Michael Vick signs 2-yr deal w/Eagles

[Hot Mega]

That's true, not all QBs have the same skill sets. But the problem is, most good QBs historically have very similar skill sets: being able to complete passes, and avoid throwing interceptions, two things Vick is particularly inept at. There hasn't been a QB in the history of the NFL who has been above average with below average passing abilities. Regardless of how well Vick runs the ball, in the end if he can't complete passes, he's not a good QB. McNabb may well be the best demonstration of this concept, as he can scramble, but has a career Passer Rating Index of 108, an above average rating. Thus, it makes sense that the Eagles passing game has been pretty successful under McNabb, whereas Atlanta wasn't under Vick. Vicks numbers make him out to be a glorified running back.

Completing passes is dependent on many other variables than just a QBs relative accuracy. Assuming your O-Line provides you reasonable time to pass..a completion still requires not only a receiver getting open but in some cases gaining body position on the defender then ultimately not dropping the pass. His completion pct. and passer rating could just as well be reflective of deficiencies with receiver factors.

Vick played 2 years in college. In one of those, his freshman year he set a passing efficiency record for a freshman and that rating is still one of the top 3 ever.

Nor is anyone expecting him to be. But his statistics show him to be a below average quarterback. His career Passer Rating Index of 94 puts him in the same category as Tarvaris Jackson (92), and David Carr (91), and last I checked, those guys weren't very good, and teams aren't fighting to get them (despite the fact that Jackson was pretty damn good last year).

Uh yeah..but Jackson nor Carr have the vision, quickness and foot speed Vick possesses to make them the threat he is when a play breaks down or they may need to avoid defenders in the pocket. That would be the monumental difference you're overlooking. Vick was an all-pro 3 times for a reason and that's a feat I doubt Jackson and Carr can accomplish once between them.

Stats aside, the (offensive) game is still about 1st downs and scores. What Vick is additionally able to do with his feet makes him more difficult in the majority cases to game plan for than someone who can complete passes at a high pct.

 

[D-rock]

Completing passes is dependent on many other variables than just a QBs relative accuracy. Assuming your O-Line provides you reasonable time to pass..a completion still requires not only a receiver getting open but in some cases gaining body position on the defender then ultimately not dropping the pass. His completion pct. and passer rating could just as well be reflective of deficiencies with receiver factors.

Vick played 2 years in college. In one of those, his freshman year he set a passing efficiency record for a freshman and that rating is still one of the top 3 ever.

I don't remember where I read it anymore, but I came across a study years ago that pointed out the fact that most of Vicks receivers had a greater percentage of passes caught that were thrown to them when they had somebody else at quarterback either because they went to another team or had somebody else put in.

Uh yeah..but Jackson nor Carr have the vision, quickness and foot speed Vick possesses to make them the threat he is when a play breaks down or they may need to avoid defenders in the pocket. That would be the monumental difference you're overlooking. Vick was an all-pro 3 times for a reason and that's a feat I doubt Jackson and Carr can accomplish once between them.

Stats aside, the (offensive) game is still about 1st downs and scores. What Vick is additionally able to do with his feet makes him more difficult in the majority cases to game plan for than someone who can complete passes at a high pct.

Don't you mean 3 time pro-bowler. That is a HUGE difference than being a 3 time all-pro. I'd say that had a lot more to do with media hype and fan misconceptions than Vick making his team be able to win more than other people. I think what shayd is saying is that Vicks running ability didn't even come close to compensating for his being a crappy quarterback, and it hurt his team.

As far as Vick and the Falcons getting a lot of rushing yards when he was there. Of course, they HAD to designed the team around that, because Vick was so crappy they had no other choice. They had at times three good runners in the backfield. It wasn't like other teams where the defenders could account for the running backs. Of course when you never have to worry about a pass 10, 20, or 30 yards down field I would take those occasional inevitable 10 yard qb runs when everything breaks down with Vick also, especially if I was probably going to win. They also put so much money into him that they didn't want to admit they made a mistake and bench him. Most opponents were content with it, despite what some people want to believe. They just let the Falcons kill themselves with their own strategy because Vick couldn't do anything else besides the occasional pass to Crumpler, and run like a chicken with his head cut off when the plays broke down, which was often.

I don't think the Eagles are entertaining any notions of making Vick and type of qb for more than a couple of plays a game. At best he's a near league minimum salary cog in a system coming from the backfield that creates problems for the defense because they can't just tee up on McNabb. Although part of what I also don't get is why a lot of people out there are now assuming Vick is going to be able to catch or block well when he has never had to do any of that before.

