Arizona Cardinals Interested in Michael Vick?
by Hawkwind on May 21, 2009 8:29 AM MDT
59 comments
Disclaimer: At this point, this sounds like a rumor that's being started by a single man but ESPN is running with it so I'll throw it out there. In no way am I am stating that I agree with or support this rumor, if it is in fact true.
ESPN's Chris Mortensen is suggesting that the Arizona Cardinals are among the top five teams that could bring in Michael Vick. He lists the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Browns and Cardinals as teams that "make sense." Mort originally listed his five teams on a Sports Centers special (that I can't find video of) and the audio has been replayed several times on ESPN radio, but he's also rehashed his thought process on his Twitter page (the specific comment is here). Of course we all know that Vick might not even be able to play this season and technically he's still under contract with the Falcons (although most expect him to be released at some point).
I'm sure that we all have varying degrees of hatred or hope (that he get's a second chance), so I'll just ask, would you support Michael Vick becoming an Arizona Cardinal? Also, what role do you think Vick will serve where ever he ends up playing?
0 recs |
59 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Interesting topic
I’m sure this is nothing more than Mortensen thinking out loud again, but the idea is intriguing. At this point of their careers I’d have to say that Vick would be a better backup for Warner than Leinart is, and he’d give us a whole new look in the red zone if they wanted a new wrinkle to give the other team to think about (although I’ve always hated it when teams get too cute in the last five yards when a more straightforward approach worked for the first 75).
Unfortunately, I’m sure his problems with accuracy and reading coverages haven’t improved at Leavenworth but this idea really does get me thinking. I could see the Whiz using him very similarly to how Pittsburgh used to use Kordell back when he was somewhat effective. I can’t see him doing much other than what I’ve mentioned for the next two seasons with Warner at the helm but once he retires, that would be interesting.
Anyways, back to reality. I still think that once Warner finishes his HOF career in style for us that St. Pierre, not Leinart, will be the new starter and we’ll have a more traditional, run-oriented and controlled passing style of offense.
by Long Beach on May 21, 2009 10:18 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
St Pierre over Leinart?
What gives you that impression?
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 10:44 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reply
Call it a gut feeling, but it’s also what I observed watching the QB’s at training camp last year. One of the few things I’ve been right about was last year when at no moment did I see the starting QB controversy between Warner and Leinart. The moment I walked in and saw the QB’s going through drills it was immediately obvious who the starter was.
Having said that, the second most polished QB there was St. Pierre. I thought during the preseason last year that he made an argument for second string then. Of course, it was hard to say since he only faced second and third string defenses whereas Leinart did have an opportunity to go against the first string but in judging their performances in like-situations I still would have given St. Pierre the nod. Whisenhunt apparently was clear to St. Pierre that this year the back up job is up for grabs, and I really won’t be surprised if it ends up being him.
by Long Beach on May 21, 2009 4:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, did you rub your crystal ball to come up with Warner being the starter???
Do me, do me. What’s my future???
J\K but seriously, anyone with half a brain knew Warner would be the starter after 07. St. Pierre did look good but it’s hard to gage how well he really did when he’s seeing 3rd stringers. Leinart looked good up until that last pre-season game when he fell apart. I really would like to see what he looks like this year in pre-season because my gut tells me he’ll have grown ten fold from last year, and he is not going to have all the pressure of Warner nipping at his heels.
Who would win in a fight, Whisenhunt or a Hurricane?
Hold on, hold on, what if the Hurricanes name was Whisenhunt?
Daaaaaaaaaa Cards, Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards!!!
by boogatt66 on May 21, 2009 7:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, however...
While I don’t doubt that most here saw it, I think the memories are a little revisionist because I remember having to listen to all the ridiculous debates about it. Warner fumbles too much, he gets injuried too easily, he’s too old, etc.
I remember Leinart looking a little shaky in the KC game as well. His numbers were good but if I recall correctly (and I probably don’t) KC dropped a few easy INT’s. The other games, I think he mostly played against the second string. However, unlike the other comments made here I can’t just blow Oakland off as one bad performance. That one was beyond bad. Three picks in a game is bad, three in a half usually gets you cut.
I hope you’re right about his continued improvement, because unlike most Leinart critics I’d really like to see him live up to the hype he came here with.
by Long Beach on May 22, 2009 10:42 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
huh?
