''What I can do is unparalleled,'' Vick said Wednesday. ``That's something that can't be taken away from me. That's how I've got to play my game. If I were put on this Earth to be a pocket passer, I'd be a pocket passer. Unparalleled? Has Michael Vick looked at his 63.0 quarterback rating this year? This guy has to be pound for pound the biggest idiot in all of professional football if he actually believes the crap that he's spewing. Okay, Vick might be talking about his running ability. So what? Almost half a season is in the books and Vick has 302 yards rushing. If you add in his passing yardage, that 1,025 yards of offense. How does that stack up to other QBs? If you take Vick's TOTAL yardage and put that against the rest of the NFL's QB's passing yardage, he would still only come in at 27th. Vick ranks 30th without adding in his rushing yardage, so don't even suggest that his rushing makes up for his pathetic passing. Go ahead, Vickolytes! Start making excuses for Michael Vick.
When I think of "unparalleled", I think of people that make up odd yet useful terms such as "Vickolytes". :cheesey:
I dont like vick much but im going to defend. Hes doing his job which is to win. He doesnt need to be a good passer. If ur team is winning y stop doing what works?? Theyre running the ball greatly and part of the reason is vick. they change their whole coverage for him which makes wholes for the running back. Yes i can throw better than him but theyre winning so i think he should keep his strategy.
I agree with MysteryMan, he wins games, period. Yea, he sucks at passing, and he isnt even a great runner anymore, but until they start losing I will defend him. I agree though that a big reason for them winning is not him, but he does add to it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MysteryMan)</div><div class='quotemain'>I dont like vick much but im going to defend. Hes doing his job which is to win. He doesnt need to be a good passer. If ur team is winning y stop doing what works?? Theyre running the ball greatly and part of the reason is vick. they change their whole coverage for him which makes wholes for the running back. Yes i can throw better than him but theyre winning so i think he should keep his strategy.</div> Michael Vick makes holes for Warrick Dunn to run through? I thought it was the Falcons' offensive line that made those holes. So, now Michael Vick deserves the credit for Warrick Dunn's rushing yardage. I wonder why the NFL credits Dunn for the yardage that he runs for? What are they thinking? I guess the next step is to start crediting Vick with the tackles that the defense makes because we know that Vick makes the defense better simply by being the Falcons QB.
Just remember.... The fact that your team wins may usually be a good reason to justify why the team should not make a change at QB. It should NOT be a reason to say that a QB is good or not. The Falcons went to the Superbowl without Vick. That doesn't mean Chandler is a great QB. Think about that statement: <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>....he sucks at passing, and he isnt even a great runner anymore...</div> Some will agree - some will disagree. If you agree, why wouldn't you classify this person as a hindrance to a good team? Ultimately, Atlanta wins games because their gameplan doesn't rely on Vick to carry the team. They allow him to make some flashy, big plays that are a help to winning, but ultimately, they will tend to lose if their running game and defense isn't working. I see nothing wrong with it and having Vick run their offense. Its kind of like a .220 hitter that can hit 40-50 HRs in a season. If that person can win you game, so be it. But I wouldn't consider them elite.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (favre4mvp)</div><div class='quotemain'>I agree with MysteryMan, he wins games, period. Yea, he sucks at passing, and he isnt even a great runner anymore, but until they start losing I will defend him. I agree though that a big reason for them winning is not him, but he does add to it.</div> It's posts like this that provoke me to ask the BIG QUESTION! If Michael Vick "sucks at passing, and he isnt even a great runner anymore" then how does he help the Falcons win???? The INDISPUTABLE Truth is that NOT ONE SINGLE VICKOLYTE can come up with anything other than some "he wins games" gobblygook that has no substance to it whatsoever. The INDISPUTABLE Truth is that Michael Vick is the most overrated quarterback in the history of the NFL.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cowboy71)</div><div class='quotemain'>When I think of "unparalleled", I think of people that make up odd yet useful terms such as "Vickolytes". :cheesey:</div> When I first coined the term "Vickolyte", I simply meant for the term to be a derivative of the term "acolyte." However, the perpetual repetition of the "Vick wins ballgames" gobblygook argument by Vickolytes continues to cement the presence of a double entendre into the final syllable of the term.
