Vick not given the same shot as Manning

[KD in CA]

Personally, I find it hard to believe that the Falcons have not been trying for years to "school" Vick in the fundamentals of being a QB.  He is either so set in his ways or just doesn't want to absorb it or is too arrogant to really listen and probably all three.  yes, you can make legitimate argument about the supporting cast, quality of coaching, and the incongruity of the WCO with Vick, but still...  Of course, Vick made his name by running around everywhere at VT.  I'm sure they told him to take off at every turn.  What college coach gives a crap about turning a Vick into a "pocket passer" when he can singlehandedly kick everyone's a*s with his legs?

875619[/snapback]

 

It just shows that the hype machine rules all. Guys like Flutie and Crouch were assumed not to have NFL level skills at the QB position when they came out of school. Vick was in the same boat talent wise but he becomes a #1 overall pick and people assume he's going to save a franchaise. Pure insanity.

[BuffOrange]

When will people realize that Vick is just not a good QB and is the most overrated player ever to play the position?

 

It's not that hard to see.  The man is a superior athlete but a s*it QB.

 

Simple.

875565[/snapback]

 

Honestly, football fans not understanding "over/underrated" has to be somewhere between death & taxes in life's sure bets.

It's actually really hard to see that he's "the most overrated QB ever" when ~50% of the population feels the same way as you.

[pdh1]

"...the black athlete is 'bred to be the better athelete because, this goes all the way to the Civil War when ... the slave owner would breed his big woman so that he would have a big black kid.'"

 

It seems like only yesterday...

875583[/snapback]

 

 

Was that said by Michael Irvin?

[Sketch Soland]

Honestly, football fans not understanding "over/underrated" has to be somewhere between death & taxes in life's sure bets.

It's actually really hard to see that he's "the most overrated QB ever" when ~50% of the population feels the same way as you.

875623[/snapback]

 

I'm talking about the media machine's opinion of Vick which is usually a job somewhere between hand and blow. They jerk Vick off on a regular basis no matter how inconsistent and subpar his play is in a way that really is astounding, thus "most overrated player ever" imo. Obviously, this is hyperbole in the sense that there is no way to quantify "most" but I think you get my point in that he seems like the "most overrated player" to my eyes, as I am using the term "overrated" in terms of the media's esteem vs. his actual performance as I see it.

 

But thank you for your slightly condescending post

[Ramius]

I'm talking about the media machine's opinion of Vick which is usually a job somewhere between hand and blow.  They jerk Vick off on a regular basis no matter how inconsistent and subpar his play is in a way that really is astounding, thus "most overrated player ever" imo.  Obviously, this is hyperbole in the sense that there is no way to quantify "most" but I think you get my point in that he seems like the "most overrated player" to my eyes, as I am using the term "overrated" in terms of the media's esteem vs. his actual performance as I see it.

 

But thank you for your slightly condescending post 

875631[/snapback]

 

Vick, overrated? bah! He just needs a better coach to kill, and better WR's to overthrow!

[Dawgg]

You mean receivers to DROP his passes.... Falcons receivers lead the league in drops. But that has nothing to do with Vick's effectiveness.

 

Vick, overrated? bah! He just needs a better coach to kill, and better WR's to overthrow!

875662[/snapback]

[jjamie12]

And that's the problem -- how exactly is that kind of teaching "wrong"?

 

...

 

If your QB is Michael Vick -- or Eric Crouch -- you tell him to run if its available because he can do more good running than throwing.

875617[/snapback]

 

How's that working out for the Falcons, and, by extension, Michael Vick's career?

 

If you can't see why that is "wrong", I don't know what to tell you... Michael Vick is the poster child for this "wrong-ness".

[BoondckCL]

What are the techniques tought to mexican quarterbacks?

[BoondckCL]

Honestly, football fans not understanding "over/underrated" has to be somewhere between death & taxes in life's sure bets.

It's actually really hard to see that he's "the most overrated QB ever" when ~50% of the population feels the same way as you.

875623[/snapback]

 

I would tend to agree with you now that people have had time to see that he just isn't that good.

 

But I would say that Vick is the most over promoted player to ever play the position. Michael Vick is a pill that the NFL wanted the consumer to swallow because he resembled in some way a cultural balance at the quarterback position. It turns out he wasn't that great, thats where over rated came in, but now they're still promoting him like he is that player that he was supposed to be coming out of college.

 

The truth of the matter is that for the buck that the NFL backs him with promotion wise, his production on the field does not meet the off field buck, thus that is why i think people are even more turned off by Vick and his playing style.

[Olaf Fub]

Are you guys insane?

 

Did you actually read the article?  It didn't say that Vick wasn't getting a fair shake because he's black... it didn't even suggest that!

