Being a Black QB; It Must be Tough

[sleaky72]

Vick just got out of prison. Half the country still believes that he shouldn't be playing in the NFL. Of course he's going to be contrite on TV.

 

You think he's going to outright say that his coaching in ATL sucked?

You think he's going to say his #1 receiver was Peerless Price who sucked balls?

 

I think not. You'll see a contrite person who repeatedly says "I'm sorry" whether he truly believes it or not.

 

Sure, he probably slacked a bit in ATL but that wasn't the root cause of his play. The root cause was a lack of supporting cast and poor coaching.

 

 

Shhhhhhh dont make too much sense to bigoted minds

[Fingon]

Ah never mind, how simple it is to live in ignorant bliss

 

I'd like to see you call Dr. Bill Cosby ignorant for having the same sentiments.

 

Vick just got out of prison. Half the country still believes that he shouldn't be playing in the NFL. Of course he's going to be contrite on TV.

 

You think he's going to outright say that his coaching in ATL sucked?

You think he's going to say his #1 receiver was Peerless Price who sucked balls?

 

I think not. You'll see a contrite person who repeatedly says "I'm sorry" whether he truly believes it or not.

 

Sure, he probably slacked a bit in ATL but that wasn't the root cause of his play. The root cause was a lack of supporting cast and poor coaching.

Ah yes, because it doesn't fit your argument then he must be lying. He expressly said that dog fighting dominated almost all of his free time. Your opinion means nothing on the subject. Who should we believe, some random guy on the internet, or Vick himself? You have absolutely nothing to refute his statement other than conjecture.

[Dawgg]

Ah yes, because it doesn't fit your argument then he must be lying. He expressly said that dog fighting dominated almost all of his free time. Your opinion means nothing on the subject. Who should we believe, some random guy on the internet, or Vick himself? You have absolutely nothing to refute his statement other than conjecture.

It's called common sense. The fact that you lack common sense fails to render an argument moot.

 

I have and continue to work with numerous NFL athletes. So yes, I speak from experience in stating that an athlete like Vick will "say all the right things" on camera. If you don't believe that, you're even MORE of an idiot than you have already revealed yourself to be... and that's saying a lot!

Edited November 25, 2010 by Dawgg

[Fingon]

It's called common sense. The fact that you lack common sense fails to render an argument moot.

 

I have and continue to work with numerous NFL athletes. So yes, I speak from experience in stating that an athlete like Vick will "say all the right things" on camera. If you don't believe that, you're even MORE of an idiot than you have already revealed yourself to be... and that's saying a lot!

It's common sense Vick was lying? Are you !@#$ing kidding me? Who the hell are you to say that you have some magical insight into his life? You don't, you have no god damn idea what Vick does with his time. If Vick says that he spent all his time on dog fighting, then I will believe him. If he says he is a reformed man, then I will believe him. If you want to call me an idiot that's fine, but I still possess mental faculties far beyond your own.

 

You have offered nothing to this conversation other than "Durr... I say Vick is lying because it's the truth." Guess what, If Vick says he almost completely disregarded film study, then who are you to refute that? Just because he isn't throwing his team mates under the bus doesn't mean he is lying. You want to know the facts of it? Vick is trying more than ever because he HAS to. If he fails, he goes back to owing his creditors millions. You don't think that's a strong incentive to work hard? Your entire argument is based upon the fallacy that because he says the right things, then he must be lying.

 

Is it conceivable that he is lying? Sure, but his words carry far more weight than your useless speculation.

 

I also enjoyed your little interjection that you work with NFL athletes. Yeah, and I'm secretly Bill Gates. It is meaningless drivel to assert you have some inside knowledge, when you will undoubtedly hide behind your anonymity.

 

 

Nice arguing skills Dawgg, I'm not sure how many more fallacies can possibly be spewed in such a short post.

 

And for the record, Vick had a very strong running game and a top 5 TE when he was in Atlanta.

Edited November 25, 2010 by Fingon

[Big Turk]

Vick just got out of prison. Half the country still believes that he shouldn't be playing in the NFL. Of course he's going to be contrite on TV.

 

You think he's going to outright say that his coaching in ATL sucked?

You think he's going to say his #1 receiver was Peerless Price who sucked balls?

 

I think not. You'll see a contrite person who repeatedly says "I'm sorry" whether he truly believes it or not.

 

Sure, he probably slacked a bit in ATL but that wasn't the root cause of his play. The root cause was a lack of supporting cast and poor coaching.

 

Right...the old, the person tells you exactly what happened, but you somehow know that this wasn't the case as if you have some sort of monitoring equipment set up to spy on Vick at his house and at the Falcons locker room...

 

I mean this borders on the absurd...

[Sisyphean Bills]

It's common sense Vick was lying?

Agreed, Fingon.

 

It's not just Vick that is saying he didn't try when he was with the Falcons. Other people with the Falcons at the time have also said that he was the last person to arrive in the morning and the first person to leave in the afternoon when he was there. Coaches have point blank said that Vick didn't grasp the offense, much less play within it. The argument that he didn't get "good enough coaching" has no legs as far as I am concerned. He had some great coaches in Atlanta. Those coaches did back flips to try to get him to work within some sort of system, to dumb it down enough for him, but it was an exercise in self-defeat. Jim Mora was absolutely right: Mike Vick was a coach killer in Atlanta. Good coaching isn't running after guys in their 20's with a box of wet wipes and a clean diaper.

[Dawgg]

Agreed, Fingon.

 

It's not just Vick that is saying he didn't try when he was with the Falcons. Other people with the Falcons at the time have also said that he was the last person to arrive in the morning and the first person to leave in the afternoon when he was there. Coaches have point blank said that Vick didn't grasp the offense, much less play within it. The argument that he didn't get "good enough coaching" has no legs as far as I am concerned. He had some great coaches in Atlanta. Those coaches did back flips to try to get him to work within some sort of system, to dumb it down enough for him, but it was an exercise in self-defeat. Jim Mora was absolutely right: Mike Vick was a coach killer in Atlanta. Good coaching isn't running after guys in their 20's with a box of wet wipes and a clean diaper.

2 things

 

1) Not denying that Vick didn't work as hard as he should have as a member of the Flacons. That's well documented.

 

2) But to say that coaching and supporting cast had little to do with his play in Atlanta is absurd. Greg Knapp was a horrible offensive coordinator. Jim Mora was a defensive coach. Peerless Price and TJ Duckett hardly qualify as a supporting cast. His only reliable receiver was Alge Crumpler. Put him on a team with a coach who grooms QBs (Reid), a great offensive coordinator (Morningweg) and a solid supporting cast (Jackson, Maclin McCoy) and it's no coincidence that he's doing well.

 

Football is not rocket science, despite what some might have you believe.

[The Dean]

In the Rooney Rule's defense...it doesn't require a certain percentage of coaches to be black. It only requires that a black coach be interviewed for every vacancy. One might consider the difference minor...but it's pretty significant, as it recognized that the bias needing breaking in the league wasn't overt racism but merely covert favoritism (in that it wasn't a "We're not going to hire blacks" attitude, but a "We're not going to hire out of our clique" bias), and more importantly that it still required minority candidates to earn the job on their merits.

 

I hated the rule at first; it took me a while to realize how subtle the wisdom was behind it: it's inclusive rather than exclusive (in that merely interviewing a black candidate doesn't preclude interviewing any other candidate you might want to talk to), and its focus is equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome. Is it racist? Hell, yes - it relies on franchises to make at least one discrimination based on skin color. But as equal opportunity policies go, you're not likely to find a smarter one. Much as I dislike Jesse Jackson's race baiting tactics, I've got to give him props for this rule.

 

 

Bingo! Well said.

 

Vick just got out of prison. Half the country still believes that he shouldn't be playing in the NFL. Of course he's going to be contrite on TV.

 

You think he's going to outright say that his coaching in ATL sucked?

You think he's going to say his #1 receiver was Peerless Price who sucked balls?

 

I think not. You'll see a contrite person who repeatedly says "I'm sorry" whether he truly believes it or not.

Sure, he probably slacked a bit in ATL but that wasn't the root cause of his play. The root cause was a lack of supporting cast and poor coaching.

 

 

I agree with you, for the most part, except for the bolded remark. To play QB at a high level in the NFL you can't be a slacker...particularly if your coaching sucks. I'm guessing poor coaching combined with a poor work ethic and attitude were the cause of Vick's poor play in Atlanta. While Price had his issues, a good QB doesn't become lousy because Peerless is on his team.

Edited November 25, 2010 by The Dean

[Dawgg]

Nice arguing skills Dawgg, I'm not sure how many more fallacies can possibly be spewed in such a short post.

 

And for the record, Vick had a very strong running game and a top 5 TE when he was in Atlanta.

Who accounted for a large chunk of that running game? Vick.

 

A top-5 tight end was his only reliable receiver.

