Join the Conversation!
Click here to register and in a few simple steps, you'll be ready to talk football in our hard hitting forums, comment on all of our exclusive articles you won't find anywhere else, build your own mock draft in our Mock Draft Database, and much, much more!
  • The Eagles are the Sexy Pick for the NFC, not the Favorite


    The offseason champions for the 2011 season are unquestionably the Philadelphia Eagles and unlike the usual March champs, the Washington Redskins, the Eagles were a good team to start with before throwing around a ton of money on players, which is why so many pundits, fans, and even players are suggesting the Eagles are the team to beat this year. The problem with this is the fact that football is unlike any other sport in that throwing around a ton of money does not automatically put a team into the championship and cohesion is an integral part of the process. For that reason as well as the fact the Packers still appear to have more talent, the Packers should still be considered the NFC favorite with the most serious threat to the Packers’ chances at repeating is a Super Bowl hangover.

    The Eagles defense will be featuring a half dozen new starters with a defensive coordinator who was the offensive line coach the year before and they have to figure out a way to gel in abridged offseason. The hiring of Jim Washburn as the defensive line coach should help ease the burden, but the situation with Mike Patterson throws a wrench in the process. Patterson, after suffering a seizure on the practice field, and it was revealed that Patterson has a brain condition that could require surgery and the timetable on his return is unknown, leaving Trent Cole as the only returning starter currently practicing.

    The talent the Eagles have acquired is undeniable, especially when it comes to the cornerback position and defensive line such as Nnamdi Asomugha, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, Jason Babin, and Cullen Jenkins, but football has rarely ever been a game where the mercenary approach has been effective when it comes to winning a championship, especially in the short term. The Eagles approach resembles the 1994 San Francisco 49ers where the offense was in place and incredibly effective and the front office brought in the last pieces to the puzzle such as Deion Sanders, Ken Norton Jr., etc and they were able to win the Super Bowl. The problem is the Eagles are doing this when the Packers are already effective on both sides of the ball and are able to keep the team intact.

    The Green Bay Packers will again feature Dom Capers as the defensive coordinator and the Packer defense will feature nine returning starters only needing to replace Cullen Jenkins, now an Eagle, and Nick Barnett. Cullen Jenkins is a great football player and replacing him will be easier said than done, but in Barnett’s case, he will be replaced by Desmond Bishop, who has been playing and learning in the Packers system for a few years and Bishop started in place of Barnett when he was hurt last year, so the transition should be virtually seamless.

    Offensively, the Eagles will be bringing back Michael Vick in his second full season as a starter and the skill positions will be largely the same with a sprinkling of talented veterans such as Ronnie Brown and Johnnie Lee Higgins. The offensive line is less of a given, coming off of a poor season last year, especially in the middle of the line. This was largely due to injuries where Todd Herremans missed about 6 weeks, Jamaal Jackson missed the entire year, and the Eagles were using their third string center at times. The Eagles also used their first pick in the draft to improve the right guard position by adding Danny Watkins. It remains to be seen if all these changes will result in effective offensive line play, but there is certainly reason to be optimistic.

    The Packers basically come back with the exact same offense, except they will get tight end Jermichael Finley back in the lineup, after missing the entire season last year, and they have also added another first round offensive tackle to develop in Derek Sherrod, who could contribute as Bryan Bulaga has. The larger advantage that the Packers have is the fact that the Packers are just better across the board on the offensive side of the ball than the Eagles.

    Breaking it down position by position, the Packers have a clear advantage at quarterback as Aaron Rodgers is an elite quarterback and they have advantages at tight end, and wide receiver. While some people might take DeSean Jackson over Greg Jennings, there is no question the Packers have a substantially better overall unit at that position. Brent Celek is a talented tight end in Philadelphia, but Jermichael Finley is a mismatch the second he steps onto the field. The Eagles have an advantage at running back and the offensive line might be a slight advantage towards Green Bay in terms of depth, there is no clear advantage one way or the other.

