Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   Pro Football (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Vick vs Luck...Prospect Hype (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53459)

dregolll 07-25-2012 08:45 PM

Vick vs Luck...Prospect Hype
 
Both prospects had tremendous hype behind them coming out of their respective drafts. So the question is who do think goes #1 overall if they came out in the same draft and who would you take #1 if you were starting a team? Now this is based strictly on hype, no factoring in Vick's career.

K Train 07-25-2012 08:48 PM

it would have been vick, he was a never before seen type talent. the kind of talent you hope to see revolutionize the position.

i would personally take luck, id want a more traditional passer if i was running a team but it depends if you want a guy to revolutionize playing QB or a guy that could master playing QB, in a more traditional sense

PACKmanN 07-25-2012 08:49 PM

We saw a Vick clone in griffin and luck still was taken ahead of him

descendency 07-25-2012 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PACKmanN (Post 3068354)
We saw a Vick clone in griffin and luck still was taken ahead of him

Seriously... :facepalm:

Complex 07-25-2012 09:06 PM

Griffin is not a Vick Clone. Luck has way more hype than Vick.

Philliez01 07-25-2012 09:10 PM

I disagree...maybe it was because I was like 11 when Vick was drafted but I did a school project on him when I was 13.

The hype around Michael Vick was almost a sociological study. He had the potential to earn every endorsement in the air and be a Michael Jordan of the sport. I know, that sounds hyperbolic but....and I really don't want to bring race into this...but I think Vick was the first black QB to have the GIGANTIC hype that he had coming out of college.

This was a guy who was far more athletic than Kordell Stewart and a 4.3 guy at QB? I think people forget how he was thought to be one who could revolutionize the position.

TheFinisher 07-25-2012 09:21 PM

Vick had more hype coming out, but he wasn't the first super mobile QB to grace the NFL. There was a guy named Randall Cunningham who debuted in the 80s.

FUNBUNCHER 07-25-2012 09:23 PM

McNabb was hyped to the heavens when he left Syracuse too.
There's no question Luck would have gone ahead of Vick in every scenario imaginable.

Luck had better coaching, better grasp of the position, played in a more complex offense, he called his own plays, was bigger than Vick and a superior athlete in his own right.

And Vick was more of a playmaker at the QB position when he was at Va Tech than he was a pure QB.
IMO Vick was drafted more on pure spec and potential upside than his demonstrated ability in actual college games.
Vick was taken 1/1 by Atlanta, but I don't believe he was regarded by every NFL GM as the consensus #1 pick.

RGIII is a better pro prospect than Vick, and even he couldn't get drafted ahead of Luck.

Philliez01 07-25-2012 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFinisher (Post 3068385)
Vick had more hype coming out, but he wasn't the first super mobile QB to grace the NFL. There was a guy named Randall Cunningham who debuted in the 80s.

Of course, but a second-round pick from UNLV doesn't carry near the hype as the first overall pick from Va Tech. I'm surprised Cunningham didn't go the USFL route, just because of the times.

TheFinisher 07-25-2012 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philliez01 (Post 3068391)
Of course, but a second-round pick from UNLV doesn't carry near the hype as the first overall pick from Va Tech. I'm surprised Cunningham didn't go the USFL route, just because of the times.

True, and I try to stay away from race topics, but you have to take in account of where the NFL was at in terms of how they viewed black QBs during that time period. Cunningham had the college credentials and definitely had the measurables to go higher than he did.

Vick obviously had more hype coming out though, I was just pointing out he wasn't "unlike anything we had ever seen before".

PACKmanN 07-25-2012 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by descendency (Post 3068366)
Seriously... :facepalm:

Explain to me how they're not physically alike because last I checked the word clone never meant playing styles.

