Vick signs with Eagles
In a move that could only be made in the dog days of summer the Eagles have signed Michael Vick to a two year deal. Immediately team officials announced the introduction of dollar dog nights for Sunday and Monday night games this season. Fearing a new fan ire weapon, the Philadelphia Police have banned fans from carrying in frozen hot dogs. Instead fans with have to throw official NFL player safe foam hot dogs which can be purchased at the stadium. Batteries and snow balls are still allowed.
I guess this means Kolb is out?I can’t believe they gave him 1.2mil. Maybe that is the minimum for a Vet of his years ?
Actually it's 1.6 mil for year one- league min. Year two, an option year is 5.2 mil.
The eagles don't need another quarterback but decide to throw Vick a bone. Time is running out for Reid/McNabb. No Superbowl this year and Vick may be the starter next season for a new coach. McNabb will definately be gone.Oh ok. He will blow through that 1.6mil in 6 months the way he spends money. I actually think Kolb can be a good QB. You are right, this is the end of the line for McNabb and Reid. Westbrook is wearing down also.
Maybe he and Pac Man can hit the "scrip club".Oh ok. He will blow through that 1.6mil in 6 months the way he spends money. I actually think Kolb can be a good QB. You are right, this is the end of the line for McNabb and Reid. Westbrook is wearing down also.
I’m not an Eagle fan, but I think McNabb is a great quarterback. Seriously, is Vick someone that the Eagles need to have right now? They made it to the NFC championship game last year and lost because of their D, not McNabb.
Oh well, as a Pats fan, I enjoyed watching Brady sitting back in the pocket picking apart the Eagles this week. Yeah, I know it’s only preseason.
Agree, I was pointing the cold hard fact that unless they win, it's over. Remember last season when it looked like McNabb and Reid wouldn't even make it through the season? Personally, i like them both and i'm trying to figue out why they need Vick? Outside of getting a star player on the cheap? Still, McNabb doesn't respond well to standing on the side lines. If the use Vick to complement McNabb i think that will work. If they pull McNabb and put in Vick, fireworks!Eagles fans are far too critical of McNabb/Reid.
McNabb arguably is a Hall of Famer. I cant believe how he is treated sometimes. They should keep him until he calls it quits, but like Bondguy said, they were trying to blow the thing up last year until they caught fire. Vick should be in for trick plays and kick returns. If he steals legitimate snaps from Mcnabb that is a joke. Most NFL owners are complete idiots when it comes to football. Coughlin was having his job threatened and then they won it all. Dungy got canned when he shouldn't have. John Fox was on the ropes last year and then they win the division.
[quote=Ron 14]
McNabb arguably is a Hall of Famer.
[/quote] LMAO!!!! Surely you jest...[quote=BerkshireBull][quote=Ron 14]
McNabb arguably is a Hall of Famer.
[/quote] LMAO!!!! Surely you jest... [/quote] 5 Pro bowls, 5 conference championship appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance, 30,000 passing yards, lowest interception/pass attempt ratio in NFL HISTORY, 65% career win %, NFL record holder for most consecutive completions, the primary performer on two of the best plays in NFL history (4th and 26, and the 14 second scramble and hail mary vs. the Cowboys in Monday night), and had a decent receiver for ONE year out of his 10 year career. I'd say he has credentials that would warrant a lengthy discussion.There you have it. Thank you.
And playing in front of a fan base that would want him crucified at the drop of a hat. Its a wonder he signed with us as quick as he did after getting drafted the way he was booed. Imagine going to work every day and having 10-15 e-mails in your box from pissed off clients who think you’re insane for putting them in some mutual fund that underperformed the market last week. Not last year, or the last 5 years, but last WEEK. And then coming right back and making the clients happy, then 2 months later those same clients are pissed off again for the same reason, but again you go and reassure them they are in a great allocation and have outperformed 95% of whatever else is out there. Then AGAIN they complain only a few weeks later. Imagine this going on for TEN YEARS, but every time you get the pissy e-mails you don’t snap at the clients or fire them. You take it, and do your best to continue giving them great service. How long would most of you be willing to take it? 6 months, take your paycheck and hightail it somewhere else? Or continue to do your job, somehow continue to love doing it, and continue to get the same abuse from your clients week in and week out for a full career?