For all those people that though Vick was great, let me ask you something. If you were controlling a team like the Falcons would you even begin to think about having Vick as your starting qb rather than Matt Ryan. It's pretty bad when a rookie, although a good one, can show you just how bad Vick really ran that team. For the love of God, he's pretty much the only veteran quarterback I can think of that wasn't even allowed to call audibles after even 7 or 8 years in the league because he didn't know what he was doing.

 

[Hot Mega]

I don't remember where I read it anymore, but I came across a study years ago that pointed out the fact that most of Vicks receivers had a greater percentage of passes caught that were thrown to them when they had somebody else at quarterback either because they went to another team or had somebody else put in.

Well Vick being a lefty does make the adjustment for the receiver somewhat different and Vick passes with allot of velocity.

Don't you mean 3 time pro-bowler. That is a HUGE difference than being a 3 time all-pro.

School me. I thought getting to the pro bowl in a season made you and all pro for that season. It doesn't?

 

[girk1]

I don't remember where I read it anymore, but I came across a study years ago that pointed out the fact that most of Vicks receivers had a greater percentage of passes caught that were thrown to them when they had somebody else at quarterback either because they went to another team or had somebody else put in.




Don't you mean 3 time pro-bowler. That is a HUGE difference than being a 3 time all-pro. I'd say that had a lot more to do with media hype and fan misconceptions than Vick making his team be able to win more than other people. I think what shayd is saying is that Vicks running ability didn't even come close to compensating for his being a crappy quarterback, and it hurt his team.

As far as Vick and the Falcons getting a lot of rushing yards when he was there. Of course, they HAD to designed the team around that, because Vick was so crappy they had no other choice. They had at times three good runners in the backfield. It wasn't like other teams where the defenders could account for the running backs.



For all those people that though Vick was great, let me ask you something. If you were controlling a team like the Falcons would you even begin to think about having Vick as your starting qb rather than Matt Ryan. It's pretty bad when a rookie, although a good one, can show you just how bad Vick really ran that team. For the love of God, he's pretty much the only veteran quarterback I can think of that wasn't even allowed to call audibles after even 7 or 8 years in the league because he didn't know what he was doing.

Another filibuster?:dunno:

What's with the intellectual dishonesty here today?:1orglaugh How the hell can you compare two offenses when they are 2 years removed & only 4 offensive starters(3 linemen) left on that Ryan Falcons offense & 8 overall starters(out of 22). That team has been overhauled since 2006 including the addition of a nearly 2000 yd rusher. It would be much more fair/intellectually honest for you to compare the 2007 Falcon results with TRULY average Qb's like Harrington,Redman & Leftwich than skip 2 years later(overhaul) & a damn good young prospect.:dunno:

I still haven't seen the post that said Vick was a 'great' Qb as you guys are suggesting. Warrick Dunn was a decent Rb ,but teams had to stay home(less aggressive) & account for Vick which allowed for better rushing numbers from these guys. TJ Dukett had two decent 500 yrd rushing seasons .


At least you didn't come here with the bogus claim that the stellar Falcon defenses(proved incompetent without Vick) were the reason he won at a 60% clip.:1orglaugh

I think this dislike of Vick & anger that he can resume his career with a 2 million dollar salary gets to some of you guys. If Vick was 'crappy' & there was no market for him it would be VERY VERY easy for teams to let him sit on his ass at home. You guys need to accept that the guy is back in the League & is still a much sought after commodity no matter what 'internet experts' think of him.

 

[girk1]

Well Vick being a lefty does make the adjustment for the receiver somewhat different and Vick passes with allot of velocity.



School me. I thought getting to the pro bowl in a season made you and all pro for that season. It doesn't?

That Offense has been nearly completetly overhauled since 2006(Vick) & is a completely bogus argument D Rock is making( 3 starting linemen & 1 receiver is all that remained from the Vick era). And young receiver(s) with two more years experience.

Pro Bowl usually consist of 3 best Qb's from each conference(total 6) while the All Pro team is generally considerd the best of the best & is usually only 1st & 2nd teams(two picks per position). Funny how people casually dismiss All Pro/Pro bowl teams until they want to make a argument in their favor. Ironically the guys who vote on Pro Bowls/All Pro are may of the same guys who swear by stats instead of results.

 

[glock27]

Vick has always been an overrated QB when it comes to traditional systems, but he is perfect for an unorthodox offense, like the Wildcat formation.

Assuming he still has the same skills he did before he went "inside".

What I don't understand is why it wasn't Miami that signed him.

They have already been doing the "Wildcat" for a year, now, and could make good use of him, in my opinion.

Also, as far as the dogfighting thing goes, the man did his time, bore the shame and disgrace that was due him, and is trying to repay his debt to society.

