incredibly hard to stop and moving him to receiver because he can run would do nothing but take away from what he can bring to a team.

And please stop with the "I'll dumb it down for you" comments, they add nothing to the discussion.

Saying he "adjusted" is rather niave. More like he had no choice.

Vick's only going to have "success" if he can still bring the same abilities to the table which made him a success. That's the ability to make plays on the ground...Again it's not like we're going to all of a sudden see him become a Donovan McNabb or a Randall Cunningham.

Those scramblers turned passers had a track record of accuracy, and had shown the ability to be a touch-passer while still able to make plays and improvise. They were also/are more cerebral than Vick as a QB.

Never said Jackson was Vick, but then again he doesn't have to be...they have AP. :wink:

[jmood88]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Saying he "adjusted" is rather niave. More like he had no choice.

His coaches made their gameplans around his strengths, which is part of what coaches are supposed to do. If you have a guy with a strong arm who is also exceptional at running why make him a dropback passer?

Vick's only going to have "success" if he can still bring the same abilities to the table which made him a success. That's the ability to make plays on the ground...Again it's not like we're going to all of a sudden see him become a Donovan McNabb or a Randall Cunningham.

Those scramblers turned passers had a track record of accuracy, and had shown the ability to be a touch-passer while still able to make plays and improvise. They were also/are more cerebral than Vick as a QB.

Never said Jackson was Vick, but then again he doesn't have to be...they have AP. :wink:

I don't see anyone who said that he's all of a sudden going to be a great passer. What I said was that he's been a winner at quarterback and being at quarterback makes him a better weapon because of what defenses have to watch out for. He may not be a great passer but his arm is more than strong enough to make alot of throws that others can't and because of that he's able to force defenses to not only focus on his running, which is what he showed when he played for the Falcons. You can talk about how he's not a good passer all you want but the fact is when he was playing teams had to change their entire scheme just to deal with him. I saw that first hand with the Saints having to draft and sign players with the goal of containing Michael Vick. If you switch his position just because he's fast you take away from what he can give you.

[JerzeyReign]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

What?

Really was commenting on the first couple post of the thread should of quoted 'em my b, dude

[wwharton]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Really was commenting on the first couple post of the thread should of quoted 'em my b, dude

It's all good. Since you're new just want to let you know we've had waaay too many threads about the details of why Vick hasn't been in the league and it's pretty much a guarantee to get the thread locked. Just bringing that up bc of your last sentence... it'd be good not to go there.

[JerzeyReign]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Salutations - You're off your rocker dude...

There's no bigger fan of Vick on these boards than me. Being that I'm from the 757. I never saw Vick's abilities as being a "cheeser", and yea by your post I'm a "sim guy" .

The Jesus reference is so far off it's unfathomable. I mean I can't turn my back on a man because I despise what he's done? I'm a Judas now because of that?

The league is still very much a passing league. If Vick's lost what made him great, being his legs, his running abilities, then he's nothing more than a backup QB.

There is a precedent to this and they are Randall Cunningham and Donovan McNabb. They went from scramblers to passers because they showed that ability, they honestly always showed that ability.

Vick had an arm, speed, agility, and no accuracy. You can't develop on something that you don't possess.

The cheeser thing was sarcasm sorry I didn't put that in there (I'm a sim guy too). Like I previous just corrected myself those comments were made mainly to some posts earlier in thread that were hatin, should of quoted, but I'm not reading 14 pages, period.Now getting to your points you've just made. It was a PASSING LEAGUE BEFORE he came into the league also. Losing a step yeah he most likely did, but he was 5 steps in front of anyone anyway. He's what 28-29 years old still in that "glory/prime" years age bracket, don't you think? And another thing to turn your point against you, lol, if it is a PASSING LEAGuE again, advantage Vick, defenses are no longer built to contain a mobile QB, which in turn he can still catch most teams off guard once again... Right or Wrong?

How do I get back on my rocker?

[wwharton]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

The cheeser thing was sarcasm sorry I didn't put that in there (I'm a sim guy too). Like I previous just corrected myself those comments were made mainly to some posts earlier in thread that were hatin, should of quoted, but I'm not reading 14 pages, period.

You can also go to your control panel and change the number of posts per page. If you're on anything higher than 56k I'd highly recommend it. Your 14 pages is my 4 pages.

[JBH3]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Please spell the word right if you're going to use it. His coaches made their gameplans around his strengths, which is part of what coaches are supposed to do. If you have a guy with a strong arm who is also exceptional at running why make him a dropback passer?

Naive. Now we're checking for grammar, spelling, and punctuation ? There's too many run-on sentences below for me to read that post.

I don't see anyone who said that he's all of a sudden going to be a great passer. What I said was <STRIKE>that</STRIKE>he's been a winner at quarterback, and being at quarterback makes him a better weapon; because of what defenses have to watch out for. He may not be a great passer, but his arm is more than strong enough to make alot of throws.
<STRIKE></STRIKE>
<STRIKE>that others can't and</STRIKE> <STRIKE>because of </STRIKE>Due to that he's able to force defenses to <STRIKE>not only</STRIKE> focus on his running; which is what he showed when he played for the Falcons.

(New idea, new paragraph)
You can talk about how he's not a good passer all you want. However, the fact is, when he was playing teams had to change their entire scheme just to deal with him. I saw that first hand with the Saints having to draft and sign players with the goal of containing Michael Vick. If you switch his position just because he's fast, you take away from what he can give you.

