PDA

View Full Version : Who goes #1 overall Mike Vick vs Carson Palmer


dregolll
08-20-2010, 10:31 PM
Who do you guys think would go #1 ovrall if these two QB prospects came out in the same draft class. Now, please don't factor in their NFL careers, this is based off their pure physical ability and hype surrounding them as prospects entering the NFL. Who goes #1?

Texas Homer
08-20-2010, 11:13 PM
I'd pick Vick.

I like Palmer, but I'd take Vick.

Bengals78
08-20-2010, 11:27 PM
Coming out of college, Carson Palmer every time.

BeerBaron
08-21-2010, 12:22 AM
Carson is my standard for what I think a franchise QB (prospect) should be. He was at least above average in every imaginable category, was out of an elite college program, and had tons of experience.

Vick on the other hand was unique. There has never been a player quite like him before or since, and his potential was absolutely limitless.

It's hard to go wrong (viewing them as prospects alone,) but I'd go with Carson.

yourfavestoner
08-21-2010, 12:31 AM
Oooooh, good topic.

Carson was pretty much the prototype of "franchise QB." Vick was an elite physical specimen with every tool you ask for. It really comes down to preference between the two.

It still saddens me to see what revisionist historians have already done with Vick's career. I don't care that he was an unorthodox quarterback, the dude was a flat out gamer. Those Falcons teams he took deep into the playoffs were downright terrible, and he literally did it by himself.

GB12
08-21-2010, 12:47 AM
Oooooh, good topic.

Carson was pretty much the prototype of "franchise QB." Vick was an elite physical specimen with every tool you ask for. It really comes down to preference between the two.

It still saddens me to see what revisionist historians have already done with Vick's career. I don't care that he was an unorthodox quarterback, the dude was a flat out gamer. Those Falcons teams he took deep into the playoffs were downright terrible, and he literally did it by himself.

I will never forget him running all over us for the first playoff loss at Lambeau.

A Perfect Score
08-21-2010, 12:56 AM
Ive stated over and over that Mike Vick is one of the most mis-used players in the history of the NFL. Trying to force him, with his skillset, into a WCO run by Greg ******* Knapp of all people was beyond idiotic. You had a player who was unique, couldn't be gameplanned for, and had off the charts playmaking ability...so they ask him to do what anyone else could of done? Ive often repeated that the process of moulding running QBs into pocket passers in the pros is an awful concept, seeing as how most of those players are drafted due to their ability to make plays with their legs...Vick is the epitome of this.

As far as Carson goes, it wasn't that he was just above average in every category...he was elite in every category. He had the size, strength, pedigree, personality, and an absolute cannon for an arm. He was, and if not for injuries probably still would be, the prototypical NFL pocket passer.

I think its like others have said, pick your poision. Much of it depends on the type of offense you are running, but I think if it all came down to it Id rather have Vick's unique talents then Carson's elite ones.

Saints-Tigers
08-21-2010, 01:52 AM
Oooooh, good topic.

Carson was pretty much the prototype of "franchise QB." Vick was an elite physical specimen with every tool you ask for. It really comes down to preference between the two.

It still saddens me to see what revisionist historians have already done with Vick's career. I don't care that he was an unorthodox quarterback, the dude was a flat out gamer. Those Falcons teams he took deep into the playoffs were downright terrible, and he literally did it by himself.

Amen.

I think people have a problem when players don't play a traditional style.

fenikz
08-21-2010, 03:09 AM
The correct answer is you pick both

http://furtherupfurtherin.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/image_7224225.jpg

BeerBaron
08-21-2010, 09:55 AM
Amen.

I think people have a problem when players don't play a traditional style.

See, the problem with players who aren't "traditional" is that you have to build a non-traditional team around them in order to make them fit. And when you get used to that non-traditional player and he either gets hurt or kills some dogs, you end up with a 2003 or 2007 season.

So your options are to either build the non-traditional team and pray to god the guy doesn't get hurt or do anything stupid, or try to change the guy into a more traditional style of player....neither option worked for the Falcons in the end.

ATLDirtyBirds
08-21-2010, 10:19 AM
Ive stated over and over that Mike Vick is one of the most mis-used players in the history of the NFL. Trying to force him, with his skillset, into a WCO run by Greg ******* Knapp of all people was beyond idiotic. You had a player who was unique, couldn't be gameplanned for, and had off the charts playmaking ability...so they ask him to do what anyone else could of done? Ive often repeated that the process of moulding running QBs into pocket passers in the pros is an awful concept, seeing as how most of those players are drafted due to their ability to make plays with their legs...Vick is the epitome of this.



Bingo. It was such an awful use of his talents. BUT THIS WAY HE WILL BE ABLE TO ROLL OUT! Genius.

Shane P. Hallam
08-21-2010, 10:31 AM
It would have been Vick I imagine.

Brent
08-21-2010, 10:33 AM
What would have been a good offense of Mike Vick?

I don't even remember what his accuracy on those deep balls was like.

descendency
08-21-2010, 10:35 AM
Carson is my standard for what I think a franchise QB (prospect) should be. He was at least above average in every imaginable category, was out of an elite college program, and had tons of experience.

Vick on the other hand was unique. There has never been a player quite like him before or since, and his potential was absolutely limitless.

It's hard to go wrong (viewing them as prospects alone,) but I'd go with Carson.

Vick was a typical dual threat QB on steroids (not literally). No accuracy but a huge arm and world class agility and explosiveness.

edit: My personal opinion is that accuracy and quickness of release are the two most important things to scout. However, without the big arm, I'm not taking a QB #1 overall. I'd take Palmer over Vick for that reason.

Splat
08-21-2010, 10:35 AM
I think a team would have seen Carson Palmer as the "safer" pick and went with him, if it didn't cost 70 million then maybe Vick.

jballa838
08-21-2010, 12:29 PM
Vick all day. as awesome as Carson Palmer was, you just knew Vick was good for a crazy game-changing play or two a game, which would be enough to win on a bad team.

Mr.Regular
08-21-2010, 12:37 PM
Im going to go with Vick.
His athleticism may never be matched at the QB position. His potential was limitless.
Palmer was a very good prospect. Good at near everything. But he did have some issues. He was a bit of a one year wonder, and his upside didn't touch Vick's. He'd be the safer choice sure, but I think Vick was a special talent that would be near impossible to pass on.

hockey619
08-21-2010, 12:45 PM
Depends: youre the gm. is your coach brad childress or McDaniels, someone who is creative with theyre offense?

If its chilly, you get carson because you know that he wont design anything unique.

but if your coach understand that vick is an unusual and unique talent and knows enough to put him in a unique offense, then id take him. Someone mentioned it before and i agree completely and have though as much about vick since his 3rd or so year. putting him in a west coast offense was a travesty and total waste of his talents.

someone asked what would be a good offense for him then?
well id say something with a lot of 3 and 4 wide sets and lots of deep passing routes, let him show off his arm. if theres no one there deep, he can take off and use all those routes as clearing routes to give him space to work his magic and then get the hell to the ground. and all that spread out wouldve created a lot of natural running lanes of a little rb like dunn. just a very simple outline, obviously itd be tough considering how bad some of those reveivers were on the falcons but i feel like trying to put him in a very traditional system was a cop out, they basically admitted they lacked the creativeness to use him. shame too, coulda been fun to watch

zachsaints52
08-21-2010, 12:49 PM
I'd take Vick and "create" the wildcat :D

TACKLE
08-21-2010, 01:00 PM
Great question.

It's hard to go against the guy you knew could be a top flight passer. But as complete of a QB prospect that Palmer was, there are other Carson Palmer types but there is only one Mike Vick. If its me, I take a chance on a guy who can be the one of the most talented players ever to step on a NFL field.

FUNBUNCHER
08-21-2010, 01:55 PM
I think a team would have seen Carson Palmer as the "safer" pick and went with him, if it didn't cost 70 million then maybe Vick.

That's what I think too. Less downside with Palmer, greater potential upside with Vick.

GB12
08-21-2010, 02:01 PM
That's what I think too. Less downside with Palmer, greater potential upside with Vick.

See I think people want to categorize them this way, but I don't think that's right. Palmer could have been up there right behind Peyton and Brady. In fact many thought he would be after his first couple years. The #3 QB in the league is better upside than whatever Vick could have turned out to be.

Halsey
08-21-2010, 02:13 PM
Anyone who actually knows what they're talking about knows the answer is Palmer. He was widely viewed as a very safe prospect with a high ceiling. Vick was much more of a gamble. The Chargers originally had the #1 pick in 2001 and didn't want to use it on Vick. The Falcon's decision to trade up for Vick was based heavily on the opportunity to create more interest and excitement. As pure NFL prospects, Palmer was a step above Vick.

umphrey
08-21-2010, 02:17 PM
Depends on the team and coach. I'd take Palmer every time. I'm 99% sure the Packers would too.

FUNBUNCHER
08-21-2010, 02:28 PM
I think people had dreams that Vick could develop into a Steve Young/John Elway type player with 4.2-4.3 speed, problem was MV never worked on his game that much outside of practice.

That's what I mean when I say that Vick had 'upside' that Palmer didn't.
With Vick, the intrigue is how do you scheme for AND against a QB who's the fastest player on the field?

In hindsight, who do people think would have been the best HC/OC for Vick in a perfect world??

I think Andy Reid, Holmgren, Mike Shanahan and Bill Walsh would have come the closest to tapping Vick's enormous potential if they'd gotten him as a rookie.

djp
08-21-2010, 02:53 PM
I think Vick would have gone first. He was just such a dominant college player.. combine that with the rifle arm, someone would have taken the gamble #1 overall over Palmer. If Vick had a Vince Young-ish arm, I think Palmer goes first.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-21-2010, 02:54 PM
Vick was the kind of prospect that made coaches and GM's dream of dominance in a way Palmer didn't, which isn't to degradate Palmer at all. In terms of moblity, size, throwing ability, and experience he (Palmer) was protoypical.

A YFS mentioned, Vick's career is sort of written off after the fact since he fizzled out and his legal trouble and everything. For a 2-3 year period though, he was the most entertaining and dangerous player in the entire NFL and that was during a time where future HOF'ers like Moss and LT were doing their thing. Our perspective on Vick is irrevocably skewed even if you do recognize his fleeting awesomeness because no one knew back when he was a prospect that he would have so much trouble running typical offenses (regardless of whether you feel he should have been asked to or not, there's no doubt he struggled mentally to do so).

So yeah, Vick would have gone first if you ignore the context their respective NFL careers have created.

ViperVisor
08-21-2010, 03:03 PM
Vick do to upside.

Vick ran for 50 1st downs in a season.

You have to have the ball to score. 3 times a game Vick by himself gives the team a lifeline of a new set of downs.

That plays into opening the passing game and doing more there would then open more running room. Rinse, repeat. It never really panned out as Vick red-lined at 25th best in Completion %.

And obviously the opponent can't score when you got the ball.

Vox Populi
08-21-2010, 03:20 PM
If I'm remembering things correctly, the major knock on Palmer was that he only produced for one season despite his near perfect prospect measureables as a "prototypical quarterback." I definitely think Vick would have gone first.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-21-2010, 03:31 PM
Vick didn't really produce for more than one season either and Palmer was far more seasoned.

ATLDirtyBirds
08-21-2010, 03:53 PM
What would have been a good offense of Mike Vick?

I don't even remember what his accuracy on those deep balls was like.


Great deep ball with pretty good accuracy on it. His problem was just relying on his athletic ability and short-mid accuracy. So I imagine something that featured a lot of 3-4 wide looks and allowed him to stay mostly in the shotgun. (Easy to see the defense, and not be blocked as much by his linemen)

JHL6719
08-21-2010, 04:06 PM
If I'm remembering things correctly, the major knock on Palmer was that he only produced for one season despite his near perfect prospect measureables as a "prototypical quarterback." I definitely think Vick would have gone first.


