Vick would bring buzz to Rams

[Bralidore(RAMMODE)]

i wasn't insulting anyone i was using the same words nj ramsfan used to describe Vick and redirected them back at him to prove a point.

And @RamsfanSam are you putting forth the argument that Vick had nothing to do with that playoff run? What your saying is just because a guy is on a team doesnt make them contenders, which is absolutely true. Where your argument failed at is when you insinuated that Vick was simply along for the ride on that team. Vick was a huge part of that team making the playoffs due to his playmaking ability (at the time). I personally remember him destroying the rams (one particular 44 yard run really sticks out...) to end our Superbowl dreams that year. Vick is not Ryan Leaf as he has actually thrown more touchdowns than interceptions.. My whole argument is simply give the guy a chance this training camp and see if there's some jam still in the jar; not sign him to a multimillion dollar deal and hang his jersey from the Edward Jones Dome rafters..Don't see at all how that's wrong.

[RamsFanSam]

And @RamsfanSam are you putting forth the argument that Vick had nothing to do with that playoff run?

No, Vick was instrumental in helping the Falcons get that far into the playoffs six years ago. The points I was trying to make is that when you look only at the fact that he was on a playoff team, pick and choose certain stats to base opinions on (like a few posters have done, both for Vick and Bulger), and not take into account that this was all six years ago, you cannot really reach a fair consensus on what either one might do next year. If we go solely on the fact that Bulger has a better record and better stats over the past five years, Vick shouldn't be considered.
Also, I'm not how sure how old you are, but I know from experience that I can't do the same things physically as I did six years ago nearly as good as I used to. If I remember right, it really started to show around the age of 30. You mentioned his athletic ability. I assume you mean his ability to run...can you explain why so many RB's retire around the age of 30? It's because they aren't true playmakers anymore. Football, with very few exceptions, is a young man's game. Vick is nearing the end of his ability to run and scramble. I'm sure his vision is starting to decline slightly, and his reaction time has likely slowed. We already have one QB who fits that description. Why do we want to bring in another that would end up alienating the majority of fans?

[PeoriaRam]

It's time some of you face the reality that Marc Bulger is an average Qb at his best. Without HOF's around, he is below average. He has no more skill than Keith Null, only experience and opportunity.

If all the starting QB's in the NFL were put through drills at the combine, he would undoubtedly rank in the lower third of the league.

Michael Vick, even at this stage is far superior to Marc Bulger athletically. Which is exactly what the Rams need given the recent state of the offensive line.

People here have spoken negatively about his plight and ability as if Marc Bulger has lit the world on fire.

Marc Bulger will never lead this team anywhere and it's time some of you face the reality of that.

Favre and Warner would also probably be in the lower third, but glory be, they're (or were) in the playoffs. The combine is a worthless abstract in terms of evaluating how good veteran players are.

This team isn't going anywhere next year anyway. However, Bulger can still play a role as the mentor for a young future Ram starter far better than Vick can.

And Bulger has more skill than Null. That's not even debatable.

[PeoriaRam]

i wasn't insulting anyone i was using the same words nj ramsfan used to describe Vick and redirected them back at him to prove a point.

And @RamsfanSam are you putting forth the argument that Vick had nothing to do with that playoff run? What your saying is just because a guy is on a team doesnt make them contenders, which is absolutely true. Where your argument failed at is when you insinuated that Vick was simply along for the ride on that team. Vick was a huge part of that team making the playoffs due to his playmaking ability (at the time). I personally remember him destroying the rams (one particular 44 yard run really sticks out...) to end our Superbowl dreams that year. Vick is not Ryan Leaf as he has actually thrown more touchdowns than interceptions.. My whole argument is simply give the guy a chance this training camp and see if there's some jam still in the jar; not sign him to a multimillion dollar deal and hang his jersey from the Edward Jones Dome rafters..Don't see at all how that's wrong.

That is still a roster spot we can give to a younger player who might possibly have a better future and who might probably do more for the team in the long run.

Honestly, there are at most 3 positions the Rams should consider adding a 30 year old or older this offseason. Wide Receiver to get a veteran presence for mentoring, Linebacker for veteran mentoring, and QB if Bulger is cut and we draft a rookie QB...for mentoring.

