Even though Michael Vick will start Sunday against the Giants in the Eagles' season finale, many have closed the book on his tenure with the team. But the Eagles could decide to bring him back for 2013.
»Read story: Eagles could decide to keep Michael Vick
»Read story: Eagles could decide to keep Michael Vick
Comments (85)
OK. According to this post, Foles is an unknown. So why does that mean keep Vick? We know Vick.- stay away from chip kelly and his gimmicky offense and goodbye to vick too too short and too fragile to survive behind this O line— your_mom_says_hi!
- No coach, espescially a new kid on the block, will want to risk what could be his one chance as head coach in the nfl on coach killer Vick...not saying everything was his fault but it begins and ends with Vick...stick with foles or draft smith or Barkley...might be able to get one with a top 3 pick, which could easily be attained through a trade— Joey1233
- Why in the world would the Birds want to keep a washed up, fragile QB who can no longer run like he once could? Even when he could use his legs he wasn't really a big time winner so why would the Eagles want him back especially for that kind of money?— vietnamvet
- And the Titanic could have missed the Iceberg.....— STEPHEN1988
- If the Eagles were in position to compete for the Super Bowl next year, and Vick was a necessary component, then this discussion would have merit. Since the Eagles aren't, and Vick isn't, the discussion has none.— Boru
- Too small, too old, too fragile- and lacks "Football Intelligence". What is the upside?— clayboy
Thats great. So the "most important" thing is rehabilitating a convicted felon instead of winning a freaking superbowl. Just like keeping your 4.5 million a year a job, or making sure your drug addicted son is employed with a team. Those are the most important things. 0 Superbowls, and rehabilitating convicted felons is clearly the GOLD STANDARD OF ANY PROFESSIONAL SPORT. Andy should become a prison Warden where he can still make a good salary of 100,000 dollars while rehabilitating so many more people with issues while still winning 0 superbowls. Dream Job.- That's a stupid article, but I guess it is the holidays and McLane wanted to file something quickly. Foles "displayed some bad tendencies" over six games? I didn't exactly see them. I saw constant improvement, which is the opposite of "tendencies". Compare Foles vs. Haslett/Washington #1 and #2. Meanwhile, Vick displayed some bad tendencies since 2001 and is one of the oldest QBs in the game. Why would the Eagles want to double down on one of the main culprits behind their demise?— jtj06
- well technically, Foles did display some bad tendencies, but I agree that it would be better to go with Foles who can still improve, then Vick who wont. At all. The only chance Mike Vick stays is if Chip Kelly brings his garbage offense here, which would really result in an amazing amount of superbowls. Please no Vick, no Kelly, no gimmicks, just RUN THE BALL AND PLAY DEFENSE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 14 YEARS. Gimmicks dont win superbowls and I have seen too many for the last 14 freaking years. The Gold has been thrown into the garbage, and is found to actually be worthless.
- Agree - no gimmicks. They need a fresh start - QB and coach - not a fresh gimmick. My biggest problem is that when gimmicks fail, you are stuck with guys that can't play their position the way it really needs to be performed. So, not only does it fail, you have to start from scratch again. Charlie, the Eagles did run the ball in the early days of McNabb and they played some excellent D in the days of Jim Johnson.
- thats partially true, but the problem is they never did both in conjunciton lol, and really Reid never CALLED less then 60% passing, it was just that with a healthy young McNabb the offense worked alot better with him running it a fair amount (becoming a "run" play). After 04, you didnt get that any more and you saw the weaker results.
- Foles showed a tendency to lead a team with no running, coaching, a crappy defense, and special teams in disarray to last second comebacks. I saw him do some things poorly and then improve on those things later. That's the only tendencies I saw, none of those are bad. — jtj06
- Foles did a fine job and this schmuck McLane obviously has some type of agenda to question Foles' ability and then to hype Vick who was a miserable turnover machine who is not qb savvy enough to take any team deep into the playoffs. When you read a guy like McCalne you have to ask yourself does he really have any clue about the NFL or does he write just for the sake of writing— uts
- McLane is the Eagles stenographer not a beat reporter. This is what the team is prepping the fan base for. What do you expect?
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners:
Powered By:
