Author |
Topic: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB. (Read 1430 times) |
|
UFF Primetime Prophet
# 29
Pay, I said pay attention, son.
  
Posts: 5675
Back to top
|
 |
Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« on: Oct 11th, 2004, 7:19am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
His latest stats speak volumes...
Passing: 18 of 29 for 196, 0 TDs, 1 INT
Rushing: 5 for 29, 0 TDs, 3 Fumbles (2 lost)
(In my money league that would total 6 FF points - and that's generous with only one point lost per turnover)
His team lost against a weak Detroit defense. He was unable to do anything to help his team. He has completely devalued Peerless Price and Alge Crumpler.
I think it's time to see what Matt Schaub can do. 
|
| « Last Edit: Oct 11th, 2004, 7:20am by Philly » |
 Logged |
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
# 183
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 2997
Back to top
|
 |
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #4 on: Oct 11th, 2004, 3:46pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Philly, you had posted that Vick never had a 300 yard passing game, and then, went on to say that I was a liar for saying that he did indeed pass for 400 yards aganist Pitt in 2002,.
Well maybe I was mistaken on the 400 passing game against pit but, if I am a liar for that then, your a liar for saying he never had a 300 yard passing game cuz,
in 2002, against Det., he passed for over 300 yards.
He needs receivers - thats the first thing.
McNabb ain't 4-0 this year w/out T.O. babe-bee and his lifetime cmp% has been AVERAGE before the T.O. era.
Vick has MORE talent than McNabb and also, is learning a new offense that is w/out playmakers like T.O. to throw to.
Vick has MEGA-TALENT, both on the ground and through the air as he even has a stronger arm than McNabb (your BEE-Loved OVER-RATED QB) so, YES, is he worth something in keeper/dynasty leagues,.............absoluteBEE he is.
Now, I fault the coaches for not taking advantage of that talent to it's fullest degree............get a WR tht can spread the field vertically, and you ain't on this thread blowing smoke. 
By the way, anyone who says he is overrated is forgetting that the falcons are a cellar team w/out him and a playoff team w/ him in the lineup-FACT.
And secondly, football is a TEAM sport,...............get him some WRs! And then, we'll talk.
|
| « Last Edit: Oct 11th, 2004, 3:49pm by KillerKingSting » |
Logged |
*BEE BYE BOE BUM!!; I SMELL THE STENCH OF SOME INSANE PLAYER SCUM.
*2004 CHUMP-ION of Insane World!!!!!
*Domination of the DUKE BEEgins right here!
|
|
|
UFF Primetime Prophet
# 29
Pay, I said pay attention, son.
Posts: 5675
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #5 on: Oct 11th, 2004, 4:29pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 11th, 2004, 3:46pm, KillerKingSting wrote:Philly, you had posted that Vick never had a 300 yard passing game, and then, went on to say that I was a liar for saying that he did indeed pass for 400 yards aganist Pitt in 2002,.
Well maybe I was mistaken on the 400 passing game against pit but, if I am a liar for that then, your a liar for saying he never had a 300 yard passing game cuz,
in 2002, against Det., he passed for over 300 yards. |
|
That's some spin you're putting on things there. If you had bothered to read the original post you refer to (http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi?board=55;a ction=display;num=1095567027;start=0 - the 15th post in that thread) then you would see I said he had only one 300 yard passing game in his career. So tell me who's doing the lying here?
Quote:He needs receivers - thats the first thing.
McNabb ain't 4-0 this year w/out T.O. babe-bee and his lifetime cmp% has been AVERAGE before the T.O. era.
Vick has MORE talent than McNabb and also, is learning a new offense that is w/out playmakers like T.O. to throw to.
Vick has MEGA-TALENT, both on the ground and through the air as he even has a stronger arm than McNabb (your BEE-Loved OVER-RATED QB) so, YES, is he worth something in keeper/dynasty leagues,.............absoluteBEE he is. |
|
I bet if I ask 10 people who they would rather have as a FF QB right now, all 10 would choose the "over-rated" Donovan McNabb than the "mega-talent" Michael Vick. But this thread has nothing to do with McNabb (who nearly everyone would agree IS a viable FF QB).
Quote:| Now, I fault the coaches for not taking advantage of that talent to it's fullest degree............get a WR tht can spread the field vertically, and you ain't on this thread blowing smoke. |
|
Michael Jenkins, Dez White, and Peerless Price all have the speed to stretch the field vertically. The fact that they don't is another argument entirely and really just enforces my original assertion.
Quote:By the way, anyone who says he is overrated is forgetting that the falcons are a cellar team w/out him and a playoff team w/ him in the lineup-FACT.