    On defense, it is more difficult to handicap a few areas because the Eagles are so new. The Eagles could definitely have an advantage at defensive line, but the Packers have a substantially better set of linebackers. It is easy to say the Eagles have a better set up at corner, but it is important to point out the Packers have a lot of talent in that area and the Packers make up some of the ground they give up at corner by having a better group of safeties than Philadelphia. The Eagles will get back Nate Allen, who lost part of his season last year due to injury and was having a great rookie year.

    Last but not least, the Eagles will be running out rookies at kicker and punter while the Packers will have Mason Crosby and Tim Masthay. And the Packers have another advantage when it comes to coaching. Andy Reid is a good coach and has a good staff, especially on offense, but Mike McCarthy is better and has the jewelry to prove it. Having Dom Capers as one of the best defensive coordinators in the NFL goes a long way as well.

    There is certainly reason to be excited about the Philadelphia Eagles as they are clearly going all in this season and in the near future to get a Super Bowl championship, but the only thing that appears able to slow down the Packers is a Super Bowl hangover. Not even injuries were able to slow them down last year, so if the Packers come back hungry to win and having so many people and players like Vince Young ready to dub the Eagles the “Dream Team” could inspire the Packers to make a bid for back to back Super Bowls. In the era of free agency, it is increasingly silly to suggest that the Super Bowl champs are the champs until they are knocked off, but the Packers appear poised to be the exception. There is good news, Eagles fans: There does not appear to be any reason the Eagles will not be in position to be a serious contender for the next few years.
    Comments 21 Comments
    1. Sascha's Avatar
      Sascha -
      They're not my favorites. I think they're the pick to win the division, but I think Green Bay and New Orleans might be better overall. Atlanta, New York, Tampa, St. Louis, Detroit, Arizona and Dallas are all players, and no matter what, I wouldn't sleep on last year's conference runner-up Chicago.
    1. Peter Smith's Avatar
      Peter Smith -
      I know the winner of the NFC West could conceivably get on a roll and "anything can happen", but I really, really have a hard time seeing them win games against 3 legitimate playoff teams in a row.

      I am still very iffy on Dallas and while I could see Detroit taking off, I still think it is a year away and at least a year of healthy Stafford.
    1. Sascha's Avatar
      Sascha -
      Don't get me wrong, Green Bay, New Orleans and Philly are clearly the favorites. The rest of the teams I mentioned are simply playoff contenders.
    1. Blackmallard's Avatar
      Blackmallard -
      Breaking it down position by position, the Packers have a clear advantage at quarterback as Aaron Rodgers is an elite quarterback and they have advantages at tight end, and wide receiver. While some people might take DeSean Jackson over Greg Jennings, there is no question the Packers have a substantially better overall unit at that position. Brent Celek is a talented tight end in Philadelphia, but Jermichael Finley is a mismatch the second he steps onto the field. The Eagles have an advantage at running back and the offensive line might be a slight advantage towards Green Bay in terms of depth, there is no clear advantage one way or the other.
      While I wouldn't call the Packers disadvantaged, I don't think anyone has a clear advantage over the Eagles at quarterback the way Mike Vick played last year. Mike Vick might be looking at another MVP type season, he stacked up against everyone in the NFL last year. I get that you probably don't like him and probably bagged on him all those years in Atlanta, but Rogers has never played better than Vick has been playing for the Eagles.

      I also do question whether the Packers have a substantially better wide receiver unit. Desean Jackson and Greg Jennings are the only two impact WR's between the units, the rest of the receivers are all in more complementary roles and it is indeed debateable which of them is better. No disrespect to Donald Driver, but Jeremy Maclin is better than anyone else the Packers have after Jennings. Its possible that Jordy Nelson will build on his playoff run and breakout, but I give Maclin the edge there from what we've seen. I give the WR edge to whichever team's #1 plays better, which could easily be Jackson if he continues to build on his strong early career.

      If Finley comes back strong he's certainly a better receiver than any TE the Eagles have, but we're not talking about an Antonio Gates or Tony Gonzales. Count him with the receivers and I like Green Bay's overall depth better but not enough to offset the next thing I'm going to talk about which is:

      You mention in passing that the Eagles have better running backs, but it goes far beyond that. They have a MUCH more dangerous running game than the Packers by far. When you consider that the Eagles are able to challenge the Packers in terms of their potential through the air, I give the overall edge on offense to the Eagles considering how dangerous they are on the ground between Vick, McCoy and now Ronnie Brown. Ronnie Brown has more potential to make impact plays than anyone who is rushing for the Packers and he's basically an afterthought on the Eagles at the moment.

