Jump to content

Vick: Ring with Jets would seal legacy (Even if with Geno under center)


Villain The Foe

Recommended Posts

No.

 

No he didn't. It'spbvious your a fanboy so I don't know why I'm bothering. 

 

But he's been an awful QB his entire career. He never completed more than 56% of his passes and never threw for more than 2500 yards and 20 TD's. He gave you a few highlights but was a bad QB. 

I dont know why you're bothering either. Lets both ponder that. I'll get back to you when I have my answer, but for now just sit tight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 244
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah, no.

Vick is/was a unique player with his speed at the position, but there's been no revolution. It's not like fast kids are trying to play QB instead of WR or CB because Michael Vick. Teams aren't taking chances on guys like Kaepernick or Geno because Michael Vick, either, they're taking those chances because the number of great pocket passers is far less than the number of NFL franchises - so teams have to be creative. And they're taking these guys with second and third rounders, not first overall picks. Andrew Luck was the best QB prospect since Peyton, but if Vick had truly engineered a revolution Johnny Manzeil would've held that honor. But when his draft rolled around, the guy with the potential to be a great pocket passer went early, and the scrambler went in the 20s.

So from your statement these mobile guys that were being drafted in the second and 3rd round are now being drafted in the 20's. Thats not bad, though I must say since you bought up a good QB in Andrew Luck (being the best prospect since Peyton Manning) I must remind you that you completely forgot about the guy drafted right after Luck going #2. RG3 was considered by many to be "the next Michael Vick with a more accurate arm". And because of that some people thought that RG3 should have been drafted #1 overall before Luck. RG3 ran for over 800 yards his rookie year to add to the 3,200 yards he threw. Bottomline, the days of the immobile pure pocket passer has past. Even Andrew Luck has some mobility to him. He rushed for almost 400 yards last year. The days of Dan Marino, Troy Aikmen, John Elway, Kurt Warner, Jim Kelly, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning stone wall QB is finished...atleast for the moment. Its the generation of the Colin Kaepernick, Cam Newton, RG3, Russell Wilson, Terrelle Pryor's, with your "pocket passers" simply being the QB's who will rush for just under 400 yards in a season which will be your Andrew Luck's, Geno Smith's, Aaron rodgers of the world. 

 

If you really look at it, QB's are no longer the pocket passers that we call them but they have added another dimension to the game. Michael Vick was the first guy that was outright deadly with it, he just wasn't as accurate as you wanted him to be. However, he was hands down the fastest, shiftiest QB in the history of the game and it revolutionized the game to the point that if you could find a human that can run almost as well but can complete 60% of their passes then you have what is becoming the modern QB of today. Michael Vick imo is the reason for this, so I consider it revolutionary. Going back and forth trying to convince people is a waste of time. I should just say that I believe this to be true based on what I've seen and what I've heard defensive minds say regarding preparation for Vick. Thats simply how I perceive it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do root for laundry. Eric Barton, for example, was a very bad guy at Maryland that was indulged and coddled because he was seen as potentially an NFL linebacker. I could never root for him. I hope he now lives in a fridge box under a highway overpass.That would be too good for him.Happened to Vick? Some PR douchebag fed him that idea. Why the passive verb? Did the dogs knock on his door and ask for him to do those things? The dogs made him do it. There was nothing voluntary on Vick's part, it was some kind of 3rd party out of body experience.Vick is a total piece of s___. Would rather watch Smith go 0-16 than see Vick ever get on the sideline.

