After having read different opinions about the sharpness of the 18-200mmVR against classic high quality zooms and primes I did a test myself, of which I first publish my comparison results @200mm.

The pictures have been taken on my D200, iso set on 200, all settings on 'normal', and no in-camera image optimalisation or postprocessing has been applied. The crops have been generated with Nikon editor program.
The 300% crops I used for the sharpness comparison come from the originals of the underneath pictures:

First fact that took my attention is that a 300% crop from a picture taken with the 18-200VR looks significant smaller than a 300% crop from the 80-200 ED. The 18-200mm looks more like a 18-180mm lens...

300% crop comparison from pictures taken @ f5.6 with tripod:

300% crop comparison from pictures taken @ f9 with tripod:

300% crop comparison from pictures taken @ f5.6 handhold:

300% crop comparison from pictures taken @ f9 handhold:

As a completion with this lens comparison: a moonshot, both with D200, iso 1000, F9
The original shot:

The quality difference is still visible, though less than with the above pictures. The difference in image size both at the same focal lenght has nearly disappeared in shots were the subject is far away.

My conclusion: To my humble opinion, the 18-200 is a great lens for what it's made for: the ultimate walk-around lens for daily use & travelling...Together with the enormous range it covers, the Nikkor 18-200mm AFS VR is a sharp lens with the advantage of the latest VR technology, but it does not replace the classical Nikon primes or classic Nikon top quality zooms in that range for sharpness or allover image quality. Next to that the advantage from the 80-200 of having f2.8 @ the whole range nearly without loosing image quality is important for some shooting situations like concerts, theatre, etc.. For slow shutter speeds VR seems indispensable though, so among  the 80-200 focal range lenses, the 70-200 VR is clearly the ultimate solution...