Quote :

"what about Delhomme then...he actually BEAT THE EAGLES in the NFC Championship game"

I can't believe you would actually try to compare Delhomme to Vick. Delhomme took his team to the playoffs ONE year. He's not even close to Vick.

8/29/2005 2:16:52 PM

Turnip: "If Vick could read, I wonder what he would say about this thread"

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 2:19 PM. Reason : ]

8/29/2005 2:18:45 PM

^^he also took his team to the SUPERBOWL INFINITELY more years than vick...also Delhomme has been the starter for 2 years, taken his team to the playoffs once...Vick has been the starter for 4 years, taken his team to the playoffs twice...50% is 50% there genius

Quote :

"ACUTALLY WHILE IN COLLEGE AGAINST WVU"

which NFL defense did he do this against? Cause Tsiamanga Biakabatuka rushed for over 300 yards against Ohio State one game...but yeah he couldnt do that in the NFL

8/29/2005 2:19:34 PM

He also missed the playoffs last year.

And don't even try to say that Vick has taken his team to the playoffs 50% of the time. That's just fucking ignorant. He's played two full seasons and has taken his team to the playoffs in each season.

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 2:22 PM. Reason : ]

8/29/2005 2:21:33 PM

he also has led his team farther than vick ever has in his whole life

so i guess vick gets a free pass for his injury proneness...cause its not even important that he cant stay healthy more than half of his career...that means nothing in deciding what players are good, and what players have been injured multiple times in their 4 year careers

8/29/2005 2:22:53 PM

Yes, Vick's whole life. Do you know how old he is? He's a lot younger than Delhomme. Also, do you think Delhomme is better than Trent Dilfer? I mean, you DO know that Trent Dilfer WON A SUPER BOWL, right? OMFG!! He MUST be better than Delhomme because he's taken his team farther than Delhomme ever has in his whole life!

And it's not injury proneness. If anyone had taken those hits, they would have been injured. Vick isn't hampered by those past injuries, and it's quite apparent when you watch him play.

Like rallydurham said, I think you know this stuff deep down, you're just afraid to admit it for whatever reason. I'm guessing pride.

8/29/2005 2:29:15 PM

Quote :

"And it's not injury proneness. If anyone had taken those hits, they would have been injured. "

and the way vick plays, he is much more susceptible to take those kind of hits than other quarterbacks.

8/29/2005 2:36:56 PM

I'm waiting for your "injury proneness" chart....

8/29/2005 2:39:33 PM

nah that's ok, you probably wouldn't understand how to interpret that one either

8/29/2005 2:42:43 PM

Actually, I would understand how to interpret it, but it wouldn't matter because you'd try to manipulate the results that you ripped from another site.

8/29/2005 2:46:30 PM

ok the first stats i posted were the official nfl individual player stats. i didn't "rip them from some site", they are the official stats.

and i did no twisting to the footballoutsiders.com stats, i just quoted them directly from the site and provided links.

8/29/2005 2:47:58 PM

FALCONS WITH VICK = PLAYOFF CONTENDER
FALCONS WITHOUT VICK = 4-12
DELHOME IS NOWHERE NEAR AS GOOD AS VICK...IN FACT DOESN'T VICK OWN THE PANTHERS PERIOD.....THE GUY WINS BALLGAMES AND EVERY TIME HE TOUCHES THE BALL HE IS A THREAT TO GO THE DISTANCE.....FUCK STATS THEY DON'T MEAN SHIT...HOW MANY SHITTY QBS THIS YEAR WILL THROW FOR OVER 3000 YARDS WHILE THEIR TEAM MISSES THE PLAYOFFS YET AGAIN???

8/29/2005 2:54:58 PM

Chang from Hawaii is the best QB in the history of college football because he has thrown for more yards than any other QB ever! OMG he is such a badass.

8/29/2005 3:50:37 PM

Michael Vick from Atlanta is the best QB in the history of the NFL because he rushed for more yards than any other quarterback last year. OMG he is such a badass!

