Fan in Chicago Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 No, the fact that they lead the league in rushing in multiple seasons defines dominating. If we can sign one of those guys as a backup QB, I'll never suggest we sign MV again. Dude do you realize that you are making an ass out of yourself here? Let me show you overall team defense during the 2001-2006 seasons vs the Falcons records in those seasons, and we can let the other people on the forum decide where the causation lies: YEAR Team Defense Rank Record 2001 30 7-9 2002 19 9-6 2003 32 5-11 2004 14 11-5 2005 22 8-8 2006 22 7-9 In an amazing surprise, it appears that the Falcons team defense correlates to their record for each season to a far greater extent than does MVs performance, which was pretty much as consistent as steel. Holy sh--, I think I debunked you again. Decent does not mean Pro-bowl. And there are many other dynamics that affect a team's W/L record, but I wouldn't expect the likes of you to be sensitive to that. I suggest if you don't want to be called an idiot, don't submit posts to forums that make you look like an idiot. And whenever you are trying to convince someone of the merits of your perspective, subject-verb agreement is ALWAYS important. You keep changing arguments when facts supplied by me debunk what you claimed. First you implied Vick will make Bills better but when I pointed out he is neither a good passer nor that his rushing would help us to a better record, you changed to say he would be better than our backups. Then I pointed out his rushing stats as related to the Falcons W-L record, you point to their defense. So did Vick cause their better record or are you agreeing to The Dean's point that it is the team that wins and not the QB ? I am saying Vick will not make the Bills better. It is your posts that make you look like an idiot and a dumba$$ who cannot stick to one line of argument and continuously deflect arguments when you cannot win any. I am not participating in a national debate which place emphasis on grammatical superiority. So, STFU !
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 You keep changing arguments when facts supplied by me debunk what you claimed. First you implied Vick will make Bills better but when I pointed out he is neither a good passer nor that his rushing would help us to a better record, you changed to say he would be better than our backups. Then I pointed out his rushing stats as related to the Falcons W-L record, you point to their defense. So did Vick cause their better record or are you agreeing to The Dean's point that it is the team that wins and not the QB ? I am saying Vick will not make the Bills better. It is your posts that make you look like an idiot and a dumba$$ who cannot stick to one line of argument and continuously deflect arguments when you cannot win any. I am not participating in a national debate which place emphasis on grammatical superiority. So, STFU ! When did my argument change? Can you quote my words where I stated Vick should be our starting QB? I considered it to be obvious that ANY team would only consider him to be a backup this year, and I thought everyone else did as well. I still flat out stated that Vick makes the Bills better, and I hold to that, because our backup situation is one of our biggest flaws as a team. So there is no contradiction there. I have not changed any of my arguments, I have simply thrown in new arguments to debunk your continuing litany of horse sh--. I NEVER suggested that the QB wins games, you did. I simply stated Vick would make us better, and to that I hold. The only response that would be acceptable and that I would not have to respond to would be "Yes, Mr. SouthGeorgiaBillsFan, your knowledge and understanding of the dynamics of the game far exceeds my own, and therefore I will not pollute this thread with my nonsense any longer." There is of course option B, which is you provide an argument with merit. But I really don't see that as forthcoming, so...
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 Maybe it's because so few people agree with that demonstrably false statement. Look, we just kissed goodbye a "mobile, athletic scrambler with a big arm". For a mobile guy, Vick took a ton of sacks. He has relatively low Ints because nobody could catch his errant throws. His main target was his TE because he never knew where his primary receiver was---hence, most drop backs ended as a toss to Crumpler or, more commonly, Vick just taking off. ???? Vick started out 11-5. His next two seasons saw 8-8 and 7-9. As soon as they got rid of him and got a decent QB (a rookie....from Boston College), they were right back to 11-5 and in the playoffs. I'm sure the fans of the Falcons truly miss all that "tremendous success" that Vick brought them. In the context of my post it was clearly evident that I was referring to the tremendous success of their running game. I like how you Vick haters conveniently leave out any context that gives meaning contrary to your argument. As far as his relatively low INTs, it seems his receivers were catching more of his "errant throws" for touchdowns than defenders were intercepting, which last I checked, is a good thing. And for the record, Vick's Rookie season was 2001 and the Falcons finished 7-9. They followed that with 9-6-1 and 5-11 in 02 & 03, before finally breaking through in 04 with an 11-5 mark. So I guess that was your credibility I just heard swirling down the toilet. Next please.