I didn't know Barton was a bad egg. What did he do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Cunningham was Vick before Vick. And he was better at it as well. Vick never threw 30 TDs or finished top 10 in the NFL in rushing yards. Plus his completion percentage was higher despite playing before the Ty Law coverage rules. Also the NFL didn't protect qbs nearly as well as they do today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So from your statement these mobile guys that were being drafted in the second and 3rd round are now being drafted in the 20's. Thats not bad, though I must say since you bought up a good QB in Andrew Luck (being the best prospect since Peyton Manning) I must remind you that you completely forgot about the guy drafted right after Luck going #2. RG3 was considered by many to be "the next Michael Vick with a more accurate arm". And because of that some people thought that RG3 should have been drafted #1 overall before Luck. RG3 ran for over 800 yards his rookie year to add to the 3,200 yards he threw. Bottomline, the days of the immobile pure pocket passer has past. Even Andrew Luck has some mobility to him. He rushed for almost 400 yards last year. The days of Dan Marino, Troy Aikmen, John Elway, Kurt Warner, Jim Kelly, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning stone wall QB is finished...atleast for the moment. Its the generation of the Colin Kaepernick, Cam Newton, RG3, Russell Wilson, Terrelle Pryor's, with your "pocket passers" simply being the QB's who will rush for just under 400 yards in a season which will be your Andrew Luck's, Geno Smith's, Aaron rodgers of the world. 

 

If you really look at it, QB's are no longer the pocket passers that we call them but they have added another dimension to the game. Michael Vick was the first guy that was outright deadly with it, he just wasn't as accurate as you wanted him to be. However, he was hands down the fastest, shiftiest QB in the history of the game and it revolutionized the game to the point that if you could find a human that can run almost as well but can complete 60% of their passes then you have what is becoming the modern QB of today. Michael Vick imo is the reason for this, so I consider it revolutionary. Going back and forth trying to convince people is a waste of time. I should just say that I believe this to be true based on what I've seen and what I've heard defensive minds say regarding preparation for Vick. Thats simply how I perceive it. 

  

 

 This is just BS.  Steve Young wasn't just a "pocket passer."   Nor was Elway for that matter early in his career.   Tarkenton wasn't either.    If somebody said Cunningham changed the position,  I could agree because for the most part,  African American's weren't though to be good enough to be QBs.    Cunningham had a lot of issues, a lot of haters, but he was also a guy who punted the ball 90 years.   He played for a crappy offensive coach(Buddy Ryan) early in his career and then he wound up almost taking the Vikings to the super bowl.    He had quite a few 20+ TD seasons and a couple of 30+ TD passing seasons.  He was also a guy who ran for 500-600 yards a season.    I mean think about that for a moment.   Chris Ivory had a whopping 850 Yards rushing and he was the Jets top RB last year.     And Cunningham played in a different era.    Now if your offense can't score 30 points, you suck as a coach.

 

   Vick had some good moments, but his moments were always Running the ball.   If Vick was putting up 30 TD passes every year and throwing for 4000 yards while rushing for over 1000 yards a season, yeah he revolutionized the game. But he sucked as a QB. He was just a QB who ran the ball.  You can't say he was better than most RBs though because for the most part, he wasn't.  So he wasn't better than any QB and he wasn't better than any RB,  hard to say he was revolutionary.  To ESPN and a few fanboys, yeah maybe, but to the real world, not even close.  He was just one of the most overhyped QBs ever and never lived up to expectations.    Vick wasn't even a better passing QB than Sanchez.  And Sanchez sucked.  

 

 The reality is the only thing people will remember Vick for is that he killed and abused dogs and made them fight.  And he got caught.    That is his legacy no matter what he does from this point on.  And by making statements like this, it kind of proves what kind of person he is and most of his "apologies" are BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 This is just BS.  Steve Young wasn't just a "pocket passer."   Nor was Elway for that matter early in his career.   Tarkenton wasn't either.    If somebody said Cunningham changed the position,  I could agree because for the most part,  African American's weren't though to be good enough to be QBs.    Cunningham had a lot of issues, a lot of haters, but he was also a guy who punted the ball 90 years.   He played for a crappy offensive coach(Buddy Ryan) early in his career and then he wound up almost taking the Vikings to the super bowl.    He had quite a few 20+ TD seasons and a couple of 30+ TD passing seasons.  He was also a guy who ran for 500-600 yards a season.    I mean think about that for a moment.   Chris Ivory had a whopping 850 Yards rushing and he was the Jets top RB last year.     And Cunningham played in a different era.    Now if your offense can't score 30 points, you suck as a coach.

