Are You Ready for Some FOOTBALL! - Week 7

[Ming]

After two recesses to check legal references and confer with child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the Green Bay Packers, whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


He's NOT a 'scrambling' QB. He's a different sort. He's a running QB. I don't remember Stewart or Cunningham running designed QB sweeps. They ran around avoiding the rush and ran the occasional draw or two.

You can argue semantics all you want. This "running QB" crap just means he isn't talented enough to win games passing the ball. How come other mobile QB's like McNabb, McNair, and Culpepper think pass first and then run as a last resort?

Oh yeah, they have passing skills.

Vick doesn't.

He has good arm strength, but mediocre accuracy. Maybe he can improve.

And why are you ? Have you SEEN the stats for Elway and Young their first two years as starters? It isn't that good at all. I think Elway has a lower completition percentage than Vick had at the end of his 2nd starting season. Young wasn't that far ahead (if he was).

in Elway's 2nd full season (his 3rd NFL season... his 1st season he played 11 games... it doesn't say how many he started) he passed for over 3,800 yards.

After his first 4 NFL seasons, Elway had 3 seasons of over 2,500 passing yards and two of over 3,000 yards...

Vick has only 1 season over 2,500 passing yards in his first 4 NFL seasons.

Steve Young can't be compared with Vick in terms of how his career began because Young developed into a good QB later in his career.

Although if you pick Vick over Young you are truly a complete moron. Young had 4 straight seasons with a QB rating over 100... and 6 altogether. His career QB rating is the highest among all Hall of Fame QB's.

I'm not going to argue with you any more Imran. I've proven my point and driven it home with authority.

Continue to drink your Mike Vick brand Kool-AidTM

but don't hold your breath waiting for him to be inducted into the hall of fame

[Ben Kenobi]

After two recesses to check legal references and confer with child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the Green Bay Packers, whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.

[OzzyKP]

[Imran Siddiqui]

How come other mobile QB's like McNabb, McNair, and Culpepper think pass first and then run as a last resort?

Cause they couldn't succeed primarily on their legs. They weren't good enough. Vick is, though he is looking to pass more these days (he doesn't have to to dominate a game however).

in Elway's 2nd full season (his 3rd NFL season... his 1st season he played 11 games... it doesn't say how many he started) he passed for over 3,800 yards.

He started most of those 11 games. Btw, in his 3rd starting season, Elway had a completion percentage roughly where Vick's career one is.

Steve Young can't be compared with Vick in terms of how his career began because Young developed into a good QB later in his career.

Although if you pick Vick over Young you are truly a complete moron. Young had 4 straight seasons with a QB rating over 100... and 6 altogether. His career QB rating is the highest among all Hall of Fame QB's.

You have serious reading comprehension problems. Who said I was picking Vick over Young AFTER Young became the 9ers great hope. Based on his FIRST TWO STARTING SEASONS, Young looked just as good as Vick did after his. Learn to read, though I know it's hard for you.

Btw, the part I bolded. Dumbest statement EVER! We can't compare Vick in his 2nd starting season to Young in similar stage of his career because Young got better later on?! WTF? Is that supposed to be an argument that supports YOUR side?

Vick has only 1 season over 2,500 passing yards in his first 4 NFL seasons.

TWO STARTING SEASON. He only played in portions of 2 games and then started 3 games late in his rookie year. Started in 2002. Got hurt in 2003 and only started 4 games. Started in 2004.

And he also has two seasons in where he ran for over 850 yards.


I'm going to love to see the look on your face when Vick gets inducted. They'll praise his different style of playing QB and you'll go crazy. I can't wait!

Though thanks for being thoroughly pwned. You still can't explain 2003 and continue to dance around the question!

[Sava]

wow, you are seriously splitting hairs

and you haven't pwned anything

I thoroughly explained 2003 and supported it using stats.

My pwnaged of you is complete.

[Imran Siddiqui]

wow, you are seriously splitting hairs

Nope. I haven't split a single hair. How you can compare someone who has only started 2 seasons to Hall of Famers who've played 15-20 years and compare it is more splitting hairs. I tried to get you to compare their first couple years, but you just couldn't get it for some reason.

and you haven't pwned anything

I thoroughly explained 2003 and supported it using stats.

You haven't explained a damn thing. All you said was in 2003 the defense was bad and the running game was bad. Why is that, Sava? I've asked that 3 times already. You won't answer it. You are trying to dance around the question claiming you answered it, but not even coming close.

So I'll ask again. Explain 2003. Don't just say the defense and running game sucked. They were both great in 2002 and 2004 and had roughly the same personel. You haven't explained it. EXPLAIN it.


Thanks for being pwned so thoroughly, though it isn't much of contest with you.

[Sava]

well you say the defense is bad because Vick was injured...

that is the dumbest statement

as I said, I have seen enough bad Bears QB's to know bad QB's don't effect the defense that much...

care to explain how the Bears could go 13-3 in 2001 with Jim Miller and Shane Mathews? Or how the Ravens won a Super Bowl with Trent Dilfer?

Don't just say the defense and running game sucked.

Why? That is the primary reason behind Atlanta's bad season. Vick's injury is the secondary cause. You can't deny the facts. The numbers don't lie.

I did explain it Imran... I posted stats and supported my argument. You were PWNED!

you have not posted anything to support your argument...


accept your my pwnage of you and stop embarassing yourself

[Ming]

Are you two STILL going at it

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ming
Are you two STILL going at it

TO TEH DEATH!!!