      Its hard to judge the Eagles on defense, but they have the potential to be positively frightening against the pass. Put Asomugha on Jennings and all of a sudden the Packers receivers aren't going to look like they outmatch Philly's at all. I do question whether they can come together to be as good as they are on paper, but they have the most talented corners in the league.
    1. Hawkeye's Avatar
      Hawkeye -
      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      I get that you probably don't like him and probably bagged on him all those years in Atlanta, but Rogers has never played better than Vick has been playing for the Eagles.
      That's pretty funny that you would say that. It's flat-out not true. If you compare their two best seasons, Rodgers easily outplays Vick.

      Rodgers
      2010-65.7%, 3922 yards, 28 TDs vs 11 ints, 101.2 rating; 356 yards rushing (5.6) 4 TDs (4 fumbles)
      Playoffs-68.2%, 1094 yards, 9 TDs vs 2 ints
      2009-64.7%, 4434 yards, 30 TDs vs 7 ints, 103.2 rating; 316 yards rushing (5.4) 5 TDs (10 fumbles)

      Vick
      2010-62.6%, 3018 yards, 21 TDs vs 6 ints, 100.2 rating; 676 yards rushing (6.8) 9 TDs (11 fumbles)
      Playoffs-55.6%, 292 yards, 1 TD vs 1 int, 79.9 rating
      2006-52.6%, 2474 yards, 20 TDs vs 13 ints, 75.7 rating; 1039 yards rushing (8.4) 2 TDs (9 fumbles)

      I know what you're going to say next.......but Vick missed four games. If we use Vick's pace to estimate a 16 game season, that works out to 4024 yards, 28 TDs vs 8 ints, 901 yards rushing and 12 TDs (14 fumbles). That's comparable to Rodgers' season, but not unquestionably better and not more efficient. It's still not better than Rodgers' 2009 season either, so saying that Rodgers has never played better than Vick is untrue. Vick is still not as efficient, not as good at protecting the football and not as good in the playoffs.
    1. Peter Smith's Avatar
      Peter Smith -
      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      While I wouldn't call the Packers disadvantaged, I don't think anyone has a clear advantage over the Eagles at quarterback the way Mike Vick played last year.
      Michael Vick's play literally went with his legs' health and the Packers played the Eagles in the playoffs, so Rodgers and Vick went head to head. Rodgers threw 3 TDs while Vick's last play of the game was that terrible decision where he threw up a punt, which was intercepted and the Eagles lost the game. He should have run, but his legs were not healthy. Then Aaron Rodgers went on and won the Super Bowl. I am not sure how that does not demonstrate a clear advantage at quarterback, but to each his own.
    1. Blackmallard's Avatar
      Blackmallard -
      Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye View Post
      I know what you're going to say next.......but Vick missed four games.
      Actually what I was going to say next was "why are you using one of Vick's Falcons seasons"?

      And no, I don't look at those statlines you put up and think that it shows Rogers as easily outplaying Vick's Eagles season on a game for game basis at all. He had better passing efficiency by an insignificant amount which Vick more than makes up for by being the best running QB of all time. Vick was hardly prone to turning the ball over and Rogers has his share of 10 fumble seasons himself.
    1. Blackmallard's Avatar
      Blackmallard -
      Quote Originally Posted by Peter Smith View Post
      Michael Vick's play literally went with his legs' health and the Packers played the Eagles in the playoffs, so Rodgers and Vick went head to head. Rodgers threw 3 TDs while Vick's last play of the game was that terrible decision where he threw up a punt, which was intercepted and the Eagles lost the game. He should have run, but his legs were not healthy. Then Aaron Rodgers went on and won the Super Bowl. I am not sure how that does not demonstrate a clear advantage at quarterback, but to each his own.
      If you boil the entire season into one game from one guy and one play from another guy you can make any point you want. Just not very well. If you compare their seasons then Vick stacks up just fine.


