What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

So 'WHO WON' the Mike Vick trade between SD & ATL? (1 Viewer)

So 'WHO WON' the Mike Vick trade between SD & ATL?

  • Atlanta won, as they got superstar Mike Vick

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • San Diego won, as they got QB Drew Brees, RB Ladainian Tomlinson, WR Reche Caldwell and WR/Return Ma

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They both won

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now. LT is a great RB but i am beggining to suspect that he will not get the respect he deserves because he is not on a good team. I know that the Chargers had a good year, but i doubt they will repeat this feat next year. I voted for the chargers gettng the better of the deal, but i see the falcons having a better record the next few years. How much of this has to do with Vick i am not sure. He is not a good QB, but i think opposing teams have bought into his hype enough that they play scared against him running and it causes them to not play the game they should.Just my thoughts.

 
For the 10 trillionth time, Drew Brees was not part of that trade.
Technically, of course, you're right. Atlanta traded it's first pick (#5) to SD for the #1 pick. They also agreed to give 2 more picks in 2001, and 1 in 2002. San Diego then took Brees with the first pick of the second round, which was their's. San Diego got the 5th pick in the 3rd round from Atlanta, (Tay Cody), and a pick the next year (Reche Caldwell).The reason Brees get associated with it is that SD would not have taken a QB in the second round if they had Vick. Probably a RB (Barlow).So, instead of Vick, San Diego got Tomlinson, Brees, Cody, Caldwell and Tim Dwight.They gave up Vick and (Barlow).Overall, SD is ahead at this time.
 
I wouldn't assume SD would have went Barlow in the top of the second when he actually fell to the mid-third. Crumpler, Chad Johnson, Steve Smith, Shaun Rodgers, K. Jenkins, Smoot, Aaron Schobel were all available when Brees was selected. SD could have stayed put and drafted Vick, C. Johnson, and then Barlow or Vick, L. Jordan, and Steve Smith. Brees really can't be included unless you open up all that speculation.

 
Both teams are clearly winners in that trade. I dont see how else to see it. LT is considered the best rb in the game and a definate difference maker. And the Brees pick turned out to be a good one.Vick,love him or hate him, is a winner.Both players mean almost everything to their teams.Win - win trade

 
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now.
There is no reason to assume he will always play like he does now.He is only 24.Had he played out his college career, he would have just finished his second year in the league rather than his fourth.He has only started 38 games, including playoffs, not even 2 1/2 seasons worth. That isn't many more than Brees had started prior to this season, when he suddenly emerged as a Pro Bowl QB out of nowhere. And he changed coaches and offenses slightly more than halfway through those career starts.It is far too premature to judge the trade. Take Brees out of it and consider the factual deal: Vick for Tomlinson, Cody, Caldwell, and Dwight. How much impact do the others San Diego got besides Tomlinson actually have in this evaluation?Tomlinson has been and is currently great. Vick has been good, but perhaps not yet great, and he has been injury prone. Then again, he has been one of the most marketable players in the NFL and has probably generated more revenue for Atlanta than Tomlinson has for San Diego.All that said, IMO Vick is still a few years from reaching his prime, while Tomlinson is in his prime. Tomlinson has taken a heavy workload and will likely flame out much sooner than Vick. If I had to pick one of them today who has been better to date, I'd take Tomlinson. But if I had to pick one of them today who will end up having the greater career, I'd take Vick. He is on the cusp of greatness. Unless you think Tomlinson will enjoy the rare longevity at RB that Emmitt, Payton, etc. did, he won't peak much longer before he starts a slow decline.Oh yeah, one other point. As great as Tomlinson has been, he hasn't helped San Diego win a playoff game to date. Vick has done that and is still alive this year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I enjoyed the fact that everyone was saying the Chargers won the trade this year. Didn't they remember Vick beating Green Bay in Lambeau? There are two considerations in major sports. Money and Winning. Money? Falcons dominate that aspect, don't they. Winning? Chargers have a one and out playoff experience and sucked before that. The Falcons have a playoff victory and now a playoff bye around a bad season.As of right now, how can you not say that the Falcons have at least slightly won that trade? But, who knows what the future holds?

 
:wall: This has been asked about 30 times, and will probably be every year while LT and Vick are in the NFL, and then when they both (or at least LT) enter the Hall of Fame.

Vick is a good player, but more importantly, brings in $$$$. But really wouldn't bring in as much in San Diego.

