What's new
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!

Michael Vick Reinstated by the NFL (1 Viewer)

niners should pick him up.

I wonder if he may just sit this year if teams only want him as a kickoff returner or specialty running back...

 
Joe Bryant said:
I think he gets signed as a slot receiver/wildcat QB, not a full time QB.

Options would be where the WR depth is in question: Cleveland, San Fran, Jax, Tenn
Why do people always mention WR when talking about Vick? Any evidence that he can play WR?
Ok. Running Back then.Any evidence he can play QB?
How many Pro Bowl seasons has he had?J
Please don't use the Pro Bowl as a method of trying to prove actual talent. Vick was a star in the NFL. He was a talented runner, a great improvisor and a poor passer.
You're saying a guy can make three pro bowls as a QB and not show any evidence that he can play QB? :lmao: J

 
I think Goodell had to suspend him, really. A lot of times, a suspension is just as much for the people who are watching the situation as it is for the player himself.

If Goodell had chosen to not suspend Vick he would have been sending the following message: yeah, the Federal government got all high and mighty about this and wanted to make an example of a celebrity who was dog fighting. But, here in the NFL, we understand that dog fighting is no big deal and they are just dogs, so who cares?"

Right or wrong, if he wasn't suspended, many people would view it as validation that there is nothing wrong with what Vick did and that he was just a victim of media frenzied District Attorney's office. Goodell doesn't want to send that message, apparently.

Suspending him for a couple games puts the NFL solidly in the camp of "dog fighting is bad", which is what the fans want to hear, but also lets the players know that the NFL will continue to allow for second chances if players cooperate with the commish, which the players want to hear.

Smart move by Goodell, in my opinion.

 
Joe Bryant said:
I think he gets signed as a slot receiver/wildcat QB, not a full time QB.

Options would be where the WR depth is in question: Cleveland, San Fran, Jax, Tenn
Why do people always mention WR when talking about Vick? Any evidence that he can play WR?
Ok. Running Back then.Any evidence he can play QB?
How many Pro Bowl seasons has he had?J
Please don't use the Pro Bowl as a method of trying to prove actual talent. Vick was a star in the NFL. He was a talented runner, a great improvisor and a poor passer.
he did manage to win some games with a pretty weak cast around him. Wasn't his record as a starting QB pretty good?
 
Any idea on timeframe for a team signing him? Is it possible that nobody will sign him?
No team woke up this morning and said "Wow, Vick's been reinstated, whay do you think we should do?" Teams have had an idea for a week at least that conditional reinstatement was coming this week. It's been a poorly kept secret, and has been reported by several outlets. Teams have done their homework, had their discussions, etc., and those who have decided they want him are ready to move. He will be signed by someone, if he's going to be signed by anyone, within a week or two. Camps are opening and they'll want him there for as many TC days as possible, preparing to play. If he's not signed within two weeks he'll not be signed (except by the UFL) at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You're saying a guy can make three pro bowls as a QB and not show any evidence that he can play QB? :goodposting:

J
Absolutely. Fans vote for the Pro Bowl participants. Romo made the Pro Bowl one year after playing less than half of a season.
:confused: So Romo didn't show any evidence he could play QB either? Quick look at passer ratings through the start of last season: http://www.profootballhof.com/history/stor...x?story_id=2664 Ratings for every NFL quarterback who has recorded 1,500 career attempts

He's no Young or Manning. But higher than lots of pretty good QBs on that list like Ken Stabler, Kerry Collins and Ron Jaworski :shrug:

J

 
I think he gets signed as a slot receiver/wildcat QB, not a full time QB.

Options would be where the WR depth is in question: Cleveland, San Fran, Jax, Tenn
Why do people always mention WR when talking about Vick? Any evidence that he can play WR?
That's a good question dgreen. I dunno why people do this. This exact thing came up for me Friday talking with a friend about Tim Tebow. People say he'll be an Hback. I ask, what exactly have you seen that shows he'd be a good Hback?Vick is a freakish athlete. But don't know that he'd make it as a WR.