[Bralidore(RAMMODE)]

the reason most running backs start to wear down at 30 is because of the wear and tear they've taken over the years. Vick hasn't taken nearly that kind of beating in his playing time...You don't simply turn 30 and everything starts to fail you. It's normally a culmination of things and lifestyles that mark your decline at that age. If you've taken care of your body or have natural ability (ala Darrell Green, Terrell Owens, Jerry Rice) 30 is just another number. But alas im done beating this topic senseless. i stand by what i say, you never know unless you try.

@peoriaram i believe a training camp roster is like 70 + players (don't quote me on this), that being said, i think we can spare ONE spot to see what Vick has. ah well im done with this thread

And no offense to RamsFanSam but if your profile is correct, your 47, ive heard and observed that physical decline occurs much more rapidly when you hit the 40 wall as opposed to the 30 one. Again this has a lot to do with lifestyle but this is true in general. "...I can't do the same things physically as I did six years ago nearly as good as I used to."

Im sure you'll be saying the same thing in another 6 years as your already past the 40 mark.

in any case im done with this thread, i dont think either side will give ground on this debate.

[Fortuninerhater]

The Vick issue is not merely Vick v. Bulger, but even if it was, Vick was NEVER the passer that Marc Bulger was or is. Superior runner? Sure. Superior athlete? Yes. Superior QB? Not so much.

Oh... and if Keith Null is as good as Bulger was in his prime... I'll take him over Vick.

When exactly was his prime? Oh yeah when he was surrounded by HOFs. Yeah, too bad those guys are no longer here. But even then, where did he lead us? Nowhere.

Why? Because he's not that good

Now, what exactly has he done in the last 3 years besides rip the Rams off for 10 million a year? Nothing.

Why? Because he's not that good.

Oh, and taking Null over Vick is your prerogative, but if he's no better than Bulger, my guess is the Rams will still be in the lottery every year.

[Fortuninerhater]

Favre and Warner would also probably be in the lower third, but glory be, they're (or were) in the playoffs. The combine is a worthless abstract in terms of evaluating how good veteran players are.

This team isn't going anywhere next year anyway. However, Bulger can still play a role as the mentor for a young future Ram starter far better than Vick can.

And Bulger has more skill than Null. That's not even debatable.

Last I checked, both Warner and Favre have been MVPs in this league, not to mention Superbowl champions. Plus Favre's 40 and Warner's 38. Based on that, I'd say they get a pass.

But Im willing to bet that at their advanced ages they'd finish ahead of Marc Bulger. What a sad commentary.

Bulger: more accurate, more experience.

Null: more mobile, stronger arm.

Seems debatable to me.

[tomahawk247]

Why? Because he's not that good

Actually it would most likely be to do with having a D that was constantly run over and gave up points for fun

Rams defensive ranking for points per game allowed during Bulger's tenure as starter and the teams' record that year:

2009 - 31st 1-15
2008 - 31st 2-14
2007 - 31st 3-13
2006 - 28th 8-8
2005 - 31st 6-10
2004 - 25th 8-8
2003 - 17th 12-4


A QB can only do so much to help a team win, and if you defense is going to give up points then it doesnt matter if Bulger had two HoF WRs and a HoF LT on his team. In the only season that Bulger had a D that ranked better than 20th, Bulger led the team to the NFC West crown, and a first round bye.

Now if you wanna talk about Bulger's short comings despite his supporting cast, you might want to look at the whole of his supporting cast, not just the O.

[Nick]

This is a thread to discuss Michael Vick and what he would bring to the Rams, not Marc Bulger and the circumstances that surrounded his success or failure. Please try to stay on topic; there are plenty of other threads where you can discuss Bulger if you wish.

[FestusRam]

Vick didn't have great wide receivers in Atlanta and often used the tight end.

Ok Bernie think about this statement you made right here.

Ok, lets bring Vick, who apparently had bad passing stats because their lack of wr's to St.Louis. Im sure our receivers will sky rocket his passer rating...

Alge Crumpler, Peerless Price, Brian Finneran, and Roddy White were all in ATL at least some time Vick was. Vick's receivers werent all that bad his passing was.

How did you get a job writing about sports?

[HUbison]

Even though the concept of Vick as our starting QB next year is a horrible idea, I'm growing closer to the point of saying "go for it", just to put all this nonsense behind us when he does not regenerate this offense.

[swatter555]

I am only a semi-active member here, but what is up with all of the hatred of Bernie M.? I read his articles on occasion, they are not any better or worse than any other columnist. Is he being insulted because he supports Vick coming here? If so, you might as well insult me too. I am 6' tall and weigh 240, you could make some weight related jokes about me. Go ahead, Ill wait.