 

   Vick had some good moments, but his moments were always Running the ball.   If Vick was putting up 30 TD passes every year and throwing for 4000 yards while rushing for over 1000 yards a season, yeah he revolutionized the game. But he sucked as a QB. He was just a QB who ran the ball.  You can't say he was better than most RBs though because for the most part, he wasn't.  So he wasn't better than any QB and he wasn't better than any RB,  hard to say he was revolutionary.  To ESPN and a few fanboys, yeah maybe, but to the real world, not even close.  He was just one of the most overhyped QBs ever and never lived up to expectations.    Vick wasn't even a better passing QB than Sanchez.  And Sanchez sucked.  

 

 The reality is the only thing people will remember Vick for is that he killed and abused dogs and made them fight.  And he got caught.    That is his legacy no matter what he does from this point on.  And by making statements like this, it kind of proves what kind of person he is and most of his "apologies" are BS.

lol sure dude. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So from your statement these mobile guys that were being drafted in the second and 3rd round are now being drafted in the 20's. Thats not bad, though I must say since you bought up a good QB in Andrew Luck (being the best prospect since Peyton Manning) I must remind you that you completely forgot about the guy drafted right after Luck going #2. RG3 was considered by many to be "the next Michael Vick with a more accurate arm". And because of that some people thought that RG3 should have been drafted #1 overall before Luck. RG3 ran for over 800 yards his rookie year to add to the 3,200 yards he threw. Bottomline, the days of the immobile pure pocket passer has past. Even Andrew Luck has some mobility to him. He rushed for almost 400 yards last year. The days of Dan Marino, Troy Aikmen, John Elway, Kurt Warner, Jim Kelly, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning stone wall QB is finished...atleast for the moment. Its the generation of the Colin Kaepernick, Cam Newton, RG3, Russell Wilson, Terrelle Pryor's, with your "pocket passers" simply being the QB's who will rush for just under 400 yards in a season which will be your Andrew Luck's, Geno Smith's, Aaron rodgers of the world. 

 

If you really look at it, QB's are no longer the pocket passers that we call them but they have added another dimension to the game. Michael Vick was the first guy that was outright deadly with it, he just wasn't as accurate as you wanted him to be. However, he was hands down the fastest, shiftiest QB in the history of the game and it revolutionized the game to the point that if you could find a human that can run almost as well but can complete 60% of their passes then you have what is becoming the modern QB of today. Michael Vick imo is the reason for this, so I consider it revolutionary. Going back and forth trying to convince people is a waste of time. I should just say that I believe this to be true based on what I've seen and what I've heard defensive minds say regarding preparation for Vick. Thats simply how I perceive it.

Yeah, but your perception is wrong. Lol. Vick is not revolutionary. Teams aren't looking for QBs like Michael Vick, and QBs aren't trying to be like Michael Vick. Vick hasn't been a revolution, he's been an anomaly. No one wants a 55% passer who runs for 1000 yards under center. No one. Teams who are unable to find the great passers are settling and scheming around lesser passers, and maybe they're doing a better job of it, but it's not because of Vick.

Guys like RGIII, Wilson, and Kaepernick aren't a sign of any great revolution, either. They're all young QBs managing games. As they develop as passers. They'll run less. The Jets didn't ask Geno Smith to the pull the ball down and run more because of Michael Vick, they asked him to do it to cut down on turnovers. Once (if ever) he can be relied upon to not throw it to the other team, they'll trust him to throw it more and run less. If Michael Vick was revolutionary, the league would be becoming more of a running league - but we both know it's not, it's all about throwing the football.

And when you talk about defensive coordinators concerned about being embarrassed by Vick, it's because he's a lesser passer who's been capable of winning unconventionally. The same way teams were embarrassed by Tim Tebow before he unceremoniously left the NFL. No one talks about being embarrassed by Peyton Manning or Aaron Rogers, because they're just simply great QBs and it's not embarrassing to lose to them - like it is when you lose to Vick or Tebow.