Palmer was suffering from poor coaching at USC that couldn't tap into his potential... Until Norm Chow showed up... turned him into a Heisman Trophy winner and #1 overall pick virtually in no time..

If I was doing the picking it's Carson Palmer and don't have to think that hard about it... I'll always take the prototype over the experiment that high in the draft at the QB position.

BeerBaron
08-21-2010, 05:19 PM
If I was doing the picking it's Carson Palmer and don't have to think that hard about it... I'll always take the prototype over the experiment that high in the draft at the QB position.

That was my thinking too. Plus, if you are the team picking at #1, you can't afford to experiment much. Remember that the Falcons didn't "earn" the pick, they traded up with the Chargers to get it. And they let him sit for a full season behind Chris Chandler iirc.

I don't remember it as well as I'd like, but Dan Reeves seemed to be doing the right things with Vick. If he doesn't get hurt in that preseason game leading to Reeves resigning later that season, who knows what would have happened. That led to Vick being forced into the WCO under Knapp....square peg in the roundest of holes.

Saints-Tigers
08-21-2010, 05:34 PM
I think Mike's accuracy on short throws was fine, from 10 yards and in, he and Crumpler were money.

His intermediate accuracy was spotty, but I felt like the Falcons were poor in pass protection and the receivers were ****.

Halsey
08-21-2010, 06:10 PM
People wondered if Vick could have a long career, because of the way he played. Palmer was considered a safe bet to play a decade or more. It's great that Vick can run it all, but Palmer puts it in the endzone more and he wasn't viewed as big a risk.

wonderbredd24
08-21-2010, 06:13 PM
At the end of the day, you need a QB who could make the clutch throw to win the game and that's Carson Palmer.

Super athletic QBs with mediocre accuracy don't win Superbowls

prock
08-21-2010, 07:58 PM
voXDOEJcz8g

Give me this man.

prock
08-21-2010, 08:01 PM
At the end of the day, you need a QB who could make the clutch throw to win the game and that's Carson Palmer.

Super athletic QBs with mediocre accuracy don't win Superbowls

Such a bce argument. Just because it hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be done. No one has ever had anywhere near his skillset. He was one of a kind, so comparing him is stupid. He may not have won a SB, but he did more for the Falcons than Carson has for the Bengals. He took a very very very average team to the NFCCG, and Palmer hasn't done **** with similar Bengals teams with much better weapons. At the end of the day, I would take the quarterback who can't be gameplanned for.

wonderbredd24
08-21-2010, 08:05 PM
Such a bce argument. Just because it hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be done. No one has ever had anywhere near his skillset. He was one of a kind, so comparing him is stupid. He may not have won a SB, but he did more for the Falcons than Carson has for the Bengals. He took a very very very average team to the NFCCG, and Palmer hasn't done **** with similar Bengals teams with much better weapons. At the end of the day, I would take the quarterback who can't be gameplanned for.
If not for a shot in the knee during from Kimo Von Oelhaffen, the Bengals not only win that playoff game but are in great position to win that Superbowl. And for a couple years, Carson Palmer was a Top 5 QB in this league. Michael Vick has never been that good.

Michael Vick's skillset never included accuracy and at the end of the day, a QB needs to be able to make the clutch, accurate throw Vick could never make. And Vick could be and was gameplanned for... we just spied him with Leon Williams and he couldn't do **** against us and he's got an 0-2 record against the Browns.

I'll ignore the ******** bce comment.

prock
08-21-2010, 08:15 PM
If not for a shot in the knee during from Kimo Von Oelhaffen, the Bengals not only win that playoff game but are in great position to win that Superbowl. And for a couple years, Carson Palmer was a Top 5 QB in this league. Michael Vick has never been that good.

Michael Vick's skillset never included accuracy and at the end of the day, a QB needs to be able to make the clutch, accurate throw Vick could never make. And Vick could be and was gameplanned for... we just spied him with Leon Williams and he couldn't do **** against us and he's got an 0-2 record against the Browns.

I'll ignore the ******** bce comment.

And if you want to play the "what if" game, if Vick wasn't in ******* prison and suspended by the NFL, then he has a chance to continue to be the most dangerous player in the league. He may not have ever been anywhere near Carson as a passer, but he was one of the fastest players in the league, and he was worth more wins for the Falcons than Palmer was for the Bengals. Just look at that team he took to the NFCCG. It wasn't very good. So while Vick may have never been a top 5 QB in the league, I don't think it would be a stretch to say he was and could have continued to be a top 5 player.

And you beat him twice, that is hardly a trend. If you are going to use that as an argument, I won't even bother trying to debate this with you. Everyone can be stopped for a series, a quarter, and maybe even a game, but Vick could NOT be stopped consistently and was the most dangerous player in the league.

wonderbredd24
08-21-2010, 08:21 PM
And if you want to play the "what if" game, if Vick wasn't in ******* prison and suspended by the NFL, then he has a chance to continue to be the most dangerous player in the league. He may not have ever been anywhere near Carson as a passer, but he was one of the fastest players in the league, and he was worth more wins for the Falcons than Palmer was for the Bengals. Just look at that team he took to the NFCCG. It wasn't very good. So while Vick may have never been a top 5 QB in the league, I don't think it would be a stretch to say he was and could have continued to be a top 5 player.

And you beat him twice, that is hardly a trend. If you are going to use that as an argument, I won't even bother trying to debate this with you. Everyone can be stopped for a series, a quarter, and maybe even a game, but Vick could NOT be stopped consistently and was the most dangerous player in the league.
Was Vick the fastest player in the league? Maybe. But he was never a Top 5 player. You need a quarterback to win the Superbowl and Vick wasn't a quarterback. He was lazy and didn't work to improve as a quarterback, which he admitted.

Randall Cunningham was a ridiculous athlete, but it wasn't until he developed into a real quarterback that he had his best shot at the Superbowl screwed by a kicker.

Steve McNair was another tremendous athlete, but he had to develop into a quarterback before he truly became a great player.

Vick was an exciting player, but when you get into the playoffs and the Superbowl, defenses are too good and a quarterback needs to make a clutch throw or few and Vick was never going to do that.

So I will take the quarterback. You can have the athlete.

prock
08-21-2010, 08:28 PM
Was Vick the fastest player in the league? Maybe. But he was never a Top 5 player. You need a quarterback to win the Superbowl and Vick wasn't a quarterback. He was lazy and didn't work to improve as a quarterback, which he admitted.

Randall Cunningham was a ridiculous athlete, but it wasn't until he developed into a real quarterback that he had his best shot at the Superbowl screwed by a kicker.

Steve McNair was another tremendous athlete, but he had to develop into a quarterback before he truly became a great player.

Vick was an exciting player, but when you get into the playoffs and the Superbowl, defenses are too good and a quarterback needs to make a clutch throw or few and Vick was never going to do that.

So I will take the quarterback. You can have the athlete.

Vick was lazy. But that is pure after the fact information, so taking that into this argument isn't relevant.

Neither McNair or Cunningham were on the level Vick was as an athlete. And when Cunningham should have won his Super Bowl, he also had the second greatest offense of all time. Give Vick one receiver as good as Moss, Carter, OR Jake Reed. Vick had **** and he made it to the NFCCG. McNair was a yard away from a SB.

And don't pretend Vick sucked at passing. He could absolutely make a clutch throw. I don't get how you think he never could. He wasn't the most likely candidate to do so, but to assume he never could would be ignorant and baseless.

wonderbredd24
08-21-2010, 08:33 PM
Vick was lazy. But that is pure after the fact information, so taking that into this argument isn't relevant.

Neither McNair or Cunningham were on the level Vick was as an athlete. And when Cunningham should have won his Super Bowl, he also had the second greatest offense of all time. Give Vick one receiver as good as Moss, Carter, OR Jake Reed. Vick had **** and he made it to the NFCCG. McNair was a yard away from a SB.

And don't pretend Vick sucked at passing. He could absolutely make a clutch throw. I don't get how you think he never could. He wasn't the most likely candidate to do so, but to assume he never could would be ignorant and baseless.
So Roddy White < Jake Reed? Got it.

Vick sucks at passing. Dude has a cannon, but it is a scattergun. He'd make a great throw and then follow it up with 3 passes nowhere near his target.

Also, Cunningham wasn't as good of an athlete as Vick? Seriously? He was plastic man

GB12
08-21-2010, 08:36 PM
So Roddy White < Jake Reed? Got it.

Vick sucks at passing. Dude has a cannon, but it is a scattergun. He'd make a great throw and then follow it up with 3 passes nowhere near his target.
Roddy White wasn't any good until after Vick was gone. And that seems more of the typical 3rd year WR breakout than being Vick's fault for not happening sooner.

wonderbredd24
08-21-2010, 08:38 PM
Roddy White wasn't any good until after Vick was gone. And that seems more of the typical 3rd year WR breakout than being Vick's fault for not happening sooner.

Debatable. Every receiver got blamed for Vick's incompetence as a passer. Maybe, just maybe the problem was the guy behind center.

GB12
08-21-2010, 08:42 PM
Debatable. Every receiver got blamed for Vick's incompetence as a passer. Maybe, just maybe the problem was the guy behind center.
Well let's take a look.

I already touched on Roddy White.

Brian Finneran sucked before Vick, sucked with Vick, and sucks after Vick

Michael Jenkins sucked with Vick and sucks without Vick

Alge Crumpler was one of the better TEs with Vick, but has sucked since

wonderbredd24
08-21-2010, 08:44 PM
Well let's take a look.

I already touched on Roddy White.

Brian Finneran sucked before Vick, sucked with Vick, and sucks after Vick

Michael Jenkins sucked with Vick and sucks without Vick

Alge Crumpler was one of the better TEs with Vick, but has sucked since

Crumpler just got old.

Michael Jenkins is a starter for the Falcons and has been dramatically more productive with Matt Ryan under center.

ATLDirtyBirds
08-21-2010, 09:09 PM
You should probably leave the Falcons stuff to the Falcons fans...


Roddy White wasn't dedicated and didn't stay in good enough football shape in his early years before he broke out by his own admission. He couldn't catch anything worth a damn either.

Crumpler was 27, 28 when Vick left. His production went way down as soon as Mike left.

And Michael Jenkins only plays because he is a very good blocker. His production has gone up a bit since Vick left. If you want to say he became slightly below average because Vick left, fine.


Vick isn't what he should have been and probably would have never met that potential because he didn't have the work ethic, but it's not like he was blessed with a lot of great talent around him.

prock
08-21-2010, 10:14 PM
Jake Reed >> any receiver Vick played with, yes.

descendency
08-21-2010, 10:17 PM
Vick isn't what he should have been and probably would have never met that potential because he didn't have the work ethic, but it's not like he was blessed with a lot of great talent around him.

I don't ever remember Vick using touch on a pass. All I remember was him firing passes at finger breaking speed.

I do admit that his WRs weren't great, but QBs make WRs more than visa versa.

prock
08-21-2010, 10:22 PM
I don't ever remember Vick using touch on a pass. All I remember was him firing passes at finger breaking speed.

I do admit that his WRs weren't great, but QBs make WRs more than visa versa.

Yeah, no one is debating that, but you can't argue that having weapons doesn't make a quarterback better. My argument is Vick did so much with so little, and Palmer hasn't done much with a whole lot more. Granted when he was healthy he didn't have a defense, but the point still stands. Obviously everyone has their own opinion, but to completely disregard Vick is ignorant.

