Wouldn't you agree that Vick had something to do with the success that Dunn and Duckett had? Though Vick wasn't an accomplished passer, his running ability prevented teams from loading the box, giving his runners a chance to succeed.

 

As for Running QB's winning the SuperBowl, we really haven't had much of a chance to see it yet. The Super Bowl era ushered in more of a drop back style passing game. Before that plenty of Running QB's won titles, I'm sure.

 

Obviously that was a different game, but we are seeing the era of a new game, IMO. How many drop back, pocket passers are getting ready to come into the league in the next few years? Bradford and Snead are great prospects. McCoy is kind of a tweener, but obviously he is more of a passer than runner. Of the three of the top rated QB prospects in the Sophomore class, only Russell Wilson is more of a passer than runner, and he is more than capable of using his wheels.

 

Also you cannot compare the amount of talent Rivers and Romo have played with to Vick. They have played with better WR (at the time obviously), better runningbacks and better defenses. Culter is a good argument, but they are night and day different. Cutler has one of the best arms in the NFL, and he is one of my favorites, but how many games has he won lately? Like I have said before, Vick didn't have to throw for 4,000 yards and 34 TD's to be effective.

 

If those teams were so good why didn't they win when he was hurt, or suspended? Last year was a totally different team than the one Vick played with, so I think that also has to be taken into account. Vick and Turner would have been a nasty combo.

 

Why do I support Vick? Really three reasons. One, I think he deserves a second chance. What he did was wrong, but other players, celebrities, etc. have gotten away with things just as bad. Two I think he was a very good, albeit non-traditional QB, and I think that eventually we'll see more mobile QB's thrive in the NFL. Three, thouigh he is a dreaded VT Hokie, I have always liked Vick.

 

Also, teams win the Super Bowl. I hate to bring Marino back into it, but isn't he much better than Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Namath, and other Super Bowl winning QB's? We only saw 6 years (one completely lost to injury) of Vick, who knows what how much he would have progressed over the last two years?

 

Also, I hate the thought that only slow, strong armed, pass only QB's can win the Super Bowl. It's too old school and unimaginative for my taste.

 

You are way more politically correct than me, but I feel the same way.:thumb:

 

You hit the nail on the head with this post.:thumb:

^^^ Oh, not with the Palmer crap.:isurrender:

 

No doubt.

 

And he's done what now????:idunno:

You are way more politically correct than me, but I feel the same way.:thumb:

 

You hit the nail on the head with this post.:thumb:

 

PP, I think we are on the same wavelength though.:thumb:

I can name 15 I'd rather have over Ward right now.

 

Larry Fitzgerald

Randy Moss

Anquan Boldin

Steve Smith

Roddy White

Calvin Johnson

Greg Jennings

Brandon Marshall

Antonio Bryant

Wes Welker

Reggie Wayne

Terrell Owens

Lee Evans

Santana Moss

Vincent Jackson

 

 

I would take Hines Ward, aka the best run blocking receiver in the league, over Antonio(one hit wonder) Bryant, Wes (I can catch everything but I never score) Welker, Lee(I am a fraud) Evans, Santana(no relation) Moss, and to even suggest Vince Jackson is better than Hines Ward makes me question your NFL knowledge. Vincent Jackson? Vincent Jackson? You said Vincent Jackson is better than Hines Ward?:idunno:

 

 

 

 

 

And I'll stand by my opinion that Vick was not a very good QB. If he was as good as you make him out to be, and he isn't going to be a distraction...why didn't more teams want him? Why did so many teams refuse to even consider the idea of signing Vick?

 

It wasn't because of his talent, it was because they want to try to remain politically correct. Why San Francisco didn't jump all over Mike Vick is beyond me. Shaun Hill and Alex Smith over Mike Vick? Sure, see you in the cellar, San Fran.....

 

Fortunately, Philadelphia could care less about being politically correct and PETA.

 

 

I'd take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Brees, Big Ben, McNabb, Eli Manning, Cutler, Rivers, Warner, Aaron Rodgers, Tony Romo, Matt Cassell, Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub all over the Vick from 2 years ago. Maybe more...

 

After the guys you just mentioned, I would take Vick over the rest and personally, I'd take him over Cutler, Rivers, Ryan, Cassell and Schaub couldn't beat out Vick before, why now when Schaub has yet to play a full season?

This discussion is really going no where. I think Vick is an average QB who can run and will never win a super bowl in the NFL as a QB. I also think that it would be stupid to try him at wide receiver. I obviously disagree with you and your opinion of the guy. I think he's an idiot who will continue to do stupid things. I can not stand someone who did the things that he did to all of those animals. I don't mind that he gets a second chance in the NFL, but that doesn't mean I have to like him. I will never like or respect anyone who did what he did.