LT is the best RB in the game, period.

They both won, but the NFL won overall. A marquee QB in Atlanta is almost as big as one playing for the Giants.

Makes you wonder if SD is just doing the NFL's marketting favors by trading Vick and Eli Manning to larger markets.

 
The reason Brees get associated with it is that SD would not have taken a QB in the second round if they had Vick. Probably a RB (Barlow).
What's to say San Diego doesn't take Tomlinson anyway with the #1 pick instead of Vick? San Diego did a lot of posturing in that off-season to get what they ended up with : A team afraid they would take the player they wanted so they offered a good trade. San Diego got the player they wanted anyway AND got picks out of it. That doesn't rule out getting Brees and Tomlinson on the same team, they just end up with some extra players in the meantime.
 
Ghengis Kahn is correct. You cant take Brees out of the equation because there is no way they would have taken him in round two if they took Vick in round one. RB was considered one of the Chargers biggest need areas and with that deep RB class that year you have to think thats the direction they would have gone at the top of the second round. Barlow, Lamont Jordan, Anthony Thomas and Travis Henry were all there.

 
I'd take Tomlinson straight up for Vick without batting an eye. Anything else the Chargers may have gotten out of the trade is just icing on the cake.

 
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now. LT is a great RB but i am beggining to suspect that he will not get the respect he deserves because he is not on a good team. I know that the Chargers had a good year, but i doubt they will repeat this feat next year. I voted for the chargers gettng the better of the deal, but i see the falcons having a better record the next few years. How much of this has to do with Vick i am not sure. He is not a good QB, but i think opposing teams have bought into his hype enough that they play scared against him running and it causes them to not play the game they should.Just my thoughts.
Vick has a good chance of getting to the super bowl this year. He is surrounded by a good defense that can change the pace of the game or mask his mistakes. He also has two good running backs for help and a decent offensive line. All he needs to do is not fumble or throw a pick. I know it's asking alot but if he can not turn the ball over I think they have a chance.Of course they blow alot of teams out if he didn't during the year.
 
I enjoyed the fact that everyone was saying the Chargers won the trade this year. Didn't they remember Vick beating Green Bay in Lambeau? There are two considerations in major sports. Money and Winning. Money? Falcons dominate that aspect, don't they. Winning? Chargers have a one and out playoff experience and sucked before that. The Falcons have a playoff victory and now a playoff bye around a bad season.As of right now, how can you not say that the Falcons have at least slightly won that trade? But, who knows what the future holds?
I would not think so. In 2003 they were almost dead last in the league don't remember but bottom 5 for franchise value. San Diego was also a basement dweller but if I recall was a few positions higher.The top teams are the Cowboys, Redskins type of teams.The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I enjoyed the fact that everyone was saying the Chargers won the trade this year.  Didn't they remember Vick beating Green Bay in Lambeau?  There are two considerations in major sports.  Money and Winning.  Money?  Falcons dominate that aspect, don't they.  Winning? Chargers have a one and out playoff experience and sucked before that.  The Falcons have a playoff victory and now a playoff bye around a bad season.As of right now, how can you not say that the Falcons have at least slightly won that trade?  But, who knows what the future holds?
I would not think so. In 2003 they were almost dead last in the league don't remember but bottom 5 for franchise value. San Diego was also a basement dweller but if I recall was a few positions higher.The top teams are the Cowboys, Redskins type of teams.The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
I wouldn't say Vick is making them a top revenue franchise, but I would guess that he is generating more revenue (gate receipts, merchandise) for the franchise than Tomlinson would have. I realize that is strictly speculation, though.
 
I enjoyed the fact that everyone was saying the Chargers won the trade this year. Didn't they remember Vick beating Green Bay in Lambeau? There are two considerations in major sports. Money and Winning. Money? Falcons dominate that aspect, don't they. Winning? Chargers have a one and out playoff experience and sucked before that. The Falcons have a playoff victory and now a playoff bye around a bad season.As of right now, how can you not say that the Falcons have at least slightly won that trade? But, who knows what the future holds?
I would not think so. In 2003 they were almost dead last in the league don't remember but bottom 5 for franchise value. San Diego was also a basement dweller but if I recall was a few positions higher.The top teams are the Cowboys, Redskins type of teams.The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
I wouldn't say Vick is making them a top revenue franchise, but I would guess that he is generating more revenue (gate receipts, merchandise) for the franchise than Tomlinson would have. I realize that is strictly speculation, though.
I have no doubt he has helped with more revenue but not as much as some would expect.
 
