Is Michael Vick the NEW Kordell Stewart? (1 Viewer)

[SoloMatisse]

Give me a minute. This is probably not a popular take with many fans out there, but Im willing to bet 75% of the FF community arent all together in disagreement here. I dont want to turn this into a bash Michael Vick post, though based on his low Qratings and passing efficiency, poor field vision, and lack of pocket presence, it wouldnt be hard to do. Ah, forget about it....I'll bash away. So the Kordell to Mike comparisons...

-exceptionally strong arms down the field

-all world athleticism

-WR speed

-less than average accuracy on short, medium AND long routes

-strong ability to move the chains on 3rd down.....by RUNNING.

- for the most part, both WINNING QBs. (correct me if Im wrong Steelers fans, but your boy won more than lost)

-both have been to TITLE games??? Is that correct? Kordell got close, right?...

That's enough to make a point...

Now, is it such a reach to compare Mike to Kordell and wonder at what point the infatuation with the raw skills will erode? When Mike left VaTech, and as somewhat of a local observer , I was blown away with Vick's skills. I thought he had the strongest arm Id ever seen paired with the fastest legs a QB has ever had. How could that combo NOT work out? One, lack of height contributing to the vision problems. Two, lack of, well, other intangibles. Ill leave it at that. The WR talent around Vick should be coming together THIS year. At some point, HE's got to be the guy to TRUST his outs and make THEM better. The running attack has definitely been there....much credited to Vick's presence. That should continue. Solid TE play. So, when's it going to happen? When will the total game develop? More importantly....will he NEED the total game to continue to develop? What's everyone's thinking on this? Is Vick really above his peers to the point that he'll never really need to be a solid passer to win the BIG game? And, just to be clear...to me, there is only one BIG game. Greatness is not remembered or measured for how well you or your team performed in a conference championship game. Im talking about getting to the BIG STAGE and getting it done. To this point, he's on the other end of a terribly lopsided trade that gave a team which I feel will evenutally WIN A SUPERBBOWL the league's best player......Ladainian Tomlinson.

Im losing my patience waiting for the great one to emerge. Will it happen???......and at what point will Mike Vick be considered simply a RICH MAN's Kordell Stewart??? Ugh......

feedback here would be cool.

 

[Sweet Love]

No...because he will never sniff 20 TDs through the air.

 

[rexnervous]

And, just to be clear...to me, there is only one BIG game. Greatness is not remembered or measured for how well you or your team performed in a conference championship game. Im talking about getting to the BIG STAGE and getting it done. To this point, he's on the other end of a terribly lopsided trade that gave a team which I feel will evenutally WIN A SUPERBBOWL the league's best player......Ladainian Tomlinson.

A short list of players who have never WON A SUPERBOWL/BIG STAGE AND GETTING IT DONEan Marino

Peyton Manning

Barry Sanders

Bo Jackson

That being said, while I find Vick exciting, I was very disappointed in how poorly he regressed this past year. There's only so much you can blame on coaching.

But I'd take him a million times over before I took Kordell. More explosive, and as a QB is more worrisome to defensive coaches than Kordell ever was.

While I believe coaching isn't the entire problem, I also think that the ATL coaches have to say "the hell with it, we've got one helluva a different talent here" and just let Mike go. Will he ever be a great QB? Probably not. But he just might get his team to the Super Bowl. And win it.

Not placing any bets on that, though.

 

[Steel City]

Vick has done nothing, at all, to make me believe that he's any better than Stewart was. The statistics seem to back that opinion up.

Stewart: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/StewKo00.htm

Vick: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/VickMi00.htm

 

[SoloMatisse]

good #s, Steel City. I knew I could count on a Pitt fan for some backup. Kordell had that one monster year with 21 passing TDs and 11 rushing. Pretty impressive. So far, Vick is best known for his rushing skills, but he hasnt come close to 11 TDs or 21 thru the air. Wow...maybe Vick is a poor man's Kordell??

 

[Texasmouth]

Well, the same problem is happening in Atlanta that happened in Pittsburgh, a very talented qb who showed some real flashes of greatness when playing his way. So then what happened in Pitt? They tried to make him into a traditional QB. He wasn't one. Before long, Stewart was bounced, gone from team to team and he is just an after thought.

Same thing will happen to Vick if they dont fit the system to him instead of trying to fit him into the system. He could get this team right back into the playoffs this year if people would let him play the way he wants to.

Anyone who tries to say Vick is so much better than Stewart on any level is full of crap. he made the same crazy plays in college and the pros.....with his feet not his arm....

 

[Da Guru]

There are 32 NFL starters. Vick is in the 20-32 range. There is no doubt he should be a starter, but he is a lower tier starter.

