For what it's worth, Sports Illustrated ranked Vick 6th in the list of franchise QB's in football, behind McNabb, Eli, Carson, Big Ben, Brady, and Peyton Manning, who was given an asterisk and for some stupid reason wasn't ranked.

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedi.../content.5.html

 

Granted, they don't give real reasons behind their methodology except for saying the generic "QB's you'd want to build a franchise around," and the list includes Brady Quinn 7th :plain and Matt Schaub 9th :lol , so the list probably shouldn't be taken that seriously.

 

And saying Vick is a bottom five QB is absurd on just about every level. He's not one of the top passers in the NFL, and I don't particularly like him (though he's exciting to watch), but he's in the top half of the NFL in QB's at the least.

 

 

If he wants to run all over the field, make him a wide reciever. As a QB he is horrendous, and that might actually HELP their passing game, which IS bottom 5 in the league. Matt Schaub is a QB I would build around, not Vick. If I was a GM and Vick asked me for as much money as he got, I'd laugh and tell him when he learns to throw the ball it's a maybe, or switch positions.

 

I like QBs that can PASS the ball. It is their job description. I am not going to give a guy the most money a QB has ever recieved to have the 29th best passer rating in the NFL or to throw more INT than TD and get sacked all the time. And since passing is the MAIN job for a QB, and Vick is quite horrible at it, yes I consider him to be a bottom 5 QB. And the Falcons would be just as good with Matt Schaub under center, you can quote me on that.

 

If he wants to be flashy and run all over the place, let him. Dont pay him money that not even Peyton Manning gets when he doesn't deserve it.

 

And FFIPA, the Falcons are not the same team. Last year showed them having a greatly improved defense to go along with a running game, but with this one sided approach of rush, rush, rush, let Vick pass and sacrifice a virgin to the gods in hopes of something good happening is not going to cut it much longer.

Since the Falcons Drafted Vick:

When he starts: 30-16-1

When he does not start: 9-19

 

And isn't that all that really matters?

 

That must be one hell of a team to be 5-1 this year with "one of the 5 worst QB's in the NFL" starting.

 

I mean, I don't even like the guy, he's overrated and overhyped, but he wins and that's all that matters. This argument is old and played out.

That one loss came with an effort by a QB that Vick can only dream of. I'll take Matt Schaub in that one loss to the patriots than any of Vicks wins. Schaub is the superior QB.

And yet they lost.

 

Take Schaub. I'll take the 30-16-1 record and you can have fun with your prototype QB.

 

The guy wins games, he's taken his team to the playoffs both times he's been healthy. He beat the Packers in Lambeau Field in the playoffs for the first time in like 30 years, he took his team to the NFC Championship in his 2nd healthy full year as a starter.

 

You need to stop hating. We get that you don't like him.

It's just that he is so defecient in the ONE area(passing) that a QB needs to excell in.

 

And the Falcons wouldn't of won that game with Vick either. Schaub passed for 290+ yards and 3 tds. Thats squeezing blood out of a turnip with that offense, and yet this kid does that in his second start...against the Pats defense.

It's just that he is so defecient in the ONE area(passing) that a QB needs to excell in.

 

And the Falcons wouldn't of won that game with Vick either. Schaub passed for 290+ yards and 3 tds. Thats squeezing blood out of a turnip with that offense, and yet this kid does that in his second start...against the Pats defense.

 

I just don't understand where this love for Schaub comes from. In his one start last year, he put up the Vick-esque line of 17-41 for 188 with 2 picks against the Saints, only with minimal rushing yards. Look at his numbers from last year - I don't see how you can project him to be a franchise QB, or even better than Vick, based on those numbers, or, hell, even his college career.

 

He had a great game vs. the Pats this year, but lost. One great start does not make a QB (ask Rob Johnson and the Bills, who evalated him on his one start for the Jags vs the Ravens years ago). And this Pats defense, without Harrison and Bruschi, is a shell of its former self, so it's not fair to say the Falcons would not have won the game had Vick played. They might not have thrown for as many yards, but it's entirely possible his impact on the game would have been greater.

 

And a QB's job is to lead his team to wins through any means necessary - not to put up gaudy passing numbers. Unless it's 2004 and your name is Peyton Manning. *cheap shot*

 

After this, I refuse to participate in any more idiotic discussions about how Matt Schaub, Jake Delhomme, or the mediocre pocket passer of the week (next week - Chris Simms!) is a better QB than the (still vastly overrated) Mike Vick.