Part of me agrees with that Pudge. But, maybe it's just me, I'd take a fully healthy Schaub over a 80 % Vick, especially at Buffalo. Make no mistake about it, they have good defense and are going to bring it.
What does it say about the quality of our QB and our overall team if our starter can't beat the Bills, who are another borderline playoff team, when he's less than 100%. Because you can be sure going through the grueling season, he won't be 100% come January when he's facing the Eagles or Panthers, or some other NFC team in the playoffs.
If Vick doesn't play and we lose, all the excuses will say we lost because Vick was out.
If Vick doesn't play and we win, what's the benefit? We have a bit more confidence in Matt Schaub? But does that really matter, because unless he destroys Buffalo, few are going to have the confidence that he's going to be able to beat teams like Carolina, Philly, New England, Pittsburgh, or any of the other top teams in the league that we may face in January/February. Building confidence in Matt Schaub seems to me something that should be pretty low on the Falcons agenda.
If Vick plays and we lose, then it indicates to me that this is not as good a team as we think. For a team that is supposed to be on par with the Eagles can't beat either the Bills or Seahawks on the road, definitely is not on par with them.
If Vick plays and we win, then of course it inspires confidence everywhere. And IMO, that is well worth the risk of Vick's further injury. Because a hamstring strain is an injury that even off 1 or 2 weeks rest he could go out and reinjure it just as easily.