 

[UnknownCoach]

Stewart ran for 300 yards 4 times in 9 seasons as a starter. Vick has run for 300 in 4 of 5 years as a starter (only time he missed it was when he missed 11 games). Stewart ran for 500 yards 1 time. Vick has run for over 500 3 times (all three seasons in which he was the primary QB). The most Stewart ever ran for is 537. Vick exceeded that all 3 of his 15 game seasons and has run for over 900. When Vick is healthy, he's been a lock to lead all QBs in rushing.

Stewart's threw more INTs than TDs and did so in half the seasons he played. The only time Vick did that was his rookie year when he had 3 picks and 2 TDs.

No, Vick is not Stewart. He's a much better runner and doesnt turn the ball over as much.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Kordell was nowhere near the rushing threat that Vick is.

 

[drdgreenlove]

vick doesnt cry probably because he doesnt care

 

[boofatty]

FACTS:

Vick is the best running back the Falcons have.

Vick can't catch, so that makes Stewart the better "slash" player.

Vick won't catch, so that makes Stewart the better "team" player.

Ron Mexico is a better "pocket passer" than Mike Vick.

Vick sucks - just ask Ron Mexico.

 

[Weiner Dog]

...and doesnt turn the ball over as much.

Not true. If you include fumbles lost (which you must), Vick has averaged 1.09 TO's/game in his career. Slash only sported 0.82 TO's/game.

 

[PMENFAN]

Both support my belief that NFL QB's have to be passers first. Both have running skills that compare with RB's, and that's an asset, but not enough of one to overcome a deficiency in passing.

With Kordell, I just don't believe he wanted to work hard enough to keep his job. He was a far better passer than Vick, and not as good a runner. His running numbers are better, because he was a legitimate threat to pass, which opened up the field for his runs. You also have to consider that LB's have gotten more agile in the time too, which leads to Vicks lower stat's rushing. Vick is simply a better runner.

I think it's fair to compare the two.

But, on NFL QB's, there is no doubt that mobility is a great assett, just look at Elway, Favre, or Gannon. Mobility was huge for them. Brady's mobility isn't in getting outside, but feeling pressure and shuffling his feet to get away. He's got different mobility. But, Stewart, Vick and even Cunningham had excellent mobility. Randall was the best passer of the 3, followed by stewart, and I'm not sure you could call Vick a passer yet. Their success though proves that you have to be a passer first, and the mobility has to be just a compliment to your game. Running QB's are great in College, where they can beat people to the corner, or break 220 LB tackles. But, it doesn't work in the NFL where the LB's are 250 and the ends have 4.7 speed. It's a different game, and Vick has just reinforced what I believe. It wont work as a runner. You have to be a passer first.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Both support my belief that NFL QB's have to be passers first.  Both have running skills that compare with RB's, and that's an asset, but not enough of one to overcome a deficiency in passing.

With Kordell, I just don't believe he wanted to work hard enough to keep his job.  He was a far better passer than Vick, and not as good a runner.  His running numbers are better, because he was a legitimate threat to pass, which opened up the field for his runs.  You also have to consider that LB's have gotten more agile in the time too, which leads to Vicks lower stat's rushing.  Vick is simply a better runner. 

I think it's fair to compare the two. 

But, on NFL QB's, there is no doubt that mobility is a great assett, just look at Elway, Favre, or Gannon.  Mobility was huge for them.  Brady's mobility isn't in getting outside, but feeling pressure and shuffling his feet to get away.  He's got different mobility.  But, Stewart, Vick and even Cunningham had excellent mobility.  Randall was the best passer of the 3, followed by stewart, and I'm not sure you could call Vick a passer yet.  Their success though proves that you have to be a passer first, and the mobility has to be just a compliment to your game.  Running QB's are great in College, where they can beat people to the corner, or break 220 LB tackles.  But, it doesn't work in the NFL where the LB's are 250 and the ends have 4.7 speed.  It's a different game, and Vick has just reinforced what I believe.  It wont work as a runner.  You have to be a passer first.

I'm not sure it hasn't worked for Vick. His team was 11-5 last year and went to the NFL Championship game. They were 2-10 the year he got hurt and when he came back they won 3 out of the last 4. Year before 9-6-1. This year they were 8-8 with a defense that regressed into one of the worst units in the NFL.

 

[Texasmouth]

Both support my belief that NFL QB's have to be passers first. Both have running skills that compare with RB's, and that's an asset, but not enough of one to overcome a deficiency in passing.

With Kordell, I just don't believe he wanted to work hard enough to keep his job. He was a far better passer than Vick, and not as good a runner. His running numbers are better, because he was a legitimate threat to pass, which opened up the field for his runs. You also have to consider that LB's have gotten more agile in the time too, which leads to Vicks lower stat's rushing. Vick is simply a better runner.

I think it's fair to compare the two.

