Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Is Vick overrated?


Recommended Posts

The Wappinger Raiders

Fran Tarkenton had a pretty good scramble, and Staubach wasn't called "Roger the Dodger" for nuthin. Steve Young has THE most amazing QB scramble for a TD I have ever seen, 50 yrds with at least 5 broken tackles and jukes in it. Cunningham was breaking tackles from the backfield and slinging the ball 50 yrds downfield for completions a decade ago. Kordell was called "slash" because he had skills that nobody had ever seen before, and never would again.

One thing in Vick's favor is that, aside from Stewart, NONE of those guys had the blinding speed Vick had. They were replaying the '02 season opener (Atl at GB) and some of the runs he made were just sick.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Right, I argee- but think about it Chavez: each of them at their time had something the NFL had never seen before, and for some it kept them unstoppable and others it washed out real fast.

 

It's much too early to know which way he'll go and there is no indication yet of either direction, regardless of the mas market mentality penciling him in for 13 Super Bowl rings and 22 straight MVP awards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me, WP, I'm generally on your side in this argument. thumbs_u

 

Vick is an exciting player with TONS of potential, but "potential" is often referred to as a "coach killer" for a very good reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole darn argument depends only on whether or not Mike Vick can throw the ball accurately, and on time, and become the orchestrator of the offense rather than the lead guitar. He's always been so incredible athletically that he has never had to do that.

Linebackers nowadays are incredible athletes in their own right, and its only a matter of time before teams get better at containing Vick's scrambling ability (if you can even call it that).

You have to figure that he's gonna learn how to set people up--trying to get safeties to come up for the run and pop and pop one over the top, things like that. People say that he has to become a passing threat to be able to run the football. I couldn't disagree more. I think this guy's running ability is going to set up the pass, not the other way around.

 

All in all, I'm ready for the ride this kid is gonna take me on. I tell ya what, either way, it is gonna be exciting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After sitting most of his first year Vick threw for 2,936 yards and 16 TD's in 2002. He ran for 777 yards and 8 TD's. He missed one game. He made more exciting plays than I've ever seen a QB make. There is no way you can blame this on ESPN hype. His run against the Vikings was unbelievable. He had a couple runs against Carolina that Steve Young or John Elway could only dream about. He threw 60 yards off his back foot, only to see his pathetic WR's drop them. His scrambling play in GB where he juked and stiff armed defenders made me stand up and say "that was unbelievable." He then gets hurt in the preseason the next year. For you to say that he is overrated fantasy-wise is understandable. He is an injury risk considering his style of play. However, he singlehandedly won FF games for me in 2002, and without him, I would not have won the Fantasy Bowl that year. For you to say he is overrated as a football player is preposterous. In college, he was the most exciting player to watch, just because he could throw an 80-yarder for a TD, or take off with blazing speed for a 50 yard run. Is it too early to put him in the Hall of Fame?? Hell yes. Is it too early to say he has incredible talent? No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wappinger Raiders:

Right, I argee- but think about it Chavez: each of them at their time had something the NFL had never seen before, and for some it kept them unstoppable and others it washed out real fast.

 

It's much too early to know which way he'll go and there is no indication yet of either direction, regardless of the mas market mentality penciling him in for 13 Super Bowl rings and 22 straight MVP awards.

You can make the same complaint about every young player in the game. That isn't their fault that the hype is there. Blame network and cable tv and the NFL. They want to hype players to promote interest in the game. Product endorsers want their player to be the "next big thing". If you have a problem with the hype Vick is getting then you should have a problem with Tomlinson, Peyton Manning, Daunte Culpepper, Priest Holmes, Donovan Mcnabb, Randy Moss, Marvin Harrison etc.

 

Bottom line is all of these players have just as many rings as Vick. ZERO. So by your standards until you win a ring you're just a lot of hype..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

phenom:

 

The Wappinger Raiders:

Right, I argee- but think about it Chavez: each of them at their time had something the NFL had never seen before, and for some it kept them unstoppable and others it washed out real fast.

 

It's much too early to know which way he'll go and there is no indication yet of either direction, regardless of the mas market mentality penciling him in for 13 Super Bowl rings and 22 straight MVP awards.