And secondly, football is a TEAM sport,...............get him some WRs! And then, we'll talk. |
|
Please read the title of this thread. I am saying that Vick is not a viable FF QB. If I have Peyton Manning as a QB and he throws for 300 yards and 3 TDs I could care less whether he leads his NFL team to a win or not. Fantasy football is not about NFL wins and losses. And I understand that football is a team sport which is why I say that Vick has devalued Peerless Price and Alge Crumpler. I'd be willing to bet that the team (QB, TE, and WR positions) would have better fantasy numbers with Matt Schaub at QB than Michael Vick. The Falcons might not win as many games, but who really cares what the Falcons do?
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
UFF Primetime Prophet
# 29
Pay, I said pay attention, son.
Posts: 5675
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #7 on: Oct 11th, 2004, 4:40pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 11th, 2004, 4:38pm, BarnabyWilde wrote:If I could have any QB to lead my fantasy team to a victory, I'd choose Peyton Manning. Vick would not even be in my top 20.
If I could have any QB to lead my NFL team to the Superbowl, I'd pick Tom Brady.
If I was looking for a QB to lead my fantasy team and my NFL team, I'd choose McNabb.
Does that make any sense? |
|
I agree with you completely, although Daunte Culpepper is certainly making a case to replace Manning and McNabb in your analysis.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
# 183
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 2997
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #9 on: Oct 11th, 2004, 7:48pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 11th, 2004, 4:29pm, Philly wrote:
Actually, you are. First you came in and said he was a fraud, now your tune has changed all together to specifically critique his fantasy numbers. Your tune changed because you don't want to look like a guy that doesn't know his FF players when Vick DOES break out cuz, I have a feeling, you know eventually that he will.
Otherwise, why not stick w/ your original blast on him of being a fraud?
Quote:| I bet if I ask 10 people who they would rather have as a FF QB right now, all 10 would choose the "over-rated" Donovan McNabb than the "mega-talent" Michael Vick. But this thread has nothing to do with McNabb (who nearly everyone would agree IS a viable FF QB). |
|
Yup, Over-Rated McNabb WITH TERREL OWENS TO THROW TO.
Lets get ALL the info out there shall we.
Quote:| Michael Jenkins, Dez White, and Peerless Price all have the speed to stretch the field vertically. The fact that they don't is another argument entirely and really just enforces my original assertion. |
|
It enforces NOTHING. Complimentary players affect other players such as QBs BECAUSE this is a TEAM SPORT. And that in and of itself AFFECTS FANTASY NUMBERS - once again, look at McNabb with T.O. and WITHOUT T.O.
Quote:Please read the title of this thread. I am saying that Vick is not a viable FF QB. If I have Peyton Manning as a QB and he throws for 300 yards and 3 TDs I could care less whether he leads his NFL team to a win or not. Fantasy football is not about NFL wins and losses. And I understand that football is a team sport which is why I say that Vick has devalued Peerless Price and Alge Crumpler. I'd be willing to bet that the team (QB, TE, and WR positions) would have better fantasy numbers with Matt Schaub at QB than Michael Vick. The Falcons might not win as many games, but who really cares what the Falcons do?
|
|
Wrong. FF is somewhat about wins and losses. The better a NFL team does, usually it also refelcts back onto their FF numbers as well. not always but usually. If you'd like me to post Peyton Manning's (you used him as an expample did you not?) numbers when his team went to the AFC championship -vs- when they didn't, I would be more than happy to.
If you'd like me to post Duante C-Pep's FF numbers when he went to the NFC championship -vs- when his team didn't make the playoffs, I'd be more than happy to.
If you'd like me to post Gannon's FF numbers of when his team went to the superbowl in contrast to when he didn't go, I'd be more than happy to.
If you'd like me to go on and on and present MORE examples of how NFL team success directly affects FF numbers , I'd be more than happy to
Lets take an even more unusual example of what I am saying so that, you don't come back with a crappy example of ONE player whose FF numbers were better when his team didn't go to the playoffs -vs- when they did.
Lets take an IDP player - LB - in which IDPs are much more difficult to assess a FF connection to a profitable NFL connection (wins & Losses),
Derrick Brooks, the all-pro LB of the BUCS had his BEST FF YEAR when the BUCS BEAT THE CRAP OUT OF THE RAIDERS (sorry Callie, no offense meant)-(and the hopeless and Terrell Owenless EAGLES) in the superbowl.
BUCS had NFL success which DIRECTLY RELATED BACK TO Simeon Rice's success, Warren Sapp's success, and Derrick Brooks BEST FF year. Thats BEST FF YEAR in case you aren't getting this.
As well as Brad Johnson's good FF year and Pittmans.
In fact, why don't we post Keyshawn Johnson's FF numbers LAST year when he didn't make the post season -vs- the year he went to the bowl.