But, on NFL QB's, there is no doubt that mobility is a great assett, just look at Elway, Favre, or Gannon. Mobility was huge for them. Brady's mobility isn't in getting outside, but feeling pressure and shuffling his feet to get away. He's got different mobility. But, Stewart, Vick and even Cunningham had excellent mobility. Randall was the best passer of the 3, followed by stewart, and I'm not sure you could call Vick a passer yet. Their success though proves that you have to be a passer first, and the mobility has to be just a compliment to your game. Running QB's are great in College, where they can beat people to the corner, or break 220 LB tackles. But, it doesn't work in the NFL where the LB's are 250 and the ends have 4.7 speed. It's a different game, and Vick has just reinforced what I believe. It wont work as a runner. You have to be a passer first.

I'm not sure it hasn't worked for Vick. His team was 11-5 last year and went to the NFL Championship game. They were 2-10 the year he got hurt and when he came back they won 3 out of the last 4. Year before 9-6-1. This year they were 8-8 with a defense that regressed into one of the worst units in the NFL.

Vicks turnover put his defense in bad positions a lot too. He isn't a complete QB and his inability to become one will cost another coach his job.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Both support my belief that NFL QB's have to be passers first.  Both have running skills that compare with RB's, and that's an asset, but not enough of one to overcome a deficiency in passing.

With Kordell, I just don't believe he wanted to work hard enough to keep his job.  He was a far better passer than Vick, and not as good a runner.  His running numbers are better, because he was a legitimate threat to pass, which opened up the field for his runs.  You also have to consider that LB's have gotten more agile in the time too, which leads to Vicks lower stat's rushing.  Vick is simply a better runner. 

I think it's fair to compare the two. 

But, on NFL QB's, there is no doubt that mobility is a great assett, just look at Elway, Favre, or Gannon.  Mobility was huge for them.  Brady's mobility isn't in getting outside, but feeling pressure and shuffling his feet to get away.  He's got different mobility.  But, Stewart, Vick and even Cunningham had excellent mobility.  Randall was the best passer of the 3, followed by stewart, and I'm not sure you could call Vick a passer yet.  Their success though proves that you have to be a passer first, and the mobility has to be just a compliment to your game.  Running QB's are great in College, where they can beat people to the corner, or break 220 LB tackles.  But, it doesn't work in the NFL where the LB's are 250 and the ends have 4.7 speed.  It's a different game, and Vick has just reinforced what I believe.  It wont work as a runner.  You have to be a passer first.

I'm not sure it hasn't worked for Vick. His team was 11-5 last year and went to the NFL Championship game. They were 2-10 the year he got hurt and when he came back they won 3 out of the last 4. Year before 9-6-1. This year they were 8-8 with a defense that regressed into one of the worst units in the NFL.

Vicks turnover put his defense in bad positions a lot too. He isn't a complete QB and his inability to become one will cost another coach his job.

He had 13 INTs and lost 5 fumbles last year for 18 turnovers. McNabb had 12 turnovers in only half a year. It'd be nice if he could hold on to the ball a little better but 18 turnovers over the course of the year doesn't seem overly excessive to me.

 

[Balco]

The running element is obviously what gives Vick some success. He is far faster than Stewart (I don't care what 40 times say), and it is a great weapon to have. However, the big rap on Vick coming out of Va. Tech was that coaches had to simplify the playbook for him, and he basically had 2 options in the passing game on each play. Nothing in the pros has shown he has improved in this area. Further troublesome is his accuracy - when Vick misses, he misses big, and it is just not on deep passes.

I look at McNabb and McNair as former running qb's who used to look to run first before passing. After a couple of years, they became solid pocket passers who could run when needed. Vick has shown zero in this area, and has become the 2nd best qb on his team, despite an enormous contract.

 

[Jason Wood]

Both support my belief that NFL QB's have to be passers first. Both have running skills that compare with RB's, and that's an asset, but not enough of one to overcome a deficiency in passing.

With Kordell, I just don't believe he wanted to work hard enough to keep his job. He was a far better passer than Vick, and not as good a runner. His running numbers are better, because he was a legitimate threat to pass, which opened up the field for his runs. You also have to consider that LB's have gotten more agile in the time too, which leads to Vicks lower stat's rushing. Vick is simply a better runner.

I think it's fair to compare the two.

But, on NFL QB's, there is no doubt that mobility is a great assett, just look at Elway, Favre, or Gannon. Mobility was huge for them. Brady's mobility isn't in getting outside, but feeling pressure and shuffling his feet to get away. He's got different mobility. But, Stewart, Vick and even Cunningham had excellent mobility. Randall was the best passer of the 3, followed by stewart, and I'm not sure you could call Vick a passer yet. Their success though proves that you have to be a passer first, and the mobility has to be just a compliment to your game. Running QB's are great in College, where they can beat people to the corner, or break 220 LB tackles. But, it doesn't work in the NFL where the LB's are 250 and the ends have 4.7 speed. It's a different game, and Vick has just reinforced what I believe. It wont work as a runner. You have to be a passer first.