You can make the same complaint about every young player in the game. That isn't their fault that the hype is there. Blame network and cable tv and the NFL. They want to hype players to promote interest in the game. Product endorsers want their player to be the "next big thing". If you have a problem with the hype Vick is getting then you should have a problem with Tomlinson, Peyton Manning, Daunte Culpepper, Priest Holmes, Donovan Mcnabb, Randy Moss, Marvin Harrison etc.

 

Bottom line is all of these players have just as many rings as Vick. ZERO. So by your standards until you win a ring you're just a lot of hype..........

Not at all, look at the names of the players you included. You started off exactly right, that was my whole point: media is making him their next big thing. Every generation wants "their" hero, and it's not good enough to be, well, good. He has to be the best ever. But again, look at all the name syou listed. How many seasons does each one of them have, consistantly putting up outstanding numbers and some on crap teams?

 

LT, in fact, is teh player who I think is being overlooked the most in the NFL. He is without a doubt in my mind the best player in the league. He has a crap line, no QB, no WR, no TE, no Def... and he still destroys defenses every week every year.

 

I'm not saying Vick WON'T do this either, but again, he had only one good season and then the very next his playing style had him taken out for most of the season. Fluke? Maybe. But maybe it's also a sign of the Kordell factor, where the Defenses have started figuring his style out. But we won't know until he has a few years under his belt, and THEN you can toss him in that list with Payton, Harrison, LT, etc.

 

And no, I do NOT think a ring decides whether you were great or not. In fact, I am a strong proponent of the opposite. I just get sick of hearing SOOO much hype abouut him being the end all of all QBs when he hasn't done anythign to deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CaptainHook:

For you to say that he is overrated fantasy-wise is understandable.  He is an injury risk considering his style of play.  However, he singlehandedly won FF games for me in 2002, and without him, I would not have won the Fantasy Bowl that year.  For you to say he is overrated as a football player is preposterous.  In college, he was the most exciting player to watch, just because he could throw an 80-yarder for a TD, or take off with blazing speed for a 50 yard run.  Is it too early to put him in the Hall of Fame?? Hell yes.  Is it too early to say he has incredible talent?  No.

Are we sure he is going to repeat that 1 season performance? Are we sure he won't get hurt again, scrambling? Are we sure Defenses won't get wise to him? Are we sure he isn't the greatest QB ever? The answer is "no" to all, since I do not believe any of us are "Karnac the all seeing". So my point of view is just as solid as anybody elses, otherwise we can start taking every 1-season flash in the pan and crown them all king for the day.

 

I will say he had an amazing year, stats don't lie. But even to say he's an amazing talent, well, again... I withold judgement until he starts racking up numbers like that consistantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wappinger Raiders:

Not at all, look at the names of the players you included. You started off exactly right, that was my whole point media is making him their next big thing. Every generation wants "their" hero, and it's not good enough to be, well, good. He has to be the best ever. But again, look at all the name syou listed. How many seasons does each one of them have, consistantly putting up outstanding numbers and some on crap teams?

 

LT, in fact, is teh player who I think is being overlooked the most in the NFL. He is without a doubt in my mind the best player in the league. He has a crap line, no QB, no WR, no TE, no Def... and he still destroys defenses every week every year.

 

I'm not saying Vick WON'T do this either, but again, he had only one good season and then the very next his playing style had him taken out for most of the season. Fluke? Maybe. But maybe it's also a sign of the Kordell factor, where the Defenses have started figuring his style out. But we won't know until he has a few years under his belt, and THEN you can toss him in that list with Payton, Harrison, LT, etc.

 

And no, I do NOT think a ring decides whether you were great or not. In fact, I am a strong proponent of the opposite. I just get sick of hearing SOOO much hype abouut him being the end all of all QBs when he hasn't done anythign to deserve it. [/QB]

This is where I see hypocrisy in your statements. First off I'm not on the Tomlinson bandwagon. He had a great season but he had to just like you said there wasn't anyone else to do anything with. They just focused on getting him the ball like they want him to get bigger contract or something.

 

You go back over Tomlinson's year and he had some bad games.

 

Week 1 34 yards rushing

Week 5 38 yards rushing

Week 9 61 yards rushing

Week 11 29 yards rushing

 

And some the games he had poor rushing games he made up for it by having a good receiving day but he was getting more passes thrown to than most #1 WR's!! Twice he got 11 catches, 3 other times he got 8 catches or more. Those are just the ones he caught what about the passes he dropped or couldn't get to. His is more a case of opportunity than being the best in the league.

