INTERESTING COMPARISON ON PATRIOT AND (1 Viewer)

[Mik789fl]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

 

[Moldy Potato]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

 

[BGP]

Football is mostly about the OL and DL. Its not sexy and doesn't fit the fantasy football mindset but that's how it is.

Anyone that believes you should keep burning high picks on QBs, WRs, and RBs doesn't understand the game. You know which teams do that year after year? The Lions and Cardinals, two of the worst franchises in the NFL.

 

[matt jones]

I honestly believe Jerry Rice wouldn't post a 1,000 yard receiving season with Michael Vick at QB.

In an unrelated note Jerry Rice always had an outstanding QB, Randy Moss, not so much.

 

[Kit Fisto]

Football is mostly about the OL and DL. Its not sexy and doesn't fit the fantasy football mindset but that's how it is.Anyone that believes you should keep burning high picks on QBs, WRs, and RBs doesn't understand the game. You know which teams do that year after year? The Lions and Cardinals, two of the worst franchises in the NFL.

What he said.

 

[AB in DC]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

Dropped passes for Atlanta7 Alge Crumpler

7 Roddy White

6 Alge Crumpler

Dropped passes for NE

6 Ben Watson

no one else above 4.

Source: STATS/Washington Post

 

[Moldy Potato]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

Dropped passes for Atlanta7 Alge Crumpler

7 Roddy White

6 Alge Crumpler

Dropped passes for NE

6 Ben Watson

no one else above 4.

Source: STATS/Washington Post

Who says a QB doesn't contribute to that? Have you seen the way Vick throws the football? Even if it is on target, that does not mean it's an easy ball to catch. The ability to put "touch" on a ball is a severely overlooked feature of a QB.Not to mention, regarding those dropped passes: that's 20 drops out of 388 attempts. If all those balls are caught, Vick still has a 57.7% completion percentage.

 

[jurb26]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

Dropped passes for Atlanta7 Alge Crumpler

7 Roddy White

6 Alge Crumpler

Dropped passes for NE

6 Ben Watson

no one else above 4.

Source: STATS/Washington Post

Who says a QB doesn't contribute to that? Have you seen the way Vick throws the football? Even if it is on target, that does not mean it's an easy ball to catch. The ability to put "touch" on a ball is a severely overlooked feature of a QB.Not to mention, regarding those dropped passes: that's 20 drops out of 388 attempts. If all those balls are caught, Vick still has a 57.7% completion percentage.

I was thinking this same thing when I read those stats. Vick has one of the strongest (if not the strongest) arms ever. Moreover, it does not seem as though he ever takes the "mustard" off his passes to make it easier for the guy making the catch. There are times when having that kind of arm strength are great but there are also times when you simply have to take a little off the pass. I really don't watch Vick nearly enough to say he does this all the time. Only that the times I have watched him it seems to be the case.

 

[jurb26]

Just looking over the stats on http://profootballreference.com/teams/nwe2006.htm I found it rather amazing that Brady had over 3500 yds passing and 24 TDs. Yet not a single WR/TE/RB with 800 yards or more or more than 4 TDs. That seems rather odd and amazing.

 

[PatsFan72]

It's not the hard throws that are causing Vick's passer rating to be low. Favre, Bledsoe, and others also throw damn hard. It's Vick's lack of field vision. He usually has one read, and then runs. No check downs, 2nd, 3rd options, Read and Run, that's what he does. And for a short QB, his touch does need to be better, but don't blame the hard fast ones, most WRs can catch those, it's his inability to put touch on it when he needs to, that is part of his problem as a throwing QB. He's still a great player, but not a good passer.

 

[Moldy Potato]

Just looking over the stats on http://profootballreference.com/teams/nwe2006.htm I found it rather amazing that Brady had over 3500 yds passing and 24 TDs. Yet not a single WR/TE/RB with 800 yards or more or more than 4 TDs. That seems rather odd and amazing.