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 3:52 PM. Reason : ]

8/29/2005 3:51:46 PM

With you guys, there is really no way to win an argument. Obviously stats are the only thing you care about....not winning games. So oh well, Im not to worried about it. I'll trade Vick not having monster stats for him to win games. Thats what he does as one of the top QBs in the league. He leads his team to victory. Fuck stats, they dont mean shit.

8/29/2005 3:52:49 PM

shitty quarterbacks have led their team further than vick many times before

8/29/2005 3:54:32 PM

So you're telling me you would rather have Vick put up huge stats, say top five in passing and rushing, but he never makes the big plays to win the games over Vick whos stats dont matter with and he makes the big plays at the right times to win games? You are really making yourself look like the idiot you are.

8/29/2005 3:54:37 PM

^^No, their team led them there. Look at Dilfer with the Ravens. The only reason they won the super bowl is because of their insane defense. Almost any QB could have won the super bowl on that team.

8/29/2005 3:55:37 PM

ANd by the way, he has only played 2 full season and made the playoffs both times. Hes gotten to the NFC championship only to lose to the Eagles who were a phenomenal team. What else do you want from the guy? Oh, I guess he should have won 2 super bowls his first two years. My bad.

8/29/2005 3:57:07 PM

.

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 3:57 PM. Reason : .]

8/29/2005 3:57:28 PM

no, you're an idiot for making such an absolute comparison.

the odds of him being top 5 in both passing and rushing AND never making big plays to win games are slim to none. there were definitely a few games last year that vick is the only reason the falcons won, i'm not disputing that. see the panthers game at the end of the year with vick's miraculous TD dive to tie the game. however, vick relied on his defense to get him field position, his offensive line to block for him, his running backs to get the other 100 yards of their 167 rushing ypg, etc.

the day vick is top 5 in both passing and rushing and the falcons fail to make the playoffs is the day i die.

^nice quadruple post there. and vick's injury is a part of his downside. the falcons didn't get to just throw out that season. they failed to make the playoffs last year and dan reeves failed to retain his job. i doubt you'd see him going around saying "forget about 2003, vick was solid in those other years". his carelessness with his body when he runs is a negative.

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 4:07 PM. Reason : ]

8/29/2005 4:03:13 PM

Well I guess Manning isnt all that good since he relies on his receivers to make catches, his o-line to block for him, his running backs to score and rack up some yards, and his defense for keeping the other teams from scoring as much. haha, god man, are you really this stupid?

^ I didnt say that he would, or that it could happen, I just asked which one you would rather have since you seem to get such a hardon over stats that dont mean shit.

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 4:06 PM. Reason : .]

8/29/2005 4:05:02 PM

Quote :

"Obviously stats are the only thing you care about....not winning games"

yeah thats why i compared Vick to other quarterbacks who have won games deeper into the postseason

Sure Vick owns the Panthers...know what else? the Cowboys and Eagles own the Panthers...in the regular season...but we own both of them in the playoffs

Quote :

"Hes gotten to the NFC championship only to lose to the Eagles who were a phenomenal team. What else do you want from the guy? "

You do know that Jake Delhomme led his team PAST the Eagles right

but obviously stats are the only thing you care about....not winning games

8/29/2005 4:08:50 PM

Quote :

"yeah thats why i compared Vick to other quarterbacks who have won games deeper into the postseason "

Vick has done just as much if not more than Culpepper

And Delhomme had one good year. He is by far nowhere near the type of QB/Player that Vick is. Please dont bring him up in arguments.

8/29/2005 4:11:09 PM

ok so you argue that delhomme isn't better than vick because it doesn't matter that delhomme went farther in the playoffs, but then that vick is better than culpepper because he went farther in the playoffs?

pick a side

8/29/2005 4:15:06 PM

If you dont think Vick is top 5, who would you say is? Manning, Brady, and McNabb I will give you top 3. After that its up to you. Culpepper and Vick are pretty much interchangable at 4-5. After that, there is nobody that you can say you would rather have on your team than Vick.

^Culpepper and Vick are pretty even as far as caliber of player go. So the fact that Vick has done just as much if not more than Culpepper makes him better than Culpepper possibly. Delhomme doesnt even play in the same league as Vick. They are not even close and shouldnt even be compared to one another. The guy had one good year, now he is average at best.