 

You are being hypocritical because you're saying Vick has only won one playoff game. *** has Tomlinson done? Well his "great year" he lead the Chargers to the worst record in the league. And don't give me the he doesn't have any help excuse. Who does Vick have? TJ Duckett and Warrick Dunn? Brian Finneran, Trevor Gaylor and Willie Jackson? The only other top player you could say he had was Keith Brooking on that 2002 playoff team. Vick single handedly made them a team to be feared.

 

What did Tomlinson do? Lead the Chargers to the worst record in the league. Yeah I'm impressed. Don't confuse fantasy value with actual football value...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A) The Falcons are HARDLY a feared team, that's laughable in itself. 9-7-1... ooh, scary.

 

:D Which of LTs "great year"'s are you referring? His 1st 3 years in the league, he has IMPROVED his stats each year with NO supporting staff. Your 4 weeks stats are nice, but here are his totals for 3 seasons:

 

2001(rookie): 1236 Rushing, 367 Rec, 10 TDs (o rec)

2002: 1683 Rushing, 489 rec, 15 TDs (1 rec)

2003: 1645 Rushing, 725 Rec, 18 TDs (4 Rec, 1 Pass)

 

Now, the whole team sucks and he hasn't led them to anything. But nobody is talking about how he "electrifies" a team, or that "everybody on the team plays better when he's on the field"... both statements that make little to no sense. Are the Falcons THAT bad that they play half speed until their savior gets on the field? The Superbolw Falcons of a few years earlier certainly didn't need him... The Chargers suck, but LT goes out and kicks ass. In fact, it just really shows that their Defense absolutely blows if he can rack up those stats in his first 3 years and they STILL can't win games.

 

Who's being hypocrite? LT has stats to back up talk of him being the best in the league, but even that's still debateable. But Vick has good 1 year... and then a near season-ending injury the next. Can you even compare them and objectively say Vick has accomplished the same? I don't think so...

 

My whole point is that if anybody deserves hype like Vick gets, it's LT since he has 3 straight inury-free years to back it up. Vick has a history of getting hurt and who knows if he'll ever be able to even have a chance to live up to his potential. My whole angle is let's see him notch up a few years of stats like his 1 good year before deciding he's going to win a few MVPs and Super Bowls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wappinger Raiders:

A) The Falcons are HARDLY a feared team, that's laughable in itself. 9-7-1... ooh, scary.

When you go to Lambeau Field in January and beat Brett Favre (who has an incredible winning % at home) by 20 points that means something. It means you can beat any team, any where at any time. That is something to fear. You can go ahead and tell me a harder place to win a playoff game right now.

 

As far as totals that's just another way to manipulate stats to make a point. You said he destroys defenses every week, every year. Those 4 weeks showed he didn't dominate those defenses. That says 75% of the time he's pretty good. Also there have been many RB's that have great statistical years but they don't improve their team. What are you doing a Playmakers and saying the team can lose as longs as LT looks good?

 

I would also like to see some links to articles where anyone is saying Vick is going to win multiple MVP's and Super Bowls. I hear that he is the most feared player in the game or as you say the "most electrifying" but saying any player is going to win one Super Bowl is premature.

 

You can also say that Vick is playing a much more challenging position than LT is. RB's are a dime a dozen that come in and dominate right away. The % of QB's that come in and win playoff's games in Lambeau are few and far between.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you go to Lambeau Field in January and beat Brett Favre (who has an incredible winning % at home) by 20 points that means something.  It means you can beat any team, any where at any time.  That is something to fear.  You can go ahead and tell me a harder place to win a playoff game right now.
A bad team is a bad team, regardless of their record in a stadium or MNF(speaking from personal Raider experience). GB was limping into the playoffs, hardly a force at that time. They were dead team walking.