Well said. If I was treated the way he was I would have absolutely flipped out years ago. Most of those meatballs wanted Ricky Williams over him ! LOL !
5 Pro-bowls and zero Superbowl wins does not make a Hall of Fame quarterback. In the Superbowl era, every Hall of Fame quarterback has a Superbowl win or more Pro-bowls. If he was All-Pro 5 times, that would be a different story. It takes a good player to make the Pro-bowl. It takes a great one to be All-Pro.
McNabb is a good quarterback and had one great season. That's not Hall of Fame material. Discuss him all that you want, but without a superbowl win, he's not getting in.I didnt say sure fire, I said arguably.
Troy Aikman 164 TD’s 140 INT’s. McNabb 194-90. I am fairly certain Aikman played with much more talent. Don’t be a meatball and look at Superbowls only. It is a sport with 22 starters.
I don't have the numbers at hand, but if i recall, McNabb had a record year last year. His best year yet for passing yards completion % etc.
I like McNabb and mentioned that he is on the clock only because the Philly sports media has made it clear that he is getting long of tooth and it's this year or not at all. At least in Philly. I don't agree but that's the rap. Ricky Williams was one of my leading points earners on my fantasy football team. Well before he decided he'd rather smoke than play.We'd have to go with more than one great season for him. You can't have a quarterback with 30,000 yards and more than a 2/1 TD/Int ratio and have one great season to account for that. If all hall of fame quarterbacks had to win a Super Bowl in order to get in the Hall of Fame there wouldn't be enough Super Bowl's to go around. In the last 30 years for every Brady, Montana, Elway and Aikman you have 15 Trent Dilfers, Mark Rypiens, Eli Mannings, Brad Johnsons, Doug Williams and Jeff Hostetlers. I don't know many things in life but I know I'm not going to see Mark Rypiens fat mug sitting on a plaque in Canton one day when I visit there.McNabb is a good quarterback and had one great season. That’s not Hall of Fame material. Discuss him all that you want, but without a superbowl win, he’s not getting in.
6 pro-bowls for Aikman; 5 for McNabb 3 years all pro for Aikman; 0 for McNabb 3 Superbowl victories for Aikman; 0 for McNabb McNabb is a very good quarterback. He just hasn't done anything that is Hall of Fame worthy. Quarterback is a position of managing a game and putting W's on the board and not stats. A quarterback on a good team that has a "run-first" mentality will rarely put up great stats. Aikman is a great example of this. Bradshaw before him is a pretty good example. Rothlisberger is a good example of this with current players.Troy Aikman 164 TD’s 140 INT’s. McNabb 194-90. I am fairly certain Aikman played with much more talent. Don’t be a meatball and look at Superbowls only. It is a sport with 22 starters.
I’ll agree that if his career ended today there is a very good chance he wouldn’t get in. I would hope he does simply because I’m a Philly homer. I think the fact that Jim Kelly is in the Hall of Fame despite having a 2 TD vs. 7 INT line in his 4 Super Bowls and has one more Pro Bowl than Kelly may help his case. Again, we’ll need at least 2-3 very solid years of him playing in order to strengthen the case.
They actually both have 5 pro bowls, but Kelly was all-pro once and McNabb never was. Making it to 4 Superbowls is an impressive feat.I’ll agree that if his career ended today there is a very good chance he wouldn’t get in. I would hope he does simply because I’m a Philly homer. I think the fact that Jim Kelly is in the Hall of Fame despite having a 2 TD vs. 7 INT line in his 4 Super Bowls and has one more Pro Bowl than Kelly may help his case. Again, we’ll need at least 2-3 very solid years of him playing in order to strengthen the case.
It's a team sport and the great quarterbacks seem to find a way to make their teams play better. If we were talking about baseball and world series wins, I would agree with you. A QB doesn't have to have a Superbowl win, but to ignore this sure doesn't make sense. The job of quarterback is to manage the team on offense to do everything possible to win. Right now, he is not a HOF QB, unless the HOF is for the very good. Give him another 2 pro-bowls, 1 all pro season, or one Superbowl and I'd agree with the HOF. Let's face it, right now, McNabb has about 5 years where he has been one of the top 6 QBs in the league. That makes him "very good". There needs to be something more than this.Looking at Superbowls is stupid. It’s a team sport. QB can’t make it happen alone. If McNabb finishes his career with any type of form, he should have a shot @ the Hall.