Vick is a great runner. I'm not sure how you can say he isn't the best running QB in football or how his running isn?t any good no more. He is however the worse passer in the game. I defended Vick in the Summer because I thought he would come around this year. That doesn't appear like it?s going to happen. Atlanta however is doing the right thing with keeping Vick in as the starter. The way they play, they are a better all around team with Mike Vick at QB than Matt Schaub with Jim Mora Jr. as Head Coach. Schaub is 0-3 as a starter under Mora. Their offense is unique. It has "special" plays designed for Michael Vick. Sometimes they work. Sometimes they don't. There were QB's back in the day that were a run first and pass second player. Vick is a run first. Pass second. He's not a top 5 QB in the NFL. He's probably not a top 10 on most people's list. However as a starting QB he does have a high winning percentage. Not just because of him though. Like most have said. Atlanta has a very good defense and a very good little RB in Warrick Dunn. Is it Vicks fault for having a good team around him. NO!! You can't compare Chris Chandler to Mike Vick. I don't think there?s one guy on the 98 Falcon Super Bowl team that there is on the 2005 Falcon team. That?s not fair to Vick. That?s not fair to Chandler. What if Atlanta reaches the Super Bowl this season? Is Vick still a bad QB. Maybe.... Will he be part of the reasons why they got there. Definitely!!! No man is above the game of football. It's a team sport and Vick is blessed with a great team. Finally, I hear this thing about the "vickolytes" defending Mike Vick. Yeah isn?t that to be expected. I still feel he should be the starting QB for Atlanta. I guess I?m a ?vickolyte? The fact is when Mike Vick makes a big play the Vick-haters never mention it. The fact is when he plays a great game with his arm or legs the Vick-haters never mention it. Vick is a make or break QB. He can win you a game on his own because of his LEGS but he can also lose you a game on his own with his ARM. It really comes down to which type of QB do you prefer. The Dual Threat or the natural pocket passer.
Hey Dolfpale, I will admit he is a prettybad QB but please don't try and tell me that he doesn;t change the way defenses play against the flacons, Seriously, after all the Vick Wins Games crap, Safeties are afraid to drop too far back, Middle liebackers come up to the line of scrimmage when he tucks the ball under his arm. Warrick Dunn is an exceptional Running back despite Michael Vick being the Qb and their defense is very good, they have a strong D-Line, good linebackers and a very good shut down corner. But please don't tell me that Vick doesn;t worry Defenses with his ability to run the ball... That is my only argument for the only QB with a lower rating that Kyle "The Saviour" Orton! P.S i was just kidding about that Saviour Orton thing before people start reminding me he had 5 picks against the Bengals! I meant to write Dolfdale, that wasn;t a joke ... or an attempt at one at least
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>Vick is a great runner. I'm not sure how you can say he isn't the best running QB in football or how his running isn?t any good no more. He is however the worse passer in the game. I defended Vick in the Summer because I thought he would come around this year. That doesn't appear like it?s going to happen. Atlanta however is doing the right thing with keeping Vick in as the starter. The way they play, they are a better all around team with Mike Vick at QB than Matt Schaub with Jim Mora Jr. as Head Coach. Schaub is 0-3 as a starter under Mora. Their offense is unique. It has "special" plays designed for Michael Vick. Sometimes they work. Sometimes they don't. There were QB's back in the day that were a run first and pass second player. Vick is a run first. Pass second. He's not a top 5 QB in the NFL. He's probably not a top 10 on most people's list. However as a starting QB he does have a high winning percentage. Not just because of him though. Like most have said. Atlanta has a very good defense and a very good little RB in Warrick Dunn. Is it Vicks fault for having a good team around him. NO!! You can't compare Chris Chandler to Mike Vick. I don't think there?s one guy on the 98 Falcon Super Bowl team that there is on the 2005 Falcon team. That?s not fair to Vick. That?s not fair to Chandler. What if Atlanta reaches the Super Bowl this season? Is Vick still a bad QB. Maybe.... Will he be part of the reasons why they got there. Definitely!!! No man is above the game of football. It's a team sport and Vick is blessed with a great team. Finally, I hear this thing about the "vickolytes" defending Mike Vick. Yeah isn?t that to be expected. I still feel he should be the starting QB for Atlanta. I guess I?m a ?vickolyte? The fact is when Mike Vick makes a big play the Vick-haters never mention it. The fact is when he plays a great game with his arm or legs the Vick-haters never mention it. Vick is a make or break QB. He can win you a game on his own because of his LEGS but he can also lose you a game on his own with his ARM. It really comes down to which type of QB do you prefer. The Dual Threat or the natural pocket passer.