 

 

 

As far as totals that's just another way to manipulate stats to make a point.  You said he destroys defenses every week, every year.  Those 4 weeks showed he didn't dominate those defenses.  That says 75% of the time he's pretty good.  Also there have been many RB's that have great statistical years but they don't improve their team.  What are you doing a Playmakers and saying the team can lose as longs as LT looks good?
Manipulate Stats? I printed out TOTAL STATS for 3 years, manipulatign nothing. You manipulated the stats to a great season to show 4 bad weeks, and some bizarrely lame reasoning that cathing so many passes as a RB is bad... tell that to Charlie Garner, Roger Craig and Ricky Watters. News flash, one player can't win games and improve a TEAM. Even Vick can't do it...

 

 

I would also like to see some links to articles where anyone is saying Vick is going to win multiple MVP's and Super Bowls.  I hear that he is the most feared player in the game or as you say the "most electrifying" but saying any player is going to win one Super Bowl is premature.
Links? How about going back in this thread itself? It was posted here and if you didn't catch my tone, I was EXAGERATING. I really don't think he'll win 14 straight MVP titles...

 

 

You can also say that Vick is playing a much more challenging position than LT is.  RB's are a dime a dozen that come in and dominate right away.  The % of QB's that come in and win playoff's games in Lambeau are few and far between.........
Again, he has won a single playoff game over a tired GB team. My god man, you are easy to please... Kordell had almost as much hype a few years ago, what happened to him?

 

Youre arguments are getting bizarre in their accusations of me being a hypocrite and manipulating stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wappinger Raiders:

Also simple math:

 

Falcons with Chandler and Anderson: Superbowl appearance

 

Falcons without Chandler and Anderson: Exit from playoffs in rd 2, seat at home watching playoffs following year.

 

Plus, you're assuming he could easily rush for those numbers and pass for more. A year after his breakout season, a pre season defense stuffed him fairly convincingly (knocking him out for 3 months is convincing I think). I think I could also assume that defense have learned to play him and he will scramble less and try to pass more.

 

Simpler math:  everybody is assuming he could do more, but the reality is he hasn't done anything outside of that one good year and a playoff win in Lambeu (over a pretty sad GB team). Also, winning 9 games in 1 season isn't that imperessive, it's just over a .500 season.

Uh...so you're saying they had 2 players, and made the playoffs, and then still made the playoffs without both of them, one being a RB rushing for around 2000 yds.

 

How does that compare to losing Vick and going sub .500?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying that Chandler and Anderson had them in a Superbowl 4 years ago. Vick gets them 1 playoff win and follows that up with a season ending injury, but suddenly he's the only thing that can get that team to 1 game over .500 and into the playoffs. Short term or selective memory it seems.

 

Until Vick get's the Falcons more than that, he's nothing more than 1 good season, potential and hype. Where are Chandler and Anderson now? Especially Anderson... Just as easy as they faded into history, Vick could also (probably won't, but again- we're not Karnac).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bad team is a bad team, regardless of their record in a stadium or MNF(speaking from personal Raider experience). GB was limping into the playoffs, hardly a force at that time. They were dead team walking.

 

Whatever that means. The Packers had won 4 of their last 5 games before that game against the Falcons. Not exactly a dead team since they also had 6 pro bowlers that year or maybe they were they all injured for that playoff game.

 

 

 

Manipulate Stats?  I printed out TOTAL STATS for 3 years, manipulatign nothing. You manipulated the stats to a great season to show 4 bad weeks,  and some bizarrely lame reasoning that cathing so many passes as a RB is bad... tell that to Charlie Garner, Roger Craig and Ricky Watters. News flash, one player can't win games and improve a TEAM. Even Vick can't do it...

 

 

There is nothing worse than total stats and basing something off of it. It doesn't show consistency or how you reached that conclusion. Since (and I will repeat your statement) that LT destroys defenses week in and week out every year. Those 4 weeks shows he has off weeks when he isn't destroying defenses.

 

 

Again, he has won a single playoff game over a tired GB team. My god man, you are easy to please... Kordell had almost as much hype a few years ago, what happened to him?

 

Youre arguments are getting bizarre in their accusations of me being a hypocrite and manipulating stats.

Which is one more tired playoff win than LT has. Since the Falcons were a playoff team with a 9-7 record with Vick. Then they tried to upgrade their offense by signing Price then Vick gets hurt. Now they are a 5-11 team; you could make the correllation that Vick is that x factor. Also as a Raider fan you should know that Tomlinson struggled against the Raiders his 1st 2 years.