It's ridiculous to keep holding his past mistakes over his head. He wants a second chance, I say give it to him.

 

[Hot Mega]

Don't you mean 3 time pro-bowler. That is a HUGE difference than being a 3 time all-pro.

You are right. There is a difference and I mistakenly conflated the two.

 

[girk1]

Vick has always been an overrated QB when it comes to traditional systems, but he is perfect for an unorthodox offense, like the Wildcat formation.

Assuming he still has the same skills he did before he went "inside".

What I don't understand is why it wasn't Miami that signed him.

They have already been doing the "Wildcat" for a year, now, and could make good use of him, in my opinion.

Also, as far as the dogfighting thing goes, the man did his time, bore the shame and disgrace that was due him, and is trying to repay his debt to society.

It's ridiculous to keep holding his past mistakes over his head. He wants a second chance, I say give it to him.

Good post.

I think the Dolphins drafted Pat White of W. Virginia to fill that role & Parcels/Miami would probably not want to get involved with the Vick drama anyway.
If teams didn't respect the impact of a QB like Vick they would't have jumped on him as quickly as the Eagles have & others were willing to.

 

[shayd]

Completing passes is dependent on many other variables than just a QBs relative accuracy. Assuming your O-Line provides you reasonable time to pass..a completion still requires not only a receiver getting open but in some cases gaining body position on the defender then ultimately not dropping the pass. His completion pct. and passer rating could just as well be reflective of deficiencies with receiver factors.

You're right, there are other factors, however, historically, successful NFL QBs have a completion percentage somewhere in the low 60s, even those who don't have excellent O-Lines, and or receivers, (at least the ones who are any good). Additionally, those factors tend to balance out over the course of a QBs career regardless, especially as offenses adapt to particular weaknesses. Bottom line, if you are an NFL QB, and you can't maintain a decent completion percentage (Vicks career average is about 10% lower than league average), and you have a bad interception percentage (he's about double the league average in his career), you're a bad Quarterback.

Vick played 2 years in college. In one of those, his freshman year he set a passing efficiency record for a freshman and that rating is still one of the top 3 ever.

I'm actually quite surprised no one commented on this before me. Yes, Vick did set the record in college, however he faced nowhere near the competition or for that matter the defensive talent that he did in the NFL. And what you're also forgetting is that in his Sophomore year, his efficiency tanked by over 50 points, with nearly the exact same offense.

Uh yeah..but Jackson nor Carr have the vision, quickness and foot speed Vick possesses to make them the threat he is when a play breaks down or they may need to avoid defenders in the pocket. That would be the monumental difference you're overlooking. Vick was an all-pro 3 times for a reason and that's a feat I doubt Jackson and Carr can accomplish once between them.

First, where does vision come into play except for completion and interception percentage? He's below average significantly in both categories, so clearly, he doesn't have superior vision to those two. Sure, neither Jackson nor Carr have the quickness or foot speed, but having those two things doesn't do anything if you can't score. I'm going to get a bit numerically inclined here, so if you're squeamish about it (as someone in this thread seems to be) cover your eyes or bury your head in the ground for a minute. To give you an idea of how Vick has performed, here are some of his extended stats (as provided by Football Outsiders). Just so they're not completely foreign, here's what the stats mean. DYAR is Defense-adjusted, yards above replacement. Replacement is considered a league average player whose line reflects the exact average in every category. It's calculated by taking the number of plays each team runs against all of their opponents, then averaging them against the rest of the league. DYAR does a pretty nice job of summing up each player as a yard producing entity. EYds are Effective Yards. It's essentially a way to value players whose stats are actually worse than they played. Alright, now for Vick, his career lines look like this, and for the sake of simplicity, I have made DYAR cumulative, (there is one for passing, and one for rushing):

2001- -107 DYAR, league average was roughly 340 yards, 435 EYds, league average was 3,200.

2002- 680 yards DYAR, league average was roughly 470 yards, 2,926 EYds, league average was 2,800.

2003- -1 yard DYAR, league average was about 275, 479 EYds, league average was 3,200.

2004- -236 DYAR, league average was about 420, 1,253 EYds, league average was 2,353.

2005- 172 DYAR, league average was about 375, 2,183 EYds, league average was 2,400.

2006- 25 DYAR, league average was about 340, 1919 EYds, league average was 3,100.


And that "stellar" 2004 season that Vick "led" the Falcons in? He had a rushing DYAR of 243; his passing was that bad, nearly -500 yards below replacement level. So yeah, his offense was horrid that season.

