Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]How come last week I was wrong for judging people based on stats, which by the way, included wins, but this week all people want to do is use stats to explain why Vick is overrated.

First of all, the Falcons are one of the worst teams in the league without Michael Vick on the field. He may not be a great passer, but he changes games. You can't honestly tell me that you think coaches lose sleep over Mark Brunell or Drew Bledsoe. That's why Vick gets votes. When coaches and players go up against Mike Vick they have to come up with ways to stop him. If I were coming up with a gameplan against the Skins or Boys I would try to make Brunell or Bledsoe beat me.

Second, Vick has no one but Crumpler and Dunn on offense. Don't give me that "he doesn't throw to recievers" nonsense. He doesn't throw to them because they're garbage. He has one legit target. The offense is him and Dunn. That's it.

Vick is the MVP of his team every single season. Without him, we've seen what happens to the Falcons. Michael Vick changes games and people respect what he can do way more than Brunell or Bledsoe.[/QUOTE]

Vick also has Duckett (underrated short-yardage back in my opinion). And what does Brunell have besides Portis, Moss and Cooley. Very few teams have more than two or three targets anyway.

I don't deny the difference that Vick can make but if he was such an MVP then he wouldn't have been so lousy these last couple of weeks in key games (both losses) to the Panthers and Bears.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I wasn't trying to change anyone's view, but if it changed yours that's great!

That's about as in depth as you have to get with Vick.

He's overrated, simple as that.

His numbers are garbage for a QB. So he wins when he's in the lineup... yeah that's great. Are you telling me Dallas or Washington would have won the same amount of games if you took away Bledsoe and Brunell?

He's a great athlete, but from a pure QB standpoint his name carries him. The Pro Bowl is a popularity contest most of the time so it's not surprising Vick is in, I just don't think it's justified based on his play.[/QUOTE]

Tom Brady's stats don't really jump off the page. He's never thrown more than 28 TDs and his next closest total is 23. Would you argue that he's overrated?

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]Vick also has Duckett (underrated short-yardage back in my opinion). And what does Brunell have besides Portis, Moss and Cooley. Very few teams have more than two or three targets anyway.

I don't deny the difference that Vick can make but if he was such an MVP then he wouldn't have been so lousy these last couple of weeks in key games (both losses) to the Panthers and Bears.[/QUOTE]

Duckett isn't any better than Zack Crockett. If you wanna put Duckett out there, you had better thrown in Betts and Sellers and David Patten, who was very good coming in.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]Duckett isn't any better than Zack Crockett. If you wanna put Duckett out there, you had better thrown in Betts and Sellers and David Patten, who was very good coming in.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough....now as far as comparing Tom Brady to Vick. Brady's passing numbers are way better than Vick's. Brady has like a 2:1 TD to INT ratio. For every TD Vick throws he throws an INT.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]Fair enough....now as far as comparing Tom Brady to Vick. Brady's passing numbers are way better than Vick's. Brady has like a 2:1 TD to INT ratio. For every TD Vick throws he throws an INT.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't trying to compare Brady to Vick. He's a far superior passer, I'm just saying that when you compare Brady to the league then his stats don't jump off the page. All he does is win which is why everyone loves him. Vick does a lot of winning too, but people still hate, I just don't get it.

That's not to put Vick's playoff appearances on par with Tom Brady's, just pointing out that it's a pretty similar situation.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]I don't deny the difference that Vick can make but if he was such an MVP then he wouldn't have been so lousy these last couple of weeks in key games (both losses) to the Panthers and Bears.[/QUOTE]

The Panthers and Bears are divison leading playoff teams. Brunell lost to the Raiders, and tried his best to lose to the Cardinals. Bledsoe also lost to the Raiders, and tried his best to lose to the Niners.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]Tom Brady's stats don't really jump off the page. He's never thrown more than 28 TDs and his next closest total is 23. Would you argue that he's overrated?[/QUOTE]

This year Brady is putting up monster numbers, he's on pace for over 4000 yards and over 25 TDs. Those are big numbers worthy of the Pro Bowl IMO.

As for his previous years I'm not sure what you're talking about, he's always had the numbers.