Complex
08-21-2010, 11:52 PM
I don't ever remember Vick using touch on a pass. All I remember was him firing passes at finger breaking speed.

I do admit that his WRs weren't great, but QBs make WRs more than visa versa.


wasn't there a thread mainly about Carson Palmer(a couple days or weeks ago) where people were saying he was overrated and his defenders were blaming his WRs and TEs for Palmers poor season. I think they said Chad Johnson was his only good weapon etc.

Vick never had a great WR or even decent one...

BeerBaron
08-22-2010, 12:04 AM
Vick never had a great WR or even decent one...

Alge Crumpler was a multi-time pro bowler, and they drafted Michael Jenkins and Roddy White while he was still there. Both have looked good, White has looked great, with Matt Ryan at QB. They also signed Peerless Price trying to give him a weapon. It wasn't for lack of trying on the Falcons end.

A QB needs decent targets, and it's the team's job to get him those, but a good QB makes those decent targets better.

yourfavestoner
08-22-2010, 12:21 AM
At the end of the day, you need a QB who could make the clutch throw to win the game and that's Carson Palmer.

Super athletic QBs with mediocre accuracy don't win Superbowls

Lol, Vick took his teams much further than Palmer has, with far, far less talent around him.

yourfavestoner
08-22-2010, 12:23 AM
Alge Crumpler was a multi-time pro bowler, and they drafted Michael Jenkins and Roddy White while he was still there. Both have looked good, White has looked great, with Matt Ryan at QB. They also signed Peerless Price trying to give him a weapon. It wasn't for lack of trying on the Falcons end.

A QB needs decent targets, and it's the team's job to get him those, but a good QB makes those decent targets better.

I guess Joey Harrington, Byron Leftwich, and Chris Redman are much better quarterbacks than Vick, since Roddy White started performing much better once these guys took over.

Not trying to put words in your mouth. But Roddy White was an incredibly raw player coming out. And Alge Crumpler was a lardass who lived off linebackers being forced to spy Vick out the backfield.

Shiver
08-22-2010, 12:46 AM
Revisionist history time. Carson Palmer wasn't all that, quite a few people liked Byron Leftwich over him.

descendency
08-22-2010, 12:51 AM
wasn't there a thread mainly about Carson Palmer(a couple days or weeks ago) where people were saying he was overrated and his defenders were blaming his WRs and TEs for Palmers poor season. I think they said Chad Johnson was his only good weapon etc.

Vick never had a great WR or even decent one...

Palmer was really good earlier in his career but he never lived up to his billing after he tore his ACL. It had nothing to do with talent.

Peyton Manning made quite a few crappy WRs into great looking ones. Tom Brady did too (Deion Branch, David Givens, and 34 year old Troy Brown). Drew Brees too. Eli Manning torched some defenses with crappy WRs (granted, he was much better early in his career with Burress).

Vick's main problem was that he KJSLDFHKJHDSFLJKSFHLKDSFKJKLHKASHKLHDKLWEHWHIDIDWH HDLSAKJHDKLJASDKKLASDLKJASDSAD up in his career during the key time he should have turned from [below] average QB/Passer to good/great (and he had a piss poor work ethic). Vick just struggled as a passer mightily. Big Arm. Good deep accuracy. Very little touch. Too much scrambling to make good mechanical throws. Honestly, his arm and his work ethic cost him a Hall of Fame career. The guy could have been the best WR or RB in the NFL for 7-10 years.

Alge Crumpler is a very good TE.

A Perfect Score
08-22-2010, 11:59 AM
Its funny to hear the hate surrounding Vick and his ability to pass. He was put in a system that was designed for him to fail. He had a one of a kind skillset, and that isn't an exaggeration. There has not been a player like him in the NFL, ever. Vince Young or Kordell Stewart are probably the closest we have ever seen, and they have no where near the athletic ability Vick had. He was put in a system that was reliant on his worst qualities as a passer...in a spread, push the field offense like the ones the Raiders have been running for the last 20 years, Vick could of been spectacular. But putting him in a WCO and asking him to rely on his ability as a mid range passer was just ******* stupid, I dont care what you say. Its a huge part of the reason he failed as a passer. And yeah, the Falcons receivers may not have been overly dominant, but I bet if you take a close look at the Falcons' rushing stats when Vick was at QB it was damn impressive.

He may have never been a Top 5 QB, but Mike Vick was bar none the most dangerous player in the NFL during his heyday.

Shane P. Hallam
08-22-2010, 12:38 PM
Its funny to hear the hate surrounding Vick and his ability to pass. He was put in a system that was designed for him to fail. He had a one of a kind skillset, and that isn't an exaggeration. There has not been a player like him in the NFL, ever. Vince Young or Kordell Stewart are probably the closest we have ever seen, and they have no where near the athletic ability Vick had. He was put in a system that was reliant on his worst qualities as a passer...in a spread, push the field offense like the ones the Raiders have been running for the last 20 years, Vick could of been spectacular. But putting him in a WCO and asking him to rely on his ability as a mid range passer was just ******* stupid, I dont care what you say. Its a huge part of the reason he failed as a passer. And yeah, the Falcons receivers may not have been overly dominant, but I bet if you take a close look at the Falcons' rushing stats when Vick was at QB it was damn impressive.

He may have never been a Top 5 QB, but Mike Vick was bar none the most dangerous player in the NFL during his heyday.

I can agree with this sentiment. Not saying he would have succeeded elsewhere, but he did win games, and some key ones for his team. He didn't put up the typical stats, but he was always valuable and tough to beat. I commend that.

SloppyJoe
08-22-2010, 12:54 PM
if i'm the OC of an NFL team, i wanna have Palmer as my QB.
absolutely no question

as a Fan, thats a little bit more tough to decide. but i guess i would go with palmer also

i'm not really a fan of taking too much risk at the top of the draft.

Brent
08-22-2010, 01:12 PM
I can agree with this sentiment. Not saying he would have succeeded elsewhere, but he did win games, and some key ones for his team. He didn't put up the typical stats, but he was always valuable and tough to beat. I commend that.
it didnt help that his top WRs for most of his career were Peerless Price and Brian Finneran. when did Roddy White show up? 2005?

BeerBaron
08-22-2010, 01:30 PM
it didnt help that his top WRs for most of his career were Peerless Price and Brian Finneran. when did Roddy White show up? 2005?

If he didn't kill a bunch of dogs, he would still have been there when White started to put it together. Unless he would have impeded White putting it together....

Also, we've tracked a long long way from the original "as prospects" part of this.

gpngc
08-22-2010, 01:53 PM
Carson Palmer was a middle-of-the-pack college QB in his junior year and shot up draft boards during a rock-solid senior season (I think they won the title or maybe that was the split with LSU).

Michael Vick was billed (probably correctly) as a once-in-a-lifetime prospect who could revive a franchise and excite a fanbase.

People can say what they want now, but the only choice that could be made between those two prospects is Michael Vick.

Shiver
08-22-2010, 01:53 PM
Vick's main problem was that he f***ed up in his career during the key time he should have turned from average QB/Passer to good/great [B](and he had a piss poor work ethic). Vick just struggled as a passer mightily. Big Arm. Good deep accuracy. Very little touch. Too much scrambling to make good mechanical throws. Honestly, his arm and his work ethic cost him a Hall of Fame career. The guy could have been the best WR or RB in the NFL for 7-10 years.

Alge Crumpler is a very good TE.'


Exactly, in fact he actually regressed as a passer. His struggles had nothing to do with scheme. Vick just never desired to put in the work to become an elite QB (which he showed, in glimpses, he could be). If he had the work ethic of Brady or Manning he would have been 'Randall Cunningham meets Steve Young.'

ATLDirtyBirds
08-22-2010, 01:57 PM
'


Exactly, in fact he actually regressed as a passer. His struggles had nothing to do with scheme. Vick just never desired to put in the work to become an elite QB (which he showed, in glimpses, he could be). If he had the work ethic of Brady or Manning he would have been 'Randall Cunningham meets Steve Young.'


You really don't think Vick would have fared better in a system that was you know, actually fit to his strengths instead of his weaknesses?

A Perfect Score
08-22-2010, 02:05 PM
'


Exactly, in fact he actually regressed as a passer. His struggles had nothing to do with scheme. Vick just never desired to put in the work to become an elite QB (which he showed, in glimpses, he could be). If he had the work ethic of Brady or Manning he would have been 'Randall Cunningham meets Steve Young.'

If Im a world class athlete with the ability to redefine a position and you put me in a system that limits and dampens the thing that makes me so multi-dimensional, I'd probably be pretty pissed off too. The coaching staff never had the creativity to properly use a weapon like Vick. As much as you can hate the guy for his personal issues and the mistakes he's made, you can't deny the negative influence that scheme and situation had on him.

Rosebud
08-22-2010, 02:10 PM
Eli Manning torched some defenses with crappy WRs (granted, he was much better early in his career with Burress).

That's just not true, Eli's coming off of his best season with Steve Smith, a rookie Hakeem Nicks and redshirt rookie Mario Manningham and broken OL. If he hadn't spent weeks unable to step into his throws because of injuries to both feet, he would've eviscerated his career highs. Eli's better now than he ever was before and he's still get more and more precise and deadly with every week.

Saints-Tigers
08-22-2010, 03:48 PM
Roddy White went from a garbage receiver to a guy that you can almost just throw the ball near him and he'll get it. Roddy makes Matt Ryan look a lot better than he is by saving his ass on a lot of throws now.

wraith
08-22-2010, 04:58 PM
Roddy White went from a garbage receiver to a guy that you can almost just throw the ball near him and he'll get it. Roddy makes Matt Ryan look a lot better than he is by saving his ass on a lot of throws now.

exactly white matured and progressed. but when vick was there he was still raw vick never had great targets to throw to

Halsey
08-22-2010, 07:01 PM
Vick fans only view his teammates as there to provide excuses. NFL teams need their QBs to be leaders and distribute the football. It's great that Vick could make some plays, but when a defense was able to contain his running the offense was stuck because they weren't beating anyone with the passing game. Vick makes an offense a one man show. That doesn't cut it in the NFL. Especially when that one man show no longer has the same speed he had at 21 years old.

ATLDirtyBirds
08-22-2010, 08:16 PM
Roddy White went from a garbage receiver to a guy that you can almost just throw the ball near him and he'll get it. Roddy makes Matt Ryan look a lot better than he is by saving his ass on a lot of throws now.


Looking back, White realizes his immaturity was to blame. He came into the NFL believing his considerable athletic ability – his combination of deceptive speed, strength and body control makes him a deep threat/possession hybrid reminiscent of Terrell Owens – would allow him to thrive, no matter how little work he put into perfecting his craft.

Once White’s alleged workday ended, he was all about two things: socializing and eating.
“My first year, I watched no film, other than what I had to watch at the facility,” White recalls. “I was just content to be in the NFL – and I was partying it up, living the kind of lifestyle off the field that I should’ve been living on the field.

“There were times I’d be in the club all night, then go straight from the club to the facility. That was kind of like my lifestyle. We’d have a morning meeting, and I couldn’t even stay awake.”
White’s diet, he says, “was terrible. I gained a bunch of weight. I would go to McDonald’s, and I could eat four double cheeseburgers.”


You mean to tell me that a raw WR broke out in his 3rd season after experience and becoming more dedicated? I simply cannot believe this, clearly Mike Vick's fault.

prock
08-22-2010, 08:27 PM
Vick fans only view his teammates as there to provide excuses. NFL teams need their QBs to be leaders and distribute the football. It's great that Vick could make some plays, but when a defense was able to contain his running the offense was stuck because they weren't beating anyone with the passing game. Vick makes an offense a one man show. That doesn't cut it in the NFL. Especially when that one man show no longer has the same speed he had at 21 years old.