Bottom line is this: Vick was a playmaker and he made the Falcon better to the point of becoming a contender almost every year he was there. Yes, he is a mobility based QB and not a good pocket passer.

Prediction wise, low end: If Vick would stay healthy he would improve the Rams ability to move the chains. With his ability to move outside of the pocket and often times demand a spy all to himself, he should open up more lanes for Jackson. On the low end, he is still an improvement.

Prediction wise, high end: Without a few years of NFL wear and tear on his body, his athleticism is barely affected. It is not what it was his rookie year, but he and SJ make this offensive something to contend with. Having a true threat at QB forces defenses out of the 8 in the box waiting to kill SJ plays. On the high end, he could really help bring some real excitment to this team.

Some people will hate Vick for a variety of reasons, no matter what he does. If you are going to be a hater, go right ahead. What Vick did was barbaric, but not beyond forgiveness. He paid his debt to society and I am not qualified to judge the content of his soul. He has paid for his crimes in an innumerable number of ways, I am willing to look past them. I think most people are, and in that way I don't think his dog fighting past will bar him from coming to St. Louis. Other issues might, but not that one.

I am not willing to pay him a large salary, he still does need to show his skills. Sign him to a moderately priced contract with a focus on performance incentives and let the chips fall where they may.

[BigGameTH]

I pretty much agree with Swatter.

IMO, If the rams have no plans to pick up a true #1 WR in the offseason, we plan on drafting a QB in the 2nd or next year, AND Vick is willing to agree to a one or two year deal, then I think we should bring him in.

Our passing game received no respect this year. The same wide receivers with Pennington, Campbell, and Orton probably will not be much better. Everyone on here was wanting a strong running game, and I think this would be a fun 1 year experiment. It feels like Campbell and Orton will be looking for something longer than 1 or 2 years.

I'm tired of seeing 8 or 9 guys staring at SJ when he takes a handoff, and at least Vick can roll out and either run it or try his girly pass thing. Like the article says, at least we would be more entertaining on offense. Vick adds an element of unpredictability that can help SJ, the center of our offense.

Yeah, he never really developed as a passer, and he probably has slowed a bit. But if we can sign him for one year, the risk is just so small I think it's worth it. I think it will help us make a more honest draft selection as well(I don't want Clausen because we NEED a quarterback, I'd want Clausen because he's the best selection).

[swatter555]

I pretty much agree with Swatter.

IMO, If the rams have no plans to pick up a true #1 WR in the offseason, we plan on drafting a QB in the 2nd or next year, AND Vick is willing to agree to a one or two year deal, then I think we should bring him in.

Our passing game received no respect this year. The same wide receivers with Pennington, Campbell, and Orton probably will not be much better. Everyone on here was wanting a strong running game, and I think this would be a fun 1 year experiment. It feels like Campbell and Orton will be looking for something longer than 1 or 2 years.

I'm tired of seeing 8 or 9 guys staring at SJ when he takes a handoff, and at least Vick can roll out and either run it or try his girly pass thing. Like the article says, at least we would be more entertaining on offense. Vick adds an element of unpredictability that can help SJ, the center of our offense.

Yeah, he never really developed as a passer, and he probably has slowed a bit. But if we can sign him for one year, the risk is just so small I think it's worth it. I think it will help us make a more honest draft selection as well(I don't want Clausen because we NEED a quarterback, I'd want Clausen because he's the best selection).

I agree with you, it is not ideal to be as desperate as we are for a QB. It is always risky to pick a QB so high in the draft, especially when he is expected to start right away. It is a recipe for futility. At the same time, it is hard to see a way around it. Without a decent QB, we will not compete. As a compromise, I would be willing to risk picking up Vick, but more ideally I do think we need to risk a pick on Clausen or Bradford.

[Bralidore(RAMMODE)]

The question is do we really HAVE to compete immediately? this could reek of a decision we will regret for years to come. The cowboys passed on Randy Moss because they needed help elsewhere even though Moss was the clear-cut best talent on the board easily. Let's not make the same mistake. There will be other good first round quarterbacks in the draft. How many more Suh's will you see? Patience is key here. And just because we don't grab a first round ROOKIEE quarterback doesn't mean we wont compete.

Our QB of the future is out there, but not this year..just wait it out guys

lets let impatience murk up our overall acquisition of talent