Look at his yardage and TD-INT ratio over the past 3 years

2002: 3764, 28-14
2003: 3620, 23-12
2004: 3692, 28-14

I don't know where you come from, but where I come from those are pretty damn good numbers. Add in completion percentages all over 60% during those years and there's just no denying what Brady has done stats wise along with the wins.

Vick doesn't even touch these numbers. He's not even in the ball park. Their situations aren't similar in the least bit.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

I'm just going to go ahead and say it: WHAT IS THE ****ING OBSESSION WITH MIKE VICK?!?!?!

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=Southpaw]The Panthers and Bears are divison leading playoff teams. Brunell lost to the Raiders, and tried his best to lose to the Cardinals. Bledsoe also lost to the Raiders, and tried his best to lose to the Niners.[/QUOTE]

I realize that. Brunell also has won three in a row, with the playoffs on the line. Though I understand what you're saying about the quality of the opponent.

What I'm saying though is that if the argument is going to be made that the Falcons are a much better team when Vick is in and they win with him and that's a big reason why he's in the Pro Bowl, then you have to factor in that when it's mattered recently against top teams they haven't won. And Vick can't be absolved of blame in those losses. So what does it matter that they're better with him if they lose anyway.?

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]I'm just going to go ahead and say it: WHAT IS THE ****ING OBSESSION WITH MIKE VICK?!?!?![/QUOTE]

First of all, I'm not at all obsessed with Vick, but if I had to guess why the general population loves him so much, it's probably because he has more natural ability than just about everyone in the league.


[QUOTE=TAFKAS]What I'm saying though is that if the argument is going to be made that the Falcons are a much better team when Vick is in and they win with him and that's a big reason why he's in the Pro Bowl, then you have to factor in that when it's mattered recently against top teams they haven't won. And Vick can't be absolved of blame in those losses. So what does it matter that they're better with him if they lose anyway.?[/QUOTE]

Good point, and I do agree that there are several areas where Vick has to improve to be a championship quarterback(i.e. closing games, relying on his teammates and not just himself, etc.). I'm not even trying to argue that he definitely should be in the Pro Bowl. It just seems like the general population of this board thinks he sucks or is overrated, and I completely disagree with that sentiment.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

i cants figure out how to make a new post but i just wanted to say hi to you dumb skins fans. anyone remember me? aww yeah denim is back in the hizzow

:headbange

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

For what it's worth, Dan Patrick is HEAVILY endorsing Brunell for the Pro Bowl on his show this PM.
Food for thought. I to, have heard the Vick arguments. He IS definately entertaining. However, any team that is not SIGNIFIGANTLY better with it's starting QB in the lineup DESPERATELY needs another starting QB!

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

Vick doesn't win big games, its as simple as that. He is an okay passer and a good runner. To say he doesn't have targets is a joke. ATL got Peerless Price, they used their last 2 1st round picks on WR's, and yet none of these guys can play in the NFL?

It's the overall ground game (Dunn, Duckett, Vick) that drives the ATL offense. Stop that and they have nothing, cuz Vick can't pass to anyone besides Crumpler.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=Southpaw]It just seems like the general population of this board thinks he sucks or is overrated, and I completely disagree with that sentiment.[/QUOTE]

It's important to remember that what I and, I think, many others are saying is not that he sucks. Just that he's overrated in terms of being one of the better QBs in the league. You can still be good but not be one of the best.

Re: Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss
 

[QUOTE=Redskins8588]:postcop:
Why would have McNabb have made the pro-bowl, and what is your reasoning that Vick made it? Was it Vick's great touchdown to int ratio of 13td's to 12 int's? Or was it Vick's incrediable completion percentage of 54%?

Why would it be so hard, if you are a redskins fan, to be upset that our very own Mark Brunell did not make it? I mean he is having a way better season than Vick is, you do have to admit that.

I agree that Hasselbeck and Delhomme(SP) should not have made it, not over Brunell and Bledsoe(SP). Espically not Delhomme, not when Brunell has 2 td's for every 1 int.

And yes I will admit that last year I couldn't stand that Brunell was our QB, but you have to give credit where credit is due and Brunell got totally nubbed.[/QUOTE]

Its wouldn't my brother....Brunell can have Haslebeck place.....I voted for Mark Brunell