Simple Poll to see where Clanram stands on #7

[THOLTFAN81]

Without me reading thru this whole thread can someone tell me is Vick under contract next year with the Eagles or his he a FA?

Vick signed a two year deal with the Eagles, with the second year being a team option worth 5.2 million dollars. So in order for Vick to be on the Eagles next year, they would have to pay him 5.2 million making the odds of him being on a new team next year likely. Also Andy Reid has said he would let Vick look for a starting job somewhere.

[RamsFan10]

Vick signed a two year deal with the Eagles, with the second year being a team option worth 5.2 million dollars. So in order for Vick to be on the Eagles next year, they would have to pay him 5.2 million making the odds of him being on a new team next year likely. Also Andy Reid has said he would let Vick look for a starting job somewhere.

Absolutely agreed. If the Rams can sign Vick and if he gets in shape, he will get his speed back. We also need to upgrade our OL if we really want Vick to scramble.

If this happens, the Rams should be a choice to be a surprise team next year, especially being in a horrible division.

[tomahawk247]

Id rather make an attempt to sign Josh Cribbs from the Browns or Brad Smith from the Jets. Both guys are doing the exact same thing that Vick is doing in Philly, but doing it ten times better.

If Vick running 2-4 plays a game out of a wildcat type formation is leading you guys to believing he can lead the Rams to the playoffs, then i cant imagine what kind of Superbowl winning dynasty we would go on if we were to sign a player like Cribbs.

[HUbison]

he will get his speed back.

I'm sorry, but in my three and a half decades on this sphere, I've never heard of an athlete past his prime "getting his speed back".

[laram0]

First let me apologize to all you VICK supporters as I voted "NO". Oh wait, I hear the dogs barking....time to feed and walk them. Sorry but I'll have to get back to this thread later.

[Ahmedrams81]

First let me apologize to all you VICK supporters as I voted "NO". Oh wait, I hear the dogs barking....time to feed and walk them. Sorry but I'll have to get back to this thread later.

He did his time man. Give the guy a chance......

[TheEmperor2001]

When is the last time Vick led someone to the playoffs? So your telling everyone here that all we have to do is bring in Vick and this team is an instant winner? Can i please have some of what your smoking? Vick doesnt even look good as a backup for the Eagles this year. So he's just going to come to St. Louis and be something he never has been? His best completion percentage in a single year was 56.4. Bulger has had better completion percentage his last three years. Everyone here is alreadycalling for his head and you want to replace him with a guy that has never passed for a higher completion percentage than Bulger has passed for the last three years? Vick has never been impressive at qb in my opinion. People say Bulger can't read defenses yet Vick has never come close to Bulger's highest qb rating. Sure Vick can scramble and run the ball but so can Tebow and I dont want us to get him either. We get it you like Vick but don't let it blind you to reality. I'm not sure if we added just Peyton Manning if even he could lead this dreadful team to the playoffs.

I hate to tell you sir, but the QB rating is the stupidest thing ever invented, and many NFL analysts would 100% agree with me on that point. Because the QB rating doesn't include rushing statistics for a QB it cannot effectively gauge the overall effectiveness of a QB. As such, scrambling QBs are constantly screwed by the lack of the rushing statistic in the QB rating. So what? Marc Bulger has a better QB rating than Michael Vick. Marc bulger has a better QB rating than Ken Stabler... does that make him a better player? NO. im sure someone like you would be surprised to know that Dan Marino's career passer rating was a meer 86.... this as u know, would be considered mediocre by today's standards, and we all know that Marino was anything but a mediocre QB. I kno you will attempt to twist my words by saying that im saying that Vick is as good as Marino, but im not, im simply saying that the QB rating is stupid. I can guarantee you a couple of things, one is that if you asked any defensive player in the NFL who they would've rather played against in their prime: Marc Bulger, or Michael Vick, most of them would say Michael Vick. You may ask, y? Bulger's QB rating implies that he is the better QB. However, you must understand that Michael Vick's scrambling ability adds another dimension to his QB efficiency. Anytime you have a QB who can throw for 2,000 yards and rush for 1,000 yards you have a consistent threat in the backfield. If the rams were to get Michael Vick, which i am neither for nor against, i can guarantee you that we would have one of the best rushing offenses in the NFL, and at least an average passing attack to boot.... which is way better than our current passing attack, ranked somewhere in the 30's...

So, all im saying is that when you guys say Vick is a terrible QB, your doing the guy a huge disservice, he lead a team with virtuallly nothing to an NFC championship... something most qB's in the Nfl today have never done, and something id bet money on that Matt Ryan will never do. If the Ram's do get Michael Vick and draft well, i don't see why we couldnt make a run to the playoffs... hell, the dolphins did it a couple of years ago by getting a veteran QB who was not as good as prime vick, or vick now IMO, so, y cant we?