Three picks in a game is bad, three in a half usually gets you cut.
Kurt Warner, an MVP candidate for most of the season, did that twice in 16 starts. Are you also saying that he should have been cut?
by Bezekira on May 22, 2009 10:53 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
Of course not, and I’m not saying Leinart should have been cut, either. However, if we look at what Leinart has achieved throughout his career to this point, in looking at his preseason last year would he have made the team after that performance if he wasn’t a first round pick?
It isn’t just the picks themselves that concern me, it was how they happened (not tipped passes, being under heavy pressure, etc.). Two came from a protected pocket that were floated into double coverage, and the third looked like he thought he could somehow throw it through the defender.
To repeat, I very much hope that the faith in Leinart is legit. However, based on his preseason from a year ago I’d like to see what St. Pierre could do against a first string, that’s all.
Peace.
by Long Beach on May 22, 2009 10:59 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really doubt Vick will be a QB in this league when he comes back.
he isn’t better than Leinart. Leinart is really underrated and still think he will be a QB.
by Pyromnc on May 21, 2009 10:47 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I think he comes back a WR and also will contribute in the Wildcat formation.
Who would win in a fight, Whisenhunt or a Hurricane?
Hold on, hold on, what if the Hurricanes name was Whisenhunt?
Daaaaaaaaaa Cards, Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards!!!
by boogatt66 on May 21, 2009 10:54 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, he'll have to be some kind of 'slash' role
I doubt a team will sign him to be a pure QB, but someone will take a look as a WR/RB/QB combo. He’s too good of an athlete for some team not to at least take a look at considering that he’s likely going to earn the vet minimum where ever he goes.
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 11:09 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this. Leinart doesn’t have anywhere near the arm strength of Vick, is obviously nowhere near as mobile, and while Vick has some obvious weaknesses – in the games they have played Leinart has never flashed the same brilliance that Vick occasionally displayed. I’d go so far as to make the argument that with the way Leinart played last preseason that if he wasn’t a former first round pick that he might have been released.
by Long Beach on May 21, 2009 5:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah yes, when in Rome...
I’m still not quite sure what that means Matty…
Who would win in a fight, Whisenhunt or a Hurricane?
Hold on, hold on, what if the Hurricanes name was Whisenhunt?
Daaaaaaaaaa Cards, Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards!!!
by boogatt66 on May 22, 2009 11:24 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
umm...yeah
I’m pretty sure that doesn’t apply here
by AJ BirdWatcher on May 22, 2009 11:30 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
He played good in the preseason
except for in the Oakland game. He may not have the best arm strength but I remember seeing him throw for over 40 yards in a few games. With us drafting Beanie Wells I expect us to create a power running game. Than you got Q and Fitz that can catch a short pass and turn it into something huge. Just because Matt can’t throw a 60 yarder doesn’t mean he can’t be a good QB.
by Pyromnc on May 21, 2009 9:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Leinart had three decent to very good games and one complete meltdown. He’ll be just fine and one thing that never gets mentioned is this: what’s the difference between Leinart’s Oakland debacle and Warner’s debacle against the Jets or Philly? One bad game here or there isn’t a reason to release someone.
by Bezekira on May 22, 2009 6:08 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent point on the the bad games
When Warner has a bad game, it’s usually towards the extreme side.
by AJ BirdWatcher on May 22, 2009 6:13 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since you asked
Here’s the difference:
Warner vs NYJ: 40/57, 472 yards, 2 TD’s, 3 INT’s.
Warner vs Eagles (reg season): 21/39, 235 yards, 3 TD’s, 3 INT’s.
Leinart vs Oakland (preseason), 4/12, 24 yards, 0 TD’s, 3 INT’s (in 2 quarters).
Huge difference in the definition of bad. Again, not be overly critical of Leinart but I’m of the belief that he’ll get pushed for the second string job this year. Hopefully the rest of you are right, and Leinart will come back this year ready to start. I just haven’t seen it yet.
by Long Beach on May 22, 2009 10:51 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough...
Who would win in a fight, Whisenhunt or a Hurricane?
Hold on, hold on, what if the Hurricanes name was Whisenhunt?
