Well a 4.4 would be impressive because I remember his size as much as his speed.
But I don't read the ESPN article as a comment about all of football history. I think he is talking about the present passer situation, although its not explicitly stated, that seems to be the context of the question he was asked.
And I do think, more than any modern running QB, he was the guy who coaches were willing to tailor their offense for. And that was new. The real argument is whether Vick represented a generational upgrade in skills, or if coaches had decided that a franchise QB was more important than a lesser skilled, but traditional, pocket passer.
Interestingly, Cunningham's greatest success came in a system devoted to deep passing in Minnesota.