QBs being better runners/athletes has nothing to do with Vick, either. Everyone in the league is a better athlete than they were years ago. There are DTs today who run faster than RBs from 20 years ago. It's just the evolution of the game. A QB today has to have enough speed and mobility to elude a pass rush before throwing the ball!. No one is looking for the next Michael Vick, who's strongest asset is the ability to run. QBs win in this league by being able to pass.

There has been no revolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Cunningham was Vick before Vick. And he was better at it as well. Vick never threw 30 TDs or finished top 10 in the NFL in rushing yards. Plus his completion percentage was higher despite playing before the Ty Law coverage rules. Also the NFL didn't protect qbs nearly as well as they do today.

Cunningham was 6'4" about 220 and could really sling it.

He was much more like the young, mobile Elway than Vick the herpes vector who compared to Randall C. is a 5'11' twerp.

FWIW Steve Young was for about 2 seasons the best QB, mobile or pocket passer, ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but your perception is wrong. Lol. Vick is not revolutionary. Teams aren't looking for QBs like Michael Vick, and QBs aren't trying to be like Michael Vick. Vick hasn't been a revolution, he's been an anomaly. No one wants a 55% passer who runs for 1000 yards under center. No one.

 

Except people who've dealt with Sanchez, apparently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cunningham was 6'4" about 220 and could really sling it.

He was much more like the young, mobile Elway than Vick the herpes vector who compared to Randall C. is a 5'11' twerp.

FWIW Steve Young was for about 2 seasons the best QB, mobile or pocket passer, ever.

 

Cunningham was actually a pretty good passer, not just a guy playing QB who was crazy fast, though it's hard to measure his numbers to today's standards and that includes Vick who benefits from today's passing rules to the point where he looks like he was almost as good.  30 TDs in a season was no joke when he first did it. It's pretty common now, but people forget you could lead the NFL in TD passes with around or even under 30 TDs back then.  In the past 20 years, it's only happened once.  He may very well have gotten his ring in his missed season, as the rest of the team was fully geared and ready. Then he gets injured like 2 seconds into the first game and was out for the season. We'll never know, and a lot has to fall right even for a great team to win it all, but they were one of the favorites that year.  

 

But consider Vick's TD totals to his peers at the position and, unlike Cunningham and others, he's way behind.  Literally one time he finished 10th in passing TDs.  Once (2010) he had 30 total TDs rushing and receiving.  Hardly elite by today's standards.  To put that in perspective, even Mark Sanchez has eclipsed that, and did it with Plaxico Burress starting and without a dynamic playmaker behind the LOS capable of taking a handful of dumpoffs 30-50 yards to the house.  Granted, Vick did it in fewer games, but that goes with the territory with him, as he has always had trouble staying on the field (as do many running QBs).

 

I think Vick gets a lot more credit, ironically, BECAUSE he was a bad passer.  Most of his great running games came when he was having crappy passing games (2010 excluded, when he actually turned into a decent passer for a year).  But for the most part, when he was passing well, he was relatively quiet with his feet.  And that's pretty common for all mobile QBs.  Why risk injury and run the ball like a RB when you can get the ball out of your hands and toss it 10-30 yards? You'd do it if your passes aren't hitting their mark.  Well Vick missed his mark quite a bit.  On the one hand, it was a good hedge to have for games when he wasn't on his game throwing, but the number of big running games is in large part to the number of games he was doing a terrible job as a passer.  If his whole career was like 2010, then he could boast being this revolutionary player.  But over the years there have been probably dozens of meh or bad QBs who had one really good or great season.

 

Guys you mention - Cunningham, Elway, Young - and other very mobile QBs don't get as many rushing yards because they were far better passers, not because they were incapable of gaining a few hundred more yards on the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Cunningham was actually a pretty good passer, not just a guy playing QB who was crazy fast, though it's hard to measure his numbers to today's standards and that includes Vick who benefits from today's passing rules to the point where he looks like he was almost as good.  30 TDs in a season was no joke when he first did it. It's pretty common now, but people forget you could lead the NFL in TD passes with around or even under 30 TDs back then.  In the past 20 years, it's only happened once.  He may very well have gotten his ring in his missed season, as the rest of the team was fully geared and ready. Then he gets injured like 2 seconds into the first game and was out for the season. We'll never know, and a lot has to fall right even for a great team to win it all, but they were one of the favorites that year.  