</div> farveformvp said, "he isn't even a great runner anymore." Please make sure you assign quotes to the people who make them. I made the point that even when you add his rushing yards to his passing yards, he only jumps from 30 to 27 on the passing yardage list, so that negates the argument that his rushing ability makes up for his sucktacular passing skills. No one, including you, have been able to refute that fact with any substance, only gobblygook about Vick makes the Falcons better. Yeah, Michael Vick has a good winning percentage. Until last year, so did Jay Fiedler. Sure, Vick makes some plays that look cool on the highlight reel, but he can't consistantly make throws when his team needs them. If I had to have a touchdown on a two minute drive, I would rather have Eli Manning than Michael Vick with no question and given the amount of time Eli has been in the league compared to Michael Vick that should be embarrassing. Michael Vick isn't a dual threat. He has to learn how to throw a football consistantly before he can be called a dual threat. At best, Michael Vick poses problems for teams because they only have to deal with a team playing a RB at QB once or twice a year. I appreciate your playing, but you failed to prove that Michael Vick is an unparalleled QB. NEXT!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wannab Favre)</div><div class='quotemain'>Hey Dolfpale, I will admit he is a prettybad QB but please don't try and tell me that he doesn;t change the way defenses play against the flacons, Seriously, after all the Vick Wins Games crap, Safeties are afraid to drop too far back, Middle liebackers come up to the line of scrimmage when he tucks the ball under his arm. Warrick Dunn is an exceptional Running back despite Michael Vick being the Qb and their defense is very good, they have a strong D-Line, good linebackers and a very good shut down corner. But please don't tell me that Vick doesn;t worry Defenses with his ability to run the ball... That is my only argument for the only QB with a lower rating that Kyle "The Saviour" Orton! P.S i was just kidding about that Saviour Orton thing before people start reminding me he had 5 picks against the Bengals! I meant to write Dolfdale, that wasn;t a joke ... or an attempt at one at least</div> Of course, defenses play the Falcons differently. They are the only team to play without a legitimate QB in the backfield. So, when a team's playbook consists of running the halfback option for all of it's passing plays then you have to play defense a little differently. I still say that, in the playoffs, someone will put Michael Vick in a position where he has to make some throws and that will be the end of the Falcons.
DD i did not say tht vick deserves to get credit for dunns rushing yards and im also not taking credit away from the O line but Vick does help. When i watched 2 games with the falcons i saw tht the D would play special for Viick. If u waych a falcon game DD u will see tht Vick makes the D think abou him more than the RB. Do think tht if the falcons put in schaub tht Dunn would do just as good?? I geuss ur just jealous tht vicks not on miami
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>You can't compare Chris Chandler to Mike Vick. I don't think there?s one guy on the 98 Falcon Super Bowl team that there is on the 2005 Falcon team. That?s not fair to Vick. That?s not fair to Chandler. What if Atlanta reaches the Super Bowl this season? Is Vick still a bad QB. Maybe.... Will he be part of the reasons why they got there. Definitely!!! No man is above the game of football. It's a team sport and Vick is blessed with a great team.</div> Just so we are clear...what you and I are saying is the same thing. Teams past, present, and future win without Vick. My only point with Chandler was to point out the same team-theme and the fact that teams win games. If Atlanta reaches the Superbowl, I think I am agreeing with you in that it doesn't make Vick any better or worse. I do disagree with you that it doesn't necessarily mean he was one of the reasons why they got there. There could be plenty of other QBs that could accomplish that if they were "blessed with a great team".
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MysteryMan)</div><div class='quotemain'>DD i did not say tht vick deserves to get credit for dunns rushing yards and im also not taking credit away from the O line but Vick does help. When i watched 2 games with the falcons i saw tht the D would play special for Viick. If u waych a falcon game DD u will see tht Vick makes the D think abou him more than the RB. Do think tht if the falcons put in schaub tht Dunn would do just as good?? I geuss ur just jealous tht vicks not on miami </div> Trust me, I am in no way jealous of the Falcons having Michael Vick. I'm not satisfied with our current QBs, but I want one that can manage a higher QB rating that 63.0.
