Mike Vick - can he coheres the offense?

[Legacy User]

No, a near-pick is an incompletion, so it matters no more than a ball thrown into the fuckin' stands....zero to do with fantasy.

As I said, that's a complete oversimplification of assessing QB play. Throwing a ball into the stands is completely different than throwing it directly into the defenders' hands. If you can't see the difference there, then you're a fucking moron. They may look the same on the stat sheet, but one shows obvious signs of a QB making horrible reads and even worse throws that could easily lose a game for you. Just because Vick got lucky and didn't get burned on those throws, doesn't mean he was playing good football.

It boggles my mind that people are dumb enough to argue this.

Seems like the stat that some of you fuckers want to ignore is that Michael Vick put up a pair of 4Q touchdowns, each time answering the opponent's score, to win a fuckin' game, which if his team had lost...they'd be in a substantial hole.

And played like dog shit the rest of the time. How about the throw that lost the Ravens game? If we're singling out individual plays and pretending they summarize all of Vick's entire tenure at QB this season, why can't I pick that one?

Maybe we should count "almost touchdowns" then, Fuckface....like the one AB dropped from Vick against Baltimore.

Go ahead. The bad throws still grossly outnumber the good throws.

[Smashmouth21]

No, a near-pick is an incompletion, so it matters no more than a ball thrown into the fuckin' stands....zero to do with fantasy.

As I said, that's a complete oversimplification of assessing QB play. Throwing a ball into the stands is completely different than throwing it directly into the defenders' hands. If you can't see the difference there, then you're a fucking moron. They may look the same on the stat sheet, but one shows obvious signs of a QB making horrible reads and even worse throws that could easily lose a game for you. Just because Vick got lucky and didn't get burned on those throws, doesn't mean he was playing good football.

It boggles my mind that people are dumb enough to argue this.

Seems like the stat that some of you fuckers want to ignore is that Michael Vick put up a pair of 4Q touchdowns, each time answering the opponent's score, to win a fuckin' game, which if his team had lost...they'd be in a substantial hole.

And played like dog shit the rest of the time. How about the throw that lost the Ravens game? If we're singling out individual plays and pretending they summarize all of Vick's entire tenure at QB this season, why can't I pick that one?

Maybe we should count "almost touchdowns" then, Fuckface....like the one AB dropped from Vick against Baltimore.

Most sane people do give credit to Vick for that throw. He was pretty much shit the rest of the time and so are the rest of your rationalizations.

[swissvale72]

Smashmouth is a pea-brained dipshit.

Rationalize that.

[Smashmouth21]

Smashmouth is a pea-brained dipshit.

Rationalize that.

[stinger8]

Smashmouth is a pea-brained dipshit.

Rationalize that.

[Legacy User]

Smashmouth is a pea-brained dipshit.

Rationalize that.

Hahahahahahaha. That's fantastic.

[Legacy User]

As I said, that's a complete oversimplification of assessing QB play. Throwing a ball into the stands is completely different than throwing it directly into the defenders' hands. If you can't see the difference there, then you're a fucking moron. They may look the same on the stat sheet, but one shows obvious signs of a QB making horrible reads and even worse throws that could easily lose a game for you. Just because Vick got lucky and didn't get burned on those throws, doesn't mean he was playing good football.

It boggles my mind that people are dumb enough to argue this.


And played like dog shit the rest of the time. How about the throw that lost the Ravens game? If we're singling out individual plays and pretending they summarize all of Vick's entire tenure at QB this season, why can't I pick that one?

Maybe we should count "almost touchdowns" then, Fuckface....like the one AB dropped from Vick against Baltimore.

Most sane people do give credit to Vick for that throw. He was pretty much shit the rest of the time and so are the rest of your rationalizations.

Yeah, that pass actually gave me hope that Vick could actually work as a starter for a few games.

Unfortunate, it's mostly been a shit show ever since that throw.

[swissvale72]

I sense Crosby, Smashmouth & Stinger are this site's equivalent of the Three Stooges....without the good humor.

