Michael Vick is a one trick pony. He's the best scrambling QB I've ever seen, even better than Steve Young or our very own Aaron Rodgers. I will give him that.

I've seen him escape sacks so many times and cutting back directions like Barry Sanders and getting 20+ yards rushing out of what could have been nothing. I will give him full credit for being the best scrambler I've ever seen.

Except, he's not a good QB.

Michael Vick has thrown 20+ TDs only once in his career, throwing for 20 TDs in 2006. He's never thrown for 3000 yards. Why does this matter? Because it matters nowadays. The NFL is a pass happy league. The NFL itself changed the rules to make the QB have all the advantages to make more money. They didn't want the NFL to be like soccer, i.e., boring.

Because of his reliance on scrambling, Vick gets injured all the time. In his entire career, he has only finished one whole season. That's not acceptable.

His accuracy as a passer is piss poor. Yes, he completed some nice passes against us yesterday but he missed some crucial ones. Not only that, on fourth and one, our D knew he would run. What happened? We stuffed him and won the game.

Another example of how passing is so necessary, with Vick as starter, the Falcons best year was 2004. Look what happened when he went head-to-head against another scrambling QB when it mattered (the Playoffs). McNabb made him look like a fool.

Whereas Vick is the better passer, the Eagles let him have his runs and stopped his passing and the Eagles destroyed the Falcons. McNabb, unlike Vick, can actually complete passes when it matters.

---

Did you mean to write "whereas Vick is the better runner"? That's the only way I can make sense out of that last paragraph.

I've never used stats to show that Vick is not a great QB. He's a very different kind of player, so you can't expect his passing stats to be great. He won a lot of games for the Falcons, I've always given him credit for that, but he never seemed like a threat to win a championship. He plays such a loose style of football that his luck always runs out sooner or later. And you're right about the injuries. Accuracy is the other big factor that you mentioned. He makes some great throws, but he's way too erratic. Accuracy is crucial in the NFL.

As I said in the other thread, I would never want him to be my team's QB, but I absolutely hate playing against him.

---

He is a good quarterback. A quarterback is a leader and a player you expect to deliver in the most clutch of moments. A quarterback is expected to help motivate your team. A quarterback is expected to help your football team when football games. Vick is a good quarterback.

Vick however is not a good passer which is an attribute that many apply to the quarterback position as a barometer of success. Falsely. The league may be growing into more and more of a pass-first league but if a player like Vick can achieve success at the position and ultimately put his team in a better spot to win football games he is ultimately good at the position he plays, regardless of his skill set.

It's similar to guys like DeSean Jackson and Darren Sproles that get sneezed at by scouts for not having the physical size or intangibles that most teams look for in their relative positions. Yet when they perform consistently at an extraordinary level they are deemed good at their position.

For a QB he is a great runner. For a RB he would kind of suck. For a RB he makes a great passer. But for a passer, he kind of sucks.

---

Vick is only good at QB because people fear his legs. Without his legs, he's half the QB Anthony Dilweg was. His legs are what make him dangerous as a scrambler and passer. If defenses see him about to run, they'll cut off their secondary duties which will leave the WR allowed to slip through the seal and all you have to do then is throw the ball up with some air and let the WR run under it.

Vick is not a good QB, but he's a dangerous player the QB position I think is the simplest I can sum it up.

---

Why is this so hard? Vick is a good QB when he's healthy, and a poor passer. Why define the entire quarterback position on passing alone, instead of the sum of his abilities and what he brings to the position, and how that helps his team?

That reflected my thoughts so closely that I have to give you a +1

---

I see your point, but doesnt change the fact I hate it when we have to face him. He scares the hell out of me.

---

i dont think he is good a good q.b has r.b w.r to help him win games not saying he cant mess up a defense he can,even with the falcons he made most of the plays he has to trust his players to make plays not always take it on himself,witch is what he does if he would use his play makers he would be a better q.b there is no i in team you cant do it by yourself he needs to practice plays with the other guys i do know at this point he is a back up but don't think that will change who vick is.

Is he a complete QB? No, not really. Is he still lethal as a runner? Absolutely.

I will say that with a little time to scheme for the guy (be it shifting line alignment, more focus on gap control, or assigning a spy as was common when he played w/ the Falcons), I doubt the Packers would have had as much trouble as they did when he came in for Kolb. But he's always problematic.

To your point, though - no he's not a very good, complete QB. His arm is strong, but his accuracy's never been good and he'll always default to the most reliable part of his game (running), which makes it tough for an o-coordinator to get the most out of a gameplan when he's in.

---