      I take it by the lack of response that you concede the 4/5ths of my post about the Eagles that wasn't about Vick.
    1. Peter Smith's Avatar
      Peter Smith -
      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      If you boil the entire season into one game from one guy and one play from another guy you can make any point you want. Just not very well. If you compare their seasons then Vick stacks up just fine.
      Except for the fact that Aaron Rodgers was better and more successful as illustrated by the statistics and the Super Bowl win. If you want to call that stacking up just fine, you are welcome to it.

      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      I take it by the lack of response that you concede the 4/5ths of my post about the Eagles that wasn't about Vick.
      My lack of response is not to suggest I am conceding anything... you are welcome to your opinion. I disagreed with it in the article.

      Jeremy Maclin is a good receiver, but I will take the unit of Donald Driver, James Jones, and Jordy Nelson over Maclin, Jason Avant, and Riley Cooper.

      As for Asomugha and such... that is why they brought him in, but the strength of the Packers passing game is they are never afraid to spread the ball around. Rodgers finds the guy who is open and lets them make the plays, such as Jordy Nelson in the Super Bowl, which you already mentioned.

      The Eagles running game is better, although Ryan Grant was injured much of last season and James Starks came on late in the year, so it remains to be seen what they can do this year. Suggesting the Eagles running game is better and the offense overall as a result was certainly true for last season and could be true again this year.
    1. Hawkeye's Avatar
      Hawkeye -
      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      Actually what I was going to say next was "why are you using one of Vick's Falcons seasons"?

      And no, I don't look at those statlines you put up and think that it shows Rogers as easily outplaying Vick's Eagles season on a game for game basis at all. He had better passing efficiency by an insignificant amount which Vick more than makes up for by being the best running QB of all time. Vick was hardly prone to turning the ball over and Rogers has his share of 10 fumble seasons himself.
      I didn't say game for game basis. As a whole, Rodgers had a better season. If you want to believe otherwise, that is up to you. Rodgers also outplayed him where it counts......the playoffs. So basically you're negating Rodgers better passing efficiency by giving Vick the arbitrary title of best running QB of all time? Already better than Randall Cunningham?

      Well, I suppose if one 10 fumble season counts as "his share", then yes he has......and nine the year before that.
      How about Vick? Eleven in 2010 and 2005. Sixteen in 2004. Nine in 2006 and 2002. In 2009 he only had 24 attempts and was out of football in 2008 and 2007, so there's no cherry picking here. He's fumble-prone and has been everytime he has played the majority of the season. So being the "best running QB of all time" is great and all, but not when it significantly increases the risk of coughing the ball up to the other team.
    1. Blackmallard's Avatar
      Blackmallard -
      Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye View Post
      So basically you're negating Rodgers better passing efficiency by giving Vick the arbitrary title of best running QB of all time? Already better than Randall Cunningham?
      Rodgers passing efficiency edge is so small as to be insignificant. You're talking about 100.2 vs 101.2 and when you break down the individual categories they are similarly so close that it is not a significant edge for Rodgers.

      Yes I think Michael Vick has already surpassed Randall Cunningham as the best rushing quarterback of all time, I didn't even think that was a debate. He's a better more dangerous runner than Cunningham ever was. He's faster, more athletic, rushes for more yards per carry, per game, per season, and barring an injury will have rushed for more yards on his career sometime this season. By the end of this season Vick will have more rushing yards, more rushing TD's, better yards per attempt, and fewer fumbles than Randall Cunningham while having played in about 40 fewer games and having received fewer total carries. What is the argument that Cunningham was a better runner exactly?

      Well, I suppose if one 10 fumble season counts as "his share", then yes he has......and nine the year before that.
      My numbers show that Rodgers has been starting for three seasons and fumbled 10 times in two of them.

      How about Vick? Eleven in 2010 and 2005. Sixteen in 2004. Nine in 2006 and 2002. In 2009 he only had 24 attempts and was out of football in 2008 and 2007, so there's no cherry picking here. He's fumble-prone and has been everytime he has played the majority of the season. So being the "best running QB of all time" is great and all, but not when it significantly increases the risk of coughing the ball up to the other team.