Similar situation with Brees. Although he obviously has stars in Horn, Bush, and Colston, he has also gotten production out of nobodies. How often this year have we seen him get production out of guys like Mark Campbell, Billy Miller, our TE Owens (still don't know his first name), Mike Karney, Aaron Stecker, Terrence Copper, Jamal Jones, etc. etc. etc.

In regards to Vick, people need to learn that a good QB doesn't need superstar receivers to have success in this league.

 

[-jb-]

looking at things a bit more holistically, the patriots and falcons were the 11th & 12th rated offenses, respectfully. Defensively, 6th & 22nd. You win on both sides of the ball.

eta - yards gained by each QB, passing and rushing:

Brady - 3631

Vick - 3513

 

[David Yudkin]

I'm not saying Vick is Peton Manning in the passing department, but if you caompare ATL vs NE, the following are way different:

coaching

defense

play calling

game prep

pass protection

If you factor all those into the mix, I think the comparison helps explain why Brady has fared better than Vick with essentially a hodge podge of receivers.

 

[jurb26]

I'm not saying Vick is Peton Manning in the passing department, but if you caompare ATL vs NE, the following are way different:coachingdefenseplay callinggame preppass protectionIf you factor all those into the mix, I think the comparison helps explain why Brady has fared better than Vick with essentially a hodge podge of receivers.

I think it's rather obvious that a few of these point directly to STRENGTHS of Brady over Vick. The play calling does because Brady has a skill set that allows him to handle far more in this department. Your next point, game prep, is a result of Brady and his ability to apply/grasp the many different game plans/schemes. I still have yet to see another QB with a good a pocket prensence as Brady.

 

[David Yudkin]

I'm not saying Vick is Peton Manning in the passing department, but if you caompare ATL vs NE, the following are way different:coachingdefenseplay callinggame preppass protectionIf you factor all those into the mix, I think the comparison helps explain why Brady has fared better than Vick with essentially a hodge podge of receivers.

I think it's rather obvious that a few of these point directly to STRENGTHS of Brady over Vick. The play calling does because Brady has a skill set that allows him to handle far more in this department. Your next point, game prep, is a result of Brady and his ability to apply/grasp the many different game plans/schemes. I still have yet to see another QB with a good a pocket prensence as Brady.

My point was that Pats >>> Falcons in many areas, so that would correspond to Brady >>> Vick no mater who was lining up at WR for either team. Certainly Vick is not in the same class as Brady as a passer, but IMO the gap between Vick and Brady is exacerbated by the differnece in the two teams.

 

[Big Score]

looking at things a bit more holistically, the patriots and falcons were the 11th & 12th rated offenses, respectfully. Defensively, 6th & 22nd. You win on both sides of the ball.eta - yards gained by each QB, passing and rushing:Brady - 3631Vick - 3513

To further add on:Brady's number of pass attempts = 516 total - of which 136 (or 26%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on. Vick's number of pass attempts = 388 total - of which 128 (or 33%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on.

 

[Buttmonkey]

And then it happened. Guys who used to be on Favre's jock have now jumped to Brady. Geez, Brady is good, why the comparison to Vick. Uh, sorry Brady fans, and I know he's damn good, but he's not the end-all, be-all of QBs. Vick isn't either for that matter.

And who the flip cares if Atlanta's receivers were former #1 picks - oh we all know first round receivers are guaranteed lock :X . Some guy on here stated that even when the ball is thrown directly to a receiver and he drops it, it's still Vicks fault. OMFG - you're an idiot.

 

[Mik789fl]

I'm not saying Vick is Peton Manning in the passing department, but if you caompare ATL vs NE, the following are way different:coachingdefenseplay callinggame preppass protectionIf you factor all those into the mix, I think the comparison helps explain why Brady has fared better than Vick with essentially a hodge podge of receivers.

I think it's rather obvious that a few of these point directly to STRENGTHS of Brady over Vick. The play calling does because Brady has a skill set that allows him to handle far more in this department. Your next point, game prep, is a result of Brady and his ability to apply/grasp the many different game plans/schemes. I still have yet to see another QB with a good a pocket prensence as Brady.

