Skip Bayless has made a career of making outlandish and mostly counter-intuitive arguments on ESPN's First Take.

You can now add Tuesday's statement from Bayless regarding Philadelphia Eagles quarterbacks Michael Vick and Vince Young to his long list of questionable opinions.

Bayless said Tuesday morning that he thinks Young, the Eagles backup and Titans castoff, is better then Vick, who led Philadelphia to the playoffs and had a passer rating over 100 last season. 

We won't quote Bayless word-for-word from First Take, but here is a series of tweets from him summarizing his argument:

"I've been consistent w/ this for 4 years: I think VYoung a little better QB than MVick, whose very good but now a little overhyped."

"VYoung got raw deal w/ JFisher and STILL won rookie of yr, 2 ProBowls, 30-17. Just needs fresh start w/ smart, supportive staff - Philly's."

"Ppl fixated on Vick's hot start last yr. But last 7 games, wore down, regressed - 11 TDs, 7 INTs, home playoff loss. Now 2-4 playoffs."

"This obviously won't happen. But I believe VYoung could have a better season-long season than MVick. And I'm not backing off that stance."

Let's just go through the tweets one-by-one and break them down. 

Bayless sets the stage for his argument by re-stating an opinion he claims he's stuck by for four years, calling Young a little better than an "overhyped" Vick. You could maybe convince me that Vick is a little overhyped, but there's very little basis to thinking that Young is better than Vick. There's just no evidence for it over the past four years.

But in typical Bayless style, he tries his hardest to put together a rational argument—something he fails to do just as often as he succeeds.

Bayless states that Young got a "raw deal with Jeff Fisher." Not even close.

Young was given every opportunity to be the face of that franchise and every time he felt a little leeway, Young fell directly on his face. The natural talent has always been there—as Bayless states with "rookie of the year, two Pro Bowls and a 30-17 career record—but the rest of it doesn't work with Young. In Tennessee, he lacked the work ethic and leadership needed to be a consistent NFL quarterback.

However, Bayless makes a point about Vick down the stretch. Statistically, he wasn't as good as the beginning of the season. But I wouldn't say people are "fixated on Vick's hot start." He was the single most important factor for the Eagles reaching the playoffs last season.

And finally, we come to Bayless's foot-in-mouth statement. "I believe Vince Young could have a better season-long season than Michael Vick. And I'm not backing off that stance."

There's simply no basis for this argument. Young ran out of strikes in Tennessee faster than Mark Reynolds at the plate. He couldn't hold that job over Kerry Collins despite given a handful of chances. But he's a better player than Vick, who may just be the most dynamic player the game has ever seen? 

Of course, we all know Bayless is essentially paid by ESPN to make comments like this in order to stir debate for their network.

Considered me "Bayless-ed" once again.