Any team can win on any given Sunday, but football isn't about any given Sunday. It's about 16 of them.
When we are talking about teams, it has to be about winning. The Pats would have been considered the best team ever. However, to be the best ever, you have to win the big one. Otherwise, we're simply just talking about potential. The great quarterbacks find a way to will their teams to victories. It never seems to be the guy who can just throw the ball the furthest or run the fastest. It's the intangibles that simply don't show up in a stat sheet. It's making the big play when it has to be made and not making the big screw up. However, it is a team sport and a great quarterback without enough talent surrounding him won't ever win the Super Bowl. My opinion is that Dan Marino is the best QB to ever play the game and he never won a Superbowl. He made the Pro-bowl 9 times and was all-pro 3 times. Marino is great whether he wins or loses. To me, it just seems awfully tough if he doesn't have additional pro bowls or Super Bowl wins to put him in the all time great category. To me, he belongs in the all-time good category with guys like Steve McNair.It's a team sport and the great quarterbacks seem to find a way to make their teams play better. If we were talking about baseball and world series wins, I would agree with you. A QB doesn't have to have a Superbowl win, but to ignore this sure doesn't make sense. The job of quarterback is to manage the team on offense to do everything possible to win. Right now, he is not a HOF QB, unless the HOF is for the very good. Give him another 2 pro-bowls, 1 all pro season, or one Superbowl and I'd agree with the HOF. Let's face it, right now, McNabb has about 5 years where he has been one of the top 6 QBs in the league. That makes him "very good". There needs to be something more than this.[/quote][quote=anonymous][quote=iceco1d]Looking at Superbowls is stupid. It’s a team sport. QB can’t make it happen alone. If McNabb finishes his career with any type of form, he should have a shot @ the Hall.
I agree that he needs to have a strong finish to his career to have a shot.
BUT, winning the Superbowl isn't that indicative of how great a TEAM is, let alone an INDIVIDUAL.
Does anyone think the Arizona Cardinals were the 2nd best team in the league last year? I don't.
The idea that "any team can win, on any given Sunday, regardless of opponent" is completely true.
For example - I personally believe that the 18-1 Patriots team from 2 years ago, is BY FAR the best complete football team to ever take the field. Did they drop the ball in the Superbowl? You betcha. Probably overconfidence, or playing too conservative for "the big game." I dunno. But just because they didn't win it all, I still think you could line them up with the 2000 Ravens, or the 08 Steelers, or the 85 Bears, 100 times, and they are going to win 75/100 games.
I think an analysis of their whole career is a much better indicator than just # of Superbowls.
PS - I'm not a fan of any of the teams mentioned in this post.
[/quote] Couldn't agree more. The Pats of 07 were the best team ever and they lost that one game. McNabb is much better than McNair was. He isn't Marino or Montana, but I think he is on that 2nd level. He needs a few more good years to get in. Obviously, one Super Bowl would put him in also. Roethlisberger is not a great QB, but he has been in great situations. He is good, like Aikman, but not great. McNabb has always worked with less than those two. Marino also never worked with anything. Elway never won until Terrell Davis fell from the sky. Kelly was good not great and his teams were loaded with Hall of Famers. McNabb has never played with a single HOF player and that needs to be considered.
It's a team sport and the great quarterbacks seem to find a way to make their teams play better. If we were talking about baseball and world series wins, I would agree with you. A QB doesn't have to have a Superbowl win, but to ignore this sure doesn't make sense. The job of quarterback is to manage the team on offense to do everything possible to win. Right now, he is not a HOF QB, unless the HOF is for the very good. Give him another 2 pro-bowls, 1 all pro season, or one Superbowl and I'd agree with the HOF. Let's face it, right now, McNabb has about 5 years where he has been one of the top 6 QBs in the league. That makes him "very good". There needs to be something more than this.[/quote][quote=iceco1d] [quote=anonymous][quote=iceco1d]Looking at Superbowls is stupid. It’s a team sport. QB can’t make it happen alone. If McNabb finishes his career with any type of form, he should have a shot @ the Hall.
I agree that he needs to have a strong finish to his career to have a shot.
BUT, winning the Superbowl isn't that indicative of how great a TEAM is, let alone an INDIVIDUAL.
Does anyone think the Arizona Cardinals were the 2nd best team in the league last year? I don't.
The idea that "any team can win, on any given Sunday, regardless of opponent" is completely true.
For example - I personally believe that the 18-1 Patriots team from 2 years ago, is BY FAR the best complete football team to ever take the field. Did they drop the ball in the Superbowl? You betcha. Probably overconfidence, or playing too conservative for "the big game." I dunno. But just because they didn't win it all, I still think you could line them up with the 2000 Ravens, or the 08 Steelers, or the 85 Bears, 100 times, and they are going to win 75/100 games.
I think an analysis of their whole career is a much better indicator than just # of Superbowls.
PS - I'm not a fan of any of the teams mentioned in this post.
[/quote] Couldn't agree more. The Pats of 07 were the best team ever and they lost that one game. McNabb is much better than McNair was. He isn't Marino or Montana, but I think he is on that 2nd level. He needs a few more good years to get in. Obviously, one Super Bowl would put him in also. Roethlisberger is not a great QB, but he has been in great situations. He is good, like Aikman, but not great. McNabb has always worked with less than those two. Marino also never worked with anything. Elway never won until Terrell Davis fell from the sky. Kelly was good not great and his teams were loaded with Hall of Famers. McNabb has never played with a single HOF player and that needs to be considered. Owens? JOKE[/quote]
Not only is Owens a HOF player, but he’s a first ballot guy. He’s been All-pro 5 times. Is it coincidental that McNabb has had 1 monster year and it was the only year that he had TO on the field for the first time? Michael Irvin, Aikman’s favorite target, was only All-pro once.
No its not coincidental and that is the entire point. If you have Hall of Famers around you like Michael Irvin, Jerry Rice, Terrell Owens you will have a better career and better numbers. McNabb had 1 year with him, other guys have played along side HOF help their entire careers.Not only is Owens a HOF player, but he’s a first ballot guy. He’s been All-pro 5 times. Is it coincidental that McNabb has had 1 monster year and it was the only year that he had TO on the field for the first time? Michael Irvin, Aikman’s favorite target, was only All-pro once.
Having better numbers doesn't make you a better player. TO had better years from 2000-2003 with Jeff Garcia as his QB and 2006-2007 with Tony Romo as his quarterback. Based upon that, McNabb held TO back and hurt his production and he's not as good as Garcia or Romo. (I'm not trying to make that argument.) How does a QB put up big numbers? Throw a lot. How does one make it to the hall of fame? Win and be all-pro.
If you look at the HOF, it appears for most players, regardless of position, it takes the following to get in: 1) 2 years making all-pro or 2) a bunch of Pro-bowls with a superbowl win. How many players are in the HOF who have never make all-pro and don't have a superbowl ring? My guess is less than 10. Are there any quarterbacks in the HOF who have never made All-pro and have never won a superbowl? I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong here, but if a player never is the best at his position and never helps to lead his team to a championship, he is merely very, very good at best and the HOF is about greatness.And there are guys who are in that have no business being there because the postseason can become overvalued. Bob Griese, Michael Irvin, Lynn Swann ? Look at their career numbers and tell me they are HOF.
For the record, if McNabb retires today I don’t think he deserves to get in. He needs more on the resume and I don’t think he gets there.
BTW, Tom Brady All Pro 1 Time
Lets try some others, Kurt Warner ? Curtis Martin ? Terrell Davis ? I say yes, no, no
[quote=Ron 14]
And there are guys who are in that have no business being there because the postseason can become overvalued. Bob Griese, Michael Irvin, Lynn Swann ? Look at their career numbers and tell me they are HOF.
