The Big Picture: Maddening

[captainwalrus]

I have to disagree with MovieBob based on all the reasons he listed (except the 'it's only a dog' one). I think Vick served his time, is honestly seeking redemption, and had a great season. If he gets picked, I'm not against it.

Also, no, Bill Belocheck (or however you spell it) makes the Pats who they are with his cheating ways of videotaping other team's practices. And Brady hardly makes his team. he has plenty of extra talent there. Ben makes the plays. Who do they have after ben? Dennis Dixon? he's shit. Charlie Batch? He's fucking worse. They got Leftwich, but he's not staying, and in the end, he's no Ben. Offensively, Roethlisberger makes that team. Ben runs, Ben Passes. He makes the time, runs the routes. He makes gold out of shit, while brady just has to throw. Ben Plays physical, he wont be likely to be out, and he'll keep getting up, keep coming back for more. He's a big man, and he's hard to bring down. He shrugs off tackles like its flies, while Brady crumbles.

1. Belichick only videotaped signals the other teams' coaches used during games. He did it openly and didn't realize he was breaking league rules because he was taping something that could be seen by anybody watching the game. The allegation that the Patriots videotaped another team's practice was later proved to be unfounded. The newspaper that ran with the story used a sketchy tip from an unnamed source. They later retracted the story, but now everyone thinks the Patriots are still a bunch of crooks. You know, kind of like how everyone still thinks Roethlisberger's a serial rapist, even though the evidence isn't there.

2. You realize the Steelers opened 3-1 last year with Batch and Dixon, right? Roethlisberger isn't as integral as you make him out to be. The Steelers would probably be an 8 win team based solely on their defense and their decent skill players. And they do have great skill players on offense. Ward is the prototypical slot receiver. Wallace is going to fill Holmes' shoes nicely. Mendenhall broke out as a great RB last year, and Miller is a top ten TE. Roethlisberger is a great QB. If the Steelers had to, they could rely on him to carry the team. But they really don't have to. The Steelers already have a solid team, offensively and defensively, and Roethlisberger is honestly used more as a game manager than anything else.

3. Brady is a great QB. I don't know what extra talent you're talking about for the Pats. They had a terrible defense last year, a mediocre running game, and their best receivers were Welker and two rookie TEs -- essentially, they had no vertical passing game whatsoever. Brady's solid QB play is basically what salvaged their season.

 

[snyderman8910]

Michael Vick tortured and killed animals for sport. Movie Bob owns a hunting and fishing license. There's a difference between eating meat and going out and killing animals for fun. I'm not saying hunting is the worst thing ever, I just don't get out how you can condemn dog-fighting but support hunting. They're both unsavory in my book.

Are you seriously comparing dog fighting to hunting and fishing? When you hunt or fish, you are required to prepare, and wait for extended periods of time. It takes patience, knowledge and skill. Also, both activities are heavily regulated by the government. Hunters are required to have a license and only allowed to hunt during certain times with certain weapons. And if a Game Warden discovers you hunting during the wrong season, or without a license, or any other infraction like having too many kills, be prepared to lose your license and face any number of penalties.

Oh, and hunters and fishermen are known to do more to support wildlife than any other group. They give more money, and their organizations do more to fight to protect wilderness and wildlife than pretty much any other group. Also, every hunter I've ever talked to truly respects and enjoys nature.

By the way. I don't hunt or fish. I find both to be boring and I refuse to wake up early enough to do either activity.

Are you saying that it doesn't take patience, knowledge or skill to dogfight? I imagine the husbandry and training for the dogs are quite complex and require a lot of time, money and skill. If governments regulated dog-fighting the way they do hunting or fishing, would it be seen as acceptable? Probably not. If Michael Vick gave generously to animal rescue organizations would we see what he had done as ok? I understand how the two things seem different and in many ways they are. I think dog-fighting is probably worse than hunting. But I do feel they are similar enough that when movie bob condemns Michael Vick to what it seemed to me was being permanently ostracized, he's being a little hypocritical if he owns a hunting and fishing license. That's all I'm saying.

