Trent Dilfer recently called out Michael Vick. While on ESPN during a telecast of “Monday Night Football,” Dilfer suggested that Vick was being overly dramatic by complaining about two injuries that he received during games against the Atlanta Falcons and Philadelphia Eagles. Vick was forced to leave both games and claimed that the officials were not calling penalties after he endured late hits.
Dilfer countered by comparing Vick to Dallas Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo and saying, “So, he [Romo] didn’t sit down and complain about being hit in the back of the head on that fumble? He didn’t whine about being on the ground or being hurt [like Vick]?”
It’s amazing that NFL teams allowed Dilfer to play pro football for 14 seasons. During his pathetic career, Dilfer threw 129 interceptions versus 113 touchdowns, and finished with an embarrassing 70 quarterback rating.
He was lucky enough to win a Super Bowl behind the greatness of Ray Lewis and the Baltimore Ravens stifling defense in 2000, but Dilfer only threw 12 touchdowns and turned the ball over 13 times that year. Dilfer epitomized the meaning of poor quarterback play. He remains the best example when analysts argue if a great defensive team can win with a weak quarterback.
Dilfer never deserved the right to play in the NFL and he should not have a berth as an expert on a game that he failed at. Vick, even with a broken hand and a concussion, is one thousand times more efficient than Dilfer was in his prime.
But life after football is much easier for Dilfer, who sits behind a desk as if he accomplished anything significant on the football field on his own merits. Dilfer also fails as an analyst. His grammar is poor and his monotone voice puts viewers to sleep.
ESPN should do all football fans a favor and sack Dilfer for good. –amir shaw