Daaaaaaaaaa Cards, Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards!!!
by boogatt66 on May 22, 2009 10:57 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just to make sure that we’re on the same page……you’re comparing a ‘full’ game in which Warner got the chance to redeem himself versus a game where Leinart didn’t, right? To even the playing field just a bit, why don’t we look at how KW did in the first two quarters of those two games……
NYJ: 9/14 for 99 yards, zero TDs and 2 picks (and two lost fumbles)
PHI: 8/15 for 90 yards, 1 TD and 2 picks
Again I’m not really campaigning for Leinart to be the starting QB over Warner, I just don’t think that his bad half against the Raiders should be viewed as evidence that he’s terrible and not even worth a roster spot.
by Bezekira on May 22, 2009 11:07 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
To quote "fair enough"
Understood about Warner vs Leinart, I don’t believe anybody here debates that. One question on what you said about redemption. Having seen the Oakland game do you believe the second half would have turned out any different than the first?
For the record, I do believe he’s worth a roster spot but unlike the rest I’m not convinced that it will be as the backup.
by Long Beach on May 22, 2009 11:15 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no idea if he'd have turned it around
but I know that at halftime of the Jets game I didn’t expect Warner to end the game with almost 500 yards passing. One thing that might be overlooked though is the score of those to games at halftime. we were actually leading the Oakland game (3-0) but in the Jets game it was basically over (0-34).
Since we’re just debating whether he’s second or third string guy though I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree and see how it plays out in August.
by Bezekira on May 22, 2009 11:38 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
UFL will be Vick's best chance
It will give that league a chance to garner some interest and Vick an opportunity to show what he can do with some “real” professional coaching again. If he can excel in the UFL then the NFL makes better sense and perhaps he can sign for more than the veteren minimum.
We all leave footprints in the sands of time, just watch out for the discarded fish hooks!
by Hawkwind on May 21, 2009 11:04 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Vick and Wells in the back field
HELL YEAH
by badmatty53 on May 21, 2009 11:14 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
hmmm
i’d take a look at him. with the cardinals weapons and his ability to make things happen, he could be dangerous especially on the road where it’s tough to pass late in the season. i remember the guy making deep playoff runs with average talent at the wideout positions and a good tight end. I also believe he needs time on a practice squad maybe even a whole season. to me it serves no good to another league now because most of those guys can’t play in the nfl. he’s better off practicing everyday against quality players even as a scout team quarterback. it remains to be seen how much he’s lost. i also find it odd how some think he should move to another position. why? he’s been a quarterback all his life! he’s also a proven winner in the league. if this happened to tom brady would you have him move to fullback ?
by lifelongcardfan on May 21, 2009 11:23 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Just because he was entertaining at QB never made him a good one!
Had he not been selling so many tickets they would have moved him years ago in Atlanta because he was never NFL QB material. Poor vision, never stayed in the pocket and poor descision making. He made plays with his legs, not his arm. That is just retarded trying to compare moving Brady to fullback and Vick to WR\RB\Wildcat, seriously!
Who would win in a fight, Whisenhunt or a Hurricane?
Hold on, hold on, what if the Hurricanes name was Whisenhunt?
Daaaaaaaaaa Cards, Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards!!!
by boogatt66 on May 21, 2009 11:32 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's why i think he has to move
First, it’s hard enough playing QB in this league but being completely away from football for two full years has to have some serious effect on his game. You hear about guys coming back from ACL’s or consecutive week layoffs being rusty and we’re talking about a guy who hasn’t even picked up a football in 2 full seasons, much less watched tape, worked on his mechanics or improved on his many deficiencies. If he can somehow get back to, or close to the player that he was before, would that be enough?
Lets not forget that he was just as much a running back as he was a QB. He never completed over 57 percent of his passes (which is even worse when you consider that his primary target was a tight end), he never had a QB rating over 82, and over the course of his six year career, he’d never shown signs of progressing as a QB. In fact he gradually grew as a runner instead of a QB. He’s simply a guy who never grew into the position. He relied on his physical ability and never developed mechanics, footwork or a proper understanding of any offensive system.
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 11:36 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Other Possible Angles
Another report (possibly from NFL Network) claimed that three of the four top teams interested in Vick were SF, StL and Seattle.
Character issues set aside for a moment, the dude is an elite athlete,. Is there any possibility that the Cards might consider signing Vick in order to prevent their division rivals from signing him so that we wouldn’t have to face him twice a year?
