Andy Reid names Michael Vick as team's starting quarterback

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Wouldn't it have been a bigger disaster if they put Kolb back in this week and they went 1-3 over the next 4 weeks? Then you would have everyone wondering why they didn't just stick with the hot hand in the first place. And after every loss the media would be peppering the Eagles with Vick questions.

I'm specifically ignoring the media implications of the decision. If the Eagles were conscious about what the media thought of their actions, they wouldn't have traded McNabb to the Redskins.

From a developmental perspective, winning or losing with Michael Vick doesn't do very much for you. He's in the last year of a backup-quarterbacks' contract. Kolb is in the first year of his starting contract. If you thought you could win with either, you'd probably want to play Kolb. If you thought you were screwed with either, you'd probably want to play Kolb.

I'm not exactly sure what playing Michael Vick does for the Eagles. They still seem to be long-term believers in Kolb, but even still, I think they really, really are hoping that Vick plays well and they can sign him to a long term deal to make him the starter. They might feel that Vick is a more worthwhile project than Kolb.

Again, though, DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin are just wasting their time learning how to best help Michael Vick win games. Anything they learn with him at QB is practically useless when anyone else steps under center. I would trust Andy Reid with any quarterback conundrum to do the right thing, but believing in Mike Vick as a long term QB solution is just beyond the level of risk tolerance I would demonstrate as a high-stress decision maker. There's just limited evidence that Vick can be a useful cog in a passing offense.

Even from Reid's perspective, this is a highly speculative move. It's a complete 180 from the McNabb trade, which was just a big age-risk dumpoff on the Redskins.