 

But consider Vick's TD totals to his peers at the position and, unlike Cunningham and others, he's way behind.  Literally one time he finished 10th in passing TDs.  Once (2010) he had 30 total TDs rushing and receiving.  Hardly elite by today's standards.  To put that in perspective, even Mark Sanchez has eclipsed that, and did it with Plaxico Burress starting and without a dynamic playmaker behind the LOS capable of taking a handful of dumpoffs 30-50 yards to the house.  Granted, Vick did it in fewer games, but that goes with the territory with him, as he has always had trouble staying on the field (as do many running QBs).

 

I think Vick gets a lot more credit, ironically, BECAUSE he was a bad passer.  Most of his great running games came when he was having crappy passing games (2010 excluded, when he actually turned into a decent passer for a year).  But for the most part, when he was passing well, he was relatively quiet with his feet.  And that's pretty common for all mobile QBs.  Why risk injury and run the ball like a RB when you can get the ball out of your hands and toss it 10-30 yards? You'd do it if your passes aren't hitting their mark.  Well Vick missed his mark quite a bit.  On the one hand, it was a good hedge to have for games when he wasn't on his game throwing, but the number of big running games is in large part to the number of games he was doing a terrible job as a passer.  If his whole career was like 2010, then he could boast being this revolutionary player.  But over the years there have been probably dozens of meh or bad QBs who had one really good or great season.

 

Guys you mention - Cunningham, Elway, Young - and other very mobile QBs don't get as many rushing yards because they were far better passers, not because they were incapable of gaining a few hundred more yards on the ground.

You make great points. Young however, despite being one of the best passers of his era and maybe of all time, is still the NFL leader for rushing yds by a QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make great points. Young however, despite being one of the best passers of his era and maybe of all time, is still the NFL leader for rushing yds by a QB.

 

It makes the accomplishment that much better.  Even more so considering how long it was before he was starting (and then how long it was before he was the regular starter for the non-Bucs). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prior to Mike Vick, teams would never consider an RG3 or a Manziel as a starting NFL QB.

 

If they can pass, they'd get considered.

 

And IMO it was Russell Wilson that got Manziel drafted in round 1, not Michael Vick.  The concern with him is/was his size (or lack thereof) more than possessing the ability to run better/faster than most QBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol sure dude. 

 

  If Vick barely plays another down in the NFL,  his legacy is that he was a dog killer.  It's as simple as that.    There are many non NFL fans who want the guy dead.  There are many Jets fans who said they won't even root for the team.     Sorry, but Vick's legacy at this point isn't about football.    Kind of like nobody thinks of OJ and football in the same sentence anymore.  And OJ was a HOF NFL running back.   Vick was a crappy QB who missed the prime of his NFL Career because he went to prison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but your perception is wrong. Lol. Vick is not revolutionary. Teams aren't looking for QBs like Michael Vick, and QBs aren't trying to be like Michael Vick. Vick hasn't been a revolution, he's been an anomaly. No one wants a 55% passer who runs for 1000 yards under center. No one. Teams who are unable to find the great passers are settling and scheming around lesser passers, and maybe they're doing a better job of it, but it's not because of Vick.

Guys like RGIII, Wilson, and Kaepernick aren't a sign of any great revolution, either. They're all young QBs managing games. As they develop as passers. They'll run less. The Jets didn't ask Geno Smith to the pull the ball down and run more because of Michael Vick, they asked him to do it to cut down on turnovers. Once (if ever) he can be relied upon to not throw it to the other team, they'll trust him to throw it more and run less. If Michael Vick was revolutionary, the league would be becoming more of a running league - but we both know it's not, it's all about throwing the football.

And when you talk about defensive coordinators concerned about being embarrassed by Vick, it's because he's a lesser passer who's been capable of winning unconventionally. The same way teams were embarrassed by Tim Tebow before he unceremoniously left the NFL. No one talks about being embarrassed by Peyton Manning or Aaron Rogers, because they're just simply great QBs and it's not embarrassing to lose to them - like it is when you lose to Vick or Tebow.

QBs being better runners/athletes has nothing to do with Vick, either. Everyone in the league is a better athlete than they were years ago. There are DTs today who run faster than RBs from 20 years ago. It's just the evolution of the game. A QB today has to have enough speed and mobility to elude a pass rush before throwing the ball!. No one is looking for the next Michael Vick, who's strongest asset is the ability to run. QBs win in this league by being able to pass.

There has been no revolution.

It's true that as they develop their passing ability they'll run less, but the ability to run is just another threat that a defense will have to worry about and plan accordingly for which will help open up other opportunities. Your comment about being more of a running type league is wrong. Thats only based on the running back position. The revolution of the dual threat QB has never been bigger than it is now. It started with Michael vick being the first QB to rush for over 1000 yards as well as being the first QB in a tandem of dual 1000 yard rushers on a single team.  Now you said that "No team wants a 55% passer that can rush for 1000 yards)...Now you have guys like Cam Newton who can complete 60% of his passes, throw for over 4000 yards with over 20 TD's as well as rush for over 700 yards and 14 TD's. There's not a team in this league right now thats looking for a franchise QB that would pass on Cam Newton, not one. 

 

You talked about these type of QB's being only 2nd and 3rd round picks and its only the Andrew Luck types that get #1 overall praise, well Cam Newton went #1 overall the year before Luck and RG3 who went #2 the year after. The league IS becoming more run oriented, just at the QB position. We have more dual threat QB's in the league starting right now than at any time in recent history putting up better numbers than at any time in history. It was ridiculous when Vick rushed for over 1000 yards as a QB, its never been done before. Now we got guys like RG3 rushing for 800 yards his rookie season, or Cam rushing for over 700 yards his rookie season and an NFL record 14 rushing TD's as a rookie. and over his 3 years he's averaging over 675 yards and about 10 TD's a season while averaging a completion rate 60% and 3,800 yards passing a season and 22 passing TD's. 

 

The dual threat rusher is so prominent in the game right now that having a QB rush for 400-500 yards in a season today isn't even considered a big deal. My perception isn't wrong, people simply dont agree when Vick said that what he did was revolutionary and that I agree with it. And we both know what I meant by the embarrassment that defensive coordinators were trying to avoid, D. coordinators admitted that they really didnt know how to game plan for him during those first few years. Trying to make it seem like they didn't want to get embarrassed by a lesser talent is taken away from the actual threat that they were talking about. This dog fighting has really damaged the perception of Vicks career I tell ya. 

 

Lastly, you talked about kids not trying to be like michael vick. Cam Newton grew up in ATL and was a huge Falcon fan. You know who Cam looked up to growing up? Mike Vick. Funning how that happens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doug Flutie or FranTarkenton might disagree with you on that.

 

It was a long time between Tarkenton and Vick to go without running QB's.  Vick showed that you could win with a QB that used his legs as much as his arm when he was with the Falcons.  Flutie was nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  If Vick barely plays another down in the NFL,  his legacy is that he was a dog killer.  It's as simple as that.    There are many non NFL fans who want the guy dead.  There are many Jets fans who said they won't even root for the team.     Sorry, but Vick's legacy at this point isn't about football.    Kind of like nobody thinks of OJ and football in the same sentence anymore.  And OJ was a HOF NFL running back.   Vick was a crappy QB who missed the prime of his NFL Career because he went to prison.

