Quote :

"- As long as we're clear on the fact that Vick led the Falcons to a 14-3 lead in the 3rd quarter I'm okay with anything you want to say."

It's all Vick when he leads them to a 14-3 advantage (I mean, Dunn's 90-yard run was ALL Vick...).

But its not Vick when he can't bring them back.

I see now....

10/15/2006 4:43:00 PM

he can't bring them back when he's not on the field.

And I didnt see the 90 yard TD run but no i dont think that had much to do with Vick.


I think the 22 yard TD had a little to do with Vick though.


I know that there aren't a lot of posters with much football knowledge (particularly NFL knowledge) here but I'm relatively optimistic that they'll be smart enough not to try to twist this into some terrible game for Vick today.

I mean i know there's a few trolls here that will but I dont think anyone is going to seriously try to use 260 rushing yards allowed by Atlanta against Vick. I'm giving you guys that much respect today because I'm feeling good about the Panthers win.

10/15/2006 4:47:32 PM

The Giants also gave up a shit ton of rushing yards. That argument is offsetting.

The difference is that Eli Manning was able to do something else (ie, complete passes) and help his team win.

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 4:51 PM. Reason : ~]

10/15/2006 4:51:28 PM

No, its definitely not offsetting.

90 of those rushing yards came on one play for Warrick Dunn. It might as well be a special teams TD. It didn't eat the clock, it didnt keep the defense off the field, it didnt keep moving the chains in key situations.

90 yard Touchdowns are terrific. They are really fun and the points you get awarded for them are really special reminders of what a lovely play it was.

But they tend to make for misleading statistics. Not for people who are wise enough to look beyond statistics, but for regular people they are certainly misleading. We call people like you "normies", its short for normal. It's okay to be a normal person, but you should probably stick to conversing with other "normies" because people like me won't fall for poor logic and it renders your arguments useless.


Also 68 of those rushing yards were Vick's. I'm not going to let you use Vick's own yards against him. That dog won't hunt, that bird won't fly, and that microwave won't deliver a delicious bowl of Easy Mac in under 5 minutes.

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 5:00 PM. Reason : a]

10/15/2006 5:00:15 PM

Quote :

"but I'm relatively optimistic that they'll be smart enough not to try to twist this into some terrible game for Vick today."

Yeah...I won't be doing that. No terrible game today, but something hovering around mediocre.

68 yards rushing isn't that special for Vick...it's solid, but not special. No "golden god"-like performance today.

10/15/2006 5:21:30 PM

^ agreed. Thanks for being logical. Average game. If he played like this every day he wouldnt be a top QB.


Luckily, he usually plays better.


Unfortuantely, his defense doesn't usually play much better. They have got to do something about that unit. They don't spend much money on the offensive side of the ball so theres no excuse for two straight seasons of such a porous run defense.

10/15/2006 5:24:37 PM

Yeah I thought that this was the year that they would be dominant on D?

They made the move for Abraham... signed Milloy and Chris Crocker to shore up their safety spots after letting Scott go for Gandy... Rod Coleman stuffing lines better than ever, front seven to be reckoned with, yada yada ya... it's like they're on-again, off-again.

10/15/2006 5:36:14 PM

vick had a great game today

10/15/2006 5:42:12 PM

haha, you people are acting like they lost to the fucking Raiders or something.

10/15/2006 5:44:31 PM

^Golden Gods don't lose to anybody.

10/15/2006 6:47:33 PM

Sure they do. Peyton loses all the time.

10/15/2006 7:27:02 PM

^^^^^ Rally, you basically just said yourself that Vick isn't a top QB.

"average game. if he played like this every day he wouldnt be a top QB"

what is your definition of average? going on your logic he is only a QB when he has one of his better days. you can't compare his best day to all the other QB's average days. The measure of a QB's greatness is based upon his averages, and today he had an average day. He completed around half his passes for around 150 yds, no td's and 1 int., he ran for about 70 yds with a touchdown, and the falcons lost...... thats pretty close to average, you said it yourself... so explain to me again how this makes him a "Golden God"?

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 7:28 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 7:27:50 PM

^^ there isn't a thread calling peyton a "Golden God"

10/15/2006 7:28:39 PM

rivers: 334 yards and 2 TDs...


what did vick do again?

10/15/2006 7:50:23 PM

Vick has won games that matter. What has Rivers done?

10/15/2006 8:04:33 PM

vick lost today i think

10/15/2006 8:05:59 PM

I didnt mean it was one of Vick's median performance games.

I mean his performance itself was average. He didnt play that well and didnt play that badly.

He was average.


Most of his games are better.


RIvers had a good day. But they played the 49ers so lets not start sucking each others dicks yet. He won't be playing the 49ers in January. He looks good, but when he throws a 8 yard pass and Gates rumbles for 50 yards because he's the best tight end in the league... thats just a bit different than when Vick throws to Crumpler and he drops it because he's got some of the worst hands of any TE in the league.

okay?

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:08 PM. Reason : a]

10/15/2006 8:06:47 PM

^^^well as of right now, Rivers is 4-1.... Vick is 3-2, thats about all you can compare considering Rivers has only started 5 games... was Vick 4-1 in his first 5 starts?

