Wednesday, August 5, 2009

The Packers Should Sign Vick

I'm quite sure that has shown up on 6.3 million blogs and sports-talk radio shows in the last month, but I haven't gotten to it yet. And since our fearless leader gave his classic response to the question yesterday, I guess I will tackle it.

I don't think Michael Vick is a very nice person. Anyone who electrocutes/drowns/tortures dogs earns that title. But he got convicted in a court of law, was sentenced to some time, and he did it. If he is good enough to play football, and someone wants to pay him to do it, he should be allowed. So from the NFL's standpoint, it is horseshit to keep him suspended.

Ignoring that factor, should the Packers sign him? I don't think Michael Vick is that great of a quarterback. He does things that nobody else can do, but he is extremely inaccurate as a passer. However, it is pretty tough to argue with the success he has had on the field. He adds an element that makes him a nightmare for defenses, even if he wouldn't be able to hit the ground if it wasn't for gravity. For the sake of argument, lets just say that he can get back to nearly where he was before he got caught gambling on canine MMA, factoring in that he will naturally be a step slower because he is two years older. Assuming that fact, can anyone honestly tell me that he wouldn't be a better backup QB than Matt Flynn or Brian Brohm? You can't, so don't even try. As a football player, which is what the Packer's play, Vick at game speed would be the best backup in the league, and probably in the top 20 starters.

While he doesn't fit the Packer's scheme at all, he doesn't fit ANY team's scheme. He isn't and never will be a normal QB, and every team runs a scheme for a normal QB. The mere threat of him taking off, negates most of his deficiencies.

It would be a shitstorm combined with a circus to have him here for training camp. But nothing is going to be worse than what happened last year with He Who Shall Not Be Named.

I'm not talking long term here, or to be brought in to compete with A-Rodg, but a year or two could be good for both sides. Vick would be able to show that he can not kill things, would generally stay out of trouble in GB because there isn't shit to do but play football, and could get some snaps here and there. Then he could move on, and by that point hopefully Brohm or Flynn would be ready. Or, if (Sports Bottle's) god forbid, A-Rodg goes down, we have someone with NFL experience to step in, and a bargain price. To me it is idiotic NOT to sign him.

But will they pull the trigger? No fucking way. The Packers haven't signed a controversial player (unless you count Andre Rison) in my life. And if you haven't noticed, Ted Thompson doesn't much like to take gambles, or not draft his own players. So unless we can fool Thompson into thinking that Vick is draft eligible somehow, it won't happen. Thompson's answers were his typical evasive answers, and he was clearly toying with the media. He would answer the same way if someone asked him if we were going to sign Bart Starr or Paul Hornung or a bag of dog shit. I would put the chances at .00045%

No comments: