NICK OR VICK?
The most frequently asked question over the next week will not be about the government shutdown. It will have nothing to do with The Voice, Breaking Bad, or any kind of regular television show. And the most frequently asked question will have nothing to do with the NHL, the MLB playoffs or even the Halloween season. No, the most frequently discussed–and debated– question over the next several days in Eastern Pennsylvania will be: Who should be the starting quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles–Michael Vick or Nick Foles?
The question is an old one, posed by fans in many NFL cities each year, every year, in the modern football era. It’s sometimes even discussed with regards to your favorite collegiate or scholastic teams. But Philadelphia is not your ordinary sports town, and sports fans in the Delaware and Lehigh Valleys are the most passionate fans in the world. The fact that the Eagles find themselves tied with their NFC East rival Cowboys with a 2-0 division record, combined with Nick Foles’ solid play in Vick’s medically-induced absence this past Sunday against Tampa Bay, will push this question to the forefront of everyone’s mind.
While I’m not going to try to persuade you to root for one player over the other, there is a very important decision you have to first make before arriving at your pick:
“What should be the Eagles’ goal this season?”
There’s many reasons why people choose one quarterback or the other, but you first must answer that question before you consider whom Chip Kelly should select for this Sunday’s key game against another division opponent.
When a high school or college coach takes over a program, I usually encourage fans to give a new head coach at least three to four years to implement a system, and to establish their “type” of players. In the NFL, there’s not as much room for patience. However, Eagles fans must have expected 2013 to be a honeymoon year for Kelly, with no realistic expectations better than seven or eight wins–even in the incredibly inept NFC East. That being said, there is absolutely NO SHOT the Birds win more than one playoff game this year–AT BEST.
If you think this team, with its pathetic defense and insufficient wide receiving corp (without Jeremy Maclin), has any shot of exceeding that goal, your thoughts on the quarterbacks shouldn’t even be considered. The team could resign Vick at season’s end, so simply naming Foles as the guy because he’s younger and under contract for next season does not give you the best answer.
The Eagles have to worry about who will be the best signal caller for 2014 and beyond, and that’s what you need to consider. It’s not about winning this Sunday, or next Sunday, or the week after that. It’s not about dog-fighting, money or race. Foles’ age, his decision making, and his accuracy should be factored into your decision. For Vick, his dynamic presence, laser-arm, his favorable relationship with his teammates and his mobility are his assets. But which of these attributes will best lead this team a year or two from now? That should determine who you want to see start the rest of this season.
Unless you want the Birds to lose–and lose often–to enhance their draft selections in the offseason. A deficiency in this year’s quarterback could actually help Philadelphia’s rebuilding process by giving them the ability to draft a blue chip prospect–maybe even a quarterback–for next year and beyond.
But this constant battle that will be stimulating talk shows (and yes, we’ll be addressing this–briefly–on Thursday’s RCN SportsTalk at 6pm) over the coming days and weeks, will largely be a waste of time.
Besides, whichever quarterback doesn’t start for the Eagles this season could always play shooting guard for the 76ers.