Someone's gotta ask, Vick anyone??

Blitzwood · #1 07-27-2009, 05:28 PM

Yes or no and why....

Also, what position?

As for me, I think he could be our third(or forth) string QB until he learns the offense.

He'll come cheap and be on his best behavior, ala Ron Artest on the Rockets last year.

We have crap backing up Schaub, which scares the heck out of me. I know Vick isn't the end all answer, but I believe he and Schaub know each other from their days in ATL, only this time their roles are reversed.

What a difference 2 years make, back then Vick wat the highest paid QB in the league at 130 mill/6 years.

WMH · #2 07-27-2009, 07:51 PM

Uhhhh, NO THANKS.

Especially not at QB. RB....maybe. Other than his legs, what did he ever do? There is no way he could run our offense as erratic as he throws.

Mike · #3 07-27-2009, 08:52 PM

Hell no.

He sucked as a QB. I am not sure him and Matt were best buddies when they were together.

He is an amazing athlete, but not a QB. I'll pass.

barrett · #4 07-27-2009, 10:17 PM

Everybody likes to talk about bad he was, but he was plenty effective as a QB. He won games and made the Falcons a better team.

When he bootlegs a few times a game, it means that everyone on the back side stays home and the MLB doesn't fill as hard on the running plays. So every runing play basically gets a 1-2 man advantage on the front side. That's how the Falcons led the NFL in Rushing with Warrick Dunn going for 1400+ at 5.1 ypc. Just compare the rest of Dunn's career to when he played with Vick. Vick may not be able to pass at all, but he makes the RBs 10 times more effective. Plus he almost never turns the ball over. This makes him ok in a ball control, run based offense for a team that wins with defense (what the falcons had when they went to the NFC Title game). I bet if you put him on the Ravens, they win more games than they do with Joe Flacco next year.

With that said I wouldn't touch him for our team and our offense in a million years.

painekiller · #5 07-27-2009, 11:16 PM

He ran this offense in Atlanta. Not Kubiak's version but he ran a WCO. And he played under Gibbs.

McNair would never go for it, IMO.

kravix · #6 07-27-2009, 11:36 PM

Vick was an amazing athlete, no doubt, but he was never an amazing QB. Sure he can make some big plays with his legs, and he can get by on passing, but he is not the guy I want leading the team on a full field 2 minute drive.

I think he is too much of a cowboy and more interested glory to be a true team player.

papabear · #7 07-28-2009, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzwood

We have crap backing up Schaub, which scares the heck out of me. I know Vick isn't the end all answer, but I believe he and Schaub know each other from their days in ATL, only this time their roles are reversed.

Vick is a better athlete than either one of our QB's, but he's not a good QB for this system. He could be dangerous on the play action bootlegs that Kubiak likes, but Kubaks offense is based on accuracy. Vick's career completion % is 53.8. I think 60% is about the minimum you would want. Schaub has been 66% while in Houston and is at 63% overall. Orlovsky and Grossman are only marginally better than Vick though. Though Orlovsky is young enough to still have room for improvement. Grossman's would probably be much higher if he could be stopped from slinging it deep every play. They both have the advantage of not being away from the game for 2 years though. The running game in Atlanta should have made the passing game easier for him than those two had it....although he does deserve credit because of how his ability to scramble affected the defense.

The biggest problem for any team right now is that Vick is the kind of QB who has to have an offense custom tailored to his talents. I don't think any team is willing to turn the reigns over to him right off the bat, and it's hard to sign a back up who almost needs a separate playbook/gameplan.

I think he's going to have play another position at least this season. By the time he signs he will be WAY behind the curve of learning the offense. There will also be the possibility that he has to miss the first few games. I doubt he plays QB much this year. If he does it will likely be in a Wildcat situation, or he takes and end around as a WR with the option to throw it. I have heard a lot of people say running back, but I don't think he's built to pound it between the tackles. He will most likely be a third down RB, slot WR, and occasional QB in the wildcat. All of that is assuming that he hasn't lost a step in his time away. I'm sure he worked out, but it's not the same as doing it on the field. I would have a hard time counting on the athleticism of someone who hasn't played in two years...and is already pushing thirty. I'm sure he's still a great athlete, but I would be very surprised if he's not a step down from where he was.

He could be very dangerous in a specialist role, but is the distraction of having him on your team worth the handful of snaps a game that he is used on? Whether it's fair or not the team he signs with is going to have to deal with the protest from the idiots at PETA, and their team is going to be just as sick of answering questions about Vick as the Vikings are of answering questions about Favre. I don't think it's worth it because I don't see him as a viable option at QB, and he will basically be learning a whole new game if he has to switch positions. There's always the school of thought that if he's better than the last man on your roster then it's worth it. If it was clear that he would have to beat out the 5th WR and be able to return kicks, and his only chance to play QB would be a wildcat type situation and he was fine with that it might be OK. With the distraction that he would bring it's not worth it with all the unknowns about his ability at this time.

NBT · #8 07-28-2009, 01:33 PM

I would lose all respect if the Texans showed any interest in the Thug.

barrett · #9 07-28-2009, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NBT

I would lose all respect if the Texans showed any interest in the Thug.

Not me. I don't want him, but I don't think he is any worse than half the guys in the NFL. His biggest problems so far are smoking pot (about half the league) and dog fighting. He was never a locker room problem and from all accounts his teammates liked him.

Everyone loves Haynesworth even though he stomped on a guys face. Everyone loves Ray Lewis even though he held back info tied to a man being murdered. Ben Rothleisberger has been accused of assaulting a woman almost every year of his career. And the list goes on and on.

Vick is not a guy I'd have over for dinner or hang out with, but he is no worse than half the guys filling NFL rosters. Our culture just puts up with law breaking as common place in athletes (DWI, Violence, drugs, sexual assault), but we called for this guy's head because he was mean to animals.

cloudwasher · #10 07-28-2009, 07:08 PM

He worked well when he was with the Falcons because they adjusted their offense to fit his style of quarterback play. Our system is based on quarterback throwing accuracy, which Vick was lacking in even before he spent two years in a federal penitentiary.

Seeing as how we finished third in the league in offense last year, I think this is one of those cases where if it ain't broke then don't fix it. Not to mention the negative publicity that would come with signing him. I don't think anyone wants those annoying PETA people protesting outside every home game.

WMH · #11 07-28-2009, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cloudwasher

I don't think anyone wants those annoying PETA people protesting outside every home game.

That would be an interesting time.....PETA folks hanging out in the parking lots......Smelling of burnt meat everywhere....

GOD I am ready for mid August!