I'm not sure it hasn't worked for Vick. His team was 11-5 last year and went to the NFL Championship game. They were 2-10 the year he got hurt and when he came back they won 3 out of the last 4. Year before 9-6-1. This year they were 8-8 with a defense that regressed into one of the worst units in the NFL.

Vicks turnover put his defense in bad positions a lot too. He isn't a complete QB and his inability to become one will cost another coach his job.

He had 13 INTs and lost 5 fumbles last year for 18 turnovers. McNabb had 12 turnovers in only half a year. It'd be nice if he could hold on to the ball a little better but 18 turnovers over the course of the year doesn't seem overly excessive to me.

You can't compare such a small sample size, McNabb's 12 TOs in nine games last year In McNabb's career, he has lost 32 fumbles and thrown 66 INTs in 3358 offensive touches [2943 pass atts + 415 rush atts]...that's one TO per 34.3 touches.

In Vick's career, he has lost 20 fumbles and thrown 39 INTs in 1748 offensive touches [1342 pass atts + 406 rush atts]...that's one TO per 29.6 touches.

Both turn the ball over a decent amount, but now if you factor the TDs per touch over that same span...

McNabb -- 155 TDs in 3358 touches = 1 TD per 21.66 touches
Vick -- 70 TDs in 1748 touches = 1 TD per 24.97 touchesMcNabb is clearly the more productive player on a per touch basis and, by proxy of taking a lot more attempts per game, demonstrably more productive on a per game basis.

But to be fair, I wouldn't use McNabb as the measuring stick for a QB's effectiveness necessarily. I'm as big an Eagles homer as you'll find, but McNabb isn't going to be confused for one of THE elite QBs in the league right now.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Both support my belief that NFL QB's have to be passers first.  Both have running skills that compare with RB's, and that's an asset, but not enough of one to overcome a deficiency in passing.

With Kordell, I just don't believe he wanted to work hard enough to keep his job.  He was a far better passer than Vick, and not as good a runner.  His running numbers are better, because he was a legitimate threat to pass, which opened up the field for his runs.  You also have to consider that LB's have gotten more agile in the time too, which leads to Vicks lower stat's rushing.  Vick is simply a better runner. 

I think it's fair to compare the two. 

But, on NFL QB's, there is no doubt that mobility is a great assett, just look at Elway, Favre, or Gannon.  Mobility was huge for them.  Brady's mobility isn't in getting outside, but feeling pressure and shuffling his feet to get away.  He's got different mobility.  But, Stewart, Vick and even Cunningham had excellent mobility.  Randall was the best passer of the 3, followed by stewart, and I'm not sure you could call Vick a passer yet.  Their success though proves that you have to be a passer first, and the mobility has to be just a compliment to your game.  Running QB's are great in College, where they can beat people to the corner, or break 220 LB tackles.  But, it doesn't work in the NFL where the LB's are 250 and the ends have 4.7 speed.  It's a different game, and Vick has just reinforced what I believe.  It wont work as a runner.  You have to be a passer first.

I'm not sure it hasn't worked for Vick. His team was 11-5 last year and went to the NFL Championship game. They were 2-10 the year he got hurt and when he came back they won 3 out of the last 4. Year before 9-6-1. This year they were 8-8 with a defense that regressed into one of the worst units in the NFL.

Vicks turnover put his defense in bad positions a lot too. He isn't a complete QB and his inability to become one will cost another coach his job.

He had 13 INTs and lost 5 fumbles last year for 18 turnovers. McNabb had 12 turnovers in only half a year. It'd be nice if he could hold on to the ball a little better but 18 turnovers over the course of the year doesn't seem overly excessive to me.

You can't compare such a small sample size, McNabb's 12 TOs in nine games last year In McNabb's career, he has lost 32 fumbles and thrown 66 INTs in 3358 offensive touches [2943 pass atts + 415 rush atts]...that's one TO per 34.3 touches.

In Vick's career, he has lost 20 fumbles and thrown 39 INTs in 1748 offensive touches [1342 pass atts + 406 rush atts]...that's one TO per 29.6 touches.

Both turn the ball over a decent amount, but now if you factor the TDs per touch over that same span...

McNabb -- 155 TDs in 3358 touches = 1 TD per 21.66 touches
Vick -- 70 TDs in 1748 touches = 1 TD per 24.97 touchesMcNabb is clearly the more productive player on a per touch basis and, by proxy of taking a lot more attempts per game, demonstrably more productive on a per game basis.

But to be fair, I wouldn't use McNabb as the measuring stick for a QB's effectiveness necessarily. I'm as big an Eagles homer as you'll find, but McNabb isn't going to be confused for one of THE elite QBs in the league right now.