 

Pair Vick with Andy Reid earlier in his career and Vick would have been a perennial all-pro. He didn't have that fortune and his play suffered as a result. Did his slacking off contribute to his poor play? You bet. But it was hardly the sole reason, as many here portray.

 

I agree with you, for the most part, except for the bolded remark. To play QB at a high level in the NFL you can't be a slacker...particularly if your coaching sucks. I'm guessing poor coaching combined with a poor work ethic and attitude were the cause of Vick's poor play in Atlanta. While Price had his issues, a good QB doesn't become lousy because Peerless is on his team.

I pretty much agree with you here.

 

I'll add this: McNair and McNabb aren't exactly known as film junkies and practice fiends... yet they managed to play at a reasonably high level for a sustained time period. Coaching matters for a QB and Vick is finally getting it now.

[Albany,n.y.]

I have wondered in recent years, and got no good answers from my friends, why it seems that black QBs do have shorter careers or at least don't stay on top as long.

 

Ten years ago or so, it looked like blacks would become the majority of QBs, as with most positions in the NFL. But, guys like Kordell Stewart, Quincy Carter, Ray Lucas, Sean King, Dante Culpepper, etc. would take their teams to the playoffs and I would think they are going to their franchise's QB. But, then their career's would flame out.

 

Vick and Young's careers have been very up and down. I thought Vick would become a top 5, if not best ever, QB in league history (and now maybe he will, but he got worse when he was with the Falcons).

 

Cunningham was great for stretches, but didn't seem to sustain long enough to a HOFer. McNabb I can't quite figure out - he seemed like a sure HOFer, but that Super Bowl performance really hurt, and he has not been very good for about the last five years or so.

 

The only black QB that I can think of with a long HOF Kelly, Marino, Fouts, etc. type career is Warren Moon.

 

But, I just don't know why this is?

I'll take a stab at it. 1st off you've included too many guys who, no matter what their skin color, wouldn't have lasted long. Stewart, Lucas & King didn't have the talent to last a long time. Carter's career was destroyed by drugs similar to Todd Marinovich's. Culpepper & Cunningham had injuries that affected their careers-plenty of white QBs get injured a lot too (RJ & TE in Buffalo), although some black QBs have come from QB running offenses growing up and are more likely to take off & run-more running plays by a QB will result in more injuries. Vick's case is unique due to the dog fighting. Young is a head case, he almost had a nervous breakdown earlier in his career. I don't know if he's that different than a white bust headcase like Ryan Leaf, but so far he's had more success. McNabb has had a long, productive career, he's just not a HOFer, similar to Phil Simms with the NYG. Finally, there's still too small a sample to draw any real conclusions, why that is is another issue.

[Sisyphean Bills]

2 things

 

1) Not denying that Vick didn't work as hard as he should have as a member of the Flacons. That's well documented.

Yet, you seem to be unable to connect the dots that Vick has changed dramatically himself and somehow seek out contortions to explain how everyone else around Vick either tore him down or built him up. Such as:

2) But to say that coaching and supporting cast had little to do with his play in Atlanta is absurd. Greg Knapp was a horrible offensive coordinator. Jim Mora was a defensive coach. Peerless Price and TJ Duckett hardly qualify as a supporting cast. His only reliable receiver was Alge Crumpler. Put him on a team with a coach who grooms QBs (Reid), a great offensive coordinator (Morningweg) and a solid supporting cast (Jackson, Maclin McCoy) and it's no coincidence that he's doing well.

 

Football is not rocket science, despite what some might have you believe.

No kidding. Occam's razor can be applied in many situations. But then that just begs the question why you persist with the theories that it's some complex chemical reaction that has to happen all around the guy in question even to the point that he and others are lying since what they say doesn't back your pet theory?

 

The thing is that Vick is playing the position differently now. It's the same West Coast offense he played in under Mora (though not as dumbed down). He was always an amazing athlete, and I never said he wasn't. But now he isn't just relying on his raw athletic ability, but putting in the time and dedication to involve the rest of the team.

[Dawgg]

Yet, you seem to be unable to connect the dots that Vick has changed dramatically himself and somehow seek out contortions to explain how everyone else around Vick either tore him down or built him up. Such as:

I never suggested he was lying, but rather that he's not going to reveal ALL the reasons for his failures in a nationally televised interview, particularly when it involves criticizing anyone but himself.

 

YES, he admitted that he didn't work as hard as he should have in Atlanta.

NO, he will not attribute his play to a poor supporting cast or substandard coaching. That doesn't mean it didn't exist. If you want to believe, go right ahead.

