Skins considered Vick !

LORD GIBBS · Post by **LORD GIBBS** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:01 pm

OMG That's just what we need, :evil:

Danny Boy thinking again

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:17 pm

Any kind of link, or are we supposed to take your word for it?

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:26 pm

That story was put out there by the DC Examiner and the infamous "unnamed league source."

Five months ago, Rick Snider wrote a piece in the DC Examiner suggesting that what the Redskins REALLY should do this offseason was consider signing quarterback Michael Vick, at the time still imprisoned for dog fighting. Fans here were largely displeased at the suggestion.

Writing in the Examiner today, John Keim reports that the team took Snider's advice and considered signing Vick ... for what sounds like about twenty seconds.

According to multiple league sources, the Redskins briefly discussed signing the ex-Falcons quarterback and came to a quick and unanimous conclusion. It would not work here. It's a message league sources say has been consistent since January.

The reasons why not are myriad, according to Keim's league sources, ranging from questions about what position Vick could play to the political nightmare of Vick this close to the nation's capital to the fact that Vick and incumbent quarterback Jason Campbell share an agent. Honestly, as long as the thesis of the article is correct and Vick isn't coming to the team, the question of why barely matter to me at all.

Link

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:32 pm

According to multiple league sources, the Redskins briefly discussed signing the ex-Falcons quarterback and came to a quick and unanimous conclusion. It would not work here. It's a message league sources say has been consistent since January.

Here's how it went...

Snyder: "Hey Vinny..."

Cerrato: "No Dan."

Snyder: "What? I was just thinking..."

Cerrato: "Yeah... I know... we could sign Vick and give Alpo or Snausages the naming rights to the stadium... right? No, Dan, not a good idea.

Snyder: "Yeah, you're right. Nevermind."

:lol:

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:39 pm

I'm sure all 32 teams had the same discussion. As I see it, there are really only two to four teams that might seriously entertain the idea.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:44 pm

Deadskins wrote:I'm sure all 32 teams had the same discussion.

Which probably took all of about 5 seconds... "hey, should we..." "NOOOOOOO!!"

"Okay, meeting adjourned."

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:37 pm

The Raiders might do it. But, they have a young high draft pick qb already. The Forty niners is another team that might do it. Mike Singletary likes Vick but would have to perform a miracle to convince the upper management. One minute Vick was on top of the world. Now he is just looking for a job. Wow!

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 7:04 pm

He'd be perfect for the Wild Cat...

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:01 pm

SkinsFreak wrote:
According to multiple league sources, the Redskins briefly discussed signing the ex-Falcons quarterback and came to a quick and unanimous conclusion. It would not work here. It's a message league sources say has been consistent since January.

Here's how it went...

Snyder: "Hey Vinny..."

Cerrato: "No Dan."

Snyder: "What? I was just thinking..."

Cerrato: "Yeah... I know... we could sign Vick and give Alpo or Snausages the naming rights to the stadium... right? No, Dan, not a good idea.

Snyder: "Yeah, you're right. Nevermind."

Are you saying that Vinny actually stood up to Danny boy. Yeah right.

ROTFALMAO

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:09 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:He'd be perfect for the Wild Cat...

Chrissy...you gotta stop with that WildCat stuff. Everybody is going to have a package for it this year. We have other positions of need without having to hire Cesar Millan as a coach for Vick.

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:27 pm

Deadskins wrote:I'm sure all 32 teams had the same discussion. As I see it, there are really only two to four teams that might seriously entertain the idea.

If I was the Dolphins I would be all over trying to get Michael Vick. Put him in the Wildcat with Ronnie Brown and that would be a very difficult offense to stop.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:09 am

CanesSkins26 wrote:
Deadskins wrote:I'm sure all 32 teams had the same discussion. As I see it, there are really only two to four teams that might seriously entertain the idea.

If I was the Dolphins I would be all over trying to get Michael Vick. Put him in the Wildcat with Ronnie Brown and that would be a very difficult offense to stop.