And oh yeah, isn't this thread titled "Michael Vick is a Golden God"???


^ i dont think you understand the meaning of average... how can his performance have been "average" if "most of his games are better"

and if he's a "Golden God" excuses shouldnt haffta be made for him

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:08 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:09 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 8:08:29 PM

Quote :

"^^^well as of right now, Rivers is 4-1.... Vick is 3-2, thats about all you can compare considering Rivers has only started 5 games... was Vick 4-1 in his first 5 starts? "

Well when Vick took over, he was on a complete shit team, and lead them to the playoffs, Rivers walked into a great team handed to him on a golden plate. You would have to be one terrible fucking QB to mess up in SD. That being said, Vick has still done a hell of a lot more than Rivers has. Until Rivers leads his team to a championship game, don't even compare the two. Vick has a resume, Rivers doesn't.

10/15/2006 8:14:00 PM

Quote :

"i dont think you understand the meaning of average... how can his performance have been "average" if "most of his games are better""

I dont even know where to begin with this.

If the class average is an 80 and I score an 80 on a test then I performed "average". If I usually score a 90, then I normally score above average.

Today Vick was average. Usually, he plays better than average.



And way to be the 90th person to take "Golden God" literally. Its just a catchy title designed to rub it in to all his detractors because more often than not he's one of the best QB's in the league.

What excuses were given? That Gates is a better TE than Crumpler? Or that the 49ers defense isnt as good as the Giants? How are those excuses....? Kobe Bryant is the best scorer in the NBA but he cant win a championship by depending on Kwame Brown.

Football is a team sport. Even moreso than basketball. Vick isn't the one allowing 260 rushing yards out there.

If you want to grade his performance, then look at his performance.

If you want to grade the Atlanta Falcons, then look at the Atlanta Falcons.

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:17 PM. Reason : a]

10/15/2006 8:16:31 PM

Vick has been in the league longer than Rivers

10/15/2006 8:18:48 PM

^^you're the one who compared them in the first place, of course you can't compare their overall records or their playoff records, Rivers has played 5 games... but so far this year his team has a better record and his QB rating is way higher.... all that with only 5 games of experience... I dont care what kind of team you say he has, i bet at the beginning of the season you picked Vick and the Falcons to do more then the Chargers this year b/c of a QB with no experience

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:20 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 8:19:22 PM

I love Vick, but I will admit he didn't have a really great game today. The Falcons played well then the D blew it at the end.

^Season isn't over yet, and as I posted before.....the Chargers are a badass team. Even Aarron Brooks could do well with them.

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:20 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 8:19:43 PM

^^^^ everytime somebody tried to grade his performace by mentioning his QB rating, pass completion percentage, Yards, and other stats... all you want to talk about is his team, how they hold him back from having great numbers.... grading his personal performance is exactly the reason so many people don't think he is a "Golden God"

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:23 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 8:22:53 PM

His personal performance is the reason the Falcons have won a lot of their games the past 4 years.

Its pointless to even argue with you people on this. You are so blinded by your hatred of Vick, you can't even think straight. There is a reason he is the highest paid player in the league, and its not because he is a great passer.

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:25 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 8:25:00 PM

wait, nobody else had anything to do with their success?

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:25 PM. Reason : ~]

10/15/2006 8:25:01 PM

At some points, no. Thats what its been said numerous times on PTI and ATH that Vick is the only player in the league that has single handedly won games by himself.

10/15/2006 8:26:24 PM

^^^ haha there you go throwing in the team again, i thought we were grading Vick, and Vick alone right now


^ every player has a good game now and then and win the game for their team... to judge a players overall performance on a game by game basis, you have to look at their stats and see what they actually provide for their team on a weekly basis, not just on one of their good days... a look at those stats shows a lot of mediocrity for Vick in pretty much every area of the game except running the ball

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:26 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:28 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 8:26:24 PM

And stats can be missleading too.

10/15/2006 8:29:59 PM

Mike Vick is fucking the rest of his team. Giants Defense is horrible and he looked like a fat turd against them.

10/15/2006 8:30:19 PM

Oh well, everyone is gonna have some bad games.

10/15/2006 8:30:52 PM

so how do you choose to judge how good a QB is? only using the few games in which he performs way above average? just picking out the points in his career that you personally like or helps prove your point? most people (those with brains anyway and who know anything about sports) tend to rely heavily on the numbers a player puts up on a weekly and yearly basis to judge how affective they are

10/15/2006 8:33:10 PM

Quote :

"the Chargers are a badass team. Even Aarron Brooks could do well with them."

[NO]

Now GTFO of this thread. You just ruined yourself.

BTW....Jaws was performing fellatio on Rivers during Sportscenter. Said he watched the "coaches tape" of the Steeler's game and that Rivers was MAGNIFICENT.

Now let's get back to talking about Vick being an average QB.

10/15/2006 8:37:45 PM

Im not saying Rivers is bad, I used to, but so far he has proven he is holding his own, but he was handed a great team.

Ok, Vick is an "average" QB, but he is a badass player. Is that what you want to hear? And since QBs are players, I guess we are running in circles.

