suuure...manning and then vick....if you are looking to lose your league.
I've been saying over and over, you can't look at Vick's stats as a whole. You have to look game by game.
1) never threw for more than 300 yards (3 games with less than 100 yards passing)
2) 6 games he didnt throw any TDs
3) 3 times he threw more INTs than TDs
4) only 5 games of multiple TDs
5) 11 of his 20 total TDs thrown happened in 3 games (are you sure which games this will happen???)
6) wracked up a good amount of rushing yards, but only 2 TDs
7) had a 3 game stretch where he threw 2 INTs and 0 TDs (and fumbled 5 times)
8) 4 games his completions didn't reach double digits
9) NO games his completed more than 20 passes
10) Less than half of his games went without and INT (7)
11) Of those 7 games, he fumbled in 3 of those games
I hate when ppl use the phrase "take out this game and he's..." .....BUT, take out the Pittsburgh and Cincy game, and Vick's stats would be completely horrible. Who knew he'd throw 7 TDs v 2 INTs in a two game stretch, especially against a D like Pittsburgh? If you say you, you're lying! Vick is hit or miss...mostly miss... so he has never, and never will be on one of my teams!
To be fair, i'll compare Vick to a QB I'm high on this year, but I haven't heard much buzz around yet. Phillip Rivers. The exact same stats...
1) had 2 300 yard games (only 1 game under 100 yrds)
2) 3 games he didnt throw any TDs
3) 1 times he threw more INTs than TDs
4) 8 games of multiple TDs
5) only threw for more than 2 TDs once (3) which means his TDs are spread out over the season (22TDs v vick's 20)
6) not a runner, so vick's 2 TDs beat him out
7) had only 2 games he threw more than one INT
8) 2 games his completions didn't reach double digits
9) 5 games he completed more than 20 passes
10) 9 games without an INT
11) fumbled 1 more time than Vick
If I can't get one of the big scorer QBs, I prefer to look for one who spreads his stats out over the season to help me win multiple games instead of one that will win me 2 games single-handedly.