Who would you want Vick or Brady?

[piratesownninjas]

OK,

Tom Brady hasn't had amazing receivers either, but he still puts up the stats... Price shouldnt be considered a bust, as he has the worst passing qb throwing him the ball... Lets be honest, its not Vick that led them into the playoffs, its Vick/Dunn/Duckett... Vick is way overhyped, and I can name 10 guys that I would take over him any day. Vick=Hype...

 

This whole conversation drives me crazy...

Joe Montana-Terry Bradshaw-Troy Aikman-Tom Brady-3+ Super Bowl Victories

Vick=How many playoff appearances?

And Steve Young says it took him 3 years to learn the WCO... We have no reason to believe that Vick is smart enough to learn the offense. Vick has never struck me as an intelligent player, just someone who has incredible physical ability. Bottom line, I don't see Vick throwing for 3400 yards or 25 touchdowns, because he's not a great passer. He has showed us that he is fragile, and can't take too many hits... What happens when he's forced to throw the ball?

I'm in no way a fan of the pats or Brady, but bottom line, the air is thin when it comes to the caliber of player Brady is.

 

Joe Montana over Dan Marino

Tom Brady over Peyton Manning.

 

Brady or Manning would be a better question, as the Vick question is just asinine.

Edited June 16, 2005 by piratesownninjas

[1stimer]

OK,

Tom Brady hasn't had amazing receivers either, but he still puts up the stats... Price shouldnt be considered a bust, as he has the worst passing qb throwing him the ball...  Lets be honest, its not Vick that led them into the playoffs, its Vick/Dunn/Duckett...

843881[/snapback]

 

 

 

Let's be honest ... without Dillon, the D, and the coaches Brady wouldn't have led the Pats to the SB either ...

[1stimer]

Just as a side note ... ATL was ranked 16th in Offensive points and 18th in Offensive yards ... there were 8 NFC teams who were ahead of them in yardage and 6 NFC teams who were ahead of them in points (2 of which are in their division)

 

Offensive points & yards

*CAR

GB

MIN

PHI

*NO

SEA

 

Offensive yards

STL

DAL

 

So to say they were helped by being in a week NFC isn't entirely true. After all, three of New England's games should have been gimmies ... 2 against MIA and 1 against SF

 

But then again, any given sunday right ... or in the case of the second MIA game ... any given monday.

[charty]

Let's be honest ... without Dillon, the D, and the coaches Brady wouldn't have led the Pats to the SB either ...

 

843902[/snapback]

 

 

 

Moron, were you born in 2004?

He won 2 SuperBowls with an average (and that is being generous) Antowain Smith.

[Furd]

It seems that I may need my QB to throw a forward pass every now and then.

 

Until Vick can learn this little trick, I'll take Brady.

[1stimer]

Moron, were you born in 2004?

He won 2 SuperBowls with an average (and that is being generous) Antowain Smith.

 

843923[/snapback]

 

 

 

i was referring to pirates comment that vick wasn't the only reason they made it to the playoffs last year ... so my comment was completely valid ... read the post

[WaterMan]

Just as a side note ... ATL was ranked 16th in Offensive points and 18th in Offensive yards ... there were 8 NFC teams who were ahead of them in yardage and 6 NFC teams who were ahead of them in points (2 of which are in their division)

 

Offensive points & yards

*CAR

GB

MIN

PHI

*NO

SEA

 

843916[/snapback]

 

 

 

And when I said the Panthers would be throwing more in 2004, people laughed.

[jgcoach]

Moron, were you born in 2004?

He won 2 SuperBowls with an average (and that is being generous) Antowain Smith.

 

843923[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Average yes but, definately servicable. He was ok for NE. If not, are you actually saying they had a high octane throwing off. I don't think so. Or are you saying the D was great, either way you're confirming what the poster wrote. At any rate, I'll take Brady before Vick.

[phenom]

I don't think people can separate Brady from the Patriots so it's an unfair question anyway.

 

If Brady was such a good prospect he wouldn't have lasted until the sixth round and been Drew Bledsoes backup.

