Skip to main content

Vince Young fans already claiming he should start over Michael Vick. Are fans really this stupid?

I love how fickle and hyperbolic many fans and analysts are. I also love how quarterbacks seem to be the epitome of the false dilemma informal fallacy. They're either the savior or the scapegoat. There's seemingly nothing in-between, even though there obviously is.

This has happened in Denver in recent weeks. After inserting Tim Tebow at quarterback, the Broncos are 4-1 and a game back of AFC West-leading Oakland. So, it's therefore obvious that Tebow is the sole reason for the Broncos rise in the standings, right? Last night, Vince Young led the Philadelphia Eagles to a 17-10 victory against the New York Giants to bring them within two games of NFC East-leading New York and Dallas. He must be the reason for the big win last night, right? Sorry, wrong in both cases.

Outside of their 38-point effort against the Oakland Raiders, the Broncos have scored the following point totals in Tebow's other four outings: 10, 17, 17 and 18. That's right. In four of their five games with him as starter, the Broncos have scored a total of 62 points or an average of 15.5 per game. They are 3-1 in those contests. At 15.5 points a game, Denver would place 29th in the NFL (out of 32 teams) in points per game., ahead of only Cleveland (14.5), Indianapolis (13.1), Jacksonville (12.5) and St. Louis (12.0). For the record, these four teams are a combined 9-31 (.225) on the season. Even if we include that 38-point game against the Raiders, the Broncos are averaging only 20.0 points a game with Tebow at the helm and that would rank them 22nd in the league (out of 32), tied with Minnesota. In the four wins with Tebow at quarterback, the Broncos have allowed 62 points (15.5 per). This would rank them second, just being San Francisco (14.5). Do we still really want to make the claim that Tebow is the reason for the Broncos' success, when the team has ranked near the very bottom in the league in points scored while he's been the starting quarterback and the defense has allowed the second fewest points in their four victories with Tebow? I don't think so.

In last night's game, the Eagles only scored 17 points. Young was intercepted three times, once in the end zone and if not for an Andy Reid-challenge, would have ended up with four interceptions for the game. The guy has thrown 37 passes this year and has been picked off 4 times, which is about 1 every 9 pass attempts (10.8%). Even with Vick having an off-year in terms of interceptions, as he has thrown 11 to this point in the season, he has thrown 300 passes, so that equates to being picked off 3.7% of the time, far less than Young's 10.8%. In 8 of the 9 games where Vick has started for the Eagles, the team has scored at least 17 points, scoring more than that total in 7 of 9, including 31 against St. Louis and Atlanta, 34 versus Dallas, 24 against Chicago and Buffalo (when they were playing well) and 23 against the top defense in the league in San Francisco. The Eagles have led going into the 4th quarter in 9 of 10 games this year. Sure, the blame will rest on Vick's shoulders for not bringing the team back when they lost the lead, but who's fault is it mainly that the team lost their leads in the first place? The defense. With Vick as starter, Philadelphia allowed 35 points to Atlanta, 29 to the Giants, 24 to San Francisco, 31 to Buffalo and 30 to Chicago, all five games ending in losses. Last night? Outside of their 34-7 win over Dallas three weeks prior, the Eagles' defense allowed the fewest points they have all season, against the explosive Giants offense. It's much easier to win games when your opponent scores 10 points as opposed to 24+.

It all comes down to defense. The Eagles would likely be in first place in the NFC East if they played better defensively this year. The Broncos would be looking at a top 5 draft pick if their defense didn't play so well these past few weeks. It doesn't matter who starts for the Philadelphia Eagles if their defense allows 30 points. However, given that possibility, Vince Young can't lead the team to enough points to counter a poor defensive effort like Michael Vick can. Vick is a much more effective runner than Young, has better throwing mechanics, a stronger arm and with all of that, more accuracy throwing the football. He had a rotten game in Philly's 21-17 loss to the Arizona Cardinals, but then again, he played all but two plays of the game with a pair of broken ribs. If he's healthy next Sunday, there's no question about it - Andy Reid should start Vick over Young, and if the defensive continues to play like they did last night, the Eagles could make what seemed like a virtually impossible push to the playoffs. In the meantime, let's cut it out with the quarterback false dilemma and hyperbolic language. It's about protecting the quarterback and playing solid defense.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"