[Legacy User]

I sense Crosby, Smashmouth & Stinger are this site's equivalent of the Three Stooges....without the good humor.

I sense that you ran out of arguments to support your asinine position and are resorting to insults to make yourself feel better about it.

[swissvale72]

I sense Crosby, Smashmouth & Stinger are this site's equivalent of the Three Stooges....without the good humor.

I sense that you ran out of arguments to support your asinine position and are resorting to insults to make yourself feel better about it.

You fuckwads started with the insults....and my position's been consistent.

[Legacy User]

I sense Crosby, Smashmouth & Stinger are this site's equivalent of the Three Stooges....without the good humor.

I sense that you ran out of arguments to support your asinine position and are resorting to insults to make yourself feel better about it.

You fuckwads started with the insults....and my position's been consistent.

Right, but I also included counter arguments with them.

I've also been consistent in my position and have countered everything you've said. But you stopped providing your own counter arguments, so I assume you don't have any more to offer. Which doesn't look so good for your argument.

[Legacy User]

Landry Jones has never played that well as a Steeler and there were zero indications that he could play that well. Fact is, though, with Landry the whole playbook was and is open to you.

Vick was absolutely abysmal, but helped win the game when it mattered most in SD.

However, Vick was even more putrid in the 'Zona game. It was time to give Jones a shot. Tomlin is a jerk if he would not have put Landry in there. There was literally no possibility that Jones would have been worse.

[Legacy User]

Not that I read the whole thread but I'm not getting the argument here with Swiss.

Especially since the most important game time moment in the history of the franchise is the Immaculate Reception. As in unplanned, luck, just the way it worked out, couldn't had planned it better. The way this season is unfolding, I have no problem with Vick starting the games that he started.

In an alternative Stiller universe, it’s very possible if Jones was given the start with a full week to stew before ever having any in season NFL success he very well could had come in with the yips. Maybe not but who knows. I do know that if Jones started and didn’t have instant success, by the third series, the boo birds would had been out in force. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

How about Tomlin saying in the post game presser that the offense hasn’t had success in the first half? Maybe “Dumblin” didn’t want to put Jones in that position? Maybe “Dumblin” isn’t as “Dumblin” as even I thought. Maybe he’s Forrest Gump? Genius planning or unplanned, luck, just the way it worked out, couldn't had planned it better. Either way I’ll take it.

Instead LJ comes in loose as a goose in the second stanza and comes up big. Now with that under his belt he knows that he can run this offense and have success with the first team. As well as "the know it alls" keeping their yaps shut.

How it all worked out is good with me..

[Legacy User]

Not that I read the whole thread but I'm not getting the argument here with Swiss.

Especially since the most important game time moment in the history of the franchise is the Immaculate Reception. As in unplanned, luck, just the way it worked out, couldn't had planned it better. The way this season is unfolding, I have no problem with Vick starting the games that he started.

In an alternative Stiller universe, it’s very possible if Jones was given the start with a full week to stew before ever having any in season NFL success he very well could had come in with the yips. Maybe not but who knows. I do know that if Jones started and didn’t have instant success, by the third series, the boo birds would had been out in force. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

How about Tomlin saying in the post game presser that the offense hasn’t had success in the first half? Maybe “Dumblin” didn’t want to put Jones in that position? Maybe “Dumblin” isn’t as “Dumblin” as even I thought. Maybe he’s Forrest Gump? Genius planning or unplanned, luck, just the way it worked out, couldn't had planned it better. Either way I’ll take it.

Instead LJ comes in loose as a goose in the second stanza and comes up big. Now with that under his belt he knows that he can run this offense and have success with the first team. As well as "the know it alls" keeping their yaps shut.

How it all worked out is good with me..

Yes, Jones *could* have been worse. I'm not arguing otherwise. Never have.

What I'm saying is that Vick was playing so horribly, that you're dumb to not at least give him a chance and find out.

The mindset of "well, he might be worse, so we better not play him" is exactly the reason we rarely ever get the chance to see young guys step up and make plays when a veteran player so obviously sucks balls.

