Cam Newton

[vancelot23]

There's no evidence that he'll be good or bad at this point.

 

[kramer1]

This argument again?

 

[Cincyfan78]

Cam looked great.

Against a bunch of guys who will be pumping my gas and bagging my groceries in another week or two.

Congrats. It may be the highlight of his career.

Of course, the fact that the Bengals #1's couldn't score against the same guys who will be bagging my groceries and serving my beer to me in another few weeks....yeah. Sad.

 

[ckhokie]

I will go on record now:

Cam Newton's peak is a Mike Vick, which is at best a #10 QB in the league. At his peak, he'll be a good to very good (not great) regular season QB - i.e. his team will win many games against crappy defenses. In the playoffs, he may get to the 2nd round, but once he starts seeing real defenses, his game won't amount to much (much like Vick) and he'll become a liability.

I will go on the record now and say you know nothing about Mike Vick.

 

[flamingrey]

I will also go on record and say you know nothing about NFL football.

 

[ckhokie]

Would you at least mind naming the 9 other QBs that are currently better than Michael Vick? The MV who was 2nd in MVP voting...jw

 

[vancelot23]

I myself would take P Manning, Brady, Matt Ryan, Brees, Rodgers, Rivers for sure over Vick. And soon you'll be able to add Bradford and Freeman.

 

[flamingrey]

You can also add Schaub and Roethlisberger for sure.

McNabb (who played better in Philly with the same offense but worse cast) to a lesser extent.

We might be able to make a case for Stafford if he could ever stay on the field long enough.

So, there are your 8 definitely in front and 2 more to a lesser extent, but in front.

 

[vancelot23]

Schaub and Vick are about the same place for me. I forgot about Ben. Stafford has to stay healthy, but yes.

 

[flamingrey]

Yeah I probably should have put Schaub with McNabb.

 

[ckhokie]

I agree with Manning, Brady, Rodgers, and Matt Ryan.

McNabb, Matt Schaub, Sam Bradford (who has played 16 career games and a 76 qb rating) are all fucking laughable.

 

[futballiscool]

It's impossible to rate Vick right now. in Atlanta he was a great athlete, but an average QB...

his first season as a starter he was in Philly he was one of the best players at any position in the entire leauge..

I think Reid's coaching has Vick on the way to the Hall of Fame...

Newton might turn out to be a decent QB, but nobody is at Vick's level as far as physical talent goes

 

[vancelot23]

Talent-wise, Vick is above everybody. As a QB, I'd put him in the 8 to 10 range, depending on how Freeman, Bradfrod, Stafford, Schaub do this year. McNabb sucks.

 

[vancelot23]

Welcome, futballiscool, to the good board.

 

[futballiscool]

Welcome, futballiscool, to the good board.

Thanks...

I was going to wait until they shutdown the old board, but that place is dead now.. looks like there were 10 post the whole day, and that's during the preseason when it should be active

 

[flamingrey]

I agree with Manning, Brady, Rodgers, and Matt Ryan.

McNabb, Matt Schaub, Sam Bradford (who has played 16 career games and a 76 qb rating) are all fucking laughable.

I didn't include Bradford.

Schaub isn't "laughable". He's been consistently very good unlike Vick who has been for 1 season. I put him slightly above Vick.

McNabb has done more for the Eagles with the same offense than Vick. McNabb never become befuddled the way Vick consistently does against good defenses. His presence in the list is not "laughable".

However, what is "laughable" is that you don't "agree with" Brees and Rivers.

 

[Tubbs1518]

Flaming has always hated Vick. Might as well not even try to have a conversation about anything like this with him. I'd go Brady, Brees, Rivers, Ryan, Vick. With Mannings neck injury he scares me too much to take. A healthy manning is above him for now though. With Bradford and Freeman close behind.

 

[futballiscool]

Talent-wise, Vick is above everybody. As a QB, I'd put him in the 8 to 10 range, depending on how Freeman, Bradfrod, Stafford, Schaub do this year. McNabb sucks.

I don't know, I think he's a really special player..

he might have the strongest arm of any QB. he's probably faster than almost every 3 down RB... as a single player he can force a defense to defend every inch of the field..

a unique talent who's in the perfect spot with the perfect supporting cast and the perfect offensive coach...

on the NFLN they were breaking down his mechanics and showed how much they improved since his time in Atl...

careerwise he's average.... but at the moment I think he's going to join the elite QBs if he has another season like his last one

 

[Tubbs1518]

And as we are talking about Vick having "1" good year, what have Bradford and Freeman done to warrent being that high? 1 good year each? And Bradford only had a 76 QB rating. Vick did lead the Falcons to a NFC championship game, won a post season game in GB, took the Eagles to the playoffs and very nearly beat GB. Vick went to the playoffs multiple times in Atlanta and his only year in Philly. And as for McNabb we are talking now not in the past. If you would consider taking McNabb over Vick now that shows your hate and blindness towards Vick.

 

[flamingrey]

It's impossible to rate Vick right now. in Atlanta he was a great athlete, but an average QB...

his first season as a starter he was in Philly he was one of the best players at any position in the entire leauge..

I think Reid's coaching has Vick on the way to the Hall of Fame...

Newton might turn out to be a decent QB, but nobody is at Vick's level as far as physical talent goes

Physical talent means nothing at the QB position. Give me an immobile pocket passer over a "physically talented" QB any day of the week.

Additionally, the first 4 or so games Vick played, he played out of his mind. I believe all above 120 QB rating. After that he dramatically dropped off and came to average about a 100 QB rating to finish the season.

Furthermore, no other team in the league averaged more yac than the Eagles. Great at inflating QB's yards and QB rating.

All that said, it is absolutely possible to rate Vick right now. He is what we saw in Atlanta. Just like any other QB that has played under Reid, he's stats are monstrously inflated.

Also, not to mention, good QB's with Vick's "physical talent" always tend to look very good in the regular season. Vince Young (and McNabb who was way more of a pocket passer to a much lesser extent) is a great example of this. Look at his win/loss percentages. Great against below .500 teams, and average at best (something like 11-14) against above .500 teams. Main reason? Teams that are above .500 usually have much better defenses than those below .500.

Vick this past season was much the same. Against the teams with bad defenses - those that don't have the means to defend against the pass and Vick's threat to run - Vick looked great. Against teams with good defenses - the ones that show up in the playoffs - Vick looked and was very average. Another reason why they were one and done in the playoffs. Vick wasn't "himself" against a very good defense.

While a couple of the QB's I mentioned aren't great, you give them the offense Vick has with the same surrounding talent and they have similar success in the regular season with a much better chance for more success in the playoffs as good defenses can't as easily neutralize a huge facet of their games.