Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
McNabb vs. Vick (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LHUCKS
- Start date
My definition of better is who is the better QB regardless of the offense or the team around them. To me that is McNabb.
The Eagles will very likely score more points and from a fantasy perspective Vick will probably score more as long as he is a starter but if I were starting a new real team today and was unsure of the talent around me I would take McNabb over Vick in a heartbeat. For that matter if I were the Eagles, I would certainly not have gotten rid of McNabb this year and he would still be starting for me over either Kolb or Vick.
The Eagles will very likely score more points and from a fantasy perspective Vick will probably score more as long as he is a starter but if I were starting a new real team today and was unsure of the talent around me I would take McNabb over Vick in a heartbeat. For that matter if I were the Eagles, I would certainly not have gotten rid of McNabb this year and he would still be starting for me over either Kolb or Vick.
BustedKnuckles
Footballguy
McNabb vs. Vick, Who is the better QB right now? = who do i start 
Fat Nick
Footballguy
I STILL really don't get all this Vick hype. He played QB well vs. the Lions, and in relief of Kolb against a GB team that didn't gameplan for a mobile QB. Suddenly he's the hottest QB in the league.
There's no denying the guy's got talent on the football field, but I don't quite see how the Mike Vick that couldn't win in Atlanta somehow transformed into a superstar game-winning QB through some time in the clank and a years as a back-up.
There's no denying the guy's got talent on the football field, but I don't quite see how the Mike Vick that couldn't win in Atlanta somehow transformed into a superstar game-winning QB through some time in the clank and a years as a back-up.
Deranged Hermit
Not cool & Pissed
Last edited by a moderator:
Happy Ragnarok
Footballguy
I think both guys are playing at a pretty high level.
If we're just going to evaluate in terms on on-field performance, I think McNabb gets a solid B+ type grade, but Vick gets an incomplete.
His only real game as a starter in years is versus the Lions. Let him prove it a week or two against real competition, then we can say he's McNabb's equal or better.
Please understand that this is entirely different than, "which do you think will do better moving forward?" The question of who is better right now is an evaluation between a guy who's been doing it well all along and a guy who merely has the potential to get back on the horse.
If we're just going to evaluate in terms on on-field performance, I think McNabb gets a solid B+ type grade, but Vick gets an incomplete.
His only real game as a starter in years is versus the Lions. Let him prove it a week or two against real competition, then we can say he's McNabb's equal or better.
Please understand that this is entirely different than, "which do you think will do better moving forward?" The question of who is better right now is an evaluation between a guy who's been doing it well all along and a guy who merely has the potential to get back on the horse.
I disagree with the "QB bringing home the championship" to determine the better QB argument. It's a team sport. Yes, the QB has a big effect on the outcome of the game but plenty of teams have won championships over the years with just decent QB play (Eli in 2007 is a great example).
I'm not using it as a sole criteria, just an important criteria that seems to favor neither QB. McNabb's probably more accurate, Vick's more mobile. If we want decent QB play, who's going to make fewer mistakes? I'll give the edge to McNabb.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
so silly, that right now 30% of the pool is voting Vick...go pee in another thread. TIA.This is a silly poll.
Deranged Hermit
Not cool & Pissed
Even when Vick was in his prime 5 years ago, he still wasn't as good as McNabb. To suggest he is now is just crazy. But, you're getting the attention you crave, so carry on.so silly, that right now 30% of the pool is voting Vick...go pee in another thread. TIA.This is a silly poll.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
that's the best part of this entire episode...the two teams actuall play each other twice...awesomeness.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Agree that McNabb five years ago was better than Vick 5 years ago, but that's not the question.Most "experts" are stating that Vick appears to be improved...also, a lot of QBs don't reach their "prime" until their late 20s/early 30s...which I am betting is the case with Mr. Vick.
meanjoegreen
Footballguy
Vick has a better surrounding cast, but McNabb is the better quarterback.