Yes, the other guy could very well be worse. But if the guy who's playing right now sucks, then why not find out for sure?!? What's the gamble? That he's going to come in and play slightly worse?

[stinger8]

I sense Crosby, Smashmouth & Stinger are this site's equivalent of the Three Stooges....without the good humor.

Thanks Swiss, can I be Shemp??

[swissvale72]

I sense Crosby, Smashmouth & Stinger are this site's equivalent of the Three Stooges....without the good humor.

Thanks Swiss, can I be Shemp??

I'm seeing you more like the Porcupine.

[swissvale72]

Not that I read the whole thread but I'm not getting the argument here with Swiss.

Especially since the most important game time moment in the history of the franchise is the Immaculate Reception. As in unplanned, luck, just the way it worked out, couldn't had planned it better. The way this season is unfolding, I have no problem with Vick starting the games that he started.

In an alternative Stiller universe, it’s very possible if Jones was given the start with a full week to stew before ever having any in season NFL success he very well could had come in with the yips. Maybe not but who knows. I do know that if Jones started and didn’t have instant success, by the third series, the boo birds would had been out in force. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

How about Tomlin saying in the post game presser that the offense hasn’t had success in the first half? Maybe “Dumblin” didn’t want to put Jones in that position? Maybe “Dumblin” isn’t as “Dumblin” as even I thought. Maybe he’s Forrest Gump? Genius planning or unplanned, luck, just the way it worked out, couldn't had planned it better. Either way I’ll take it.

Instead LJ comes in loose as a goose in the second stanza and comes up big. Now with that under his belt he knows that he can run this offense and have success with the first team. As well as "the know it alls" keeping their yaps shut.

How it all worked out is good with me..

Yes, Jones *could* have been worse. I'm not arguing otherwise. Never have.

What I'm saying is that Vick was playing so horribly, that you're dumb to not at least give him a chance and find out.

The mindset of "well, he might be worse, so we better not play him" is exactly the reason we rarely ever get the chance to see young guys step up and make plays when a veteran player so obviously sucks balls.

Yes, the other guy could very well be worse. But if the guy who's playing right now sucks, then why not find out for sure?!? What's the gamble? That he's going to come in and play slightly worse?

Couple things.....

Yes, Jones could have been worse.....and Lit, surprised that Aristotlian like you would postulate such absolutes.

The common criticism of Steelers not going with younger guys, etc. loses its validity when we're discussing the most important position in sports, quarterback. Steelers trailed 10-3 at halftime, had narrowed to 10-6 at the time of the Vick injury. When Jones entered the game, Steelers had the ball at the 32 and one L. Bell run later, were at the Cardinal 9-yard line. Tomlin very well could have believed, legitimately, that he could win the game with Mike Vick, the same Mike Vick that was under center when his team scored a pair of 4Q touchdowns just six days earlier....and wasn't about to switch off to a guy that had never appeared in an NFL game, and by all accounts had sucked at practice....which means something.

[Legacy User]

Couple things.....

Yes, Jones could have been worse.....and Lit, surprised that Aristotlian like you would postulate such absolutes.

The common criticism of Steelers not going with younger guys, etc. loses its validity when we're discussing the most important position in sports, quarterback. Steelers trailed 10-3 at halftime, had narrowed to 10-6 at the time of the Vick injury. When Jones entered the game, Steelers had the ball at the 32 and one L. Bell run later, were at the Cardinal 9-yard line. Tomlin very well could have believed, legitimately, that he could win the game with Mike Vick, the same Mike Vick that was under center when his team scored a pair of 4Q touchdowns just six days earlier....and wasn't about to switch off to a guy that had never appeared in an NFL game, and by all accounts had sucked at practice....which means something.

I agree that QB is insanely important, and under different circumstances, I'd agree that it's not a position you want to gamble with. The place where your argument falls apart is that Vick sucked. Horribly. You act like he was the reason for winning those games, but he wasn't. I've said before, we could have just as easily lost those games because of him. Yes, he made a very small handful of plays. But he was completely ineffective otherwise.