J
You answered your own question as to both. Neither one of them is a very good passer, both both are incredibly talented players, therefore it is in a team's best interest to get them on the field. Vick's speed as a slot receiver/wildcat QB would be extremely dangerous if he even has only above average hands. Tebow's athleticism and size make him a good H-Back option.Fact of the matter is, I don't think there is any NFL team out there that wants him as a QB, but I think there are many that want him on their roster...and Mike no longer has the clout to demand to be played at his chosen position.
Unless he's running a reverse, I don't see how Vick would be effective as a wr, in the slot or on the outside. The wr position in the nfl is all about route running and being able to catch the ball in traffic, as everyone is fast. There's a reason you don't regularly see the top sprinters in the world starting at wr on nfl teams.
 
I think he gets signed as a slot receiver/wildcat QB, not a full time QB.Options would be where the WR depth is in question: Cleveland, San Fran, Jax, Tenn
Why do people always mention WR when talking about Vick? Any evidence that he can play WR?
Ok. Running Back then.
RB I can agree with more than WR. He has shown the ability to run with the ball. More than that is needed to be a WR unless you are just throwing him some WR screens. But, we have no idea if he can run routes or catch well. Can he make a catch on the run? Can he go down low and snatch it before it hits the ground? Can he toe the sideline while holding onto the ball? Can he go up and make a catch above his head knowing he's about to be hit?PR may be a spot for him...assuming he can catch a punt with dudes bearing down on him. If not, then maybe KR.
Any evidence he can play QB?
More than WR. He's not Joe Montana, but he's not Akili Smith either. He can play QB. But, part of his QB success is his ability as a runner. That threat allows him the chance to make some throws. People are way too down on his passing. There are about 100 QBs in the NFL. He belongs there somewhere.
 
Funny line from Judd Zulgad: Vick is stealing attention from Favre watch. Does this mean Favre makes his decision tonight?

 
You're saying a guy can make three pro bowls as a QB and not show any evidence that he can play QB? :blackdot:

J
Absolutely. Fans vote for the Pro Bowl participants. Romo made the Pro Bowl one year after playing less than half of a season.
:lol: So Romo didn't show any evidence he could play QB either? Quick look at passer ratings through the start of last season: http://www.profootballhof.com/history/stor...x?story_id=2664 Ratings for every NFL quarterback who has recorded 1,500 career attempts

He's no Young or Manning. But higher than lots of pretty good QBs on that list like Ken Stabler, Kerry Collins and Ron Jaworski :shrug:

J
How long before the vastly under-rated Tim Couch is back in the league?
 
Goodell did good. He didn't specify any suspension (he could get his complete reinstatement tomorrow or the day before the regular season starts. It really gives him the chance to get refamiliar with the game and it's speed.

In terms of his ability, HE WON GAMES. It really does not matter how inaccurate his arm was if he was winning games. Imagine if he was perfectly accurate but his teams went 3-13 every year. Nobody would give a damn. Put your fantasy football caps down for a second and look at what the guy actually did. He won games with a terrible completion percentage. Imagine if he had some accuracy.

Here is an interesting anecdote:

When Vick was the first player to lead his team past the Packers at Lambeau in the playoffs, did anything think Vick and Favre would be competing for media headlines years later?

 
You're saying a guy can make three pro bowls as a QB and not show any evidence that he can play QB? :blackdot:

J
Absolutely. Fans vote for the Pro Bowl participants. Romo made the Pro Bowl one year after playing less than half of a season.
:lol: So Romo didn't show any evidence he could play QB either? Quick look at passer ratings through the start of last season: http://www.profootballhof.com/history/stor...x?story_id=2664 Ratings for every NFL quarterback who has recorded 1,500 career attempts

He's no Young or Manning. But higher than lots of pretty good QBs on that list like Ken Stabler, Kerry Collins and Ron Jaworski :shrug:

J
How long before the vastly under-rated Tim Couch is back in the league?
If he could pair that passer rating with run ability like Vick, pretty soon I'd think.J

 
Hopefully, he'll be on the field before W6 (which I think is a possibility), but overall, a great job by Goodell, I think.