Well, I disagree. The differences are pretty stark. Hunters have to seek out and wait for the animals they kill. In fact, most governments condone hunting as it keeps local animal populations in check. case in point, in my state it is legal to hunt deer during certain seasons. Part of the reason for this is that deer don't really have any natural predators. Hunting keeps the population from growing too wild preventing the animals from starving (too many deer not enough food). It also prevents car accidents to an extent. Ever hit a deer? Yeah, that's no bug.

Those that conduct dog fights, purchase the animals and "train" them to attack, and even kill, other dogs. Something that I already mentioned is not in their nature. And what you referred to as training is really just torture (maybe I referred to it as training in my full post, I'm not really sure). I fail to see any skill in dog fighting. Its basically organized animal abuse for entertainment. Anyone who treated their animals in such a manner, would have the police at their door asking questions and probably have Animal Welfare coming for their animals.

Bottom line is that Hunting involves seeking out an animal in the wild. A wild, sometimes dangerous animal, in their natural habitat and killing it. Most hunters eat their kills, too. Hunting serves a number of purposes. Dog fighting involves taking a innocent domestic animal and forcing it to do something that it would never do through torture and abuse. All in the name of "fun" and gambling. In my mind, there is a world of difference between the two.

And I would fight any effort to legalize dog fighting. It is sick and depraved.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your opinion. Didn't mean to come off confrontation, if I did. I can actually understand you not liking either. I'm just trying to point out that hunting is not anywhere near as bad as dog fighting. At least, in my book.

I have to disagree with your arguments about the merits of hunting. I think native populations of animals, if left alone tend to take care of themselves, either through predation or through scarcity of resources and hunting to control the population is by no means the most effective way of preventing traffic accidents. These are secondary consequences of hunting, not the primary reason for it.

Some smaller things: I don't agree with the argument that hunting is better because the animals pose some danger because it is still nowhere near a fair fight. Also, on the idea of dogs being forced to do something unnatural: many modern breeds of dogs were initially bred, as guards, hunters or wardogs, and they are descended from violent wild animals.

I think you have a point about the violence of training. That is definitely a difference between hunting and dog-fighting which makes dog-fighting crueler. The main point I was trying to make however was this: In my mind, hunting and dog-fighting are similar enough that I don't feel comfortable with Movie Bob's level of hostility towards Michael Vick. Movie Bob basically says the worst possible thing about Michael Vick: that he is beyond remdemption. I feel like in order to make such a statement, you need to have all your bases covered. You can't say "animal murder is especially sick" (4:03 in the video), and then go around hunting. I understand that some people see a very real difference, but I guess for me the distinction isn't sharp enough to justify what he said.

I didn't feel confronted, and I hope you haven't either.

 

[Ryujisama]

Huh.... I honestly thought this was gonna be about how EA and Madden are scamming folks since the first Madden game that came out, but then it degraded into another rant about how Micheal Vick is apparently the source of all evil/the anti-christ/the devil-incarnate/a douche (whole governments are treating their own people similarly, yet Vick is on the top of the shit-list?). Isn't anyone just tired of hearing about people rant and rave about him anymore? Hell, even PETA's moved on to other topics... Seriously, guys, move on.

P.S. I'm not a Vick supporter (I don't even like football), nor am I a dog hater. I'm just a guy who believes this dead horse just needs to go away. Beating it any further would just defeat the purpose...

 

[Micheal Kandeloussi]

i agree

 

[maninahat]

Especially when they are all forms of optional entertainment for American Joes. It isn't as if the average American in this day and age has to hunt or fish. They freely choose to, at the expense of the suffering of blameless animals. Blood sports are obviously the most unpleasant and cruellest of all these sports, but hunting and fishing are still pretty unpleasant. Just because the hunter "respects nature" or "donates to wildlife" or requires "skills" doesn't change the ultimate fact that we, above all, kill animals for the entertainment of it.

