Michael Vick: Fact of Fiction

[Bill Swerski]

Moulds made Price in Buffalo.

 

Without a decent WR opposite him, to draw the double coverage, he's been exposed for what he is. A great complimentary #2 WR, but not a true #1 WR. He simply cannot beat double coverage, the way quality WR's do.

 

658404[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Possibly. And it's also possible that Atlanta's offensive system is limiting his opportunities. FWIW, Price had a much better season without Vick last year (64 receptions, 838 yds) than with him this year (45 receptions, 575 yds).

 

And Vick definitley has a cannon for an arm. His arm strength is pretty close to Favre's.

[JoJoTheWebToedBoy]

No offense, but he's got a freakin' cannon for an arm.

Moulds made Price in Buffalo.

 

Without a decent WR opposite him, to draw the double coverage, he's been exposed for what he is. A great complimentary #2 WR, but not a true #1 WR. He simply cannot beat double coverage, the way quality WR's do.

 

But otherwise I agree with your assesment.

 

658404[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yea but he seldom hits anyone with it. You put some accuracy with it, and you got something. He's going to need that in later years. But overall, I do think he has re-defined the QB position. So it's very hard to stack him up against the rest of the league.

[Big Score 1]

Possibly.  And it's also possible that Atlanta's offensive system is limiting his opportunities.  FWIW, Price had a much better season without Vick last year (64 receptions, 838 yds) than with him this year (45 receptions, 575 yds).

 

And Vick definitley has a cannon for an arm.  His arm strength is pretty close to Favre's.

658698[/snapback]

There's no possibly about it. I've watched every game since Price has come to Atlanta and he has a real hard time beating the double team. He is a very good #2, but no way is he a true #1. He really needs Jenkins to come on next year to take some of the heat off him.

 

Also regarding last years numbers for Price:

 

Price pulled in 16 receptions for 264 yards with Vick throwing to him the last four and 1 quarter games of 2003.

 

264 x 4 = 1,056 yards. 16 x 4 = 64.

 

Too bad Vick wasn't throwing to Price all year long, eh?

 

As for this year, the Falcons are in a completely different offensive system heavily geared to the running game and Alge Crumpler really came into his own this year.

 

Crumpler 2003 - 44 recpts for 552 yards

Crumpler 2004 - 48 recpts for 774 yards

 

If you were in Vick's shoes, who would you prefer throwing the ball too, a WR who is having trouble breaking free, or a huge fast TE who is almost always open?

[Bill Swerski]

Also regarding last years numbers for Price:

 

Price pulled in 16 receptions for 264 yards with Vick throwing to him the last four and 1 quarter games of 2003.

 

264 x 4 = 1,056 yards. 16 x 4 = 64.

 

Too bad Vick wasn't throwing to Price all year long, eh

658836[/snapback]

 

But he was throwing to Price all year long this season. What happened?

 

No doubt that Price is having a difficult time as a #1 WR. But I think that the WCO and the fact that Vick is still learning it have cut into his numbers somewhat.

[Big Score 1]

Yea but he seldom hits anyone with it. You put some accuracy with it, and you got something. He's going to need that in later years. But overall, I do think he has re-defined the QB position. So it's very hard to stack him up against the rest of the league.

658808[/snapback]

You're right, he does need to work on his accuracy a bit. A 56.4% completion rate ain't gonna cut it. I'd like to see him be a 60+% passer, at the very least. But heck, 56.4% is only 1.4% less than McNabbs 2003 completion rate and this year McNabb is at 63.3. If McNabb can improve, so can Vick.

 

'Course it didn't hurt that McNabb had a slight upgrade to his WR corps this year.

 

I'd also like to see Vick work on ball security some, but not if it comes at the expense of his scrambling ability.

[Big Score 1]

But he was throwing to Price all year long this season.  What happened?

 

No doubt that Price is having a difficult time as a #1 WR.  But I think that the WCO and the fact that Vick is still learning it have cut into his numbers somewhat.

