The Open Mat Forum

Miscellaneous => Polls => Topic started by: a guest on August 18, 2009, 11:20:33 AM

Title: Favre or Vick
Post by: a guest on August 18, 2009, 11:20:33 AM
Lots of stuff out there regarding these two quarterbacks playing in the 2009-2010 season.  If you were an owner, who would you rather sign today?
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 11:22:46 AM
i'd pick the one who is not 41 years old.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 11:35:55 AM
I will take Vick, but not as a QB
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: buck on August 18, 2009, 12:16:02 PM
Favre was good 10 years ago, Vick is 29.  Easy choice.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: ViseGrip on August 18, 2009, 12:19:13 PM
Quote from: "Viratas"
I will take Vick, but not as a QB
My sentiments exactly.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: nywrestler4life on August 18, 2009, 01:48:10 PM
Vick still has a huge career in front of him.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 02:32:21 PM
You may be correct

I would make his a FS
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 02:46:22 PM
Quote from: "Viratas"
You may be correct

I would make his a FS

even though he has never played defense or hit anyone, you make him a defensive player.

-tom cruise laugh-
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 03:03:07 PM
Yes I would. FS is the least physical position on Defense.

Deon Sanders did pretty well and Vick has hit more guys as a QB the Sanders ever did as a FS. Also, as an ex QB he would have decent reads. Also, I am sure he has never tackled anyone right Jimmy?

I would also consider him a slot player, but then again you dont think he can take a hit so maybe not.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: ViseGrip on August 18, 2009, 03:43:45 PM
Quote from: "Viratas"
Yes I would. FS is the least physical position on Defense.

Deon Sanders did pretty well and Vick has hit more guys as a QB the Sanders ever did as a FS. Also, as an ex QB he would have decent reads. Also, I am sure he has never tackled anyone right Jimmy?

I would also consider him a slot player, but then again you dont think he can take a hit so maybe not.

I tend to disagree on the physicality of cornerbacks over FSs. FS are still charged with some run support and generally not so with CBs.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 03:47:10 PM
well I suppose if your idea to make Vick a defensive back is so brilliant, there is a good chance the professionals in the Viking Org. will recognize the same idea, and we will be seeing Vick playing defense soon.

[video:333z0k79]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU4p5CcZvh4&feature=PlayList&p=CDB7F53E604EC07A&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=11[/video:333z0k79]
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 04:31:21 PM
Jimmy football is a topic I know I can run circles around you in. Specifically from a position by position break down so you will not in the least annoy me on this one.

VG. I Disagree in Most Defenses the FS Job is to be the saftey valve and not come up for any major run support, that is the job of the SS. Corners contain and FS chase. If you FS is coming up and making a lot of tackles most likely you SS sucks as do you LB's. The FS also serves as Secondary Contain for the Corners.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 05:16:05 PM
I have plenty of football experience.  Maybe not as much as you, but enough to know that winning is everything in the NFL.  And if the professionals in the Eagle organization from the Owner to GM to Assistants to Scouts to Coaches to Head Coach believe as YOU do, that Vick should be used as the starting Free Safety, surely that is where they will put him.

Why do YOU think that in reality there is not a snowballs chance in hell Vick EVER plays on defense.  

The answer to that question should shed some light on your fun Madden-esque theory.

And if you are really suggesting Vick is best suited to play FS, you are doing a horrible disservice to your football credibility.

If vick plays safety I will give you a huge apology.  But the professionals know that Vick has no business being used at FS.  That is an 'armchair' theory if I have ever heard one!!  LOL
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 05:17:54 PM
Next V is going to tell us Usain Bolt needs to be starting for the Bears at WR bc Hester and Co. can't get it done.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 05:59:46 PM
Yea ok Jimmy I feel so much worse now that you disagree with me.

He was not that good of a QB in the NFL before this, so what makes you think he will be good now? You can think my opinion is absurd all you want. Yea nobody is moving him and yea they are professional coaches so I am sure they are all smart cookies. Thats why the always win right? I would look at moving him awau from QB. Maybe Def. Maybe not, I think he could have a far more productive career at a postion other then QB.

Reasons I believe he would make a good FS.

1. Speed
2. Play making ability
3. Knowledge of the offense and abilty to read
4. Height.

Now please come back with another one of your oh so insightful posts.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 06:06:08 PM
If you polled every scout, GM and coach in the NFL they would all say that moving Vick to defense is a dumb dumb dumb idea.

You know that too.

That is all I will say on the subject.  I'll keep my eye out this year and see if he plays Defense tho V.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 06:22:57 PM
Yea that was my point. See arguements and debates with you are all the same. "Well this is what every one says and does so it must be so". What was once funny is no longer. its just tiresome and old material. I know you are a bright guy, but see the difference between you and me and most others with the exception of your step dad sparky is that we do not feel a dire need to go out and "prove or in your case attempt to prove" that we are oh so smart. You thrive off feeble attempts at belittling people to stroke your own fragile ego. Thats cool I am used to it and still like you.