 

Vick was touted as the #1 pick by all 32 NFL GM's (if their team needed a QB) but I guess Huddlers here know better than people who are paid to make these types of decisions..............

[Grogansghost]

I don't think people can separate Brady from the Patriots so it's an unfair question anyway. 

 

If Brady was such a good prospect he wouldn't have lasted until the sixth round and been Drew Bledsoes backup.

 

Vick was touted as the #1 pick by all 32 NFL GM's (if their team needed a QB) but I guess Huddlers here know better than people who are paid to make these types of decisions..............

 

844740[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I don't think many people are going to argue with you that out of college Vick seemed like a better prospect. But now we get to judge based on their NFL performances.

 

For me Vick would be too risky. Maybe he'll become more consistent, but I think it's just as likely he won't - and his style makes him more likely he'll to get hurt than Brady. With Brady you know what you're getting.

 

Also, the Falcons seem like a pretty solid team to me - strong defense, strong running, Price did fine in Buffalo, plus Crumpler as a safety valve. Maybe learning the new offense is what held him back, but it doesn't seem like he's suffering from a lack of talent around him. It will be interesting to see what he does this year.

[WaterMan]

He's suffering at a lack of talent at the WR position. He just needs one reliable guy and he has no one.

 

People say, "Vick runs first and passes second." Yeah but who's getting open in Atlanta besides Crumpler, who's being keyed on?

[Grogansghost]

Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD

1999 Bills 16 4 31 393 12.7 45 3

2000 Bills 16 16 52 762 14.7 42 3

2001 Bills 16 16 55 895 16.3 70 7

2002 Bills 16 16 94 1252 13.3 73 9

2003 Falc 16 15 64 838 13.1 49 3

2004 Falc 16 15 45 575 12.8 50 3

TOTAL 96 82 341 4715 13.8 73 28

 

Stats for Price from nfl.com - the guy was steadily improving every year until he went to Atlanta.

 

Brings up a chicken and egg type question - is it the WR's holding back Vick, or is Vick ruining once promising talent.

 

Disclaimer: I'm just a bit bitter that I drafted Price last year.

[charty]

Average yes but, definately servicable. He was ok for NE. If not, are you actually saying they had a high octane throwing off. I don't think so. Or are you saying the D was great, either way you're confirming what the poster wrote. At any rate, I'll take Brady before Vick.

 

844528[/snapback]

 

 

 

Come on.

2001, Antowain had 1157 yards and 12 TDs, by far his best year.

 

In 2002, he had 982 yds and 6 tds. The Pats were 28th in rush yds, while 11th in Passing yards and 2nd in Passing TDs.

The reason the Pats didn't make the playoffs in '02 was because of a lack of running game and the defense had an off year. But, a lack of running game will also have a negative impact the defensive stats, which it did in 2002.

 

In 2003, Antowain had 642 yds and 3 TDs, the Pats were 27th in rushing yards and 8th in passing yards.

 

You call '02 and '03 servicable? average?

 

This actually is showing that Brady and the Defense won in spite of a below average running game.

 

My only point was responding to the post that said without Dillon, the Pats wouldn't have won the SB, but that person was only responding to another dumb comment.

[msaint]

Let's be honest ... without Dillon, the D, and the coaches Brady wouldn't have led the Pats to the SB either ...

 

843902[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

let's be honest....

 

without franco harris, swann/stallworth, the steel curtain and chuck knoll, bradshaw wouldn't have led the steelers to 4 SBs

 

without the no name defense, cszonka/morris and shula, griese never would led miami to undefeated season and SB...

 

without marshall faulk, his receivers, that turf, and martz, warner wouldn't have led the rams to the sb

 

without arguably the greatest o-line in history, emmitt smith, and that tough defense, aikman wouldn't have led dallas to their SB's

 

without terrell davis, a good defense, a killer o-line, and mike shanahan, elway wouldn't have finally led the broncos to SB's

 

without lombardi, herb adderly/willie davis/forrest gregg, bart starr would never have led the pack to SBs...