 

But to take what he said in an interview and assume that's the sole reason for his prior failures and current success is somewhat naive. Vick managed to do a lot with a little in Atlanta. In Philly, he's able to do a lot more with much better players and far superior coaching.

 

The thing is that Vick is playing the position differently now. It's the same West Coast offense he played in under Mora

 

Yes, the same except:

 

Reid is far better at grooming QBs than Mora

Morningweg is a far better offensive coordinator than Knapp

Eagles offensive line/skill players are far superior to what he had in Atlanta

 

If you think this is solely the product of an attitude change, it's you who's failing to connect the dots.

[SwampD]

i consider myself somewhat of a casual expert on race issues and i have to agree, color doesnt appear to be a factor with nfl quarterbacks to me either

 

they all look the same to me anyway. quarterbacks i mean

I'm not going to read through this whole thread so I don't know if this has already been said, and this seemed like as good a post to respond to about it, but I disagree.

 

If Fitz was black, he would be getting killed by Bills fans. They would say,"See, they just can't be a QB. He's great when he uses his legs but he has no accuracy when he throws." I bet you can personally think of few people that would say that.

[finknottle]

In the Rooney Rule's defense...it doesn't require a certain percentage of coaches to be black. It only requires that a black coach be interviewed for every vacancy. One might consider the difference minor...but it's pretty significant, as it recognized that the bias needing breaking in the league wasn't overt racism but merely covert favoritism (in that it wasn't a "We're not going to hire blacks" attitude, but a "We're not going to hire out of our clique" bias), and more importantly that it still required minority candidates to earn the job on their merits.

 

I hated the rule at first; it took me a while to realize how subtle the wisdom was behind it: it's inclusive rather than exclusive (in that merely interviewing a black candidate doesn't preclude interviewing any other candidate you might want to talk to), and its focus is equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome. Is it racist? Hell, yes - it relies on franchises to make at least one discrimination based on skin color. But as equal opportunity policies go, you're not likely to find a smarter one. Much as I dislike Jesse Jackson's race baiting tactics, I've got to give him props for this rule.

 

Based on your explanation of the wisdom, why does the Rooney Rule not apply to other under-represented groups?

 

Should each NFL team be required to also interview and give serious consideration to an Asian candidate for their head coach hirings? What about women and the disabled?

[bbb]

I'll take a stab at it. 1st off you've included too many guys who, no matter what their skin color, wouldn't have lasted long. Stewart, Lucas & King didn't have the talent to last a long time. Carter's career was destroyed by drugs similar to Todd Marinovich's. Culpepper & Cunningham had injuries that affected their careers-plenty of white QBs get injured a lot too (RJ & TE in Buffalo), although some black QBs have come from QB running offenses growing up and are more likely to take off & run-more running plays by a QB will result in more injuries. Vick's case is unique due to the dog fighting. Young is a head case, he almost had a nervous breakdown earlier in his career. I don't know if he's that different than a white bust headcase like Ryan Leaf, but so far he's had more success. McNabb has had a long, productive career, he's just not a HOFer, similar to Phil Simms with the NYG. Finally, there's still too small a sample to draw any real conclusions, why that is is another issue.

 

I think your sample size theory might have some merit. Of course, I didn't name all the black QBs of the last 15 years or so, and didn't even get into the busts (Akili Smith, Jamarcus Russell), sticking just with those who seemed to have actually done something substantial.

 

I don't have any numbers to back this up, but I'm pretty sure that the number of starting black QBs really was trending up somewhere from 7-15 years ago, and now seems to be trending down (to my surprise).

 

The sample size theory makes as much as sense as any. You could probably randomly the same number of white starting QBs at a certain time 8 years ago or so, and may have the same results. But, now it seems like there are more white QBs replacing the washouts than black oens.

[reddogblitz]

I agree with you, for the most part, except for the bolded remark. To play QB at a high level in the NFL you can't be a slacker...particularly if your coaching sucks. I'm guessing poor coaching combined with a poor work ethic and attitude were the cause of Vick's poor play in Atlanta.

Really Dean? Do you even know who his coach in Atlanta was? The year they went to the Super Bowl his coach was Dan Reeves. I think he did a heck of a coaching job getting Vick up to the point where they could beat GB in GB in the playoffs in the cold and then get to the Super Bowl. Reaves was coach from 1998 to 2003. Then Wade took over and then Jim Mora Jr in 2004 and 2005. The Falcons went to the NFC Championship in 2004.