I enjoyed the fact that everyone was saying the Chargers won the trade this year.  Didn't they remember Vick beating Green Bay in Lambeau?  There are two considerations in major sports.  Money and Winning.  Money?  Falcons dominate that aspect, don't they.  Winning? Chargers have a one and out playoff experience and sucked before that.  The Falcons have a playoff victory and now a playoff bye around a bad season.As of right now, how can you not say that the Falcons have at least slightly won that trade?  But, who knows what the future holds?
I would not think so. In 2003 they were almost dead last in the league don't remember but bottom 5 for franchise value. San Diego was also a basement dweller but if I recall was a few positions higher.The top teams are the Cowboys, Redskins type of teams.The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
I wouldn't say Vick is making them a top revenue franchise, but I would guess that he is generating more revenue (gate receipts, merchandise) for the franchise than Tomlinson would have. I realize that is strictly speculation, though.
I have no doubt he has helped with more revenue but not as much as some would expect.
Not just speculation; I was curious about that myself and looked it up. Atlanta increased attendance for their home games in 2002 and 2003 by well over 100,000. San Diego remained fairly constant--though their numbers were already at the level which Atlanta rose to.Reference (didn't find 2004 numbers)Both the Georgia Dome and Qualcomm Stadium seat just over 70,000, so the impact of selling out for Atlanta is pretty huge when considering the local TV revenue they did not have before.
 
I enjoyed the fact that everyone was saying the Chargers won the trade this year. Didn't they remember Vick beating Green Bay in Lambeau? There are two considerations in major sports. Money and Winning. Money? Falcons dominate that aspect, don't they. Winning? Chargers have a one and out playoff experience and sucked before that. The Falcons have a playoff victory and now a playoff bye around a bad season.As of right now, how can you not say that the Falcons have at least slightly won that trade? But, who knows what the future holds?
I would not think so. In 2003 they were almost dead last in the league don't remember but bottom 5 for franchise value. San Diego was also a basement dweller but if I recall was a few positions higher.The top teams are the Cowboys, Redskins type of teams.The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
I wouldn't say Vick is making them a top revenue franchise, but I would guess that he is generating more revenue (gate receipts, merchandise) for the franchise than Tomlinson would have. I realize that is strictly speculation, though.
I have no doubt he has helped with more revenue but not as much as some would expect.
Not just speculation; I was curious about that myself and looked it up. Atlanta increased attendance for their home games in 2002 and 2003 by well over 100,000. San Diego remained fairly constant--though their numbers were already at the level which Atlanta rose to.Reference (didn't find 2004 numbers)Both the Georgia Dome and Qualcomm Stadium seat just over 70,000, so the impact of selling out for Atlanta is pretty huge when considering the local TV revenue they did not have before.
Your right.I would like to see the numbers for 2003 and see the attendance per game Vick versus Backup. I think Vick does bring in fans but it will stop if they start losing with him at the Helm which will happen as they get tougher schedules.
 
Atlanta got a guy that sells out the stadium, sells jerseys, attracts national interest AND he has the ability to take a mediocre team and make them a Super Bowl team. They've won so many different ways, I have to give it to Atlanta, even though LT is great.

 
I enjoyed the fact that everyone was saying the Chargers won the trade this year. Didn't they remember Vick beating Green Bay in Lambeau? There are two considerations in major sports. Money and Winning. Money? Falcons dominate that aspect, don't they. Winning? Chargers have a one and out playoff experience and sucked before that. The Falcons have a playoff victory and now a playoff bye around a bad season.As of right now, how can you not say that the Falcons have at least slightly won that trade? But, who knows what the future holds?
I would not think so. In 2003 they were almost dead last in the league don't remember but bottom 5 for franchise value. San Diego was also a basement dweller but if I recall was a few positions higher.The top teams are the Cowboys, Redskins type of teams.The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
I wouldn't say Vick is making them a top revenue franchise, but I would guess that he is generating more revenue (gate receipts, merchandise) for the franchise than Tomlinson would have. I realize that is strictly speculation, though.
I have no doubt he has helped with more revenue but not as much as some would expect.
Not just speculation; I was curious about that myself and looked it up. Atlanta increased attendance for their home games in 2002 and 2003 by well over 100,000. San Diego remained fairly constant--though their numbers were already at the level which Atlanta rose to.Reference (didn't find 2004 numbers)Both the Georgia Dome and Qualcomm Stadium seat just over 70,000, so the impact of selling out for Atlanta is pretty huge when considering the local TV revenue they did not have before.
Your right.I would like to see the numbers for 2003 and see the attendance per game Vick versus Backup. I think Vick does bring in fans but it will stop if they start losing with him at the Helm which will happen as they get tougher schedules.
When they re-aligned the divisions the "tougher schedule" thing went out the window. Only 2 games each year are set by where you finished now.Everything else is set by division alliances.
 