Booster4324 Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 When did my argument change? Can you quote my words where I stated Vick should be our starting QB? I considered it to be obvious that ANY team would only consider him to be a backup this year, and I thought everyone else did as well. I still flat out stated that Vick makes the Bills better, and I hold to that, because our backup situation is one of our biggest flaws as a team. So there is no contradiction there. I have not changed any of my arguments, I have simply thrown in new arguments to debunk your continuing litany of horse sh--. I NEVER suggested that the QB wins games, you did. I simply stated Vick would make us better, and to that I hold. The only response that would be acceptable and that I would not have to respond to would be "Yes, Mr. SouthGeorgiaBillsFan, your knowledge and understanding of the dynamics of the game far exceeds my own, and therefore I will not pollute this thread with my nonsense any longer." There is of course option B, which is you provide an argument with merit. But I really don't see that as forthcoming, so... You also keep misrepresenting the facts about the type of dogs killed by Michael Vick and never bother to respond to evidence that proves you are wrong.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 You also keep misrepresenting the facts about the type of dogs killed by Michael Vick and never bother to respond to evidence that proves you are wrong. I didn't see the evidence, but you can gladly post it here again and I will look at it. But if you are suggesting he was fighting poodles, then I'd have to say you are the one misrepresenting the facts. Every article I've read mentions only one breed of dogs - pit bulls. So uh..I'm not sure what your saying but please feel free to resubmit whatever post I missed that you are referring to (I actually looked back through this thread and couldn't find anything - perhaps I just overlooked it?) For the record, a google search of "Michael Vick Dogs" yields page after page of pictures of different dogs - every one of which is a pit bull. Perhaps I missed the boat but I'm going to need some conclusive evidence otherwise before I'll grant that, so again, please resubmit your evidence if you don't mind.
Mr. WEO Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 In the context of my post it was clearly evident that I was referring to the tremendous success of their running game. I like how you Vick haters conveniently leave out any context that gives meaning contrary to your argument. As far as his relatively low INTs, it seems his receivers were catching more of his "errant throws" for touchdowns than defenders were intercepting, which last I checked, is a good thing. And for the record, Vick's Rookie season was 2001 and the Falcons finished 7-9. They followed that with 9-6 and 5-11 in 02 & 03, before finally breaking through in 04 with an 11-5 mark. So I guess that was your credibility I just heard swirling down the toilet. Next please. I am well aware of when Vick's career started (he hardly played in 2001 and 2003, son)---my ("clearly evident in the context of my post") point was that he, at his peak, had an took an 11-5 team and turned it into a 7-9 team as he padded his rushing stats with over 1000 yards in 2006. Meanwhile, his passing game was the worst in the NFL. So what? What good is it if your QB rushes for over 1000 yards? His offense ranked 25th in points scored. We had a better offense last year. Next you'll be telling us all about the "tremendous success" of the Barry Sanders Lions.
Booster4324 Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 I didn't see the evidence, but you can gladly post it here again and I will look at it. But if you are suggesting he was fighting poodles, then I'd have to say you are the one misrepresenting the facts. Every article I've read mentions only one breed of dogs - pit bulls. So uh..I'm not sure what your saying but please feel free to resubmit whatever post I missed that you are referring to (I actually looked back through this thread and couldn't find anything - perhaps I just overlooked it?) For the record, a google search of "Michael Vick Dogs" yields page after page of pictures of different dogs - every one of which is a pit bull. Perhaps I missed the boat but I'm going to need some conclusive evidence otherwise before I'll grant that, so again, please resubmit your evidence if you don't mind. http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1505498 And http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...ained_fami.html because another link was broken.
HurlyBurly51 Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 No need to get all caught up in the Vick debate, as he will never be a Bill. Now that there are numerous teams vying for his services, no way does Buffalo win that "sweepstakes." Hell, if we were the only NFL option for him, we'd still probably lose out to the UFL.
The Dean Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 I didn't see the evidence, but you can gladly post it here again and I will look at it. But if you are suggesting he was fighting poodles, then I'd have to say you are the one misrepresenting the facts. Every article I've read mentions only one breed of dogs - pit bulls. Aye aye aye. Dog breeders steal dogs to use in training. They are not the dogs they use to fight, and wager on. They are the dogs they use to train the fighting dogs.