 

how many times are people going to use this "he's only a product of his team" argument against brady? qb's -- most of them in canton -- have been succeeding because of their TEAMS for decades. are we forgetting that the falcons had a very nice defense themselves this year, and that just might have contributed to the falcons reaching the nfc championship? pure athletic talent: no doubt, hands down vick. and he could develop into one of the better qbs into the league over the years. proven leadership and winning: brady. if you're going to compare the two BEFORE getting to the pros in order to make a case for vick (i.e. vick highly touted 1st rounder, brady a no-name 6th rounder) then you can compare them AFTER being in the pros to make a case for brady...and in that, there's simply no comparison. could vick pull a mcnabb if he got a TO-level WR in there? i would say yes, he's got a smuch if not more talent than mcnabb. but until he does, he's just a good pro qb with lots of potential and electric big-play ability, IMO.

Edited June 17, 2005 by msaint

[1stimer]

let's be honest....

 

without franco harris, swann/stallworth, the steel curtain and chuck knoll, bradshaw wouldn't have led the steelers to 4 SBs

 

without the no name defense, cszonka/morris and shula, griese never would led miami to undefeated season and SB...

 

without marshall faulk, his receivers, that turf, and martz, warner wouldn't have led the rams to the sb

 

without arguably the greatest o-line in history, emmitt smith, and that tough defense, aikman wouldn't have led dallas to their SB's

 

without terrell davis, a good defense, a killer o-line, and mike shanahan, elway wouldn't have finally led the broncos to SB's

 

without lombardi, herb adderly/willie davis/forrest gregg, bart starr would never have led the pack to SBs...

 

how many times are people going to use this "he's only a product of his team" argument against brady? qb's -- most of them in canton -- have been succeeding because of their TEAMS for decades. are we forgetting that the falcons had a very nice defense themselves this year, and that just might have contributed to the falcons reaching the nfc championship? pure athletic talent: no doubt, hands down vick. and he could develop into one of the better qbs into the league over the years. proven leadership and winning: brady. if you're going to compare the two BEFORE getting to the pros in order to make a case for vick (i.e. vick highly touted 1st rounder, brady a no-name 6th rounder) then you can compare them AFTER being in the pros to make a case for brady...and in that, there's simply no comparison. could vick pull a mcnabb if he got a TO-level WR in there? i would say yes, he's got a smuch if not more talent than mcnabb. but until he does, he's just a good pro qb with lots of potential and electric big-play ability, IMO.

 

845077[/snapback]

 

 

 

msaint ... from the bottom of my heart - THANK YOU!

 

The boards have been oozing with Brady is the best because he has three rings and could make other teams better too comments. Brady is not the caliber QB that could instantly make the 49ers a winner. There is a team factor that contributes to a Championship team. The credit should not go to just one individual and unfortunately it ususally does.

 

I am not saying Vick is better than Brady ... I think Brady has more stability than Vick and Vick has more potential than Brady and most would agree with that. I was just pointing out to say that Vick had help to the playoffs and so did Brady.

 

No matter how good a QB is, he can't win a ring by himself ... it takes the team.

[phenom]

if you're going to compare the two BEFORE getting to the pros in order to make a case for vick (i.e. vick highly touted 1st rounder, brady a no-name 6th rounder) then you can compare them AFTER being in the pros to make a case for brady...and in that, there's simply no comparison.

845077[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are the HC of an NFL team who you want to build your franchise on Vick or Brady.  Vick and his reckless playing style scare a few away but I would take him anyway I think that while you can't change how he plays you can help  him out (give him a better OL and a WR who can make the big catches).  Vick also should get better and better if he becomes a better student of his playbook.  Brady also is a great QB, IMO he gets the job done well but I think he really did struggle against the PIT Defense and MIA Defense which makes me think that if he runs into some 3 good (not spectacular) CBs he won't be able to move the ball efficently. 

 

This should be good.  Let's go Pats fans and Vick haters.  Hey ATL Falcon a little help.