Stats aside, the (offensive) game is still about 1st downs and scores. What Vick is additionally able to do with his feet makes him more difficult in the majority cases to game plan for than someone who can complete passes at a high pct.

Exactly! And the only way to get either of them is to get positive yardage. Vick has statistically proven unable to do it through the air, and has been above average running, and from the QB position, that makes him a poor QB, as passing has greater value at that position than rushing does. And since he's so difficult to plan for, perhaps you wouldn't mind explaining how he still can't offset his negative passing value with his "superior" rushing skills? The short answer is he can't, and he's a poor QB as a result.

I don't remember where I read it anymore, but I came across a study years ago that pointed out the fact that most of Vicks receivers had a greater percentage of passes caught that were thrown to them when they had somebody else at quarterback either because they went to another team or had somebody else put in.

According to DYAR, the Atlanta receivers were about 230ish yards better per game post Vick.

Another filibuster?:dunno:

What's with the intellectual dishonesty here today?

Perhaps you could enlighten me as to where I was dishonest?

How the hell can you compare two offenses when they are 2 years removed & only 4 offensive starters(3 linemen) left on that Ryan Falcons offense & 8 overall starters(out of 22). That team has been overhauled since 2006 including the addition of a nearly 2000 yd rusher. It would be much more fair/intellectually honest for you to compare the 2007 Falcon results with TRULY average Qb's like Harrington,Redman & Leftwich than skip 2 years later(overhaul) & a damn good young prospect.:dunno:

Very easily. You compare how they compare against their opponents to how the rest of the league plays against those same opponents.

And if it's more honest, let's compare them:

Harrington - 123 DYAR, league average was about 290, 2,044 Eyds, league average was roughly 2,600.

Redman (whom I had forgotten completely about) - 163 DYAR, 1,010 Eyds.

Leftwich - -215 DYAR, 29 Eyds in 5 games, so sample size is of concern there.

But that pretty much gives you a good idea. Leftwich was please-make-it-stop, Redman was terrible, and Harrington was, surprise better than Vick.

I still haven't seen the post that said Vick was a 'great' Qb as you guys are suggesting. Warrick Dunn was a decent Rb ,but teams had to stay home(less aggressive) & account for Vick which allowed for better rushing numbers from these guys. TJ Dukett had two decent 500 yrd rushing seasons .

You're right, perhaps I jumped the gun a bit, but initially I was addressing a potential conflict with McNabb, not Vick being "great". If that offended you, I apologize.

At least you didn't come here with the bogus claim that the stellar Falcon defenses(proved incompetent without Vick) were the reason he won at a 60% clip.:1orglaugh

Again, perhaps you can enlighten me as to what was "bogus"? All of those are accurate descriptions of Atlanta based on DYAR. Then again, if you're more inclined to think that having Vick on a football team was the reason the team won, good on you, but the numbers say otherwise. I'd be inclined to think you have the same view on all sports, which for lack of a better term, is just ignorant. If it makes you feel any better, I did in fact play football until college, but I'm more rooted in baseball. But please, enlighten me, so I don't waste my time being "bogus".

 

[Hot Mega]

You're right, there are other factors, however, historically, successful NFL QBs have a completion percentage somewhere in the low 60s, even those who don't have excellent O-Lines, and or receivers, (at least the ones who are any good). Additionally, those factors tend to balance out over the course of a QBs career regardless, especially as offenses adapt to particular weaknesses. Bottom line, if you are an NFL QB, and you can't maintain a decent completion percentage (Vicks career average is about 10% lower than league average), and you have a bad interception percentage (he's about double the league average in his career), you're a bad Quarterback.[/I][/B]

IF all you can do is pass. Clearly Vick is one of the most talented players in history of the league who happens to play QB because he also has a cannon for an arm.

Because of that he had immense, virtually boundless potential.

In listening to Vick and what has now become evident of his lifestyle I conclude the primary reasoning behind the stats you reference is that he didn't dedicate himself to his craft. That's what separates individuals with great talent from great accomplishments.

To me it's a little foolish to judge a QB who has the additional talent Vick has (ala Tarkenton, Staubach, Cunningham, etc.) in the same way you judge a player who only passes and can't scramble.

Like I said before, in the end it's about 1st downs and TDs....the guy under center who becomes responsible for more of those than his opponent's will likely be recognized favorably for it.

No person with a reasonable amount of knowledge of NFL football would nearly attempt to put Vick in his prime in the same sentence with a David Carr and/or a Tavaris Jackson.

You mention his drop-off from frosh to soph seasons....I suppose it's worth mention that with Vick under center at VT they only lost one game in 2 season (the only game he didn't play in). Pretty tough to top leading your team to a National title berth as a freshman. However, in spite of the drop-off you cite he was still drafted as the first overall pick in his respective draft. Even if not statistically important, that fact ought to tell you something. His first full year he was an MVP candidate...that doesn't happen by being the equivalent talent as Jackson and Carr.