658841[/snapback]

At the risk of being repetitive:

As for this year, the Falcons are in a completely different offensive system heavily geared to the running game and Alge Crumpler really came into his own this year.

658836[/snapback]

I didn't call it the WCO because Jim Mora's version, seems to lean more heavily towards the run, when compared to other WCO's like Sherman's, Holmgren's or Reid's. Also Vick isn't like Manning, in that he will rarely change the plays that are called into him. If the play isn't a pass to Price, then the play isn't a pass to Price.

[Menudo]

Fact.

 

That is just a guess, I'm not sure if he is "with Waterman" or not ?

Edited January 18, 2005 by Menudo

[Jrick35]

I need some clarification here.

 

What makes a QB great?

 

Some say Manning is great, his stats back that up. Others say he won't be great until he wins a Super Bowl.

 

Some say Vick sucks, his "passing stats" back that up. But if he wins this week he will get a shot at a Super Bowl.

 

I say there are different ways of measuring a QB's greatness. And that winning the Super Bowl is not the sole measure of greatness. I am a huge Trent Dilfer fan but his 1 Super Bowl win does not make him a great QB.

 

Troy Aikman never threw for 49 TD's but winning 3 Super Bowls makes him pretty great.

 

John Elway was a great QB for some 17 years, not just the last 2 when he won the Super Bowl.

 

And Manning is a great QB who may yet win a Super Bowl, even if it is late in his career the way Elway did.

 

Marino was a great QB even though he didn't win the Super Bowl when he got there.

 

Career stats & Super Bowls are a great way to measure a QB's greatness, as well as the intangibles, but in the absence of purely great stats or Super Bowl wins how can you measure a QB's greatness? Wins.

 

And Michael Vick led teams sure do win an awful lot of games, for whatever reason.

 

I have been posting in a thread today regarding this week's NE-Indy game where a lot of people are blaming Manning for the loss. In the game Peyton completed 65% of his passes and had only 1 INT. Obviously pretty good stats, and yet the Colts lost. And I would be willing to bet that right now Peyton would trade all 49 of his TD's this year for a win last Sunday.

 

Greatness comes in many forms and Mike Vick is one of them.

[Seahawk37]

Matt Hasselbeck is such a better Quarter Back. Look at the qb ratings even with our receivers not looking at the ball but instead the end zone and they drop passes. even with those Matt Hasselbeck has a higher rating than vick! sure vick does a lot for his team but he isnt cut out passing the ball. he did terrible this season fantasy wise. Ask anyone Matt Hasselbeck owns vick in the passing game. if yu dont beleive me then me seahawks V.S. you Falcons Madden 05 online pick the time!

[Seahawk37]

Dilfer is terrble Jrick! what are you talking about. he almost lost to the miami dolphins but thanks o a michael Boulware interception he got the win. and thanks to shaun alexanders 3 tds against the cardinals he got the win. he started 2 games and had 4 interceptions not good at all.

[Big Score 1]

Fact. 

 

That is just a guess, I'm not sure if he is "with Waterman" or not ?

 

659759[/snapback]

 

 

Fiction

[Chavez]

Until Vick starts consistently stringing together good years, he's Kordell Stewart.

[Chavez]

I'd also like to see Vick work on ball security some, but not if it comes at the expense of his scrambling ability.

 

658850[/snapback]

 

 

 

One legit knock on Vick is that he seems to lack "pocket sense" - watching him, he doesn't seem to have the innate feel for where the pressure is coming from that some of the other QBs do. Culpepper has the same issue, and they both fumble more than you'd expect.

[Azazello1313]

I look at the numbers every week.

656868[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

it seems like you look at all of them but the W-L column

[DMD]

it seems like you look at all of them but the W-L column

 

660187[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Of course I look at the W-L column and I also know everything that goes into that column - a lot more than the play of one player. Peyton Manning is no longer playing in the playoffs but does that mean that he is a worse QB than Vick because of their respective team's W-L? There is a reason why the final four teams this weekend all have top defenses.

