Philadelphia Eagles: Why Benching Michael Vick Is Lose-Lose Proposition for Reid
There is no way Andy Reid can emerge from the current Philadelphia Eagles QB drama and not lose. The Eagles stand at just 3-4 on the season and have dropped three straight games.
Vick certainly deserves his fair share of blame for the team's struggles, but Philadelphia is at a point in the season where Reid cannot possibly make the right decision either way.
If he benches Vick, Reid would appear to be making the beleaguered QB his latest scapegoat for his coaching flaws. If he does not bench Vick, he'll be blamed for being loyal almost to a fault.
Such is the nature of coaching in the NFL, a decision must be made and the reality is that it cannot possibly be a popular one.
"Obviously, (Andy Reid) thinking about making a change at quarterback. If he makes that decision, I support it. It's tough when you know everything is up in the balance, but that's the decision that coach is thinking about making, and I'm going to fight until he says, 'Come on out,' and he takes me out of the game. I can't do it by myself. I would love to stay in there and finish what I started. It would mean the world to me. But, hey, that's not my decision right now."
What can Reid do here? Turning to Nick Foles not only makes Vick a scapegoat, but it also signals an effort to begin rebuilding and taking this team in a new direction.
Keep in mind that Vick did not have any turnovers against the Falcons; instead, the defense was actually at fault for the loss, allowing 31 points.
So when the offense was the problem, Reid fired his defensive coordinator Juan Castillo. Now, as the defense becomes the issue, he contemplates making a QB change.
This is the definition of a dysfunctional situation, and Reid is the main catalyst for an enormous mess. There is no doubt that he is an exceptional coach, but he is currently in a lose-lose QB situation and has no way out.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?