55 replies to this topic

[Philly to ship]

Here this is for all the "Box Score Watchers" out there that think vick is the ONLY one to blame for this years start.

[cmart102]

Obviously Vick isn't the only one to blame, the whole team sucks. But Vick sucks as well

[Lloyd]

Numbers lie all the time. Especially in football.

And Vick isn't the ONLY problem. No one thinks that starting Foles will win us a Super Bowl.  The Eagles are weak as a whole...everyone knows this.

However, Vick is the QB, and he's a QB playing below standards, and QBs take most of the blame.  Always have, always will. So, sorry to all those Vick fanboys out there. Your boy is getting trashed not because he's the ONLY problem, but because he's A problem...and he's playing the most important position in football.

[Vex]

Why do the Vick defenders all act like the people saying Vick needs benched is he's the only problem? He's clearly not, but you're about as smart as the average rock if you think Vick hasn't been a problem.

[Philly to ship]

But do you want to win this year?? Vick is the best option for the eagles to win games. The season is not over by any means. The whole NFL is weak as far as records go. 9-7 will get you into the playoffs. hell 8-8 probably will. If our O-line could turn it around we would see a different Michael Vick. Im thinking we already will. He no longer should wait in the pocket for his receivers. As soon as that hole is opened in the line. RUN MIKE RUN!!!

[ChimpKelly]

Well Jason Peters is injured...so the massive run plays are out the window this year.

[Vex]

Philly to ship, on 02 November 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

But do you want to win this year?? Vick is the best option for the eagles to win games. The season is not over by any means. The whole NFL is weak as far as records go. 9-7 will get you into the playoffs. hell 8-8 probably will. If our O-line could turn it around we would see a different Michael Vick. Im thinking we already will. He no longer should wait in the pocket for his receivers. As soon as that hole is opened in the line. RUN MIKE RUN!!!

Vick was supposed to turn it back on for around the past 20 games or so. O-line was a strength last year and still turned the ball over a lot. I just don't see him magically "turning on" like those 7 games in 2010. I wanted him to, but it's just not going to happen.

[Lloyd]

Philly to ship, on 02 November 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

But do you want to win this year?? Vick is the best option for the eagles to win games. The season is not over by any means. The whole NFL is weak as far as records go. 9-7 will get you into the playoffs. hell 8-8 probably will. If our O-line could turn it around we would see a different Michael Vick. Im thinking we already will. He no longer should wait in the pocket for his receivers. As soon as that hole is opened in the line. RUN MIKE RUN!!!

Run Mike Run was how he has played for most of his career.  Where has that taken him?

[ronlandis]

Lloyd, on 02 November 2012 - 03:52 PM, said:

Numbers lie all the time. Especially in football.

And Vick isn't the ONLY problem. No one thinks that starting Foles will win us a Super Bowl.  The Eagles are weak as a whole...everyone knows this.

However, Vick is the QB, and he's a QB playing below standards, and QBs take most of the blame.  Always have, always will. So, sorry to all those Vick fanboys out there. Your boy is getting trashed not because he's the ONLY problem, but because he's A problem...and he's playing the most important position in football.

Numbers lie so much you can't even make heads or tails of it.  Every campaign season I hear candidates throwing numbers around and the one guy's math says one thing and the other guy's math says the exact opposite and the only thing I know for sure is that both guys are twisting up the numbers to make me think things that aren't true.

[time2rock]

So is MDS perhaps implying that we should move to using more 2 back sets (like we did in the 2nd half against NY) ?  We obviously had success with this formation then.  Why not continue to use what works until a team shows they can shut it down ?  Another case of Andy outsmarting himself.

[SirReal]

Lloyd, on 02 November 2012 - 06:54 PM, said:

Run Mike Run was how he has played for most of his career.  Where has that taken him?

A couple of Pro Bowl nods, and runner-up for League MVP.


(Cue the Black-and-White "No SB Means he ain't done $#!t" responses)

[time2rock]

SirReal, on 03 November 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

A couple of Pro Bowl nods, and runner-up for League MVP.


(Cue the Black-and-White "No SB Means he ain't done $#!t" responses)

Vick was tied with 30 other QBs for 2nd in MVP voting, all with 0 votes.

[Plache]

Vick isn't the whole problem........the O-Line sucks......the D-Line sucks......the secondary sucks......linebackers not named Ryans suck.......the team has no receivers that can go get that 3rd and 14 ball that's just behind them...you know, back shoulder throws.....no wr's with ups on the team.......even if they had one, they don't have a QB that could make precision passes.....anyway, I digress.....Vick isn't the whole problem, but he's a MAJOR problem....turnovers tell the story.....

[InfiniteSeriesN]

Lloyd, on 02 November 2012 - 03:52 PM, said:

Numbers lie all the time. Especially in football.

And Vick isn't the ONLY problem. No one thinks that starting Foles will win us a Super Bowl.  The Eagles are weak as a whole...everyone knows this.