      Turning the ball over too much has never been Vick's problem. Obviously the way he runs he does fumble, of course Rodgers has a similar number of fumbles that you'd expect from a typical Vick season in 2/3 years. Vick has always thrown few interceptions no matter how you slice it whether you look at it per game or per attempt. His issue in Atlanta was essentially completion percentage, he had trouble connecting with his receivers. That hasn't been a problem in Philly, so the offense has exploded.

      Vick played like an elite quarterback last year, and unless he gets worse you can't count anyone as having an advantage at the QB position over the Eagles right now. He was performing right there with the very best in the league in every way. He is missing a track record of consistency that guys like Manning, Brady, and Brees have but he put up an elite season, and I think last year is a lot more indicative of what sort of player he is than seasons we can dig up from the Falcons from 2006 and before.
    1. Chris Raiden's Avatar
      Chris Raiden -
      Getting away from the Vick v. Rodgers debate for a moment (edge: guy with the ring in my book)... As a team, the Packers and Saints start with a major edge: same coaches, same key players (give or take), same systems. The biggest argument against the Eagles right now is trying to mesh all these new parts in the span of about five week versus two teams that have spent years melding their parts into working units and now have five weeks to integrate 2-3 new parts versus 5-6 on defense alone. That's going to be the big difference early on. It could have a bigger impact down the stretch when the injuries start to take their toll and the Eagles start breaking in even more new guys versus New Orleans and Green Bay, both of which are going to be going to stocks of spare parts with more time in system.
    1. Sascha's Avatar
      Sascha -
      Peter, you mentioned Avant and Maclin and co. but forgot about Johnny Lee Higgins. I think he adds another dimension, especially to the deep game.
    1. Peter Smith's Avatar
      Peter Smith -
      Quote Originally Posted by r5d3 View Post
      Peter, you mentioned Avant and Maclin and co. but forgot about Johnny Lee Higgins. I think he adds another dimension, especially to the deep game.
      I mentioned him in the article... I think he is a good pick up for them.
    1. Hawkeye's Avatar
      Hawkeye -
      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      Rodgers passing efficiency edge is so small as to be insignificant. You're talking about 100.2 vs 101.2 and when you break down the individual categories they are similarly so close that it is not a significant edge for Rodgers.
      You’re talking about insignificant and then you want to factor in Vick’s rushing to give him an edge. If they had the same number of carries, he edges Rodgers by 126 yards or an extra 8 yards a game for Rodgers to get there. That’s not much.

      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      Yes I think Michael Vick has already surpassed Randall Cunningham as the best rushing quarterback of all time, I didn't even think that was a debate. He's a better more dangerous runner than Cunningham ever was. He's faster, more athletic, rushes for more yards per carry, per game, per season, and barring an injury will have rushed for more yards on his career sometime this season. By the end of this season Vick will have more rushing yards, more rushing TD's, better yards per attempt, and fewer fumbles than Randall Cunningham while having played in about 40 fewer games and having received fewer total carries. What is the argument that Cunningham was a better runner exactly?
      He’s faster and more athletic? You know this how? Of course he’s going to have less fumbles, you just said it will be in 40less games. Come see me when his career is over. Ditto for his rushing average. You make a fair enough argument, but I’ll still take Cunningham because he was more dangerous as the whole package.



      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      Turning the ball over too much has never been Vick's problem. Obviously the way he runs he does fumble, of course Rodgers has a similar number of fumbles that you'd expect from a typical Vick season in 2/3 years. Vick has always thrown few interceptions no matter how you slice it whether you look at it per game or per attempt. His issue in Atlanta was essentially completion percentage, he had trouble connecting with his receivers. That hasn't been a problem in Philly, so the offense has exploded.

      Vick played like an elite quarterback last year, and unless he gets worse you can't count anyone as having an advantage at the QB position over the Eagles right now. He was performing right there with the very best in the league in every way. He is missing a track record of consistency that guys like Manning, Brady, and Brees have but he put up an elite season, and I think last year is a lot more indicative of what sort of player he is than seasons we can dig up from the Falcons from 2006 and before.
      Really? Turning the ball over has never been his problem? I’d love to live in that fantasy world.