Im mature enough to separate the two. Im also mature enough to know that I've done some bad things in my past that I'm genuinely sorry about and really do regret. When I think of Vick dog fighting it only comes to mind when I'm on this forum and see how ridiculous people act about the situation that is almost a decade old and that he apologized and served his time for. If Vick doesn't play another down in the NFL his legacy will be that he revolutionized the QB position from a dual threat standpoint and that he was the sickest QB in Madden Football history (Madden 2004). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's true that as they develop their passing ability they'll run less, but the ability to run is just another threat that a defense will have to worry about and plan accordingly for which will help open up other opportunities. Your comment about being more of a running type league is wrong. Thats only based on the running back position. The revolution of the dual threat QB has never been bigger than it is now. It started with Michael vick being the first QB to rush for over 1000 yards as well as being the first QB in a tandem of dual 1000 yard rushers on a single team.  Now you said that "No team wants a 55% passer that can rush for 1000 yards)...Now you have guys like Cam Newton who can complete 60% of his passes, throw for over 4000 yards with over 20 TD's as well as rush for over 700 yards and 14 TD's. There's not a team in this league right now thats looking for a franchise QB that would pass on Cam Newton, not one. 

 

You talked about these type of QB's being only 2nd and 3rd round picks and its only the Andrew Luck types that get #1 overall praise, well Cam Newton went #1 overall the year before Luck and RG3 who went #2 the year after. The league IS becoming more run oriented, just at the QB position. We have more dual threat QB's in the league starting right now than at any time in recent history putting up better numbers than at any time in history. It was ridiculous when Vick rushed for over 1000 yards as a QB, its never been done before. Now we got guys like RG3 rushing for 800 yards his rookie season, or Cam rushing for over 700 yards his rookie season and an NFL record 14 rushing TD's as a rookie. and over his 3 years he's averaging over 675 yards and about 10 TD's a season while averaging a completion rate 60% and 3,800 yards passing a season and 22 passing TD's. 

 

The dual threat rusher is so prominent in the game right now that having a QB rush for 400-500 yards in a season today isn't even considered a big deal. My perception isn't wrong, people simply dont agree when Vick said that what he did was revolutionary and that I agree with it.

 

Cunningham rushed for nearly 1000 yards (942).  The only reason he didn't is because he was too good of a passer.  If Vick was a better passer, he wouldn't have had 1000 rushing yards that season either.  In other words, the reason Vick is so famous (as a player) is, in no small part, because he's a bad passer.  

 

No one seriously believes that because, at each one's most prolific season running the ball, that the 6 additional yards per game Vick averaged (66 vs 59) makes one a revolutionary player and the other not the real McCoy.  Especially when, in these 2 respective seasons, Cunningham had more than double Vick's rushing TDs, 30 passing TDs to Vick's 20, and another 1000 passing yards.  

 

They are (were) 2 different levels of football player, and Vick was a noticeable level worse, though Cunningham was hardly the perfect passer himself.  Vick's just more famous is all.  And Vick is more famous now because he's more recent, he's still playing, his entire career was in the internet era (high speed internet era at that), and in no small part because of his off-field crap and "2nd career" with Philadelphia.  His baby brother only added to the family's reputation for being the trash they all probably are.  

 

Oh yeah, and also that time period from Cunningham to Vick was a period of a lot of attitude change regarding the skin color of an NFL QB.  Cunningham - like Moon - were far more revolutionary than Vick, who rode on their coattails for an eager media that talked him up as though he was something he wasn't: a really good QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cunningham rushed for nearly 1000 yards (942).  The only reason he didn't is because he was too good of a passer.  If Vick was a better passer, he wouldn't have had 1000 rushing yards that season either.  In other words, the reason Vick is so famous (as a player) is, in no small part, because he's a bad passer.  

 

No one seriously believes that because, at each one's most prolific season running the ball, that the 6 additional yards per game Vick averaged (66 vs 59) makes one a revolutionary player and the other not the real McCoy.  Especially when, in these 2 respective seasons, Cunningham had more than double Vick's rushing TDs, 30 passing TDs to Vick's 20, and another 1000 passing yards.  