Also – perhaps another reason for Mortensen including the Cardinals on his list was speculation based on Warner’s comments about giving Vick a “second chance.” (In fact, those of us who tend to be conspiracy theorists might suspect that the reason Warner piped up may have been because the Cardinal front office suggested he do so).
CHICKEN LITTLE WAS RIGHT!
by JJeff88 on May 21, 2009 11:29 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
i respect ur opinion but....
yeah you can say he can’t do this and he doesn’t have that but what he has is playoff wins! you can’t deny that! out side of crumpler and without looking it up, tell me who vick had to throw to? he took that team on his shoulders and almost took them to the superbowl. with talented teammates he’d get the job done.
by lifelongcardfan on May 21, 2009 11:39 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
don't let one playoff blind you to his other five years of total mediocrity
The Falcons won more than eight games only once with him at QB and he was 13-17 in his last 30 starts. Oh, and all of this playoff success that you speak of…..he’s 2-2.
As far as his weapons, here’s what he had to throw to and how they faired before and after Vick:
Peerless Price – wasn’t great but he was a 1,000 yard receiver before coming to ATL
Dez White – again, wasn’t great but he posted two decent seasons with the bears before killing his career in ATL
Michael Jenkins – he was really young when Vick was there but posted much better numbers after he left (even with the Harrington, Redman, Leftwich combo)
--there were other spares but it’s very hard to say that these were terrible recievers that Vick picked up and carried on his back, plus he had Warrick Dunn in his prime.
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 11:56 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
He would be a great Cardinal!
I did a scientific study on this topic a little over a year ago.
I was playing madden 08 and I made a fantasy Cardinals team with Michael Vick as the QB. Long story short, the Cardinals won the superbowl.
by CardsDefense on May 21, 2009 11:43 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
I’m sold, lmao. Sign the man! Honestly though, I don’t think he’s worth the character issues to sign him..unless our offense crumbles in the next few years which I DO NOT see happening.
by Fitz Jizzle on May 21, 2009 1:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Warrick Dunn, Peerless Price, Roddy White, Michael Jenkins off the top of my head.
They only went to the playoffs twice with Vick too and Matt Ryan didn’t seem to have any problems with his receivers.
Who would win in a fight, Whisenhunt or a Hurricane?
Hold on, hold on, what if the Hurricanes name was Whisenhunt?
Daaaaaaaaaa Cards, Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards Da Cards!!!
by boogatt66 on May 21, 2009 11:47 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
of all those...
aside from dunn, none were above average at that particular stage of their careers! price is considered one of the leagues all time free agent bust!, jenkins was nothing better than a number 3 wideout and white was also average at best. good to elite players are guys that that have to be accounted for when formulating an actual gameplan. none of those guys you listed fit this description. have vick didn’t have elite talent at the skill positions to help him out and he still played good.
by lifelongcardfan on May 21, 2009 12:03 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
reply button is your friend
Tons of QB’s don’t have elite talent at the skill positions but they make those players better and still win. Vick didn’t do either on a consistent basis. If you can guarantee someone that they’re getting the 2004 version of Vick (yea five years ago), I’m sure the line would be plenty long and he’d be handed a starting QB job. But we’re not talking about that Vick, we’re talking about a guy who regressed the two seasons after that and has spent the last two seasons in stripes.
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 12:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Imagine that we pick up Vick
Warner comes out the gate shooting, Vick comes in in the fourth and we pound the rock until the whistle blows. It sounds beautiful to me.
by badmatty53 on May 21, 2009 12:53 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
okay name some
lol, we aren’t going anywhere with this back and forth stuff with vick! you point out that he didn’t play well his last two years and i believe it because of the lack of talent around him. there is no guarantee that he’s gonna be the same! that’s why i think he needs to sit on a practice squad for perhaps the whole year! bezekira, you’re an astute fan for sure, but if you think you can make deep playoff runs year after year without playmakers at the wideout position, i have to question your wisdom. look at our team for crying out loud! of all the superbowl winners, there are only two, 82, niners and 70 colts that didn’t have playmaking wideouts out there!
by lifelongcardfan on May 21, 2009 12:39 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree we're arguing with no resolution on either Vick or the reply button
but in the off season, this is what we have.
