Tony Dungy: Michael Vick wants another chance

Normally, that may be true, but in Vick's last season, the Falcons offensive line was horrible (45 sacks) and every passing play seemed like a fire drill. Defenses didn't lay back, they tore through the line.

And while I won't ever say Vick was a great passing quarterback, a couple points do perhaps play into why his success throwing was limited:

Receivers--His leading wideouts over his past three seasons were Peerless Price, Brian Finneran, Dez White, Michael Jenkins. A mediocre bunch at best. Hard to complete a pass when the receivers can't get free from the cornerback.

Greg Knapp--a guy, in my opinion, who really doesn't deserve to be an NLF OC, ran an offense that lacked imagination, especially with a weapon like Vick. his offense was bland, hardly ever creative, and perhaps worst of all, predictable. Not surprising to me that Vick's best passing season was under a different offense with Dan Reeves.

 

It is hard to be imaginitive on offense with such a limited quarterback. And Vick's passing seasons were all fairly similar, some with a slightly higher completion percentage, others with more touchdows.

Ben Roethlisberger completed 65.3 percent of his passes for 3,154 yards, 32 touchdowns and 11 interceptions while being sacked 47 times in 2007. A good passer with some mobility can still make plays in between jail breaks up front.

 

You didn't answer the question:
What did Drew Brees, being several yards short of Dan Marino's passing record, prove last season?

You tallied up Vick's 7-9 RECORD against his passing ability. Ok...I can play the tallying up of Drew Brees passing ability next to his team's record. The result ends up the same. No playoffs.

So, again, your point is?

I've seen enough marginally talented QB's win super bowls. If Trent Dilfer could win a super bowl at qb, why admonish the style of play from Vick, a qb who himself was one game away from the big game?

 

Leonard Little shouldn't be in jail -- he should have been executed. His actions constitute nothing short of willful murder.

Vick of course will be ALLOWED to play, and of course he will be wildly erratic as he was before, and of course he will be back in jail on some other thug bullshit within a fairly short period of time.

 

If you are going to use the quote function, leave the comments in context. Doing otherwise is self-serving and dishonest. I hope the poster who just accused me of lying will take that into account in the future.

I also noticed that you can't come up with an example of a great running quarterback with mediocre passing skills winning a championship. That is because it hasn't happened. You are trying to argue that Vick was somehow changing perceptions of what a successful quarterback is. You know how you change perceptions like that in the NFL? Win a championship. Hell, just make it to a Super Bowl.

My point is exactly that, but I'll repeat it for you. Being an elite passer does not guarantee victories, but I can show you many examples of elite passers winning championships. Start with Montana, Young, Manning and Brady. You cannot even show me one example of a quarterback like Vick even making it to a Super Bowl. The closest I can think would be Steve Young and Donovan McNabb, gifted running quarterbacks who had their greatest success once they learned to rely more on their arms than their feet.

Teams have won championships with mediocre quarterbacks, but the Trent Dilfers of the world didn't change the perceptions of what an NFL quarterback should be, either. The Ravens' defense that he won a championship might have even been able to carry Vick to a title, but just as it did with Dilfer that would say a lot more about the excellence of that defense than it would about the guy taking the snaps on offense.

 

I'm not going to get into the "does he deserve another chance" argument

But, from a football standpoint, the only Michael Vick stat that matters is this one:

2007 DNP
2008 DNP

The guy hasn't taken a snap in two years. There is almost no chance he can step in and help any team as a QB, even a "wildcat" QB any time soon.

Anything he accomplished prior to 2007 is meaningless after that kind of layoff.

 

Steve Young success didn't come from having the "sudden" epiphany of not relying on his legs, choosing to opt on his arm. It came from leaving the dysfunctional Tampa Bay Buccaneers organization and joining the San Francisco 49ers.

Donovan McNabb went to three straight NFC championships while holding the "running qb" title. Fran Tarkenton went to four super bowls while being a "running QB."

Sorry, I don't buy the fact that being a running QB holds a team back from winning a super bowl so as long as the trent dilfers of the world are still quarterbacking their teams into the super bowl.

I really don't care about perception. Mediocre, elite passing and running qbs can all win a super bowl.