This discussion is really going no where. I think Vick is an average QB who can run and will never win a super bowl in the NFL as a QB. I also think that it would be stupid to try him at wide receiver. I obviously disagree with you and your opinion of the guy. I think he's an idiot who will continue to do stupid things. I can not stand someone who did the things that he did to all of those animals. I don't mind that he gets a second chance in the NFL, but that doesn't mean I have to like him. I will never like or respect anyone who did what he did.

 

That's all you had to say from the jump. We could have ended this discussion 4 pages ago.

 

No one is asking you to like him. We are just asking you to recognize that he has the physical tools to be as good as he was(at some point) in his return.

 

 

 

 

You should also say that you hope he continues to do stupid things so you will be justified in your opinion about him.

Vincent Jackson is only 26 years old and is improving steadily every single year. Of course I'd take him right now over an aging Hines Ward. :idunno:

And I'm not saying Ward isn't or wasn't a good receiver. He WAS one of the top 10 receivers a few years back. Now he's a great run blocker and an above average receiver. He had a good year last year but he's obviously declining from what he used to be. This discussion shouldn't even be about him. It should be about Vick.

 

I'd rather have San Fran's QB' situation now than with Vick. Like I said before, I wouldn't have the guy on my team. Teams that didn't take him were not avoiding him to be "politically correct". They were avoiding him because they didn't want the baggage that comes with him. You think almost every team but Philly is only worried about being "politically correct"? :lol:

 

And I stand by what I said earlier about the QB's I would take over Vick. As a matter of fact, I'd take any QB in the league over Vick because if I've said it once, I've said it a million times. I wouldn't have him on my team. It has nothing to do with being politically correct either. It has everything to do with not wanting Vick on my team.

That's all you had to say from the jump. We could have ended this discussion 4 pages ago.

 

No one is asking you to like him. We are just asking you to recognize that he has the physical tools to be as good as he was(at some point) in his return.

 

 

 

 

You should also say that you hope he continues to do stupid things so you will be justified in your opinion about him.

 

He can be as good as he was before he went to prison, but he'll still be an average passing QB who can run the ball. That doesn't mean I'd want him on my team. He can't throw very well, end of discussion.

 

And I don't care if he continues to do stupid things. I have no stake in him doing something stupid at this point.

He can be as good as he was before he went to prison, but he'll still be an average passing QB who can run the ball. That doesn't mean I'd want him on my team. He can't throw very well, end of discussion.

 

And I don't care if he continues to do stupid things. I have no stake in him doing something stupid at this point.

 

I just don't see him doing anything stupid again and you seem to be the only person who actually thinks he will do something stupid again. Most people, whether they like him or not, want him or their favorite team or not seem to think he has learned his lesson. Until he proves me wrong, I think he has learned his lesson. Again, I hope he has learned his lesson.

 

Fine, for argument's sake, he is an average qb. That still makes him better than Bulger, Delhomme, whoever Tampa bay starts at qb, Russell, Culpepper, Stafford, Sanchez, Clemens, Jackson, Rosenfels, Orton, Hill, Smith, the list goes on and on....but to each his own.

Vincent Jackson is only 26 years old and is improving steadily every single year. Of course I'd take him right now over an aging Hines Ward. :idunno:

And I'm not saying Ward isn't or wasn't a good receiver. He WAS one of the top 10 receivers a few years back. Now he's a great run blocker and an above average receiver. He had a good year last year but he's obviously declining from what he used to be. This discussion shouldn't even be about him. It should be about Vick.

 

I'd rather have San Fran's QB' situation now than with Vick. Like I said before, I wouldn't have the guy on my team. Teams that didn't take him were not avoiding him to be "politically correct". They were avoiding him because they didn't want the baggage that comes with him. You think almost every team but Philly is only worried about being "politically correct"? :lol:

 

And I stand by what I said earlier about the QB's I would take over Vick. As a matter of fact, I'd take any QB in the league over Vick because if I've said it once, I've said it a million times. I wouldn't have him on my team. It has nothing to do with being politically correct either. It has everything to do with not wanting Vick on my team.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree, but we both know that Vick is likely to get drafted in fantasy football this year before either qb from San Fran is drafted....so whatever.:lol:

 

There were also at least 7 teams interested(Cincy, Patriots, Eagles, Chiefs, Steelers, Tampa Bayjust to name a few) in Vick with Philly being the most aggressive. To believe the teams that didn't go after Vick didn't go after him because they think he can't play is laughable. They were worried about another things. They all know he can still play. The question was, who is willing to take a chance? They all know he can still play. :lol:

 

He can play for my team, Tampa Bay, any day of the week. He's better than Leftwich and Freeman.