If people didn't hunt local animal populations would explode in some areas, not to mention that taking a hands-on approach encourages people to develop a respect for the animals they eat. It's not strictly necessary, no, but factory farms are so far removed from the natural process that by the time we pick up meat at the store it looks nothing like the animal it came from. It's convenient but in many ways it's also dehumanizing. I'm not against super market meat but I'd never want that to be the only option.

Aside from that, if you want wild game the only way to get it is to hunt for it, and meats like venison are some of the healthiest you can eat. Even if you remove the philosophical aspect from hunting and do it for pure pleasure, you still get something you can use. That alone separates it from dog fighting.

But that still doesn't get away from the fact that you don't need to eat either farmed or hunted animals. Yes, there are less cruel ways about getting meat on your plate, but it is still unpleasant and fairly unecessary in a day and age where practically every fungi, nut and vegetable is available to you (and where they are far more economical/efficient to eat over meat).

I also recognise that culling is a necessary process and that hunting is far more pleasant than resorting to mass farms and slaughterhouses, but I doubt that is the reason people go out to hunt in the first place. Above all, outdoorsmen are doing it for the joy of it. If there are benefits to hunting, that it is fortunate, but these benefits are only secondary to why they really do it. That was the vegan's orignal point: the fact that a man who seeks entertainment by hunting or fishing can't shake the fact that he is ultimately doing it at the expense of the animals to some extent, and thus it is hypocritical of Bob not to let that weigh into his argument about how someone who engages in animal cruelty is totally unforgiveable.

 

[MannyDon]

The man was tried convicted and paid his debt to society in jail he does not owe Bob or anyone else on this forum a fucking thing get over yourselves.
And were the hell did people get this ass backwards perception that dogs are nothing more than these cute cuddily emotional blank slates just waiting to be filled with your love and affection. There are many breeds of dogs out there and they all have different temperaments. Here in australia in some states you cant even own some breeds of dog because the breed is considered A dangerous breed.
And in some parts we have a growing feral dog problem because formally domesticated dogs have started gathering in packs and attacking farm animals and in some cases people.
Don't get me wrong I love dogs but in my opinion any dog is just one empty stomach away from doing something nasty to something or someone.

 

[Xentek]

Is this the big picture? Nah, just some rant.

He served his time; not good enough? Then your beef is with the legislator and not with EA or the athlete.

 

[SamStar42]

The whole 'ALL SPORTS GAMES ARE THE SAME' piss me off so much. Mostly because it's by people who don't even fucking PLAY these games, they just state the same things as everyone else because it's nice to be different. Honestly, play FIFA 10 and then FIFA 11. You can fucking notice the difference straight away.

Would be nice to see people play games before judging them.

 

[Saltyk]

Michael Vick tortured and killed animals for sport. Movie Bob owns a hunting and fishing license. There's a difference between eating meat and going out and killing animals for fun. I'm not saying hunting is the worst thing ever, I just don't get out how you can condemn dog-fighting but support hunting. They're both unsavory in my book.

Are you seriously comparing dog fighting to hunting and fishing? When you hunt or fish, you are required to prepare, and wait for extended periods of time. It takes patience, knowledge and skill. Also, both activities are heavily regulated by the government. Hunters are required to have a license and only allowed to hunt during certain times with certain weapons. And if a Game Warden discovers you hunting during the wrong season, or without a license, or any other infraction like having too many kills, be prepared to lose your license and face any number of penalties.

Oh, and hunters and fishermen are known to do more to support wildlife than any other group. They give more money, and their organizations do more to fight to protect wilderness and wildlife than pretty much any other group. Also, every hunter I've ever talked to truly respects and enjoys nature.