I disagree. Vick not only doesn't make in one dimensional, he adds another dimension to it. His running ability opens up so much more room for passing. Once the defense knows it is a passing play, they still have to worry about the running game. He may not be the thrower a guy like Palmer is, but his legs add a whole different dimension that defenses have to account for. Also, he won a lot more games with a worse team than a lot of better passers have. To look at Vick solely as a runner is ignorant.

descendency
08-22-2010, 10:30 PM
but you can't argue that having weapons doesn't make a quarterback better

Actually, that's my exact opinion - with one exception and that is a true #1 WR. I mean, you can't win with below-NFL talent WRs, but as long as the guys belong in the starting lineup of an NFL team, then the QB is the determining factor and there are just tons of examples in the past decade. The exception is that elite WR who can do it all, go over the middle, run the stick routes, run the staple routes, is a red-zone threat, etc.

That's just not true, Eli's coming off of his best season with Steve Smith, a rookie Hakeem Nicks and redshirt rookie Mario Manningham and broken OL. If he hadn't spent weeks unable to step into his throws because of injuries to both feet, he would've eviscerated his career highs. Eli's better now than he ever was before and he's still get more and more precise and deadly with every week.

yeah, I worded that poorly. I meant that Eli performed better with Burress as opposed to when they lost him. The last season was the result of a QB finally developing into what he was supposed to be (and sadly a lot of people missed it because the Giants D and run game just didn't perform well at all)

Paranoidmoonduck
08-23-2010, 12:35 AM
I've never understood the Michael Vick discussion even a little bit.

His lack of success was his fault and there's nothing you can bring up to skew that. Can you argue that Knapp's WCO was less than a great fit or that Atlanta never succeeded in their attempt to put strong receivers around him? Sure, but all that falls secondary to the fact that Vick never put all his effort into learning the systems he was entrusted to run. Running a WCO isn't a hard thing in the grand scheme of being an NFL quarterback and whether it fit his skillset or not is irrelevant. Vick was never ever mentally there to the degree he needed to be and we shouldn't blame the Falcons for not pandering to him. They did exactly what they should have done, which is make their expectations for Vick clear and expect him to act like a professional and deliver.

All this crap about mediocre receivers or schematic fits is insane. If Vick had worked at being a great quarterback, he would have dominated in any scheme. As it was, he was prone to concentration errors and could never be precise enough to run a timing-based pass attack. Vick tried to be the Barry Sanders of quarterbacks; a guy who would shine as the play fell apart. The problem is that you can't be that guy if you're a quarterback. The whole play flows from you. If you're off doing your own thing, how the hell are you going to lead a team? The fact that the Falcons won as much as they did is a testament to Vick's unbelievable skill, not his leadership or work ethic.

Seriously, this whole discussion of where the fault lies in regards to the way Vick's career went is played out and stupid. It's his fault.

Halsey
08-23-2010, 05:25 AM
It's always someone elses fault when it comes to Michael Vicktim fans. His fans will blame everyone from teammates to coaches to the government to PETA to whoever else they can think of. Vick has even admitted that he didn't work hard when he was with the Falcons. His fans will literally argue with Vick's own words in an effort to remove any responsibility from him.

Just look at Roddy White as a great example: He went from catching about 30 balls a year with Vick to averaging about 85 catches a year without him.....but Vick had nothing to do with it.....riiiiiiight.

Saints-Tigers
08-23-2010, 05:54 AM
And just ignore that Roddy White had an even worse work ethic than Vick when he was there.

We are far from Mike Vick fans(most of us), we are just fans of reality.

Halsey
08-23-2010, 06:01 AM
I see, so Roddy White, who is a fan and friend of Vick, didn't work hard when Vick was there, but started working hard when Vick left. Sounds like another Vickcuse to me.

http://nbcsportsmedia3.msnbc.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo_StoryLevel/071211/071211_freevick_vmed_8a.widec.jpg

Saints-Tigers
08-23-2010, 07:17 AM
You don't have to take my word for it, keep protecting your boy all you want, but I'll take Roddy's word.

Looking back, White realizes his immaturity was to blame. He came into the NFL believing his considerable athletic ability – his combination of deceptive speed, strength and body control makes him a deep threat/possession hybrid reminiscent of Terrell Owens – would allow him to thrive, no matter how little work he put into perfecting his craft.

Once White’s alleged workday ended, he was all about two things: socializing and eating.
“My first year, I watched no film, other than what I had to watch at the facility,” White recalls. “I was just content to be in the NFL – and I was partying it up, living the kind of lifestyle off the field that I should’ve been living on the field.

“There were times I’d be in the club all night, then go straight from the club to the facility. That was kind of like my lifestyle. We’d have a morning meeting, and I couldn’t even stay awake.”
White’s diet, he says, “was terrible. I gained a bunch of weight. I would go to McDonald’s, and I could eat four double cheeseburgers.”

Halsey
08-23-2010, 07:44 AM
Yeap, the fact that White went from averaging 30 catches with Vick to 80 catches without him muct have been all about his work ethic. It had nothing to do with the QB throwing balls over his head and at his ankles. The fact that Michael Jenkins now averages 50 catches a year, when he was hardly touching the ball with Vick must be because Jenkins wasn't working hard either.

ATLDirtyBirds
08-23-2010, 07:50 AM
No, you guys are right. It's Michael Vick's fault a raw WR took time to develop and that Roddy didn't put the effort in. It must have been the magic of Leftwich and Harrington that allowed Roddy to rise to his current level.

Halsey
08-23-2010, 07:53 AM
Who was at fault when Vick went 1/5 with 2 ints vs preseason competition the other night? Those darn Eagles WRs must not be working hard either!

Paranoidmoonduck
08-23-2010, 08:51 AM
Who cares about Roddy White or Alge Crumpler or any of Vick's teammates (although I like how no one has mentioned that Vick almost uniformly had great support from the run game)?

If Vick had worked like an NFL QB should, then we could start talking about how his teammates held him back. But if he was holding himself back, it really doesn't matter at all how the team around him was.

nepg
08-23-2010, 09:33 AM
One of the thing with Vick is before Gregg Knapp came in and ruined him, they had an offense that Vick was starting to grow in, and the offense was evolving around him. But no matter what, they always backed him up with stiffs like Matt Schaub rather than building a stable of athletic QBs to back up Vick and play other positions.

That was the main downfall. The Falcons never went all-in with Vick, they always tried to toe the line between Vick and traditional...then they tried to make Vick traditional, which made him look bad and ultimately ruined him (you know, that and the whole killing dogs thing).

I take Vick, to answer the question. There's no one in the history of football that would have gone #1 over him in that situation... He was just too unique.

wonderbredd24
08-23-2010, 09:55 AM
There's no one in the history of football that would have gone #1 over him in that situation... He was just too unique.

Hyperbolic insanity

yourfavestoner
08-23-2010, 10:58 AM
I see, so Roddy White, who is a fan and friend of Vick, didn't work hard when Vick was there, but started working hard when Vick left. Sounds like another Vickcuse to me.

http://nbcsportsmedia3.msnbc.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo_StoryLevel/071211/071211_freevick_vmed_8a.widec.jpg

Yeap, the fact that White went from averaging 30 catches with Vick to 80 catches without him muct have been all about his work ethic. It had nothing to do with the QB throwing balls over his head and at his ankles. The fact that Michael Jenkins now averages 50 catches a year, when he was hardly touching the ball with Vick must be because Jenkins wasn't working hard either.

It must have been that year of development with real quarterbacks like Joey Harrington, Chris Redman, and Byron Leftwich that finally put him over the top.

Seriously, the Roddy White argument is the dumbest argument anti-Vick people have.

Who cares about Roddy White or Alge Crumpler or any of Vick's teammates (although I like how no one has mentioned that Vick almost uniformly had great support from the run game)?

If Vick had worked like an NFL QB should, then we could start talking about how his teammates held him back. But if he was holding himself back, it really doesn't matter at all how the team around him was.

If Vick would have worked as hard as he could have, we'd likely be talking about one of the greatest of all time. As it stands now, he put in about 50% effort and was still better than everyone except Manning, Brady, and McNabb in that time period.

Re: the running-game - I'm sure it was the uber-talent of Warrick Dunn and TJ Ducket (lol) that was carrying Vick. Those two had defenses shaking in their boots.

The team was making NFC Championships with him playing. They held top five draft picks without him.

Lazy or not, he was still better than damn near everybody else. If you can't see what he did for that terrible Falcons team, you're either blind, or you have selective memory.

nepg
08-23-2010, 11:23 AM
Roddy White only started 13 games his first two seasons. He was the perfect receiver for Vick because he was able to move with Vick and has a very big hit box to make up for Vick's accuracy inadequacies (which are overblown, tbh). Same with Alge Crumpler, and I always thought TO should have gone to Atlanta instead of Philly.

I am surprised no one has brought up how ****** that offensive line was the entire time Vick was there. I mean, that was the worst OL in football for his entire stay in Atlanta.

prock
08-23-2010, 12:03 PM
Who was at fault when Vick went 1/5 with 2 ints vs preseason competition the other night? Those darn Eagles WRs must not be working hard either!

Damn, you really aren't smart, are you? Why does Vick going 1/5 in a preseason game after spending a few years away from football and in prison have ANYTHING whatsoever to do with him going first overall if Carson Palmer was in the same draft? Every argument you have posted in this thread reminds me of another great poster on this site, bce.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-23-2010, 04:29 PM
Lazy or not, he was still better than damn near everybody else. If you can't see what he did for that terrible Falcons team, you're either blind, or you have selective memory.

I hope I didn't give the impression that I was doing that. I assumed my earlier posts in this thread indicated that I think Vick gets knocked down by fans more than he should considering how dangerous he was for a brief period.

That said, I think the discussion of who's fault his career track was is stupid. It was his own effort or lack thereof which defined him in the long run.

Saints-Tigers
08-23-2010, 05:55 PM
I agree Paranoid, but I just wanted to address the terrible arguments of people like Halsey(nothing new to see here) like Roddy White was this pro bowl receiver that just looked bad because of Vick, and the Godly Matt Ryan came in and developed him.

Basileus777
08-23-2010, 06:29 PM
although I like how no one has mentioned that Vick almost uniformly had great support from the run game?

It's probably because that great run game was in large part fueled by Vick himself, both directly and indirectly.

Shiver
08-23-2010, 06:39 PM
You really don't think Vick would have fared better in a system that was you know, actually fit to his strengths instead of his weaknesses?

Steve Young thought it was the perfect scheme for him. I think he would know, since he was the penultimate runner-passer QB. If he had the work ethic, which he didn't and he has said as much, he would have been successful. He was the last one in, first one out, which you cannot have from the QB position.

Who cares about Roddy White or Alge Crumpler or any of Vick's teammates (although I like how no one has mentioned that Vick almost uniformly had great support from the run game)?

If Vick had worked like an NFL QB should, then we could start talking about how his teammates held him back. But if he was holding himself back, it really doesn't matter at all how the team around him was.


Vick made that running game. Warrick Dunn and TJ Duckett? Really? They were beneficiaries of DE/LB sitting back on the backside waiting for Michael Vick. The Falcons were 26th in rushing yards, average 3.9 ypc with the same team that had Vick at the helm and were the #1 rushing team in the league by a mile.

nepg
08-23-2010, 06:55 PM
That said, I think the discussion of who's fault his career track was is stupid. It was his own effort or lack thereof which defined him in the long run.

I'm going to go ahead and disagree here. I'm sure Vick could have worked harder, but he can only do what the coaches tell/ask him to do. And he can only work within the system that the coaches surround him with.

