Well, no, you didn't just say that. You said it was unfeasable mechanically for power reasons.
I actually implied it with my shakespear rip-off, though I understand that it may not have been clear (to be or not to be the question, is equivalent to be or not to be relevant, or so I would interpret it). My point was that the way it was flavored would be relevant only in card text (i.e. giving it powers equivalent to flying, but not flying itself), not in the card name.
Bay_falconer, once again, you are comparing what should not be compared: - Shivan dragon (and Serra Angel) was a great card at some point. It isn't anymore, but it was. - Shivan dragon is red and rare, a gamebreaker. Craw Wurm is green and common. If you were able to easily give flying to craw wurms, then those would easily become gamebreakers too, leading to an overpowered color. I didn't mean that huge flying fatties shouldn't exist at all, simply that they shouldn't be a common occurence.
Congrats, Wynzerman, though I'd argue that pre-Modern green creatures aren't really remembered for being "good", when compared to Hippy, Juzam, Morphling, free creatures, Rebels...That aside, now let's just get R&D to grok this.
You should never explain layers to people unless one of the following is true: they're studying for a judge exam, you're both in a Ben Affleck movie and it's the only way to save the world, or you hate them.
Congrats, Wynzerman, though I'd argue that pre-Modern green creatures aren't really remembered for being "good", when compared to Hippy, Juzam, Morphling, free creatures, Rebels...That aside, now let's just get R&D to grok this.
Oddly, I really don't like granting keywords in green at all. Mostly because of green's idea that you are what you are. I mean, if the keyword defines green , I don't mind.
I see it in the absolute negative space of that statement. Green is about adaptation and arms-racing, because those are means of survival. Identity, on the otherhand is a machination of sentience, which only experiences through it's planeswalkers and higher-echelon lifeforms that do more than devour or task. When I play a Vorapede , I don't have any delusion or complex feeling about how the creature must feel or see itself, the way I do when I play Fiend Hunter , or Treasure Mage . For the Vorapede to sprout wings in order to devour something mid-flight, or to hunt something vulnerable to aerial strikes is fairly sensible. While the humans or sentient creatures that do the same thing feel denatured.
Well, for me, I think it would be more unusual for a Vorapede than for any human. The reason is that a creature includes the tools it uses as well. A white creature that gets flying until end of turn simply rides a flying animal, jumps magically or uses its environment. A Vorapede that gets flying would feel strange to me.
But this isn't an argument against flying in Green. In my opinion, Green could have as much flying as White has.... as I do not agree with any argument from R&D why White should be a color of flying. IMO it was forced into White. It's an evasive ability, so you avoid losses... that doesn't hurt in White. And they also needed a more aggressive color than Blue. But this doesn't make white the flavorfully perfect choice. IMO, flying rather kills the "community" flavor in White as it doesn't feel like "living and dying together". I preferred the time when White was centered around humans, rather than birds, griffins, etc.
I also disagree with the "green prefers P/T rating over evasion" argument or the "green = survival" statement.
For me, a fundamental fact is that green achieves the adaptive characteristic/nature by some sort of dedication or specialization, especially on creatures, but in a rather static way. Specialization doesn't require sapience, but rather circumvents it. (Just to include this discussion as well)
So instead of a creature that gets flying until end of turn, Green should focus on casting a dedicated hunter in return. So basically, I agree with Bay as well that green shouldn't get many "grant keywords" or "u.e.o.t." abilities.
I believe that a mono-green Sphinx of the Steel Wind or Akroma, Angel of Fury makes much more sense than any 8/8 vanilla creature, despite the fact that these two creatures have flying. It's because they both have a strong combat-specialization. An 8/8 creature is mainly dedicated in comparison to other 7/7 vanilla creatures.
So my answer to the original question, whether or not green should get flying until end of turn, is simply: Not too often. But I'd rather be fine with more green creatures with flying in general.
Bay, learn how to quote. My only recollection of Terravore mattering was as a sideboard in ONS/ODS standard. He's a little sick with fetches. I wouldn't have put him in with the rest, unless I'm forgetting a legacy or extended appearance.
I have no idea why serendib efreet exists, I'm putting it on early magic mistakes. Green was weak in gathering and the first couple years, becuase no one understood where creatures should be. No one has argued it wasn't.
Ali is a tricky creature.That's not in green's slice. Ditto for a couple others you list.
Ball lightning is a burn spell. Nekrataal and Rector are combo spell/creatures. Green's match is manadorks. Birds and elves have appeared in a huge number of tournament decks over the years. I would guess one of them holds the record for appearing in the most tournament decks.
I'd rather have Weatherseed or gamekeeper than Ivory, unless you're trying to slow mill your opponent. If you are using it as a combo piece, again, that's not in green's area.
Blastoderm and Deranged hermit held their own against rebels, morphling , and masticore . According to MaRo, Hermit was considered a mistake, morphling was not.
You should never explain layers to people unless one of the following is true: they're studying for a judge exam, you're both in a Ben Affleck movie and it's the only way to save the world, or you hate them.
Bay, learn how to quote. My only recollection of Terravore mattering was as a sideboard in ONS/ODS standard. He's a little sick with fetches. I wouldn't have put him in with the rest, unless I'm forgetting a legacy or extended appearance.
Weird as it sounds, it's always on the verge of play in any format with adequate lands that get binned (Fetches, Masques Depletion Lands, Dust Bowl etc.) It's also note-worthy as being the card that Knight of the Reliquary is based on. I think that gives it something of a legacy, but it was never as prominent as the ODS/ONS standard. It also fell in and out of favor for Maverick in legacy over the last few years (if I recall correctly, it was also hot tech for Loam decks.)
only experiences through it's planeswalkers and higher-echelon lifeforms that do more than devour or task. When I play a 
