Jump to content

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


Villain The Foe

Recommended Posts

I like Sanchez better than Vick.  I knew Sanchez sucked, but I could/would at least root for him.  Vick is garbage, and not just because of dog fighting.  It's because of dog torturing (not that dog fighting isn't torture in and of itself, but Vick went a bit further with it).

 

Now that I've gotten my last word in, we can discontinue the convo.   ;)

Sh_t, I just responded to something else you said to me. Respond and I'll let you have the last word. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 244
  • Created
  • Last Reply

VICKS LEGACY IS KILLING DOGS EVEN IF HE WINS SB !!!!!

As far as in between the white lines, he's a career 55% completion pct with an increased concussion risk.

The only positive I like about him is his arm strength but most of the time his almost mushy brain can't handle the accuracy. Too bad.

If geno can't improve by leaps and bounds our QB situation will, once again, suck ass.

I cheer for Matt Simms cause he's got pedigree and I just want to see him pull a Brady before our very eyes. But mostly. I cheer for him cause I don't think the two in front of him can do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cunningham was a dramatically better passer than Vick.

Vick was not a dramatically better runner than Cunningham.  The only thing that makes it seem so are rule changes, medical changes, and Cunningham's somewhat-repaired knee from 1992+.

Cunningham was a better passer than Vick, and Vick was not only dramatically better, he was dramatically better than everyone else before him. He is the undisputed best rushing QB in the history of the NFL period. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cunningham was a better passer than Vick, and Vick was not only dramatically better, he was dramatically better than everyone else before him. He is the undisputed best rushing QB in the history of the NFL period. 

 

 

not really.  did you see my link ?   you seem to be remembering all the long runs, forgetting all the crappy runs

 

career yards/td's

 

1. Michael Vick   5,174   32

2. Randall Cunningham   4,928   35

3. Steve Young   4,239   43

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not really.  did you see my link ?   you seem to be remembering all the long runs, forgetting all the crappy runs

 

career yards/td's

 

1. Michael Vick   5,174   32

2. Randall Cunningham   4,928   35

3. Steve Young   4,239   43

Yeah, and thats Vick in 11 years vs. Cunningham in 16 years. So you can manipulate stats and call the omitted one's "crappy", but at the end of the day Cunningham isn't on the same level as Vick when it comes to QB rushing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, and thats Vick in 11 years vs. Cunningham in 16 years. So you can manipulate stats and call the omitted one's "crappy", but at the end of the day Cunningham isn't on the same level as Vick when it comes to QB rushing. 

 

yeah, he is.  and so is young.   vicks game is running, so he runs more.  cunningham and young are the best dual threat QB's ever

 

vick has an 80 yard TD on his resume

 

cool

 

doesn't make him dramatically better.  he has more flash and style, speed, sure but randall and young came 20 years before him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not about proof, its about perception. Im not here to change your mind, just to explain my reasoning. Proof is something much more concrete and less about popularity. I didnt say that Vick revolutionized the NFL, I never once said that. I've stated that he revolutionized the QB position in respects to rushing the football and what is to be expected of QB's today. THAT is what i've been saying all along. You, Sperm and everyone else have either taken my position out of context (Check the highlighted part of your quote) or are pissed that Ron Mexico, aka Mike Vick has allegedly distributed herpes to them as well as killed their dog lol (joking). 

 

Seriously, Mike Vick revolutionized the position and what is to be expected from the position, especially since we no longer put in the time in developing guys at that position so QB's must also possess a quality to their game that can get them on the field earlier, keep them on the field, and win football games. 

 

I can't show you proof of what I agree with because its only based on perspective. Thats like the debate of Tony Gwynn. Many people believe that Ted Williams is the best hitter of all time, Some, including myself, believe that it was Tony Gwynn by a f'ing mile. No one can prove the other wrong.....its a debate on one's perspective. 

 

And for the record, you keep typing too. lol

Seriously no, he did not.

As has been pointed out, there were running QBs before Michael Vick. A running QB is nothing new. Vick gained 1000 yards rushing, and no one has done that since. No one is looking for that from their QB. Teams want QBs who can throw the ball, not QBs who can run with the ball. These guys you're citing who are still very early in their careers, and seeing their rushing totals drop, do absolutely nothing to enhance your point. If anything, it's the championship winning Steve Young who revolutionized the position. Michael Vick is a smaller, less successful, more frequently injured, more turnover prone, much more inclined to run version of Steve Young.

Vick came into the league with a bunch of hype that he only barely came close to fulfilling one year in his entire career. Like him all you want, defend him all you want, but he's never been a great player - much less revolutionary at his position. Seriously, not even close.

Oh, and like Michael Vick, baseball sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously no, he did not.