I chose McNabb because of his style of game. A running QB is going to have more turnovers more than likely. Pre TO, McNabb's TD per touch was 23.7, pretty close to Vick's current rate. Vick's never going to be super accurate but throwing to a WR not named Jenkins, Price or Finneran might help him out a bit. Have to admit his wide receiver core has been one of the worst in the NFL since he was drafted.

 

[Weiner Dog]

Uh...not as pretty.

Just taking a quick look, his TD/INT ratio sky-rocketed from 1.78 to 2.76 with Owen's arrival. McNabb's yards/attempt and completion percentage all improved also.

 

[PMENFAN]

Both support my belief that NFL QB's have to be passers first. Both have running skills that compare with RB's, and that's an asset, but not enough of one to overcome a deficiency in passing.

With Kordell, I just don't believe he wanted to work hard enough to keep his job. He was a far better passer than Vick, and not as good a runner. His running numbers are better, because he was a legitimate threat to pass, which opened up the field for his runs. You also have to consider that LB's have gotten more agile in the time too, which leads to Vicks lower stat's rushing. Vick is simply a better runner.

I think it's fair to compare the two.

But, on NFL QB's, there is no doubt that mobility is a great assett, just look at Elway, Favre, or Gannon. Mobility was huge for them. Brady's mobility isn't in getting outside, but feeling pressure and shuffling his feet to get away. He's got different mobility. But, Stewart, Vick and even Cunningham had excellent mobility. Randall was the best passer of the 3, followed by stewart, and I'm not sure you could call Vick a passer yet. Their success though proves that you have to be a passer first, and the mobility has to be just a compliment to your game. Running QB's are great in College, where they can beat people to the corner, or break 220 LB tackles. But, it doesn't work in the NFL where the LB's are 250 and the ends have 4.7 speed. It's a different game, and Vick has just reinforced what I believe. It wont work as a runner. You have to be a passer first.

I'm not sure it hasn't worked for Vick. His team was 11-5 last year and went to the NFL Championship game. They were 2-10 the year he got hurt and when he came back they won 3 out of the last 4. Year before 9-6-1. This year they were 8-8 with a defense that regressed into one of the worst units in the NFL.

Vicks turnover put his defense in bad positions a lot too. He isn't a complete QB and his inability to become one will cost another coach his job.

He had 13 INTs and lost 5 fumbles last year for 18 turnovers. McNabb had 12 turnovers in only half a year. It'd be nice if he could hold on to the ball a little better but 18 turnovers over the course of the year doesn't seem overly excessive to me.

You can't compare such a small sample size, McNabb's 12 TOs in nine games last year In McNabb's career, he has lost 32 fumbles and thrown 66 INTs in 3358 offensive touches [2943 pass atts + 415 rush atts]...that's one TO per 34.3 touches.

In Vick's career, he has lost 20 fumbles and thrown 39 INTs in 1748 offensive touches [1342 pass atts + 406 rush atts]...that's one TO per 29.6 touches.

Both turn the ball over a decent amount, but now if you factor the TDs per touch over that same span...

McNabb -- 155 TDs in 3358 touches = 1 TD per 21.66 touches
Vick -- 70 TDs in 1748 touches = 1 TD per 24.97 touchesMcNabb is clearly the more productive player on a per touch basis and, by proxy of taking a lot more attempts per game, demonstrably more productive on a per game basis.

But to be fair, I wouldn't use McNabb as the measuring stick for a QB's effectiveness necessarily. I'm as big an Eagles homer as you'll find, but McNabb isn't going to be confused for one of THE elite QBs in the league right now.

I chose McNabb because of his style of game. A running QB is going to have more turnovers more than likely. Pre TO, McNabb's TD per touch was 23.7, pretty close to Vick's current rate. Vick's never going to be super accurate but throwing to a WR not named Jenkins, Price or Finneran might help him out a bit. Have to admit his wide receiver core has been one of the worst in the NFL since he was drafted.

To use McNabb as a measuring stick is to measure to the 10-20 range, not an elite QB, and Vick doesn't even stack up. To sum it up, Vick has, without question, the physical tools in great feet and a strong arm. Where he lacks, and has shown no improvement, maybe even regressed, is the mental game. He's great as a runner, and that's showy and sells tickets, but it gets him hurt each year. You lay it at the defenses feet that Vick didn't take the Falcons further, yet you want to say he's elite? Elite players carry their team, like Tom Brady did this year. That's an elite QB. The Falcons have had the success they've had because their running game has been pretty darn good since Alex Gibbs showed up a few years back.

I wouldn't close the book on Vick. He may decide to commit himself to better mechanics to improve his accuracy and compliment his running ability. My gut tells me they should put Vick in the backfield and let Schaub throw the ball. Put 20 lbs on Vick and he could be a very good back, who is a legitimate threat to throw the ball.