Hey, um... for all you out there that think Vick should be benched, what happened when Vick went out with an injury? They lost that game, did they not?!? I dont care whos in there as long as they win. If they had my grandma in there but kept winning, I say leave her in there. She may suck, but winning is all that matters and although Vick doesnt do a whole lot to help the team, they still win and why change something that works? Its like all the critisim that Ben Rothlisburger took last year when he had bad numbers but kept winning, why mess with a team that wins?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale)</div><div class='quotemain'>farveformvp said, "he isn't even a great runner anymore." Please make sure you assign quotes to the people who make them.</div> I never quoted you. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I made the point that even when you add his rushing yards to his passing yards, he only jumps from 30 to 27 on the passing yardage list, so that negates the argument that his rushing ability makes up for his sucktacular passing skills. No one, including you, have been able to refute that fact with any substance, only gobblygook about Vick makes the Falcons better. Yeah, Michael Vick has a good winning percentage. Until last year, so did Jay Fiedler. Sure, Vick makes some plays that look cool on the highlight reel, but he can't consistantly make throws when his team needs them. If I had to have a touchdown on a two minute drive, I would rather have Eli Manning than Michael Vick with no question and given the amount of time Eli has been in the league compared to Michael Vick that should be embarrassing. Michael Vick isn't a dual threat. He has to learn how to throw a football consistantly before he can be called a dual threat. At best, Michael Vick poses problems for teams because they only have to deal with a team playing a RB at QB once or twice a year. I appreciate your playing, but you failed to prove that Michael Vick is an unparalleled QB. NEXT!</div> So what other options do the Falcons have? Put in Matt Schaub and let him start. Schaub is 0-3 as a starter under Jim Mora. Give it to someone off the couch??? Draft??? Free Agency???(WHO) I'll be waiting on an answer. I'm serious. What would be the better options. Lets hear it!! It's easy to bench Mike Vick but who will replace him. I've provided a clear point that Matt Schaub is 0-3 as a starter. Does that not prove that the team doesn't play as well with him. So who should their guy be under center if not Vick?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cowboy71)</div><div class='quotemain'>If Atlanta reaches the Superbowl, I think I am agreeing with you in that it doesn't make Vick any better or worse. I do disagree with you that it doesn't necessarily mean he was one of the reasons why they got there. There could be plenty of other QBs that could accomplish that if they were "blessed with a great team".</div> So if Atlanta were to reach the Super Bowl this season with Mike Vick as the starting QB, he is not ONE of many reasons why they made the Super Bowl. This is where most people bring in the Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson argument. Were they not ONE of many reasons why their respective teams made the Super Bowl. I believe they were. If Atlanta makes it this season Vick is ONE of many reasons why they made it. Again ONE. Meaning I'm not saying the only. Warrick Dunn and Defense to name others
Alright heres what i have to say about this topic... I will have to agree with DD. First off we can all agree here that defenses have to completely change their gameplan for Mike Vick. He certainly is a gamechanger and a playmaker. He has allll the tools for an Uber QB. Incredible runner, strong arm.... if only he had like Chad Pennington's ability to read defenses or the smarts of him (yes Chad is a smart QB). He just doesnt have that ability. My point is with the team that Atlanta is this year they should definatly go to the Superbowl with the weak NFC conference they are in. And any decent QB and i said QB could bring them to it. Mike Vick can play awful vs the Jets and still win the game but he cant do that to teams like Giants or the Panthers. If he cant bring this Falcons team to the Superbowl team i will never have confidence in him ever bringing a team to that big game. And right now its looking like he'll never have that ability to bring a team that far. I'm kinda all over the place here but the fact is that if Atlanta gets to the Superbowl it wont be because of Mike Vick but if they dont it will be because of Mike Vick. As Cowboys said he is like a .220 40 hr hitter in baseball. He is flashy but not consistant at all. I dont think he'll ever be a good QB in this league he'll always be a threat to defenses but if he doesnt step it up soon and get to his potential then he may never get there
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>So what other options do the Falcons have? Put in Matt Schaub and let him start. Schaub is 0-3 as a starter under Jim Mora. Give it to someone off the couch??? Draft??? Free Agency???(WHO) I'll be waiting on an answer. I'm serious. What would be the better options. Lets hear it!! It's easy to bench Mike Vick but who will replace him. I've provided a clear point that Matt Schaub is 0-3 as a starter. Does that not prove that the team doesn't play as well with him. So who should their guy be under center if not Vick?</div> You need to check your facts. According to NFL.com, Matt Schaub has only started two games in his career, one last year and one this year. I would hardly think that two games is a fair assessment of Schaub's ability as a starting QB. What numbers he has this year are pretty good. (3 tds, 0 ints, 93.0 QB rating) Besides, if you read this thread all the way through you would know that I never said that Michael Vick shouldn't be starting. The point of this thread is that I took exception to Michael Vick saying his game is unparalleled. I'm not sure if the Falcons should replace him or not. Mora has foolishly built that offense around Michael Vick and I'm not sure it would work now with an actual quarterback. I will say that I would like the Falcons chances a lot better if they had a consistant passing game that they could count on, rather than basing an offense around a scrambling idiot that can't read a defense. I've noticed that you continue to bring up the Falcons win-loss record and giving Michael Vick the credit for it and knocking Matt Schaub because he hasn't won the two games that he gotten to start. Do win-loss records belong to players or teams? Do you remember what you said to me when you were attacking the fact that Steve Smith has been a better WR than Randy Moss this year? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>Also Dale all that matters is win-loss amoung teams. TEAMS! TEAMS! T-E-A-M-S!!! If you put together a team with good chemistry or that is winning you get good results.</div> Make up your mind. I guess the answer depends on whether it supports your argument or not. DolfanDale's prediction for Porky's rebuttal - Porky will defend Michael Vick by saying that he has a good chemistry with the Falcons. Why? Because "good chemistry" is abstract and lacks substance which is easier to defend than defending the cold hard fact that Michael Vick is a pityful passer who would rank 27th among quarterbacks even if you added his rushing yardage to his passing yardage.