See Pat White

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 9:12 am

tcwest10 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:He'd be perfect for the Wild Cat...

Chrissy...you gotta stop with that WildCat stuff. Everybody is going to have a package for it this year. We have other positions of need without having to hire Cesar Millan as a coach for Vick.

I never said that I wanted him here, just stating that whomever gets him well have a real threat for that specific formation.

I don't care if they have schemes for it, a scheme cannot beat execution. ie. The Redskins running the same play over and over and over and over again in the 80's.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 9:18 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
tcwest10 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:He'd be perfect for the Wild Cat...

Chrissy...you gotta stop with that WildCat stuff. Everybody is going to have a package for it this year. We have other positions of need without having to hire Cesar Millan as a coach for Vick.

I never said that I wanted him here, just stating that whomever gets him well have a real threat for that specific formation.

I don't care if they have schemes for it, a scheme cannot beat execution. ie. The Redskins running the same play over and over and over and over again in the 80's.

And I would add...while teams may be better prepared for the Wildcat... Vick will bring the added dimension of a passer to the wildcat.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 9:35 am

DEHog wrote:And I would add...while teams may be better prepared for the Wildcat... Vick will bring the added dimension of a passer to the wildcat.

Exactly, we all he's not Peyton Manning but he's a more than capable passer. Check my post history, I've vehemently against Vick the QB, lol. But what can we say..., I mean really..., he's been to more playoffs than JC. :twisted:

The guy even if he has lost a step is an amazing runner. Pffft... If I had a team that used the wildcat he'd be a prime target.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 10:00 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
tcwest10 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:He'd be perfect for the Wild Cat...

Chrissy...you gotta stop with that WildCat stuff. Everybody is going to have a package for it this year. We have other positions of need without having to hire Cesar Millan as a coach for Vick.

I never said that I wanted him here, just stating that whomever gets him well have a real threat for that specific formation.

I don't care if they have schemes for it, a scheme cannot beat execution. ie. The Redskins running the same play over and over and over and over again in the 80's.

Somebody else said the same thing to me. I think it was VetSkins. Anyway, the WildCat worked last year because it hadn't been extensively tried at the pro level before. Nobody was prepared for it. I remember reading that Henning used it for a series while with the Panthers in 2006, which must be right because he went straight to Miami after that.
I can see why you like Vick for that; there's no risk to the actual QB, right? You could do your direct snap, 11 on 11 and never have JCam step on the field. (Hypothetical- not assuming you wanted Vick here)
Of course, opposing defenses would recognize right away what was happening, and overload the side the RB (or erstwhile QB, in this case) generally favors. If you'll recall, most of the WildCat stuff we saw had TE's lining up where the tackle would be. How many variations are there? Maybe 6 or 7 right now? Think about it. Almost half the league started messing with it after watching Miami roll (even Oakland!!)...somebody is going to figure out how to shut it down. Buddy Ryan's sperm is crawling all over the place now.

Anyhow, the thread was about Danny considering Vick, so naturally...I just went with it. No foul intended.
(Incidentally...we used to have a Delaware Blue Chickens fan here that was big on 'Justice' who could probably tell you all about this offense himself. Wonder where he went off to?)

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 10:45 am

tcwest10 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
tcwest10 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:He'd be perfect for the Wild Cat...

Chrissy...you gotta stop with that WildCat stuff. Everybody is going to have a package for it this year. We have other positions of need without having to hire Cesar Millan as a coach for Vick.

I never said that I wanted him here, just stating that whomever gets him well have a real threat for that specific formation.

I don't care if they have schemes for it, a scheme cannot beat execution. ie. The Redskins running the same play over and over and over and over again in the 80's.