      Vick played like an elite QB? Those passing numbers are not elite. If those numbers make him elite, then he’s also in company with Kyle Orton (58.8%, 3653 Yards 20 TDs vs 9 ints), Josh Freeman (61.4 %, 3451 yards, 25 TDs vs 6 ints), Matt Ryan (62.5%, 3705 yards, 28 TDs vs 9 ints) and Matt Cassel (58.2%, 3116 yards, 27 TDs vs 7 ints). Seriously, his numbers were average. They just look awesome considering the source. Until he puts up four more seasons like this, then his time in Atlanta is still indicative of what kind of a QB he is.
    1. Blackmallard's Avatar
      Blackmallard -
      Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye View Post
      He’s faster and more athletic? You know this how? Of course he’s going to have less fumbles, you just said it will be in 40less games. Come see me when his career is over. Ditto for his rushing average. You make a fair enough argument, but I’ll still take Cunningham because he was more dangerous as the whole package.
      Like I said when I stated Vick was the greatest rushing quarterback of all time my meaning was that he was the best at rushing, not that he was the best quarterback overall who is known for rushing.

      As for whether he is faster and rushes better than Cunningham, I have seen them both. Are you or is anyone seriously suggesting that Vick isn't faster?





      Really? Turning the ball over has never been his problem? I’d love to live in that fantasy world.
      He turned the ball over nine times total in 2010.

      16 times in 2006

      18 in 2005

      19 in 04

      14 in 02

      So, he's never turned it over 20 times in any season. People aren't used to looking at a total turnover number for QB's, fumbles lost usually get glossed over, but these are good totals. If those were interceptions alone that wouldn't be terrible, but for the combined numbers to be like that there is no case that Vick has been turnover prone. He has been the opposite.

      Compare that with Drew Brees, who to my knowledge isn't considered turnover prone and is universally considered an elite QB

      24 in 10

      17 in 09

      18 in 08

      22 in 07

      And don't get me started on QB's who have actually had turnover issues like Brett Favre, Eli Manning, or Jay Cutler. Do I really have to even look them up? Those are all successful QB's and all have multiple seasons where they threw more interceptions than Vick has ever had combined fumbles lost and interceptions.

      Vick doesn't turn it over much, that is a fact. He throws very few interceptions, and the fact that his style leads to above average fumbles doesn't offset that. Also, its hardly rare for QB's to fumble around 10 times in a season which is about what I expect from Vick. You are the one in a fantasy land if you think he has ever turned the ball over a lot.

      Vick played like an elite QB? Those passing numbers are not elite. If those numbers make him elite, then he’s also in company with Kyle Orton (58.8%, 3653 Yards 20 TDs vs 9 ints), Josh Freeman (61.4 %, 3451 yards, 25 TDs vs 6 ints), Matt Ryan (62.5%, 3705 yards, 28 TDs vs 9 ints) and Matt Cassel (58.2%, 3116 yards, 27 TDs vs 7 ints).
      You realize that everyone you just listed had a career year, and also didn't put up efficiency numbers or yards per game or score as many touchdowns as Vick did right? Heck, Matt Ryan was even a pro-bowler. You just listed a bunch of people who had good seasons, and Vick's was better than any of them. That is the definition of "elite".


      Seriously, his numbers were average. They just look awesome considering the source.
      No, they look awesome because Vick was on fire last year and put up a bunch of monster games.
    1. Texecutioner's Avatar
      Texecutioner -
      Quote Originally Posted by Blackmallard View Post
      Like I said when I stated Vick was the greatest rushing quarterback of all time my meaning was that he was the best at rushing, not that he was the best quarterback overall who is known for rushing.

      As for whether he is faster and rushes better than Cunningham, I have seen them both. Are you or is anyone seriously suggesting that Vick isn't faster?







      He turned the ball over nine times total in 2010.

      16 times in 2006

      18 in 2005

      19 in 04

      14 in 02

      So, he's never turned it over 20 times in any season. People aren't used to looking at a total turnover number for QB's, fumbles lost usually get glossed over, but these are good totals. If those were interceptions alone that wouldn't be terrible, but for the combined numbers to be like that there is no case that Vick has been turnover prone. He has been the opposite.

