Vick looks good in return to playing field

[Hookem Horns]

He played quarterback, ran the wildcat formation, even lined up at wide receiver and completed a pass right-handed.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/32588851/ns/sports-nfl/

[Specnatz]

Really? I think it looked like ****. I have seen better football from SMU over the last 10 years.

[Hookem Horns]

Originally Posted by Specnatz

Really? I think it looked like ****. I have seen better football from SMU over the last 10 years.

I didn't see the game, just going off the article there. If the Eagles are looking like crap that is good news for me as a Giants fan.

[Specnatz]

Originally Posted by Hookem Horns

I didn't see the game, just going off the article there. If the Eagles are looking like crap that is good news for me as a Giants fan.

It looked like the 4th quarter of preseason game #1. No fluid motion, the game plan looked like it was put together on Wednesday.

[jgl35]

Originally Posted by Hookem Horns

I didn't see the game, just going off the article there. If the Eagles are looking like crap that is good news for me as a Giants fan.

They are just plain sloppy and have been all pre season. The reasons given don't cut it. Peters, the LT they got from the Bills, has a *^&%$ game. Much more important to worry about then giving Vick five plays. They still don't run the ball to set anything up and when they do run, they can't.
The young guys seen to be more focused then the "starters", but the starters now get to sit against the Jets next week. The Giants, Cowboys, and Redskins are better right now.

[Kaiser Toro]

The Eagles did not look on the same page as they tried to implement Vick into the offense, as well as having plenty of new guys at offensive skill positions. However, once Vick was involved, he looked very good for a guy who spent two years in the pen. The zip he had on the ball may be a tenth of a second off what he once had.

[HoustonFrog]

Originally Posted by Kaiser Toro

The Eagles did not look on the same page as they tried to implement Vick into the offense, as well as having plenty of new guys at offensive skill positions. However, once Vick was involved, he looked very good for a guy who spent two years in the pen. The zip he had on the ball may be a tenth of a second off what he once had.

Prison may have made him more accurate.

[Mr teX]

Vick looked good in his return but they did implement him poorly. The eagles as a whole have looked inconsistent all preseason, but McCoy won't be the primary RB when they start the season as he's been all preseason & if i'm not mistaken Trent Cole has been out on the defense. Once the season starts, i expect game plans & strategies to be shored up tremendously.

whomever is the giants fan in here, they're the ones that need to worry b/c Cutler made that defense look terrible last week.

[HOU-TEX]

Originally Posted by Kaiser Toro

The Eagles did not look on the same page as they tried to implement Vick into the offense, as well as having plenty of new guys at offensive skill positions. However, once Vick was involved, he looked very good for a guy who spent two years in the pen. The zip he had on the ball may be a tenth of a second off what he once had.

I suppose I never kept up with Vick when he was playing. I thought his first completion was a freakin bullet. I also think he's added quite a bit of muscle compared to what he used to have.

I think you're 100% right about how the Eagles looked. Not much rythm

[Specnatz]

Originally Posted by HoustonFrog

Prison may have made him more accurate.

There is a joke in and out there some where

[Texecutioner]

I don't see what people are talking about when they say he looked good. He didn't hardly even do anything to say he looked good. He only threw one real pass from what I saw and granted that one pass was good, but other than that, he just shoveled a few tosses forward which made his completions at 100%. He didn't hardly do anything though really. On that play where he boot legged it to the side he didn't seem to have the same speed either. Granted, it's still early and all and I'm not judging his speed off of that one play, but I don't see why people are saying he looked real good. If this was any other back up playing that did what he did in that game, no one would have even cared or said that the player really looked good.

[CloakNNNdagger]

Taken down from behind by a friggin' DEFENSIVE END.

[StarStruck]

I forgot all about Thursday night pro ball and was watching Yates vs. Washington. Any idea when the game will rebroadcast?

[Hookem Horns]

Originally Posted by Mr teX

whomever is the giants fan in here, they're the ones that need to worry b/c Cutler made that defense look terrible last week.