 

Michael Vick is pretty much Kyle Boller with a great ability to run the ball. Both like to throw to tight ends. Both are pretty much worthless throwing the ball down the field other than the rare good game or throw. But Vick runs far better.

 

Let's compare - through week 14 when the Falcons clinched and had been trying to win:

 

Boller rushing: 44 - 137 yds, 1 TD

Vick rushing: 108 - 790 yds, 2 TD

 

Boller passing: 207 of 365 (57%) for 2030 yds, 11 TDs, 7 FUM, 8 INT

Vick passing: 151 of 266 (57%) for 1979 yds, 11 TDs, 6 FUM, 10 INT

 

Vick has great fantasy value if you catch the games that he runs well. If all you consider is passing yardage and scores, Vick was the #27 QB this season. Counting the rushing in standard FF performance scoring, he was 10th.

 

Sure, Vick is a "new dimension" to the offense (at the expense of passing) but I would always have problems considering any quarterback as really good, let alone great, if he cannot throw very well. He has a cannon for an arm, but that doesn't equate to accuracy. Maybe he will develop into a QB above my expectations, but I have not seen much in him to suggest that he can take the step up to being a very good passer and until then, he's just the highest level of high-school QB style where you always put your best athlete as your QB so he can run it.

[WaterMan]

McNabb's accuracy was a problem until he got TO...

[Bill Swerski]

McNabb's accuracy was a problem until he got TO...

 

660492[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Wrong. McNabb was a MUCH better passer in previous years than Vick is right now...

 

2000: 3365 yds, 21 TD, 13 INT

2001: 3233 yds, 25 TD, 12 INT

 

Try looking up the numbers next time, momotard.

Edited January 19, 2005 by Bill Swerski

[WaterMan]

Wrong.  McNabb was a MUCH better passer in previous years than Vick is right now...

 

2000: 3365 yds, 21 TD, 13 INT

2001: 3233 yds, 25 TD, 12 INT

 

Try looking up the numbers next time, momotard. 

 

660516[/snapback]

 

 

 

I said McNabb had a problem with accuracy before TO. Because beforeTO, like with Vick, McNabb did not have a dominant receiver. You don't remember all of McNabb's NBA bounce passes in 2002 and 2003?

 

2001 - 57.8%

2002 - 58.4%

2003 - 57.5%

 

2004 with TO - 64% and his QB Ratio has never been higher.

 

Not to mention with TO he's thrown almost the same number of TDs as 2002 and 2003 combined. Also McNabb's rushing attempts and rushing yards have went down since TO. Now all Vick needs is a receiver like TO so he can gain the passing yards that are supposed to make a QB great.

[Jrick35]

Dilfer is terrble Jrick! what are you talking about. he almost lost to the miami dolphins but thanks o a michael Boulware interception he got the win. and thanks to shaun alexanders 3 tds against the cardinals he got the win. he started 2 games and had 4 interceptions not good at all.

 

660055[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

If you will re-read my post young man, you will see that I wrote that Dilfer's win in the Super Bowl did NOT automatically make him a great QB.

 

It was a counterpoint to the people that say the true measure of greatness in a QB is winning the Super Bowl.

[Bill Swerski]

I said McNabb had a problem with accuracy before TO. Because beforeTO, like with Vick, McNabb did not have a dominant receiver. You don't remember all of McNabb's NBA bounce passes in 2002 and 2003?

 

2001 - 57.8%

2002 - 58.4%

2003 - 57.5%

 

660528[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Funny, those numbers are all higher than John Elway's career completion percentage of 56.9%. Apparently completion percentage isn't the best way to measure a QB's effectiveness.

 

And McNabb's raw passing and TD numbers from 2000 and 2001 clearly show that he was a better passer then than Vick is right now.

 

Not to mention with TO he's thrown almost the same number of TDs as 2002 and 2003 combined.

 

Of course, you failed to account for the fact that McNabb missed six games in 2002 with a broken ankle, momotard.

