No One Played Better than Vick

No one was better than Vick.

Really. Last week, no one was better than Mike Vick was. How's that you say? What am I smoking? Some of you are no doubt wondering if I'm talking about the same Mike Vick, quarterback of the Atlanta Falcons, who went 10/20, for 115 yards, no TD's and an INT? The Mike Vick who was sacked 5 times and fumbled twice? The Mike Vick whose QB rating was 46.9? THAT Mike Vick?

In a word, yes. Let me clarify. I'm talking Fantasy Football here. You see, in my league last week, Mike Vick scored negative one point. Yes. -1 pt. If I had left the starting QB position empty, I would have got no points, but I wouldn't have lost any either, which means literally, I would have done better to play no one in the QB slot than to start Vick.

So, this week's column is about that glorious and heart-wrenching experience that is Fantasy Football.

By Thursday night/Friday morning, it's a little late to be talking about whom you should play and whom you should bench. Aside from injury reports, you should have all the info you need for that by now. No, this week I'm asking a different question: Does the proliferation of Fantasy Football erode fan loyalty for teams?

I'm a die-hard Titans fan. One of my best friends lives and dies with Philly, and another with the Pats. I cannot cheer for any team that is playing against my boys. Yet I have Reggie Wayne on my fantasy team. Wayne plays for the Colts which has become recently Tennessee's biggest hurdle in the division and the conference. If he has a lot of big games, it follows that the Colts are probably having good games, which makes life tougher on my Titans.

Some folks say the age of the salary cap has already eroded team loyalty, because stars move from place to place too quickly, taking fan's affections with them. Some say that cap has helped team loyalty because fans consider the players too greedy and don't miss them. We'll call that a wash. I miss seeing Jevon Kearse in a Titans uniform, but I don't think of him too often. Neither Eddie George.

NFL.com just realized that Fantasy Football is a nine-figure moneymaker each year. The NFL has thrown its weight behind a massive marketing campaign to increase the number of people playing in fantasy leagues. The NFL as an organization governed primarily by the team owners wouldn't encourage something that's bad for the teams that make up the organization, would it?

Then again, which is better for the NFL? Is it people in 32 markets being die-hard loyal to their team, or is it people in every market tuning in to as many games as they can to check up on their fantasy studs? Do we really need to ask that question?

When it comes right down to it though, does a true-blue, loyal fan change their allegiance, just because they want to do well in a fantasy game? I think not. I think that what we wind up with is fans who are more educated about the game, know more about those who play it, and have a greater appreciation for the different systems and relationships that make the game work. We have a larger audience for small-market teams with star-caliber players who would have otherwise gone unnoticed (*cough* Steve McNair *cough*). We wind up with people watching games that might otherwise seem meaningless except for those playing in it (if even then). And we have something to keep us occupied Tuesday through Saturday.

Do some people feel conflicted each week, as their fantasy stars line up against their hometown heroes? I certainly hope so, I do. But then again, what's a football game without a little drama?

Next week: There's no I in "team," but there are an M and an E.