The WCO worked for Steve Young, but he and Vick aren't in the same boat as far as running QBs go. I don't think Young ever ran a designed run, and I doubt any plays were ran that gave him the option to. Young just ran out of instinct. It wasn't what he was put out there to do. Vick, on the other hand, is out there to run the football. Most of the pass plays should have given him the option to run the ball if he saw fit. Vick was always the most dangerous player on the field.

But instead of embracing Vick's talents, Knapp tried to reign him in and turn him into Steve Young...which was stupid and really set Vick back developmentally.

FUNBUNCHER
08-23-2010, 06:56 PM
It's scary to think about the success Vick had early in his career basically playing sandlot football.

I think if they had come out in the same year, it would have been a Leaf/Manning situation, depending on the team, each player's strengths and weaknesses would be evaluated differently.

nepg
08-23-2010, 06:57 PM
Vick goes #1 anyway because when it got right down to it, whatever team took Vick was going to make a ****-ton of dough by selling out every single game and selling a ******** amount of merch.

wonderbredd24
08-23-2010, 07:01 PM
Vick goes #1 anyway because when it got right down to it, whatever team took Vick was going to make a ****-ton of dough by selling out every single game and selling a ******** amount of merch.
Which is exactly why Jacksonville took Teb... oh wait.

nepg
08-23-2010, 07:02 PM
Not even close to the same level of dollar making, sir.

wonderbredd24
08-23-2010, 07:04 PM
Not even close to the same level of dollar making, sir.
And why Houston took Vince Yo... oh wait.

Tebow is the #1 selling jersey out of this rookie class and it's not even close.

Basileus777
08-23-2010, 07:04 PM
Which is exactly why Jacksonville took Teb... oh wait.

Yeah, because Tebow's image and marketability had nothing to do with why Denver took him in the first round.

Oh wait...

nepg
08-23-2010, 07:06 PM
And why Houston took Vince Yo... oh wait.

Tebow is the #1 selling jersey out of this rookie class and it's not even close.

Ya, but Jacksonville also took Tyson Alualu with the #10 overall pick, so your argument is invalid.

wonderbredd24
08-23-2010, 07:06 PM
Yeah, because Tebow's image and marketability had nothing to do with why Denver took him in the first round.

Oh wait...
Tebow's image and marketability aren't going to save Josh McDaniel's ass if he can't play.

wonderbredd24
08-23-2010, 07:17 PM
Ya, but Jacksonville also took Tyson Alualu with the #10 overall pick, so your argument is invalid.
That pick makes the argument. They made the pick what they felt was the best move for their football team. They didn't make the pick based on potential ticket sales and merchandise, because it rarely ever happens.

That's why Houston took Mario Williams and not Vince Young.

NFL teams make their money from the TV contract. The rest is just icing on the cake.

hockey619
08-23-2010, 07:40 PM
bad example. we took him primarily because our front office is full of monkeys throwing darts at other monkeys.


The monkeys have very clean mechanics though thanks to McDaniels. So there is hope for Tebow dont worry.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
08-23-2010, 09:17 PM
Here's what it comes down to: The question isn't whether or not you can afford to draft Michael Vick if he busts, it's whether or not you can afford to pass on Mike Vick if he breaks out.

When you look at it that way, the answer is simple. You draft Vick. There's a Palmer in every other draft, at least. There was no Vick before Vick and there hasn't been one since.

nepg
08-23-2010, 09:45 PM
Here's what it comes down to: The question isn't whether or not you can afford to draft Michael Vick if he busts, it's whether or not you can afford to pass on Mike Vick if he breaks out.

When you look at it that way, the answer is simple. You draft Vick. There's a Palmer in every other draft, at least. There was no Vick before Vick and there hasn't been one since.

Pretty much.

Though the Palmer comment is pretty false. We've got Jake Locker this year, but I don't remember too many Palmer-types in the last 7 years (experience, production, elite size, elite arm, accuracy, flawless mechanics, intangibles). Maybe Eli?

Nalej
08-23-2010, 09:45 PM
Here's what it comes down to: The question isn't whether or not you can afford to draft Michael Vick if he busts, it's whether or not you can afford to pass on Mike Vick if he breaks out.

When you look at it that way, the answer is simple. You draft Vick. There's a Palmer in every other draft, at least. There was no Vick before Vick and there hasn't been one since.

Survery says!

wonderbredd24
08-23-2010, 10:04 PM
Here's what it comes down to: The question isn't whether or not you can afford to draft Michael Vick if he busts, it's whether or not you can afford to pass on Mike Vick if he breaks out.

When you look at it that way, the answer is simple. You draft Vick. There's a Palmer in every other draft, at least. There was no Vick before Vick and there hasn't been one since.
http://www.mixxbuzzers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/randall-cunningham.jpg

nepg
08-23-2010, 10:29 PM
xRxxuI3JJkQ

Because Randall Cunningham is the man!

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
08-23-2010, 10:33 PM
Steve Young thought it was the perfect scheme for him. I think he would know, since he was the penultimate runner-passer QB.

Penultimate means second to last.
(had to do that after watching Dark Blue.. =D)

A Perfect Score
08-23-2010, 10:56 PM
http://www.mixxbuzzers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/randall-cunningham.jpg

Suggesting that Cunningham had the kind of athleticism Vick had is beyond stupid. As great as Cunningham was at times, he NEVER had the potential that Vick had. Cunningham was a QB who could run. McNabb was the same way. As were dozens of other QBs. Vick wasn't just a QB who could run in a pinch...Vick was a QB who was more dynamic then his RB. He was a unique player, and there was never someone before him with that same sort of ability.

wonderbredd24
08-23-2010, 11:22 PM
Suggesting that Cunningham had the kind of athleticism Vick had is beyond stupid. As great as Cunningham was at times, he NEVER had the potential that Vick had. Cunningham was a QB who could run. McNabb was the same way. As were dozens of other QBs. Vick wasn't just a QB who could run in a pinch...Vick was a QB who was more dynamic then his RB. He was a unique player, and there was never someone before him with that same sort of ability.

Cunningham was 6'4"
He had the strongest arm in the NFL by a wide margin.
And he was one of the most incredible athletes the game has ever seen

He had 942 yards rushing in 1990, which was 10th in the league in rushing yards and averaged 8 yards per carry. Suggesting he could only run in a pinch is just insane.

There are people who will argue that Randall Cunningham was the most physically gifted quarterback in NFL history.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/philadelphia-eagles/09000d5d801f9a2e

FUNBUNCHER
08-23-2010, 11:28 PM
The only thing Vick had over Cunningham as a runner was pure, flat-out speed.

Cunningham was the smoothest, most elusive, shiftiest runner for a 6'4 QB there's ever been in the NFL, and would have been a helluva WR after the catch.

Vick averaged 7.2 yards/rush over his career, Cunningham 6.4.
However, over the same 7 year time-span, Cunningham averaged 7.1 yards/rush. Vick 7.2.

Cunningham was every bit the running threat to opposing offenses that Vick was, the difference being that while Cunningham may rip off a 40 to 50 yard gain, whereas if you didn't contain Mike Vick, he's going to the house.

If Buddy Ryan had the good sense to hire a credible OC, the Eagles could have been something special in the mid '80s - early '90s.

RaiderNation
08-24-2010, 01:36 AM
Id go with Mike Vick personally. Vick prime>Palmer prime

Shiver
08-24-2010, 01:38 AM
Suggesting that Cunningham had the kind of athleticism Vick had is beyond stupid. As great as Cunningham was at times, he NEVER had the potential that Vick had. Cunningham was a QB who could run. McNabb was the same way. As were dozens of other QBs. Vick wasn't just a QB who could run in a pinch...Vick was a QB who was more dynamic then his RB. He was a unique player, and there was never someone before him with that same sort of ability.


Uh, are you serious? Cunningham was and is better than Michael Vick, even athletically. However, in today's media charged environment he was more hyped. Cunningham's MVP season of 3,500 yards, 34 touchdowns/13 interceptions with 942 rushing yards with 5 touchdowns on the ground will never be matched.

*mind-boggled*

Saints-Tigers
08-24-2010, 02:01 AM
Cunningham was not more athletic than Vick.

Vox Populi
08-24-2010, 02:06 AM
Just look at Roddy White as a great example: He went from catching about 30 balls a year with Vick to averaging about 85 catches a year without him.....but Vick had nothing to do with it.....riiiiiiight.

Did you become a Falcons fan after Vick got arrested and suspended? Jesus, its like you have no ******* idea who Roddy White was before he broke out.

Vox Populi
08-24-2010, 02:10 AM
And why Houston took Vince Yo... oh wait.

Tebow is the #1 selling jersey out of this rookie class and it's not even close.

Jersey revenue is divided equally among all teams, so thats kind of irrelevant.

TACKLE
08-24-2010, 02:16 AM
The impact of the money generated from jersey sales has to be one of the most overrated things in professional sports.

San Diego Chicken
08-24-2010, 07:16 AM
Vick was very unique with what he brought to the table. As a prospect it would almost have to be him, although I know who I would prefer as the QB of my team.

Strictly speaking as prospects, since the late 90's it would go (generally the way people felt at the time)

1) Peyton Manning
2) Mike Vick
3) Eli Manning
4) Carson Palmer
5) Ryan Leaf

The top 4 were mortal lock #1 picks and the fifth at least made it a discussion with #1, so he must be there.

Halsey
08-24-2010, 12:32 PM
Vick fans are so amazed at how athletic and entertaining he is that they can't remain objective about the fact that he wasn't that good at leading an offense. Yeah, Vick could make some great runs and even some good throws, but he rarely got the passing game in any kind of rhythm, was a terrible leader with a poor work ethic and couldn't adjust to athletic defenses that could contain his running. When a Vick led offense runs into a defense that can contain his running, he was rarely able to make them pay on a consistent basis with the passing game.

and ever notice how Vick fans always claim he has the worst pass catchers and blockers. Funny how the players around great QBs always seems to play well, and the guys around Vick never do. Peyton Manning makes some guy named Pierre Garcon look great. Vick made Roddy White look like a bust.

prock
08-24-2010, 12:55 PM
Vick fans are so amazed at how athletic and entertaining he is that they can't remain objective about the fact that he wasn't that good at leading an offense. Yeah, Vick could make some great runs and even some good throws, but he rarely got the passing game in any kind of rhythm, was a terrible leader with a poor work ethic and couldn't adjust to athletic defenses that could contain his running. When a Vick led offense runs into a defense that can contain his running, he was rarely able to make them pay on a consistent basis with the passing game.

and ever notice how Vick fans always claim he has the worst pass catchers and blockers. Funny how the players around great QBs always seems to play well, and the guys around Vick never do. Peyton Manning makes some guy named Pierre Garcon look great. Vick made Roddy White look like a bust.

You are a moron. Roddy White took 3 years to bust out, just like most receivers do. If you want to compare Vick or Peyton Manning, go right ahead, there is no point to it and you aren't proving anything in this argument.

He couldn't lead an offense? He led a ****** team to the NFCCG on his back. You can keep relying on your ignorant arguments, but the fact is that Vick was an absolute monster in the NFL for a few years, and then he went to jail. You can have your "elite pocket passer" that comes around every 2 or 3 years, I will take the freak who has the potential to be absolutely unstoppable, and even when he was used in a poor system, didn't work hard, and had an unbelievably bad supporting cast, he still was able to lead a bad team to the NFCCG.

descendency
08-24-2010, 12:55 PM
Vick was very unique with what he brought to the table. As a prospect it would almost have to be him, although I know who I would prefer as the QB of my team.