 

838218[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I guess I'm looking at the question differently because I thought broncosn05 asked who he wanted to build a franchise around.

 

 

Now how many successful startup franchises started with a QB recently?

 

Lets go with Cleveland, Baltimore, Houston, Carolina and Jacksonville

 

Carolina went with Kerry Collins

Cleveland had Tim Couch

Baltimore had Vinny Testeverde

Houston started with David Carr

Jacksonville went with Mark Brunell

 

 

Now if you just look at the question and not get blinded by Vicks athleticism/below par QB ability and Brady's 3 Super Bowls and playoff cool I think you can make a more rational decision. All of the teams that went with franchise type QB's ie Carolina, Cleveland, Houston and Jax picked QB's who had pretty much the same type talent as Tom Brady. Some had early success, some didn't but it didn't last and only David Carr is still with his original team because they went in another direction to build their team. You can't build a team with an average QB with great intangibles. Look at Baltimore they went with defense and won a Super Bowl with a journeyman QB.

 

 

 

As Msaint said it took some other players to make Terry Bradshaw, John Elway, Troy Aikman winners. When you take a QB with your first pick to build a franchise you need someone who can make others better.

 

Brady will need competent WR's, a decent O-line and a solid running game to go along with a solid defense to get his team into the playoff's.

 

Vick will need an avg running game and solid defense to get into the playoff's.

 

 

These have been shown in the performances. It has been said that Brady didn't lead the Patriots to the playoff's in 2002 because lack of a running game and a poor defensive performance that year.

 

 

Vick has made it to the playoff's in each year as a full time starter.

 

 

I don't think people are understanding that starting a franchise you will be talent deficient in comparison to the rest of the league. When you start a franchise you can't build on intangibles, it doesn't work that way..........

Edited June 17, 2005 by phenom

[Grits and Shins]

let's be honest....

 

without franco harris, swann/stallworth, the steel curtain and chuck knoll, bradshaw wouldn't have led the steelers to 4 SBs

 

without the no name defense, cszonka/morris and shula, griese never would led miami to undefeated season and SB...

 

without marshall faulk, his receivers, that turf, and martz, warner wouldn't have led the rams to the sb

 

without arguably the greatest o-line in history, emmitt smith, and that tough defense, aikman wouldn't have led dallas to their SB's

 

without terrell davis, a good defense, a killer o-line, and mike shanahan, elway wouldn't have finally led the broncos to SB's

 

without lombardi, herb adderly/willie davis/forrest gregg, bart starr would never have led the pack to SBs...

 

how many times are people going to use this "he's only a product of his team" argument against brady? qb's -- most of them in canton -- have been succeeding because of their TEAMS for decades. are we forgetting that the falcons had a very nice defense themselves this year, and that just might have contributed to the falcons reaching the nfc championship? pure athletic talent: no doubt, hands down vick. and he could develop into one of the better qbs into the league over the years. proven leadership and winning: brady. if you're going to compare the two BEFORE getting to the pros in order to make a case for vick (i.e. vick highly touted 1st rounder, brady a no-name 6th rounder) then you can compare them AFTER being in the pros to make a case for brady...and in that, there's simply no comparison. could vick pull a mcnabb if he got a TO-level WR in there? i would say yes, he's got a smuch if not more talent than mcnabb. but until he does, he's just a good pro qb with lots of potential and electric big-play ability, IMO.

 

845077[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Brady = Aikman in the eyes of these morans. They figure you can just plug any QB into the NE/DAL team and get a winner.

[1stimer]

Brady = Aikman in the eyes of these morans.  They figure you can just plug any QB into the NE/DAL team and get a winner.

 

845162[/snapback]

 

 

 

I wouldn't say any but there is probably at least a handful of QB's in the league that may have been able to accomplish what Brady has if they had been in the same situation. However, that begins to enter the realm of heresay and speculation ... but Favre, P Manning, Cpep, McNabb, T Green and possibly a couple of others probably have what it takes to do what was done by Brady. No one will ever know though ... all they can do is about it on some internet forum.