 

In 2001 he rushed for 114 yards and had 37 yards receiving with 1 TD. That's in 2 games. Just so you know that's 57 yards rushing and 18.5 yards receiving, not quite the destruction of the defense.

 

In 2002 he rushed for 153 yards and had 28 yards receiving along with 2 TD's in his first meeting with the Raiders. Good game for LT.

 

However in the rematch rushed for 57 yards and another 22 yards receiving with 1 TD.

 

So in 3 of 4 games with Tomlinson the Raiders held him to 57 yards rushing and 20 yards receiving. Not exactly your destruction of the defense week in and week out theory; but then you wouldn't know that if all you do is look at the totals...............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sighhh... the guy combines for over 2200 yrds 2 years in a row, and you STILL want to try to argue that those numbers dont really reflect his quality... whatever.

 

As a Raider fan, I DON'T like to admit the best player in the league is a Charger, but he is.

 

All of this doesn't change the fact that his stats are way more impressive than Vick's. Stats don't lie. LT is only an example of somebody who would deserve the hype Vick gets since he has 3 years of improved stats to back it up.

 

Again, Vick has that single season, then he got knocked out by a pre season defense. Until he proves that he is the real deal by repeating his numbers a few years in a row, whether he makes the playoffs or not, he will never be more than hype. If you wanna keep strokin the man, by all means go ahead. But at the end of the day, your basing it all on a single season with nothign else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at what Vick did with a pathetic 2 win Falcons team, when he finally got back fulltime under center, starting week 14 against the likes of Carolina, Indy, Tampa & Jacksonville.

 

The Falcons, with Vick back at the helm, reeled off 3 wins out of those four matchups.

 

This included a typical Vick game against the eventual Superbowl runner up, Carolina.

 

179 yd passing, 1 Td, No Ints & 141 rushing, 1 TD in an Overtime victory.

 

Don't forget, by the time Vick came back, the Falcons had lost a key weapon for Vick to utilize, in Warrick Dunn.

 

So to recap.

 

12 games without Vick = 2 wins.

 

4 games with Vick, but now without Dunn = 3 wins.

 

Hmmmmmm........ thinking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Vatican Hitsquad:

Sighhh... the guy combines for over 2200 yrds 2 years in a row, and you STILL want to try to argue that those numbers dont really reflect his quality... whatever.

Okay break that down; 2,200 yards combined...is that an impressive statistical accomplishment? Yes it's pretty good. Is it something above and beyond anyone else? No not really let's see who else has done it in the last 2 years

 

Jamal Lewis

Ahman Green

Priest Holmes

Ricky Williams

 

And Deuce McAllister was 50 yards from doing it last year. Pretty exclusive company but any of those guys can do it again this year and you could add Clinton Portis, Edgerrin James.

 

Now Michael Vick had back to back games of 175+ yards passing and 90 yards rushing in 2001. Then that game of 173 yards rushing and 173 yards passing.

 

You name me 1 QB in the NFL that can do that or has done that. You probably will skip this part and not answer. Vick can do what no other QB can it's as simple as that.

 

My feeling on players that are good on bad teams is they haven't proven anything. Anybody can standout with a bunch of bad players around them. Prove yourself in the playoffs when the intensity is taken up...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah 2,000 combined yards should be the standard if you want to be considered a good RB. Notice I said good, to be a great RB I would say you need 17 or 1800 yards rushing and another four or five hundred yards receiving. 1000 yards? What are you still living in the 70's? You don't even have to average 65 yards a game to get that.

 

You can doubt Edgerrin all you want to but he is two years removed from an ACL injury and he got stronger as the year went on. Maybe you didn't see him running through Patriots. I'm seeing him as a top 5 RB this year. If you disagree so what.

 

 

Under 200 yards passing is a joke y modern standards for a QB, ya know. Sure, those rushing numbers are amazing, but he's a QB... and those sstats are from 2001? You're bringing up somethign he did 3 years ago?

 

Okay you kind of trailed off here, you said those rushing numbers were amazing but he's a QB and you just kind of stopped. I'll take it you concede that point no other QB is doing what he is doing. You also say that it was from 3 years ago. Okay fine. But then when I asked you about who in the NFL can do what he does you bring up a relic from the past. Randall Cunningham? When I said in the NFL I'm talking in the now; like current players. You don't see me comparing LT to Jim Brown, Walter Payton or Barry Sanders. Stay with me on this okay, I'll try to slow down for you.