Vick should have a meaningful 2009 season and Goodell's done this in a way that should help the NFL take the smallest PR hit possible. The Dungy mentor thing is great. That'll soften the blow, with Dungy being one of the most respected men ever associated with the NFL. It'll also help for whatever team is smart enough to sign Vick.

 
IMO no team signs him til after the end of training camp when he can better sneak in under the radar w/ the protesters.
I don't think so. The whole point of him being conditionally reinstated is so he can have the benefit of training camp and getting back in game form. Especially with the wild cat most likely in his future, any team that signs him will want preseason time spent on that with him. Waiting so they would avoid protesters is a pretty minor reason as compared to having him ready to play. Without the benefit of training camp, having been out of the league 2 years, there would really be no point in signing him at all. He'd be useless for 2009.And the protesters will be there regardless. No point in trying to sneak him in. With all the pub surrounding this, it wouldn't matter when he signs. There will be a PR hit for whoever signs him, they already know that, and so anyone making the decision to do so is already making the decision to live with whatever protests occur.
On a related note, I was wondering if allowing him to play 2 preseason games was a way for the NFL to see exactly how the public would react. They can test the waters with those games before they make a final decision.
 
I think he gets signed as a slot receiver/wildcat QB, not a full time QB.Options would be where the WR depth is in question: Cleveland, San Fran, Jax, Tenn
Why do people always mention WR when talking about Vick? Any evidence that he can play WR?
Ok. Running Back then.Any evidence he can play QB?
... well there's the question about whether or not he's even in shape to play. But I'm sure prision life keeps you in tip top shape.
 
People forget sometimes that winning quarterbacking in football is about getting the ball down the field, getting 1st downs, getting into the end zone... and from the D's perspective, stopping those things. It's not just about looking at a passer rating or completion percentage to decide if someone is a good or lousy QB.

In most games with most QBs, defenses game plan for the QB a certain way, but when they played ATL they had to account for the QB as a prolific runner. Vick was a 1,000 yard rusher one year. This makes a huge difference, one that I don't think fans fully grasp. It completely changed how teams had to play defense, because if they didn't account for him properly he could beat them and beat them and beat them down the field, and being a 54% career passer vs a 62% passer didn't really matter. And the threat of him running opened so many other things up on the field for other players.

That's why Vick was and still could be so valuable to a team, and why his teams won games.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think its a major assumption that he'll just pick up where he left off two years ago. What if his speed is gone, or dramatically affected? Two years without working out is kind of a big deal, I think.

Not saying he can't help a team, I don't really know. But he's been away from the game for awhile now.

 
What about Tampa? Vick-Ward-Bryant-Winslow
I've wondered about that myself. A talented roster with no real solution at QB. Leftwich has a fatal flaw, imo (slow release) and McCown's gettting to the point where the yearly "he's better than you think" talk is falling on deaf ears.Vick isn't the perfect QB by any means, but I think he'd be TB's best option.
 
Just as Roger Goodell and the various employees at the NFL offices in New York City must be bracing themselves for the inevitable backlash tomorrow.
I listened to an hour of fans calling in on ESPN980 today, and the backlash was mostly (I'd say at least 2/3) against Goodell for punishing excessively, micromanaging, and coming up with a reinstatement plan that makes little sense. It's hard to argue that "Unable to play first 2 preseasons games, then able to play the last 2, then unable to play the first 5-6 regular season games, then able to play" isn't dumb.I don't think this was the backlash you were referring too, but I think there'll be more "let him play now if someone signs him" backlash than "don't let him play again".

 
Just want to mention that Goodell's putting on a clinic on how to handle this right now (in the presser).

As I've said before, any team that can't sign Vick without taking just a minimal (meaningless) PR hit needs to fire the entire PR dept.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
By the way, Vicks career passing % is 53.8% and his YPA is 6.7.

Eli Manning? 55.9% and 6.4. Not a lot of difference. With no threat to run at all.