[BIG-BLUE]

I'm sorry, but in my three and a half decades on this sphere, I've never heard of an athlete past his prime "getting his speed back".

Ah come on Hub haven't you heard of HGH, look what they did for Barry Bonds

[PeoriaRam]

Absolutely agreed. If the Rams can sign Vick and if he gets in shape, he will get his speed back. We also need to upgrade our OL if we really want Vick to scramble.

If this happens, the Rams should be a choice to be a surprise team next year, especially being in a horrible division.

We're not getting better than a 5 game improvement, even if Jesus came down from heaven and announced that he would be taking snaps in St. Louis in 2010.

[PeoriaRam]

I hate to tell you sir, but the QB rating is the stupidest thing ever invented, and many NFL analysts would 100% agree with me on that point. Because the QB rating doesn't include rushing statistics for a QB it cannot effectively gauge the overall effectiveness of a QB. As such, scrambling QBs are constantly screwed by the lack of the rushing statistic in the QB rating. So what? Marc Bulger has a better QB rating than Michael Vick. Marc bulger has a better QB rating than Ken Stabler... does that make him a better player? NO. im sure someone like you would be surprised to know that Dan Marino's career passer rating was a meer 86.... this as u know, would be considered mediocre by today's standards, and we all know that Marino was anything but a mediocre QB. I kno you will attempt to twist my words by saying that im saying that Vick is as good as Marino, but im not, im simply saying that the QB rating is stupid. I can guarantee you a couple of things, one is that if you asked any defensive player in the NFL who they would've rather played against in their prime: Marc Bulger, or Michael Vick, most of them would say Michael Vick. You may ask, y? Bulger's QB rating implies that he is the better QB. However, you must understand that Michael Vick's scrambling ability adds another dimension to his QB efficiency. Anytime you have a QB who can throw for 2,000 yards and rush for 1,000 yards you have a consistent threat in the backfield. If the rams were to get Michael Vick, which i am neither for nor against, i can guarantee you that we would have one of the best rushing offenses in the NFL, and at least an average passing attack to boot.... which is way better than our current passing attack, ranked somewhere in the 30's...

So, all im saying is that when you guys say Vick is a terrible QB, your doing the guy a huge disservice, he lead a team with virtuallly nothing to an NFC championship... something most qB's in the Nfl today have never done, and something id bet money on that Matt Ryan will never do. If the Ram's do get Michael Vick and draft well, i don't see why we couldnt make a run to the playoffs... hell, the dolphins did it a couple of years ago by getting a veteran QB who was not as good as prime vick, or vick now IMO, so, y cant we?

Alright, I'm convinced. You're Keith Null.

[rammiser]

I hate to tell you sir, but the QB rating is the stupidest thing ever invented, and many NFL analysts would 100% agree with me on that point. Because the QB rating doesn't include rushing statistics for a QB it cannot effectively gauge the overall effectiveness of a QB. As such, scrambling QBs are constantly screwed by the lack of the rushing statistic in the QB rating. So what? Marc Bulger has a better QB rating than Michael Vick. Marc bulger has a better QB rating than Ken Stabler... does that make him a better player? NO. im sure someone like you would be surprised to know that Dan Marino's career passer rating was a meer 86.... this as u know, would be considered mediocre by today's standards, and we all know that Marino was anything but a mediocre QB. I kno you will attempt to twist my words by saying that im saying that Vick is as good as Marino, but im not, im simply saying that the QB rating is stupid. I can guarantee you a couple of things, one is that if you asked any defensive player in the NFL who they would've rather played against in their prime: Marc Bulger, or Michael Vick, most of them would say Michael Vick. You may ask, y? Bulger's QB rating implies that he is the better QB. However, you must understand that Michael Vick's scrambling ability adds another dimension to his QB efficiency. Anytime you have a QB who can throw for 2,000 yards and rush for 1,000 yards you have a consistent threat in the backfield. If the rams were to get Michael Vick, which i am neither for nor against, i can guarantee you that we would have one of the best rushing offenses in the NFL, and at least an average passing attack to boot.... which is way better than our current passing attack, ranked somewhere in the 30's...

So, all im saying is that when you guys say Vick is a terrible QB, your doing the guy a huge disservice, he lead a team with virtuallly nothing to an NFC championship... something most qB's in the Nfl today have never done, and something id bet money on that Matt Ryan will never do. If the Ram's do get Michael Vick and draft well, i don't see why we couldnt make a run to the playoffs... hell, the dolphins did it a couple of years ago by getting a veteran QB who was not as good as prime vick, or vick now IMO, so, y cant we?