However, Vick is the QB, and he's a QB playing below standards, and QBs take most of the blame.  Always have, always will. So, sorry to all those Vick fanboys out there. Your boy is getting trashed not because he's the ONLY problem, but because he's A problem...and he's playing the most important position in football.

all the QB rating numbers say he's playing average to very slightly above average.

stop letting your emotions get so much in the way of analytical thought.

[DoctorWhom]

time2rock, on 03 November 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

So is MDS perhaps implying that we should move to using more 2 back sets (like we did in the 2nd half against NY) ?  We obviously had success with this formation then.  Why not continue to use what works until a team shows they can shut it down ?  Another case of Andy outsmarting himself.

Yes, I assume MDS is implying the 2 back set is needed in order for the run game to have success. His analysis was incomplete bc he doesn't say "why" the single back set is so unsuccessful. He just says it is. Eh, he's reading a damn script.
The defense concerns me, so the run game probably won't have any chance of being established vs the Saints (playing catch up or keep up will be the theme). Oh, and I'm not saying the running game ever IS established. Good one!
I read earlier:
  "(Nnamdi) Asomugha in three games this year has given up a perfect quarterback rating on plays in which he's been targeted," NFL Films' Greg Cosell said this week. "So every time he's been targeted, the ball's been caught. Asomugha, at this moment in time, is a below-average NFL corner. (Dominique) Rodgers-Cromartie is also an average player at this point." Cosell said he'd be "very surprised" if the Saints didn't drop 30-plus points on the Eagles. (article by Evan Silva at rotoworld)
...and now Nate Allen will be out, David Sims will take his place (awesome?), the D-line can't get pressure, corners seem confused...so I'm bracing for a disaster. I hope I'm wrong, but, this game really could be THE implosion that ends it all.
...and to think Michael Smith is yapping about the run game.

[Baynit]

phillyphan754, on 02 November 2012 - 04:49 PM, said:

Well Jason Peters is injured...so the massive run plays are out the window this year.

finally a man with some sense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

While theres alot of problems with this team including Vick none more so than not having Peters in the run and screen game......

@ DoctorWhom that picture is just disturbing man

[bobbywizdum]

Philly to ship, on 02 November 2012 - 03:47 PM, said:

Here this is for all the "Box Score Watchers" out there that think vick is the ONLY one to blame for this years start.

so riddle me this...In 2008 and 2009 we had virtually zero run game. Westbrook was injured or ineffective just about 90 percent of both seasons and in 09 shady was a rookie still learning the ropes. The defense in 08 was pretty good and in 09 they were waaaaay worste than this one. Mcnabb managed to still be a top ten qb both seasons and our offense as a whole was top 5 both seasons. Most people feel mcnabb was done at the time as well. How do any of the other numbers justify a 2nd to last offense and a qb ranked 29th in the league? an old, washed up, mcnabb did 100 times better than what we are getting from vick this year. What does that tell you about qb not being a major problem on the team?

[InfiniteSeriesN]

bobbywizdum, on 03 November 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:

so riddle me this...In 2008 and 2009 we had virtually zero run game. Westbrook was injured or ineffective just about 90 percent of both seasons and in 09 shady was a rookie still learning the ropes. The defense in 08 was pretty good and in 09 they were waaaaay worste than this one. Mcnabb managed to still be a top ten qb both seasons and our offense as a whole was top 5 both seasons. Most people feel mcnabb was done at the time as well. How do any of the other numbers justify a 2nd to last offense and a qb ranked 29th in the league? an old, washed up, mcnabb did 100 times better than what we are getting from vick this year. What does that tell you about qb not being a major problem on the team?

Eagles' o-line rankings:

2008: ranked 14th

2009: ranked 4th

2012: ranked 30th

http://wp.advancednf...2012&season=reg

any questions?

[DoctorWhom]

@Baynit. Thanks. I know off topic but on Chelsea Lately they had Chuy Bravo actually nursing Brad Wollock. It was about the most hilarious thing I've ever seen. I pissed my pants! YouTube it if ur into a sick but good laugh.

Back on topic. Peters' absence has killed the O-line, but hell, u have a practice squader at center and a back up at what? RG? Yeah, the unfortunate(fortunate to some of u) downfall of Andy and Vick could be linked to this year's woes on the offensive line. To me, it's like the defense has regressed from last year as well. It makes no sense why they are worse than last year's unit. I mean, a better LB core...D-line is solid but can't get pressure; it is really bizarre...the secondary is experienced but seem confused to me...hell, I'm confused by this team. I don't get them.

[Kolbfan4]

InfiniteSeriesN, on 03 November 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

Eagles' o-line rankings:

2008: ranked 14th

2009: ranked 4th

2012: ranked 30th

http://wp.advancednf...2012&season=reg

any questions?

When your QB runs away from a clean pocket that sure doesn't help. It also doesn't help when he doesn't know how to read a defense. He holds the ball a half a second longer than any other QB for a reason.