Strictly speaking as prospects, since the late 90's it would go (generally the way people felt at the time)

1) Peyton Manning
2) Mike Vick
3) Eli Manning
4) Carson Palmer
5) Ryan Leaf

The top 4 were mortal lock #1 picks and the fifth at least made it a discussion with #1, so he must be there.

Manning wasn't that great of a prospect. Matthew Stafford would be considered a better prospect by most. So would Ryan Leaf.

Manning is a guy you kick yourself for doubting.

I don't even know how Eli is ahead of Carson Palmer.

Complex
08-24-2010, 01:28 PM
Vick fans are so amazed at how athletic and entertaining he is that they can't remain objective about the fact that he wasn't that good at leading an offense. Yeah, Vick could make some great runs and even some good throws, but he rarely got the passing game in any kind of rhythm, was a terrible leader with a poor work ethic and couldn't adjust to athletic defenses that could contain his running. When a Vick led offense runs into a defense that can contain his running, he was rarely able to make them pay on a consistent basis with the passing game.

and ever notice how Vick fans always claim he has the worst pass catchers and blockers. Funny how the players around great QBs always seems to play well, and the guys around Vick never do. Peyton Manning makes some guy named Pierre Garcon look great. Vick made Roddy White look like a bust.

Peyton also had Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark who took pressure off Pierre Garcon. lol Pierre Garcon was the 3rd opition for Peyton not a #1 like Roddy White was suppose to be

Shiver
08-24-2010, 02:00 PM
You are a moron.

Ad hominem attack.

Roddy White took 3 years to bust out, just like most receivers do. If you want to compare Vick or Peyton Manning, go right ahead, there is no point to it and you aren't proving anything in this argument.Roddy White wasn't great early in his career, his talent was great but his consistency was maddening. But no receiver would produce with Michael Vick at QB. We would have been better off investing our first round picks in RB and running a Nebraska offense with him. (which we basically did do in '06)

He couldn't lead an offense? He led a ****** team to the NFCCG on his back. You can keep relying on your ignorant arguments, but the fact is that Vick was an absolute monster in the NFL for a few years, and then he went to jail. You can have your "elite pocket passer" that comes around every 2 or 3 years, I will take the freak who has the potential to be absolutely unstoppable, and even when he was used in a poor system, didn't work hard, and had an unbelievably bad supporting cast, he still was able to lead a bad team to the NFCCG.Vick was very stoppable, especially when he gave up even trying to be a good passer after '02. Are you aware just how terrible the NFC was that year? Or do you even remember? Atlanta got a bye at 11-5 (while beating no one of significance), beat an 8-8 Rams team at home, then got stomped by the Eagles. Not the greatest achievement in the universe by any stretch of the imagination. Will you please stop arguing with people who saw him play every game, thank you.

Vick could have been this generation's Cunningham. He could have been a 3,400 yard passer and 900 yard rusher. He had the tools, he showed glimpses such as the tail end of the '05 season and for a three game stretch in '06. Trust me, I got swept up in hope that he had "turned the corner" every time he had a good game passing. Unfortunately his work ethic was awful, he let his great talents go to waste. His entire persona changed after '03, when Reeves was fired (he kept Vick grounded) and they gave him that mega-deal. When he started getting paid like he was Peyton Manning, he stopped trying to progress, he plateaued from then on.

Don't take my word for it, Vick has said it himself:

There was a lot more I could have done off the field and in the film room that could have elevated my game to a different level," Vick said on 790 The Zone, per the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "I was complacent at the time, somewhat lazy (http://www.ajc.com/sports/atlanta-falcons/vick-i-settled-for-296063.html), and I settled for mediocrity. I thought what I was doing was enough."

That is all you need to know.

prock
08-24-2010, 05:53 PM
Ad hominem attack.

Couldn't care less.

Roddy White wasn't great early in his career, his talent was great but his consistency was maddening. But no receiver would produce with Michael Vick at QB. We would have been better off investing our first round picks in RB and running a Nebraska offense with him. (which we basically did do in '06)

Nothing in here refutes my argument, but I agree.

Vick was very stoppable, especially when he gave up even trying to be a good passer after '02. Are you aware just how terrible the NFC was that year? Or do you even remember? Atlanta got a bye at 11-5 (while beating no one of significance), beat an 8-8 Rams team at home, then got stomped by the Eagles. Not the greatest achievement in the universe by any stretch of the imagination. Will you please stop arguing with people who saw him play every game, thank you.

He still took a bad team to an 11-5 record. The NFC wasn't good that year, but neither was the team he had.

Vick could have been this generation's Cunningham. He could have been a 3,400 yard passer and 900 yard rusher. He had the tools, he showed glimpses such as the tail end of the '05 season and for a three game stretch in '06. Trust me, I got swept up in hope that he had "turned the corner" every time he had a good game passing. Unfortunately his work ethic was awful, he let his great talents go to waste. His entire persona changed after '03, when Reeves was fired (he kept Vick grounded) and they gave him that mega-deal. When he started getting paid like he was Peyton Manning, he stopped trying to progress, he plateaued from then on.

Don't take my word for it, Vick has said it himself:



That is all you need to know.

Yeah, I know Vick was lazy. He had no work ethic. I never said he did. I agree he wasted his talent. But he was still a very good football player while he was in the league, and had he had the work ethic to go with his talents, he could have been a completely dominant. I agree with you, I was just refuting Hasley's 100% ******** arguments.

yourfavestoner
08-24-2010, 05:58 PM
Yeah, I don't think anybody is arguing that Vick wasn't lazy, or that he didn't live up to his potential.

We're arguing that his talent was so transcending that he was able to lead a craptastic team to significant success despite being lazy, having poor team management, and even worse coaching.

Saints-Tigers
08-24-2010, 05:58 PM
Vick being lazy and not using his talents doesn't mean the receivers on his team were worth a damn.

San Diego Chicken
08-24-2010, 06:12 PM
Manning wasn't that great of a prospect. Matthew Stafford would be considered a better prospect by most. So would Ryan Leaf.

Manning is a guy you kick yourself for doubting.

I don't even know how Eli is ahead of Carson Palmer.

Peyton Manning wasn't that good of a prospect? Nonsense my friend. He was a mortal lock to go #1 in 2 drafts - '97 and '98. Ask Scott Wright or anyone else who analyzed drafts back in the day.

FUNBUNCHER
08-24-2010, 06:24 PM
Honestly, it's hard to look back and evaluate guys as strictly pro prospects after they've already been in the NFL.

Peyton Manning the pro is 100x better than Manning the Tennessee Vol.
I never had the impression that Peyton was considered a cyborg playing QB, the way I view him now, when he was coming out of UT.

I thought it was a butt-dumb decision for the Colts to pick Manning over Leaf; Ryan was a beast in Washington State's Rose Bowl loss to nat'l champs Michigan. Leaf threw for 33 TDs and averaged 330 yards passing/game in '97.
At that point I was just sick of hearing about Peyton Manning all the time grinding in the SEC.

Shiver
08-24-2010, 06:43 PM
Yeah, I don't think anybody is arguing that Vick wasn't lazy, or that he didn't live up to his potential.

We're arguing that his talent was so transcending that he was able to lead a craptastic team to significant success despite being lazy, having poor team management, and even worse coaching.


Uh... what?


We were a .500 team the entire time Vick was here. No better, no worse. In the one season where Vick got the team over eight wins, the Pythagorean win prediction showed that the team should have won was eight games, but lucked into eleven in what might have been the worst conference ('04 NFC) the entire decade. For all the "Vick wins games" argument, the team was an eight win team with him.

San Diego Chicken
08-24-2010, 06:44 PM
i'd refute that. a significant* number of teams/people had leaf over him. which by no means goes to say he was a crappy prospect, just that ryan leaf is a tremendously underrated prospect.

* by which i mean enough for it to have been more than crazy talk, not significant as in a majority.

I agree completely; Leaf was a fantastic prospect which is why I included him in my top 5 list. But I do strongly believe Peyton is the #1 QB prospect of the last two decades and I don't think it's particularly close.

Mr.Regular
08-24-2010, 07:09 PM
Vick was very unique with what he brought to the table. As a prospect it would almost have to be him, although I know who I would prefer as the QB of my team.

Strictly speaking as prospects, since the late 90's it would go (generally the way people felt at the time)

1) Peyton Manning
2) Mike Vick
3) Eli Manning
4) Carson Palmer
5) Ryan Leaf

The top 4 were mortal lock #1 picks and the fifth at least made it a discussion with #1, so he must be there.
You have to put Russell in there. He's near the top.
I've never seen an arm like his before. I know arm strength isn't everything, but his was out of this world. 'Rocket-arm' is thrown around too much in the scouting world but JaMarcus had one. Never seen a prospect be able to throw like he could. Not just the strength really either, he put great touch on all his passes. Could zip a ball out there so quickly, anywhere on the field.
I know that isn't everything, but he showed fantastic touch and accuracy in college. He was considered inaccurate in the NFL but he could read defenses and put the ball right on the money in college. Plus he moved very well for a big man. Possibly the strongest arm the NFL has ever seen, on a 6'6 frame, and showed all the other traits we look for. Russell was a bust because of laziness, not because he wasn't talented.

Anyway, this Vick talk is a little crazy. He didn't suck for Atlanta, but he wasn't amazing either. He was very mediocre. I put a lot of that on the goofy system they threw him into, but in the end he never developed as a passer. Regardless, he was an elite prospect, better than Palmer IMO. Palmer was a a one year wonder at USC, but had all the traits we look for. Leadership, good arm, smart, etc. But he was never considered the possible once in every decade or so talent like Vick.

Job
08-25-2010, 02:03 AM
Edited for dumbness.

Halsey
08-25-2010, 04:17 AM
You have to put Russell in there. He's near the top.


No you don't. Being maybe the most physically talented QB prospect ever didn't make him a great overall prospect. There were questions about his work ethic, intelligence, physical condition, experience, etc. Russell was not an elite QB prospect and many thought the Raiders should have taken Calvin Johnson at the time, despite having more important needs than WR.

Vox Populi
08-25-2010, 09:11 AM
I'd put Stafford ahead of Russell as a prospect. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Jeff George and Drew Bledsoe could challenge for a place there even though thats just based on perception and what I've heard.

yourfavestoner
08-25-2010, 10:36 AM
Uh... what?


We were a .500 team the entire time Vick was here. No better, no worse. In the one season where Vick got the team over eight wins, the Pythagorean win prediction showed that the team should have won was eight games, but lucked into eleven in what might have been the worst conference ('04 NFC) the entire decade. For all the "Vick wins games" argument, the team was an eight win team with him.

And without him, they were amongst the worst teams in the entire league (2003, 2007). I do not think it can be stated enough how truly, truly awful the Falcons were without him. The fact that he was able to win playoff games at all is a testament in itself.

Dude also had Dan Reeves and Jim Mora as his headcoaches. Both you and I were livid during the entire Mora/McKay era at how poorly the team was run as well as the contradictory nature of trying to install the zone blocking/West Coast Offense, despite continuing to acquire talent that fit a power running/deep passing system (Roddy White, Justin Blalock, etc).

And Dan Reeves? Ask Giants or Broncos fans how they feel about Dan Reeves.

Halsey
08-25-2010, 11:36 AM
The Falcons were not a good organization back in the Vick days. The fact that they were foolish enough to make him the highest paid player in the league is proof of that. It's true that Vick made the Falcons better than when they were starting Doug Johnson or Joey Harrington. They were never any better than mediocre with him, however.

Babylon
08-25-2010, 02:33 PM
No you don't. Being maybe the most physically talented QB prospect ever didn't make him a great overall prospect. There were questions about his work ethic, intelligence, physical condition, experience, etc. Russell was not an elite QB prospect and many thought the Raiders should have taken Calvin Johnson at the time, despite having more important needs than WR.