The Dean Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1505498 And http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...ained_fami.html because another link was broken. Good articles, that support when everyone should know. THAT is how dog fighting operations work. It would only be surprising if they didn't use family dogs. But it isn't as if any of the dogs chose this life. They are all innocent victims of a very sick and twisted group of monsters.
buffaloaggie Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 Also, Roddy White played with MV in only his first two seasons in the NFL - 2005 & 2006 - during that time are you saying he was a premier receiver? That would be a flagrantly unsubstantiated statement. I don't think anyone said Roddy White was a premier receiver with Vick. The fact is Vick often looked for Crumpler only, so the WRs were afterthoughts in the offense. He has no touch when throwing the ball. The fact that Matt Ryan AND Joey Harrington/Chris Redman were all able to get Roddy White the ball just shows how bad Vick is. He zeros in on one receiver (Crumpler at the time) and does not know how to check down. He drills the ball in when he doesn't have to, resulting in many dropped balls. Ryan is a successful QB working with pretty much the same receivers that Vick had his final year with the Falcons and he is getting the job done passing. Vick is nothing to Falcon fans. They have Matt Ryan, who they are happy with and he is WAY less likely to do anything stupid like pitbull fighting, smoking weed or flipping off fans. Fans are doing just fine with a team that just went 11-5 and they have forgotten about Vick and his "tremendous success" as you infer.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1505498 And http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...ained_fami.html because another link was broken. Thanks for the response, sorry I missed it originally. So perhaps they would have lived otherwise - those specific dogs anyway, if not for MV's dog fighting operation. Concession granted, on that point. I still find it horribly irresponsible that people would deem a pit bull a suitable family pet - I've known several people who have been attacked by their own, supposedly non-violent, pit bulls. A guy I worked and his wife were mauled by his three pit bulls, and he claims they had never so much as snapped at anyone. It actually led to his divorce, as his wife had repeatedly stated that she was uncomfortable having the dogs running around in the yard prior to the attack. My cousin was attacked by my uncle's pit bull when she was four and still bears a scar on her face, and he was the epitome of the "family dog" - had never had a single aggressive behavior before that. I myself was attacked by my neighbors pit, that I petted and played with every day. The dog damn near castrated me: I had two holes in my scrotum(luckily he only caught the skin and didn't get any tissue), one in my leg, and the other in my pinky knuckle where I had jammed it into his maw. I hate to think what would have happened if not for my quick reflexes They are an unpredictable breed, which isn't uncommon for dogs. The main difference between a pit bull and a lab is that a lab doesn't have throat rending jaw power. But in MV's case, it wasn't like he was pitting Lassie against Old Yeller in a match to the death All that being said, I still think this is really a non-issue. The guy fought some pit bulls, which are a species of dog that has been bred to fight and kill for centuries. I fail to see what the big deal is here. I understand it is violent for the sake of entertainment, but so is MMA, and football for that matter. I mean at least he wasn't fighting gladiators against each other to the death for the enjoyment of the masses. I understand that it hurts the dogs - but in reality, dogs fight anyway of their own accord, especially pit bulls, and hurt each other, all the time - even family dogs. I personally don't see any problem with placing a wager on that from time to time. But even if I did, I still feel like MV's punishment was more than adequate for his crime, and as long as he doesn't engage in that behavior again, I don't see how anyone has the right to continue holding it against him. If he did engage in dog fighting again, I personally would not care, but at the same time I wouldn't try to convince anyone else the Bills should consider signing him either. All I'm saying is that the guy should get another chance to be an athlete. After all, Mike Tyson did, and the Bills could certainly benefit from having him on the roster (Vick, not Tyson ).
Turn Down For Watkins Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 I guess there was a Vick sighting in Chicago per PFT. Link
Like A Mofo Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 I guess there was a Vick sighting in Chicago per PFT. Link Was Marv there to pick him up at the airport?