 

Uhhh... Isn't Vick a good player on a bad team? Isn't the argument that without him they can't do anything? So you've actually come around and finally agreed with me? Wow, OK, 1 down, the rest of the world to go...

 

I agree that about the Chargers they are a bad team with or without Tomlinson. The Falcons are not a playoff team without Vick, with him they are............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah 2,000 combined yards should be the standard if you want to be considered a good RB.  Notice I said good, to be a great RB I would say you need 17 or 1800 yards rushing and another four or five hundred yards receiving.  1000 yards?  What are you still living in the 70's?  You don't even have to average 65 yards a game to get that.
OK, let's call the NFL, the new standard is set. You named 4 players who would be "good", not "great", and Ricky Watters was one of them (Somebody call Fred Lane and tell him the news!!)!! But serisouly, I agree that 100 yrds is too low cuz every RB can do it. I just don't agree with your new standard.

 

 

You can doubt Edgerrin all you want to but he is two years removed from an ACL injury and he got stronger as the year went on.  Maybe you didn't see him running through Patriots.  I'm seeing him as a top 5 RB this year.  If you disagree so what.
I do and will doubt him. He's worth drafting, and will be "good", but he's hardly in the league of LT, Duece, Alexander or even Ricky Watters now... wink

 

 

 

Under 200 yards passing is a joke y modern standards for a QB, ya know. Sure, those rushing numbers are amazing, but he's a QB... and those sstats are from 2001? You're bringing up somethign he did 3 years ago?

 

Okay you kind of trailed off here, you said those rushing numbers were amazing but he's a QB and you just kind of stopped.

I had nothing else to say, I figured telling ya that under 200 yrds passign a game was a joke for a QB, kind alike a RB not being able to rush for over 65 yrds in a game... if you didn't realise that...

 

 

I'll take it you concede that point no other QB is doing what he is doing.  You also say that it was from 3 years ago.  Okay fine.
I do concede no QB today is doing what Vick is doing. My claim is that it's not special, and he only was able to do it for a single season without getting hurt.

 

 

 

But then when I asked you about who in the NFL can do what he does you bring up a relic from the past.  Randall Cunningham? 
This is my favorite part of your post, out of your ever increasingly funny posts. I wanted to answer it first, but decided to just go down in order as usual.

 

10 years ago is a relic? are you 12 years old or something? Besides, if you forget what you typed in your previous post, which i replied to:

 

 

"You name me 1 QB in the NFL that can do that or has done that. You probably will skip this part and not answer. Vick can do what no other QB can it's as simple as that."
You'll notice I bolded out where you asked me to name any QB that has ever done what Vick is doing. Not only did I defy your prediction of my ignoring it, but I gave you the name of a QB who not only DID do it, but did it longer AND gave you a link to a site backing up my claim (google Randall for more stats on his career). Now faced with that, you want to get all revisionist and manipulate your own words? Whatever.

 

 

When I said in the NFL I'm talking in the now; like current players.  You don't see me comparing LT to Jim Brown, Walter Payton or Barry Sanders.  Stay with me on this okay, I'll try to slow down for you.
Lol, see my above post... you forgot what you even typed, then tried to use it against me. You rule.

 

Vick is not so unique, though... what he''s doing HAS been done before, you just meant to say "never before this last season", right? LOL

 

 

I agree that about the Chargers they are a bad team with or without Tomlinson.  The Falcons are not a playoff team without Vick, with him they are
So again, you agree that Vick is a good player on a bad team, thus to follow your own logic from the above post (in case you forgot what you typed again, I'll repeat it:

 

 

My feeling on players that are good on bad teams is they haven't proven anything. Anybody can standout with a bunch of bad players around them. Prove yourself in the playoffs when the intensity is taken up
We absolutely agree here, and that's my whole point. You have to show conistancy to standout. 1 good season, well, until you repeat that performance you're just a flash in the pan and a player with potential. It HAS been done before, and you see what happened. Go a couple of years in a row, showing an improvement in your game before you can be considered great or even comparable to Randall (but the 90's were SO long ago).

 

Good for a team is one thing, great amongst the league and history is another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information