By the way. I don't hunt or fish. I find both to be boring and I refuse to wake up early enough to do either activity.

Are you saying that it doesn't take patience, knowledge or skill to dogfight? I imagine the husbandry and training for the dogs are quite complex and require a lot of time, money and skill. If governments regulated dog-fighting the way they do hunting or fishing, would it be seen as acceptable? Probably not. If Michael Vick gave generously to animal rescue organizations would we see what he had done as ok? I understand how the two things seem different and in many ways they are. I think dog-fighting is probably worse than hunting. But I do feel they are similar enough that when movie bob condemns Michael Vick to what it seemed to me was being permanently ostracized, he's being a little hypocritical if he owns a hunting and fishing license. That's all I'm saying.

Well, I disagree. The differences are pretty stark. Hunters have to seek out and wait for the animals they kill. In fact, most governments condone hunting as it keeps local animal populations in check. case in point, in my state it is legal to hunt deer during certain seasons. Part of the reason for this is that deer don't really have any natural predators. Hunting keeps the population from growing too wild preventing the animals from starving (too many deer not enough food). It also prevents car accidents to an extent. Ever hit a deer? Yeah, that's no bug.

Those that conduct dog fights, purchase the animals and "train" them to attack, and even kill, other dogs. Something that I already mentioned is not in their nature. And what you referred to as training is really just torture (maybe I referred to it as training in my full post, I'm not really sure). I fail to see any skill in dog fighting. Its basically organized animal abuse for entertainment. Anyone who treated their animals in such a manner, would have the police at their door asking questions and probably have Animal Welfare coming for their animals.

Bottom line is that Hunting involves seeking out an animal in the wild. A wild, sometimes dangerous animal, in their natural habitat and killing it. Most hunters eat their kills, too. Hunting serves a number of purposes. Dog fighting involves taking a innocent domestic animal and forcing it to do something that it would never do through torture and abuse. All in the name of "fun" and gambling. In my mind, there is a world of difference between the two.

And I would fight any effort to legalize dog fighting. It is sick and depraved.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your opinion. Didn't mean to come off confrontation, if I did. I can actually understand you not liking either. I'm just trying to point out that hunting is not anywhere near as bad as dog fighting. At least, in my book.

I have to disagree with your arguments about the merits of hunting. I think native populations of animals, if left alone tend to take care of themselves, either through predation or through scarcity of resources and hunting to control the population is by no means the most effective way of preventing traffic accidents. These are secondary consequences of hunting, not the primary reason for it.

Some smaller things: I don't agree with the argument that hunting is better because the animals pose some danger because it is still nowhere near a fair fight. Also, on the idea of dogs being forced to do something unnatural: many modern breeds of dogs were initially bred, as guards, hunters or wardogs, and they are descended from violent wild animals.

I think you have a point about the violence of training. That is definitely a difference between hunting and dog-fighting which makes dog-fighting crueler. The main point I was trying to make however was this: In my mind, hunting and dog-fighting are similar enough that I don't feel comfortable with Movie Bob's level of hostility towards Michael Vick. Movie Bob basically says the worst possible thing about Michael Vick: that he is beyond remdemption. I feel like in order to make such a statement, you need to have all your bases covered. You can't say "animal murder is especially sick" (4:03 in the video), and then go around hunting. I understand that some people see a very real difference, but I guess for me the distinction isn't sharp enough to justify what he said.

I didn't feel confronted, and I hope you haven't either.

I haven't felt confronted. I just like to know that we are both coming at this from a point of mutual respect. Tone doesn't come through in written form too well. And on the internet, the only difference between your best friend and worst enemy is the subject being discussed.
Anyway....