I would like to see the numbers for 2003 and see the attendance per game Vick versus Backup.  I think Vick does bring in fans but it will stop if they start losing with him at the Helm which will happen as they get tougher schedules.
----------- 2003 ----------- ----------- 2004 ----------- SEASON SEASON TOTAL DATE ATTENDANCE TOTAL AVERAGE ATTENDANCE TOTAL AVERAGE CHANGE 1 70,241 70,241 70,241 // 70,822 70,822 70,822 (+ 1%) 2 70,871 141,112 70,556 // 70,534 141,356 70,678 ( 0%) 3 70,427 211,539 70,513 // 70,434 211,790 70,597 ( 0%) 4 70,837 282,376 70,594 // 70,187 281,977 70,494 ( 0%) 5 70,064 352,440 70,488 // 70,810 352,787 70,557 ( 0%) 6 70,891 423,331 70,555 // 70,521 423,308 70,551 ( 0%) 7 70,079 493,410 70,487 // 70,616 493,924 70,561 ( 0%) 8 70,266 563,676 70,460 // SourceLooks like they remained constant. Vick was out the first 6 home games of 2003 I believe. Maybe by the time he was injured they had sold that many season tickets? Maybe the interest had become self-sustaining? Hard to say.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I voted for win-win deal. It felt like a bit of a cop-out so I'm suprised to see that is the top choice so far. Both teams benefitted from this trade, but if that choice wasn't there I'd have gone with Atlanta. Vick is pretty good now and he is going to be one of the all-time greats, IMO.Also keep these two little slogans in mind:Show me the money.Just win baby.Vick has done both for the Falcons.

 
The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
This is so true! I live in ATL and have Falcon's season tickets and the Vick hype makes me sick :X ATL has just as good a shot as any other team in the NFC to go to the Super Bowl. Their record was more to do w/ them having an easy schedule this year... they have a good defense... they have a great TE... and they have a 3-headed running game that's hard to defend against. When Arthur Blank bought the Falcons in 2002 he cut season ticket costs to make it a lot more affordable for people to go. The upper section cost only $100 (up to $125 this year) per season ticket. I'm a Dolphins fan and more of a Falcon's homer, but I have 8 tickets that I divide up between people in my office, just b/c we all love going to football games. Who can beat going for $10 per game! Blank increased the parking spots, made it easier to tailgate, they also now have a big fan experience thing outside before every game. This is one of the big reason's that attendance has shot up... Vick helped... but it wasn't just b/c of him.They may have had a losing record last year w/o Vick... but they were winning every home game last year at half-time and they would just wear out and lose the game. Vick's legs help make them better! The Falcon's are definitely not a one-man show, even though that's what the media hype makes people believe. I still can't convince my 10 year old nephew that Vick isn't the greatest QB in the NFL. I think he's a great athlete, but I would put him in the bottom 1/3 of the league as far as being a passer. He's got potential, but if he doesn't get better and when the day comes that he loses his ability to run and scramble like that... he's going to fade away very quickly.
 
How different do you think the results to this would be had SD not made the playoffs this year?Record since trade:SD, 29-35 with 1 playoff appearance (0-1)Atl, 32-31-1 with 2 playoff appearances (1-1 but still alive this year)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....

 
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
Excellent point. For what it's worth, Vick's name did come up once in that thread that I saw. Three guesses who picked him and the first two guesses don't count. :D
 
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
Actually, it did come up once by the Usual Suspects.
 