Edited January 19, 2005 by Bill Swerski

[pork chop express]

Of course I look at the W-L column and I also know everything that goes into that column - a lot more than the play of one player. Peyton Manning is no longer playing in the playoffs but does that mean that he is a worse QB than Vick because of their respective team's W-L? There is a reason why the final four teams this weekend all have top defenses.

 

Michael Vick is pretty much Kyle Boller with a great ability to run the ball. Both like to throw to tight ends. Both are pretty much worthless throwing the ball down the field other than the rare good game or throw. But Vick runs far better.

 

Let's compare - through week 14 when the Falcons clinched and had been trying to win:

 

Boller rushing: 44 - 137 yds, 1 TD

Vick rushing: 108 - 790 yds, 2 TD

 

Boller passing: 207 of 365 (57%) for 2030 yds, 11 TDs, 7 FUM, 8 INT

Vick passing: 151 of 266  (57%) for 1979 yds, 11 TDs, 6 FUM, 10 INT

 

Vick has great fantasy value if you catch the games that he runs well. If all you consider is passing yardage and scores, Vick was the #27 QB this season. Counting the rushing in standard FF performance scoring, he was 10th.

 

Sure, Vick is a "new dimension" to the offense (at the expense of passing) but I would always have problems considering any quarterback as really good, let alone great, if he cannot throw very well. He has a cannon for an arm, but that doesn't equate to accuracy. Maybe he will develop into a QB above my expectations, but I have not seen much in him to suggest that he can take the step up to being a very good passer and until then, he's just the highest level of high-school QB style where you always put your best athlete as your QB so he can run it.

 

660357[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

This is probably the most accurate break down of Vick that I have seen. He hits the nail on the head with the glorified high school QB analogy. With all that being said, no one disputes his ability to change a game with every play and the fact that he is the most exciting player in the league, but he is not a great QB. He is average at best.

[lkirc]

I have said this before, but I think it bears repeating.

 

Our focus on fantasy stats skews our thinking on Vick. I must admit that when the Falcons acquired him, I thought he would someday make a great kick returner and deep threat WR. I must say that he has proven me wrong.

 

I think Vick is one of those rare athletes that can make such amazing plays that he can win games that his team does not deserve to win. He can make something out of nothing. Those types of players are few and far between. It doesn't really matter what position they play. They can carry thier teams on thier backs.

 

Vick's value comes from the fact that he is an incredible runner playing the QB position. Defenses have to account for him on every play. Do you really think that Atlanta had the top rushing attack in the NFL becasue of the OLine or Warrick Dunn? Just the threat of Vick breaking free makes the defense tentative.

 

I think that Vick is able to lead the Falcons to wins because of his great athletic ability and also the fact that his teamates play with confidence when he is on the field. They know that they are never out of the game if they play hard. He makes everyone around him better. Is this not the measure of a truly great player in any sport? Jordan, Magic, Montana, Gretzky. These players made those around them better. I think Vick brings the same to his team.

 

The fact that he cannot throw the ball effectively yet should scare every other team in the NFL. This guy is still learning and has led his team to the NFC championship. This is a team with a rookie coach, a new system on offense and defense, a horrible offensive line and an undersized defense. God help the NFL if Vick ever adds paasing downfield to his arsenal.

[REZ]

Vick is a lot of fun to watch. I regard him as a very good player but not really a very good qb. DMD pretty much hit the nail on the head in regards to my feelings about Vick.

[WaterMan]

The fact that he cannot throw the ball effectively yet should scare every other team in the NFL. This guy is still learning and has led his team to the NFC championship. This is a team with a rookie coach, a new system on offense and defense, a horrible offensive line and an undersized defense. God help the NFL if Vick ever adds passing downfield to his arsenal.

[jgcoach]

McNabb's accuracy was a problem until he got TO...

 

660492[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Not true. McNabb's problem was his w/rs had a hard time getting to and then holding onto the ball until T.O. got there. Besides that his stats were never as abysmal on a consistant basis.