 

Here is what the article says:

 

He goes on to say:

 

If you guys would actually take the time to READ the article, you might learn something.  This is not some guy claiming that NFL fans are easier on white QB's than black.  This is an interesting take from an NFL player who has experience in this. He's telling us that certain QB's are taught different things because of their different abilities, and that this sort of teaching is wrong.

875571[/snapback]

 

No. The article is implying that black QBs are taught differently than white QBs and that's why they struggle in the NFL more. It's an attempt to pawn off Vick's poor play on fans and coaches. It tries to make him a victim, his poor decisions are the result of the way he was treated because of the color of his skin.

 

Players are coached based on their ability and what they excel at. Brady and Manning aren't taught to take off and run with the ball because it's not something they are good at doing. However, Steve Young probably was and we all know JP was taught that last year. So the idea that only black QBs are coached like Vick is a complete falsehood.

 

Also, Warren Moon was coached like Manning, to be a pocket passer, because that was his strength. The idea that skin color determines coaching style is a flat out lie.

[jjamie12]

The idea that skin color determines coaching style is a flat out lie.

875695[/snapback]

 

No kidding. And, I think, if you read the article, it clearly says: "It's all about the tutelage they get from the time they're in college on. I saw that with Dameyune Craig. He was told, 'If your first read isn't there, take off and run.' Do you think that anyone ever told Peyton Manning or Tom Brady to do that? Again, it's about the tutelage they get."

 

And, why don't Peyton or Brady take off running? Because they can't run. Vick (and in this article, Dameyune Craig can, too) can. What Gandy is saying is that they are being taught things that, over the long haul are counter-productive. They are taught that because of their ATHLETIC ABILITY. Not their skin color.

[Captain Hindsight]

Get a load of this one...

 

Downside to Athleticism

 

just a tease:

"In particular, Gandy has a pretty interesting take on why black quarterbacks such as current teammate Michael Vick undergo so much public scrutiny. Gandy has watched teammates – Vick, Aaron Brooks in New Orleans, Kordell Stewart in Pittsburgh, Tony Banks in St. Louis and Dameyune Craig at Auburn – operate under a different set of standards"

875378[/snapback]

lets also remember that vick has been in the league lopnger than manning. and therefore his clock is running out.... o and hes getting paid out the ass

[drunkenirishmann]

Was that said by Michael Irvin?

875624[/snapback]

 

Those would be the infamous comments by "Jimmy the Greek".

[Olaf Fub]

No kidding.  And, I think, if you read the article, it clearly says: "It's all about the tutelage they get from the time they're in college on. I saw that with Dameyune Craig. He was told, 'If your first read isn't there, take off and run.' Do you think that anyone ever told Peyton Manning or Tom Brady to do that? Again, it's about the tutelage they get."

 

And, why don't Peyton or Brady take off running?  Because they can't run.  Vick (and in this article, Dameyune Craig can, too) can.  What Gandy is saying is that they are being taught things that, over the long haul are counter-productive.  They are taught that because of their ATHLETIC ABILITY.  Not their skin color.

875698[/snapback]

 

Here's another quote from the article, "The black quarterback is told, 'Do something, make a big play."

 

Plus, all the running QBs mentioned are black where the pocket passers mentioned are white. What the author and Gandy fail to realize is that they are making a false arguement based on stereotypes that they hold.

 

I'm sorry but c'mon, you don't even need to read between the lines on this one.

[Prognastic]

How are Asian QBs coached?

[stuckincincy]

What it seems to me he (Gandy, a lineman for the Falcons) is suggesting is that Vick and other black QBs don't get a fair shake by COACHES.  Suggesting that black QBs are trained/coached differently.  For ex., Manning has been taught to throw the ball away rather than take the sack.  Vick has bee taught to run and make a play rather than take the sack.

 

Consequently, black QBs have different expectations placed on them in comparison to white QBs as a direct result of them being more athletic than white guys.  And because of these different expectation, black QBs are usually less succesful.

 

In other words, Vick is having a bad year because he's black and therefore treated differently than white QBs.  It's not because of his lack of abilities, his bad recievers, bad play calling, or anything like that; its merely boils down to him being black.  I think this is pretty well atrocious.  I guess the guy never watched Warren Moon play or Doug Williams. 

 

I think this article is a clear indication that racism is more prevalent than anyone cares to admit in our society and in the NFL.

875578[/snapback]

 

Um.

 

There aren't many jobs like NFL work that can make one fabulously rich, let alone just regular rich, just because of genetically gained athletic talents.

 

Regardless if you are black, white, plaid, or have 2, 3 or 4 dangling gonads, or may or may not have the brainpower of a stale cheeseburger or the social skills of a tick, if you will increase the gate and cash flow, you are the same as any other business asset and will be encouraged.