I hate to tell you sir, but thats a load of CRAP. Is completion percentage a stupid stat as well, just curious? Most people on here when bashing Bulger always use the rating against him but when it points in his favor its a stupid stat. So because Vick had one good year and led the team to the NFC Championship 7 YEARS AGO. Seven years ago he was the player you describe. I've seen Vick in his limited work in Philly and he does not look that explosive, not even close. I'm sure he'll get his speed back though (sarcasm). Someone like you would like to know I wasnt even saying Bulger is a better qb even though I think he was or is. What I was saying is the guys completion percentage was never higher than Bulgers worst three years. If you'd like me to spell out what that means I can. It means that Mike Vick doesnt complete a very good percentage of his passes, but by your assessment he can run so that offsets his bad quarterbacking. Hey lets put Stevn Jackson under center if you want a running qb who can't hit the broad side of a barn from 15 feet.

I'm doing Mike Vick no disservice what so ever. The guy was never a very good qb and it's 7 years since the guy took a team to the playoffs. So Mike Vick used to be able to run, if I had my choice and thats what we wanted why not draft Tebow then? Isnt he in the same mold and a lot younger than Vick? Not that I want Tebow just saying why bring in a guy your not sure even has the skills to play qb?

[TheEmperor2001]

I hate to tell you sir, but thats a load of CRAP. Is completion percentage a stupid stat as well, just curious? Most people on here when bashing Bulger always use the rating against him but when it points in his favor its a stupid stat. So because Vick had one good year and led the team to the NFC Championship 7 YEARS AGO. Seven years ago he was the player you describe. I've seen Vick in his limited work in Philly and he does not look that explosive, not even close. I'm sure he'll get his speed back though (sarcasm). Someone like you would like to know I wasnt even saying Bulger is a better qb even though I think he was or is. What I was saying is the guys completion percentage was never higher than Bulgers worst three years. If you'd like me to spell out what that means I can. It means that Mike Vick doesnt complete a very good percentage of his passes, but by your assessment he can run so that offsets his bad quarterbacking. Hey lets put Stevn Jackson under center if you want a running qb who can't hit the broad side of a barn from 15 feet.

I'm doing Mike Vick no disservice what so ever. The guy was never a very good qb and it's 7 years since the guy took a team to the playoffs. So Mike Vick used to be able to run, if I had my choice and thats what we wanted why not draft Tebow then? Isnt he in the same mold and a lot younger than Vick? Not that I want Tebow just saying why bring in a guy your not sure even has the skills to play qb?

The fact that your comparing steven jackson's throwing ability to Michael Vick, even if trying to make a point, is absolutely stupid. To compare Tim Tebow's throwing ability to Michael Vick's is also stupid. The reason Tim Tebow wont be drafted high is because he played in a fairytale option offense exclusively out the shotgun and has a ridiculously long throwing motion and terrible footwork. If you EVER watched Vick play in college for VA Tech, you'd know that he played in a PRO STYLE offense and had what was considered great footwork as well as an arm that was stronger and more accurate than Tim Tebow's while playing on a team that might've been half as good as Tebow. Not to mention Michael Vick's speed and field awareness today is three times what Tim Tebow's ever was or ever will be. To say that we're not sure Michael Vick has the skills to play QB after being voted to three pro bowls for the QB POSITION shows your lack of knowledge on Michael Vick as a QB. You talk about the topic of getting Michael Vick as if it's some sort of HUGE RISK. We're a frickin 1 and 15 team. We have nothing, there is no decision this franchise can make that can set us back any further than we already are. We'd be getting an extremely cheap, healthy, and capable QB that has something to prove, so hell, why not give the guy a shot.

In addition, you alluded to Michael Vick's time in Philedelphia as being "not that explosive". I hate to break it to you, but the wildcat isn't a formation that can be run by any QB outside of maybe Tim Tebow, due to the speed and hitting ability of linebackers and defensive backs at the pro level. This is the reason that NO QB has shown any success in any sort of wildcat whatsoever, hence, why it's a play that almost exclusively utilizes the runining back. So, no wonder Vick doesn't look that "explosive" because he's only playing 2-3 plays a game at a position that no QB can effectively play.

I understand what your saying, and you've made some valid points that i can respect. I dont think you're stupid as you seem to think i am, but i am in a slightly different place on this issue. All im sayin is that our QB play CAN'T get any worse... and it's like Michael Irvin said when Vince Young was put in for Kerry Collins (before we knew VY "could throw"...he always could) you've could two messes who cant throw... at least take the one who can run. Right now, Michael Vick at his worst can give us more than Bulger, Boller, and dare i say it... Keith null (for now). And if you think that some rookie QB named Jimmy Clausen, or Colt McCoy can do better than Vick... i'd have to say you're sadly mistaken.