I just don't see him doing anything stupid again and you seem to be the only person who actually thinks he will do something stupid again. Most people, whether they like him or not, want him or their favorite team or not seem to think he has learned his lesson. Until he proves me wrong, I think he has learned his lesson. Again, I hope he has learned his lesson.

 

Fine, for argument's sake, he is an average qb. That still makes him better than Bulger, Delhomme, whoever Tampa bay starts at qb, Russell, Culpepper, Stafford, Sanchez, Clemens, Jackson, Rosenfels, Orton, Hill, Smith, the list goes on and on....but to each his own.

 

You are not understanding me. I do not care if he's better than those guys you listed. I would not want him on my team. If I were an owner I wouldn't have even considered it.

 

I would have been a lot like the Giants owner, John Mara or the Jets owner Woody Johnson.

 

"No," Giants owner Mara said with a laugh. "On a lot of levels, no."

 

Johnson was also adamant about Vick not becoming a Jet. "There's no interest," said Johnson.

 

The Jets have had plenty of issues at quarterback in recent years and drafted USC's Mark Sanchez with the fifth pick in this year's draft. He will battle with Kellen Clemens for the starting spot.

 

"We've got Kellen Clemens and now we have young Mark Sanchez, so I think we're good on quarterbacks," said Johnson, adding that even if they weren't set, he likely still wouldn't be interested. "I don't think we'd go in that direction."

 

link

You are not understanding me. I do not care if he's better than those guys you listed. I would not want him on my team. If I were an owner I wouldn't have even considered it.

 

I would have been a lot like the Giants owner, John Mara or the Jets owner Woody Johnson.

 

 

 

link

 

 

I understand their stance. I am saying it is because of the baggage that comes with him, most of which involves remaining politically correct, IMO. They know he can still play. IMO, it's a lot like T.O. Someone is going to take the chance.

 

 

For me, if I am an owner, if I think Vick, or T.O., or Plax can make my team better, I'd take the chance. I love to gamble.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, but we both know that Vick is likely to get drafted in fantasy football this year before either qb from San Fran is drafted....so whatever.:lol:

 

There were also at least 7 teams interested(Cincy, Patriots, Eagles, Chiefs, Steelers, Tampa Bayjust to name a few) in Vick with Philly being the most aggressive. To believe the teams that didn't go after Vick didn't go after him because they think he can't play is laughable. They were worried about another things. They all know he can still play. The question was, who is willing to take a chance? They all know he can still play. :lol:

 

He can play for my team, Tampa Bay, any day of the week. He's better than Leftwich and Freeman.

 

Not sure what fantasy football league you are talking about, but I'd take Hill over Vick any day of the week. As a matter of fact, I just took Hill in the 13th round of the BGP league, and Vick was available.

 

And I know Vick can still play. He can still play and probably run the ball well but continue to be an average passer. And I don't care how many teams were interested. 7 out of 32 isn't that good of odds. If he were this supernatural athlete like some think, I'd think teams with QB problems would be more interested. The Vikings practically begged Favre to come out of retirement, but did they even think about Vick?

I understand their stance. I am saying it is because of the baggage that comes with him, most of which involves remaining politically correct, IMO. They know he can still play. IMO, it's a lot like T.O. Someone is going to take the chance.

 

 

For me, if I am an owner, if I think Vick, or T.O., or Plax can make my team better, I'd take the chance. I love to gamble.

 

It's nothing like TO. TO isn't a convicted felon...he just has a big mouth. Big...big difference.

 

And it has nothing to do with being politically correct. It has to do with them not wanting someone like Vick on their team.

Not sure what fantasy football league you are talking about, but I'd take Hill over Vick any day of the week. As a matter of fact, I just took Hill in the 13th round of the BGP league, and Vick was available.

 

And I know Vick can still play. He can still play and probably run the ball well but continue to be an average passer. And I don't care how many teams were interested. 7 out of 32 isn't that good of odds. If he were this supernatural athlete like some think, I'd think teams with QB problems would be more interested. The Vikings practically begged Favre to come out of retirement, but did they even think about Vick?

 

Honestly, with the way Jackson ended the season, I don't know why they thought about Farve. I like Rosenfels, but I'd still take Vick. I don't know why the Vikings didn't look at Vick, but again, I really don't know why a lot of teams didn't take a hard look at him. Especially in San Fran.

 

I was just naming teams qb's off the top of my head. I am sure I could look at a list of the starting qb's and find 10 teams that he could start or in week 6.

 

You also didn't draft Hill as a starter, neither. We'll see how much you play him this year.