 

[cstu]

Just some pros for Vick:

Has 5 years of NFL experience by age 25.

Has thrown more TD's than INT's the past 4 years.

Has rushed for 597 yards or more every season he's started and stayed healthy.

He has never had a losing record as a starter.

 

[Unlucky]

Another similarity between Kordell and Vick: awful WRs.

Kordell had Thigpen for one good year, and then was stuck with bad and very young WRs, much like Vick has. Perhaps, with the development of White and Jenkins, we'll start to see much better passing numbers from Vick. If your WRs don't get open, and aren't in the right places, and don't make the tough catches, a QB can really struggle.

 

[BigRed]

Vick has done nothing, at all, to make me believe that he's any better than Stewart was.  The statistics seem to back that opinion up.

Stewart: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/StewKo00.htm

Vick:  http://pro-football-reference.com/players/VickMi00.htm

Nothing personal to you SC, but has anyone else long gotten sick of the "stats tell the whole story" mentality....(see: most HOF threads)....just a general observation. Anyway...

Vick is better than Cowher's old mistress, but he has been very disappointing to say the least - not to mention a prima donna pansy to boot. Ouch mommy I got a hangnail when I fall down, put me on IR :X Talk about not getting your money's worth (well I take that back....I'm sure there are plenty of Vick apologists still filling the stands in ATL).

As the "athletic" (ie can't pass or read Ds) QB takes yet another hit. tsk tsk

 

[cstu]

Vick has done nothing, at all, to make me believe that he's any better than Stewart was. The statistics seem to back that opinion up.

Stewart: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/StewKo00.htm

Vick: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/VickMi00.htm

Nothing personal to you SC, but has anyone else long gotten sick of the "stats tell the whole story" mentality....(see: most HOF threads)....just a general observation. Anyway...

Vick is better than Cowher's old mistress, but he has been very disappointing to say the least - not to mention a prima donna pansy to boot. Ouch mommy I got a hangnail when I fall down, put me on IR :X Talk about not getting your money's worth (well I take that back....I'm sure there are plenty of Vick apologists still filling the stands in ATL).

As the "athletic" (ie can't pass or read Ds) QB takes yet another hit. tsk tsk

How about a comparison to another "athletic" QB who had a strong arm but lacked touch on his passes and what he did by age 25?Playoff record: 0-2.

| 1983 den |  11 |   123   259  47.5  1663   6.4   7  14 |    28   146   1 || 1984 den |  15 |   214   380  56.3  2598   6.8  18  15 |    56   237   1 || 1985 den |  16 |   327   605  54.0  3891   6.4  22  23 |    51   253   0

 

[BigRed]

The prosecution rests.

 

[Green Apple Splatter]

Kordell was nowhere near the rushing threat that Vick is.

Vick is nowhere near the passing thread that Stewart was.

 

[GATOR HATER]

FACTS:

Vick is the best running back the Falcons have.

Vick can't catch, so that makes Stewart the better "slash" player.

Vick won't catch, so that makes Stewart the better "team" player.

Ron Mexico is a better "pocket passer" than Mike Vick.

Vick sucks - just ask Ron Mexico.

Hey he did CATCH something, wasn't a STD or something that made him give the Ron Mexico alias, because I'm sure the lady didn't care he was a football player since he sucked at Qb....

 

[cstu]

The prosecution rests.

I guess you think 25 is age to give up on QB's, eh?

 

[Jason Wood]

The prosecution rests.

I guess you think 25 is age to give up on QB's, eh?

I don't think his age is a reason to give up on him obviously. But I DO think the massive amount of money he's already made AND the fact the Falcons have won a decent amount of games with him under center make it very very hard to imagine Vick making the tough decision to really change/improve his game. Vick has been just good enough to get paid like a franchise QB, and I've seen nothing from him to indicate he doesn't believe he's already good enough to lead the franchise to the Bowl.

 

[Big Score]

How about a comparison to another "athletic" QB who had a strong arm but lacked touch on his passes and what he did by age 25?

Playoff record: 0-2.

| 1983 den |  11 |   123   259  47.5  1663   6.4   7  14 |    28   146   1 || 1984 den |  15 |   214   380  56.3  2598   6.8  18  15 |    56   237   1 || 1985 den |  16 |   327   605  54.0  3891   6.4  22  23 |    51   253   0

& comparison cstu. Hadn't even thought Elway. Somebody else said it earlier in this thread and I beleive it to be true. It's probably to early to close the book on Vick and say that he's definitively lacking as a passing QB and will always be lacking.

He could very well suprise us all and suddenly "get it", ala Steve Young.

 

[Quez]

Vick overthrew the second target in the skills challenge by like +8 feet

 

[Big Score]

Vick overthrew.........