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 4:16 PM. Reason : .]

8/29/2005 4:15:13 PM

brett favre in a heartbeat over vick. if you really want me to list all the quarterbacks i'd rather have than vick i can

8/29/2005 4:17:22 PM

you know what would happen if you put Vick in at QB on a team like Minnesota or Indy where they have a bunch of stud wide receivers? The receivers would get pissed cause Vick wouldnt hit them when they were open and the team wouldnt do shit...Vick doesnt need receivers...first thing he needs is to learn how to throw

or are you gonna change your side AGAIN and say he CAN throw?

and actually if you dont think Delhomme's 2nd half of the season last year was good...well you might as well just shoot yourself because you dont know shit about anything

8/29/2005 4:18:27 PM

You would honestly, at this point in his career take Favre over Vick? Wow, please dont post in this thread anymore. And I cant imagine who the others you would take over him would be.

8/29/2005 4:19:12 PM

All I am saying is that Vick is a top 5 QB. Thats it. I know he isnt a good passer, but he gets the job done other ways. Thats the end of the argument and you all who are against him are still failing to show how he isnt.

8/29/2005 4:20:24 PM

Oh, and he has only played 2 full years, give the guy some time to adjust. Atleast he is doing more than Rivers will ever do sitting on the fucking bench. HAHA I bet thats what this whole argument is about. All you state fans are just pissed your little boy Philip isnt playing. Now I get it.

8/29/2005 4:21:55 PM

Let me just ask you this. If Vick totally dismantles teams again this year, and they make the playoffs AGAIN, will you admit that he is a top 5 QB?? I mean shit, what else does he have to do?

And yes, I know they are gonna lose some games, so dont be like "He sucks because they lost 3 games"

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 4:24 PM. Reason : .]

8/29/2005 4:22:58 PM

i dont know how rivers even got brought up...i dont like vick cause he owns my panthers..but wait

you're not a state fan?

8/29/2005 4:23:47 PM

See, there is your problem. No matter what Vick does, you are never gonna admit he is a badass QB because you hate him pesonally. So there is really no point in this argument with you.

8/29/2005 4:25:23 PM

i'll say again

are you a state fan

8/29/2005 4:28:16 PM

No, I cant fucking stand them.

8/29/2005 4:29:10 PM

well then Vick, Manning, Delhomme, Rivers, Culpepper aside....thats just weak

what are you a fucking tarheels fan that went to state or something?

8/29/2005 4:39:11 PM

Quote :

"You would honestly, at this point in his career take Favre over Vick? Wow, please dont post in this thread anymore. And I cant imagine who the others you would take over him would be."

You can't honestly tell me that having Brett Favre on the field doesn't make every player on that team better. I would compare the stats with Favre playing to those without him (as you've done with Vick), but I can't....he hasn't missed a game since 1992. He has great arm strength, spectacular pocket presence, and can still throw on the run - using his legs to make time for his arm (something Vick needs to learn). Favre COMPLETED 340 passes last year - that's more than Vick attempted - and had a 64% completion rate.

So, do you take the most dependable player in the NFL, who has accuracy AND mobility (not to mention his leadership), or do you take the volatile "QB" who completes only half his passes and runs every third play, greatly exposing himself to injury?

8/29/2005 4:49:47 PM

he takes the flashy player of course...not the one who has as much composure as anybody to ever play QB, let alone Superbowl rings...he takes the flashy youngster with potential

8/29/2005 4:54:57 PM

^^thank you, you saved me the trouble. great post

8/29/2005 5:16:09 PM

so lets see

1. Manning
2. Brady
3. McNabb
4. Culpepper
5. Favre

top 5 QB eh?

8/29/2005 5:17:56 PM

something like that. culpepper and mcnabb are pretty interchangable. if we don't see a drop in performance from culpepper this year without moss on the field, i'd say he's ahead of mcnabb, but i would agree with those 5 guys being the top 5 right now.

8/29/2005 5:23:10 PM

Favre is NOT currently a better QB than Vick. He's at the end of his career and anyone that has seen him play the last two seasons knows that. Of course, I realize you guys are grasping at straws here, so you're at the point where you're throwing out names of guys like Green, Favre and Delhomme. I can't wait until we get to Griese, Feely and Rattay.