 

They are (were) 2 different levels of football player, and Vick was a noticeable level worse, though Cunningham was hardly the perfect passer himself.  Vick's just more famous is all.  And Vick is more famous now because he's more recent, he's still playing, his entire career was in the internet era (high speed internet era at that), and in no small part because of his off-field crap and "2nd career" with Philadelphia.  His baby brother only added to the family's reputation for being the trash they all probably are.  

 

Oh yeah, and also that time period from Cunningham to Vick was a period of a lot of attitude change regarding the skin color of an NFL QB.  Cunningham - like Moon - were far more revolutionary than Vick, who rode on their coattails for an eager media that talked him up as though he was something he wasn't: a really good QB.

Not true. Cunningham didnt rush for 1000 yards because he was 58 yards short of it. Do I think Cunningham was a better passer than Vick? yes....though not by much. I got to see his full body of work over 16 years. Vick's career isn't complete. I will say that they are very similar when it comes to passing and passing percentage. Both averaged 60% completion for the first time in their 8th season in the league. Cunningham was only a slightly better passer than Vick, Michael Vick hands down is the best running QB in the history of the NFL.....with a passing ability similar to Randall Cunningham's. 

 

If you compare Cunningham's first 11 years to Vicks then this is what you get.

22,877 passing yards for Cunningham to 21,489 passing yards for Vick.

150 passing TD's for Cunningham, 128 passing TD's for Vick.

105 INT's for Cunningham, 85 for Vick.

52.9% completion rate Cunningham, 56.2 completion rate Vick.  

4482 rushing yards Cunnigham, 5857 rush yards vick.

32 rushing TD's Cunningham, 36 rushing TD's Vick. 

27,359 Total yards for Cunningham, 27,346 total yards for Vick (A difference of 13 yards)

182 total TD's Cunningham, 164 total TD's for Vick (A difference of 18 TD's)

 

And these numbers are with Vick missing 2 years in the league in his prime. 

 

To make it seem like Cunningham was clear cut better is simply favoritism. To say that Vick was a bad passer then after looking at the numbers you could say the same thing for Cunningham in his first 11 years yet no one does. You'll probably say that they played in a different league where it was harder to throw the ball in Cunnigham's time. Well, Vick didnt play in that time and Cunningham isn't playing now so we dont know what would have happened. They played in 16 games a year so in that regard its the same. And it wasn't that much different. The Mel Blount rule came into affect in the 70's and the Tom Brady Rule came info affect less than 10 years ago. For the most part they've played in a similar type environment. If anything Cunningham also got to play with 2 HOF WR's in Cris Carter and Randy Moss in Philly and in Minnesota as well as Mike Quick who was a 5X All-Pro. The best WR Vick had was desean jackson for (for which he completed 60.1% of his passes with a top 10 target in those 3 years). Who were even Vick's WR's in ATL? I'll tell you, a washed up Terrance Mathis, Brian Finneran (that had his best years with Vick), Peerless Price, Alge Crumpler (who made his career under Vick), Michael Jenkins and a rookie Roddy White who didnt explode on to the scene until his 3rd year (2007) and Vick was gone by then. 

 

Im not saying its you, but generally speaking the lack of respect for Vick and his game is the dog fighting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll probably say that they played in a different league where it was harder to throw the ball in Cunnigham's time. Well, Vick didnt play in that time and Cunningham isn't playing now so we dont know what would have happened.

 

Mark Sanchez once matched Joe Namath's career high for TD's in a season, with 26.  I guess he's comparable to Joe Namath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Vick, apparently comparable to Randall Cunningham, couldn't get a starting job with a single team in the NFL this offseason.  Not even the Raiders, who signed Matt Schaub.

 

Yes, Matt Schaub.  The same guy who had a pick 6 in a record 4 straight games this past season.  Not even Sanchez did that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Sanchez once matched Joe Namath's career high for TD's in a season, with 26.  I guess he's comparable to Joe Namath.

No its not, because Joe Namath played with 14 game seasons, before the Mel Blount rule and I also think before the Dick "Night Train" Lane rule. Namath played like 40 years ago, to make this statement of yours hurts my brain to force it to respond

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...