Now if you'd like to BET that SCHAUB would have as GREAT (even better in your opinion right?) as FF numbers throughout a WHOLE SEASON (minus 2 games) than Vick did in 2002, then your on. Whats the bet? 
Now, if the Falcons aren't winning as many games w/ Schaub at the helm then, their IDPs wouldn't be as profitable either (Kerney's sacks would be waaaaaaaaay down from what they are now, as well as Bradys, as well as MOST of the IDPs on that team including Bryon Scott-DB) so, just because YOU want CONSTRICT YOUR FOCUS on ONE SIDE of the ball doesn't mean that your making anything but a subjective and incomplete analysis of a seemingly one-sided, moot point.
As far as Duante C-Pep goes, he is obviously money in the bank.
Further more, i think your assessment of FF QBs isn't nearly as good as mine. Just look at this past week when you told someone to sit CARR who absoluetly BLEW UP w/ MEGA FF (we are talking FF aren't we?  ) NUMBERS!!!!!
In contrast to that most horrid advice  , I told that same gridironer to play CARR.
In fact, didn't you reccomend Collins & Harrington?
Even Roeth, a rookie, beat out BOTH of those QBs FF numbers (we are talking FF numbers aren't we ) and he happened to be on the LIST of QBs that gridironer offered for his QB start.
How is it that I or ANYONE can believe your bias assessment of Vick's skills and FF potential when in fact, you aren't even able to pick a rookie QB that would beat out Harrington against - so you say - Atlanta's OVER-RATED Defense (by the way, Roy Williams as you mention to TORCH the Falcon's 2ndary, didn't do that either). I think you need to redeem yourself first before you can actually add any validity to your next post by picking the RIGHT QB to start in an FF game.
So the fact is you reccomended NOT starting CARR who happened to be the BEST option at that time. This all directly relates back to this thread and your assessment of Vick's FF potential.
Lets not forget, the COACHES changed the offense that VICK was most successful at - therefore, give him some time and he'll come right around.
|
| « Last Edit: Oct 12th, 2004, 3:03am by KillerKingSting » |
Logged |
*BEE BYE BOE BUM!!; I SMELL THE STENCH OF SOME INSANE PLAYER SCUM.
*2004 CHUMP-ION of Insane World!!!!!
*Domination of the DUKE BEEgins right here!
|
|
|
Water Boy
# 404
I love ''the Gridiron''!
 
Posts: 28
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #10 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 1:21am » |
Quote Modify
|
While Mike Vick will eventually be a very good fantasy quarterback, I do not feel that he is right now. Sure, with his legs he can always have the huge game we love in fantasy leagues, but his passing is just too inconsistent. With Vick, you are looking at most games being 125-200 yards passing with maybe 1TD and 2 INTs. Vick also tends to fumble a lot. There are many fantasy quarterbacks that can put up numbers better then this on a consistent basis. Until Vick can improve his consistency I do not rate him very highly.
Vick will also not be very viable in most of our leagues right now due to the fact that his receivers are just not that good. Peerless Price came over with much hoopla, but it is beginning to look like he needs a star like Moulds across from him for him to excell. When in the lead role, he cant handle the tougher coverage. Finneran is a decent possession receiver, but again, nothing special. And Dez White and Jenkins are not developed enough yet to make a difference. Vicks most reliable receiver is Alge Crumpler, but even he tends to vanish for long stretches in games.
So I guess my whole ramble is basically saying that Vick is a phenominal athlete who can win any game in real life, but in fantasy terms, he's just not that good. Hopefully he can improve.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
# 183
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 2997
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #11 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 2:46am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 1:21am, s_laflesh wrote:| While Mike Vick will eventually be a very good fantasy quarterback, I do not feel that he is right now. |
|
I can't argue w/ that. At least you recognize his potenital. I really feel, as I have said before that, this is a new system and once he gets a hold of it, he'll be fine. The year he wasn't injured, he exploded. (using Insane Gang's scoring system which contains a lot of the basic formats around the FF community).
Quote:| Sure, with his legs he can always have the huge game we love in fantasy leagues, but his passing is just too inconsistent. With Vick, you are looking at most games being 125-200 yards passing with maybe 1TD and 2 INTs. Vick also tends to fumble a lot. There are many fantasy quarterbacks that can put up numbers better then this on a consistent basis. Until Vick can improve his consistency I do not rate him very highly. |
|
In a deep keeper or dynasty league his VALUE though, should be realized. As of right now, I can not argue that his FF numbers aren't getting it done.
Quote:| Vick will also not be very viable in most of our leagues right now due to the fact that his receivers are just not that good. Peerless Price came over with much hoopla, but it is beginning to look like he needs a star like Moulds across from him for him to excell. When in the lead role, he cant handle the tougher coverage. Finneran is a decent possession receiver, but again, nothing special. And Dez White and Jenkins are not developed enough yet to make a difference. Vicks most reliable receiver is Alge Crumpler, but even he tends to vanish for long stretches in games. |
|
Thank you ole great FF god for sending me someone who finally tells the truth of the matter without blaming everything on Vick's lack of FF production. 