The Vick is making Atlanta a top revenue franchise is just another Vick myth.
This is so true! I live in ATL and have Falcon's season tickets and the Vick hype makes me sick :X ATL has just as good a shot as any other team in the NFC to go to the Super Bowl. Their record was more to do w/ them having an easy schedule this year... they have a good defense... they have a great TE... and they have a 3-headed running game that's hard to defend against. When Arthur Blank bought the Falcons in 2002 he cut season ticket costs to make it a lot more affordable for people to go. The upper section cost only $100 (up to $125 this year) per season ticket. I'm a Dolphins fan and more of a Falcon's homer, but I have 8 tickets that I divide up between people in my office, just b/c we all love going to football games. Who can beat going for $10 per game! Blank increased the parking spots, made it easier to tailgate, they also now have a big fan experience thing outside before every game. This is one of the big reason's that attendance has shot up... Vick helped... but it wasn't just b/c of him.They may have had a losing record last year w/o Vick... but they were winning every home game last year at half-time and they would just wear out and lose the game. Vick's legs help make them better! The Falcon's are definitely not a one-man show, even though that's what the media hype makes people believe. I still can't convince my 10 year old nephew that Vick isn't the greatest QB in the NFL. I think he's a great athlete, but I would put him in the bottom 1/3 of the league as far as being a passer. He's got potential, but if he doesn't get better and when the day comes that he loses his ability to run and scramble like that... he's going to fade away very quickly.
There must be some truth behind the mythVick’s jersey is in the top 10 in sales USA Today article
 
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
Excellent point. For what it's worth, Vick's name did come up once in that thread that I saw. Three guesses who picked him and the first two guesses don't count. :D
rhawkins:
Actually, it did come up once by the Usual Suspects.
Thanks for the corrections - so all we've proved here is that my powers of recollection stink. :D I think the point is still made however.
 
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
There is no way I would take LT or any RB for that matter in my top five for a Franchise personally. I would however think about taking Vick. If your starting a real team the QB is far more important. I think that is more a reflection that this is a Fantasy board more than anything else.It was also alarmingly surprising to me how many people did not include D players or Olinemen. Again a sign that responses maybe FF skewed IMO.
 
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
There is no way I would take LT or any RB for that matter in my top five for a Franchise personally. I would however think about taking Vick. If your starting a real team the QB is far more important. I think that is more a reflection that this is a Fantasy board more than anything else.It was also alarmingly surprising to me how many people did not include D players or Olinemen. Again a sign that responses maybe FF skewed IMO.
:goodposting:
 
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now.
There is no reason to assume he will always play like he does now.
Why not? He's stinks as a QB.
And QBs have always reached their peak at age 24 and/or after their first 38 starts, right?
No QB's usually have shown QB skills by 24. Vick hasn't done that, all he has proven is that he can run.I put him right there with Harrington as far as QB talent is concerned. Vick is the most exciting player in the NFL, no doubt, but he stinks as a QB.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now.
There is no reason to assume he will always play like he does now.
Why not? He's stinks as a QB.
And QBs have always reached their peak at age 24 and/or after their first 38 starts, right?
No QB's usually have shown QB skills by 24. Vick hasn't done that, all he has proven is that he can run.I put him right there with Harrington as far as QB talent is concerned. Vick is the most exciting player in the NFL, no doubt, but he stinks as a QB.
Just as one example, off the top of my head, I chose to compare Vick to Elway.Vick's first 38 starts, including his two playoff starts, yielded these numbers:512/944 (54.2%) for 6555 yards (6.94 ypa), 36 TDs, 28 interceptionsPlus 295/2133/12 rushingI don't know where to find Elway's game logs to compare exactly 38 starts against Vick's, so I just used the totals from his first 3 seasons, also including 2 playoff games. He played in 44 games during that span, and I suspect he started all of them. His numbers:693/1296 (53.4%) for 8459 yards (6.53 ypa), 49 TDs, 55 interceptionsPlus 142/668/2 rushingElway accounted for about 20 more passing yards per game, but he also attempted almost 5 more passes per game. Meanwhile, Vick's completion percentage, yards per attempt, and TD/interception ratio were all better. And obviously that doesn't account at all for the huge edge Vick had rushing.Boy, I bet you thought Elway was never going to amount to much, huh?
 
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
There is no way I would take LT or any RB for that matter in my top five for a Franchise personally. I would however think about taking Vick. If your starting a real team the QB is far more important. I think that is more a reflection that this is a Fantasy board more than anything else.It was also alarmingly surprising to me how many people did not include D players or Olinemen. Again a sign that responses maybe FF skewed IMO.
:goodposting:
I saw alot of posts where people where including o-line and defensive players. In fact there were a few that went almost all linemen. There was a debate about the logic of picking a safety also.
 