I agree. To me Russell didnt throw the ball where it needed to be thrown and his mobility was always overrated.

Saints-Tigers
08-25-2010, 09:22 PM
Russell has a lot of revisionist history as a prospect. As much as I liked him, he wasn't even a sure fire lock type guy over Brady Freaking Quinn, and he wouldn't have had a prayer of going above Ryan Leaf for instance.

Nalej
08-26-2010, 11:40 AM
Akili Smith! Man, I had a huge man crush on him.
I'd have him rated over Russell and Akili went... 2nd? 3rd? Can't remember

Shiver
08-26-2010, 11:50 AM
Russell has a lot of revisionist history as a prospect. As much as I liked him, he wasn't even a sure fire lock type guy over Brady Freaking Quinn, and he wouldn't have had a prayer of going above Ryan Leaf for instance.



I would agree with this. I was one of the forum's biggest supporters of Russell as a prospect, with one HUGE caveat: if he was drafted by the Raiders he was going to fail. He could have been a better Ben Roethlisberger, but he needed to go to a solid organization/locker room to reach his potential. He wasn't a self-starter like Peyton Manning is. In that dysfunctional situation he got fat and lazy.

descendency
08-26-2010, 11:55 AM
I agree completely; Leaf was a fantastic prospect which is why I included him in my top 5 list. But I do strongly believe Peyton is the #1 QB prospect of the last two decades and I don't think it's particularly close.

That's cool. All I meant is that you are alone in that claim. Most people would put Stafford, Russell, Vick, Palmer, Leaf (maybe), Clausen (ok... not really that many), and a few more over Manning as prospects.

I really don't remember what Manning did at Tennessee that made him such a great prospect. I remember him being the best QB in college football at the time (arguably), but maybe not the best prospect even in his own class.

And I really have no idea why you had Eli on your list at all (especially over leaf).

yourfavestoner
08-26-2010, 12:46 PM
I would agree with this. I was one of the forum's biggest supporters of Russell as a prospect, with one HUGE caveat: if he was drafted by the Raiders he was going to fail. He could have been a better Ben Roethlisberger, but he needed to go to a solid organization/locker room to reach his potential. He wasn't a self-starter like Peyton Manning is. In that dysfunctional situation he got fat and lazy.

Yup, I was in that same boat as you with Russell. He's essentially responsible for his own failures, but by going to an owner like Al Davis (who constantly cuts the legs out from under his coaches and is an "enabler" to his players' unwarranted sense of entitlement) he was doomed from the start.

That's cool. All I meant is that you are alone in that claim. Most people would put Stafford, Russell, Vick, Palmer, Leaf (maybe), Clausen (ok... not really that many), and a few more over Manning as prospects.

I really don't remember what Manning did at Tennessee that made him such a great prospect. I remember him being the best QB in college football at the time (arguably), but maybe not the best prospect even in his own class.

And I really have no idea why you had Eli on your list at all (especially over leaf).

Peyton was a great prospect. He had prototypical height and build, great pocket presence, a great understanding of offensive theory, great mid-range accuracy (the most important area of the field in terms of making the jump from college to the pros), a strong enough arm (not a cannon by any means, but good enough to make all the throws), and a very successful college career. Nobody thought he had the upside that he's shown in the pros, but he was about as safe as a prospect as you could possibly have at quarterback. His only real knock was that he could never beat Florida.

And Eli is on his list because he's arguably the best QB prospect of the last decade. He was Peyton's equal in just about every category and has a stronger arm, to boot.

TACKLE
08-26-2010, 12:58 PM
That's cool. All I meant is that you are alone in that claim. Most people would put Stafford, Russell, Vick, Palmer, Leaf (maybe), Clausen (ok... not really that many), and a few more over Manning as prospects.

I really don't remember what Manning did at Tennessee that made him such a great prospect. I remember him being the best QB in college football at the time (arguably), but maybe not the best prospect even in his own class.

And I really have no idea why you had Eli on your list at all (especially over leaf).

The fact that you even mentioned Jimmy Clausen in same breath as Peyton as a prospect is quite disturbing.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
08-26-2010, 01:23 PM
The fact that you even mentioned Jimmy Clausen in same breath as Peyton as a prospect is quite disturbing.

Seriously. Seems like Clausen is getting the Brady Quinn treatment. Hint: If a guy falls as far as those two did in the draft, there's a reason for that. And that reason is they really weren't great prospects.

yourfavestoner
08-26-2010, 01:39 PM
anybody who put clausen over manning (either manning) as a prospect is a ******* moron. full stop.

further, the only reason that peyton may not have been the best prospect in his own class was because leaf was such an incredible prospect. it's nonsensical to suggest that it's because manning wasn't a very strong prospect in his own right and demonstrates extremely bad memory in the best case.

further, the ONLY reason russell was a top guy was because of his arm. he was *never* 1/5 the prospect peyton was. period.

i think part of the problem, here, is that most of this board was 4-7 years old when peyton came out. which is why jimmy clausen's name was even mentioned in this thread.

That just made me feel old. And I am not old.

But you are 100% correct in this post.

soybean
08-26-2010, 02:23 PM
wasn't aaron rodgers, according to scott, in the same boat as eli in terms of prospects? essentially, had no flaws?

yourfavestoner
08-26-2010, 02:32 PM
wasn't aaron rodgers, according to scott, in the same boat as eli in terms of prospects? essentially, had no flaws?

His only knocks at the time were being a "Tedford system" QB (ie mechanical flaws) and that he didn't have elite arm strength. Adequate, but not above average.

But yes, Scott had him rated higher than Alex Smith and was the top player on his rankings in that draft class. Most people pretty much had them 1a/1b and whichever one didn't get taken by SF was going to fall because nobody really "needed" a quarterback that year.

ViperVisor
08-26-2010, 02:33 PM
wasn't aaron rodgers, according to scott, in the same boat as eli in terms of prospects? essentially, had no flaws?

He tried to send ESP be keeping Rodgers #1 to the 49ers in the mock for as long as possible but sad for us it didn't work.

nepg
08-26-2010, 02:37 PM
Rodgers would have ended up the same way or worse (would have had way more pressure coming from Cal) than Alex Smith.

Halsey
08-26-2010, 03:02 PM
There may have been some people who rated Leaf ahead of Manning, but I remember feeling like most people thought Manning was the clear #1 overall choice. Peyton had good measurables, grew up being tutored by an NFL QB, and had been living with huge expectations and celebrity status for a long time. Many were in love with Leaf's upside, but Manning was considered a safe bet to be a star QB.

Saints-Tigers
08-26-2010, 04:21 PM
There may have been some people who rated Leaf ahead of Manning, but I remember feeling like most people thought Manning was the clear #1 overall choice. Peyton had good measurables, grew up being tutored by an NFL QB, and had been living with huge expectations and celebrity status for a long time. Many were in love with Leaf's upside, but Manning was considered a safe bet to be a star QB.

This is how I remember it as well.

As for Rodgers and Smith, I had Rodgers rated as a late first round type, and Smith I had as barely a second rounder. Guess I overrated him.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-26-2010, 04:22 PM
Rodgers would have ended up the same way or worse (would have had way more pressure coming from Cal) than Alex Smith.

Really? You think the only reason Rodgers succeeded was circumstantial and had nothing to do with the kind of player he is?

Bengals78
08-26-2010, 04:30 PM
Really? You think the only reason Rodgers succeeded was circumstantial and had nothing to do with the kind of player he is?

I think having time to sit and watch and being on a team that had a lot of great pieces in place helped him a lot. Not too mention the consistency the organization has had with him there unlike SF. I thought he was better than Smith coming out, but he definitely hit the jackpot out of those 2

nepg
08-26-2010, 04:30 PM
I think the reason Alex Smith had trouble is circumstantial and had little to do with the kind of player he is. That he's come through says a lot about the kind of player he is.

Aaron Rodgers did have extremely favorable circumstances, and has made the most of the situation in which he landed.

I'm saying that Alex Smith is a damn good QB, and severely underrated and overhated. I had him pegged as the #1 pick around mid-season that year. He's amazingly smart, athletic, and is obviously extremely tough both mentally and physically. The organization dropped the ball with their support for Smith, but the kid has persevered. Hell, he's still one of the youngest starting QBs in the NFL...

I'm not saying (or trying to say) anything negative about Aaron Rodgers. The kind of QB he was coming out of college...I expect that he would have crumbled under those circumstances (few people wouldn't have). No line, no receivers, 5 different coordinators in as many years... To expect a stiff, mechanical QB with vastly inferior athleticism to be able to make it through to now like Smith has seems overly silly.

People unfairly compare the two, and it's tiring to hear 49ers fans moan about Aaron Rodgers when the the players were drafted into polar opposite situations.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-26-2010, 04:39 PM
Smith was dealt a pretty rough hand, but if you think the only difference between the two was circumstantial, you're fooling yourself. Smith's lack of confidence can't simply be attributed to Nolan undermining him or any other exterior source, nor can his lack of leadership prior to this year be mainly blamed on anyone but him.

I felt the Niners should have drafted Rodgers all along and that he was clearly the better QB, but I was a Cal fan, so there you go.

nepg
08-26-2010, 04:44 PM
How can his lack of confidence not be linked to being undermined and having a different offensive system to learn every year until now? Coming out, confidence was a strength of his. As was leadership. When your coach and organization attempt to sabotage you and make efforts to get the rest of the team against you, how can your confidence and ability to lead said team not be affected?

Paranoidmoonduck
08-26-2010, 04:57 PM
It can be affected, but if it's completely nonexistent, that qualifies as being a negative if you're trying to be an NFL quarterback. Coming out, we knew nothing about those attributes of his (all we knew is he was smart) because they hadn't actually been tested.

Would a team managing Smith better led him to better success to date? Yes. Is the only difference between very successful quarterbacks and mediocre quarterbacks always that they didn't get enough nice words from their coaches? **** no.

prock
08-26-2010, 05:34 PM
I was like eight when Peyton came out, so I try not to have an opinion on matters that far back.

yo123
08-26-2010, 06:00 PM
I was like eight when Peyton came out, so I try not to have an opinion on matters that far back.


Same with half of this board. More people should follow your lead and stop talking out their ass on things that happened before their balls dropped.

Nalej
08-26-2010, 06:32 PM
I'm 25 and sometimes I have feel old as dirt when I hear some of the guys on here talking...
then again... some guys on here talk about some games when my dad was a kid...

so it all balances out

nepg
08-26-2010, 06:35 PM
I don't know if I look at Vick as a QB prospect. I look at him as a potentially transcendant player that you couldn't pass on.

The Top 5 QB prospects...that's tough...
1. John Elway
2. Vinny Testeverde
3. Peyton Manning
4. Drew Bledsoe
5a. Carson Palmer (Vinny Testeverde clone - try to find a difference)
5b. Jeff George
5c. Eli Manning
5d. Matt Ryan

Sue me for having 4 #5's.

I do think Ryan Leaf was awesome, but the big reason he pushed Manning for #1 was the way Manning crumbled in big games.

A Perfect Score
08-26-2010, 07:58 PM
I don't think Matt Ryan deserves to be in the discussion for best QB prospects ever. There was a very legitimate concern that he was not a franchise QB...

wonderbredd24
08-26-2010, 08:00 PM
I don't know if I look at Vick as a QB prospect. I look at him as a potentially transcendant player that you couldn't pass on.

The Chargers didn't seem to have a problem passing on him

RaiderNation
08-26-2010, 08:13 PM
IDK about Ryan being a top QB prospect of all time. Eli Manning could replace him

nepg
08-26-2010, 08:48 PM
I don't think Matt Ryan deserves to be in the discussion for best QB prospects ever. There was a very legitimate concern that he was not a franchise QB...