Quote:| So I guess my whole ramble is basically saying that Vick is a phenominal athlete who can win any game in real life, but in fantasy terms, he's just not that good. Hopefully he can improve. |
|
McNair was once critiqued for his lack of passing numbers. Even though he could run the ball and manage games , his premature assessed stigma was that, he was a scrambling QB that couldn't get it done through the air.
Patience patience, lets not forget the past, and allow for phenominal athletes such as VickTorious  to develop properly
Thanks for your fair analysis laflesh!
|
| « Last Edit: Oct 12th, 2004, 2:49am by KillerKingSting » |
Logged |
*BEE BYE BOE BUM!!; I SMELL THE STENCH OF SOME INSANE PLAYER SCUM.
*2004 CHUMP-ION of Insane World!!!!!
*Domination of the DUKE BEEgins right here!
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
# 183
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 2997
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #13 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 6:09am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 5:02am, sexydexy wrote:| Vick is a 4 year veteran now. When is his "potential" going to be realized? |
|
Vick realized his potential in 2002, where were you then? In Insane Gang Scoring system, he was the #2-3 best scoring QB there was. And did it w/ basically the SAME team that went 5-11(?) in 2003 w/out Vick at the helm.
Quote:| Peyton Manning put up numbers his rookie years but had a lot of picks. His second year on, he was gold. |
|
Peyton has Marvin, enough said. Peyton, in his college career was more prepared for the NFL style of play than Vick. There is a difference in how they were brought along as well. Peyton has a RICH NFL Bloodline that follows him in that his father was a ProBowl QB that tutored him from day 1 as an upcoming QB.
Lets take everything into consideration before we slam the Vick babe-bee!!!!
Quote:| McNabb put up good numbers in 2002 before his injury with crappy receivers. He was good FF wise before TO. |
|
So was Vick in 2002 w/out a defense that MCNabb always had.
Quote:Michael Vick is a good NFL player because he adds an extra element to defensive planning. Because they have to account for his tremendous skills, they put lots of effort towards stopping him. [quote]
and he was a tremendous FF QB in 2002
[quote]Either way, he can avoid being on my fantasy teams for anything less than a back up. |
|
I understand your position but, to each his own, and he will stay on my roster and in time, like Mcnair,, like McNabb (scrambling QBs), will break out.
|
|
Logged |
*BEE BYE BOE BUM!!; I SMELL THE STENCH OF SOME INSANE PLAYER SCUM.
*2004 CHUMP-ION of Insane World!!!!!
*Domination of the DUKE BEEgins right here!
|
|
|
Red Zone Master
# 179
oh Lord, deliver us from the fury of the Norsemen!
 
Posts: 1045
Back to top
|
 |
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #16 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 9:48am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 8:41am, KillerKingSting wrote:| He will adjust once given time. Sheesh! |
|
OK, as a Vick owner, I've watched you guys go back and forth the last couple weeks. But this statement sinks you KKS, IMO. given time!!  given time!!!???? 
GIVEN TIME!????!!! 
How much longer am I supposed to take losses because this stiff just needs to be "given time"!?
He started off the year with mediocre 7 & 14 pt performances. Not good, but at least I'm in the game. Then follows that up with super-human-sure-to-go-to-the-HOF -1, 3 & -2 pt dominating spectacles of QB magic. ZERO PTS in 3 $%#^ing weeks! I lost by 15, 9 & 5 in those weeks. None of those weeks was a buzzsaw, I lost simply because Vick sucks!
You can argue all you want about what his value is as an athlete or even an NFL QB, as there is a lot more to that than just fantasy stats; however, you simply CANNOT argue that he's still a viable fantasy QB.
The title of this thread is perfect.
|
| « Last Edit: Oct 12th, 2004, 9:48am by captainpurple » |
Logged |
3 straight underperforming seasons, one nitwit head coach, 2 problem child WRs, 1 collosal trade bungle....but a wild boat party with booze and hookers!!!????? Priceless.
|
|
|
UFF Primetime Prophet
# 29
Pay, I said pay attention, son.
Posts: 5675
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #17 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 9:58am » |
Quote Modify
|
Here's the deal. I presented an argument earlier and used some facts to back it up. I said Vick only had one 300 yard passing game in his ENTIRE NFL CAREER! You called me a liar and said he had more than 400 yards in a win against the Steelers in 2002. It turned out that you were incorrect. Then you came into this thread and called me a liar again for saying he never had a 300 yard passing game. I'm glad you finally did some homework and found his stats from 2002 that show his single 300 yard game, but your hypothesis was incorrect. I had already given him credit for that game.