So I guess all six people who voted for Vick are the same ones saying Atlanta won the deal in this thread?I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
There is no way I would take LT or any RB for that matter in my top five for a Franchise personally. I would however think about taking Vick. If your starting a real team the QB is far more important.
I agree. I would always take a top-flight QB over a top-flight RB. However, since LT has clearly established himself as a top-flight RB and I think Vick is an over-rated QB who has yet to show me he can do many of the fundamental things I believe every QB should be able to do, I would have no hesitation taking Tomlinson. Easy decision as far as I'm concerned.
 
I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
No, because QB is more of a position of need in the NFL than RB. Put another way, if the real NFL did a draft from scratch with existing players, Manning, Vick, and probably Brady, McNabb and Culpepper would go ahead of LT, but a lot of GM's would include LT but not Vick in their "top 5" lists. Vick would also go ahead of guys like Ed Reed who showed up on a lot of lists.
 
I find it interesting that in the other current thread on which 5 players you'd take to start a franchise, LaDainian's name comes up time and again - but I don't recall Vick's name coming up once. I think that's a pretty good indication of who won this deal.....
No, because QB is more of a position of need in the NFL than RB. Put another way, if the real NFL did a draft from scratch with existing players, Manning, Vick, and probably Brady, McNabb and Culpepper would go ahead of LT, but a lot of GM's would include LT but not Vick in their "top 5" lists. Vick would also go ahead of guys like Ed Reed who showed up on a lot of lists.
This reasoning is laughable - there's even a little commentary within that same thread about where Vick would fit in in that scenario as given by NFL "insiders." Vick wasn't within sniffing distance of Manning even.How many SB rings did Elway get without a dominant running back? How did Steve Young do in Tampa Bay? Why do Trent Dilfer and Mark Rypien have a championship ring while Dan Marino and Dan Fouts have none? Jeff Garcia sure did turn things around for the Browns didn't he? So much for the quarterback primacy theory.Quarterback is definitely not the first thing a starting franchise needs (ask Houston). You put your franchise qb behind a bad line and you won't have a franchise qb for long. As LT proved last year a great running back can propsper even behind a lousy offensive line.But you guys go ahead with the groupthink, let me know when you have some actual facts to back up that opinion.
 
By the way, this season Vick was ranked 20th in passer rating among those qb's who played 20 games or more with 78.1 - just ahead of Joey Harrington who had a 77.5 (now there are rumors that Harrington will be released for his poor performance). He was better in 2002 with an 81.6 - which earned him a rank of 20th that season as well. His other two seasons have been wash outs.In that same span, LaDainian has gone over 1600 yards combined every year, scored more than 10 touchdowns every year, gone over 2000 yards combined twice, and has missed one game. The last three years he has finished 10th, 3rd and 2nd in rushing yards.Ladainain has scored more touchdowns (60), than Vick has throwing and rushing combined (49).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now.
I simply don't understand this line of thinking:1st year: sit the bench2nd year: 2nd round of playoffs3rd year: hurt, but go 3-1 in your 4 starts4th year: #2 seed in NFC, fate toe be determinedHow can anyone look at that and not think that hes a winner?
 
ESPN interviewed 8 anonymous NFL GMs...one of the questions was 'Would you trade Vick for the package SD got?"7 out of 8 GMs said that Vick was more valuable and they would not trade him for that package.

 
By the way, this season Vick was ranked 20th in passer rating among those qb's who played 20 games or more with 78.1 - just ahead of Joey Harrington who had a 77.5 (now there are rumors that Harrington will be released for his poor performance). He was better in 2002 with an 81.6 - which earned him a rank of 20th that season as well. His other two seasons have been wash outs.In that same span, LaDainian has gone over 1600 yards combined every year, scored more than 10 touchdowns every year, gone over 2000 yards combined twice, and has missed one game. The last three years he has finished 10th, 3rd and 2nd in rushing yards.Ladainain has scored more touchdowns (60), than Vick has throwing and rushing combined (49).
This trade worked out in favor of both teams since both players were great fits for the teams they went to. Vick is an electrifying player and one of most versatile players to ever play. His passing is nothing special right now, but when a QB leads the league in YPC (7.5) he's definitely one of a kind.
 