Actually, controlling animal populations that would otherwise explode as they have no natural predators, is the primary reason for hunting. I've heard of plenty of situations where a person could get permission to hunt animals in the off season that were damaging crops. Farmers could ask the government to allow hunters to hunt on their farm for a few days to kill deer that were destroying his crop. There are many animals that that lack any predators today that require hunting to keep them in check. One could argue that the reason this is required is because we previously hunted those predators to extinction or the brink of it. Then again, mountain lions in a major city wouldn't go very well. And even if deer did have a natural predator, we'd probably have to hunt that predator to maintain their population.

I remember a simple lesson from an old biology class. The entire class went outside and we started with one "predator" attacking the "prey" as they ran from from side of a small field to the other. And before long, we had half the class as "predators" completely eliminating the "prey". The point was to show how easy an ecosystem can be set out of whack without balance. By doing something like introducing an animal without natural predators to an environment. Something we have done plenty of times.

I can't say I don't understand not wanting to kill an animal. Personally I don't think I could bring myself to actually kill an animal. Or at least, preform the skinning and preparation required to eat the animal afterward.

Have you ever seen dogs confront each other? Generally speaking they bare their teeth, growl, snap, and may bite, but generally it ends with one dog walking away without any blood being shed. That being said, I have seen dogs act in horrible and aggressive ways towards each other. I once saw three Rottweilers killing a smaller dog once. I'll spare you the details of that. But you do have a point that not all dogs are sweet little lap dogs. That doesn't make forcing them to fight for entertainment any less sick.

For the record, I also find cockfighting and bullfighting equally repugnant. The Bullfighting part might surprise you, but I find that sort of "entertainment" disgusting. Whether they kill the animal or not, isn't the point.

 

[Drake_Dercon]

"trying to turn his life around" does not mean "has turned his life around" or even "is turning his life around".

As far as I know, Vick hasn't done anything to redeem himself other than playing a good season. When he starts donating 50% of his salary to charity, does volunteer work at a homeless centre and subsidizes animal shelters, or at least helps the police find and convict other people that do what he did, I will not consider him redeemed.

A second chance means that you use it to do good.

 

[Siege_TF]

This is a bit much.

You got a huge double standard going here. What sets dogs apart from chickens, cows, birds, mice, squirrels, fish, etc. that we kill/eat every single day? They're cuddly? Pffh.

This is a sentiment I've seen a lot in this topic, or at least the last two pages that I've bothered to read.
This is a joke, right? Mens Rea. Look it up. Let's compare Vik to a livestock farmer. Vik has Mens Rea because he killed animals for fun and profit in a cruel manner. A livestock farmer genreally doesn't because he kills animals for profit in a humane manner.

You are aware that there ARE animal cruelty laws, and they apply to livestock, right?
You DO know that if a cow, chicken, mouse, squirrel, fish (well, maybe not fish. I know they're served live in certain places in Japan, but that's Japan for you), etc is treated inhumanely, particularly for fun the person(s) responcible ARE in breach of various laws and liable to receive legal sanction, RIGHT?

This is not opinion, kneejerk reactionism, or bleedig heart sentimentality; two minutes in google would reveal this as fact;

http://www.khou.com/sports/Two-Texa...-with-livestock-animal-cruelty-119038774.html
BENBROOK, Texas?Two Texas high school baseball players accused of sacrificing chickens in a superstitious ritual to end their slump have been charged with cruelty to livestock animals.

Not a dog, or a cat, or some other cute and cuddly animal. Not even someone's pet chicken. Farm Chickens, a handful out of potentially thousands if it's a chicken farm that they took them from.

http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Cruelty-laws-apply-to-livestock-lawsuit-says-1300764.php
Under state law, animal cruelty can be charged as a felony. But the law exempts livestock handlers from prosecution so long as their actions are in line with "customary animal husbandry practices."

In other words if you're going to kill something you have the legal obligation to kill it quickly and with minimal pain, and not torture it in the persuit of fun, profit, superstition, etc, etc, eventually finishing it off when it can't fulfill those purposes anymore.

There is no double standard here; that's why Vic went to jail and why livestock farmers don't.