Now you want to compare him to McNabb, but you say it isn't a fair comparison because McNabb has TO. Well, McNabb never had TO before this year. Look at the last 10 games or so of the 2003 season (where McNabb was throwing to Stinkston and Trash) and tell me that he wasn't a stud FF QB. Look at the 2000 season (his first as a full-time starter) and he accounted for 27 TDs, 3300 passing yards, and 600 rushing yards. Who was his supporting cast then? It wasn't TO or Peerless Price or Warrick Dunn... it was Darnell Autry at RB and Torrance Small and Charles Johnson at WR. Stop using Atlanta's supporting cast as the reason he sucks right now. A great QB like Vick should be able to do it on his own and make the players around him better. He doesn't.
Don't throw the Carr v. Harrington decision in my face. I was wrong about that one. I felt that Harrington was going to have a big game (others did too) and that Carr might still be hobbling a bit from an injury the week before. I was wrong there. You neglected to mention the other threads where my recommendations were dead on. You're trying to devalue my opinion because I predicted one matchup incorrectly while inflating your own expertise because you got that matchup right. It's a ridiculous path to take, as I'm sure anyone would tell you.
When I look at Vick, I'm looking at the whole picture. And that picture shows me that Vick does not warrant a #1 FF QB position. If I had Vick on my team, I'd be doing whatever I could to trade him because his 150 passing yards, 0 TDs, and 2 turnovers a game just won't win many games for my fantasy team.
Will Vick ever be a consistent FF QB? I don't know. I know he isn't right now. Would he be better if he had LaDainian Tomlinson in the backfield and Randy Moss and Terrell Owens as wideouts? I'm sure he would, but let's deal with the situation as it is. Let's not call a duck anything but a duck.
Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB (unless you get extra points for turnovers and low pass-yardage totals).
I'd be willing to bet that Matt Schaub could run the offense better and produce better fantasy numbers for the QB, WR, and TE positions if he was given the starting nod. However, he won't be unless Vick gets hurt, so there's no use making a bet.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
# 183
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 2997
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #18 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 11:41am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 9:48am, captainpurple wrote:
OK, as a Vick owner, I've watched you guys go back and forth the last couple weeks. But this statement sinks you KKS, IMO. given time!! given time!!!????
GIVEN TIME!????!!!
How much longer am I supposed to take losses because this stiff just needs to be "given time"!?
He started off the year with mediocre 7 & 14 pt performances. Not good, but at least I'm in the game. Then follows that up with super-human-sure-to-go-to-the-HOF -1, 3 & -2 pt dominating spectacles of QB magic. ZERO PTS in 3 $%#^ing weeks! I lost by 15, 9 & 5 in those weeks. None of those weeks was a buzzsaw, I lost simply because Vick sucks!
You can argue all you want about what his value is as an athlete or even an NFL QB, as there is a lot more to that than just fantasy stats; however, you simply CANNOT argue that he's still a viable fantasy QB.
The title of this thread is perfect.
|
|
Look, my opinion of Vick is purely keeper and Dynasty related right now. Before perhaps, I was very high on him doing something RIGHT NOWish.
But I always remained my interest and opinion of Vick as related to a DEEP KEEPER OR DYNASTY LEAGUE.
If your losing because you've played him (like I have) and you want to BLAME solely HIM for doing so then, sorry but, I'm not buying that AT ALL as I am 5-1 and I have played him all 5 weeks!
To be fair my league is different, it does consist of 21 starters as well as a 2-QB set.
If your NOT in a keeper (deep) OR a dynasty league then, fine, I wouldn't blame you a BIT if you dropped him right now. BUT I STILL MAINTAIN HE WILL MAKE A COMEBACK THIS YEAR.
PERIOD.
Yes TIME. He didn't play in the preseason, his coaching staff has been completely worked over, his OFFENSE has completely CHANGED and your going to tell me that you didn't have enough foresight to PERHAPS foresee something like this - and yet you want to BLAME it on him?????
Nah, that BS babe-bee.
The TITLE of this thread was a spawn off the original thread in which was an advice post and PHILLY came in and remarked that VICK was a FRAUD.
He CHANGED that TUNE IMMEDIATELY when I called him on it - and thats that.
From here on out, it was just pure fun for me, but, if your going to BLAME anyone for your LOSSES, look first at WHY YOU decided to play him while all the while ignoring all the intangible and physical changes that he has been presented with.
|
|
Logged |
*BEE BYE BOE BUM!!; I SMELL THE STENCH OF SOME INSANE PLAYER SCUM.
*2004 CHUMP-ION of Insane World!!!!!
