VIVA LA VICKBALL!!!

[Chuck~Taylor]

Excellent idea, Oz.

Though to be fair, sometimes I think we need to start a Steelers suck thread, too, since we tend to hijack the NFL running threads, too. Especially since it looks like the Steelers are going to do nothing more than play spoiler the rest of the way.

And given what Jake Plummer did to the Steelers yesterday and the way the Bengals are stumbling, those consecutive big games by Vick are becoming less and less impressive.

And Chuck Taylor, I was going to post this on the NFL thread, but let's keep it here. One of the frustrations the rest of us have with the Vick lovers is you tend to give him all of the credit when they win and none of the blame when he struggles and they lose.

Maybe his receivers and his line did suck yesterday against Detroit (I wasn't watching that obe, but they were damn good in both areas when he lit up the Steelers. He didn't do it all by himself that day.

All I have to say is if you're going to blame Vick, you better blame the receivers and that O-line as well.

 

[Hank_Scorpio]

Excellent idea, Oz.

Though to be fair, sometimes I think we need to start a Steelers suck thread, too, since we tend to hijack the NFL running threads, too. Especially since it looks like the Steelers are going to do nothing more than play spoiler the rest of the way.

And given what Jake Plummer did to the Steelers yesterday and the way the Bengals are stumbling, those consecutive big games by Vick are becoming less and less impressive.

And Chuck Taylor, I was going to post this on the NFL thread, but let's keep it here. One of the frustrations the rest of us have with the Vick lovers is you tend to give him all of the credit when they win and none of the blame when he struggles and they lose.

Maybe his receivers and his line did suck yesterday against Detroit (I wasn't watching that obe, but they were damn good in both areas when he lit up the Steelers. He didn't do it all by himself that day.

All I have to say is if you're going to blame Vick, you better blame the receivers and that O-line as well.

Again, missing the point.

Let's try this ONCE more.

The Vick lovers (this would be you, Chuckie) give Vick all of the credit when the Falcons win.

You have to give him at least some of the blame when they lose. Like yesterday for instance, the Lions first two TDs were a direct result of a Vick error.

In the first one, he scrambled, held the ball VERY loosely and put it on the carpet. On the second TD, Vick threw an interception, not seeing Bly in the zone and almost threw right to him.

 

[hockeybeat]

This fellating of Vick gives me an idea: When I do well at my job, I should get all the credit. If I **** up, it's someone else's fault!

It's a way of life!

 

[heyabbott]

This fellating of Vick gives me an idea: When I do well at my job, I should get all the credit. If I **** up, it's someone else's fault!

It's a way of life!

Outing alert hockeybeat is Donald Rumsfled

 

[Chuck~Taylor]

Excellent idea, Oz.

Though to be fair, sometimes I think we need to start a Steelers suck thread, too, since we tend to hijack the NFL running threads, too. Especially since it looks like the Steelers are going to do nothing more than play spoiler the rest of the way.

And given what Jake Plummer did to the Steelers yesterday and the way the Bengals are stumbling, those consecutive big games by Vick are becoming less and less impressive.

And Chuck Taylor, I was going to post this on the NFL thread, but let's keep it here. One of the frustrations the rest of us have with the Vick lovers is you tend to give him all of the credit when they win and none of the blame when he struggles and they lose.

Maybe his receivers and his line did suck yesterday against Detroit (I wasn't watching that obe, but they were damn good in both areas when he lit up the Steelers. He didn't do it all by himself that day.

All I have to say is if you're going to blame Vick, you better blame the receivers and that O-line as well.

Again, missing the point.

Let's try this ONCE more.

The Vick lovers (this would be you, Chuckie) give Vick all of the credit when the Falcons win.

You have to give him at least some of the blame when they lose. Like yesterday for instance, the Lions first two TDs were a direct result of a Vick error.

In the first one, he scrambled, held the ball VERY loosely and put it on the carpet. On the second TD, Vick threw an interception, not seeing Bly in the zone and almost threw right to him.

I'm sorry, but I never gave Vick all the credit when he did good. I always said it was a team effort. The O line needs to protect better and receivers need to stop dropping balls. When they played against the Steelers and Bengals, they were great. That's why Vick played so well. The NFL isn't like the NBA. You can't have one guy go out there and take all the shots and pray to god you'll win. It dosn't work that way in the NFL. It's the ultimate team sport. I'm not saying Vick is a great passer(those interceptions were terrible). But I'm saying he's better than you think.

 

[Oz]

Chuck, sometimes you don't need to be flashy to produce. Take Roethlisberger, who some -- people like you -- say is overrated in another sense. Here's what he did leading up to the Super Bowl ...

AFC wild card at Cincy -- 14 for 19, 208 yards, three touchdowns, 148.7 rating
AFC divisionals at Indy -- 14 for 24, 197 yards, two touchdowns, INT, 95.3 rating
AFC title game at Denver -- 21 for 29, 275 yards, two touchdowns, rush TD, 124.9 rating

... Now I'm not saying Roethlisberger revolutionized the game, but he did make the Steelers a Super Bowl champion less than two years after they held the No. 11 pick for a reason. And Vick's never won more than one playoff game in a row.

I know which I would want taking snaps for me in January.

 

[Chuck~Taylor]

Chuck, sometimes you don't need to be flashy to produce. Take Roethlisberger, who some -- people like you -- say is overrated in another sense. He's what he did leading up to the Super Bowl ...