Somebody else said the same thing to me. I think it was VetSkins. Anyway, the WildCat worked last year because it hadn't been extensively tried at the pro level before. Nobody was prepared for it. I remember reading that Henning used it for a series while with the Panthers in 2006, which must be right because he went straight to Miami after that.
I can see why you like Vick for that; there's no risk to the actual QB, right? You could do your direct snap, 11 on 11 and never have JCam step on the field. (Hypothetical- not assuming you wanted Vick here)
Of course, opposing defenses would recognize right away what was happening, and overload the side the RB (or erstwhile QB, in this case) generally favors. If you'll recall, most of the WildCat stuff we saw had TE's lining up where the tackle would be. How many variations are there? Maybe 6 or 7 right now? Think about it. Almost half the league started messing with it after watching Miami roll (even Oakland!!)...somebody is going to figure out how to shut it down. Buddy Ryan's sperm is crawling all over the place now.
Anyhow, the thread was about Danny considering Vick, so naturally...I just went with it. No foul intended.
(Incidentally...we used to have a Delaware Blue Chickens fan here that was big on 'Justice' who could probably tell you all about this offense himself. Wonder where he went off to?)

Delaware ran the WingT this is a form of the single wing (a very good O for youth football)
The traditional SW doesn't even have a QB it has a Blocking Back, Fullback, Tailback and a Wingback. All behind a unbalanced line.

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 10:59 am

tcwest10 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
tcwest10 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:He'd be perfect for the Wild Cat...

Chrissy...you gotta stop with that WildCat stuff. Everybody is going to have a package for it this year. We have other positions of need without having to hire Cesar Millan as a coach for Vick.

I never said that I wanted him here, just stating that whomever gets him well have a real threat for that specific formation.

I don't care if they have schemes for it, a scheme cannot beat execution. ie. The Redskins running the same play over and over and over and over again in the 80's.

Somebody else said the same thing to me. I think it was VetSkins. Anyway, the WildCat worked last year because it hadn't been extensively tried at the pro level before. Nobody was prepared for it. I remember reading that Henning used it for a series while with the Panthers in 2006, which must be right because he went straight to Miami after that.
I can see why you like Vick for that; there's no risk to the actual QB, right? You could do your direct snap, 11 on 11 and never have JCam step on the field. (Hypothetical- not assuming you wanted Vick here)
Of course, opposing defenses would recognize right away what was happening, and overload the side the RB (or erstwhile QB, in this case) generally favors. If you'll recall, most of the WildCat stuff we saw had TE's lining up where the tackle would be. How many variations are there? Maybe 6 or 7 right now? Think about it. Almost half the league started messing with it after watching Miami roll (even Oakland!!)...somebody is going to figure out how to shut it down. Buddy Ryan's sperm is crawling all over the place now.
Anyhow, the thread was about Danny considering Vick, so naturally...I just went with it. No foul intended.
(Incidentally...we used to have a Delaware Blue Chickens fan here that was big on 'Justice' who could probably tell you all about this offense himself. Wonder where he went off to?)

The beauty of Vick running the WildCat is that you have a true QB (yes, Vick is a QB, note I didn't say pocket passing QB) running this. You don't have to cover the run 1st and keep an eye on the route runners. This is a QB with wheels that is a true double theat. If we had the right personnel for it, I would be for it, but I like Zorn and what he's trying to do here, so as exciting as it seems, I'm not for Vick in burgundy and gold.

HanburgerHelper · Post by **HanburgerHelper** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:31 am

Oh Jeez, I'm tired of people talking about Vick like he's Satan incarnate.

:roll:

Dogfighting aside, he's still Michael Vick and has mad skills. And he's not OJ Simpson-- he didn't kill his wife and he certainly didn't skate free for what he did. He was crucified for animal cruelty and he lied because he knew he would lose everything. He probably paid more than anyone in the history of the world for animal abuse ever did. And, I got to say that if it wasn't animal cruelty coupled with gambling, I don't think Vick gets near the punishment.