And are you serious about him keeping us int he AZ game?

Vick had 6 passing yards to that point.

6.

Six.

VI.

Are you really going to contend that Vick is the reason that game was close? Cause you're wrong. That's entirely on our defense and Le'veon Bell. Vick should haven't have made it out of the first quarter, let alone the first half.

[jeemie]

Are you really going to contend that Vick is the reason that game was close? Cause you're wrong. That's entirely on our defense and Le'veon Bell. Vick should haven't have made it out of the first quarter, let alone the first half.

Even moreso by Arizona repeatedly shooting itself in the foot with penalties...one of which put the Steelers in FG position to make it 10-6.

At some point, when the guy who is in is sucking so bad, when the known is awful, you have to let go of the Fear of the Unknown.

Even at the all-important QB position.

I think it was completely unreasonable for Mike Tomlin to assume Mike Vick would nut up again like he did for five minutes in San Diego...Arizona's defense was better, and much of those two last-second drives against San Diego were the result of busted defensive coverage. You can't just keep counting on that to happen again and again.

[Legacy User]

Are you really going to contend that Vick is the reason that game was close? Cause you're wrong. That's entirely on our defense and Le'veon Bell. Vick should haven't have made it out of the first quarter, let alone the first half.

Even moreso by Arizona repeatedly shooting itself in the foot with penalties...one of which put the Steelers in FG position to make it 10-6.

At some point, when the guy who is in is sucking so bad, when the known is awful, you have to let go of the Fear of the Unknown.

Even at the all-important QB position.

I think it was completely unreasonable for Mike Tomlin to assume Mike Vick would nut up again like he did for five minutes in San Diego...Arizona's defense was better, and much of those two last-second drives against San Diego were the result of busted defensive coverage. You can't just keep counting on that to happen again and again.

What coverages were busted on that last drive against SD? Let's give credit to Michael Vick where it's due - that was a fantastic drive with fantastic throws (the 15 yarder to DHB was late, however).

[jeemie]

What coverages were busted on that last drive against SD?

Wheaton tooled his man (actually outmuscled him) with the double move...no one up top to help.

The middle of the D lost contain and allowed Vick to scramble to the 16.

I'll give Vick credit on the pass to Heath, though...one of only a couple passes he threw in ALL his games that was pretty much on time and on target.

[Legacy User]

What coverages were busted on that last drive against SD?

Wheaton tooled his man (actually outmuscled him) with the double move...no one up top to help.

The middle of the D lost contain and allowed Vick to scramble to the 16.

I'll give Vick credit on the pass to Heath, though...one of only a couple passes he threw in ALL his games that was pretty much on time and on target.

I said the last drive, not the second to last drive. Did Michael Vick deliver a perfect ball on that throw to Wheaton or not? Yeah lets not give Vick any credit for that run - super weak, Jeemie. We might as well not give Landry Jones credit for his second touchdown either. Focus on what Vick could control and he performed well above the line on those last two drives.

I think you are distorting that last drive (and even the long TD throw) to suit your view - did or did not Michael Vick engineer the drive that won the game? Your contention that busted coverages were responsible for the last drive is flat out wrong and misleading.

[jeemie]

Yeah lets not give Vick any credit for that run - super weak, Jeemie. We might as well not give Landry Jones credit for his second touchdown either.

Where did I fail to give Vick credit for the run?

The defense just let the middle of the field go, though- did they not?

[franco32]

Vick was scared and confused for 3 games. I don't remember him once checking out of a run when the box got stacked and we were outnumbered. Landry did that immediately when he checked out of the run to Bell and threw that beautiful back shoulder toss to AB. It wasn't just that Vick lacked the physical tools to be accurate and get the job done, it was that he was a mess mentally.

Even during his "magical" 5 minutes in SD, he wasn't that great. His bomb to Wheaton was short and way inside and his pass to DHB was so high that he had to climb a ladder to get it. Very lucky to convert that 3rd down. The route to Heath may have been his best pass in 3 games.