[Imran Siddiqui]

well you say the defense is bad because Vick was injured...

that is the dumbest statement

Explain how the defense went from 8th in points scored against to 30th and then back up to 14th in that three year span?

How the defense went from 23rd in yards allowed to 32nd (ie, last) and then to the teens in three years?

They didn't change personnel that much at all. The explaination I've come to is that the 3 and outs that became a signature of the Falcons offense in 2003 tired out the defense.

I mean it isn't a hard concept to follow Sava. If the defense is on the field all the time and the other team has ALL the time of possession, your defense WILL get tired and WILL let up points and yards in the 4th Q.

care to explain how the Bears could go 13-3 in 2001 with Jim Miller and Shane Mathews? Or how the Ravens won a Super Bowl with Trent Dilfer?

Both teams' offenses were competent enough so that the defense wasn't out there all the time. They both ran first and avoided too many 3 and outs. Look at Jamal Lewis' rushing stats for the 2000 Ravens.

That is the primary reason behind Atlanta's bad season. Vick's injury is the secondary cause.

So the rushing game and defense just MAGICALLY sucked? Suddenly a fairy came by and cursed them? Then why did it happen? Why did it all fall apart?

Vick had over 750 yards rushing in 2003 and over 900 in 2004. That kills the rushing game when he's out. In fact, in 2003 the Falcons were 14th in the league in rushing with 1949 yards. In 2004 without Vick's rushing yardarge, the Falcons end up 20th in the league with 1770 yards. In 2002, the Falcons without Vick's rushing yards have 1591 yards!! That's among the lowest in the league!! So the rushing game didn't suffer with Vick out? Don't make us laugh! And with too many 3 and outs the defense suffers.

How else did they decline so badly in one year and then bounce right back up the next? What is your explination for it? That's right, YOU DON'T HAVE ONE!

accept your my pwnage of you

When you actually come close to pwning me, then maybe I will. As for now, the only one getting pwned is you, over and over and over again.

[Sava]

Imran... you are taking Vick's injury and making this leap in logic and applying it to the Falcon's defense.

I don't know why Atlanta's defense sucked in 2003. I don't follow that team.

I am just looking at the facts.

In 2003, Atlanta went 5-11. Vick was injured. Their defense was 30th in points allowed and 32nd in yardage allowed (or vice versa, I forget which). Sorry, but Vick does not play defense... him being in the lineup is not going to make the defense play all that much better (despite your armchair NFL analysis of the situation).

You saying Vick's injury is what made their defense bad is a major BAM!

You have no proof of that (you criminal ).

I'm not denying Vick is a valuable part of Atlanta's team.

But my major points still remain.

This year, they are winning with rushing the ball and defense. The stats prove this. You have not addressed these FACTS!

Michael Vick's career numbers are mediocre

If you want to dispute these major points, be my guest. If you want to continue to split hairs or engage in strawmen and red herrings, fine, do so to your heart's content.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't know why Atlanta's defense sucked in 2003.

Ah, so you are just going to leave it there without anything else. Saying a team wins with defense and then that exact defense falters badly one year and rebounds the next is utterly insane.

In 2003, Atlanta went 5-11. Vick was injured. Their defense was 30th in points allowed and 32nd in yardage allowed (or vice versa, I forget which). Sorry, but Vick does not play defense... him being in the lineup is not going to make the defense play all that much better.

Then EXPLAIN why in 2002 was 8th in points allowed and 23rd in yardage allowed and in 2004 they were 14th in points allowed and 14 in yardage allowed. How does such a drop happen so suddenly with hardly any changes in the defense?

Furthermore, LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS... they aren't all that great. If your contention is that the team wins with defense and their points allowed has been 8th and 14th in their two recent playoff years and the yardage allowed has been 23rd and 14th, I don't see a defense like that propelling any team without a pretty good offense. The ARIZONA CARDINALS allowed less points that the Falcons did last year.

Furthermore, while the front 7 is pretty good and they can get after the QB, the secondary is pitiful. Even before this year when 3 of the 4 starters are people picked up after the regular season started.

And a QB that runs for 770 yards one year and 902 yards another contributes VERY heavily to the rushing game of that squad. The rushing game doesn't really work as well without that QB.

This year, they are winning with rushing the ball and defense. The stats prove this. You have not addressed these FACTS!

The defense is 9th in points allowed and 16th in yardage allowed, and you want me to believe this defense is so dominant it can propel a team to victory? The Detroit Lions have a far more dominant defense (10th in points allowed, 6th in yardage allowed), for one.

As for rushing, of course, that is why the team is winning. However one of the integral pieces to the rushing attack is #7. He's got 233 yards rushing. Maybe without Vick, they'd only be 2nd, but I can guarentee you that the Falcons don't beat Philly on Monday Night without his running ability. Remember last year without Vick, the Falcons go from #1 to #20. He's a very integral part to their rushing attack.


You want to try again?

[Sava]

The defense is 9th in points allowed

wrong...

7th in points allowed http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NF...r?sort_col_1=3

The Detroit Lions have a far more dominant defense (10th in points allowed

wrong, Detroit is 16th in points allowed

16th in yardage allowed,

wrong 13th in yardage allowed http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NF...L/2005/regular


you are so wrong about so many things



pwned again...

[Shi Huangdi]

Rushing Stats and Defense stats are intertwined, Sava. The better a team is able to rush, the longer the offense will be able to keep possesion of the ball. And the less a defense is on the field, the less total yards and points they are going to give up.