      Compare that with Drew Brees, who to my knowledge isn't considered turnover prone and is universally considered an elite QB

      24 in 10

      17 in 09

      18 in 08

      22 in 07

      And don't get me started on QB's who have actually had turnover issues like Brett Favre, Eli Manning, or Jay Cutler. Do I really have to even look them up? Those are all successful QB's and all have multiple seasons where they threw more interceptions than Vick has ever had combined fumbles lost and interceptions.

      Vick doesn't turn it over much, that is a fact. He throws very few interceptions, and the fact that his style leads to above average fumbles doesn't offset that. Also, its hardly rare for QB's to fumble around 10 times in a season which is about what I expect from Vick. You are the one in a fantasy land if you think he has ever turned the ball over a lot.



      You realize that everyone you just listed had a career year, and also didn't put up efficiency numbers or yards per game or score as many touchdowns as Vick did right? Heck, Matt Ryan was even a pro-bowler. You just listed a bunch of people who had good seasons, and Vick's was better than any of them. That is the definition of "elite".




      No, they look awesome because Vick was on fire last year and put up a bunch of monster games.
      Vick doesn't all of a sudden become elite after one season especially when he went to an offense that had the best skill position players in the entire NFL with a HC that has been successful playing a ton of QB's in his system before Vick ever showed up. Let's remember that Jeff Garcia had become an after thought before having to become the starter in Philly as well and all of a sudden he starts getting all these wins and looks like a much better QB again and he didn't have anywhere near as good of weapons as Vick has gotten to play with.
    1. Blackmallard's Avatar
      Blackmallard -
      Quote Originally Posted by Texecutioner View Post
      Vick doesn't all of a sudden become elite after one season
      True its only been one year so we'll have to see how he follows it up, but I think that what we saw last season is closer to what you should expect going forward than anything from the 06 and earlier Falcons. Whether Vick got better or he's just in a better situation I don't think the Eagles offense is all of a sudden going to look like the old Falcons.

      especially when he went to an offense that had the best skill position players in the entire NFL
      I take it you agree with me then that the Packers don't have overall better receivers/running backs? To me the receiver question comes down to whether you think Deshawn Jackson or Greg Jennings is better, but they are close. Philly's running backs are much better though and its not really close.

      with a HC that has been successful playing a ton of QB's in his system before Vick ever showed up. Let's remember that Jeff Garcia had become an after thought before having to become the starter in Philly as well and all of a sudden he starts getting all these wins and looks like a much better QB again and he didn't have anywhere near as good of weapons as Vick has gotten to play with.
      I like what I saw from Vick better than what I saw out of Garcia or McNabb. At the same time its not like Garcia's success in Philly was some sort of illusion because he did pretty well in Tampa after he left as well, and they were hardly a QB factory under Gruden. So I think a lot of that turnaround was just that Garcia was good despite his struggles in Cleveland.
    1. l.a. no-teamers's Avatar
      l.a. no-teamers -
      With all due respect to Cunningham, I too don't even think it's even debatable that Vick is the best runner the QB position has ever seen in the NFL. Vick trumps him (and everyone else) in just about every rushing category imaginable. He beats Cunningham in the eye test too in terms of explosiveness.

      As far as Vick the player, I have to agree with BM here also, in that you can only project him on his most recent play rather than how he played 5 years ago. Obviously one year is a small sample, and while not a great indicator, it is a more pertinent indicator than dated samples. We can all agree that Vick has always been uber talented, so why is it hard to agree that it's possible he's finally harnessed that talent.
    1. MovingExpress's Avatar
      MovingExpress -
      While it's possible, the real question is, is it repeatable? Last year, he was a new man, but he played better early on than in the playoffs and late season run. We need to see how he reacts to NFL defenses "figuring him out" now.
  • Pigskin Heaven on Facebook
  • The Forums

    Have you checked out the Pigskin Heaven Forums lately? Stop by today for more hard hitting discussion and content, much like the articles you're reading now, and as always, it's 100% free. So register today, and get in on all the action!