When the "known" quantity is playing so horribly that you have close to a 0% chance of winning, the "unknown" quantity actually becomes a safer bet. AZ has a much better D than SD. There is no way in my mind Vick is going to lead us to more points unless he were to luck into more personal fouls and DPIs.

[Legacy User]

Are you really going to contend that Vick is the reason that game was close? Cause you're wrong. That's entirely on our defense and Le'veon Bell. Vick should haven't have made it out of the first quarter, let alone the first half.

Even moreso by Arizona repeatedly shooting itself in the foot with penalties...one of which put the Steelers in FG position to make it 10-6.

At some point, when the guy who is in is sucking so bad, when the known is awful, you have to let go of the Fear of the Unknown.

Even at the all-important QB position.

I think it was completely unreasonable for Mike Tomlin to assume Mike Vick would nut up again like he did for five minutes in San Diego...Arizona's defense was better, and much of those two last-second drives against San Diego were the result of busted defensive coverage. You can't just keep counting on that to happen again and again.

Do you want to stand by your contention that "MUCH" of the last drive against San Diego was a result of busted coverage or do you want to admit Vick actually performed well in that series rather than try to create the impression that Vick happened into success because SD was incompetent.

By saying the SD defense "allowed" Vick to scramble for 24, your basically blaming the defense rather than giving Vick credit - it's really agenda driven.

[jeemie]

You're exaggerating a little bit on the Wheaton bomb, Franco.

It led him a little too far inside, so that one San Diego defender might have gotten him, whereas if it had been thrown just a tad more to the outside, Wheaton could have kept streaking straight down the sidelines.

But it wasn't THAT bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmSvCAAQiMI (official NFL vids don't embed).

[jeemie]

By saying the SD defense "allowed" Vick to scramble for 16, your basically blaming the defense rather than giving Vick credit - its really agenda driven.

But they did allow him to scramble...Vick still had to scramble.

Just like they blew the coverage on Wheaton...but Vick still had to get him the ball.

All that my pointing these facts out does is show it wasn't sudden spectacular play by Mike Vick to make these things happen...just competent play.

Which he was incapable of for most of three games.

By contrast, the throws Jones made to Martavis Bryant in the back of the end zone and to Heath Miller with a guy bearing down in his grille were passes Mike Vick would never EVER make, nor could Vick have placed the back shoulder throw to Brown the way Jones placed it.

The slant to Martavis was all Martavis, though, and Jones did have that horrible piece of shit throw that hit Antonio in the foot.

[Legacy User]

By saying the SD defense "allowed" Vick to scramble for 16, your basically blaming the defense rather than giving Vick credit - its really agenda driven.

But they did allow him to scramble...Vick still had to scramble.

Just like they blew the coverage on Wheaton...but Vick still had to get him the ball.

All that my pointing these facts out does is show it wasn't sudden spectacular play by Mike Vick to make these things happen...just competent play.

Which he was incapable of for most of three games.

By contrast, the throws Jones made to Martavis Bryant in the back of the end zone and to Heath miller with a guy bearing down in his grille were passes Mike Vick would never EVER make.

Except for that throw to Heath Miller on that last drive?

You still haven't addressed that last drive and how it was a result of busted coverage rather than above the line play. I agree Landry outplayed Vick against Arizona by a sizeable margin, but you are changing the facts of the end of the SD game to promote a bad line of thinking.

[Havoc]

The throw to Wheaton occurred at the 7:42 mark.

I have seen many qb's screw up this type of throw resulting in an incompletion.

[Legacy User]

The throw to Wheaton occured at the 7:42 mark.

I have seen many qb's screw up this type of throw resulting in an incomlpete.

It's also funny that Jeemie just thinks SD blew the coverage and Vick just happened to find it. No mention of how Vick actually manipulates the safety on that throw by going from Markus to AB on the crosser (Safety takes a step towards AB as MV stares him down, Vick keeps his head on AB when he makes the throw to MW) and then back to Wheaton, which basically allowed the unimpeded deep throw to happen - but far be it from me to actually analyze the play beyond the surface. Nope, just a blown coverage but nobody actually stops to ask why it was blown.