What's the point of all this? Stats don't always complete a story.

 

[girk1]

You're right, perhaps I jumped the gun a bit, but initially I was addressing a potential conflict with McNabb, not Vick being "great". If that offended you, I apologize.

Again, perhaps you can enlighten me as to what was "bogus"? All of those are accurate descriptions of Atlanta based on DYAR. Then again, if you're more inclined to think that having Vick on a football team was the reason the team won, good on you, but the numbers say otherwise. I'd be inclined to think you have the same view on all sports, which for lack of a better term, is just ignorant. If it makes you feel any better, I did in fact play football until college, but I'm more rooted in baseball. But please, enlighten me, so I don't waste my time being "bogus".

Yeah I gave more credit to Vick for those wins, than those 'Vaunted' Falcon defenses you spoke of,:1orglaugh (then dropped to last in the entire League without Vick at QB2003?) & his obvious impact on the team's Rushing Offense/ Time of Possession. Both impact defenses tremendously.

I suggest you send those 'fairly' useless stats to Andy Reid (& other teams who wanted Vick) & not me I'm not the GM/Coach who signed him despite all of his baggage:dunno: You may be able to convince them that Carr/Jackson/Harrington have as much or more postive impact:dunno:

And certainly make sure you tell them you played HS Football & even some Baseball as that surely will impress them I guess.

No person with a reasonable amount of knowledge of NFL football would nearly attempt to put Vick in his prime in the same sentence with a David Carr and/or a Tavaris Jackson.


What's the point of all this? Stats don't always complete a story.

That's the problem with some of these guys who will pull up the most obscurest of Stats to compare QB's instead of IMPACT on a team & W-L column. There is really nowhere to go in a discussion once someone actually compares Jackson/Carr/Harrington,etc.... to Vick impact wise.:dunno:

I'm gonna side with the Eagles who know they got a bargain with Vick, hope he can keep clean & is still as explosive after two years prison.

 

[shayd]

IF all you can do is pass. Clearly Vick is one of the most talented players in history of the league who happens to play QB because he also has a cannon for an arm.

Because of that he had immense, virtually boundless potential.

Actually, it's completely irrelevant what means you use most, (although I would agree that Vick has tons of potential). That's exactly where EYds come in.

Looking at his career EYds/play yields:

2001- 2.75

2002- 5

2003- 2.6

2004- 2.1

2005- 4.7

2006- 3.5

For a career average of 3.4 yards/play

The league average for the period of 2001-2006 is 5.8 yards. Now you may wonder why the discrepancy, let's play around a little. If you bump Vick's completion percentage up just 2%, the correlated increase in EYds bumps him up to:

2001- 5.4

2002- 7.2

2003- 4.6

2004- 5.6

2005- 7.6

2006- 6.9

Which bumps his career average up to 6.2 EYds/play. That's assuming his rushing stats remained the exact same. That's a pretty drastic increase, and pretty well illustrates the value of accurate passing to a QB. Vick could literally have the strongest arm the world has ever seen, and if his completion % remained at his career average, he'd be a below average QB.

In listening to Vick and what has now become evident of his lifestyle I conclude the primary reasoning behind the stats you reference is that he didn't dedicate himself to his craft. That's what separates individuals with great talent from great accomplishments.

Motivation really doesn't mean much tangibly. If he wasn't trying, that's kinda his problem, and if he obliterates his career averages in most of the categories in which he's historically weak, then we'll see, but it's hard to attribute individual success to a players motivation.

To me it's a little foolish to judge a QB who has the additional talent Vick has (ala Tarkenton, Staubach, Cunningham, etc.) in the same way you judge a player who only passes and can't scramble.

Yes, he has additional talent, but his ability to rush effectively is offset by his inability to complete passes at even a league average rate.

Like I said before, in the end it's about 1st downs and TDs....the guy under center who becomes responsible for more of those than his opponent's will likely be recognized favorably for it.

Very true, and with a career EYds of 3.4, Vick would produce fewer TDs and First Downs than a league average QB.

No person with a reasonable amount of knowledge of NFL football would nearly attempt to put Vick in his prime in the same sentence with a David Carr and/or a Tavaris Jackson.

Really, that's just playing favorites. Saying a player is better than another "because I've seen it" really doesn't hold any water. When their stats are that remarkably similar, unfortunately for Vick, as a QB they have nearly identical value.