AFC wild card at Cincy -- 14 for 19, 208 yards, three touchdowns, 148.7 rating
AFC divisionals at Indy -- 14 for 24, 197 yards, two touchdowns, INT, 95.3 rating
AFC title game at Denver -- 21 for 29, 275 yards, two touchdowns, rush TD, 124.9 rating

... Now I'm not saying Roethlisberger revolutionized the game, but he did make the Steelers a Super Bowl champion less than two years after they held the No. 11 pick for a reason. And Vick's never won more than one playoff game in a row.

I know which I would want taking snaps for me in January.

I see your point. You left out that terrible game he had in the Super Bowl but I see your point.

 

[Oz]

Oz ... HE made them a Super Bowl champ? Please. He's still there. Is he also making them suck at unforseen levels?

The Steelers won for several reasons. A long list in fact, one which starts with Van Oldenmorrison's gooning of Carson Palmer, without which, they are one and done in the playoffs.

Somewhere on that list, around No. 83, between "The bus drivers got the team to the game on time" and "someone had to win" is Roethlisberger.

I ask you one question, would they have won the Super Bowl with Tommy MaddoXFL or Charlie Batch at quarterback? Yes or no.

 

[Chuck~Taylor]

Oz ... HE made them a Super Bowl champ? Please. He's still there. Is he also making them suck at unforseen levels?

The Steelers won for several reasons. A long list in fact, one which starts with Van Oldenmorrison's gooning of Carson Palmer, without which, they are one and done in the playoffs.

Somewhere on that list, around No. 83, between "The bus drivers got the team to the game on time" and "someone had to win" is Roethlisberger.

I ask you one question, would they have won the Super Bowl with Tommy MaddoXFL or Charlie Batch at quarterback? Yes or no.

No, but they could've won it with a guy like David Garrard.

 

[Chuck~Taylor]

As much as it pains me to say this, all other things being equal, they sure as **** would have won it with Vick.

DING DING DING DING WE'VE GOT A WINNER!

:)

 

[Oz]

I ask you one question, would they have won the Super Bowl with Tommy MaddoXFL or Charlie Batch at quarterback? Yes or no.

No, but they could've won it with a guy like David Garrard.

Who's under contract with the Jaguars and was not an option when the Steelers picked Ben two years ago. So how did the Steelers become a better team? What changed from that to 2005?

Not much, except for the quarterback. A change at quarterback can often change a team's entire outlook.

As for the Steelers possibly winning with Vick, I have two words for you -- Kordell Stewart.

 

[Chuck~Taylor]

I ask you one question, would they have won the Super Bowl with Tommy MaddoXFL or Charlie Batch at quarterback? Yes or no.

No, but they could've won it with a guy like David Garrard.

Who's under contract with the Jaguars and was not an option when the Steelers picked Ben two years ago. So how did the Steelers become a better team? What changed from that to 2005?

Not much, except for the quarterback. A change at quarterback can often change a team's entire outlook.

As for the Steelers possibly winning with Vick, I have two words for you -- Kordell Stewart.

I'm not saying they could've picked him up. I'm saying they could've won it if he was the starting QB on the team.

 

[shotglass]

As for the Steelers possibly winning with Vick, I have two words for you -- Kordell Stewart.

Truer words...

 

[BYH]

VIVA LA ROETHLISREVOLUTION!!!!!!

 

[shotglass]

Yeah, but Ben Roethlisberger never ran so fast that he beat the arc-lights to the far end of the field.

 

[Oz]

I'm not saying they could've picked him up. I'm saying they could've won it if he was the starting QB on the team.

But he wasn't. They MIGHT have, but we don't know. Maybe Garrard is a great regular season quarterback who flops in January.

I mean, we saw Garrard go 3 for 8 for 68 yards in that 28-3 playoff loss at New England last January, but we still don't know he would react as a starter in one road playoff game, let alone a second or third if given the chance. Maybe he turns into Kordell, we don't know.

 

[Hank_Scorpio]

Chuckie's grasping at straws now.

 

[Oz]

Kordell was the Vick of that time. Neither was or is known as the most accurate passing quarterback, but gave defensive coordinators fits with his legs and scared opponents with a cannon arm. Seems like a fair comparison to me.

 

[fever_dog]

vick is a better player than kordell and has had a much better career, but vick still has a ways to go to match kordell's magical year in 1997, when he threw 21 TDs and ran for 11.

 

[outofplace]

Vick is far more athletic than Stewart was at his best. Kordell had a pop-gun arm. He threw a really long pass in college once, and something happened to him later, but his arm in the NFL was like Steve Avery of the Braves -- once a fireballer, later barely able to crack 80. Too many hand jobs probably. Not that theres ...

You obviously didn't watch him play. Arm strength wasn't Stewart's problem. His problems were all mental.

And yes, Roethlisberger was awful in the Super Bowl. But he was outstanding getting the Steelers there. I won't bother to repeat the numbers again because some of you are too attached to your "beneficiary of the system who never throws" idea of Roethlisberger to actually look at them.

Could Vick have won the Super Bowl with that team? Maybe. He hasn't won one. Roethlisberger has. Roethlisberger has shown he can put together three consecutive strong playoff performances, something Vick hasn't done.

And the whining about Palmer's injury cracks me up. First of all, nobody but Bengals fans or Steelers haters thinks that was a dirty hit. More importantly, we don't know how that game would have gone. Just because Palmer hit one big pass it's over?

The first time the teams played, Palmer marched his team right down the field twice. The Bengals blew both opportunities and ended up with only three points and the Steelers dominated from there. That was in Cinci. Not to mention the fact that the Bengals couldn't stop anybody.

Palmer's health just gives the Bengals a better shot in a shootout. It wouldn't have guarantee them a victory.