And ncWOLFsu can stop posting now, because this shit...

Quote :

"vick relied on...his offensive line to block for him"

...is just ridiculous. Seriously, you're just making shit up now. Atlanta's offensive line was HORRIBLE last year. Vick was sacked more than any other QB in the league. That shouldn't happen to a QB with that foot speed. Most QB's have at least 5-6 seconds to drop back and make a pass. Vick was getting about 3-4.

It's quite obvious you didn't watch Atlanta play last year. And you can't really pass judgement on a player that you haven't seen play and expect us to swallow your opinions. I'd much rather listen to the professionals from ESPN, FOX, etc. that know about the game and know how valuable Vick is as a QB.

8/29/2005 5:36:41 PM

no, the reason vick got sacked so much is that he ran out of the pocket where his line couldnt block for him.

when he was in the pocket, they blocked fine. when atlanta rushed for all those yards per game on their called run plays, the line bloced fine.

^you argue like a 5 year old. we provide our opinions and back them up with solid information. then you come in and throw in a little "NUH-UH!!!" and leave. gg, really.

[Edited on August 29, 2005 at 5:44 PM. Reason : ]

8/29/2005 5:42:38 PM

You want solid info again? Let me repost what Rally said earlier. And there really isnt much you can say to refute it. This is why Vick is so good.

Quote :

"Well then explain the following. When McNabb went down: The Eagles still won every week with 3rd string QB AJ Feeley. The same AJ Feeley who can barely make the Dolphins roster. When Culpepper went down: The Vikings went undefeated with Gus Frerotte. The same Gus Frerotte that couldn't hold down a starting job in Washington. When AIkman went down: The Cowboys went undefeated with Steve Beuerlein and Jason Garrett. When Tommy Maddox went down: The Steelers went 15-0 behind Ben Roethlisberger. A fucking rookie QB. When Mike Vick went down: The Falcons went 2-10. When he returned: They went 3-1. You see, when other teams lose their QB, they have other weapons on offense that can help them win ball games. When Mike Vick goes down its game over. There's no 'reset' button in the NFL. You will never beat me in this argument. Part of it is that I'm pretty good at backing shit up. But I can't take all the credit. It's easy to look smart when you defend the logical side of the argument."

8/29/2005 5:50:19 PM

again,

atlanta's offense was set up for vick. they have called qb bootleg plays, qb sneaks, all sorts of plays involving vick's running ability. rollouts, etc. if you haven't noticed, matt schaub and chris chandler weren't the most mobile quarterbacks. they aren't anything to write home about as quarterbacks in any NFL offense, much less in one put together with vick in mind.

the fact that atlanta has shitty backups does NOT make vick a better quarterback.

8/29/2005 6:00:58 PM

come on guys...vick can run really fast...you know like you're playing ncaa 2006 and somebody subs in a fast WR at QB and calls a pass play and scrambles every time...i mean thats how football should be played

8/29/2005 6:08:51 PM

Quote :

"no, the reason vick got sacked so much is that he ran out of the pocket where his line couldnt block for him. when he was in the pocket, they blocked fine. when atlanta rushed for all those yards per game on their called run plays, the line bloced fine."

You obviously haven't watched the Falcons play, because you couldn't be more wrong. Seriously, stop making shit up. Everyone that watched Atlanta last year knows how horribly the offensive line blocked for Vick. If you'll look back at threads from last season, that's what Falcons fans were complaining about. Why the fuck do you think Vick ran out of the pocket? BECAUSE HIS FUCKING OFFENSIVE LINE WASN'T BLOCKING, YOU DUMB SHIT.

8/29/2005 6:25:24 PM

^I think I've figured out the formula. If I just insult the person who disagrees with me, they'll be forced to see my point of view. Fuck the facts!

8/29/2005 6:32:57 PM

I just posted the facts. Anyone that contends Vick was sacked so much because he ran out of the pocket and not because of the offensive line's inability to pass block obviously didn't watch the Falcons last year and is therefore a fucking retard that is making shit up.

8/29/2005 6:50:16 PM