pittsburg wasn't in the top ten in offense when they won the superbowl. new england was seventh and tampa bay the year before wasn't in the top ten.
I'm not saying the top ten I am saying dead last. You can't finish dead last in rushing or passing and succeed it's simple.
moving the ball and scoring are two different things. I just looked up total offense rankings. it doesn't mean he didn't move the ball so the saracastic "OK" isn't warranted.
What it tells me is that yes the offense can move the ball but they don't score too often after moving it or turn it over. Both not good.
Steelers were 8th in scoring offense last year. Ultimately, the problem with a QB like Vick is that they won't be consistent. Sure, you can move the ball a whole lot, but eventually you're going to get stopped on 2 runs or throw two incomplete passes and you're going to have 3rd and long. Atlanta is just good in that scenario (same with the Texans). So they might put up yards, but end up with not a lot of points. Vick's other problem is that he's wildly inconsistent and you have no idea what to expect on a weekly basis.
and vick is tenth in touchdown passes. so do yards matter or touchdowns. look, I'm not arguing that vick doesn't need improvement, or had a good year. but its not all on him. he moved the ball up and down the field, and he's better than average at getting the ball in the endzone. so yeah, the inconsistency needs to be eliminated, but when you consider rushing, touchdowns, and passes, he had a decent year. atlanta has a lot of problems, vick isn't one.
True. But it would still be the same, you'd have a bunch of teams that don't want their coaches and a bunch of coaches who don't want their team.
I still don't see how you think Vick isn't at least part of their problems. You say his inconsistency needs to improve so who does that fall on? I mean they are talking about holding on to Schaub and trading Vick after next season if he doesn't work out. He has something to do with their problems.
yards touchdowns now you're on consistency. credibility lost. I've countered your points. he moves the ball, he scores. what more do you want. the only people talking about schaub are the media.
Credibility lost? Then you lost credibility a long time ago adding to the points I made. How have you countered my points? I'm on consistency now which he also has a problem with too. You make it sound like he moves the ball and scores at will or like one of the top QBs in the league. He threw for 20 TD passes, wow. More than half of those came in three outings where he threw for 4 TD passes twice and 3 TD passes once. He had six games where he didn't throw a TD pass at all and five where he didn't pass or run for one. Yeah he is tenth in the league in passing TDs but look who he is ahead of, only three of the players he is ahead of have started/played in all 16 games as he did. Face it, he is part of the problem. I am not saying he is the Falcons only problem but he is part of them.
pun, I bet if you look at all qbs they have games where they throw a lot of touchdowns, and games where they throw none. just look at carson palmer. but because he is a classic qb, no one blames him for the bengals' problems. the fact that he stayed healthy is not a problem. if and buts, the fact is he is tenth in touchdown passes. thats a good number. case closed. if you were smart you would knock his picks. good night.
Now you're comparing the Bengals to the Falcons. The Bengals have off the field issues not on the field. It's not that the classic quarterback thing it's the fact that teams need their quarterbacks to pass and pass successfully. The Falcons and Vick did not do this or they wouldn't be last in the league in that category. The quarterbacks ahead of Vick in TD passes at most had 4 games where they did not pass for one and those with four sat out that last game resting for the playoffs. I could knock his picks??? I could knock anything about Vick's passing game.
so twenty touchdowns isn't successful? first you said they had a good defense. wrong. then you said vick didn't score. wrong. now you're knocking him for having big touchdown games. vick threw four touchdowns agains the cowboys and they lost. that game would have put them in the playoffs.
Like I said I can knock any aspect of his passing game. Vick is overrated. It really isn't that hard. If you think he is not part of the Falcons problems overall you're only kidding yourself. I never knocked the big games, that's you again putting words in my mouth. I said that most of his TDs came from those 3 big games. I never said he had a good defense, I said they were solid, you again putting words in my mouth. According to stats, which you keep bringing up, Vick's team only scored more than 10 other teams. That's not good. I never knocked Vick's scoring just said his moving the ball did not lead to many scores and that is evident by their ranking. Now you're using ifs and ands bringing up the Cowboys game. Face it, Vick isn't perfect and he needs to step up. Quit acting like there isn't anything wrong with him and none of this is his fault. I'm not solely blaming him but I realize he has some flaws that need to be addressed.
. your whole first post was about vick's shortcomings holding them back. you didn't mention anything about changing their defense. if the defense was top ten like the offense, they would be a better team. that's what you don't seen to grasp. if the rest of their team was decent, the defense doesn't have to be top ten, they would be in the playoffs. every team in the playoffs has a higher ranked defense than atlanta. all 12, case closed edit: my bad the 8-8 giants have a worse one. i guess eli is good.
Look at my first post more closely bub. I said he not them. You say "if the rest of the team was decent, the defense doesn't have to be top ten and they would be in the playoffs." Is Vick part of the rest of them?
