In case you're anti-televisionist or you've just been distracted by the Michael Phelps drama, I'll give you a quick rundown on a situation that's been in the NFL news. The Vikings are in need of a quarterback as Tavaris Jackson has been nothing short of disappointing. Jackson also tore his MCL, which could affect his ability although it's said he won't miss any games. Brett Favre claims to be retired, so we'll talk about him when he changes his mind again here in about six months. It's obvious that the Vikings only offense comes from running back Adrian Peterson, and 31 other teams know that. That's why the Vikings are so desperate to get a better QB than current starter Sage Rosenfels, to balance out the offense. No offense, Sage, I think everyone can agree that you have the coolest name out of all the quarterbacks. With Michael Vick eligible to play starting Week 6, he HAS to be on the radar for Minnesota.
So curious to see what fellow writers have to say, I've asked a few different bloggers what they would do if they were the Vikings GM--would they pursue Vick, risking fan support and locker room distractions to get a proven QB? Vick is likely pretty rusty, but his trainers have come up with a new system to get his arm back to full strength. Instead of throwing footballs to his receivers he's been throwing bones to his retrievers, and it seems to be generating positive results.
No, I'm kidding, but here's their answers:
Bill Williamson, ESPN.COM
It’s not about what I think the Vikings should do, it’s what I think they will do and I don’t think Vick will be signed. The Vikings may be desperate, but the Vikings want a new stadium. They will not, I don’t think, risk losing in the court of public opinion, pursuing Vick just because of a need .I really don’t see it happening.
Shakey1, STYLE POINTS
Michael Vick is an off the wall talent who can electrify an offense with just the threat of him handling the ball. Most teams would kill for a playmaker of his caliber, and now they can get their hands on the best in the game for free.
Teams need to look past his obvious shortcomings and give him a shot. If it doesn't work out, they can cut him and wash their hands of the situation. The Vikings should be jumping up and down at the thought of adding a weapon like Vick to their quarterbacking crew. But they'll probably just sign Jeff George and call it a day.
paneech1472, PANEECH
I think it might be easier to lure Favre back into football than to assimilate Vick back into a role of acceptance with any NFL team.
Vick would be helpful and would remind the Vikes faithful of a young Randall Cunningham, but from a PR standpoint, the move would be a "dog".
Pat Yasinskas, ESPN.COM
If I were the Minnesota Vikings, I would not pursue Michael Vick. He would come with distractions from the media and the protest groups. He's a wonderful athlete, but he's been out of football completely for two years. There's no way he can come in and pick up the offense fast enough to help this season. Go out and look for other available veterans and watch who comes available later when teams have to release players.
MidwayIllustrated.com, MONSTERS OF MIDWAY ILLUSTRATED
Nope I would not pursue Michael Vick. From a purely football stand point I wouldn't do it. Not for anything related to his legal troubles, just his inability to be a good solid accurate QB.
Vick can run the ball, but what the Vikings need is that other dimension of a QB who is good with his throws, accurate and can consistently move the chains to take the heat off of Adrian Peterson.
Michael Vick in my opinion does not bring that type of experience and talent to the table.
There you have it, folks. The majority say no to Vick, but only time will tell what happens to the scrambler. Feel free to tell me what you think!
Airdisch
