Michael Vick Signs With Philadelphia Eagles—Good Football Decision?

The Philadelphia Eagles signed Michael Vick to a one-year, $1.6 million contract Thursday, August 13, with an option year for $5.2 million in 2010.

I will not get into the morals of this move, as I have covered them for Examiner.com. Here, I will just address this move from a football standpoint, which does include public relations implications.

Let's start there. Philadelphia is not exactly known as a forgiving nor laid-back town or fan base. The scrutiny and emotions will be a distraction that may derail the season of a serious Super Bowl contender.

And remember, this team has been there before. In 2004, the team brought in Terrell Owens, only to see the team chemistry blow-up when Donovan McNabb was not hopeless enough in his outlook once Owens was hurt. It created one of the worst off-seasons in NFL history, and it took the team four years to get back to the NFC Championship games they routinely made before bringing Owens in.

In other words, this did not work before, and it appears that the Eagles are fitting Albert Einstein's definition of insanity—doing the same thing and expecting different results.

What makes this worse is that facts do not suggest this would be a good move were there no PR nightmares to contend with. Here are some things that suggest Vick is not a worthwhile free agent:

1. Two years since he has played. Not only does the game change rapidly, but being in football condition is one of the hardest physical achievements.
2. Vick's biggest asset has always been his athleticism, but one must wonder if that has fallen off yet. Not only might the time away have hurt him, but he is nearly 30 now—by the time he does play, he might not have the athleticism he used to have.
   
3. As a backup to McNabb, Vick is only likely to step in if there is an injury to the franchise quarterback. Because of his reckless style, he is susceptible to injury and may force the Eagles to be down to one quarterback.
4. His playing time will only impair the development of the supposed next franchise quarterback, Kevin Kolb.
5. If Vick does play well, that will only intensify the heat on McNabb, who despite being consistently one of the league's five best signal-callers always seems one step away from being benched by a franchise that succumbs to the weight of the most fickle fan base in football.
6. And last but not least, let's not forget that Vick never was a good quarterback. He has never had a passer rating higher than 81.6, and has only been higher than his career average of 75.7 one other time, in 2004.

An electrifying player, he was selected to the Pro Bowl three times (2002, 2004, 2005), even though he averaged just 15 TD passes in those seasons. Only in 2002 (his second season) was he worthy of this honour, and it seems teams adjusted to his capabilities after that season.

In his last two Pro Bowl seasons, his touchdowns outnumbered his turnovers by just one, even when you count his rushing touchdowns and fumbles. In 2006, his last season, he accounted for more total yards (3513) than any other after 2002—ten quarterbacks in 2008 had more passing yards than that.

In other words, he is heavily overrated. So congratulations, Philadelphia: you are paying $1.6 million in a recession for a PR and ethical nightmare who may never be able to play like he used to, which was not that good in the first place.