As Rams Fan Sam aptly posted below me, my tone in my first post was out of place. My fault. I shouldn't have been as emotional as i was on something as unimportant as the topic of football, if i in any way offended you, that's my bad and my blunder, sorry.

P.S. I'll take Campbell or Tavaris Jackson tho any day, over current Vick.

[RamsFanSam]

I would like to remind everyone to be CIVIL in this discussion. I don't want to have to shut this thread down, but if the discussion strays from civility, I will be forced to do so.

[rammiser]

The fact that your comparing steven jackson's throwing ability to Michael Vick, even if trying to make a point, is absolutely stupid. To compare Tim Tebow's throwing ability to Michael Vick's is also stupid. The reason Tim Tebow wont be drafted high is because he played in a fairytale option offense exclusively out the shotgun and has a ridiculously long throwing motion and terrible footwork. If you EVER watched Vick play in college for VA Tech, you'd know that he played in a PRO STYLE offense and had what was considered great footwork as well as an arm that was stronger and more accurate than Tim Tebow's while playing on a team that might've been half as good as Tebow. Not to mention Michael Vick's speed and field awareness today is three times what Tim Tebow's ever was or ever will be. To say that we're not sure Michael Vick has the skills to play QB after being voted to three pro bowls for the QB POSITION shows your lack of knowledge on Michael Vick as a QB. You talk about the topic of getting Michael Vick as if it's some sort of HUGE RISK. We're a frickin 1 and 15 team. We have nothing, there is no decision this franchise can make that can set us back any further than we already are. We'd be getting an extremely cheap, healthy, and capable QB that has something to prove, so hell, why not give the guy a shot.

In addition, you alluded to Michael Vick's time in Philedelphia as being "not that explosive". I hate to break it to you, but the wildcat isn't a formation that can be run by any QB outside of maybe Tim Tebow, due to the speed and hitting ability of linebackers and defensive backs at the pro level. This is the reason that NO QB has shown any success in any sort of wildcat whatsoever, hence, why it's a play that almost exclusively utilizes the runining back. So, no wonder Vick doesn't look that "explosive" because he's only playing 2-3 plays a game at a position that no QB can effectively play.

I understand what your saying, and you've made some valid points that i can respect. I dont think you're stupid as you seem to think i am, but i am in a slightly different place on this issue. All im sayin is that our QB play CAN'T get any worse... and it's like Michael Irvin said when Vince Young was put in for Kerry Collins (before we knew VY "could throw"...he always could) you've could two messes who cant throw... at least take the one who can run. Right now, Michael Vick at his worst can give us more than Bulger, Boller, and dare i say it... Keith null (for now). And if you think that some rookie QB named Jimmy Clausen, or Colt McCoy can do better than Vick... i'd have to say you're sadly mistaken.

As Rams Fan Sam aptly posted below me, my tone in my first post was out of place. My fault. I shouldn't have been as emotional as i was on something as unimportant as the topic of football, if i in any way offended you, that's my bad and my blunder, sorry.

P.S. I'll take Campbell or Tavaris Jackson tho any day, over current Vick.

Apology accepted and I apologize for answering you in the same tone but I was put off a little by your remarks but no biggie.

I get it, Vick used to be an explosive player. You are touting his running ability but say he cant run out of the wildcat? I'm a bit confused at that because if his running is his strength then it should not matter if he's running out of the wildcat or running out of the qb position. He should be an equal passing threat out of the wildcat or the regular offense should he not? I'm not comparing any rookie to Vick and can't stand Tebow just for the record as I've posted before. I just feel your going off of the Vick of old before prison. Do we really know he can still do anything like what he used to do running the ball? I understand we have nothing to lose except for an important roster spot.

Vick's Pro Bowls even though he played qb were more for his running than his passing for sure. This is what scares me, is he an explosive playmaker running the ball anymore? I havnt seen it in Philly whether it be from the wildcat or not. I don't think it's a huge risk to bring in Vick, but if I had my choice I'd rather have a qb that can still play the position for sure. There is no doubt in my mind Vick is better than Boller and Null thats not saying much. Of course Vick can scramble but if he can't find an open wr in my opinion Bulger is still better with an offensive line that gives him time.

I want the Rams to draft Suh and hopefully get a qb in round two but I just am not confident at all that Vick can do any of the things he used to do before going to prison.

[THOLTFAN81]

Man a 50/50 split here and on the stltoday poll 61% of fans want Vick...