 

[wonkify]

Thanks for this, Bob. Some might find hunting and fishing and being protective of companion animals to be at odds but it isn't.

A day in the field with a trained gun dog leaves a person forever marked with love and respect for them. That's in addition to regard for them as pets.

A millionaire who would expend such effort and planning to run the vile enterprise Vick was engaged in is at the very least a sociopath with a chilling lack of empathy for other living creatures.

A fine face for any product's marketing campaign.

This is a truly despicable human being.

 

[Argatroph]

The evil that Vick brought about was still counting against the Falcon's salary cap while he was in prison putting a damper on the amount of quality players we can bring in. Matty Ice is amazing and we've built a sound offense with turner, gonzo, and white but our D is weak. until that gets bolstered 2nd round playoff will be out stopping point

 

[mew4ever23]

I agree with you about the Madden series in general bob - It's disgraceful that EA's be able to get away with releasing the same game with an updated roster for as long as they have been, and anyone actually buying this garbage should be ashamed of themselves.

However, I think that people up in arms about this guy being on the cover are making a mountain out of a molehill. It's just a lackluster sports title that everyone will forget about when they release next year's edition, and I know you said you didn't want to hear this bob, but dammit, I think you need to: He served his time. He paid his debt to society. The fact that you would have him chucked under a bus for something he did years ago, and has since payed for, quite frankly, strikes me as vindictive.

 

[Battenbergcake]

He can die in a damn fire.

Surely being devoured by a cloud of flaming winged piranha's would be much more becoming of Vicks.

 

[Susan Arendt]

He can die in a damn fire.

Surely being devoured by a cloud of flaming winged piranha's would be much more becoming of Vicks.

Someone's been watching old James Cameron movies.

 

[wekill]

although yes i do agree with you that we should not allow him to get to be on the cover of a game or even be still in the NFL
saying this kinda stuff on the internet is going to lose you the video series
just be careful i know im not the first person to post and this will probably be ignored but try to stick to your comics and movies, leave the games to the rest of us.

 

[emeraldrafael]

Snip

1) If we want to hold evidence against Ben like its the word of God, then I see no reason the same shouldnt be extended to the Pats. I'm sorry, if that makes me a bad person, but if there's going to be bias, may as well spread it around. And the fact that you are pointing them out, and purposely so (because there's obviously something wrong if no other coaches publicly do it), you are still cheating, and its still illegal. BUt the Pats got a slap on the wrist for it. Fairness in punishment, and Goodel just does not do it.

2) The Steelers opened three and one last year behind leftwich. And the game that Dixon did start he lost. Hence why they got leftwich.

And actually, Dixon was injured for most of the games that Ben was out, and the game He (leftwich) was out (against the Ravens, fourth game in, and when Ben should have come back, because the Ravens and the Steelers is like... is like... Id ont know, Brazil vs whoever is number two in the world at soccer. Its like Detroit Vs Chicago, or Montreal Vs Boston. Its the Yankees vs Philly. it brings ratings, and would have been perfect for the league's supposed money woes) the steelers lost. So no, the steelers went 0-1 with Batch and Dixon. They went 3-0 with Leftwich.

3) Brady hasnt been as good since his accident, and its highly noticable. He had Moss, but because he cant take some teasing and had a hissy fit, Moss was gotten rid of. And who really did the Steelers have? Ward's old, and he had a horrible season. Mendenhal doesnt fit the game that Ben likes to play, and was hampered (He's a runner, Bens a Passer). There was really no one there, and the Steelers were lucky they had started against weaker teams early on to get that 3-1 record. And as I said, Brady's great, because he has a great team around him (the Pats have been good for more then just last season, and its not all Brady. The Steelers have been almost dependant on both Ben and Troy. Without them, that offense and Defense quickly falls). Put him on a team like, say... the Browns, or... the Broncos, and he wouldnt look so good. Ben is just better. He's all purpose, and he's tougher. He's a guy you can build a franchise around and not worry about your pocket protection. He does it all and he doesnt crumble under the pressure. Sure, he throws the occasion interception, or will miss the player, but that game isnt built for Ben. The Rooneys want to run a running game, and this is a passing league.