Assuming all other things are roughly equal, I'll go with the guy that's actually been playing in key games rather than the guy sitting in the federal penn not playing football. I just don't see how Vick can be that improved. If he is improved as you say, think how good he would have been with more experience rather than time off.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
he was in the "penn" over a year ago...and has rededicated himself for the past year+...weak argument IMHO.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
A) I'm not the only one saying it, a lot of "experts" on television and radio are saying itB) Sure he may have been better, but that's another discussion
Fat Nick
Footballguy
But unfortunately the winning team doesn't necessarily equate to the best QB. The only fair way to remove all variables to actually test who was better is for them to be traded at half-time and play for each team for 1/2 of the game. So we're back to our same guesstimates. Regarding the "experts" saying Vick is so much better, I'll call them full of it too. 1.5 games. .5 against a team who didn't prepare for a quarterback DRASTICALLY different than the starter, and 1 against a team that is a combined 2-30 over the last 2 years. Play strong against a contender who prepares for you, and I'll start considering the comparison valid.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
to be clear this poll is not intended to be about fantasy football, just football
Are these the 40K J-school experts or the experts that had Kolb rated so high this off season?
LHUCKS
Footballguy
totally agree, as a football fan I just think it's awesome that they play each other twiceBut unfortunately the winning team doesn't necessarily equate to the best QB.
dhockster
Footballguy
The real answer is we don't know yet.
Vick has looked better than he did with the Falcons, but the fact that he played against GB who didn't gameplan for him, and against a mediocre
Lions defense is too small a sample size to say he is really different from where he was with Atlanta. We won't know until he plays against
quality defenses. If he does well against quality opposition, then I would say he is better than McNabb currently.
A different question might be who is better suited to run the Eagles offense right now. With the sad state of the Eagles offensive line, I definitely say Vick. McNabb, while good at avoiding the rush, can't scramble like he used to, and he would be a high injury risk with the way the line is playing. Vick's escapibility gives him an advantage.
Vick has looked better than he did with the Falcons, but the fact that he played against GB who didn't gameplan for him, and against a mediocre
Lions defense is too small a sample size to say he is really different from where he was with Atlanta. We won't know until he plays against
quality defenses. If he does well against quality opposition, then I would say he is better than McNabb currently.
A different question might be who is better suited to run the Eagles offense right now. With the sad state of the Eagles offensive line, I definitely say Vick. McNabb, while good at avoiding the rush, can't scramble like he used to, and he would be a high injury risk with the way the line is playing. Vick's escapibility gives him an advantage.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Of course, I'm asking people to prognosticate/use an educated guess here.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fat Nick
Footballguy
Agreed. Even w/o the Vick saga, McNabb in Washington vs. Philly is gonna be huge.totally agree, as a football fan I just think it's awesome that they play each other twiceBut unfortunately the winning team doesn't necessarily equate to the best QB.that's the best part of this entire episode...the two teams actuall play each other twice...awesomeness.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
McNabb, obviously. Six good quarters of QB play, four of which were against the Lions, don't suddenly make Vick a borderline top 10 NFL QB, which McNabb still is.
Is the winning team's QB always better than the losing team's QB? Is Mark Sanchez better than Tom Brady? Is Matt Cassel better than Philip Rivers?
Last edited by a moderator:
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
This should not even be close as far as I am concerned...
To me both have their positives and negatives as players, but if I had to pick one right now to lead my team through a 16 game season and the guy who gives me the best chance to make playoffs and win it would easily be McNabb.
Here are their records as starting QB's in games played by each guy...
-McNabb has 92 wins to 49 losses and 1 tie
-Vick has 38 wins to 28 losses and 1 tie
I will take the proven track record as well as the experience at this stage as it is clear that McNabb still has the ability to play at a high level and Vick is still very much in question.
To me both have their positives and negatives as players, but if I had to pick one right now to lead my team through a 16 game season and the guy who gives me the best chance to make playoffs and win it would easily be McNabb.
Here are their records as starting QB's in games played by each guy...
-McNabb has 92 wins to 49 losses and 1 tie
-Vick has 38 wins to 28 losses and 1 tie
I will take the proven track record as well as the experience at this stage as it is clear that McNabb still has the ability to play at a high level and Vick is still very much in question.
PatsFanCT
Footballguy
So silly that only one person in this thread is admitting to voting for Vick. Methinks there's a lot of voters messing with you. Does that surprise you?This poll and question is silly. It has been, and is McNabb, and it isn't even close.so silly, that right now 30% of the pool is voting Vick...go pee in another thread. TIA.
dhockster
Footballguy
I can't make an educated guess because I don't know enough about who Michael Vick is now as a QB. We won't know until heplays some more games against quality defenses. He has played well enough, though, that I think the Eagles owe it to their fans to find out if he hastruly changed for the better, by being more accurate and being able to read defenses. If he has, then he truly will be a pro bowl caliber QBwith the physcial skills he possesses.