[InfiniteSeriesN]

Kolbfan4, on 03 November 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

When your QB runs away from a clean pocket that sure doesn't help. It also doesn't help when he doesn't know how to read a defense. He holds the ball a half a second longer than any other QB for a reason.

so vick is horrible enough to push the o-line into looking like they're among the three worst lines in the league while still performing at the level of an average QB?

um ok.

[bobbywizdum]

InfiniteSeriesN, on 03 November 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

so vick is horrible enough to push the o-line into looking like they're among the three worst lines in the league while still performing at the level of an average QB?

um ok.

InfiniteSeriesN, on 03 November 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

Eagles' o-line rankings:

2008: ranked 14th

2009: ranked 4th

2012: ranked 30th

http://wp.advancednf...2012&season=reg

any questions?

last year they were ranked 9th....vick still sucked !!! any questions?

[InfiniteSeriesN]

bobbywizdum, on 03 November 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

last year they were ranked 9th....vick still sucked !!! any questions?

and last year vick was ranked 14th, which would place him above average and nowhere near 'suck'.

[nipples]

InfiniteSeriesN, on 03 November 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

so vick is horrible enough to push the o-line into looking like they're among the three worst lines in the league while still performing at the level of an average QB?

um ok.

Actually yes, he really is that bad. Obviously you can't say the o-line is GOOD, but Vick makes them look much, much worse than they are.

[InfiniteSeriesN]

nipples, on 03 November 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

Actually yes, he really is that bad. Obviously you can't say the o-line is GOOD, but Vick makes them look much, much worse than they are.

logic would seem to dictate that if he's bad enough to make the line look so awful, he wouldn't be capable of putting up an average passer rating.

what would support your thesis, for example, is if the o-line were average, while vick's QB ratings were in the tank.

a lot of you are so mad at the eagles losing, that it's affecting your ability to be analytical. you're overemotional.

[bobbywizdum]

InfiniteSeriesN, on 03 November 2012 - 12:37 PM, said:

and last year vick was ranked 14th, which would place him above average and nowhere near 'suck'.

nowhere near suck for a guy making top 3 qb money? are you serious. so 10-4 with a 93 rating (top ten) sucked enough for mcnabb to get traded, but despite be surrounded with far more talent than the 09 team...7-6 with an 84 rating and a ton of turnovers isn't sucking?  Dropping from "14th" to 29th with a ton of new excuses every day isn't signs of even further suckage?

[InfiniteSeriesN]

bobbywizdum, on 03 November 2012 - 12:59 PM, said:

nowhere near suck for a guy making top 3 qb money? are you serious. so 10-4 with a 93 rating (top ten) sucked enough for mcnabb to get traded, but despite be surrounded with far more talent than the 09 team...7-6 with an 84 rating and a ton of turnovers isn't sucking?  Dropping from "14th" to 29th with a ton of new excuses every day isn't signs of even further suckage?

more talent where? not at o-line. <--and that's the point.

also, this defense isn't so good either. and the special teams are a true train wreck: among other things we're next to dead last in average starting field position.

there are a lot of things seriously wrong with this team, but the numbers suggest that QB just isn't one of them.

[wussbasket]

ESPN's total QBR rating is complete BS.

this is from last year:

Quote

Rodgers, whose Packers won at the Georgia Dome, completed 26 of 39 passes for 396 yards and two touchdowns.  His Total QBR was 82.1.

Tebow, whose Broncos lost at home to the Chargers, completed four of 10 passes for 79 yards and a touchdown.  And he ran the ball six times for 38 yards and a touchdown.  And his Total QBR was 83.2.

[Lloyd]

SirReal, on 03 November 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

A couple of Pro Bowl nods, and runner-up for League MVP.


(Cue the Black-and-White "No SB Means he ain't done $#!t" responses)

He's been around for 10 years and he has how many playoff wins?

Sorry, but maybe this type of response is typical because it makes sense. He got to those Pro Bowls because of what he did with his legs, not his arms. It's awesome that Vick can run for 1,000 yards. It's also completely unnecessary at his position.  And playoff defenses have zero problem shutting him down.

[antiravis]

Vick is a thrilling player to watch in part because he's so erratic. He goes from awful to amazing from one play to the next. His performance against the Giants in 2010 is evidence enough of that.

But while inconsistent play like that is good for entertainment, it's not good for championships. It's not reductive to demand that a quarterback string together enough good performances to give a team a chance at the Super Bowl. It's the entire motivation of the sport! I'll take a boring quarterback who wins championships over a pro bowl quarterback with one playoff win on his resume.

As a million people have said before, we know it's not all Vick's fault. But the quarterback position is so important to a team's success that you can't pretend that he hasn't contributed significantly to our losses and swapping him out is a necessity. If Vick isn't going to be the QB in 2013 (and I think we all know at this point that he isn't, for performance, financial and coaching-related reasons) then he shouldn't be the QB in 2012.