I don't feel bad for his blunder, he deserved it. It was stupid and horribly wrong. But he should be reinstated or the notion you can rehabilitate criminals is a load of crap. If he's not rehabbed, why is he out? Hell, the damn teacher's union reinstates coke addicts to return from a slap on the wrist and teach our kids and those people ARE supposed to be role models. They should get ousted. NFL players are entertainers, nothing more. They're not in a public-appointed power position with our kids, the NFL is a private enterprise (or I would have bought stock years ago) and any contact your kids have with them is up to parents. It's a right to work issue for me. If you do a crime and do the time and are indeed rehabilitated, you shouldn't be banned from working. It's essentially taking away "Pursuit of Happiness". You may as well condemn them for life or execute them.

I'd take Vick on my team if we were barron of any QB talent but we're not and have hope in Campbell and Brennan. If someone did take him, I'd put it in his contract that he couldn't do any interviews and I'd try to curtail the sh*tstorm with some hard admonitions. I'm realistic though. It will never happen. Maybe Vick can play in Canada, but if he plays in the NFL again, it will surprise me.

Vick is like the Pete Rose of Football. The Redskins and other teams probably will black-ball him. I can't even see the Raiders taking him. No organization wants to deal with him because of the media storm he'll generate and the controversy/protests it will create. PETA will be harrassing any team owner who employs Vick on a daily basis because Vick is forever the King of all Animal abusers because of his fame.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:06 pm

Michael Vick is not being kept out of the NFL because of the dog fighting. The NFL (and specifically, Roger Goodell) will decide when, or if, Vick can be a part of the NFL when they are completely satisfied his return will not harm the NFL's image - that and only that is relevant.

stop with the justice stuff - it is over, he's done the time - Vick only needs to convince the NFL (and especially the guy he flat out lied to) that he's a changed man - that is not happening soon, as I think the earliest Goodell has indicated it will be July before he will even begin thinking about that, let alone how long it will take him to make a decision.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:16 pm

I understand that the NFL has to protect it's image, I have no gripe with that.

I have issues with rabid dog lovers that will protest his return after he's served his time.

Bob 0119 · Post by **Bob 0119** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:23 pm

SkinsFreak wrote:That story was put out there by the DC Examiner and the infamous "unnamed league source."

Five months ago, Rick Snider wrote a piece in the DC Examiner suggesting that what the Redskins REALLY should do this offseason was consider signing quarterback Michael Vick, at the time still imprisoned for dog fighting. Fans here were largely displeased at the suggestion.

Writing in the Examiner today, John Keim reports that the team took Snider's advice and considered signing Vick ... for what sounds like about twenty seconds.

According to multiple league sources, the Redskins briefly discussed signing the ex-Falcons quarterback and came to a quick and unanimous conclusion. It would not work here. It's a message league sources say has been consistent since January.

The reasons why not are myriad, according to Keim's league sources, ranging from questions about what position Vick could play to the political nightmare of Vick this close to the nation's capital to the fact that Vick and incumbent quarterback Jason Campbell share an agent. Honestly, as long as the thesis of the article is correct and Vick isn't coming to the team, the question of why barely matter to me at all.

Link

I'm with ya Freak, I fail to see the problem here.

This only goes one of two ways. Either:

A) The story isn't true; everyone knows that what Snyder wants, Snyder gets. This is why he kept Vinny around (as he is nothing more than a yes-man) and why he chose Zorn over a veteran head coach (because Zorn was less likely to tell him "no").

-or-

B) The story is true, and much of what has been stated in A is false. Snyder does leave the football decisions to the people he has hired to make them. :shock:

Well certainly it can't be B can it?

Bob 0119 · Post by **Bob 0119** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:28 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I understand that the NFL has to protect it's image, I have no gripe with that.

I have issues with rabid dog lovers that will protest his return after he's served his time.

well said

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:47 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I have issues with rabid dog lovers

Who loves a rabid dog?

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sun Jun 14, 2009 3:11 am

Probably anybody over 40.
You know..."Old Yeller" ?