Seems like somethings never change :(

 

[ILUVBEER99]

Too bad there were no message boards to record people's feelings about Young and Elway early in their careers. The critizism's would likely be very similar.

The media and fans gave up on Elway after his first few years, thankfully for Denver they didn't.

 

[Texasmouth]

Vick has done nothing, at all, to make me believe that he's any better than Stewart was.  The statistics seem to back that opinion up.

Stewart: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/StewKo00.htm

Vick:  http://pro-football-reference.com/players/VickMi00.htm

Nothing personal to you SC, but has anyone else long gotten sick of the "stats tell the whole story" mentality....(see: most HOF threads)....just a general observation. Anyway...

Vick is better than Cowher's old mistress, but he has been very disappointing to say the least - not to mention a prima donna pansy to boot. Ouch mommy I got a hangnail when I fall down, put me on IR :X Talk about not getting your money's worth (well I take that back....I'm sure there are plenty of Vick apologists still filling the stands in ATL).

As the "athletic" (ie can't pass or read Ds) QB takes yet another hit. tsk tsk

How about a comparison to another "athletic" QB who had a strong arm but lacked touch on his passes and what he did by age 25?Playoff record: 0-2.

| 1983 den |  11 |   123   259  47.5  1663   6.4   7  14 |    28   146   1 || 1984 den |  15 |   214   380  56.3  2598   6.8  18  15 |    56   237   1 || 1985 den |  16 |   327   605  54.0  3891   6.4  22  23 |    51   253   0

I dont see how people keep calling Elway an "athletic" QB. Give me a break. He was no statue but to call him athletic is a little much. His super bowl wins had nothing to do with him rushing the ball and I think it is a reall stretch to a. Compare Vick's running to Elways "moving" in the pocket. b. Compare anything Vick does to Elway. Vick will never be Elway or anywhere near as successful at QB as Elway. Vick might one day be almost as good as Cunningham but even that is a stretch in my mind.

 

[ILUVBEER99]

Vick has done nothing, at all, to make me believe that he's any better than Stewart was. The statistics seem to back that opinion up.

Stewart: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/StewKo00.htm

Vick: http://pro-football-reference.com/players/VickMi00.htm

Nothing personal to you SC, but has anyone else long gotten sick of the "stats tell the whole story" mentality....(see: most HOF threads)....just a general observation. Anyway...

Vick is better than Cowher's old mistress, but he has been very disappointing to say the least - not to mention a prima donna pansy to boot. Ouch mommy I got a hangnail when I fall down, put me on IR :X Talk about not getting your money's worth (well I take that back....I'm sure there are plenty of Vick apologists still filling the stands in ATL).

As the "athletic" (ie can't pass or read Ds) QB takes yet another hit. tsk tsk

How about a comparison to another "athletic" QB who had a strong arm but lacked touch on his passes and what he did by age 25?Playoff record: 0-2.

| 1983 den | 11 | 123 259 47.5 1663 6.4 7 14 | 28 146 1 || 1984 den | 15 | 214 380 56.3 2598 6.8 18 15 | 56 237 1 || 1985 den | 16 | 327 605 54.0 3891 6.4 22 23 | 51 253 0

I dont see how people keep calling Elway an "athletic" QB. Give me a break. He was no statue but to call him athletic is a little much. His super bowl wins had nothing to do with him rushing the ball and I think it is a reall stretch to a. Compare Vick's running to Elways "moving" in the pocket. b. Compare anything Vick does to Elway. Vick will never be Elway or anywhere near as successful at QB as Elway. Vick might one day be almost as good as Cunningham but even that is a stretch in my mind.

Please tell me your kidding, Elway was an UNBELIEVABLE athelete. Speed isn't the only requirement for being athletic. Elway could have played at the highest level in both football and baseball.The hype on Elway coming into the NFL was huge, and people came out and bashed him mercifully his first few years, much like they do Vick.

 

[Big Score]

I dont see how people keep calling Elway an "athletic" QB. Give me a break. He was no statue but to call him athletic is a little much. His super bowl wins had nothing to do with him rushing the ball and I think it is a reall stretch to a. Compare Vick's running to Elways "moving" in the pocket. b. Compare anything Vick does to Elway. Vick will never be Elway or anywhere near as successful at QB as Elway. Vick might one day be almost as good as Cunningham but even that is a stretch in my mind.

I think you're showing how young you are Texasmouth. That, or plain and simply, you just didn't watch much football in the 80's.

 

[Texasmouth]

I dont see how people keep calling Elway an "athletic" QB. Give me a break. He was no statue but to call him athletic is a little much. His super bowl wins had nothing to do with him rushing the ball and I think it is a reall stretch to a. Compare Vick's running to Elways "moving" in the pocket. b. Compare anything Vick does to Elway. Vick will never be Elway or anywhere near as successful at QB as Elway. Vick might one day be almost as good as Cunningham but even that is a stretch in my mind.