I'm not saying he's not a good QB. Or that he's not one that you couldnt build something around. But he's no where near as good as people like to say he is, and he doesnt deserve at least one of his rings (though you could probably debate that with Ben's first ring against Seattle, depending on what you want to believe and how much conspiracy you want to talk about). Especially after his accident, he only went further down. RIght now, He'd probably be my third or fouth pick for a QB, with the three players above him being:

1) Ben Roethlisberger
2) Aaron Rodgers
3) Joe Flacco/Michael Vick (I dont care what you say, the man runs a dman good game, and his wildcats are game breaking winners. You cant even begin to debate that, just looking at his numbers).

Snip

She had DTF written on something like an ID card when she walked in. Thats not lying, or exaggerating. Thats fact, its been proven by eye witness accounts and by records. ALso, Ben treated her very well, and most of her "evidence" is heresay. She at first didnt even wnat to contribute herself to a rape test kit and used the "but I'm nineteen, a small town girl" defense in her favor to play on heart strings. And what are you saying he used violence against her? Ben's a saint, I've met the guy, and somewhat know the guy because I know people he sparringly associates with. Local talent types. Ben did nothing (as was proven, since it didnt even go to court, in either case, and with both cases having barely enough evidence scraped up to even be called a case), and did no harass her. In my (and most other minds that arent clearly retarded or have something against the guy) mind, he's innocent, and never committed. Would you say the same for the Likes of Brady if he was in the same spot? Would BOB say the same about brady if Brady was caught doing what Ben SUPPOSEDLY did, what Vick DID do, or if he was just profoundly STUPID like Plexico? Oh, and its James Harrison that beats his wife, not Ben (though the way I heard, she didnt want his baby baptized or something. I dont know, to be honest, I tune out on Harrison, cause I just dont like him as a person. As a player though, he's the man at what he does). Get your steelers right.

See above for why the steelers offense did well. Leftwich is Ben lite. He's the back up they should have, and the back up they need. Not this Dixon *****, who cant even win a fucking game. The kid (and I'll admit it, he's a kid, and without playing experience in the real game) just has no potential of any calibur when you compare to Ben, and the American Conference eats him alive. His division eats him alive. Dixon will never be able to outplay the likes of Brady, Flacco, even Sanchez (and thats low). he'd have a tough time going against the kid who QBs Cleveland (I wanna say his name is McCoy).

Lets look at some of the other competiton too.

Rodgers - well... He runs a style Similar to Bens really. Thats why I like the guy. So yeah, He would be my number two choice, just cause his mistakes a bit higher then Bens, though if someone said they wanted him number one over all, I wouldnt argue. Its almost really a tie between the two.

Manning, Peyton - He's in a fast decline. Look at the Colts this year. They are built around him, and they were only 10-6, in a pathetically weak division. THey were the only team in their division to even peak over .500. Its small wonder why they make it. Its honestly hard to say who's better between him and his little bro Eli.

Manning, Eli - He has his good days, but hten he has his bad days. and they are BAD. I dont know, I'd go for Eli over Peyton with hardly a second thought, but he'd have to straighten his ship rather quickly if he expects to stay around and compete with he likes of the AFC. And the big boys would just bounce him around like a Pinball.

Romo - I know, you didnt mention him, but he was a popular guy people liked to compare ben to and say Ben was worse. He's garbage. Well, he's hype too, but he's garbage. His little 0-6 (I think) streak proves that.