As has been pointed out, there were running QBs before Michael Vick. A running QB is nothing new. Vick gained 1000 yards rushing, and no one has done that since. No one is looking for that from their QB. Teams want QBs who can throw the ball, not QBs who can run with the ball. These guys you're citing who are still very early in their careers, and seeing their rushing totals drop, do absolutely nothing to enhance your point. If anything, it's the championship winning Steve Young who revolutionized the position. Michael Vick is a smaller, less successful, more frequently injured, more turnover prone, much more inclined to run version of Steve Young.

Vick came into the league with a bunch of hype that he only barely came close to fulfilling one year in his entire career. Like him all you want, defend him all you want, but he's never been a great player - much less revolutionary at his position. Seriously, not even close.

Oh, and like Michael Vick, baseball sucks.

Here ye, here ye. Let it be known, I have been swayed in my views and I'm going the way of the Slats man! Baseball sucks and associating Vick with Baseball was too fatal a blow to overcome. Dog fighting and the spreading of STD's fails in comparison to the association of Vicks game to the suckiness that is regular season baseball! 

 

Vick f'ing sucks, and baseball does too!  :winking0001:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://sportslistoftheday.com/2011/12/11/sports-list-of-the-day-3/

 

 

 

cliff battles revolutionized the position, truth be told

 

year/career rushing yards/career rushing TD's

 

1. Michael Vick  2001 5,174   32

2. Randall Cunningham 1985  4,928   35

3. Steve Young 1985  4,239   43

4. Fran Tarkenton 1961  3,674   32

5. Steve McNair 1995  3,590   37

6. Cliff Battles  1937 3,511   23

7. Donovan McNabb 1999  3,459   29

8. John Elway 1983  3,407   33

9. Tobin Rote 1950  3,128   37

10. Spec Sanders 1946  2,900   33

11. Kordell Stewart 1995  2,874   38

 

Great list and a great historical perspective.  We have to give an honorable mention to Bobby Douglas, who could not pass a lick, and did not rack up the career numbers of the players on the list.  Rushed for 968 yards in 14 games for the Bears in '72. He was an absolute mutha thumper to bring down.

 

Then there was Marlin Briscoe -- the guy who never got a real shot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here ye, here ye. Let it be known, I have been swayed in my views and I'm going the way of the Slats man! Baseball sucks and associating Vick with Baseball was too fatal a blow to overcome. Dog fighting and the spreading of STD's fails in comparison to the association of Vicks game to the suckiness that is regular season baseball! 

 

Vick f'ing sucks, and baseball does too!  :winking0001:

This total cop out saddens me.

Let me ask you, do you honestly think the revolutionary Vick is a HoF'er? I'd think revolutionary players would make their way there, but that Vick won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This total cop out saddens me.

Let me ask you, do you honestly think the revolutionary Vick is a HoF'er? I'd think revolutionary players would make their way there, but that Vick won't.

What?

 

When I find myself in discussion with multiple people since about 1 o'clock this afternoon, the last thing I would call that is a cop out. Your question and my answer to it (which is that I dont think Vick is a HOF'er at this point) wont change a thing regarding my feelings on the topic that I've been discussing. 

 

Your sadness doesn't sadden me, especially when what you're sad over isn't factual. I was trying to politely let our views stand on what they're worth and call it a wrap. I forget sometimes that I'm on Jetnation. Forgive me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What?

 

When I find myself in discussion with multiple people since about 1 o'clock this afternoon, the last thing I would call that is a cop out. Your question and my answer to it (which is that I dont think Vick is a HOF'er at this point) wont change a thing regarding my feelings on the topic that I've been discussing. 

 

Your sadness doesn't sadden me, especially when what you're sad over isn't factual. I was trying to politely let our views stand on what they're worth and call it a wrap. I forget sometimes that I'm on Jetnation. Forgive me.

Okay. So Vick revolutionalized the QB position in the NFL, but he's not a HoF'er. Cool, got it. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://sportslistoftheday.com/2011/12/11/sports-list-of-the-day-3/

 

 

 

cliff battles revolutionized the position, truth be told

 

year/career rushing yards/career rushing TD's

 

1. Michael Vick  2001 5,174   32

2. Randall Cunningham 1985  4,928   35

3. Steve Young 1985  4,239   43

4. Fran Tarkenton 1961  3,674   32

5. Steve McNair 1995  3,590   37

6. Cliff Battles  1937 3,511   23

7. Donovan McNabb 1999  3,459   29

8. John Elway 1983  3,407   33

9. Tobin Rote 1950  3,128   37

10. Spec Sanders 1946  2,900   33

11. Kordell Stewart 1995  2,874   38

 

I think this is the link that you asked if I seen. I didnt. I only noticed it after Mostro quoted you. there are a few things I noticed

 

#1. Michael Vick is at the top of this list. 