Fan in Chicago Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 When did my argument change? Can you quote my words where I stated Vick should be our starting QB? I considered it to be obvious that ANY team would only consider him to be a backup this year, and I thought everyone else did as well. I still flat out stated that Vick makes the Bills better, and I hold to that, because our backup situation is one of our biggest flaws as a team. So there is no contradiction there. I have not changed any of my arguments, I have simply thrown in new arguments to debunk your continuing litany of horse sh--. I NEVER suggested that the QB wins games, you did. I simply stated Vick would make us better, and to that I hold. The only response that would be acceptable and that I would not have to respond to would be "Yes, Mr. SouthGeorgiaBillsFan, your knowledge and understanding of the dynamics of the game far exceeds my own, and therefore I will not pollute this thread with my nonsense any longer." There is of course option B, which is you provide an argument with merit. But I really don't see that as forthcoming, so... You refuse to acknowledge what I first state and ask me the same question back. I explained in my previous posts where you have been changing arguments. It is apparent that you are more interested name calling than engaging in a debate which sticks to the point and is supported by facts. So, this is my last response to you in this thread. Have fun imagining that you 'won' this argument.
shibuya Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 If you want the Bills ot move out of Buffalo faster then by all means sign Vick but I guarentee that season ticket holders start to cancel and next years renewals will be in the toilet Most Buffalonians actually have integrity, the rest of you pro-vick clowns have none. I for one will never route or watch another Bills game if vick is signed, anbd I know of many who feel the same way so be careful what you wish for....
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 I don't think anyone said Roddy White was a premier receiver with Vick. The fact is Vick often looked for Crumpler only, so the WRs were afterthoughts in the offense. He has no touch when throwing the ball. The fact that Matt Ryan AND Joey Harrington/Chris Redman were all able to get Roddy White the ball just shows how bad Vick is. He zeros in on one receiver (Crumpler at the time) and does not know how to check down. He drills the ball in when he doesn't have to, resulting in many dropped balls. Ryan is a successful QB working with pretty much the same receivers that Vick had his final year with the Falcons and he is getting the job done passing. Vick is nothing to Falcon fans. They have Matt Ryan, who they are happy with and he is WAY less likely to do anything stupid like pitbull fighting, smoking weed or flipping off fans. Fans are doing just fine with a team that just went 11-5 and they have forgotten about Vick and his "tremendous success" as you infer. We will see what the Falcon's record is at the end of the season. We will see how often Matt Ryan finds Roddy White now that he's got big Tony to look for. Keep in mind, as of yet, Matt Ryan, for all his attention, has yet to surpass anything Vick did for the Falcons. Vick has won a playoff game, and made the Pro Bowl twice, neither of which Ryan can yet claim (I am almost certain that will change before his career ends though) And once again, I stated that Vick was a factor in the tremendous success of the RUNNING GAME, which yes, was actually opened up because of Vick's ability to scramble and the conundrum that places on a defense. My point is it would be so nice to have that conundrum to rely upon should TE get injured. It would be much nicer than say...the conundrum Ryan Fitzpatrick will place on the Bills should he ever need to enter the game.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 If you want the Bills ot move out of Buffalo faster then by all means sign Vick but I guarentee that season ticket holders start to cancel and next years renewals will be in the toilet Most Buffalonians actually have integrity, the rest of you pro-vick clowns have none. I for one will never route or watch another Bills game if vick is signed, anbd I know of many who feel the same way so be careful what you wish for.... I think you are unsure of what the word integrity means. Integrity is not the practice of continuing to pass sanctimonious and unfounded judgment against a man that, whom according to the law and a jury of his peers, has served his punishment for his crime. Integrity does not mean pretending that you're high and mighty and never done anything worse that fight dogs against each other, because I'm positive most of us have. And integrity is not pretending that you speak for the majority of Bills fans. I predict that less than 1% of season ticket holders will cancel their tickets. After all, you are the same bunch of clowns who swore to do the same if they retained DJ...and yet...do you have season tickets? Get real.
The Dean Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 We will see what the Falcon's record is at the end of the season. We will see how often Matt Ryan finds Roddy White now that he's got big Tony to look for. Keep in mind, as of yet, Matt Ryan, for all his attention, has yet to surpass anything Vick did for the Falcons. He surpassed Vick by a mile. In Ryan's first year, he threw for more yards than Vick ever did in a season, had a completion percentage Vick can only dream of, had a QB rating in excess of any Vick attained. Ryan helped the Falcons make the playoffs in his rookie year. Vick didn't do that, either. The Falcons can now operate in a steady manner, using all their tools. No coach in his right mind would ever trade what the Falcons have now for what they had with Vick.
Booster4324 Posted August 12, 2009 Posted August 12, 2009 But in MV's case, it wasn't like he was pitting Lassie against Old Yeller in a match to the death No, he threw Lassie to a pit bull to teach the pit bull to fight. Then stood there and laughed when the pit bull killed Lassie.
Recommended Posts