Tony Dungy: Michael Vick wants another chance

You tried to argue that he had shown improvement as a passer. I was addressing that, but you just keep on trying to misrepresent my posts. Maybe somebody will believe you. It doesn't change the fact that the numbers do not back up your assertion. His rushing statistics in 2006 do not change that one bit, except perhaps as window dressing to cover up the fact that you made an argument that is not supported by the facts.

And I still don't see any numbers regarding how many passes Roddy White dropped. Funny how that works. Care to back up your argument there or just complain about mine? If you are going to use the statistic, perhaps it would be good if you had the actual number to offer some real perspective on the impact of White's drops on Vick's lousy passing numbers.

I know, I know. There I go dealing in facts rather than opinions again.

Of course defensive coordinators had to plan around his ability as a runner. They also planned to take advantage of his limitations as a passer.

 

All true, but sadly some people get even more worked up about violence against animals than they do about violence against human beings.

 

The 53% completion percentage is magnified even more when you take into account that DC's had to keep a spy on Vick because of his running ability.

 

WHERE did I argue that he had shown IMPROVEMENT as a passer?

I said you don't know the future and he could possibly become a better one.

Again, you're lying.

Who asked for it to change his "passing" statistics? Again...where was that asked? I said his rushing statistics was a huge plus in his ability to play the QB. Have you somehow extinguished that point?

 

Excellent point. His rushing skills also helped slow the pass rush of some opponents because defenders were so concerned about him making them look bad. Unfortunately, Vick was not able to take advantage of that nearly often enough due to his limited skills as a passer.

 

Vick had a winning record as an NFL starting QB. I think he took advantage of his position more often than he didn't.

 

I read this as a suggestion that Vick was improving as a passer. If I misread your point, my apologies for misrepresenting your argument. I was not lying, but unlike you I actually care if I misrepresented another poster on this board.

If my first read was incorrect and you were instead suggesting that Vick was somehow proving that it wasn't better to be a passer first and a runner second by his performance in 2006, the Falcons' 7-9 record that season doesn't really back you up on that.

And I never did anything but say that Vick is a fantastic weapon as a runner. I simply said that I would rather have an elite passer who can't run than a runner who is only mediocre as a passer.

 

I don't think Vick deserves a second chance. I also think Leonard Little and all the miscreants should be out of their respective leagues, regardless of whether or not they paid their debts to society.

 

And we're back to the first silly point, trying to rely solely on a quarterback's win-loss record to determine his worth.

But let's clear this up, as a passer he was never able to take full advantage of the opportunities that his running skills created. Being able to take off and run is great. Being able to buy time and then shred the defense with big passing plays is better. See the career of Steve Young, who got better as he learned to do that. See also Ben Roethlisberger, who does exactly the things Vick often failed to do on broken plays.

 

A lot of abused animals have a brain the size of a small plum. Vick certainly might be deficient but he has been equipped to know better.

 

And I CLEARLY never referred to anything remotely saying that. You read what you wanted to read and ran with it. I said you don't know the future if he "could" possibly be a better passing QB.

I think anyone can cherry pick a season and believe they're proving a point. What did Drew Brees, being several yards short of Dan Marino's passing record, prove last season? It didn't prove your point about being an elite passer automatically adding up to wins.

 

Nice twist. But you were the one trying to argue that Vick was changing the perception that a quarterback must throw well to succeed. The Falcons really had one good run with Vick at quarterback and were headed in the wrong direction his final season, as proven by the 7-9 record in 2006. Maybe he would have gone on to change perceptions from there if he hadn't landed in jail, but again you are relying on what could be instead of what is.

Again, I apologized if I misread your post above. Of course, you couldn't possibly accept that gracefully, could you?

You took my omission of Vick's running stats in one post and turned it into an entire pissing match. So tell us all again about people reading what they want to read and running with it. To be clear, you did EXACTLY what you are complaining about me doing, yet you are unwilling to acknowledge it.

I NEVER said that being an elite passer guarantees wins. That is you trying to pin a flawed argument on me. Yes, there are examples of elite passers failing to win. There are also examples of elite passers who did win, or did Joe Montana's career completely escape your notice? Throw in Tom Brady, Young and Peyton Manning while we're at it.

In the Super Bowl era, where is your example of a great running quarterback with mediocre passing skills winning a championship?