#2. Vick is the only one over 5,000 yards AND he's still active. 

#3. Everyone else on this list thats is relevant (Cunningham, Young) had about 50% more playing time in their career than Vick did yet Vick yardage wise crushes them. 

 

Its cool that you think differently, stand by your position. I feel my way about Vick, it is what it is. 

 

Great list and a great historical perspective.  We have to give an honorable mention to Bobby Douglas, who could not pass a lick, and did not rack up the career numbers of the players on the list.  Rushed for 968 yards in 14 games for the Bears in '72. He was an absolute mutha thumper to bring down.

 

Then there was Marlin Briscoe -- the guy who never got a real shot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1e6ba36215fa9d8f7db97e7a1b91f2f1.jpg

 

 

What?

 

When I find myself in discussion with multiple people since about 1 o'clock this afternoon, the last thing I would call that is a cop out. Your question and my answer to it (which is that I dont think Vick is a HOF'er at this point) wont change a thing regarding my feelings on the topic that I've been discussing. 

 

Your sadness doesn't sadden me, especially when what you're sad over isn't factual. I was trying to politely let our views stand on what they're worth and call it a wrap. I forget sometimes that I'm on Jetnation. Forgive me. 

 

 

I think this is the link that you asked if I seen. I didnt. I only noticed it after Mostro quoted you. there are a few things I noticed

 

#1. Michael Vick is at the top of this list. 

#2. Vick is the only one over 5,000 yards AND he's still active. 

#3. Everyone else on this list thats is relevant (Cunningham, Young) had about 50% more playing time in their career than Vick did yet Vick yardage wise crushes them. 

 

Its cool that you think differently, stand by your position. I feel my way about Vick, it is what it is. 

 

 

I dont think he is at this point. His career isn't over. You're welcome. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing this thread has me convinced of is that Villain does not fully understand the definition of "revolution".

 

You're essentially disproving your own argument by acknowledging the facts presented by others that there were multiple players who came before Vick who were successful runners.  The key difference is Vick having a greater degree of dependency on running due to his inferior skills as a passer.  Regardless if everyone were to concede that Vick is a superior and more successful runner, the fact that there were others before him who did the same long before he showed up means that it, by definition, cannot be considered "revolutionary".  Someone cannot be responsible for starting something that already existed before them.  It also doesn't help when pointing out how nobody else has had such heavy reliance on running at the QB position.  When you're the only one to do something, it also cannot be considered a revolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing this thread has me convinced of is that Villain does not fully understand the definition of "revolution".

 

You're essentially disproving your own argument by acknowledging the facts presented by others that there were multiple players who came before Vick who were successful runners.  The key difference is Vick having a greater degree of dependency on running due to his inferior skills as a passer.  Regardless if everyone were to concede that Vick is a superior and more successful runner, the fact that there were others before him who did the same long before he showed up means that it, by definition, cannot be considered "revolutionary".  Someone cannot be responsible for starting something that already existed before them.  It also doesn't help when pointing out how nobody else has had such heavy reliance on running at the QB position.  When you're the only one to do something, it also cannot be considered a revolution.

The definition of "Revolutionize": To change something radically or fundamentally. 

 

Me acknowledging that there were people on a football field who ran the ball with success doesn't change the fact that Vick did it on a much higher level. What you and others are doing is trying to discredit his overwhelming success as a runner by saying that his passing was inferior. His passing was rather similar to Randall Cunningham in his first 11 years, and certain aspects of his passing game (completion % and INT's) were better than Cunninghams. A QB being a threat to rush for over 1000 yards in a season didn't happen before Vick, to average almost 700 yards rushing for a QB didnt happen before Vick, being a threat on that level in the running game with the ability to make all the throws did not happen before Vick. If it has then show me. You can't. Everyone brings up Randall Cunningham and Cunningham's running wasn't no where as good a running threat as Michael Vick. He wasn't nearly as fast as Michael Vick, he wasn't nearly as explosive as Michael Vick. Michael Vick had Randy Moss speed with a  Brett Favre cannon. It was never seen before Michael Vick. Randall Cunningham didnt have Randy Moss speed and a Brett Favre-like Cannon. Michael Vick did. Steve Young didnt have Randy Moss speed either, he didnt rush for over 5000 yards in his first decade playing. None of these people scratched the surface of 5000 yards in their complete career yet Vick did it in his first 11 years in the league. He has just about every major rushing record from the QB position. 