You mention his drop-off from frosh to soph seasons....I suppose it's worth mention that with Vick under center at VT they only lost one game in 2 season (the only game he didn't play in). Pretty tough to top leading your team to a National title berth as a freshman. However, in spite of the drop-off you cite he was still drafted as the first overall pick in his respective draft. Even if not statistically important, that fact ought to tell you something. His first full year he was an MVP candidate...that doesn't happen by being the equivalent talent as Jackson and Carr.

That really doesn't reflect his ability. His selection in the draft is more indicative of what his team needed and perceived as their best option. Ryan Leaf had nearly comparable success in college, but unfortunately, as he proved, college success (as a team) means nothing in terms of player value. Individual stats do.

What's the point of all this? Stats don't always complete a story.

Stats tell enough of the story to make a judgement on the ability of a player. If you disagree with that, I'm not sure what to tell you, because that's pretty much an accepted fact in all sports.

Yeah I gave more credit to Vick for those wins, than those 'Vaunted' Falcon defenses you spoke of,:1orglaugh (then dropped to last in the entire League without Vick at QB2003?) & his obvious impact on the team's Rushing Offense/ Time of Possession. Both impact defenses tremendously.

Exactly, because their offensive so significantly (TOP) effected their defense, it's more accurate to compare their performance against the league average in DYAR. And you're right, I missed the fact that they were terrible in 2003. But uh, combining their defensive DYAR, they look like:

2001: 13th

2002: 5th

2003: Last

2004: 7th

2005: 10th

2006: 12th

I suggest you send those 'fairly' useless stats to Andy Reid (& other teams who wanted Vick) & not me I'm not the GM/Coach who signed him despite all of his baggage:dunno: You may be able to convince them that Carr/Jackson/Harrington have as much or more postive impact:dunno:

I never insinuated you were. You merely seemed to think that Vick was a good QB, and uh, his stats say he isn't.

And certainly make sure you tell them you played HS Football & even some Baseball as that surely will impress them I guess.

Ah. I get it. Question my authority on the matter based on the fact that "only people who have played get it" and then dismiss it when I reveal I have. Clever.

That's the problem with some of these guys who will pull up the most obscurest of Stats to compare QB's instead of IMPACT on a team & W-L column. There is really nowhere to go in a discussion once someone actually compares Jackson/Carr/Harrington,etc.... to Vick impact wise.:dunno:

I'm gonna side with the Eagles who know they got a bargain with Vick, hope he can keep clean & is still as explosive after two years prison.

Alright, I'm done with this childishness. If you think Vick is good, good on you. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story. :thumbsup:

 

[shayd]

Oops, wrong thread. Sorry.


But just an aside, Hot Mega, the same 2% increase in rushing would increase Vicks Eyds/play to 4.2.

 

[Hot Mega]

Motivation really doesn't mean much tangibly. If he wasn't trying, that's kinda his problem, and if he obliterates his career averages in most of the categories in which he's historically weak, then we'll see, but it's hard to attribute individual success to a players motivation.

I didn't argue it tangibly did. I cited his own admissions and apparent lifestyle as a possible factor to whatever degree his obvious talent may not be reflecting in certain statistics.

You believe it's "hard to attribute individual success to a players (sic) motivation."??? Wow.

Yes, he has additional talent, but his ability to rush effectively is offset by his inability to complete passes at even a league average rate.

That's probably not true (the notion that it's an offset). It would be wrong-headed to judge Vick's rushing stats as some offset to completing passes as many plays that may otherwise result in sacks turn into positive plays and in some cases big plays because of his ability to run.

Really, that's just playing favorites. Saying a player is better than another "because I've seen it" really doesn't hold any water. When their stats are that remarkably similar, unfortunately for Vick, as a QB they have nearly identical value.

"playing favorites" huh? I guess that's what those who signed him to endorsement deals and selected him for Pro Bowls were doing as well.:dunno:

That really doesn't reflect his ability. His selection in the draft is more indicative of what his team needed and perceived as their best option. Ryan Leaf had nearly comparable success in college, but unfortunately, as he proved, college success (as a team) means nothing in terms of player value. Individual stats do.

You might have have had a slim point had Vick went on to become a "bust" in the NFL like Leaf. Even as such, Vick only played college football for 2 years and only lost one game (the national title game) as a starter. Their collegiate careers don't match up.

But me citing his placing in the draft wasn't to necessarily support his ability but to counter your reference to his drop-off from his frosh year to soph year. Point being, even as a second year player with such a drop-off, he was STILL chosen no. 1 overall.

Stats tell enough of the story to make a judgement on the ability of a player. If you disagree with that, I'm not sure what to tell you, because that's pretty much an accepted fact in all sports.

