More Overrated - Vick or Roethlisberger

[pudley4]

The game isn't officially over yet, but since they're both blowouts let's get this poll going...

[Homer]

Vick, easy.

[daryn]

agreed, just going by the definition of overrated.

[istewart]

Obviously Vick, but Vick is obviously more valuable as well. I mean, how often do you hear the Michael Vick experience? And then you look at his passing stats...

[Mano]

I don't think anybody was rating Rothlisberger as a "great" QB just yet, just were all amazed that he seemed to be able to avoid making typical rookie mistakes, and wouldn't lose the game for you, which is what he needed to do with the team he was on this season. Unfortunately, that has all changed in the playoffs, and we are seeing why rookie QB's don't usually fare well in the NFL. Hope this performance doesn't do him permanent damage, as I think he has shown potential to be a decent QB.

[ClaytonN]

Vick, only because Roethlessberger wasn't nearly as hyper.

[Nottom]

I vote for Roethlisberger.

Basically I think Pittsburg got to the Championship game dispite the fact that Big Ben was their quarterback. It is hard to argue that the Falcons could be there without Vick.

Vick gets a lot of hype, but no one really considers him a great quarterback. People always just talk about how exciting he is to watch.

Then again, I'm from Va Tech so I could be a bit biased.

[Daliman]

Roethlisberger gets a bit of a pass here because he had the bad thumb, and his expectations are not as high. Vick is supposedly the Messiah, and I have have been saying all along that if a team can contain him at all, he is a subpar QB, period. Ben is a solid QB with many good years ahead of him.

[jakethebake]

I don't think anyone is overrating Ben R. now.

[Clarkmeister]

Manning. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Rick Diesel]

I don't think either of them is even close to being overrated at all.

Vick has a team that does not have one half decent receiver on it (and don't try to say that Peerless Price is any good, he sucks).

Ben is a rookie, and although played well most of the season, nobody was rating him anywhere near the top of the QBs.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Vick has a team that does not have one half decent receiver on it (and don't try to say that Peerless Price is any good, he sucks).

[/ QUOTE ]
He has "half-decent" receivers. He'd need great receivers to make him look good.

[ QUOTE ]
Ben is a rookie, and although played well most of the season, nobody was rating him anywhere near the top of the QBs.

[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. Give him time.

[CCx]

Going to have to go with Vick, who some talking heads were calling the "Michael Jordan" of the NFL before the game this week.

[Shajen]

[ QUOTE ]
Going to have to go with Vick, who some talking heads were calling the "Michael Jordan" of the NFL before the game this week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even Mike couldn't do it without Pippen.

I guess I need to go dig up my post in Clark's thread on Vick now huh?

Over-rated? Depends on your definition of the word.

Either way, my vote goes to Manning.

[Nottom]

Did anybody who picked Vick notice the Falcons record last year? There was really only 1 noticable difference between that team and the ones that won playoff games in the 2 surrounding seasons.

I have a hard time seeing how someone who makes that kind of impact on his team can be overrated. He might not be a great "quarterback" but he is definately a great player.

[ClaytonN]

The question is more overrated.

That one has to go to Ben. He hasn't been nearly as hyped. He might damn well be underrated.

[XXXXING FISH]

VICK - over paid

[Gatts]

[ QUOTE ]
Did anybody who picked Vick notice the Falcons record last year? There was really only 1 noticable difference between that team and the ones that won playoff games in the 2 surrounding seasons.

I have a hard time seeing how someone who makes that kind of impact on his team can be overrated. He might not be a great "quarterback" but he is definately a great player.

[/ QUOTE ]

This year, the Birds had an average D, while last year, they had one of the worst in the league. In 2002, they had an above average one.

It's also important to remember that Atlanta didn't even have something approaching competent at QB last year.

Last year they were 3 games under and this year they're three games over, let's call it 4 since Vick sat out the last 2. 7 game improvement, 2-3 is probably the defense, so Vick is say, 4-5 games over Kurt Kittner. This is a VERY simplistic look at it that probably overstates Vick's value, but why is being worth 4 games over Kurt Kittner so amazing?

[CORed]

Your forgetting Jake Plummer. Oh wait, you can't be overrated if nobody (except Mike Shanahan) thinks you're worth [censored].

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]

Last year they were 3 games under and this year they're three games over, let's call it 4 since Vick sat out the last 2. 7 game improvement, 2-3 is probably the defense, so Vick is say, 4-5 games over Kurt Kittner.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of their wins last year came after Vicks return so this comparison is completely bogus. They went 3-1 (to finish 5-11) after his return including a win over the NFC champion Panthers.

I'm pretty sure their defense is basically the same personel as it was last year (although I'm not positive about this). The main reason it was sooo bad last year is becasue their offense was terrible and couldn't sustain anything, which of course wears down the defense and make it look much worse than it actually was.

[ClaytonN]

Exactly. The best defense is a good offense. Our defense was terrible because our T.O.P. was one of the worst in the league last year.

With the #1 rushing attack in the league, it's easy to see why the defense improved. Add the new defensive coordinator (the guy from the Packers) and changing from a 3-4 to a 4-3.

But I digress.

[Gatts]

Well, yeah, but the thing is, Atlanta played like [censored] last year, not because they were wthout Vick, but because they were stuck with Kurt Kittner.

If you put Kurt Kittner on the Colts, they probably go like 3-13. So does that make Peyton Manning the MVP? How much is Peyton Manning worth? Well, a lot, especially compared to a bum.

Think about it in baseball. Decent 1B hitter goes down and gets replaced by my grandmother who is the worst player in the history of the league. Decent guy looks pretty freakin' valuable. But you don't compare a player to his replacement to determine his worth, you compare him to the league as a whole at his position.

So instead of comparing Vick's Falcons to Vickless Falcons, you'd have to compare Vick's otherwise average team to an average team, which as of right now, is nearly impossible.

[jdl22]

I voted for Vick but I don't think either are overrated.

Vick is the most exciting player in football but as a quarterback isn't really rated that highly. On talk shows like PTI they always put Vick below the guys like Brady and McNabb and above crappy guys like Plummer. I think that's about where he is.

Roethlisberger isn't overrated either. People talk a lot about his record but when talking about him they tend to put him right where he belongs. During the season it was mainly that he was a solid quarterback for a rookie and the Steelers made life easy for him with the running game and D. In the postseason everybody on tv said he was terrible, it wasn't like with Favre where he was horrific and the guys cut him slack.

I think both get too much attention and perhaps people that don't follow the game much overrate these guys. Vick gets attention because he is fun to watch. Roethlisberger is some sort of cult hero here in Pittsburgh but people following the team closely don't actually think he's better than most of the qb's in the league.