Both are amazingly gifted athletes.

killxswitch 07-25-2012 11:59 PM

Is Luck even that hyped still? He was before, but I think he was so overhyped that it kind of reversed course a bit and RG3 became the more hyped player a number of months ago. Expectations are high but I even live in his new city and the level of hype isn't that high. Luck's demeanor doesn't really lend itself to being hyped anyway.

descendency 07-26-2012 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PACKmanN (Post 3068525)
Explain to me how they're not physically alike because last I checked the word clone never meant playing styles.

Yes, usually when you say one is a clone of another, most people seem to mean playing style. However...

Vick has more explosion in and out of his breaks and has more natural wiggle. Vick might also be faster (not over 100m maybe, but over 40 yards), as hard as that might be to believe.

Vick is smaller.

Vick has a bigger arm.

Vick has poor accuracy and absolutely no touch to any of this throws.

Besides being both being fast and black, there isn't much similar between them.

prock 07-26-2012 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PACKmanN (Post 3068525)
Explain to me how they're not physically alike because last I checked the word clone never meant playing styles.

Both are amazingly gifted athletes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by descendency (Post 3068552)
Yes, usually when you say one is a clone of another, most people seem to mean playing style. However...

Vick has more explosion in and out of his breaks and has more natural wiggle. Vick might also be faster (not over 100m maybe, but over 40 yards), as hard as that might be to believe.

Vick is smaller.

Vick has a bigger arm.

Vick has poor accuracy and absolutely no touch to any of this throws.

Besides being both being fast and black, there isn't much similar between them.

Black and gifted athletes = clones. Duh, get your **** straight d.

Cudders 07-26-2012 01:13 AM

“Revolutionizing” the quarterback position is one of the most overrated discussions in terms of future quarterbacks. In a perfect bubble, it’s an interesting debate, I admit. But the NFL isn’t a perfect bubble. And the quarterback position can’t be revolutionized. We’ve seen a number of jaw-dropping specimens enter the NFL now. Each of them has been tagged with the phrase “potential to revolutionize the position” and none have done it. To be an elite quarterback in the NFL, there is a core skill set that a passer needs to possess and being a stud athlete isn’t one of them. Great anticipation, high football aptitude, managing game situations, mastering the most minute details, and I’ll even throw a strong arm in there at the tail end of the list.

Those are the most important, time-tested qualities. Being an athletic freak that can improvise and extend broken snaps isn’t a reliable trait and it isn’t going to lead to someone revolutionizing the position. Because no offense is ever going to be predicated on a quarterback’s ability to improvise and play backyard football. They’re always going to expect a quarterback to do those benchmark things. In fact, the best improvisational passer in the NFL right now is Ben Roethlisberger. But no one looked at Roethlisberger coming out of a MAC school and declared that he was going to revolutionize quarterbacks. And he hasn’t. And neither has Cam Newton. If Cam continues to develop and becomes an elite quarterback in the mold of a Roethlisberger, it won’t be because he’s tall, compact, and a powerful runner when he has to be. It’ll be because he progressed in the “problem” areas. The same areas that have been around football for so long and aren’t disappearing soon.

That’s the reason I would take Andrew Luck over Michael Vick ten times out of ten in April. In that perfect bubble, Michael Vick has the higher theoretical upside. Bigger arm, better athlete, etc. After that, the rest is teachable. That’s the belief. Andrew Luck still has the higher actual ceiling though. Luck showed scouts things at Stanford that it took Vick almost a decade to do in the NFL, let alone doing it as a starter at Virginia Tech. And the things that Luck did translate a lot better to the pro passing game than the things that Vick did. Vick can have that magical moment where he escapes from a collapsing pocket and converts a first down out of thin air on a breathtaking scramble from time-to-time. Luck can sit back, manipulate the pocket, and convert first downs with his arm from drive-to-drive, quarter-to-quarter, game-to-game, season-to-season.

But that ends that rant aimed at sensationalist outlets that want to tag H/W/S quarterback prospects as transcendent even when the most critical components of their game are deficient.