Yet Eli is about to sign one of the richest contracts ever.

 
By the way, Vicks career passing % is 53.8% and his YPA is 6.7.Eli Manning? 55.9% and 6.4. Not a lot of difference. With no threat to run at all.Yet Eli is about to sign one of the richest contracts ever.
You are absolutely right there is no difference between these two.They could be twins.
 
Vick was a good runner. Playing QB gave him the opportunity to run with the ball more frequently and in more dangerous positions than any other position would have allowed. And that running ability caused his team to win at greater frequency than even your average NFL QB could have likely duplicated. A healthy running attack is generally a recipe for success in the NFL. That shouldn't be a surprise to anybody.

And yes, he has a big arm. Of course his ability to run opened up opportunities to pass the ball deep. Were he a more capable QB, he'd have taken greater advantage of those opportunities. But don't try to sell him as a good QB. He was a good runner who played QB. And he was no less a gimmick at QB than Tomlinson or Ronnie Brown.

And they both have better passer ratings.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And what the hell kind of quality measurement leaves this as your top 10 QBs of all time?

1 Steve Young* 96.81

2 Peyton Manning 94.72

3 Kurt Warner 93.17

4 Tom Brady 92.93

5 Joe Montana* 92.26

6 Carson Palmer 90.12

7 Daunte Culpepper 89.95

8 Chad Pennington 88.89

9 Marc Bulger 88.08

10 Drew Brees 87.94

Um, no.

 
11 Jeff Garcia 87.24

12 Trent Green 86.90

13 Dan Marino* 86.38

14 Matt Hasselbeck 86.23

15 Donovan McNabb 85.78

16 Brett Favre 85.70

17 Jake Delhomme 85.23

18 Rich Gannon 84.71

19 Jim Kelly* 84.39

20 Mark Brunell 84.21

21 Brian Griese 83.64

:rolleyes:

 
There will definitely be some teams that are interested, we know this.

But in order for it not to blow up, there's a lot of factors:

1. What is his role? Are you bringing him in to compete with the starter? If so, you have to be pretty sure that Vick is at least at his previous level.

2. If you bring him in as a backup, is he going to be happy with that? Will the fans? What if you bring him in for a Wildcat package, and he performs well? It won't take long for people to clamor for him as the starter.

3. Is the potential payoff worth the circus that goes with signing him?

4. The potential PR backlash. I think this is a minor consideration, personally, but it does need to be considered. If the team wins, fans will come.

 
Vick relied on his speed and quicks to make plays...it'll be interesting to see how much of that was lost. My guess is that he wont have much of an impact for the remainder of his career...maybe a career backup type after getting a few shots to start without good results.

I hope he surprises me though, he was electric in his prime and it would be fun to see that again.

 
4. The potential PR backlash. I think this is a minor consideration, personally, but it does need to be considered. If the team wins, fans will come.
Agreed that this is minor...most people are ready to give him another shot. There are some dog lovers out there that will never forgive, but for the most part polls I've seen are in his favor from a PR perspective.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Posted by Mike Florio on July 27, 2009 6:07 PM ET

We think that today's events should cause every team to revisit the question of whether they wish to pursue quarterback Mike Vick.

Even if said teams already have decided to take a pass, his conditional reinstatement significantly alters the aroma surrounding Vick, compelling prudent teams to conduct an objective assessment of whether he fits their short-term and/or long-term plans.

That said, plenty likely will come to the conclusion that they're not interested. But some that might have not been interested could end up becoming very interested, given the dramatic change in the circumstances.

One team that is expected to remain not interested is one of the teams that had to deal with him twice per year.

Per Darin Gantt of the Rock Hill Herald, the Carolina Panthers aren't interested.



"For the record, you can cross the Panthers off the list," Gantt writes. "There are those here who influence football decisions who -- even when Vick was still playing well -- thought that he was one of the most talented running backs in the league."
 
everyone is saying the Dolphins pioneered the Wildcat last year. Yet Vick was basically running the Wildcat for the Falcons from the day he was drafted. And he was effective at it. They still hadn't found a way to contain him. And everyone who thinks their team should have a Wildcat in their playbook needs to step back and think about it when they say he can't play QB. He may not be fit into your traditional view of what a QB should be. But he got the job done.