*Domination of the DUKE BEEgins right here!
|
|
|
Red Zone Master
# 179
oh Lord, deliver us from the fury of the Norsemen!
Posts: 1045
Back to top
|
 |
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #19 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 11:55am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 11:41am, KillerKingSting wrote:
... if your going to BLAME anyone for your LOSSES, look first at WHY YOU decided to play him while all the while ignoring all the intangible and physical changes that he has been presented with.
|
|
This is worse than fighting with my wife! Back her into a corner, confront her with it, and she takes my argument and throws it in my face!
You are saying I should be accountable for starting Vick? In other words, I should've known better? Yet you've been the most ardent supporter of his eventual resurgence!? How can you argue on one front that Vick is a start who deserves to start and then argue anyone who starts him should've known he wouldn't be that great?
Never mind, I see Philly has already gone down this road, I'll leave the torch for him. 
|
|
Logged |
3 straight underperforming seasons, one nitwit head coach, 2 problem child WRs, 1 collosal trade bungle....but a wild boat party with booze and hookers!!!????? Priceless.
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
# 183
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 2997
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #20 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 12:03pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 9:58am, Philly wrote:| Here's the deal. I presented an argument earlier and used some facts to back it up. |
|
When at first???? when you ORIGINALLY came onto to the ORIGINAL Vick advice thread and called him a FRAUD???? Thats facts??? PLU-LEEEEEZE! 
Quote:| I said Vick only had one 300 yard passing game in his ENTIRE NFL CAREER! You called me a liar and said he had more than 400 yards in a win against the Steelers in 2002. It turned out that you were incorrect. Then you came into this thread and called me a liar again for saying he never had a 300 yard passing game. I'm glad you finally did some homework and found his stats from 2002 that show his single 300 yard game, but your hypothesis was incorrect. I had already given him credit for that game. |
|
Fair enough, and I've already corrected myself on that and admitted my mistake. Is this Back to the future or what?
Fact is, you were arguing FF stats and when someone gets DOUBLE (if not more in some leagues) the POINTS for rushing yards (over 800 I believe in 2002) than they do for passing yards then, you'd figure he had around a 36 to 3700 passing season (if not more if leragues only give 1 pt per 25 yards passing) if you combine his rushing stats from 2002.
Add in his rushing TDs (which ALSO MOST BASIC leagues give DOUBLE the points - or close to it - than a passing TD) and you have a QB that has thrown for at LEAST 3700 yards, and passed for a ratio of approx. 32 TDs while all the while only throwing 8 INTs that year.
So what again, was your so called FACT about how terrible of a FF QB he was in that year?
Quote:| Now you want to compare him to McNabb, but you say it isn't a fair comparison because McNabb has TO. Well, McNabb never had TO before this year. Look at the last 10 games or so of the 2003 season (where McNabb was throwing to Stinkston and Trash) and tell me that he wasn't a stud FF QB. Look at the 2000 season (his first as a full-time starter) and he accounted for 27 TDs, 3300 passing yards, and 600 rushing yards. Who was his supporting cast then? It wasn't TO or Peerless Price or Warrick Dunn... it was Darnell Autry at RB and Torrance Small and Charles Johnson at WR. Stop using Atlanta's supporting cast as the reason he sucks right now. A great QB like Vick should be able to do it on his own and make the players around him better. He doesn't. |
|
MCNabb was INJURED and SUCKED BADLY after that tenth game WHICH was a IMPORTANT part of your ORIGINAL REACH for an argument about Vick back on the original discussion-Vick-Thread. Now its OK when McNabb is injured? but not Vick???
He doesn't make the players around him BETTER????????
Whats thier RECORD with him as a starter and WITHOUT him as a starter? Thats about as CLOSE to a FACT that you'll ever come across Philster. Start talking sesne!!!! And if you'd like to relate it to FF numbers then QUIT IGNORING my every comment and RESPOND to my every comment LIKE I do YOURS.
The FF IDPs are MUCH BETTER with HIM in the lineup. PERIOD. Same cast as last year - check the STATS for yourslelf.
Now I have to question why it is you do NOT answer every one of my quotes as I do yours. If I'm wrong then fine, I'll go with that, admit that, but at least I'll face that.
Can you offer me the same? If so, please begin to do so.
Quote:| Don't throw the Carr v. Harrington decision in my face. I was wrong about that one. I felt that Harrington was going to have a big game (others did too) and that Carr might still be hobbling a bit from an injury the week before. I was wrong there. You neglected to mention the other threads where my recommendations were dead on. You're trying to devalue my opinion because I predicted one matchup incorrectly while inflating your own expertise because you got that matchup right. It's a ridiculous path to take, as I'm sure anyone would tell you. |
|
Sure I agree, I was REACHING for a point, just like you do with MANY of your comments. And actually, I was just kidding around - you gettin sensitive or something? I thought you never get rattled?