Fixed.

[JBH3]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

The cheeser thing was sarcasm sorry I didn't put that in there (I'm a sim guy too). Like I previous just corrected myself those comments were made mainly to some posts earlier in thread that were hatin, should of quoted, but I'm not reading 14 pages, period.Now getting to your points you've just made. It was a PASSING LEAGUE BEFORE he came into the league also. Losing a step yeah he most likely did, but he was 5 steps in front of anyone anyway. He's what 28-29 years old still in that "glory/prime" years age bracket, don't you think? And another thing to turn your point against you, lol, if it is a PASSING LEAGuE again, advantage Vick, defenses are no longer built to contain a mobile QB, which in turn he can still catch most teams off guard once again... Right or Wrong?

How do I get back on my rocker?

The rocker comment was in referring to Jesus in association w/ Michael Vick. Grossly neglegent.

Ok. So fine...let's end it.

Vick comes back to the NFL, remains a dominant force on the ground, still can't have a better passing % than JaMarcus Russell, perhaps propels a team to the playoffs and what...wins a Superbowl?

IMO - We've seen the greatest he could offer in 2004. It was his best year passing and running, and I honestly don't think he can do any better. He would have to though to lead a team to a ring...

[coogrfan]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

His coaches made their gameplans around his strengths, which is part of what coaches are supposed to do. If you have a guy with a strong arm who is also exceptional at running why make him a dropback passer?


I don't see anyone who said that he's all of a sudden going to be a great passer. What I said was that he's been a winner at quarterback and being at quarterback makes him a better weapon because of what defenses have to watch out for. He may not be a great passer but his arm is more than strong enough to make alot of throws that others can't and because of that he's able to force defenses to not only focus on his running, which is what he showed when he played for the Falcons. You can talk about how he's not a good passer all you want but the fact is when he was playing teams had to change their entire scheme just to deal with him. I saw that first hand with the Saints having to draft and sign players with the goal of containing Michael Vick. If you switch his position just because he's fast you take away from what he can give you.

For the record, Vick is 38-28-1 as a starter; since the start of the 2005 season he is 15-16.

It would appear defenses did manage to find a way to deal with him.

[JBH3]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

For the record, Vick is 38-28-1 as a starter; since the start of the 2005 season he is 15-16.

It would appear defenses did manage to find a way to deal with him.

Ha ha...thinks for that figure. What say you jmood?

[blazerfan50]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

I want vick in the nfl!!!

[wwharton]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Ha ha...thinks for that figure. What say you jmood?

Can't remember which year it was but he was hurt somewhere in there (I remember because it happened in a preseason game against the Ravens... got clocked and I think a leg injury). That withstanding, you also have to consider how many different coaches were involved with different philosophies.

I'm not going to say Vick is amazing and it's everyone around him who's at fault for him not being more successful, but I'm also not going to say he was a bum or gimmick and the pieces around him had nothing to do with his success. If we were guaranteed to get the Vick that was in the NFL just before the suspension I'd say it'd be crazy for many teams not to go after him. He was a winner and coaches have looked more into offenses that would better utilize his best assets. I'm not convinced he'll be that same player so I think teams should be a bit more hesitant but you can't just look at the record of any QB and say that's why they're great or why they suck.

[JBH3]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

Can't remember which year it was but he was hurt somewhere in there (I remember because it happened in a preseason game against the Ravens... got clocked and I think a leg injury). That withstanding, you also have to consider how many different coaches were involved with different philosophies.

I'm not going to say Vick is amazing and it's everyone around him who's at fault for him not being more successful, but I'm also not going to say he was a bum or gimmick and the pieces around him had nothing to do with his success. If we were guaranteed to get the Vick that was in the NFL just before the suspension I'd say it'd be crazy for many teams not to go after him. He was a winner and coaches have looked more into offenses that would better utilize his best assets. I'm not convinced he'll be that same player so I think teams should be a bit more hesitant but you can't just look at the record of any QB and say that's why they're great or why they suck.

2003 was the year he got hurt and only played in 5 games, and then Doug Johnson quaterbacked the Falcons to a 4-7 record; Vick was 1-4 before the injury.

Vick has since played 3 healthy seasons, playing 15/15/16 games from 04-06.

[JerzeyReign]

Re: Michael Vick Discussion Thread

The rocker comment was in referring to Jesus in association w/ Michael Vick. Grossly neglegent.

Ok. So fine...let's end it.

Vick comes back to the NFL, remains a dominant force on the ground, still can't have a better passing % than JaMarcus Russell, perhaps propels a team to the playoffs and what...wins a Superbowl?

IMO - We've seen the greatest he could offer in 2004. It was his best year passing and running, and I honestly don't think he can do any better. He would have to though to lead a team to a ring...

JaMarcus Russell? Nevermind let's just end it now. It takes two to tango. JaMarcus Russell barely decent receiving corp is better than anything Vick has EVER used. All Vick had was Crumpler and Dunn. A tight end who was doubled majority of the time and Dunn someone who is not considered an every down back. But that's beating a dead horse. Do I think Vick can lead a team to a ring, no. Do I think he's still can be a factor in the National Football League, yes without a doubt. I think individuals are setting the bar to high for Vick right now, I hate to see the reaction when he makes his first turnover or loses his first game. That'll probably be lead story on Sportscenter, lol