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now.
There is no reason to assume he will always play like he does now.
Why not? He's stinks as a QB.
And QBs have always reached their peak at age 24 and/or after their first 38 starts, right?
No QB's usually have shown QB skills by 24. Vick hasn't done that, all he has proven is that he can run.I put him right there with Harrington as far as QB talent is concerned. Vick is the most exciting player in the NFL, no doubt, but he stinks as a QB.
Just as one example, off the top of my head, I chose to compare Vick to Elway.Vick's first 38 starts, including his two playoff starts, yielded these numbers:512/944 (54.2%) for 6555 yards (6.94 ypa), 36 TDs, 28 interceptionsPlus 295/2133/12 rushingI don't know where to find Elway's game logs to compare exactly 38 starts against Vick's, so I just used the totals from his first 3 seasons, also including 2 playoff games. He played in 44 games during that span, and I suspect he started all of them. His numbers:693/1296 (53.4%) for 8459 yards (6.53 ypa), 49 TDs, 55 interceptionsPlus 142/668/2 rushingElway accounted for about 20 more passing yards per game, but he also attempted almost 5 more passes per game. Meanwhile, Vick's completion percentage, yards per attempt, and TD/interception ratio were all better. And obviously that doesn't account at all for the huge edge Vick had rushing.Boy, I bet you thought Elway was never going to amount to much, huh?
JWB, please stop introducing logic and reason into yet another Vick-bashing fest:reported:
 
I love to watch Vick play. But i seriously doubt that he will ever lead his team to a super bowl as long as he plays like he does now.
There is no reason to assume he will always play like he does now.
Why not? He's stinks as a QB.
And QBs have always reached their peak at age 24 and/or after their first 38 starts, right?
No QB's usually have shown QB skills by 24. Vick hasn't done that, all he has proven is that he can run.I put him right there with Harrington as far as QB talent is concerned. Vick is the most exciting player in the NFL, no doubt, but he stinks as a QB.
Just as one example, off the top of my head, I chose to compare Vick to Elway.Vick's first 38 starts, including his two playoff starts, yielded these numbers:512/944 (54.2%) for 6555 yards (6.94 ypa), 36 TDs, 28 interceptionsPlus 295/2133/12 rushingI don't know where to find Elway's game logs to compare exactly 38 starts against Vick's, so I just used the totals from his first 3 seasons, also including 2 playoff games. He played in 44 games during that span, and I suspect he started all of them. His numbers:693/1296 (53.4%) for 8459 yards (6.53 ypa), 49 TDs, 55 interceptionsPlus 142/668/2 rushingElway accounted for about 20 more passing yards per game, but he also attempted almost 5 more passes per game. Meanwhile, Vick's completion percentage, yards per attempt, and TD/interception ratio were all better. And obviously that doesn't account at all for the huge edge Vick had rushing.Boy, I bet you thought Elway was never going to amount to much, huh?
JWB, please stop introducing logic and reason into yet another Vick-bashing fest:reported:
It's becoming more and more clear that Vick is this generation's Elway - a QB that wins but doesn't put up up great numbers. Hopefully he becomes more like Steve Young with his passing, but right now he emulating Elway in the way that counts - winning.
 
By the way, this season Vick was ranked 20th in passer rating among those qb's who played 20 games or more with 78.1 - just ahead of Joey Harrington who had a 77.5 (now there are rumors that Harrington will be released for his poor performance). He was better in 2002 with an 81.6 - which earned him a rank of 20th that season as well. His other two seasons have been wash outs.In that same span, LaDainian has gone over 1600 yards combined every year, scored more than 10 touchdowns every year, gone over 2000 yards combined twice, and has missed one game. The last three years he has finished 10th, 3rd and 2nd in rushing yards.Ladainain has scored more touchdowns (60), than Vick has throwing and rushing combined (49).
Yeah, but you would be very hard pressed to show how LT has had as big of an impact in W/L for SD as Vick has for Atl. The bottom line for most GMs is (and should be) that it took SD 4 years while having LT to finally break into the above .500 ranks. Meanwhile Vick came in and has been a winner for Atl every year he has been healthy and starting!Vick's impact in Atl has been far more positive than LT's in SD so far. Outside of great stats, LT hasn't really helped SD win all that much in 4 years. With exception of course being this past year. However I think mosly this year had to do with Brees (see how a great QB makes a diff), Gates, and the strong run D. Vick has taken Atl to the playoffs now 2 out of 2 years. AND HE IS NOT EVEN PLAYING NEAR HIS BEST YET! You would be hard pressed to convince me or anyone that LT has not played his best just yet. Its possible, but far more unlikely.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top