They have a new D Coordinator due to Spags departure to St Louis. However they are stacked on the D side of the ball. I am not too concerned right now since they looked strong against Carolina. I didn't see the Bears game, so I don't know who they had in there, what type of schemes they were monkeying around with, etc.

[Mr teX]

Originally Posted by Texecutioner

I don't see what people are talking about when they say he looked good. He didn't hardly even do anything to say he looked good. He only threw one real pass from what I saw and granted that one pass was good, but other than that, he just shoveled a few tosses forward which made his completions at 100%. He didn't hardly do anything though really. On that play where he boot legged it to the side he didn't seem to have the same speed either. Granted, it's still early and all and I'm not judging his speed off of that one play, but I don't see why people are saying he looked real good. If this was any other back up playing that did what he did in that game, no one would have even cared or said that the player really looked good.

Well, from my perspective i meant he looked good ...as in it doesn't look like he's lost much if anything.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by StarStruck

I forgot all about Thursday night pro ball and was watching Yates vs. Washington. Any idea when the game will rebroadcast?

It's on right now. It will be on several times this weekend.

[Texecutioner]

Originally Posted by Mr teX

Well, from my perspective i meant he looked good ...as in it doesn't look like he's lost much if anything.

How in hell could you tell? He didn't do anything, but a few shovel passes that even an offensive lineman could do. Hell, Travis Johnson could have made those passes. They were practically hand offs. That one pass he made was pretty good, but that was one pass that was only like 10 yards. Other than that, he did absolutely nothing for anyone to say that he "looked good." He just looked like any typical back up that went in there and shoveled a 12 inch toss, but it was forward. They were glorified hand offs.

If this was any other back up in the league, no one would have said that the guy looked good. Everyone would have been saying the guy didn't get a shot at show casing his abilities, so we don't know how the guy really looked. But since it's Vick people are looking way further into 1 yard shovel passes and sensationalizing it like he went out there and had some impressive performance. In reality Vick didn't even get any real opportunities to really have a true perspective on how he did. This has got to be the first time in the history of this sport where so many people act like a QB played well and looked good from doing like 3 shovel passes that were glorified hand offs and complimented the guy so well.

[CloakNNNdagger]

McNabb appears to be having difficulty biting his tongue.

McNabb calls Vick's role a "gimmick"


Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb faced the media on Monday for the first time since venting after Thursday night's preseason game regarding the inability of the offense to establish a rhythm, due to the periodic use of quarterback Mike Vick.

McNabb, in response to questions from WIP Howard Eskin, tried to downplay the in-game discussion with offensive coordinator Marty Mornhinweg, during which quarterback told coach how to do his job.

Asked whether McNabb would be more comfortable with Vick taking consecutive snaps or engineering an entire series, McNabb had this to say, via the Philadelphia Inquirer: "Before you can come up with gimmicks, before you can come up with something else, you got to get your base offense going."

It's the same notion McNabb mentioned on Thursday night, and we still don't know what it means.

At what point has the team gotten the "base offense going"? When leading by 10 or more points? After gaining 250 yards?

And if "coming up with gimmicks" (a phrase that, in our view, inherently demeans Vick's role in the offense) disrupts the ability of the offense to get up to full speed, doesn't using Vick constitute tapping the breaks if/when the offense otherwise is humming along?

Bottom line? It's great that the Eagles have given Mike Vick a second chance. But his second chance ultimately could screw up the team's best chance to win a Super Bowl.

[Goldensilence]

Originally Posted by CloakNNNdagger

McNabb appears to be having difficulty biting his tongue.

I think McNabb is right though. Vick looks pretty forced because I think the coaches want to see what they've got and some of the fans as well. I'm expecting once the season starts most Vick talk will die down as he's by far the third best QB on the roster. Kolb looked fairly impressive as well. Eagles are giving him a second chance, but I expect it to be more of an opportunity to trade him for a pick for a team desperate at QB. Could see a few of those soon too. If Russell can't develop into a decent QB that might be worth a mid to late round flyer. Vick plus the RBs there might make for an interesting scenario.

[HOU-TEX]

Yay?

NEW YORK — NFL commissioner Roger Goodell says Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Michael Vick is eligible to play beginning in the third game of the regular season.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...t/6601274.html