My point was that Pats >>> Falcons in many areas, so that would correspond to Brady >>> Vick no mater who was lining up at WR for either team. Certainly Vick is not in the same class as Brady as a passer, but IMO the gap between Vick and Brady is exacerbated by the differnece in the two teams.

Good point. Here's a "what if"? What if Brady and Vick were flip-flopped,would The Pats still have won 3 Super Bowls with Vick? Would The Falcons have won more games and seen more January's? I think the latter might be true,The Falcons would have won more,but I don't think the Pats get 3 rings with Vick,possibly proving the point of the original post.

 

[billyjoe]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

So Brady is better then Vick?Great thread. Joe needs to make this sticky. This will generate a lot of debate.

 

[David Yudkin]

I'm not saying Vick is Peton Manning in the passing department, but if you caompare ATL vs NE, the following are way different:coachingdefenseplay callinggame preppass protectionIf you factor all those into the mix, I think the comparison helps explain why Brady has fared better than Vick with essentially a hodge podge of receivers.

I think it's rather obvious that a few of these point directly to STRENGTHS of Brady over Vick. The play calling does because Brady has a skill set that allows him to handle far more in this department. Your next point, game prep, is a result of Brady and his ability to apply/grasp the many different game plans/schemes. I still have yet to see another QB with a good a pocket prensence as Brady.

My point was that Pats >>> Falcons in many areas, so that would correspond to Brady >>> Vick no mater who was lining up at WR for either team. Certainly Vick is not in the same class as Brady as a passer, but IMO the gap between Vick and Brady is exacerbated by the differnece in the two teams.

Good point. Here's a "what if"? What if Brady and Vick were flip-flopped,would The Pats still have won 3 Super Bowls with Vick? Would The Falcons have won more games and seen more January's? I think the latter might be true,The Falcons would have won more,but I don't think the Pats get 3 rings with Vick,possibly proving the point of the original post.

Vick doesn't fit the Patriots offense as currently deployed. Whether the coaching staff would have been able to design a new scheme to fit Vick's game is anyone's guess. Similarly, the different regimes in Atlanta were not able to advance deep into the playoffs with Vick. I'm hypothesizing that while Vick was part of the reason, he was not the primary reason for that. So adding Brady probably would not have suddenly made the Falcons Super Bowl champs. Net result, Pats would likely not have been 3 time champs while the Falcons would not have won any titles (although they may have won more regular season games and a few playoff games).I think Brady + Belichick + the Pats scheme + the rest of the Pats team all fit great together, so altering that formula would have yielded different results (ie not as much success). Interesting debate but one that is impossible to really prove either way.

 

[Liquid Tension]

looking at things a bit more holistically, the patriots and falcons were the 11th & 12th rated offenses, respectfully. Defensively, 6th & 22nd. You win on both sides of the ball.eta - yards gained by each QB, passing and rushing:Brady - 3631Vick - 3513

To further add on:Brady's number of pass attempts = 516 total - of which 136 (or 26%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on. Vick's number of pass attempts = 388 total - of which 128 (or 33%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on.

BigScore. These are the types of comments that are interesting to me. QB's are not going to be great when throwing from 3rd and long situations very often. Of course, some QB's like Chad Pennington dump off on 3rd and 8 on an amazingly high % of the time just to help their QB rating (that is for another day)It is easy to look at stats, but what bout the protection for the QB's? Brady gets excellent protection as does a guy like Pennington. However, like almost every QB, when their protection breaks down they are simply not that good. When you have Stabler type protection most QB's can deliver.Edited to have it say Pennington dumps off on 3rd and 8 not Brady

 

[Frank Black]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

I agree, but only to an extent. Without having seen Vick passing even to 1 good NFL WR in his career, I don't think we have sufficient evidence yet to rule on the definitive reasons for Vick's passing woes.

 

[Frank Black]

I'm not saying Vick is Peton Manning in the passing department, but if you caompare ATL vs NE, the following are way different:coachingdefenseplay callinggame preppass protectionIf you factor all those into the mix, I think the comparison helps explain why Brady has fared better than Vick with essentially a hodge podge of receivers.

I think it's rather obvious that a few of these point directly to STRENGTHS of Brady over Vick. The play calling does because Brady has a skill set that allows him to handle far more in this department. Your next point, game prep, is a result of Brady and his ability to apply/grasp the many different game plans/schemes. I still have yet to see another QB with a good a pocket prensence as Brady.

My point was that Pats >>> Falcons in many areas, so that would correspond to Brady >>> Vick no mater who was lining up at WR for either team. Certainly Vick is not in the same class as Brady as a passer, but IMO the gap between Vick and Brady is exacerbated by the differnece in the two teams.

 

[Phlash]

looking at things a bit more holistically, the patriots and falcons were the 11th & 12th rated offenses, respectfully. Defensively, 6th & 22nd. You win on both sides of the ball.eta - yards gained by each QB, passing and rushing:Brady - 3631Vick - 3513

To further add on:Brady's number of pass attempts = 516 total - of which 136 (or 26%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on. Vick's number of pass attempts = 388 total - of which 128 (or 33%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on.

BigScore. These are the types of comments that are interesting to me. QB's are not going top be great when throwing from 3rd and long situations very often. Of course, some QB's like Tom Brady dump off on 3rd and 8 on an amazingly high % of the time just to help their QB rating (that is for another day)

So Brady is a statwhore now, huh?

 

[Phlash]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

I agree, but only to an extent. Without having seen Vick passing even to 1 good NFL WR in his career, I don't think we have sufficient evidence yet to rule on the definitive reasons for Vick's passing woes.

Peerless Price

 

[Liquid Tension]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

I agree, but only to an extent. Without having seen Vick passing even to 1 good NFL WR in his career, I don't think we have sufficient evidence yet to rule on the definitive reasons for Vick's passing woes.

Having a good TE helps a QB and Vick has that. He also has been supported by a decent running attack which makes play action more effective

 

[Liquid Tension]

looking at things a bit more holistically, the patriots and falcons were the 11th & 12th rated offenses, respectfully. Defensively, 6th & 22nd. You win on both sides of the ball.eta - yards gained by each QB, passing and rushing:Brady - 3631Vick - 3513

To further add on:Brady's number of pass attempts = 516 total - of which 136 (or 26%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on. Vick's number of pass attempts = 388 total - of which 128 (or 33%) were on 3rd down, generally the least favorable down to pass on.

BigScore. These are the types of comments that are interesting to me. QB's are not going top be great when throwing from 3rd and long situations very often. Of course, some QB's like Tom Brady dump off on 3rd and 8 on an amazingly high % of the time just to help their QB rating (that is for another day)

So Brady is a statwhore now, huh?

I will correct this; I honestly meant to write Chad Pennington and we were on the topic of Brady. My mistake. I will make the change

 

[Liquid Tension]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

I agree, but only to an extent. Without having seen Vick passing even to 1 good NFL WR in his career, I don't think we have sufficient evidence yet to rule on the definitive reasons for Vick's passing woes.

Peerless Price

Peerless Price = Mediocrity

 

[Slum Lord]

I agree, but only to an extent. Without having seen Vick passing even to 1 good NFL WR in his career, I don't think we have sufficient evidence yet to rule on the definitive reasons for Vick's passing woes.

There is no end to the Vick apologists. Never had one single good WR?? Did you see Brett Favre throwing too...Ruvell Martin? Carlile (spelling?) Holliday? These guys came off the scrap heap and caught some darn impressive balls at the end of the year. Are good WR's really that hard to find? I've been watching Brett throw to pedestrian WR's his whole career (heck Bill Schroeder had a few 1000+ yard seasons, does anyone know who he is?) and year after year, he produces. Walker, one year. Two years with Sharpe (pre-MVP no less) and... who else? Freeman? Brett MADE Freeman a great WR. No one wanted Driver, since he was a 7th round draft pick.You cant say after 6 years they never had a good WR. No way. Vick just isnt any good passing the ball. Thats just reality.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I saw this in a short article in The Orlando Sentinel after The Pats upset The Chargers,basically the article stated the fact that New England is winning with a group of wide-outs that are cast-offs and free agents from other teams while Atlanta has a group of #1 draft picks at the position and "experts" contend if Mike Vick could only get some "decent" receivers he'd be much better. I know many factors go into a winning team but do you think the fact that The Pats keep winning with their wr's and The Falcons passing game struggles is a result of coaching and/or a system or the result of the quarterback play? If it's the latter then Mike Vick may never get "better". Interested to hear some thoughts on this.

