Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=GMScud;518232]As a QB? Because any non-QB who can avg 16 TDs a year is not only going to have a job, but will likely also be a pro-bowler with a phat contract. [b] IMO Vick's future in this league (if he even has one) is not at QB.[/b][/quote] Nope, it's going to be as a 'gimmick' as I've been saying throughout the thread. He's not going to get another job in the NFL as a starting QB, but even if he's 90% of what he was athletically the last season he played, he's still an elite level 'weapon'.

If you were a defensive coordinator and had to game plan against a starting RB, a #1 WR, a decent QB AND had to account for a weapon like Vick who can throw, run, catch on any play? That's a tough match-up for any defense.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=Paintrain;518239]Nope, it's going to be as a 'gimmick' as I've been saying throughout the thread. He's not going to get another job in the NFL as a starting QB, but even if he's 90% of what he was athletically the last season he played, he's still an elite level 'weapon'.

If you were a defensive coordinator and had to game plan against a starting RB, a #1 WR, a decent QB AND had to account for a weapon like Vick who can throw, run, catch on any play? That's a tough match-up for any defense.[/quote]

Considering the hot new trend is the "wildcat" formation, I could see a team picking him just to experiment with him in that regard. He does have a big arm and is blazing fast, so they could run him in wildcat and keep defenses honest because of the pass option when he's in the backfield.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=GMScud;518232]As a QB? Because any non-QB who can avg 16 TDs a year is not only going to have a job, but will likely also be a pro-bowler with a phat contract. [B]IMO Vick's future in this league (if he even has one) is not at QB.[/B][/quote]

That's what I am saying. The crazy thing is I believe that he is capable of a 16 TD season outside of the QB position. Use him as a returner, a passer, a runner and a reciever.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=Paintrain;518049]I'm for Vick to the Redskins, not as a starting QB but as an 'athlete' that we can use as a RB, WR, wildcat QB, etc. Giving him 15 touches a game with his skills (assuming they've only minimally diminished) would give us a dynamic we need on offense.[/quote]

I would support adding Vick as long as the Redskins management did their due diligence before signing him.

By that I mean that mangement would need to interview him and others to ascertain that he regrets what he did and that he is dedicated to resuming his career and to being a positive influence in the community.

Then, they would need to work him out to see if he still has the skills we remember.

Lastly, they would need to inform him that if he misbehaves even once, then he'll be cut.

I think that Vick has paid a heavy price for what he has done. I don't think that he should be banned or blackballed from the NFL, as well.

As far as what his role would be were he to be signed, I would certainly not rule him out as a QB.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

I am a dog owner and lover. I hope he never gets to rejoin the league. If he joins the Redskins, I will not be able to watch. I don't think Snyder is that stupid. There would be such a negative uprising from the fans.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

This thread is a hell of an insult to Jason Campbell!!!

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=Redskin Warrior;518268]This thread is a hell of an insult to Jason Campbell!!![/quote]


Not if you actually read it.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=Angry;518269]Not if you actually read it.[/quote]

lol, read on the internet? FOOLISHNESS! Why make an informed comment when an uninformed one is much easier?

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=Soup's Uncle;518266][b]I am a dog owner and lover.[/b] I hope he never gets to rejoin the league. If he joins the Redskins, I will not be able to watch. I don't think Snyder is that stupid. There would be such a negative uprising from the fans.[/quote]

Since no-one took my Leonard Little bait from earlier in the thread I will pose it like this, do you love your wife (if married) and mother? Little killed a woman a few years ago in a DUI that was married and a mother of a young child. Would you feel the same level of indignation if the Redskins signed him?

Without excusing or justifying Vick's actions and involvement, how is what he did worse than killing a human being?

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

alcohol negates specific intent . . .but im sure the "experts" will chime in soon enough to tell me how wrong i am lol!!!

i.e. vick knew what he was doing was wrong and had the specific intent of killing a dog. little should have known drinking and driving would increase the chances of causing a car accident (recklessness) but did not have the specific intent of getting into a fatal car accident.

go skins!!

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=over the mountain;518282]alcohol negates specific intent . . .but im sure the "experts" will chime in soon enough to tell me how wrong i am lol!!!

i.e. vick knew what he was doing was wrong and had the specific intent of killing a dog. [b]little should have known drinking and driving would increase the chances of causing a car accident (recklessness) but did not have the specific intent of getting into a fatal car accident.[/b]

go skins!![/quote]

Isn't that playing semantics? Little knew that he had been drinking when he got behind the wheel. Intent to break laws has very little to do with whether they are broken and the consequences. I'm sure 'he didn't mean it' isn't a very successful defense tactic.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

The guy made Roddy White look like a bust and can't aim to save his life. 56.4% is his best completion percentage for a season? I'll pass.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=Paintrain;518287]Isn't that playing semantics? Little knew that he had been drinking when he got behind the wheel. Intent to break laws has very little to do with whether they are broken and the consequences. I'm sure 'he didn't mean it' isn't a very successful defense tactic.[/quote]

I agree.

What Little did is worse than Vick. Intent doesn't change the magnitude of his criminal act. However I don't think that either of them derserve eternal condemnation for their acts. They served, are serving, their criminal and civil punishments. As long as they can show remoarse and willingness to make amends they should have a second chance.

Liking what they did to a Manson style crime is exorbitant.


On a side note did you know that the first lady Laura Bush has killed someone while behind the wheel?..that gotta suck to live with that.

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

Speak of the devil...

[url=http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/06/vicks-creditors-want-to-know-about-his-reinstatement-efforts/]ProFootballTalk.com - VICK’S CREDITORS WANT TO KNOW ABOUT HIS REINSTATEMENT EFFORTS[/url]

Re: Would you accept Michael Vick on the Redskins?
 

[quote=Skinny Tee;518305]What Little did is worse than Vick. Intent doesn't change the magnitude of his criminal act. [/quote]
Certainly the magnitude of the result of Little's actions is [B]far[/B] worse than what Vick did. Of course human life is far more valuable than an animal life.

However the intent of making an extremely poor judgement (don't know if Little is a habitual DUI type, if he is than that's another story) while under the influence of alcohol that [B]accidentally[/B] resulted in the loss of human life cannot be compared to the cold-heartedness and evil that is required to finance and operate a dog-fighting venture which systematically tortures / maims / kills animals for [B]fun[/B] over a period of years.