[/quote] I think that you are looking at the wrong numbers. A reciever for a team that throws the ball a lot will put up big numbers. However when someone is the number 1 reciever on a team with 2 HOF receivers and the team relies on running and defense, there simply isn't a chance to put up numbers. Swann came up big everytime that he was needed. Swann is in the HOF based upon great performances in big games along with 4 Super Bowl wins and 3 Pro-Bowls and 1 All-pro selection. Irvin had 3 Superbowls, 5 Pro-Bowls, and 1 All-pro. Griese was in 8 Pro-Bowls, and was All-Pro twice and was one of the QBs in the only perfect season. Stats don't tell us enough. Griese was All-pro with what looks like very modest stats. However, All-pro isn't a popularity contest. One only becomes All-Pro by being the best QB in the conference. These guys all had at least one year of greatness, several years of very goodness, and won the big one. It's that combination that leads to the HOF. Football greatness, unlike baseball greatness isn't measured by stats. Since football is very much a team sport, it makes sense that it is about winning and losing. Good players make those around them better. Think of it this way. An offense would rather get more yards than less. However, I wouldn't be surprised if teams have losing records in which their team passed for 350 yards. Until things changed with Manning/Brady, teams with winning records would primarily shut down their passing attack with the lead. How would Griese/Swann/Irvin have big numbers if they aren't throwing the ball? When Griese was named All-Pro for the first time, he only threw for 19 touchdowns and barely 2000 yards. Heck, looking at stats, you might come to the conclusion that Brian Griese was better. At some point, all of these guys were the best in the league in comparison to their colleagues. That seems to be something that almost all HOF players have in common.He's in if he retires today. 3 Superbowls, 1 All Pro, 4 Pro bowls, best statistical season ever, best w-l record ever (?)BTW, Tom Brady All Pro 1 Time
Warner is in. 2 All-pros, 4 pro-bowls, 1 superbowl win
Martin is in. 1 all-pro, 5 pro-bowls, top couple career rusher Davis is in. 3 all-pro, 3 pro-bowls, 2 superbowl wins What sets all of the other guys apart from McNabb? Superbowls and All-pro.[quote=iceco1d]
At some point, all of these guys were the best in the league in comparison to their colleagues. That seems to be something that almost all HOF players have in common.I think that the year the Eagles went to the Superbowl, McNabb was the best in the league compared to his colleagues.
[/quote] Peyton Manning was All-pro that year and not McNabb.
Brady is clearly in. He has been a top 3 QB for 6/7 yrs and only 1 All Pro. I am not going to make my decisions based on All Pro numbers.
Brian Urlacher has a Super Bowl appearance, 3 All Pros, 1 Defensive Player of Year and 5+ Pro bowls. I am a Bears fan and this guy has no business even walking through the doors of the HOF as a visitor.
In my opinion everything has to be looked at: situation, stats, pro bowls, playoffs, all pros etc. There is no clear cut definition. I think the pro bowls and all pros are the least valuable because the moronic media is making those picks.You can't use "All-Pro" and "only" in the same sentence. Becoming "All-Pro" one time is a major accomplishment. My guess is that every single player who has become All-pro once with a bunch of Pro-bowls is in the HOF. The All-Pro quarterback is the very best quarterback in the world for that one season. To get to the top of one's profession even one time is a major accomplishment.Brady is clearly in. He has been a top 3 QB for 6/7 yrs and only 1 All Pro. I am not going to make my decisions based on All Pro numbers.
So Urlacher is HOF ? no way
[quote=Ron 14]Brian Urlacher has a Super Bowl appearance, 3 All Pros, 1 Defensive Player of Year and 5+ Pro bowls. I am a Bears fan and this guy has no business even walking through the doors of the HOF as a visitor.
In my opinion everything has to be looked at: situation, stats, pro bowls, playoffs, all pros etc. There is no clear cut definition. I think the pro bowls and all pros are the least valuable because the moronic media is making those picks. [/quote] Urlacher is in easily. He has been all-pro 4 times and has been in the pro-bowl 6 times. I agree that everything needs to be considered. However, the pro-bowl and all-pro teams has already taken into account most of that information except the post-season. Your "moronic media" quote is moronic simply because this same moronic media is the one choosing the Hall of Fame entrants. I'm not saying that someone should automatically be in because of these things. It's more along the lines of baseball (pre-steroid era) where certain stats would guarantee entrance. It's awfully hard for someone (Urlacher) to be voted as one of the two best players at his position for 4 different years and not be considered an all-time great. Here's a challenge for you if you don't think that pro-bowls and all-pro are that important. Name one player in the HOF who did not make the pro-bowl at least 5 times or was named to one all-pro team. (Obviously, I am talking about guys who are there because of their on the field accomplishments.) How about naming one guy who made the pro-bowl 5 times and was named to one all-pro team and isn't in the hall? My guess is that nobody can answer this question. I assume that there are a couple people out there who don't fit the category.Nobody has been all-pro 4 times and not made the hall. He's going to have to do something very bad as a person to not get in.So Urlacher is HOF ? no way
You can't use "All-Pro" and "only" in the same sentence. Becoming "All-Pro" one time is a major accomplishment. My guess is that every single player who has become All-pro once with a bunch of Pro-bowls is in the HOF. The All-Pro quarterback is the very best quarterback in the world for that one season. To get to the top of one's profession even one time is a major accomplishment. [/quote] You are nuts. Edgerrin James, Jerome Bettis, Zach Thomas, Randall Cunningham, Andre Rison, Herman Moore, Mark Carrier, Leroy Butler all fall into this category. None of them are HOF.[quote=Ron 14]Brady is clearly in. He has been a top 3 QB for 6/7 yrs and only 1 All Pro. I am not going to make my decisions based on All Pro numbers.