Brady - I've already said my piece. You take him out of the Pats, the Pats could still perform in an at least 10+ win season (and a 12+ if you go to 18 games). He's good, but he's been declining since his accident, and he's losing that calm he had. You can still see it in Ben, cause he's just got a constant smile on his face. With Brady, he's losing it. he's becoming more serious, more "old". He's gonna crack, and when he does, he's gonna break and crumble. Brady's heading for an emotion pitfall, and there's no telling what kinda effect that will take on his play (it will be Negative, you just dont know how long it will last). And I want someone who can last, and do more then Brady does. Besides, the guy gets bounced around by teams like the Ravens, Steelers, and appearantly the Jets. And he just cant break the grab, or escape the trap.

Brees - you're telling me you have Reggie Bush on your team and you still cant produce yearly? Oh no, I dont care if you won your superbowl the season before last. you crumbled in a game against a team that if it werent for the division leader rule didnt have any business in the playoffs and by all rights should not have been there. You get to go sit in the corner, and you can come back when you show yourself much more clearly.

Also Drew, you'd better right a nice big Thank You card to Old Man Favre, because if he didnt decide to go all gunslinger, you wouldnt even HAVE that superbowl ring you own right now. Who Dat indeed.

Vick - Oh yeah, I did just go there. He's a great wild cat QB, and he played himself a fantastic season. In fact, after talking with someone, I would whole heartedly agree that if he went in every game, and continued his numbers like he did, that man is easily MVP status. However that wild cat is a dangerous weapon, and I wouldnt want to play that kinda game. you're good, I'll admit it, and there's no debating. You've got the numbers, the experience, you've got it all. But that risk, well, see Brett Favre above.

Rivers - Cause his name somehow still seems to be in the running. He's... just no. No no no, go back to the chargers, I dont want to see you. You're a liability, and you will hinder any chance there could be. Just go, and quickly, before you contamenate the rest of my team.

The Defense is a whole other matter. Just like it is on the Pats. And Troy was injured and not up to his talent for a good portion of the year. Plus his play is dependent on the position. Put him in Safety, and he's a monster who will wreck your life. That can be seen just when you watch the game where he jumped the ENTIRE defensive line and pretty much drove the QB down in such a display of awesomeness the Gods themselves would later sing ballads to his achievement (oka, thats a bit much, but still). Put him in his other position, and he's... not so much. He just doesnt get the same options and randomness, which is where he excels. James Harrison is also a big component of their defense, as he's a tank, and isnt afraid to get right up in your face and then send it straight to the turf. The Style play he plays isnt "allowed" currently, but thats just so Goodel can get his 18 game season and for that, it has to look "safe". You watch, if he gets it, plays will get brutal again, and Harrison will shine, only then he'll be worse, cause you'll see him doing it in 18 games, and not his 16 he has going now.

And the Steelers running game wasnt stunning by any means last season. Also, who will you switch to? Batch and Dixon both suck, and they are so clearly numbers 2 and 3 (or hell, even number 3 and 4 with Leftwich, and numbers 4 and 5 if you want to convert Randel El and bring that back [though thats something you dont do for more then maybe a game, and even thats abit much]). If they're centering wasnt there, that line would (and did) crumble (though to give credit, their backup center is a very competent replacement).

Bill Makes that team, not Tom. Mike can say what he wants to, but Ben implements, and overrides. Ben knows better. Ben Plays better. Theres been many a games that Ben has won for his team by going against Mike's decision, while Brady will follow Bill.

 

[Ashley Norris]

How about instead of abusing Michael Vick you do segments on how many legal wars your country has been in lately or other stuff you know nothing about hmm. How does someone with stupid view get to be on the same site as people like Extra Credits who try to move things forward and not backwards?

Michael Vick can have 10,000 dog fights(not that I condone that) and I'd still put him on the front of the new madden game because football is football he isn?t going to be hosting a dog show. How about you try and make more helpful videos and sound like you got some positive brain cells.

I didn't realise Escapist Magazine let personal attacks on people be posted on there sites... I guess no more Extra Credits for me then.