Alas we find ourselves in another theoretical versus practical application debate...I don't disagree with Vick's stats....they are what they are. What they reflect though is again where you're anecdotally mislead. The fact that he's been a winner at the collegiate level, a multi-year Pro Bowler and record setting player (FOs doesn't even have enough bandwidth nor storage space to cite them all) who's lead his team to multiple post season victories are what's at odds with the stats you rely on.

All along I've been thinking you had the bigger problem for contending the absurd notion that Vick in his prime has no greater value than a player like David Carr in his prime. I apologize for such a thought....I'm obviously the one with the bigger problem for even debating such an absurdity with you.

 

[girk1]

Stats tell enough of the story to make a judgement on the ability of a player. If you disagree with that, I'm not sure what to tell you, because that's pretty much an accepted fact in all sports.



Exactly, because their offensive so significantly (TOP) effected their defense, it's more accurate to compare their performance against the league average in DYAR. And you're right, I missed the fact that they were terrible in 2003. But uh, combining their defensive DYAR, they look like:

2001: 13th

2002: 5th

2003: Last

2004: 7th

2005: 10th

2006: 12th

Thanks for agreeing with me on how most of those defensive rankings(not your obscure stats though) were established due to Vick's ENORMOUS impact on the teams as a starter. Those great Falcons defenses, which YOU gave credit for the teams success, were ranked 25th,26th, & 24th the 3 seasons before Vick arrived. They Improved due to the Falcons dominate rushing Offense because of Vick's impact & dropped to 32nd the season Vick was injured. There is really nothing more to add to that absurd suggestion about the Falcons defense being responsible for that teams success during Vick's era.



You said I 'Questioned your authority' Shayd:dunno: Exactlly what authority does playing HS Football & Baseball(?) have to do with understanding a NFL player's value/talent to a franchise. Unlike you I have deferred this to the people making the decisions like Andy Reid/management(several teams were very interested even though they knew of the backlash ,but figured he is worth it) & the guys writing the big Checks. I like many guys here have played HS sports( football/basketball) ,but I see no relevance to the NFL & it gives you or no one some supposed 'Authority'.

Fact is obscure stats don't tell the whole story & many teams still wanted to sign Vick badly & the Eagles saw his 2 million dollars as a steal/bargain. Despite the backlash & internet experts/stat geeks who question the man's Playing ability.

You believe it's "hard to attribute individual success to a players (sic) motivation."??? Wow.



That's probably not true (the notion that it's an offset). It would be wrong-headed to judge Vick's rushing stats as some offset to completing passes as many plays that may otherwise result in sacks turn into positive plays and in some cases big plays because of his ability to run.



"playing favorites" huh? I guess that's what those who signed him to endorsement deals and selected him for Pro Bowls were doing as well.:dunno:



You might have have had a slim point had Vick went on to become a "bust" in the NFL like Leaf. Even as such, Vick only played college football for 2 years and only lost one game (the national title game) as a starter. Their collegiate careers don't match up.

But me citing his placing in the draft wasn't to necessarily support his ability but to counter your reference to his drop-off from his frosh year to soph year. Point being, even as a second year player with such a drop-off, he was STILL chosen no. 1 overall.



Alas we find ourselves in another theoretical versus practical application debate...I don't disagree with Vick's stats....they are what they are. What they reflect though is again where you're anecdotally mislead. The fact that he's been a winner at the collegiate level, a multi-year Pro Bowler and record setting player (FOs doesn't even have enough bandwidth nor storage space to cite them all) who's lead his team to multiple post season victories are what's at odds with the stats you rely on.

All along I've been thinking you had the bigger problem for contending the absurd notion that Vick in his prime has no greater value than a player like David Carr in his prime. I apologize for such a thought....I'm obviously the one with the bigger problem for even debating such an absurdity with you.

Hell I thought it was bad when Vick was compared to Carr/Tavaris Jackson, but Ryan Leaf came out of nowhere. Vick is disliked even more than I imagined when someone can compare him to Leaf with a straight face.

 

[Gomorra]

Vicks no Peyton Manning but he's got talent and there's really no arguing that. Any QB that can rush for 1k and pass for 2.5K is gonna be a threat anywhere. I don't understand why people hate on Vick for rushing like he does. He was my favorite player to watch in 06 and I'm glad hes back

 

[girk1]

Vicks no Peyton Manning but he's got talent and there's really no arguing that. Any QB that can rush for 1k and pass for 2.5K is gonna be a threat anywhere. I don't understand why people hate on Vick for rushing like he does. He was my favorite player to watch in 06 and I'm glad hes back

Yes. No one has put Vick in the Brady/Manning coversations ,but for someone to actually watch NFL games & dismiss his overall impact is:dunno:


Steve Young(AND I am NOT suggesting Vick shall ever approach Young) was never able to even complete 55% of his passes in his first 4 seasons in the League & could only dream of a 75 passer rating.Young Nearly had double the interception to Td ratio & was gladly shipped out of town where he played back up years in San Fran before he got his chance again.(People will blame Tampa Bay for Young's failures ,but Doug Williams had some moderate success there until he felt unappreciated & left for the USFL).

