Athletes and accolades: The Spin off thread

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

this small point I have to disagree on for the simple fact that as talented as Vick was (getting the Falcs to the playoffs and championship games, they never worked to give him the weapons that say, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady has especially at WR.

Pearless Price?

Marty Booker?


if Vick ever had a monster WR like Owens or Moss (2 others with questionable off field antics) just hink of what the Falcons could do.

Them picking a squeaky clean looking Matt Ryan is changing all of that for them now....let's see what happens.

Not to turn this into a Vick discussion, but...

Vick's highest completion percentage was 56.4 % with the rest of the time being around 50%. In that time he had Alge Crumpler (who was a pretty good receiver), and Brian Finneran. Plus, Vick's completion numbers and other passing stats weren't that great coming out of college. He was the most gifted running quarterback ever, and a great talent, and that's where nearly all his value was. It's a shame the Falcons never bit a receiving group around him, although they were pretty committed to having him run the ball 20-25 times a game (plus, Warrick Dunn was pretty good for a couple of those years).

Previous to Randy Moss, who did Brady have as a top flight receiver? Troy Brown? David Givens? Deion Branch? None of those guys is better Finneran or Crumpler.

Also, the vast difference between Manning and Vick isn't as easily explained by pointing to Manning's receivers.

Could it have made a difference for Vick to have a stud receiver? Absolutely, his numbers would have been better. However, I don't think it would have made THAT much of a difference.

Incidentally, I don't think Ryan's going to be all that great in the NFL. His college numbers don't lead one to believe he'll be a great NFL QB (low completion percentages, high interception rates). Ironically enough, people make the same arguments (no receivers at BC) for Ryan's struggles.

(Also, in the interest of full disclosure, I'm by no means a Pats or Colts fan. Giants all the way.)

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Not to turn this into a Vick discussion, but...

Vick's highest completion percentage was 56.4 % with the rest of the time being around 50%. In that time he had Alge Crumpler (who was a pretty good receiver), and Brian Finneran. Plus, Vick's completion numbers and other passing stats weren't that great coming out of college. He was the most gifted running quarterback ever, and a great talent, and that's where nearly all his value was. It's a shame the Falcons never bit a receiving group around him, although they were pretty committed to having him run the ball 20-25 times a game (plus, Warrick Dunn was pretty good for a couple of those years).

Previous to Randy Moss, who did Brady have as a top flight receiver? Troy Brown? David Givens? Deion Branch? None of those guys is better Finneran or Crumpler.

Also, the vast difference between Manning and Vick isn't as easily explained by pointing to Manning's receivers.

Could it have made a difference for Vick to have a stud receiver? Absolutely, his numbers would have been better. However, I don't think it would have made THAT much of a difference.

Incidentally, I don't think Ryan's going to be all that great in the NFL. His college numbers don't lead one to believe he'll be a great NFL QB (low completion percentages, high interception rates). Ironically enough, people make the same arguments (no receivers at BC) for Ryan's struggles.

(Also, in the interest of full disclosure, I'm by no means a Pats or Colts fan. Giants all the way.)

your completion numbers would be low if your rushing numbers are high...correct?

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

your completion numbers would be low if your rushing numbers are high...correct?

Not necessarily - you could have a higher completion percentage because you're throwing less passes. It's not like he's the only QB who has had those issues with low completion percentages; Eli Manning and Vince Young are a couple of others that spring to mind.

Also, if you look at Randall Cunningham's stats, his passing numbers were better in his prime than Vick's. He was running the ball a lot, but he still had at least a couple of good season throwing the ball for the Eagles. (I'm not sure how much he was running the ball for the Vikings when he had his big year).

When I'm saying that Mike Vick wasn't a good passer, I'm not saying he wasn't a heck of a football player, he was. It's like Derek Jeter (my favorite baseball player); he's a terrible defensive shortstop, but a great baseball player. It's just there are aspects of their games that are subpar.