In terms of media-driven excitement and interest though, I would give it to Vick. He had that wow factor. The kind that brought people to and kept them on the edge of their seats. He was one of the forefathers of “revolutionizing” the position. A good chunk of people had Luck behind RGIII when it came down to it. (And, for the record, Vick and RGIII were not that comparable as prospects. RGIII runs circles around Vick in terms of passing at the same stage in their development. And Vick was more electric and explosive than RGIII could dream of being in the open field.)

FUNBUNCHER 07-26-2012 01:28 AM

Luck is an ATHLETIC QB. He's top 7-8 one of the most athletic QBs in the league the minute the regular season starts.
Vick/RGIII/Rogers/Newton/Luck/Locker/Tannehill/Gabbert/Tebow....not necessarily in that order.

If a QB has mastered the passing game, that additional mobility on rollouts and beyond the LOS is almost impossible to defend against.

Vikings4ever 07-26-2012 01:47 AM

Vick was hyped as a freak athlete who was a quarterback.

Luck's been hyped as a freak quarterback who's an athlete.

I'd take the later any day.

jrdrylie 07-26-2012 11:17 AM

If Vick had played in today's NCAA with all the spread offenses out there, he would have put up unreal numbers and would definitely been drafted over Luck.

FUNBUNCHER 07-26-2012 12:15 PM

You can't go back and make Vick a better passer in college than he actually was.
In the exact same offense, Vick wasn't even as proficient as Tyrod Taylor was his senior year.

People forget that Vick played with one of the best defenses in the country when he was at Tech. He wasn't asked to do a lot, and he really didn't.
He played with a lot of short fields and turnovers generated by the defense.
It's not like he was scoring 2+ TDs a game.

And even if Vick was RGIII at Va Tech, I have a hard time believing an NFL GM is going to take a six foot Vick over a 6'4, 235# Luck,(4.59 speed/10'4 BJ/36 inch vert).

niel89 07-26-2012 06:20 PM

No question for me, I take Luck every time. With Luck you say "Look at all the amazing things he is already doing," with Vick its "Imagine all the amazing things he could do."

I was a draft guy when Vick came out, but Luck's hype was immense. Mostly because he is that good.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock 07-27-2012 09:26 AM

Cam Newton anybody?

Halsey 07-27-2012 11:43 PM

Luck would have been the easy choice ahead of Vick. Luck is bigger, taller, more polished, and less durability questions.

BamaFalcon59 07-31-2012 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER (Post 3068797)
You can't go back and make Vick a better passer in college than he actually was.
In the exact same offense, Vick wasn't even as proficient as Tyrod Taylor was his senior year.

People forget that Vick played with one of the best defenses in the country when he was at Tech. He wasn't asked to do a lot, and he really didn't.
He played with a lot of short fields and turnovers generated by the defense.
It's not like he was scoring 2+ TDs a game.

And even if Vick was RGIII at Va Tech, I have a hard time believing an NFL GM is going to take a six foot Vick over a 6'4, 235# Luck,(4.59 speed/10'4 BJ/36 inch vert).

Vick in the Baylor offense last season would have been something to see. Big differences between Vick and RG as players and as athletes.

FUNBUNCHER 07-31-2012 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BamaFalcon59 (Post 3074975)
Vick in the Baylor offense last season would have been something to see. Big differences between Vick and RG as players and as athletes.

Are you saying Vick was a better pro QB prospect than Griffin?? Or that Vick was a better athlete than Griffin??

Sure Vick would have been spectacular in a read option spread, but I don't think he would have been as dynamic a passer as RGIII was.

Most of the runs by the QB at Baylor were by design, so the only real difference I see is that instead of throwing for over 4K yards/72% completions/37 TDs and 6 INTs, (Vick wouldn't have approached those numbers IMO), Mike would have likely doubled RGIII's rushing numbers,(699yds, 10 TDs in 2011).

BamaFalcon59 07-31-2012 11:51 PM

Vick would have put up similar passing numbers with the receiver talent at Baylor and the design of the passing game.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.