I think you're showing how young you are Texasmouth. That, or plain and simply, you just didn't watch much football in the 80's.

Please tell me you swell gentlemen of conversation are joking. Yes, I saw Elway play in the 80's. I never said he wasn't an athlete. Mike Vanderjagdt is an athlete too, that doesn't mean anyone should be comparing him to Vick. Give me a break now, Elway was athletic but not any where near what these guys are now. Comparing Elway to Vick in terms of running is a joke. Comparing Vick to Elway in terms of being a QB is a joke.

 

[cstu]

Too bad there were no message boards to record people's feelings about Young and Elway early in their careers. The critizism's would likely be very similar.

The media and fans gave up on Elway after his first few years, thankfully for Denver they didn't.

I guess it's hard for some people to acknowledge how difficult the QB position is and accept that not every QB comes into the league like Brady and Roethlisberger. It's pretty common for QB's to take 5+ years to develop into consistent passers, even when they can't scramble like Vick. Wood has a point and Vick certainly has made enough money to be content with what he does and not work hard enough to develop his passing.

 

[Big Score]

Please tell me you ### clowns are joking.

Any particular reason you felt/saw the need, to start calling people derogatory names Texasmouth?

 

[Texasmouth]

Please tell me you ### clowns are joking.

Any particular reason you felt/saw the need, to start calling people derogatory names Texasmouth?

My fault. I apologize.

 

[cstu]

I dont see how people keep calling Elway an "athletic" QB. Give me a break. He was no statue but to call him athletic is a little much. His super bowl wins had nothing to do with him rushing the ball and I think it is a reall stretch to a. Compare Vick's running to Elways "moving" in the pocket. b. Compare anything Vick does to Elway. Vick will never be Elway or anywhere near as successful at QB as Elway. Vick might one day be almost as good as Cunningham but even that is a stretch in my mind.

I think you're showing how young you are Texasmouth. That, or plain and simply, you just didn't watch much football in the 80's.

Please tell me you ### clowns are joking. Yes, I saw Elway play in the 80's. I never said he wasn't an athlete. Mike Vanderjagdt is an athlete too, that doesn't mean anyone should be comparing him to Vick. Give me a break now, Elway was athletic but not any where near what these guys are now. Comparing Elway to Vick in terms of running is a joke. Comparing Vick to Elway in terms of being a QB is a joke.

So what if Elway wasn't as fast as Vick, he still wasn't that much better of a passer. Vick runs better than Elway did and Elway threw a little better. They are still along the same lines as QB's early in their careers. Cunningham is probably closer to Vick in terms of all-around ability, but he still didn't become a really good passer until he was 27. I have no idea whether Vick will develop his passing to the point where he can pass for 30 TD's a season, but I think it's a very good possibility.

 

[Big Score]

Please tell me you ### clowns are joking.

Any particular reason you felt/saw the need, to start calling people derogatory names Texasmouth?

My fault. I apologize.

Cool

 

[Texasmouth]

I think the only way Vick will succeed is if they just give him the green light to play how he wants. If they do that he will get back on track, even though he has a lot more of a chance of getting hurt....if they don't, he will look good in one out of three games at best.

 

[Texasmouth]

Please tell me you ### clowns are joking.

Any particular reason you felt/saw the need, to start calling people derogatory names Texasmouth?

My fault. I apologize.

Cool

FIXORED......

 

[SoloMatisse]

Comparing Vick to Elway and Young....even though Young takes personal responsibility in tutoring and mentoring Vick.....with all due respect to Vick simply isnt fair. Elway went to FIVE Superbowls. He CARRIED 3 teams to the bowl. Young played in the USFL, then in Tampa, one of the worst teams in the history of football, then played behind Montana for several years. There was no real ample opportunity to establish goals not realized early in his career. Young and Elway were two absolutely brilliant football minds. Genius. Both extremely BRIGHT. Im not stretching my imagination far enough to consider Vick bright. That's where the seperation between greatness and great 'athleticism' begins and ends.

 

[Bojang0301]

Kordell threw for over 3000, over 20 TD's and had years with over 60% completion rating... please lets not insult him with comparisons to Vick.

 

[PMENFAN]

So what if Elway wasn't as fast as Vick, he still wasn't that much better of a passer. Vick runs better than Elway did and Elway threw a little better. They are still along the same lines as QB's early in their careers.

Elway carried 3 teams on his back to SB's that had little business, besides John Elway, being there. Vick, playing in an NFC that is as weak as the AFC was at Elways time, has done nothing approaching this. Vick has potential, but I think he lacks the will to improve. But, enough w/ the Elway comparisons. Let's compare him to players he measures up to. We've got Jake Plummer, and Kordell.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I said the same thing years ago and 95% of the board laughed at me. Glad to see some people are figuring it out.