[Grits and Shins]

Is Vick a great athlete, yes.

 

Is Vick more athletic than Brady, probably.

 

Is Vick more fun to watch, most likely.

 

Was Vick considered a higher prospect coming out of college, certainly ... but I fail to see what that has to do with anything ... Ryan Leaf was also considered a higher prospect out of college than Brady.

 

Which is the better leader for their team? Heck if I know. But I do know that Vick tries to win games on his own while Brady leads his team.

 

For me it comes down to one thing really ... the fact that Vick can't throw a pass and I'm thinking I want my QB to throw some passes. I suppose if Vick really worked at it day in and day out he could change his "run first-pass as a last resort" mentality ... but I doubt it.

 

Exactly how many running QBs have taken their team to a SB and won?

 

Brady spreads the ball around to the open guy and makes very few mistakes.

[Grits and Shins]

I wouldn't say any but there is probably at least a handful of QB's in the league that may have been able to accomplish what Brady has if they had been in the same situation.  However, that begins to enter the realm of heresay and speculation ... but Favre, P Manning, Cpep, McNabb, T Green and possibly a couple of others probably have what it takes to do what was done by Brady.  No one will ever know though ... all they can do is  about it on some internet forum.

 

845173[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

My point was that the NE fans better get used to hearing it ... we Dallas fans hear all the time that Aikman and Emmitt were products of the system and not great players.

[Clubfoothead]

Think I'd trade down for more draft picks...

 

838293[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Some perspective.

[jgcoach]

I don't think people can separate Brady from the Patriots so it's an unfair question anyway. 

 

If Brady was such a good prospect he wouldn't have lasted until the sixth round and been Drew Bledsoes backup.

 

Vick was touted as the #1 pick by all 32 NFL GM's (if their team needed a QB) but I guess Huddlers here know better than people who are paid to make these types of decisions..............

 

844740[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Ya, your right, there's never been a 1st. rd. bust before ha?

[jgcoach]

He's suffering at a lack of talent at the WR position. He just needs one reliable guy and he has no one.

 

People say, "Vick runs first and passes second." Yeah but who's getting open in Atlanta besides Crumpler, who's being keyed on?

 

844756[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Crumpler isn't the only guy open. Vick has either taken off by then or made a bad decision.

[jgcoach]

Come on.

2001, Antowain had 1157 yards and 12 TDs, by far his best year.

 

In 2002, he had 982 yds and 6 tds.  The Pats were 28th in rush yds, while 11th in Passing yards and 2nd in Passing TDs.

The reason the Pats didn't make the playoffs in '02 was because of a lack of running game and the defense had an off year.  But, a lack of running game will also have a negative impact the defensive stats, which it did in 2002.

 

In 2003, Antowain had 642 yds and 3 TDs, the Pats were 27th in rushing yards and 8th in passing yards.

 

You call '02 and '03 servicable? average?

 

This actually is showing that Brady and the Defense won in spite of a below average running game.

 

My only point was responding to the post that said without Dillon, the Pats wouldn't have won the SB, but that person was only responding to another dumb comment.

 

844840[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

If you look at the post my reply was pertaining to, it was about them winning the super bowl without a running game. In 01' they did have a running game and def. 02' they didn't make the playoffs because they didn't have the running game and the D let down. Brady couldn't carry the O. In 03' he only played 13 games with 182 att. for 642yds. 3.5 yds. per carry would be considered servicable, yes. Any other questions?

 

Edited: Oh ya, I'd still take Brady over Vick as I mentioned in my previous post.

Edited June 17, 2005 by jgcoach

[broncosn05]

Is Vick a great athlete, yes.

 

Is Vick more athletic than Brady, probably.

 

Is Vick more fun to watch, most likely.

 

845178[/snapback]

 

 

 

Is Vick a great athlete, F UCK YEAH .

 

Is Vick more athletic than Brady, H3LL YEAH.

 

Is Vick more fun to watch, .

 

Sorry had to correct your humbleness on the part of Mike Vick.