I’d continue to argue that winning one playoff game doesn’t constitute a ‘deep’ playoff run, but hey what do I know. Also since we’re talking about how great a QB he is in the playoffs, let’s look at his playoff stats. In four games (with a 2-2 record) he threw for 609 yards (152 yards per game, threw 3 TDS and 3 picks and completed 56% of his passes. I understand that he doesn’t have Fitz and Q at WR but he wasn’t he only guy on that team.
As for SB winners without great WRs…I think two Patriots teams would like to say something about that. A recent Ravens team might also chime in and that’s just in the past ten years.
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 1:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
okay!
i forgot about the pats! and even the ravens. i give their offense 0 credit, although they had hall of fame tight end and the great defense won the game. even you have to consider this an aberration to our mini debate! but i get your point. although it’s clear all great offenses have elite wideouts . how can this be argued? as for vick, i have one question for everyone poster that reads this: given time to get back in playing shape and understands the cards offense, can vick help the cardinals? I say yes! by the way i’m done with the vick issue
by lifelongcardfan on May 21, 2009 2:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh and Vick can't be on the practice squad, he's got way to many accrued seasons
I do agree that he can help a team, but he’ll have to get back into shape on your 53 man roster.
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 2:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
We already have a left handed QB with a # 7 on his jersey!
by CardsDefense on May 21, 2009 3:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Leinart's taken his fair share of hits already...
I don’t think he needs to be compared to Michael Vick now! :-)
by AJ BirdWatcher on May 21, 2009 4:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Urban puts the rumor to rest
in his latest blog…..
Briefly talked to general manager Rod Graves now that he has returned from the owner’s meetings, and brought up the report floating around – apparently through ESPN speculation – that the Cards could have some interest in Michael Vick if and when Vick is reinstated. Uh, no. While Graves said he wishes Vick well, as for the idea of the Cards might look into Vick’s availability, "We can put that to rest right now."
by Bezekira on May 21, 2009 3:24 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
With all the intentional misdirection in the league . .
Graves comment may mean they are already talking to Vick. LOL
by Drullin'OverDaCards on May 21, 2009 5:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Vick
has tarnished his image for the NFL. It wouldn’t matter how well he does if or when he ever gets to come back because of what happened. Most everyone I talk to just thinks of him as a mediocre QB that got caught up in illegal activities. He will be known more for what he did off the field than on. I feel sorry for him for not being a more upstanding man outside of the NFL. As a man he should know better than to allow things like this to happen. I would not like it if he became a Cardinal. I think the team and organization knows better than most that it would not be a good scenario to bring him to Arizona. We need players that are passionate about playing and want to do their best in the NFL. I am glad Rod Graves has put it to rest.
by kj197728 on May 21, 2009 5:30 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
More importantly for a franchise that has always had a relatively small fanbase, why would they want to sign a guy that would almost certainly alienate them from a chunk of current or potential fans.
by AJ BirdWatcher on May 21, 2009 5:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
On a side note (busy Saturday)
I may have directions to an undisclosed location where there may or may no be illegal dog fights. I also may or may not have information about a certain dog who may or may not be going down in the first. wink, wink.
by badmatty53 on May 21, 2009 5:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
With or without the lure of peanut butter?
We all leave footprints in the sands of time, just watch out for the discarded fish hooks!
by Hawkwind on May 21, 2009 5:56 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've been totally quiet on this subject but,
we definitely wouldn’t want MV. We are trying to create a running game that would be undermined by Vick’s constant rushing. Yeah, we would definitely have 100+ yards per game on the ground, but most would come from him. I think he presence would stunt the growth of our top young backs, not to mention piss off our receivers who would go out for a pass knowing 70% of the time he would just take off and run. Although with only 40-50 catches, Q’s contract would equal his production.
by hevchv on May 22, 2009 3:21 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
#7
Im a falcons fan and I know this is Cardinals territory but I had to say something. I have no repeat NO hard feelings or anger or anything towwards Mike. I watched him and was amazed at his physical skills both his arm and his legs. I cheered for him and yelled when we won with him but myself and alot of Falcons fans would be overjoyed if the Cardinals want to give Mike a second chance if nothing else so that the stories about whats going on with him would stop appearing in my Falcons news stories. it’s really getting irritating. If the Cards want Mike good luck and God bless to Mike and the Cards
by sirenman on May 30, 2009 5:40 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Revenge Of The Birds
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