 

What he did revolutionized the game and made ways for the Cam Newtons, Colin Kaepernicks, RG3's that we see today in the NFL. He's not a Hall of Famer, he was not friendly to dogs at one time, his alias is Ron, he may have an STD....or two (Sperm said), but none of this takes away the fact that for his first 6 years in the league he's averaged close to 700 yards and in 11 years averages almost 550 yards, and thats with him having 3 years where he had  just 289 yards, 255 yards and 95 yards. So if you take out those 3 years when he didnt play then that means in just 8 years Vick amassed 5,218 which gives him a career average of  652 yards a season. There is no QB dead or alive that statistically compete with this dude on that level. Yet in the passing game Vick can surely be compared to Randall Cunningham. 

 

 

I'll say it again since it was hard to read it when Vick said it. Michael Vick revolutionized the QB position when it comes to running the football and what is to be expected of QB's today. You dont have to believe it, its happening whether you'd like to accept it or not. Now you can read this and jump through all the hoops on how I spoke about a Favre cannon but he wasn't as good as favre with that cannon etc. Let me save you and others the trouble and tell you that its all true. But Mike Vick was good enough to ve a starter in this league for a career even with everyone's criticisms. His ability was good enough that he could go to jail, come out and have teams looking for his services to start for them no matter the criticism of his game or the love people have for dogs. Vick is good enough to be a Jet right now and be the starter if its felt that Geno isn't ready. So talking about how crummy a passer he is and this is why he rushed for so many yards is frivolous, so save yourself the trouble of typing because the NFL has disagreed with that for the past 11 years and Defensive Coordinators have said that its been dreadful having to plan for this guy, especially when he played in Atlanta. 

 

The word Revolutionized is relevant when it comes to Michael Vick and the QB rushing game. No one did it like he did it, before he did it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 No game like Cunningham with 124 rushing yards while throwing 250 in the air and 4 passing TDs.  When Vick did have good passing games, and he did have some, he didn't reach Cunningham's average rushing game (in his banner rushing year), let alone his own.

Vick is/was a vastly inferior QB. The only thing he revolutionized is fan tolerance for someone who distributes herpes, who tortures canines and enjoys every moment of it, and who sucked at hitting his receivers.

lol, my bad, I didn't even see this statement earlier, I've been going back and forth with so many people earlier I really didn't realize you said this. 

What Vick hasn't done was rush for 124 yards while throwing for 250 yards and 4 TD's. Nope, he certainly hasn't. This is what he has done though. Vick threw for 333 yards "in the air" and 4 TD's (with a passer rating of 150) while running for 80 yards on 8 attempts and scoring two rushing TD's. lol. Has Cunningham done such a thing???? Nope. You now how I know he didnt? Because Michael Vick is the only QB in NFL history to throw for over 300 yards and 4 TD's and run for over 50 yards with 2 rushing TD's in the same game. No one has done it before him, no one has done it after him. 

So, Michael Vick may not have put up those exact numbers that Cunningham did, but in the video that I've provided you below, no QB in the almost 100 year history (Not the infallible Randall Cunningham, Not Steve Young, not Tarkenton and not any of the rushing QB's from the early 20th century that people bring up but no one has actually seen play) has ever put up a throwing/rushing/scoring spectacle like what Vick did against the Redskins in 2010. So he's actually played a better game than that Cunningham game you mentioned. I know that for some it hurts to hear that, but its true. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, my bad, I didn't even see this statement earlier, I've been going back and forth with so many people earlier I really didn't realize you said this. 

What Vick hasn't done was rush for 124 yards while throwing for 250 yards and 4 TD's. Nope, he certainly hasn't. This is what he has done though. Vick threw for 333 yards "in the air" and 4 TD's (with a passer rating of 150) while running for 80 yards on 8 attempts and scoring two rushing TD's. lol. Has Cunningham done such a thing???? Nope. You now how I know he didnt? Because Michael Vick is the only QB in NFL history to throw for over 300 yards and 4 TD's and run for over 50 yards with 2 rushing TD's in the same game. No one has done it before him, no one has done it after him. 

So, Michael Vick may not have put up those exact numbers that Cunningham did, but in the video that I've provided you below, no QB in the almost 100 year history (Not the infallible Randall Cunningham, Not Steve Young, not Tarkenton and not any of the rushing QB's from the early 20th century that people bring up but no one has actually seen play) has ever put up a throwing/rushing/scoring spectacle like what Vick did against the Redskins in 2010. So he's actually played a better game than that Cunningham game you mentioned. I know that for some it hurts to hear that, but its true. 

 

 

But you said it was the greater amount of rushing yards that separates Vick from all others.  Then you show me a comparison game where Cunningham's rushing #s outgain Vick's by over 50%? 

 

I'm not certain I understand your original argument, then, where 45 yards in his best game ever is valued equivalently when Vick comes up short, but Vick being ahead by an additional SIX yards per game is to be considered very significant and, even more, revolutionary.

 

Further, it was his 1000-yard season that you weighed so heavily, and every above-the-mean rushing game he had that year accompanied by a below average (if not outright horrid) passing performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...