Also if you polled the GM's the Majority would not take him at all, as was pretty much the case. Now go text sparky and tell him you pwned me little fella while you rub one out to some Tom Cruise movie.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 06:29:02 PM
you are psychoanalyzing me too much.

I just called you out that suggesting Vick is best suited to play Free Safety in the NFL is a dumb idea and would never happen.  The people that know football best (GMs, Scouts, Assistants, Head Coaches, Owners, etc. etc.) agree with me.

I like you too.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 06:31:12 PM
Quote from: "Jimmy the Gent"
you are psychoanalyzing me too much.

I just called you out that suggesting Vick is best suited to play Free Safety in the NFL is a dumb idea and would never happen.  The people that know football best (GMs, Scouts, Assistants, Head Coaches, Owners, etc. etc.) agree with me.

I like you too.

Stop being an idiot or will punch you as I am not above vilolence at all. I never said he would be best suited, I am saying i would give him a look there. Now I am not a GM or HC so no worries really. Iwill say with out a doubt I do not think he is a good NFL QB though.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 06:35:55 PM
you should never resort to violence.

I don't think Vick is a great quarterback.  He is borderline 'good'.  I'd say he is in the middle of the 32 starting QBs.  

However as a Free Safety, I would almost guarantee he would be in the bottom 5% of starting FS in the NFL
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 06:38:13 PM
I am surprised you chose the career you did, I would think someone as smart as you in every topic would be running a team or Company by now. :D  

I would say right now he would be at the bottom 2 years aways is a long time in the Pro Game. He was avg. before this all happened.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: "Viratas"
I am surprised you chose the career you did, I would think someone as smart as you in every topic would be running a team or Company by now. :D  

I would say right now he would be at the bottom 2 years aways is a long time in the Pro Game. He was avg. before this all happened.

If by average you mean selected to the Pro Bowl multiple times, then, yes, he was average.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 07:20:21 PM
Look at his stats (as a passer not a runner) Yea the Pro-bowl has nothing to do with popularity either?

His TD to Int ratio is not so hot. Career 75 passer rating. Yea I would say Average.

Best year was 2002 passer rating wise with 16 TD and 8 INT.. Yea thats stellar.

Take that season out and he is avg. at best.

Hell T Jack has better stats the Vick career wise and we all know he is well below average.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 07:33:40 PM
LOL!

You intentionally ignore Vick's ability as a RUNNING QB so as to make your argument work ALOT better.  hehe.

I never thought you would resort to that type of debate tactic in which case I must respond:

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

That is what made him a unique QB - his runnings ability.  Oh, but let's just not "count" that.  jeez V, step it up man.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 07:39:51 PM
If the NFL made a rule that Vick was not allowed to rush for TDs (He has rushed for 21 TDs) or rush for positive yards (he has rushed for nearly 4,000 yards) I would agree with you.  He is a below average QB.

But since the NFL hasn't made any rules to stop Vick from using his legs, as it stands he is an average/ above average-to-good QB.

That is hardly debatable V.  Let's be realistic my friend.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 07:43:02 PM
No it makes him a good runner. Did all the ability lead them to the promise land?

Vince Young can run is he Above Average? Oh yea and so was Daunte Culpecker.

His career record is 38-28-1

He rushed for over 1K yards once.

But hey I am sure you are right I am wrong just as you always are big guy. Feel better liitle one?

Good QB's win football games period.

If all there was to being a QB was to run around then AP would be a hall of fame guy at QB I guess.

Most Rushing TD's in a season by a QB

Steve Crogan 12 (NE, 1976)
Kordell Stewart 11 (PIT, 1997)
Tobin Rote 11 (GB, 1956)
Johnny Lujack 11 (CHI, 1950)
Daunte Culpepper 10 (MIN, 2002)
Billy Kilmer 10 (SF, 1961)
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 18, 2009, 08:09:13 PM
Quote from: "Viratas"
No it makes him a good runner. Did all the ability lead them to the promise land?

Oh, okay, I didn't know that for a quarterback to be considered average-to-good he had to get to the promised land.  Nice logic.

Vince Young can run is he Above Average? Oh yea and so was Daunte Culpecker.

Vince Young can run but he did not do well in the NFL.  So because Vince Young failed as a running QB, that somehow takes away from Vick succeeding as a running QB?  Nice Logic.  And by the way, when Culpepper retires, his body of work will be considered to be that of, most definitely, an above average QB.

His career record is 38-28-1

That is a career record that admittedly only includes about 4 full seasons, but as far as that time period ten games over .500 is most definitely nothing to be ashamed of for an NFL QB.  

