bigdog17k Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 Vick should be starting, he wouldn't start with the Pats. It's pretty simple really... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitty Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 Are the Pats going to use Cleo Lemon on defense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 Vick should be starting, he wouldn't start with the Pats. It's pretty simple really...12, 13, 13 amount of interceptions in his last three seasons. A career QB rating of 75.7, and has never thrown for over 3000 yards in a season. Never completed over 57% of his passes in one season. Why should he be starting? It's pretty simple really... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 3, 2009 Report Share Posted August 3, 2009 12, 13, 13 amount of interceptions in his last three seasons. A career QB rating of 75.7, and has never thrown for over 3000 yards in a season. Never completed over 57% of his passes in one season. Why should he be starting? It's pretty simple really... Vick is a RB and everybody knows it, you obviously haven't seen how he plays the game... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 3, 2009 Report Share Posted August 3, 2009 Vick is a RB and everybody knows it, you obviously haven't seen how he plays the game... No, obviously I have. Go ahead and throw the ball to the opponent 20 times in a season, and let me know what your record is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 No, obviously I have. Go ahead and throw the ball to the opponent 20 times in a season, and let me know what your record is. You act like a 75.7 QB rating is terrible. 60 and below is bad. He's ultimately just an average QB with his arm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 You act like a 75.7 QB rating is terrible. 60 and below is bad. He's ultimately just an average QB with his arm..... If you want to win games, a 75.7 QB rating is terrible. 85 and above is good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 .... If you want to win games, a 75.7 QB rating is terrible. 85 and above is good. You're missing my point, Vick has other intangibles. They're called his legs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 You're missing my point, Vick has other intangibles. They're called his legs.But has his legs ever led his team to a Super Bowl? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 But has his legs ever led his team to a Super Bowl? Ok, so by that logic that means any QB with a rating 85 or over who never has been to a Superbowl is a failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Ok, so by that logic that means any QB with a rating 85 or over who never has been to a Superbowl is a failure.QB Rating isn't everything. But don't you think that a lot of interceptions + poor completion rating + poor QB rating might mean he's a bad quarterback? Or is that all just a coincidence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 QB Rating isn't everything. But don't you think that a lot of interceptions + poor completion rating + poor QB rating might mean he's a bad quarterback? Or is that all just a coincidence? Not really, Vick is a talented athlete. Let me ask you a question, Rex Grossman led the Bears to their first Superbowl appearance since 1985. And lost. Hasn't done much since then. Would you rather have Vick or Grossman, it's just a simple question. Because what you're saying is you would rather have someone like Grossman on your team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) Not really, Vick is a talented athlete. Let me ask you a question, Rex Grossman led the Bears to their first Superbowl appearance since 1985. And lost. Hasn't done much since then. Would you rather have Vick or Grossman, it's just a simple question. Because what you're saying is you would rather have someone like Grossman on your team.You don't watch football, do you? The Bears' defense led them to the Super Bowl, not Grossman. Your opinion here is no longer valid. Edited August 4, 2009 by trutrojan8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 You don't watch football, do you? The Bears' defense led them to the Super Bowl, not Grossman. Your opinion here is no longer valid. Okay, we're playing this game. Well then why did Grossman have his best year that year? I guess that didn't matter. I remember having him in fantasy and his value was through the roof. All you heard about was Grossman. It also took you a while to respond to this. My opinion here is no longer valid? Shut up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Okay, we're playing this game. Well then why did Grossman have his best year that year? I guess that didn't matter. I remember having him in fantasy and his value was through the roof. All you heard about was Grossman. It also took you a while to respond to this. My opinion here is no longer valid? Shut up.20 interceptions. 21 sacks. 73.9 QB rating. 8 fumbles. 54% completion rating. Grossman did not lead the Bears to the big game. Oh, a while to respond? 15 minutes? Sorry I don't refresh this thread every 5 seconds to get my response in within the minute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Oh, a while to respond? 15 minutes? Sorry I don't refresh this thread every 5 seconds to get my response in within the minute. Well you were pretty damn quick to respond earlier, jackass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 Well you were pretty damn quick to respond earlier, jackass.Way to stay on topic. Also, just because I was quick to respond earlier, doesn't mean I'm glued to the computer. Unlike you I don't try to respond to every thread within minutes of the latest response. But back on topic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 4, 2009 Report Share Posted August 4, 2009 I don't even know why we are arguing. If you think Vick is a terrible QB, and shouldn't start anywhere than fine, that's your opinion. And I respect that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.