Thankfully Bill Walsh was making football decisions in SF & not these 'stat guys' who would have deemed Young a complete bust(Tampa Bay drafted Testeverde & gladly traded Young) as some here have suggested.

 

[Hot Mega]

Yes. No one has put Vick in the Brady/Manning coversations ,but for someone to actually watch NFL games & dismiss his overall impact is:dunno:

Well Manning (Peyton) is the example of where stats can make a player look much better than he actually is. Peyton Manning throughout his career has been a stat sheet stuffer. Where ever there are favorable stats to be accumulated Peyton is well represented.

He's had the very good fortune throughout his career to be a part of LOADED teams and have had some of the very best and clearly great receivers to pass the ball to.

It's undeniable that in his NFL career the Colts have had some of the best defenses in the league.

I will give Manning this, he appears to be a dedicated, focused player but in the pocket he pitter patted his feet more than a tap dancer and until very recently he's been an absolute choke artist dating back to his days at UT.

Manning was supposed to win a million Heisman trophies, a million national championships and beat UF every year. He did neither, not even beating UF once....despite having again...LOADED teams.

He leaves UT and Tee Martin promptly beats UF and wins UT a national title.

Peyton was suppose to lead the Colts to multiple SB wins.....he has just one in beating one of the worst opponents in recent SB history.

I shudder to think what Vick would have been able to do with the coaching, receivers, defense and running game Manning has been so fortunate to have throughout his career.

 

[cementhead]

Michael Vick = scumbag:ban:

Philadelphia Eagles = assholes

 

[girk1]

Well Manning (Peyton) is the example of where stats can make a player look much better than he actually is. Peyton Manning throughout his career has been a stat sheet stuffer. Where ever there are favorable stats to be accumulated Peyton is well represented.

He's had the very good fortune throughout his career to be a part of LOADED teams and have had some of the very best and clearly great receivers to pass the ball to.

It's undeniable that in his NFL career the Colts have had some of the best defenses in the league.

I will give Manning this, he appears to be a dedicated, focused player but in the pocket he pitter patted his feet more than a tap dancer and until very recently he's been an absolute choke artist dating back to his days at UT.

Manning was supposed to win a million Heisman trophies, a million national championships and beat UF every year. He did neither, not even beating UF once....despite having again...LOADED teams.

He leaves UT and Tee Martin promptly beats UF and wins UT a national title.

Peyton was suppose to lead the Colts to multiple SB wins.....he has just one in beating one of the worst opponents in recent SB history.

I shudder to think what Vick would have been able to do with the coaching, receivers, defense and running game Manning has been so fortunate to have throughout his career.

Yes. I remember how Manning was publicly skewered because of his many documented failings ,but it is amazing how a single Super Bowl win can change a Qb's 'legacy' & public perception. I have personally never thought Manning was any better than Dan Fouts(I was a huge fan of Fouts ,John Jefferson,Chandler,Joiner,Winslow,& the 'Air Coryell' Chargers..) or Marino ,but he was fortunate enough to play on more well rounded teams than those two.

The defenses of Tony Dungy played a HUGE part in the Colts winning the Championship.


Though Mannng is a tough /dedicated QB the guy does get 'happy feet' & is a bit too emotional at times. He has never consistently exhibited the poise of Brady or Montana. As a 'pure' passer Vick didn't measure up at the time ,but his IMPACT as a player was undeniable.


I remember being pissed when coaches/analyst would suggest turning Vick into a 'pocket passer':dunno: & not utilizing a very important aspect of his game(running). The League & Coaches are horrified at the thought of a teams star QB being injured(& losing their jobs), but I always thought a QB could better protect himself on the run than being a statue in the pocket.


Steve Young's play at the less talented Bucs was dreadful(could only dream of having Vick's success in ATL) ,but with time & surrounding him with the talent/system in San Francisco one can see the obvious improvements. No doubt Vick could have benefitted greatly from the same talent/system as did Young.
I don't know what 2 years in prison could do to athlete at such a sensitive position ,but hopefully he has something left. Maybe some athletic ability is gone ,gut his dedication/work ethic shall probably improve.