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 8:48 PM. Reason : ..]

10/15/2006 8:45:12 PM

Quote :

"Ok, Vick is an "average" QB, but he is a badass player. Is that what you want to hear? And since QBs are players, I guess we are running in circles."

Huh???

The only thing that Vick is badass at is being a mobile QB. Unfortunately for him, that's not the only qualification for being a good QB. So he is not a complete "player". He's badass at making defenders miss...that's about it.

So when you combine "badass mobility" with "below average passing"...you get an average QB AND player.

10/15/2006 8:51:44 PM

/thread

10/15/2006 8:53:09 PM

You pass for 50yds, or run for 50yds. Difference? None.

10/15/2006 8:56:41 PM

you run for 50 yards or complete 50 percent of your passes. difference? huge.

10/15/2006 8:59:31 PM

Thats comparing apples and oranges.

10/15/2006 9:04:30 PM

Quote :

"You pass for 50yds, or run for 50yds. Difference? None."

Alright dumbass. Then today, Vick had a total of about 220 yds (run or pass, doesn't matter), with 1 TD and 1 interception and 1 fumble (and passed a tad over 50%). Pretty fucking average...actually maybe a little below average (2 turnovers is not good).

ON THE YEAR...

He's averaging about 210 TOTAL yds a game....5 tds to 5 turnovers and right at 50% completion. PRETTY FUCKING AVERAGE (again...maybe a little below).

So keep digging your hole...idiot.

[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 9:11 PM. Reason : .]

10/15/2006 9:10:17 PM

okay first of all rushing yards are worth more than passing yards everyone knows that and i gave a huge demonstration of that last year. i can dig up the posts when im sober.

Vick didnt play that well today I can guess from following the game today. I did not WATCH the game and thats why i dont know exactly how he played.

Its funny. I didnt WATCH the game so im not COMMENTING on specifically how well he played.

A lot of you guys should take a lesson since most of you do not WATCH the Atlanta Falcons play every week.

The ones of you who just look at stats and bring your opinions are just obnoxious. Watch the fucking game and then get back to me.

Ive seen 85-90% of his starts over the past ~5 years.

10/15/2006 9:13:28 PM

"i am the authority on football. anyone who thinks otherwise is just stupid."

10/15/2006 9:15:19 PM

Agreed, I watch them every week. And I will be the first to admit he had a poor game today. But if you watch the Falcons play week in and week out, like I do, you would be amazed at how good the guy is. Sure, his stats are not up to par usually, but alot more matters than just stats.

Its almost pointless to argue with you people, you will never give Vick credit for being a good QB unless he leads the Falcons to a superbowl win, something a lot of great QBs have never done.



[Edited on October 15, 2006 at 9:17 PM. Reason : /]

10/15/2006 9:16:16 PM

Quote :

"Ive seen 85-90% of his starts over the past ~5 years."

????

10/15/2006 9:17:29 PM

Quote :

"Agreed, I watch them every week. And I will be the first to admit he had a poor game today that I piggyback on rallydurham in threads and that I would gladly put his and Vick's cock in my mouth at the same time and suck til both are limp. "

10/15/2006 9:19:32 PM

haha, wow, great comeback man, I guess thats what you post when you run out of lame arguments huh?

10/15/2006 9:20:39 PM

Quote :

"haha, wow, great comeback man, I guess thats what you post when you run out of lame arguments huh?"

Rally is the only poster here making any good argument for Vick. You either repeat the shit he posts or say stuff that gets shot down by everyone else.

And directed towards rally...I'd love to see the stuff you posted a while back about rushing yards being more important than passing yards. Because I think I understand what you're saying...a 150 yd rushing game by a RB is just as good as a 300 yd passing game by a QB...but it might be apples and oranges if the QB is the one getting the rushing yardage. I'd like to take a look at your analysis to make a decision though.

10/15/2006 9:24:25 PM

i'm still waiting on you to explain to me how you judge his greatness if not by stats. Rally has already said you can't judge his performance by his team, so you cant say he is great because of a 13-3 year... and so if he's not good b/c he makes his team win sometimes, and he's not good according to stats, what makes you know he is such a great QB?

10/15/2006 9:24:38 PM

i dont care how good vick is...long as the panthers get to the playoffs

10/15/2006 9:25:23 PM

Quote :

"you will never give Vick credit for being a good QB unless he leads the Falcons to a superbowl win"

Dan Marino had stats and didnt make it there

Peyton has stats and didnt make it there

Trent Dilfer did not have stats, made it there

so yes, until he makes a run like Trent Dilfer I wont give him credit because in my eyes he is a version of Trent...avg QB that gets his team by.

If he was such a good player, such a great leader, such a big threat his teams would win all the time, thus allowing them to reach the superbowl.

he played against a bad defense today, he got sacked numerous times(guess his legs failed him on those) and he had an average day as far as stats and output.

now if u want to argue that stats do not reflect leadership or performance, then the fact that they did not win should have the same play as him having a poor day with his #'s whichhhhh coincides with his career #'s whichhhhhhhh also reflects his career win/loss record.

10/15/2006 9:26:36 PM