 

NFL players are the same as actors. They all hire agents to get them profitable gigs according to the marketability of what they can offer the entertainment biz.

 

Racism my eye...

[BuffOrange]

I'm talking about the media machine's opinion of Vick which is usually a job somewhere between hand and blow.  They jerk Vick off on a regular basis no matter how inconsistent and subpar his play is in a way that really is astounding, thus "most overrated player ever" imo.  Obviously, this is hyperbole in the sense that there is no way to quantify "most" but I think you get my point in that he seems like the "most overrated player" to my eyes, as I am using the term "overrated" in terms of the media's esteem vs. his actual performance as I see it.

 

But thank you for your slightly condescending post 

875631[/snapback]

 

No prob - that's what I'm here for

 

For whatever reason the guy creates polarizing opinions: he's either God's gift or sucks ass. Last year, the popular opinion (particularly among black analysts) was that the coaches did a bad job of not playing to his strengths: that he's never going to be Manning/Brady and they shouldn't pretend such, but he can still be an effective QB in his own non-traditional way. I tended to agree with this.

 

Of course now that the coaches are "letting Vick be Vick" as they say, this article seems to think that he can be Manning/Brady if given the opportunity, which is clearly absurd.

[Dawgg]

I don't think they are. Nor does TMQ:

 

Sour Play of the Week No. 2: Dallas leading 7-0, Atlanta had second-and-10 at the Cowboys' 49 on the first snap of the second quarter. Michael Vick sprinted backwards all the way to his own 38 before heave-hoeing a crazy pass that was intercepted and returned for a touchdown by DeMarcus Ware. TMQ has asked this three times and will ask it a fourth: Why do Atlanta coaches have Vick running backward so much? The Falcons are sinking slowly into the sunset, and nearly all their calamity plays this season have come with Vick racing backward. Vick is the NFL's best running-quarterback threat since Randall Cunningham. When Vick executes conventional sprint-outs, he is devastating. On the conventional sprint-out, Vick is close to the line and can take off running; if the defense comes up to honor the run, then Vick throws. When Atlanta coaches tell Vick to race straight backward -- he often appears to be executing an eight-step or even nine-step drop -- Vick retreats away from the line and surrenders his running threat, while having to throw off his back foot falling backward, which is a recipe for fiasco. Now it's Dallas 31, Atlanta 28 with nine minutes remaining, the Falcons facing third-and-3 in a game in which they rushed for an average of 4.7 yards per carry. Did Atlanta power-run? Did Vick sprint out? Atlanta coaches called a shotgun formation. Vick raced backward, then threw incomplete; as the punt boomed, TMQ wrote the words "game over" in his notebook. Why do Atlanta coaches have Michael Vick running backward so much?

 

 

Of course now that the coaches are "letting Vick be Vick" as they say...

875810[/snapback]

[MDH]

I don't think they are.  Nor does TMQ:

 

Sour Play of the Week No. 2: Dallas leading 7-0, Atlanta had second-and-10 at the Cowboys' 49 on the first snap of the second quarter. Michael Vick sprinted backwards all the way to his own 38 before heave-hoeing a crazy pass that was intercepted and returned for a touchdown by DeMarcus Ware. TMQ has asked this three times and will ask it a fourth: Why do Atlanta coaches have Vick running backward so much? The Falcons are sinking slowly into the sunset, and nearly all their calamity plays this season have come with Vick racing backward. Vick is the NFL's best running-quarterback threat since Randall Cunningham. When Vick executes conventional sprint-outs, he is devastating. On the conventional sprint-out, Vick is close to the line and can take off running; if the defense comes up to honor the run, then Vick throws. When Atlanta coaches tell Vick to race straight backward -- he often appears to be executing an eight-step or even nine-step drop -- Vick retreats away from the line and surrenders his running threat, while having to throw off his back foot falling backward, which is a recipe for fiasco. Now it's Dallas 31, Atlanta 28 with nine minutes remaining, the Falcons facing third-and-3 in a game in which they rushed for an average of 4.7 yards per carry. Did Atlanta power-run? Did Vick sprint out? Atlanta coaches called a shotgun formation. Vick raced backward, then threw incomplete; as the punt boomed, TMQ wrote the words "game over" in his notebook. Why do Atlanta coaches have Michael Vick running backward so much?

875819[/snapback]

 

It's the WRs fault and the coaches fault...does Vick ever get any of the blame for his lack of (overall) success in the NFL? He has not grown as a player in his 6 years in the league. At some point he's got to share much of the blame for his struggles.

[BuffOrange]

Did you just use TMQ to make a point?