I just read two poorly-formulated blog posts about the Philadelphia Eagles signing Michael Vick.
My own initial reaction when I learned the news at 8:40 PM (4 minutes after the story broke on ESPN.com) was one of disgust and displeasure. That was my first reaction. 5 hours later I have a more optimistic opinion in terms of football, which is why I am waiting until now to write my own blog post about it. So before I start complaining about Mike Freeman and Pete Prisco, let me let you in on my view.
There is no way the Eagles signed Vick to give McNabb competition. They just gave McNabb an raise. Vick has been out of not only the NFL for the past 2 years, but been out of the free world for that long. He is not in football shape, and I would be willing to bet that he is not in shape in general at the moment. He has proven in the past that he can be a tremendous athlete. The Eagles will most likely be using him as a supplemental utility man, and I would also be suprised to see him make an impact this year. They'll find a place for him in the offense and McNabb will be the quarterback in the long run.
But I tell you what this is not: a shot at Donovan McNabb. In his press conference he stated a number of times that he lobbied for Vick to be signed! McNabb and Vick have had a mentor-player type relationship throughout Vick's career dating back to McNabb's days at Syracuse. Does this put pressure on McNabb to perform, having a capable backup behind him? Yeah, it sure does, but this is not a move that disrespects McNabb like the Kolb drafting did, because McNabb pulled for the move to be made.
That's my take. Now read these two articles by Pete Prisco and Mike Freeman:
Prisco - http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/
Freeman - http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/
Note the times on the initial posts. If they would have waited to write these articles until after the game they would have realized in McNabb's press conference that he lobbied for the move. It wasn't a suprise to McNabb. If I were a reporter, I would wait to get my facts straight before I write my bonehead opinion in a story with speculation used as substitutes for facts. This is more about Prisco's post because I think had he waited, he would have come up with something more meaningful to say on the subject.
As for Freeman. If you've been to this site enough and read enough of his boneheaded opinions about sports, you won't find this to be a suprise. The typical read-more-into-it-than-you-need-to-
or-probably-should scenario if you ask me. Instead of writing about what Vick can or can't bring to the Eagles, talking about what kind of football sense this makes, no he chose to add a chapter to the same story we've been hearing for the past 10 years in Philadelphis, with the whole "booed at the draft" bit for about the 4,000th time. I'm going to agree that the move puts more pressure on McNabb to perform, but compared to the Kolb fiasco from last year, this move probably disrespected Freeman more than it disrespected McNabb.
What I am suprised to see is that no one is talking about the PR situation that is going to happen. How will the fans react? I mean, PETA has already released a statement saying that they are "disappointed with the Eagles for signing someone who hangs dogs..." etc. etc. blah blah shut up already. What he did was wrong, yes. But for goodness sake, PETA, give him a shot to right his ways, to prove that he is a changed person. The fan reaction is probably going to be mixed, I wouldn't be suprised if boos rain down on him, and I wouldn't be suprised to see protesters at Eagles events. Is this going to have an effect on the team? Write about that someone, and not the same old crap we see every other day in Philly.
Moral: Wait, get your facts straight, and stop forming your opinions based on speculation and nothing. You'll save yourself some embarassment.