Depends on who you talked to, really. The "concern" was his INT totals. It really depended on which side of the "his receivers sucked ass" argument you were on. If you felt his weapons were sub-par, especially going up against tough defenses with loaded secondaries in the ACC, you thought he was one of the better prospects to come out in a long time. If you were in the other camp, you seriously questioned the guy.

djp
08-26-2010, 08:51 PM
I don't know if I look at Vick as a QB prospect. I look at him as a potentially transcendant player that you couldn't pass on.

The Top 5 QB prospects...that's tough...
1. John Elway
2. Vinny Testeverde
3. Peyton Manning
4. Drew Bledsoe
5a. Carson Palmer (Vinny Testeverde clone - try to find a difference)
5b. Jeff George
5c. Eli Manning
5d. Matt Ryan

Sue me for having 4 #5's.

I do think Ryan Leaf was awesome, but the big reason he pushed Manning for #1 was the way Manning crumbled in big games.

Matt Ryan???? lol, are you serious?

A Perfect Score
08-26-2010, 08:53 PM
Depends on who you talked to, really. The "concern" was his INT totals. It really depended on which side of the "his receivers sucked ass" argument you were on. If you felt his weapons were sub-par, especially going up against tough defenses with loaded secondaries in the ACC, you thought he was one of the better prospects to come out in a long time. If you were in the other camp, you seriously questioned the guy.

He had plenty of concerns, stemming from his tendency to force the ball to his sub-par physical tools.

Halsey
08-26-2010, 09:46 PM
The funny thing about Ryan's 19 INT's that he threw as a senior was the fact that it was 19 INT's out of 654 passes attempted. That means about 3% of his passes were intercepted, which is pretty normal. All many people saw was the number 19 under that INT category and they couldn't get over it.

Saints-Tigers
08-27-2010, 02:07 AM
Ryan wouldn't have had a prayer of going over Carson Palmer or Jeff George.

elway=goat
08-27-2010, 06:58 AM
See, the problem with players who aren't "traditional" is that you have to build a non-traditional team around them in order to make them fit. And when you get used to that non-traditional player and he either gets hurt or kills some dogs, you end up with a 2003 or 2007 season.

So your options are to either build the non-traditional team and pray to god the guy doesn't get hurt or do anything stupid, or try to change the guy into a more traditional style of player....neither option worked for the Falcons in the end.

Good post..

To me it comes down to two supreme prospect QB's. One used his athletic ability to dominate and the other was more of the classic pocket passer. To be honest, I wanted to see Palmer dominate alittle more than he did in college so I had question marks about whether or not he would be consistant in the Pro's. I wasnt as hi on him as most.

Vick on the other hand was so fun to watch. Just outright destroyed teams, and was very impressive. My problems with him is his size, and I didnt really see him completely dominate consitantly with his arm. But lets be honest he didnt have to.

I would take Palmer.. Stickly because he is easier to build around, and I am a strong believer that "scrambling" QB's will get you to a point.. But not come through in the end.

I think typically guys who use there feet never develope a true passing game. They never really get down the mental aspect of being a QB, because growing up they dominate high school/college with there legs. The problem is in the NFL everyone is just as fast and athletic as you.

So when you get deep to the playoffs, and you have to face supreme defenese' you cant just beat them with your legs, I am a firm believer in that..

That is why, given the oppertunity between two elite prospects one is a scambler one a pocket passer.. I am taking the pocket passer 99.9% of the time. That 00.1% is if you get a guy who figured out the mental part of the game along with using his legs(IE: Elway/Steve Young).

Saints-Tigers
08-27-2010, 08:16 AM
I think you're right about that. Guys like Elway and Young were athletic enough to hurt guys bad, but not athletic to the point that they didn't have to polish their game up as young guys and just dominate with their feet.

Someone is going to get it eventually, it might be forever before it happens, but some 6'5 supreme Calvin Johnson like athlete is going to be an amazing QB too. I can't w ait for the Saints to draft that guy.

FUNBUNCHER
08-27-2010, 02:31 PM
Good post..

To me it comes down to two supreme prospect QB's. One used his athletic ability to dominate and the other was more of the classic pocket passer. To be honest, I wanted to see Palmer dominate alittle more than he did in college so I had question marks about whether or not he would be consistant in the Pro's. I wasnt as hi on him as most.

Vick on the other hand was so fun to watch. Just outright destroyed teams, and was very impressive. My problems with him is his size, and I didnt really see him completely dominate consitantly with his arm. But lets be honest he didnt have to.

I would take Palmer.. Stickly because he is easier to build around, and I am a strong believer that "scrambling" QB's will get you to a point.. But not come through in the end.

I think typically guys who use there feet never develope a true passing game. They never really get down the mental aspect of being a QB, because growing up they dominate high school/college with there legs. The problem is in the NFL everyone is just as fast and athletic as you.

So when you get deep to the playoffs, and you have to face supreme defenese' you cant just beat them with your legs, I am a firm believer in that..

That is why, given the oppertunity between two elite prospects one is a scambler one a pocket passer.. I am taking the pocket passer 99.9% of the time. That 00.1% is if you get a guy who figured out the mental part of the game along with using his legs(IE: Elway/Steve Young).

I agree with most of this, except that it's a bad stereotype that a great running/scrambling QB never develops his overall game.

Staubach, Tarkenton, Elway and Steve Young were all dynamic runners who were equally talented passers. I'd even include Cunningham and McNabb in this group, although only one made it to the SB.

I think Jake Locker is going to be the next great dual threat Qb in the NFL,
( sorry Tebow) and the debate in 2011 will be, do you take Mallett or Locker??

hoekd0250
08-27-2010, 04:18 PM
the reason that young and elway and now i would say rodgers are so great as runners out of the pocket is that they keep a defense honest because they developed the correct running skills of trying to make a play with your arm on the move till the last second. Watch when running the were always scanning the field for the open throw till they past the los, unlike pure running qbs who try to run first at any sign of pressure

Miaoww
08-27-2010, 05:18 PM
I think typically guys who use there feet never develop a true passing game. They never really get down the mental aspect of being a QB, because growing up they dominate high school/college with there legs. The problem is in the NFL everyone is just as fast and athletic as you.

Except Vick made everyone else look slow (and yes I looked at a few highlight tapes to make sure I wasn't misremembering this). It was a kind of magic watching Vick in the open field - that burst, that top end speed, that agility. He literally made the super freaks of the NFL look like mere mortals.

As for who I'd take, if I don't consider their NFL careers? Vick, and it's not even close.

Yes I would have been wary of his flaws - mainly his mid range inaccuracy and his lack of size (what was he, 6', 215? With the way he scrambled I'd be worried he'd get hurt), but he's a once in a generation talent.

I'd have built the offence around him. You've already tied the franchise to him, you can't worry that the offence would be unconventional. The one big acquisition would have been a dangerous receiving TE. Somebody that's a threat with the ball in hand - one that linebackers can't pay too much attention to, or else Vick would be running past them at 100mph.

Obviously if you look back now everyone would take Palmer, but I can't get those visions of Vick tearing the Panthers apart twice a year out of my head. Imagine if the franchise had tailored the offence to his strengths. Terrifying.

Shiver
08-27-2010, 05:40 PM
I wish Vick had been drafted by someone who had a coach who would drive him to be great. If he would have had a Mike Holmgren-type (ala Brett Favre) he could have been all-time special.

hockey619
08-27-2010, 08:42 PM
Im surprised how many guys are taking Carson Palmer here considering this is talking about them strictly as prospects.

Carson was a very good prospect but he had some question marks as he excelled for only one year.

But i think people are forgetting how transcendent a talent Vick was coming out of VT. He would turn broken plays into long touchdown runs where he made guys look stupid and others like they were jogging. A creative and ballsy coach who was really willing to lay it on the line could have created a monster of an offense with him, something teams wouldnt see anywhere else.

This isnt a slight on Palmer but Vick was an impossibly rare athlete. Ran like reggie bush and threw like jamarcus russell. vick and barry sanders are among a handful of guys that are truly once in a generation talents true freaks of nature

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
08-27-2010, 09:18 PM
Imagine if Vick had Sean Payton as his coach...

LonghornsLegend
08-28-2010, 11:50 AM
Randall Cunningham was a ridiculous athlete, but it wasn't until he developed into a real quarterback that he had his best shot at the Superbowl screwed by a kicker.
.

Lol seriously? Cunningham was in the league at least 12 years before that season, so who knows what Vick turns into since he had only played 6 seasons before going to jail. He very easily could have won a SB with his skillset, it's unfair to judge him after 6 seasons and act like the verdict was out on him.


Yea he never completed more then 60% of his passes, or threw for more then 3,000 yards, but he was also running for 1,000 yards as a QB and as already previously stated he never had that legit #1 WR. It's very unfair to put Roddy's first 2 seasons on Vick, I didn't watch every game but even I saw how many times he could beat his man deep and drop a perfectly placed right off of his hands.


There were countless people calling Roddy a bust, not because of Vick, or because he couldn't get enough passes, but he just couldn't catch a cold. It's hard to really judge an unorthodox QB like Vick by general QB passing stats, that doesn't tell the whole picture.


He still had alot to grow as a QB even after 6 seasons in the league, and we don't know how he would have developed.


I also hate when people say that "well if Carson hadn't blown out his knee they would of probably made the SB", it's one of the dumbest arguments I've heard on this board hands down.


That was the 1st ******* play of the game, so I guess we don't have to play playoff games now since we know who would already win? We also know that they were gonna waltz right into the SB too I guess.

Halsey
08-28-2010, 12:21 PM
Imagine if Vick had Sean Payton as his coach...

He'd do the same thing Andy Reid does: Make him a backup and special packages QB.

wonderbredd24
08-28-2010, 12:22 PM
Lol seriously? Cunningham was in the league at least 12 years before that season, so who knows what Vick turns into since he had only played 6 seasons before going to jail. He very easily could have won a SB with his skillset, it's unfair to judge him after 6 seasons and act like the verdict was out on him.


Yea he never completed more then 60% of his passes, or threw for more then 3,000 yards, but he was also running for 1,000 yards as a QB and as already previously stated he never had that legit #1 WR. It's very unfair to put Roddy's first 2 seasons on Vick, I didn't watch every game but even I saw how many times he could beat his man deep and drop a perfectly placed right off of his hands.


There were countless people calling Roddy a bust, not because of Vick, or because he couldn't get enough passes, but he just couldn't catch a cold. It's hard to really judge an unorthodox QB like Vick by general QB passing stats, that doesn't tell the whole picture.


He still had alot to grow as a QB even after 6 seasons in the league, and we don't know how he would have developed.
Lol seriously? Nothing you've mentioned changes what I said. Cunningham didn't make a serious playoff push until he developed into a passer getting within one kick of the Superbowl.

Where in that quote is a judgement of Vick? Nowhere? If you're gonna quote something, you might want it to be relevant. Lol seriously?
I also hate when people say that "well if Carson hadn't blown out his knee they would of probably made the SB", it's one of the dumbest arguments I've heard on this board hands down.


That was the 1st ******* play of the game, so I guess we don't have to play playoff games now since we know who would already win? We also know that they were gonna waltz right into the SB too I guess.
Lol seriously? The first play of the game was a 66 yard touchdown to Chris Henry setting a Bengals playoff record.

The Bengals were up 10-0 in that game. Would having the quarterback who led the league in TDs, completion percentage, and TD:INT differential made the difference to beat the eventual Superbowl champion Steelers or at least put a damper on their 24 unanswered points to win the game? That's up for debate.