Quote:| When I look at Vick, I'm looking at the whole picture. And that picture shows me that Vick does not warrant a #1 FF QB position. If I had Vick on my team, I'd be doing whatever I could to trade him because his 150 passing yards, 0 TDs, and 2 turnovers a game just won't win many games for my fantasy team. |
|
No, your NOT looking at the whole picture IMO.
Quote:| Will Vick ever be a consistent FF QB? I don't know. I know he isn't right now. Would he be better if he had LaDainian Tomlinson in the backfield and Randy Moss and Terrell Owens as wideouts? I'm sure he would, but let's deal with the situation as it is. Let's not call a duck anything but a duck. |
|
I said nothing about a Duck. You;ve taken 4 games that he has played in this year to slam him outright as a FRAUD. All I am doing is telling you he isn't. Like it or not, I am not going away and neither is Vick - he'll get there this year. I agree that the great athletes will overcome controversy and I expect him to do the same - IF his coaching staff will allow him to be HIM.
Quote:| Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB (unless you get extra points for turnovers and low pass-yardage totals). |
|
Hmmmm, isn't FARVE known for throwing INTs? Did HE get points for those? DID I see you call HIM a FRAUD? I am assuming that this is your idea of a joke. Har Dee Har Barf! 
Quote:| I'd be willing to bet that Matt Schaub could run the offense better and produce better fantasy numbers for the QB, WR, and TE positions if he was given the starting nod. However, he won't be unless Vick gets hurt, so there's no use making a bet. |
|
Oh, I am sure ONE day you will get that chance to see him start a season at QB and at THST time, we will then compare his numbers to Vick's in 2002 so, make your bet right here and right now, you keep mentioning it so, whats up?
|
|
Logged |
*BEE BYE BOE BUM!!; I SMELL THE STENCH OF SOME INSANE PLAYER SCUM.
*2004 CHUMP-ION of Insane World!!!!!
*Domination of the DUKE BEEgins right here!
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
# 183
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 2997
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #21 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 12:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 11:55am, captainpurple wrote:
This is worse than fighting with my wife! Back her into a corner, confront her with it, and she takes my argument and throws it in my face!
You are saying I should be accountable for starting Vick? In other words, I should've known better? Yet you've been the most ardent supporter of his eventual resurgence!? How can you argue on one front that Vick is a start who deserves to start and then argue anyone who starts him should've known he wouldn't be that great?
Never mind, I see Philly has already gone down this road, I'll leave the torch for him.
|
|
Ok fine, the way you feel is ON you. Not me.
But all I am saying is that - are you to tell me that Offseason coaching changes, Offseason, Offensive style changes, NO preseason TIME is NOT something to consider in your FF ANALYSIS for starting VICK all this time?
You'd rather just BLAME it on ME because I am an advocate of his talent?
|
|
Logged |
*BEE BYE BOE BUM!!; I SMELL THE STENCH OF SOME INSANE PLAYER SCUM.
*2004 CHUMP-ION of Insane World!!!!!
*Domination of the DUKE BEEgins right here!
|
|
|
UFF Primetime Prophet
# 29
Pay, I said pay attention, son.
Posts: 5675
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #22 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 1:55pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 12:03pm, KillerKingSting wrote:
When at first???? when you ORIGINALLY came onto to the ORIGINAL Vick advice thread and called him a FRAUD???? Thats facts??? PLU-LEEEEEZE! |
|
No, the fact that I called him a fraud is an opinion. But I backed my opinion up with a number of facts which can be verified... not statistics I just made up off the top of my head to support my argument.
Quote:| Fair enough, and I've already corrected myself on that and admitted my mistake. Is this Back to the future or what? |
|
You corrected yourself on the original mistake, but you didn't address the fact that the first words out of your mouth in this thread were to call me a liar again for saying he never had a 300 yard passing game. If you keep falsely accusing me of saying things I didn't, then it just weakens your position. Your Debating 101 lesson for the day. 
Quote:| Fact is, you were arguing FF stats and when someone gets DOUBLE (if not more in some leagues) the POINTS for rushing yards (over 800 I believe in 2002) than they do for passing yards then, you'd figure he had around a 36 to 3700 passing season (if not more if leragues only give 1 pt per 25 yards passing) if you combine his rushing stats from 2002. |
|
He didn't have over 800 rushing yards in 2002, but it was close enough so I won't point out the fact that you didn't bother to check those stats before presenting them either.
Quote:| MCNabb was INJURED and SUCKED BADLY after that tenth game WHICH was a IMPORTANT part of your ORIGINAL REACH for an argument about Vick back on the original discussion-Vick-Thread. Now its OK when McNabb is injured? but not Vick??? |
|
No, McNabb was perfectly healthy at the end of the 2003 season. He battled through an injured thumb at the beginning of the 2003 season when his stats were poor. Then he turned things around in about week 6 or 7 and had a great finish to the year (NFL-wise and Fantasy-wise).
