The thing is you're being very vague. Your specific statement was an exaggeration (I assumed that) but you haven't offered anything more realistic. We disagree on what should be expected from a QB picked #1 overall, so what is it that you expect? Or what percentage of QBs have lived up to your expectations? I think longevity is a good measure, and wouldn't consider Bledsoe a bust, but I don't think it can be the only measure bc, again, there would be a large number of players considered busts.
Much like BK's saying, we can agree to disagree if you just feel like most #1 QBs are busts (or #1 players period) but personally I'm not going to use the media created hype as the baseline to start the evaluation of a career. Vick's career has been disappointing, and I think that's mostly due to the self imposed 2 years off (even if we don't consider the reason for it), but even in his short time he did more for a beaten up franchise than many other QBs picked #1. Like Cebby said, he's an average #1 pick, probably slightly above average as a QB picked #1.
|
Quote: |
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted by SoxFan01605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know. I look at a bust relative to the expectations associated with where they're picked. If he's even a late first-rounder I might be more inclined to agree with you, but at #1 overall, a few years of moderate success is not what you're drafting for at all.
I also agree that common expectations are unrealistic for #1's (especially QBs) and many of them are considered busts...lol. Even ignoring public perception though, if you select a QB that high, he has to hit...why do you think so many GMs take a safer position or move out altogether (including the Chargers on Vick himself...likely in part for that very reason).
My expectations are less about some arbitrary achievement list and more on sustained performance. Relative to what he was drafted to do, he accomplished very little. The sample size for his accomplishments is too small, and that's his own fault.
Now on Vick as a player was a mixed bag. He was a mediocre passer at best, was lazy about his work, and failed to progress at his position because of those things. On the other hand, Vick was a phenomenal athlete (maybe the most dynamic to hit an NFL field), had great running vision and instincts, and was difficult to defend at-times because of it.
In other words, he showed the raw ability and, in flashes, the skill that got him drafted and gave hope that he was perhaps capable of progressing. Then he got in his own way (and NOT just the dog fighting stuff). He just screams "untapped potential"...That's almost like a bust archetype to me.
Now of course we can agree to disagree on him being a bust. It's certainly not to such an obvious "top 50 worst" extent. Like I said before...ignoring the OPs "many SBs" expectations, you realistically expect more than Vick gave at #1 overall. And I'm a bit amused at the way some have reacted like it's either a ridiculous notion or an unfathomable act of "hating" to consider the notion. (EDIT: that's not meant to imply you are doing that, wwharton)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar to what I stated in the reply above this, go through and look at the players picked #1 and specifically the QBs picked #1. Then it's a matter of grading on a curve or overall. If you have an overall standard then most would be considered busts based on the criteria presented. If you grade on a curve (how I feel all players should be evaluated rather than dealing with hype) then he's average at worst.
Maybe it's the way the question is worded that's the problem. If we're talking about all QBs drafted since Vick, I'd be more inclined to say he's been disappointing to the point of being labeled a bust. It's the focus on the #1 pick and what's expected that I can't agree with. People seem to expect too much from the #1 pick. I don't think some are really looking at what these picks have done over the years... especially QBs. You mention people trading out of the spot but that doesn't happen all that often really. I believe SD had Drew Brees at the time they passed on Vick (could be wrong on the timetable). I think any #1 pick that had a significant role in that god awful team becoming a playoff contender can not be considered a bust when compared to others picked at that spot, bc I don't think that happens all that often.
BTW, I agree with you, it's not a ridiculous notion at all. I just don't consider what he's done worthy of being called a bust.