I think people are kidding themselves if they think Vick's passing woes are a result of his receivers.

I agree, but only to an extent. Without having seen Vick passing even to 1 good NFL WR in his career, I don't think we have sufficient evidence yet to rule on the definitive reasons for Vick's passing woes.

Peerless Price

Peerless Price = Mediocrity

peerless price + Vick = less than Mediocrity

 

[NEUPJ]

Vick has one of the strongest (if not the strongest) arms ever.

Jeff George disagrees. However, he was also a complete disappointment.

 

[Family Matters]

I find it amazing that without any evidence to show that Vick is a good passing QB people have defended him for years by blaming everything and everyone else around him. It's never Vick's fault. Yet let a known good QB have a bad year and everyone blamed that QB. Why does Vick have a different set of standards than others?

The answer is that by judging his performance on the same standards as other QB's would lead to a logical conclusion which is that he is not a very good passer.

He's had 6 years to prove something. To date we know what we already knew and that is he can run better any QB ever has. But that makes him a 1 demisonal QB. Of course most QB's are 1 demisonal. They usually can only pass. Why is that a problem for Vick? The reason is that defenses have to plan to stop the run and the pass if they expect to win. But with Vick they only have to stop the run. The threat of passing is absent by NFL standards. IOW-no need to double cover anyone so the safety can be comiited to helping with the run. Other QB's that can only pass still have their team's running game to compliment the offensive attack. Atlanta does not pose a dual threat like most teams.

Even if you still want to argue what a great QB he is wouldn't we at least have to agree that he should be better than his back up? I'm not talking about Schaub either.

I bet everyone here would agree that Doug Johnson was not a good QB. Certainly not worthy of being a starter. Right? Of course not. Yet in 2003 when Vick was injured the first 10 games, Johnson was the starter. So if Vick is a better QB then shouldn't his numbers be at least better than Johnson's? You woiuld think so. Here their numbers form 2003:

Vick: 50 comp on 100 att for a 50% comp %, 4 TD, 3 INT and a YPA of 5.8.

Johnson:136 comp on 243 att for a 55% comp %, 8 TD, 12 INT and a YPA of 6.8.

The only thing Vick did better was throw for fewer INT's. Johnson the back up out performed him in every other catagory. I think this makes it clear. Same system, same line, same WR/TE/RB's. Same everything but the results.

Since then Vick's numbers haven't been much better except for the rare good game. He simply isn't a good passer and there is 6 years of hard evidence to prove it. After 74 games I think we know.

 

[Bri]

if there were steps-A great WR first runs his routes well, and catches the ball properly, then makes a big play. Atlanta's WRs just try and make the big play, every play. New England WRs try to go thru the steps one at a time. They rarely get to the big play step but they're doing it the right way.

It seems like you can't watch Marvin Harrison play and think Atlanta WRs know how to play the position.

 

[Fiddles]

I dont know how anyone that watched all of the falcons games this year can put most if not all of the blame on vick.

 

[Buttmonkey]

IThe only thing Vick did better was throw for fewer INT's. J.

Yeah, INTs aren't important

 

[Family Matters]

IThe only thing Vick did better was throw for fewer INT's. J.

Yeah, INTs aren't important

Not sure I understand your point. I said he did that better. I never said that it wasn't important. Yet that was the only performance indicator that he was better at. Any thoughts on the rest of the performance? At least you didn't discount everything else about his perofrmance. Or did you?