He rushed for over 1K yards once.

Correct.  He did rush for over 1,000 yards once. In fact he is the only QB in the history of the NFL to do so!  He also ran for 600, 700 and 900 yards in other seasons.  Pretty awesome coming from a QB.

Good QB's win football games period.  

I agree.  Vick revolutionized the position.  And had modest success at it as evidenced by his 58% winning percentage.  You seem to be setting up a strawman, that I believe Vick was the best thing since sliced bread.  I never said that.  I said he was an average-to-good NFL QB, which he is.  And any honest or objective person will tell you the same thing.


You need to work on your debate skills you resort to strawmen and nastiness too often Viratas.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Viratas on August 18, 2009, 08:12:07 PM
LOL This coming from you? Pot meet Kettle, welcome the sparky world of circular arguements.

The king of turning things into nastiness is being critical of me?

Jimmy you are to funny.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: ViseGrip on August 19, 2009, 11:51:20 AM
Quote from: "Viratas"
LOL This coming from you? Pot meet Kettle, welcome the sparky world of circular arguements.

The king of turning things into nastiness is being critical of me?

Jimmy you are to funny.

Both he AND his side-kick Sparkles need lessons on the psychological aspects of the term projection.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Black-n-Red on August 21, 2009, 09:38:17 PM
...and someone needs to do a GOOGLE search of Psycho-Babble 101 and get another term besides "projection" to throw out there.  You use that one way too much.

Isn't this the point where Sparky should chime in and claim that he's living in your head rent-free?
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: royboy on August 21, 2009, 11:38:39 PM
let me make this clear. I hated Michael Vick way before hating him was cool. lol.

He is a ball hog. That is it. I bet he could be a pretty good quarterback if he actually ever cared about learning how to play the position...but he didn't ever really do anything but be a ball hog.

Cue the scene from semipro when Downtown Funky Stuff Malone gets  verbally belittled b/c he has tons of talent and that is it...Now replace him with Mike Vick.

I think he'd do good at running back or reciever or in some crazy wildcat formation. But as a coach I would put the ball hog on defense. That way if he gets the ball he actually deserves it for doing his job. Instead he gets the ball and decides he wants the glory every play. Seriously go back and watch some of his losses. The guy was a degenerate ballhog that went to jail for two years. Now he is out and is gonna be around long enough for people to forgive the dumb crap he did and pay off his debt...

as for picking between him and Favre Id have to go with him b/c I am sick and gnikcuf tired of hearing that dinosaurs name.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 22, 2009, 01:55:07 AM
if by ball hog you mean a qb that can also run for over 1000 yards in a season then, yes, he was a ball hog, a ball hog that the coaches loved and opposing defenses hated.

a qb that had multiple pro bowls in 5 years, an NFC title game, and a 60% win percentage as a qb in the nfl.

nice call.  ball hogs suck, just ask michael jordon.

nice fail douchebag.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: royboy on August 23, 2009, 12:46:44 PM
Yea 1000 yards rushing as a quarterback. who is he playing for army?

One thing you won't see on his resume is a superbowl ring. he'll never have one unless hes on the bench.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 23, 2009, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: "royboy"
Yea 1000 yards rushing as a quarterback. who is he playing for army?

One thing you won't see on his resume is a superbowl ring. he'll never have one unless hes on the bench.

lol.  so what are you suggesting?  That if a QB doesn't have a superbowl ring on his resume he isn't good?

What an idiot.  nice logic.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: royboy on August 23, 2009, 11:14:22 PM
not my thoughts at all. Prior to everyone hating him it seemed like people predicting him to change the way we play football for good. By having a superstar ball hog run a retarded broken offense. He could get his team so far but in the playoffs they would fall against good defenses. b/c as good as he was he wasn't really a good qb.
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Indiana Wrestler on August 24, 2009, 04:29:21 AM
Vick, but only to instill a goal-line offense with him as QB or RB/Wing. As a QB he'd be familiar w/ handing off, reading D. He'd b able to roll out with a triple option/wildcat formation. However, if I needed a QB for a single season while my rookie QB develops, I would chose Farve. Vick is a play-maker, not a franchise. Favre will help you win early in the year when he's healthy, and let your rookie learn from one of the greatest QB playmakers all time
Title: Re: Favre or Vick
Post by: Jimmy the Gent on August 24, 2009, 02:40:41 PM
Quote from: "royboy"

 He could get his team so far but in the playoffs they would fall against good defenses. b/c as good as he was he wasn't really a good qb.


Huh?  so what you are saying is that unless a QB makes it to the Superbowl he is not a good quarterback?

Again, nice stupid logic there.

Do I have to remind you that Vick led his team to the NFC Championship game?