Pro Bowl Bound - Samuels, Moss

Base it on the receivers he has around him, the number of wins his team has, or the numbers he puts up, none of which merit a slot. Black, White, Asian or Redneck, the guy is overrated & does not deserve the distinction of being named a Pro-Bowl quarterback.

The bottom line is, if his peers and the coaches that have to play against him every week thought he was as overrated as you guys seem to think he is, he wouldn't have gotten in. As I said before, Cooley was by far the fan favorite at the fullback position, but didn't get in, so it's a lot more than just a matter of a lot uneducated fans drooling over Michael Vick that got him into the Pro Bowl.

The funny thing is, this wouldn't even be a discussion if Brunell had gotten the nod.

I'm glad some of our guys made it, but the ProBowl is overrated. It's become more about the NFL showcasing its stars, rather than a legitmate award based on performance. In other words it's just like all the other "all-star" games.

The bottom line is, if his peers and the coaches that have to play against him every week thought he was as overrated as you guys seem to think he is, he wouldn't have gotten in. As I said before, Cooley was by far the fan favorite at the fullback position, but didn't get in, so it's a lot more than just a matter of a lot uneducated fans drooling over Michael Vick that got him into the Pro Bowl.

The funny thing is, this wouldn't even be a discussion if Brunell had gotten the nod.

Exactly! Vick's peers think that he's a Pro Bowler and their votes are the ones that really matter. If people in the league didn't vote for him he wouldn't be going.

Exactly! Vick's peers think that he's a Pro Bowler and their votes are the ones that really matter. If people in the league didn't vote for him he wouldn't be going.

Players in the locker room usually don't put much thought into who they vote for. They often just fill out names just based on previous year's performance or simply name recognition. It's sort of an afterthought for them....or so I've been told.

This year Brady is putting up monster numbers, he's on pace for over 4000 yards and over 25 TDs. Those are big numbers worthy of the Pro Bowl IMO.

As for his previous years I'm not sure what you're talking about, he's always had the numbers.

Look at his yardage and TD-INT ratio over the past 3 years

2002: 3764, 28-14
2003: 3620, 23-12
2004: 3692, 28-14

I don't know where you come from, but where I come from those are pretty damn good numbers. Add in completion percentages all over 60% during those years and there's just no denying what Brady has done stats wise along with the wins.

Vick doesn't even touch these numbers. He's not even in the ball park. Their situations aren't similar in the least bit.

In 03 and 04, the last 2 times the Pats won Super Bowls he was in the top 10 with those passing numbers. If we're going to use stats to justify Pro Bowlers then he probably shouldn't have gone because there were 2 or 3 other QB's from the AFC who had more yards or TD's than him each year.

Brady wins games that's why it's similar to Vick. I even said that I wasn't comparing their numbers. All I said was they don't jump off the page. IMO they don't. I don't look at Tom Brady's stats and wonder how he did that. I did that with Manning and Culpepper last year, not Brady, but Brady is the one who took home the Lombardi Trophy. Brady's most important stat is 3, as in Super Bowl rings. I like QB's who win...that's what Vick does.

Players in the locker room usually don't put much thought into who they vote for. They often just fill out names just based on previous year's performance or simply name recognition. It's sort of an afterthought for them....or so I've been told.

Well if 1/3 of the voting isn't even paid attention to...why do we pay so much attention to it?

Vick doesn't win big games, its as simple as that. He is an okay passer and a good runner. To say he doesn't have targets is a joke. ATL got Peerless Price, they used their last 2 1st round picks on WR's, and yet none of these guys can play in the NFL?

It's the overall ground game (Dunn, Duckett, Vick) that drives the ATL offense. Stop that and they have nothing, cuz Vick can't pass to anyone besides Crumpler.

No, actually Peerless Price isn't in the NFL. On top of that, guys like Freddie Mitchell and Rod Gardner were picked in the first round of the draft, that doesn't mean that they're a lock to be good. I don't think Roddy White or Michael Jenkins can play. Jenkins wasn't even that good at Ohio State and Roddy White went to UAB, he only got into the first round because of a good combine. That's as inexact a science as any in sports.

I realize that. Brunell also has won three in a row, with the playoffs on the line. Though I understand what you're saying about the quality of the opponent.

What I'm saying though is that if the argument is going to be made that the Falcons are a much better team when Vick is in and they win with him and that's a big reason why he's in the Pro Bowl, then you have to factor in that when it's mattered recently against top teams they haven't won. And Vick can't be absolved of blame in those losses. So what does it matter that they're better with him if they lose anyway.?

What if the Skins lose this weekend? Does that mean that Mark Brunell has no business in the Pro Bowl because that could cost his team the playoff spot? Brunell doesn't scare anybody. He throws to 2 people on the team and that's because he has a reciever who is very good. He'd be worse than Vick if he were a Falcon. The Falcons have Vick, Crumpler, Dunn, Hall and Coleman who can play. That's pretty much it. That team is garbage. Mike Vick is the only reason they're even in a playoff hunt.

What's funny about this thread is that there was a similar debate last year about the greatness of Brett Favre. Some people said that he was great and now he just gets by on reputation. That was even before this season, people were doubting Brett Favre.

Just wanted to clear that up.

For the record, I'm not comparing Vick to Favre, merely pointing out that a lot of question people for some strange reasons.

In 03 and 04, the last 2 times the Pats won Super Bowls he was in the top 10 with those passing numbers. If we're going to use stats to justify Pro Bowlers then he probably shouldn't have gone because there were 2 or 3 other QB's from the AFC who had more yards or TD's than him each year.

Brady wins games that's why it's similar to Vick. I even said that I wasn't comparing their numbers. All I said was they don't jump off the page. IMO they don't. I don't look at Tom Brady's stats and wonder how he did that. I did that with Manning and Culpepper last year, not Brady, but Brady is the one who took home the Lombardi Trophy. Brady's most important stat is 3, as in Super Bowl rings. I like QB's who win...that's what Vick does.

Vick doesn't win the way Brady does, but then again who does? But the interesting thing about comparing Brady and Vick is this. You, and several others, say that Vick has no wide receivers. That all he has is Dunn and Crumpler. Names like Branch, Givens, Brown and even Patten don't exactly scare people when not mentioned with Tom Brady. In fact what a lot of people said when the Redskins signed Patten was "can he be good without Brady" Hard to say without all those receivers playing for other teams but at any rate those receivers do quite well with Brady.

So we'd have to ask ourselves how much of the Falcons' receiver issues lie with the QB? Are Jenkins, Finneran and White really that bad? Maybe, or maybe Vick just isn't that good....yet.