 
4. The potential PR backlash. I think this is a minor consideration, personally, but it does need to be considered. If the team wins, fans will come.
Agreed that this is minor...most people are ready to give him another shot. There are some dog lovers out there that will never forgive, but for the most part polls I've seen are in his favor from a PR perspective.
I also think the protestors could actually help Vick and the team that signs him. Animal right's protestors have a knack for making people hate them. If the NFL and the team that signs him keep playing the narrative that Goodell began today (what he did was horrible, but we're trying to help a young man turn his life around, etc), the protestors could absolutely make Vick seem to be more of a sympathetic figure.
 
Just as Roger Goodell and the various employees at the NFL offices in New York City must be bracing themselves for the inevitable backlash tomorrow.
I listened to an hour of fans calling in on ESPN980 today, and the backlash was mostly (I'd say at least 2/3) against Goodell for punishing excessively, micromanaging, and coming up with a reinstatement plan that makes little sense. It's hard to argue that "Unable to play first 2 preseasons games, then able to play the last 2, then unable to play the first 5-6 regular season games, then able to play" isn't dumb.I don't think this was the backlash you were referring too, but I think there'll be more "let him play now if someone signs him" backlash than "don't let him play again".
We'll see what happens in NYC at NFL HQ's tomorrow - it may take until later in the week for a big protest, but I imagine that there'll be some hysterics tomorrow, too. Note that I agree with some of the other posters that the extreme 'animal rights' folks tend to become repulsive in their protests, so the fact that there will be some hysterical protests may not be a bad thing for the Vick camp (look at how ridiculous/over the top these PETA people are, etc...).

I think the notion that there won't be a popular outcry at this conditional re-instatement is a little too optimistic, however. There are lots of dog lovers nationwide who consider Vick lower than whale barf on the bottom of the ocean, and a good sized number of them live in NYC (which is one of the largest urban areas in the US, after all).

My .02.

 
Just as Roger Goodell and the various employees at the NFL offices in New York City must be bracing themselves for the inevitable backlash tomorrow.
I listened to an hour of fans calling in on ESPN980 today, and the backlash was mostly (I'd say at least 2/3) against Goodell for punishing excessively, micromanaging, and coming up with a reinstatement plan that makes little sense. It's hard to argue that "Unable to play first 2 preseasons games, then able to play the last 2, then unable to play the first 5-6 regular season games, then able to play" isn't dumb.I don't think this was the backlash you were referring too, but I think there'll be more "let him play now if someone signs him" backlash than "don't let him play again".
We'll see what happens in NYC at NFL HQ's tomorrow - it may take until later in the week for a big protest, but I imagine that there'll be some hysterics tomorrow, too. Note that I agree with some of the other posters that the extreme 'animal rights' folks tend to become repulsive in their protests, so the fact that there will be some hysterical protests may not be a bad thing for the Vick camp (look at how ridiculous/over the top these PETA people are, etc...).

I think the notion that there won't be a popular outcry at this conditional re-instatement is a little too optimistic, however. There are lots of dog lovers nationwide who consider Vick lower than whale barf on the bottom of the ocean, and a good sized number of them live in NYC (which is one of the largest urban areas in the US, after all).

My .02.
The Humane Society, the ASPCA and even PETA have surprisingly been pretty supportive of Vick. I don't know why b/c Vick sure didn't show any mercy or give any 2nd chances to those dogs. Count me in the Vick-is-lower-than-whale-barf column.I'm rooting for him to break his neck. :confused:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Scooby Doo said:
Yeah Vick makes plays - slamming dogs heads into the ground, electrocuting dogs, shooting dogs, drowning dogs and fighting dogs to their deaths - nice plays.
If you're going to be a tool can you at least be an entertaining one?TIA
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top