IF THE NFL WERE TO START OVER...

[eaglesrule]

"If I'm an owner, I'm in the business of selling tickets and winning games. I don't really care how many 300 yard passing games my quarterback has.

Furthermore, if you draft another top QB.. they need players around them to make the whole system work. Peyton wouldn't be Peyton without Edge, Marvin, and a good o-line. And Daunte and Donovan wouldn't be as great without the two best receivers in the league."

Well, I agree toa point. Culpepper and donovan to a greater extent , mcnabb have won games without the big receiver. don't try and say donovan is a product of owens. today excluded, he has won a hell of a lot of games for the eagles sans owens.

I hate to say it, I think the number one pick woudl be vick -- and I hasten to add that it isn't a football decision, its a marketing one.

If it were me, it would probably be peyton.

[Vikes_Fan2823]

1. Ray Lewis
2. Peyton Manning
3. LaDainian Tomlinson
4. Julius Peppers
5. Daunte Culpepper
6. Ed Reed
7. Dwight Freeny
8. Walter Jones
9. Tom Brady
10. Randy Moss

But that's just if you want to be a competitive team. If you are looking for sell jerseys and fill stadiums, you get Michael Vick or Donovan McNabb, etc.

[Ironhorse75]

I hate to say it, I think the number one pick woudl be vick

I think someone needs to put this in their sig and save it forever.

But it really is amazing how fast he and Blank turned that franchise around.

They had a piece on Arthur and Vick's first year he was playing for more people in his college era than his professional home games.

[Flockers]

nobody thinks tom brady deserves to be in any top 10...i mean c'mon

Yeah, but Vick does

No team in their right mind would take Vick over Culpepper or McNabb.

As an unbiased Seahawks fan.. if I had a choice out of any player in the league to put on my team with the first overall choice.. I would take Michael Vick.

McGahee.

[maddog60]

Here's a stat for you: Falcons 12-4 with Vick, 4-12 without Vick.

Show me some proof Vick actually was the factor that made that difference, otherwise it's useless.

If I'm an owner, I'm in the business of selling tickets and winning games. I don't really care how many 300 yard passing games my quarterback has.

Fair enough. From a marketing perspective, sure, Vick is a player you won't. However, if you're trying to build a good solid winning football team, you'd be better off with Big Ben than with a 4th year vet who can't put up the numbers that rookie did and still doesn't think enough to protect the ball.

And Daunte and Donovan wouldn't be as great without the two best receivers in the league. Vick does it with a couple decent running backs, one good tight end, no receivers, and a below average o-line.

Look at your statistics. Donovan McNabb got the job done, produced better statistics than Vick has ever all with Thrash and Pinkston. You can make the claim that Daunte may not be so great without Randy, but McNabb spent his time proving he can win with the worst WR corps in the NFL for about 3 years.

[SeaWolf]

1) Manning
2) Culpepper
3) McNabb
4) Vick
5) Moss
6) Tomlinson
7) Brady
8) Ray Lewis
9) Ogden
10) Walter Jones

[CC]

Here's a stat for you: Falcons 12-4 with Vick, 4-12 without Vick.

Show me some proof Vick actually was the factor that made that difference, otherwise it's useless.

You can't just mark that down to coincidence, obviously Vick has a lot more of an effect on his team than anyone else realises.

[eaglesrule]

yea, vick does have a big effect. but usually a revamped defense and a new coach can do that too. Those are not insignifcant factors. and given that the o only scored 3 points more than the d let up, I am inlcined that the defense is the thing that really won it for them.

[hastur]

my top 10 list would be all linemen, offense and defense, except for a QB.

All coaches start rebuilding with linemen. They do this for a living. We don't. I will assume they know more than us.

Randy Moss??? are you guys nuts? he wouldn't make my top 50. He's a great receiver, yes, but not someone to build a team around.

[maddog60]

You can't just mark that down to coincidence, obviously Vick has a lot more of an effect on his team than anyone else realises.

I don't chalk it up to coincidence as Vick is clearly better than Doug Johnson, but without any proof you can't give Vick credit for the difference (certainly not the entire difference) when:

a) The defense played substantially better.
b) The team had a new head coach
c) They acquired Denver's O-line coach.
d) Vick's numbers come out to about the same as Quincy Carter's last year. Last time I checked, no one is building a team around him.

Giving Michael Vick no credit for any of those wins would be wrong, but giving him full credit is just as ludicrous.