Quote:He doesn't make the players around him BETTER????????
Whats thier RECORD with him as a starter and WITHOUT him as a starter? Thats about as CLOSE to a FACT that you'll ever come across Philster. Start talking sesne!!!! And if you'd like to relate it to FF numbers then QUIT IGNORING my every comment and RESPOND to my every comment LIKE I do YOURS. |
|
Their record with him last week as a starter was 0-1. Anyway, yes, the team does win more with him than without, but look at his replacements... Doug Johnson? Kurt Kittner? How could he possibly do worse than them? (And I don't respond to every comment of yours because you go off on too many different tangents to try to take the argument away from the fact that Vick is not a viable FF starter right now.)
Quote:| The FF IDPs are MUCH BETTER with HIM in the lineup. PERIOD. Same cast as last year - check the STATS for yourslelf. |
|
I'll take your word for it. I don't have the IDP background and don't have the time to check all those stats (not that you did either). Anyway, I'm speaking of Vick specifically not being a viable FF starter, not Patrick Kerney or Keith Brooking.
Quote:Now I have to question why it is you do NOT answer every one of my quotes as I do yours. If I'm wrong then fine, I'll go with that, admit that, but at least I'll face that.
Can you offer me the same? If so, please begin to do so. |
|
I'm not going to answer all of them... just the ones I feel are relevant to the argument or the ones I feel inclined to comment on.
Quote:| Sure I agree, I was REACHING for a point, just like you do with MANY of your comments. And actually, I was just kidding around - you gettin sensitive or something? I thought you never get rattled? |
|
Nope... I'm just having fun arguing a point I believe strongly in. I'm still not resorting to multiple exclamation points or anything.
Quote:| I said nothing about a Duck. You;ve taken 4 games that he has played in this year to slam him outright as a FRAUD. All I am doing is telling you he isn't. Like it or not, I am not going away and neither is Vick - he'll get there this year. I agree that the great athletes will overcome controversy and I expect him to do the same - IF his coaching staff will allow him to be HIM. |
|
When I called him a fraud, I was referring to the fact that he is so overrated as a FF QB because he is an amazing athlete who has the ability to throw the ball the length of the field and run faster than anyone else on the field. But the fact is that he is underachieving for his fantasy owners. Maybe it's the coaches, maybe it's his WRs, maybe it's his O-line, maybe it's his commission on the Nike commercials... whatever it is, it is causing his fantasy owners to sit him or suffer through poor fantasy outputs.
Quote:| Hmmmm, isn't FARVE known for throwing INTs? Did HE get points for those? DID I see you call HIM a FRAUD? I am assuming that this is your idea of a joke. Har Dee Har Barf! |
|
Favre threw 3 INTs last night! Yes, he throws a lot of them. But how many yards did he throw for to offset those negative points? How many TDs did he throw for? You're not really going to try to argue that Vick is a better FF QB than Favre, are you?
Quote:Oh, I am sure ONE day you will get that chance to see him start a season at QB and at THST time, we will then compare his numbers to Vick's in 2002 so, make your bet right here and right now, you keep mentioning it so, whats up?
|
|
I'll take Matt Schaub's first five starts for Atlanta (also his first five in the NFL, period) and compare them to Michael Vick's first five starts of the 2004 season (which is his 4th year in the league). We'll use a standard scoring system (1/25 pass, 1/10 rush, 6/TD, -2/INTorFUM) and see who scores better. I'll bet $20 it is Schaub.
|
| « Last Edit: Oct 12th, 2004, 1:56pm by Philly » |
Logged |
|
|
|
Red Zone Master
# 179
oh Lord, deliver us from the fury of the Norsemen!
Posts: 1045
Back to top
|
|
Re: Michael Vick is no longer a viable FF QB.
« Reply #23 on: Oct 12th, 2004, 2:00pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 12th, 2004, 12:07pm, KillerKingSting wrote:| You'd rather just BLAME it on ME because I am an advocate of his talent? |
|
No, please don't mistake my Vick frustrations with personal feelings. I'm upset with Vick, and with the argument that he's still a viable FF QB. I don't agree that he is and choose to argue the point with you, but I certainly don't blame you for his performance, nor harbor any personal feelings one way or another because of it.
|
|
Logged |
3 straight underperforming seasons, one nitwit head coach, 2 problem child WRs, 1 collosal trade bungle....but a wild boat party with booze and hookers!!!????? Priceless.
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Games
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print
out there who are enamored with Vick (they probably just see his Nike commercial and not his actual games)... so he may be good trade bait still.