Keep in mind that my criteria is 5 pro-bowls and 1 all-pro.
Cunningham, James, Moore, Carrier, and Butler don't fit the criteria. They have all only made 3 or 4 Pro-bowls. Bettis and Thomas will both make the hall. Neither is eligible, so of course, they aren't in. Bettis has 6 pro-bowls and 2 all-pro seasons. Thomas has 7 pro-bowls and 5 all-pro seasons. That leaves good ole Andre Rison. He was in 5 pro-bowls and was all pro once. With a bad reputation and no post season exploits, he won't get in. Congratulations. You have found one of the exceptions. I'm sure that there are more, but not too many.I don’t think we are that far apart in terms of being on the same page. I don’t know why exactly, but Bettis, Urlacher, and Thomas don’t “feel” like HOF material to me. I just think sometimes real real good players get in when it should be reserved for great.
Bettis being joined with Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith ? Urlacher and Thomas alongside Ray Lewis ? Just doesn't feel right. IMHO.
Ron, the NFL has been in existence for 75+ years. Guys like Sanders, Smith, and Lewis, are people who would get consideration for “Greatest of all time” at their position. The HOF goes beyond this. It is reserved for the top 4-7 people who are eligible in a given year.
Nobody is trying to say that Urlacher/Thomas is in a Ray Lewis league. However, if you were to look at the group of linebackers that made all-pro/pro-bowl a comparable number of times with Urlacher/Thomas, it's hard to not be impressed. By the way, don't under rate Bettis. Because of numbers, he obviously isn't in a Sanders/Smith class. However, if my goal was to put together a team to win a Super Bowl, I'd go with Bettis over Sanders any day. Sanders, I believe, is the all-time leader in runs for losses. To win football games, you need to give the ball on short yardage to a guy who will always go forward. His season in 2004 speaks volumes about the guy. He was told that he would no longer start. He didn't complain. He started the year with just 5 carries in the first game and gained 5 yards and had 3 touchdowns. Having him able to always go forward took lots of the pressure off of Big Ben and allowed that team to go 15-1. He only averaged a shade over 3 yards a carry, but dang, if he didn't always go forward and get every necessary first down. He may have had the worst stats ever for a Pro-bowl running back, but it was mightily deserved. My point? I don't know. Maybe, simply, that it's not just about stats.I think you need to be in the top 3 or 4 of your generation and to me Bettis isn't there.
Ron, don’t take this information to the bank, but during Bettis’s playing career, there was only one running back who made more more pro-bowls or was all-pro more. (Marshall Faulk) So, if we look at the NFL simply through the vision of that 13 year period, Bettis is the number 2 back in the game.
I put Sanders, Smith, Faulk, Terrell Davis, Curtis Martin above him in that generation.
It’s tough to determine “generations”, but, anyway, I’d agree with the first three, but not Davis and Martin.
Davis was a great back for 3 years. Martin was primarily a very good back for a bunch of years. Bettis had 1 fewer all-pro season than Davis (3 to 2), but twice as many pro-bowl seasons (6-3). Bettis was all-pro more times than Martin (2-1) and had more pro-bowl seasons (6-5). Obviously, I am cherry picking my years with Bettis by only using the years that he was in the league. That being said if we take any running back and have them be in the top 2 (as measured by Pro-Bowls) for the years that cover their career, every one of them is in the HOF. Davis is an interesting case. He was all-pro for three years, but only had 4 seasons of gaining more than 750 yards.Source URL:https://www.wealthmanagement.com/forums/lounge/vick-signs-eagles