 

Which coach was bad for MV?

Edited November 26, 2010 by reddogblitz

[Hplarrm]

Based on your explanation of the wisdom, why does the Rooney Rule not apply to other under-represented groups?

 

Should each NFL team be required to also interview and give serious consideration to an Asian candidate for their head coach hirings? What about women and the disabled?

 

The reason is that though the views of some are motivated by the principles they choose, most folks back here in the real world tend to also be heavily motivated by the practical aspects of situations.

 

It does makes sense if one chooses actions based on a single principle of equal treatment for all based on race that something like the Rooney Rule would be applied equally to all races, genders or whatever you choose as areas to hamhandedly apply this equality principle.

 

However, back in reality the NFL (and most folks actually) recognize the reality that teams are managing a set of employees of which the vast majority are African-Americans.

 

It creates a real management problem and is in fact offensive to an increasingly powerful NFLPA which is mot only a partner with team owners but actually command a substantial majority to total gross receipts under the current CBA.

 

If the majority of NFL players were Asian and virtually all these players were restricted from getting HC jobs with no other perceptible rational other than their ethnic heritage then my guess is there would be a Rooney Rule about Asian HCs. If the majority of players were women and gender was seemingly a restriction to good players or bad players with good football minds and skills were restricted from HC jobs then there would be a Rooney Rule for women.

 

Likewise for a plethora of disabled players.

 

The problem is that here in America everyone generally has a right to select which principle you want to advocate or live by even if this limited selection would be stupid if applied in real life.

 

However, back here in the real world it is about much more than simplistic application of a limited set of principles.

 

A solution needs to be found which reaches for the best production of E pluribus unum, one from many ideas even if some of them are simply stupid (this same idea applies to consideration of views not only of the NFL but in terms of politics not only from Sarah Palin to Barack Obama or someone who actually pursues views which are way to the left of Obama or way to the right of Palin.

 

The actual reason there is no Rooney Rule for women, Asian, the disabled or most other gotcha one would conjure up to try to validate some limited application of principle is that these Rules would be stupid in those cases.

[Buffalo Billy]

It always kills me when people who work at ESPN complain about how media portrays stuff. It's like Vitale saying "nobody talks about ___, wah". Well you're the most prominent voice in college hoops so why don't you talk about them instead of crying about it and talking about Duke/UNC all the time.

 

"You don't hear about the adversity Campbell had to overcome in Washington" - really? That must be why the Raiders were one of the more popular sleeper picks in August. Nevermind the Raiders drafting Russell in the first place.

 

"You don't hear anyone criticizing Palmer" - really? Seriously? What are you watching/reading/listening to - KKK radio?

 

You seriously don't understand why Manning gets more slack than McNabb for throwing a pick?

 

"If Brett Favre had done this..." - I mean c'mon, John Madden is retired; the universal Favre love from the media burned and crashed about 5 years ago, for good reason.

 

Cliff Notes: "I'm aware of facts A, B, and C that basically kill the point I'm trying to make, but it seems from my anecdotal observations ___". Gee, that's moving.

 

My own anecdotal note as someone who has lived in Philly for a while - McNabb is less popular among black fans than whites.

Bolded part, /endthread.

 

"You know when it comes to racism, people say, 'I don't care if they're black, white, purple, or green.' Uh, hold on now- purple people? You gotta draw the line somewhere. To hell with purple people!"

 

-Mitch Hedberg, the greatest stand up comedian of all-time

Unless of course they are suffocating. In that case, HELP THEM!

 

Just did a quick count. Of the top 33 QBs listed on NFL.com, 6 are black. Not sure what that means. Draw your own conclusions.

12% of Americans are black. According to your count 18% of NFL QBs are black, putting them ahead of the trend. What conclusion are you trying to lead people to?

[Mr. WEO]

"Love my (NFL black QB's), where's my bieches?"

[Red]

My perception is, meh. I don't see racism being an issue like it was back in, say, Jim Brown's day or anything. Looking at the make-up of the league, and how alot of NFL defenses are now entirely black, IMO, proves that any stigma is long gone and the only thing that matters is win now. Winning is more important than any racist ideas.

 

As far as black QB's go, with the exception of Warren Moon I've never like them. Like the Trent Edwards check down, there always seems to be a tendency to run before pass if the first option is not available. I think Randal Cunningham ruined it for me. Then Vick,...forget about it. Warren Moon was a classy, classy QB that has never gotten the proper reverence for his abilities as a passing QB IMO.