You proved my point. What you need best at the QB position is to be a manager. I think you can be a manager at QB while being a running one.

 

Excellent point on Big Ben.

But the Falcons offensive limitations were completely at the hands of Knapp and not Vick.

 

He is not entitled to anything - but like I said, if a league can find it within itself to forgive guys like PacMan Jones and half the Bengals roster -- it surely should be able to find it within itself to excuse a guy who fought some dogs and made money gambling on it.

Secondly, the state of quarterback play in this league is so bad, there is no question Michael Vick would be an upgrade over the starter on at least ten or 12 teams - even if he hadn't played in a few years.

And since the consumate Pittsburgh fan boy is hear hurting all of our ears with his cheerleading for Ben Roethlisberger........

In 2006, Vick's last year as a starter before he was sent to jail - he accounted for 3,513 yards (passing and rushing), 22 touchdowns (passing and rushing) and 13 interceptions.

That same year, Big Ben Roethlisberger, the greatest quarterback on the planet, accounted for 3,611 yards (passing and rushing), 20 touchdowns and 23 interceptions.

Now, looking at those numbers -- remind me again which quarterback was more effective that season?

To discount Michael Vick's rushing ability is ridiculous given that it is a big part of his game and a big reason he was such a dangerous record.

And he was 38-28-1 - a winning record by a decent amount-- as a starter for a team and franchise that sucks.

They've won a total of three division titles - one with him as the starter.

He was a full-time starter and healthy for four seasons -- and made the Pro-Bowl three of those seasons. He was the fourth leading passer in Falcons history and he set set a team record for lowest interception percentage in a season and he also holds seven NFL rushing records for quarterbacks (I know, I know, those yards and touchdowns don't count as much as spirals through the air).


In other words, I don't think Michael Vick is the greatest quarterback ever. I don't think he is this great superstar player. But anyone who says Michael Vick wasn't a good and highly effective player in this league is either (a) a racist or (b) a moron or (c) a dog lover who can't let it go.

The guy was a good player. Not a great player, but he proved he could make a lot of plays and lead his team to victories, both in the regular season and postseason
and that is a helluva lot more than a whole lot of guys currently starting at that position in that league can say.

 

No. I didn't prove your point at all. But nice try.

That Ravens team could have won with just about anybody at quarterback. They won in spite of Dilfer, not because of him. Teams are not out there looking for another Trent Dilfer to win them a championship. They are looking for a Tom Brady, Peyton Manning or even a Ben Roethlisberger, somebody who will carry a much heavier portion of the load than Dilfer had to.

Just because people's perceptions of McNabb were behind the reality doesn't change the fact that he was at his best when he learned to think pass first, run second.

Regarding Young, I wasn't comparing him to his days with the Bucs. That comparison makes no sense. But once again, you are attempting to pin a flawed argument on me. I was talking about his play within his time with the 49ers. He became an elite quarterback when he learned to use his running skills only as a supplement to his passing skills. Also, Vick has never shown any signs of being anywhere close to the passer Young was.

Agan, you still don't have an example of a running quarterback winning it all. It hasn't happened. You keep on playing in the land of make-believe-what-might-be. I'll stick to reality. Thanks.

 

You do know he's only 29, right? Not young by any stretch. But not some 35 or 37 year-old trying to make a comeback either.
And he's coming back from prison, not injury.
I'll bet anything ... anything ... Vick is a starter by regular-season 2010.

 

No wonder you are backing up Big Chee. You both like making up flawed arguments and trying to pin them on people you disagree with.

I never claimed Ben Roethlisberger was the best anything. Not once. I just used him as a comparison to Vick when it comes to playing behind a line that gives up a high number of sacks. It was an appropriate comparison after another poster brought up the 45 times Vick was sacked in '06.

Just about every quarterback in the NFL was better than Roethlisberger in '06, so that really doesn't say much. Whether it was due to his recovery from the offseason motorcycle accident or not, Roethlisberger was terrible the first nine or 10 games that season. So saying Vick was better in '06 is to damn him with faint praise.

And that amazing '06 of Vick's? It got the Falcons a 7-9 record. Yeah, that worked well. I'm sure NFL teams are just lining up to copy that model of success. :