I think you are the only one so far who has admitted to voting Vick and even you do not have a reason.Better fantasy stats do not make a better QB and as Ghost Rider said, the winning QB is not always the better QB (or even close in many cases). Why is Vick the better QB today? Even if the Eagles win all of their remaining games with Vick and ends up with monster stats, a person could just as easily suggest that McNabb would have done as well or better with this team. This is one of those debates that is fun but completely unprovable.It will be fun to bump this thread at season end to see how each of them did and see how much better Vick was.
Deranged Hermit
Not cool & Pissed
He's a pretty well known McNabb basher. You could put Derek Anderson's name in there instead of Vick and he'd say DA.I think you are the only one so far who has admitted to voting Vick and even you do not have a reason.Better fantasy stats do not make a better QB and as Ghost Rider said, the winning QB is not always the better QB (or even close in many cases). Why is Vick the better QB today? Even if the Eagles win all of their remaining games with Vick and ends up with monster stats, a person could just as easily suggest that McNabb would have done as well or better with this team. This is one of those debates that is fun but completely unprovable.It will be fun to bump this thread at season end to see how each of them did and see how much better Vick was.
moleculo
Footballguy
Vick couldn't win in Atlanta? I thought he did pretty good.
If what you say does happen, I don't think a person could EASILY suggest that McNabb would have done the same or better......especially when you consider how much more mobile and faster Vick is than McNabb. McNabb had good numbers in 2009 for the Eagles, which really isn't that different of a team from today's Eagles (just looking at the offense), they weren't WOW numbers. I think Vick will put numbers closer to the WOW range. You could make the argument how DJackson, Maclin, Celek, and McCoy are now better, but you would also have to agree that the line is worse this year than it was last year.I think you are the only one so far who has admitted to voting Vick and even you do not have a reason.Better fantasy stats do not make a better QB and as Ghost Rider said, the winning QB is not always the better QB (or even close in many cases). Why is Vick the better QB today?It will be fun to bump this thread at season end to see how each of them did and see how much better Vick was.
Even if the Eagles win all of their remaining games with Vick and ends up with monster stats, a person could just as easily suggest that McNabb would have done as well or better with this team. This is one of those debates that is fun but completely unprovable.
FUBAR
Footballguy
I don't know if he will, but the Falcons defense were pretty mundane during his time there and his best receivers were Crumpler or Finneran. Yet his worst record was 7-9. Now he has one of the best receiving trios in the league (at least potentially) and although the defense has been plain bad through 2 games, can be pretty decent I think. I won't make the prediction that the Eagles will win the Super Bowl but it's not out of the question.
I'm very interested to see how he does with DJax, Maclin and Celek.
All that said, I chose McNabb simply because I asked myself "which would I want QBing my team", and the answer is McNabb.
He's a pretty well known McNabb basher. You could put Derek Anderson's name in there instead of Vick and he'd say DA.I think you are the only one so far who has admitted to voting Vick and even you do not have a reason.Better fantasy stats do not make a better QB and as Ghost Rider said, the winning QB is not always the better QB (or even close in many cases). Why is Vick the better QB today? Even if the Eagles win all of their remaining games with Vick and ends up with monster stats, a person could just as easily suggest that McNabb would have done as well or better with this team. This is one of those debates that is fun but completely unprovable.It will be fun to bump this thread at season end to see how each of them did and see how much better Vick was.
I wouldn't say I'm a well known McNabb basher. And no, Derek Anderson sucks....he's never have and never will be as good as McNabb.One other thing to consider that I think someone mentioned in another thread.....
When we consider "who's better" when looking at any two players, I think people don't just look at stats and teams. They look at the person. Obviously, McNabb is a ten times better person off the football field and I think that might cloud some people's judgement with his play on the field.
Just a thought.
When we consider "who's better" when looking at any two players, I think people don't just look at stats and teams. They look at the person. Obviously, McNabb is a ten times better person off the football field and I think that might cloud some people's judgement with his play on the field.
Just a thought.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Exactly, which leads me to one of my points....the Shark Pool is pretty much incapable of remaining objective...it's illustrated in this forum time and time again.
Deranged Hermit
Not cool & Pissed
Got ya. We don't agree with you so we're not objective.
*edit* I guess almost 71% of the Shark Pool is 'wrong' too.
Last edited by a moderator:
*edit* I guess almost 71% of the Shark Pool is 'wrong' too.
meanjoegreen
Footballguy
The title of the thread is clear. It says who is the better QB, not who is the better person.eoMMan said:
Don't.JLHUCKS said:
Similar threads
- Poll
